| Author | Message | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1215 Registered: 7-2003  |
Raven, no offense taken. Sometimes good parables will make the listener uncomfortable. It's not necessarily a bad thing if it leads to deeper thought and meaningful discussion. Chris | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3844 Registered: 12-2003  |
Chris, I had some thoughts similar to your version when I read Esther's story. I agree with Raven that the force feeding doesn't seem quite "right", but I do suspect that, as Raven further commented, God does bring people to Himself before they have awaremenss of what it means. The thing I find missing from your version, Chris, (which is extremely thought-provoking, BTW--and thanks for doing it!), is those receiving the donuts having a point of "agreement" or "belief" and of turning away from their rigidity. I believe that God's grace elicits a profound response when a person encounters it and is awakened to receive it. From God's perspective, the elect are chosen and called. From our three-dimensional perspective, we are asked to believe and repent (reactions made possible, of course, by God Himself). I still say that election and God's eternal calling are absolutely true. Yet inside that reality, He does ask us to respond. I truly can't explain this, and I'm not negating God's complete sovereignty or even hinting that my salvation is made possible by my reaction. I'm just saying there's something I can't explain hereóthere's mystery God hasn't revealed to us yet. It's ALL of God, and His grace is not an act of semi-violence toward us. How it works, I can't sayóI'm content to embrace the mystery and to praise God for revealing that I am not the last word in my own life! Really interesting thoughts...thanks again, Esther and Chris! Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3845 Registered: 12-2003 |
Yes, Chris--I agree with your observation that the parable would be more accurate if the professor and Steve were the same person. When I read it, I thought of that, too, and realized also that the Holy Spirit would have to be part of the picture as well. And yes, Joyce, it's good to see you again! Colleen | ||
| Snowboardingmom Registered user Username: Snowboardingmom Post Number: 69 Registered: 11-2005 |
The force issue bothered me a little, but what bothered me most was the limited atonement part (push-ups being done for only some people). I'm just getting to the point of sort of grasping the being chosen part, but I don't know about the limited atonement -- that's much harder for me to accept. (I just learned the "L" in TULIP). That just seems so bleak. I guess if you're not chosen by God, then it might as well be limited atonement. But still, it's one thing that the results are the same, and another thing to say that Christ only died for some rather than all. Am I missing something or not understanding it right? | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1216 Registered: 7-2003 |
Colleen and Raven, On the violence issue, it wasn't my intent to convey a violent act. In this alternate version I think that the class just isn't interested in donuts, don't want donuts, and don't like donuts. Of course, they just don't know what they are missing. The Professor "gently and lovingly, yet firmly" feeds the chosen students the donut, but he is most definately the one doing the feeding to this select group. In this alternate version, the Professor doesn't just set a donut on anyone's desk because none of them are into donuts and none of them would eat it. Setting it on their desk would be useless. So he selects some and feeds them. Once they taste the donut they enjoy very much and wonder what they ever would have done without donuts. Chris | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1217 Registered: 7-2003 |
Snowboardingmom, I think you've struck at the key to the two parables! In both parables only some students ate donuts. But in the first parable, push ups were done for all students, all students were offered a donut, but only some chose to eat the donut. In the other parable Steve only did push ups for some of the students. Every one of the chosen students that Steve did push ups for ate a donut. Those that Steve did not do push ups for did not eat a donut. Now we're to the heart of the matter! Chris | ||
| Justdodie Registered user Username: Justdodie Post Number: 18 Registered: 2-2006  |
Wow! My head is spinning! Raven, I was not familiar with your term, "TULIP Calvinism", so I googled it. What an eye-opener! I had heard of Calvinism, but never was curious enough to learn what it meant. I ended up at http://www.crivoice.org/tulip.html which compares "TULIP Calvinism" with "Arminianism." What a bleak outlook indeed, to live under Calvinism! Is that the position that the Adventist church takes? I never heard the term discussed growing up, but thinking back to how I felt, it certainly pretty much describes what I was led to believe: that I was totally bad, totally condemned, totally unacceptable to God, that God couldn't bear to even look on human beings. I had a friend once (she was a member of the Assemblies of God) who told me that she believed that all children were "just naturally evil." I was shocked and horrified, but she was adamant. I couldn't understand how someone could think that way. I also remember vividly the last time I attended an SDA church---after a long, animated conversation during Sabbath School, in which pretty much every denomination, every philosophy, every belief system was thoroughly bashed, one kindly little lady stood up as we were breaking up for church and stated matter-of-factly "We're all just dirt." That was my A-HA moment, when I finally GOT IT, when I realized what it was about that church that was so detrimental and hurtful to my soul. And in that moment I knew what a mistake it would be for me to ever go back. I have NOT. But I am still puzzled. It almost sounds like some of you in this discussion DO believe in Calvinism. Is that true? Or am I misunderstanding? It sounds like Colleen does, and it sounds like Snowboardingmom does, maybe. Or am I hopelessly confused? Chris, I couldn't really tell from anything you said. Care to elaborate? This sounds like a great topic to bring up for discussion at work tomorrow. We have a pretty good mix of people there, and get into some very lively conversations about religion. Luckily, everyone is quite tolerant and non-judgemental of others' views so we can enjoy doing this. Can't wait to hear what they all think! Joyce | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 679 Registered: 4-2000  |
We are all born as rebels against God. Before a person can choose Christ his heart must be changed. His dead spirit must be made to come alive in Christ--to be born again. The unregenerate person will never choose Christ on his own. Clearly, we cannot choose what we do not desire. God must do something first to enable us to desire and to choose him. Our salvation still involves our making an actual decision. God gifts to us the ability to come to Him and to choose Him. Faith itself is a gift from God. Our "wanter" becomes changed as He compels and draws us to Him. Therefore, we choose Christ freely. Oftentimes people will cite John 3:16 to suggest that the word "whoever" means that salvation is readily available for everyone. The truth is that only His elect (the "whoever") are willing to believe in Him. Jesus declared, "that no one can come to me unless it has been granted him from the Father" (John 6:65 NASB). In his excellent book, CHOSEN BY GOD, Dr. R. C. Sproul comments that "People do not seek God. They seek after the BENEFITS THAT ONLY GOD CAN GIVE THEM. The sin of fallen man is this: Man seeks the benefits of God while at the same time fleeing from God himself. We are, by nature, fugitives...The unbeliever will not seek. The unbeliever will not knock. Seeking is the business of believers...Seeking is the result of faith, not the cause of it." (pages 110, 111) Dennis Fischer | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1201 Registered: 10-2004  |
Joyce, I'm just curious, were you taught in the SDA church that the Father and Jesus were two separate beings? Also, were you taught that Jesus was not fully God and fully equal with the Father? The fact is that, as Chris already said, God took upon Himself the punishment for our sins on the Cross.  Jeremy | ||
| Justdodie Registered user Username: Justdodie Post Number: 19 Registered: 2-2006 |
Hi Jeremy, I'm glad you asked that question because it's another source of confusion that I encountered elsewhere on this forum in a lengthy discussion regarding the trinity. I was shocked to find that some people felt that SDAs don't believe in the trinity. I remember being taught very emphatically that all three--Father, Son, Holy Ghost--were one: the Godhead. Granted, I never really understood the concept, but I was NEVER taught that they were separate. It was always strongly emphasized that somehow, in a way we can't really comprehend, they are "three persons in one." And yes, I was taught that Jesus was fully God and equal with the Father. It came as a great shock to me the first time I heard someone (not SDA) say she thought that Jesus was "the son of God, but not God." I just thought that all Christians believed in the trinity in the same way. Boy, do I have a lot to learn! So, was I taught the official SDA doctrine? That's how I read it in the 27 (now 28!) fundamentals. But, I quit going to church shortly after I left home, so I probably missed a lot of the "finer points" of theology by not being in it for years and years as an adult. Joyce | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 441 Registered: 7-2004  |
Joyce, SDA's are very Arminian (or maybe even closer to Palaegian sp?); Methodists are Arminian, and many various groups. Calvinists are generally found in Presbyterian and other Reformed theology groups. Then there's ones who fall in various places in-between. I'm not a theologian, so it would be hard for me to thoroughly explain both camps, but in a nutshell - Arminians see salvation as all about what we do (choose God, cooperate with God), while Calvinists see salvation as all about what God does (calls us, awakens our spirit to new life so that we can choose God). Since leaving the SDA church, I have become less Arminian in my thinking, but wouldn't really call myself a Calvinist either. And I strongly disagree with hyper-Calvinism, which believes in double-predestination, that God has specifically created and intended some people for hell. I think Colleen stated it well above, that it's a mystery (and fun to debate), but that somehow God is 100% sovereign and doing all the work, and yet expects us to make a choice also. One of the things that caused me to look more closely at this issue, is that if you look in the New Testament at all the times the word choose, chose, chosen is used - every case it is God choosing us and not one case of us choosing God. I'm not surprised about the experience you described at the SDA church, where it was said "we're all just dirt." That really has nothing to do with Arminianism versus Calvinism. Instead, I think it has more to do with how SDA's believe it's up to us to cooperate with God so that we can become sinless before our probation closes so we can be accepted for heaven (because they say we have to be "safe" to save). With such a strong focus on overcoming sin in our life and being told by EGW to never consider ourselves saved until we are in heaven, it really messes with a person. It's really wonderful as a believer in Jesus to know that regardless of our sins, our new identity tells us we are saved, beloved, and grace lavished upon us because Jesus' righteousness is counted in place of any of our qualities. | ||
| Justdodie Registered user Username: Justdodie Post Number: 20 Registered: 2-2006 |
Dennis, I have a little different outlook on the quote you gave: "WE ARE, BY NATURE, FUGITIVES...THE UNBELIEVER WILL NOT SEEK. THE UNBELIEVER WILL NOT KNOCK. SEEKING IS THE BUSINESS OF BELIEVERS... SEEKING IS THE RESULT OF FAITH, NOT THE CAUSE OF IT." I've been seeking for 25 years, but certainly have not been a "believer" for most of that time. Most of the time I've just been wondering and asking and looking for answers. I have found that it wasn't until I made a conscious choice to commit to attending a church and studying regularly that I have been able to believe in any "real" way. And, still, I don't have any "certainty" or set beliefs---merely a desire to continue to seek and to learn whatever I can. Of course, I guess you might say that my willingness to be guided, to learn, is faith of a sort, although I don't think it's in the same sense as you're referring to. I've found that if the concept of God is presented in a way that makes sense, people are eager to embrace it. I think we are all seekers. We just may not realize it if we've never been offered anything worth accepting. Joyce | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1202 Registered: 10-2004 |
I think the "We're all just dirt" comment also testifies to how SDAs believe that we are, literally, just dirt--we have no soul, no spirit, just a body made from dirt with breath/spark of life, just like an animal. It really denies that we are made in the image of God and have immaterial spirits! Also (relating to the abortion topic), since an unborn baby is just dirt, it's ok to murder it.  Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2006) | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1203 Registered: 10-2004 |
The Adventist doctrine of Man is the same as the atheist belief. Jeremy | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 484 Registered: 7-2004  |
Another take on donuts. Donuts are placed in front of everyone. Pushups were done for every donut. No one naturally likes or wants donuts. The teacher gently feeds donuts to some, but not all, after which they discover that donuts really are good. The only thing that stops others from eating donuts is their own dislike. Even those who ate donuts are free to force themselves to throw them up later. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1204 Registered: 10-2004 |
Rick, I know you may have meant "salvation" rather than "Jesus" but I offer my differing viewpoint: I don't believe that we can "vomit" Jesus once we "eat" Him. We never get sick of Him--He causes us to love Him more and more. "...if anyone eats of this bread [single action in the Greek), he will live forever;" (John 6:51 NASB.) Also: "Jesus answered and said to her, 'Everyone who drinks [present tense] of this water will thirst again; 14but whoever drinks [single action] of the water that I will give him shall never thirst [unto the age(s)/forever]; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life." (John 4:13-14 NASB.) Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2006) | ||
| Justdodie Registered user Username: Justdodie Post Number: 21 Registered: 2-2006 |
Jeremy, can you please elaborate on your statement: "THE ADVENTIST DOCTRINE OF MAN IS THE SAME AS THE ATHEIST BELIEF." I'm not sure what you're referring to. Thanks, Joyce | ||
| Javagirl Registered user Username: Javagirl Post Number: 230 Registered: 6-2005 |
Grace, you forgot the 2nd part of the warning.... 1."So, you've been brainwashed into the cheap grace camp........(or New Covenant camp) 2. "I guess that means its okay to go out and murder someone......" Sigh | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1589 Registered: 3-2005 |
Justdodie, We agree about the fact that we were taught orthodox Trinitarianism in Adventism. I was also surprised that a lot of SDAs do not believe in the Trinity. That is why Adventism is such a mixed up mess of confusion. You will find true evangelical Christians mixed with Arian, Trinity-denying non-Christians. But you find the same thing now in the so-called evangelical world now with the full acceptance of TD Jakes as a brother in Christ by the likes of Billy Graham, Rick Warren, etc. TD Jakes denies the doctrine of the Trinity. Some will take a fine-toothed comb, and try to parse out the words of the SDA doctrinal statement claiming SDAs are tri-theists, but I hadn't heard that before. If a person accepts the Bible as inerrant, then there is no other way to read the entire Bible, than understand the fact that God is absolutely sovereign over everything. He has been the one choosing His people. We can only choose Him, after He first has drawn us to Him, and opened our spiritual eyes. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1205 Registered: 10-2004 |
Joyce, I was referring to the SDA belief that man is only material/physical (body/breath) and that we thus cease to exist when we die. The materialist atheists also believe this same thing. Javagirl, Yes, my dad was actually told by a relative on the phone (after he had only said that he believed we are saved by believing in Jesus and not by works--he didn't even say anything about the Law being obsolete!), that this means he must think that it is ok to murder, steal, etc. Yes, a big...sigh. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 27, 2006) |
