| Author | Message | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 178 Registered: 6-2006  |
Hi y'all! I spent part of the day with my in-laws to celebrate some birthdays and of course, the subject of church came up. Uncle-in-law said to Father-in-law, "It sure is great to have such a good Sabbath School lesson again. I don't know a lot about 1844, or 1888 and the IJ, but I really enjoyed learning about it". Father-in-law answered "we'll I spent some time up visiting Pastor (Robert) Wieland and our group was discussing how many SDA scholars like Waggoner, Canright, Rea, etc studied it and then got to a point to where they just left the church." Uncle-in-law then replied "well, you can try and navigate to Hawaii, but if you read one direction wrong, then you might end up in Los Angeles." Basically they figured that it was the fault of the scholars, NOT the doctrines that caused these guys to flee. I thought the whole exchange was funny, because since I've been part of this great group of Formers, (Thanks Colleen and Richard!) I knew exactly what and who they were talking about! In a way though, it made it worse, because I just wanted to shout out "IT'S A BAD DOCTRINE!! THESE GUYS LEFT BECAUSE THE IJ IS NOT BIBLICAL!! EGW IS A FALSE PROPHET!!" Of course I didn't want to stick my hand in that hornet's nest! Hehe. I'm sure we would've had WW3... Anyway, the situation made me appreciate all of you all the more. (((BIG HUG))) Leigh Anne | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2784 Registered: 3-2004  |
Leigh Anne, Here is a cyber hug to you. It is so good to know the names of whom they spoke and to know the TRUTH. I really appreciate this web site also and every one on it. We truly have an awesome God. Diana | ||
| Randyg Registered user Username: Randyg Post Number: 245 Registered: 12-2004 |
Sounds familiar, During my weekly golf game with my two Adventist buddies, one said to me, I'm a quarter way through that Cottrell paper you gave me. He's had it for like two months but I think is actually afraid to read it. I made the comment that it would make a good comparative study with Goldstein's Sabbath School lessons, and that it wouldn't use the word obviously nearly as often! I await his reaction to the rest of the paper. | ||
| Aliza Registered user Username: Aliza Post Number: 8 Registered: 8-2006 |
Randy, your comment about the Cottrell paper reminds me that a year ago I had a "chance" encounter in an airport. Three of us had been to a conference together and while waiting one of our group had engaged a young 20-something guy in conversation. When I rejoined the conversation, it had a spiritual topic to it. He was from Lincoln and "somehow" had been rerouted to the wrong location. I just knew he was SDA and that was quickly confirmed. The others dropped out of the conversation as he started asking me questions. Since that time he has remained in occasional e-mail contact. He said he recently was at a Sabbath School class and it had gotten him interested in reading the Cottrell paper I had referred him to. He said he'd tried to read it several times over the past year, but now was really doing it. I just love those Holy Ghost set-ups! He asked so many questions I was the last one on the plane. Aliza | ||
| Cathy2 Registered user Username: Cathy2 Post Number: 201 Registered: 2-2006 |
My memory is, probably, just glitchy, and I may have read it, ages ago, but what is the 'Cottrell Paper'? 'Cottrell' sounds so familiar. My parents fully believed Walter Rea (and Ford) in the 80's, then, in the late 90's, my dad completely turned back to Ellen like it never happened; to the point, that he accuses me and my children of going to hell if I (we) rejected the 'Spirit of Prophecy'--Ellen White. It just left me swimmy-headed. Especially, since Rea/Ford and my parent's attitude, back then, helped me intellectually, begin to break free of the SDA Institution. Thanks for any info on Cottrell, Cathy | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 181 Registered: 6-2006 |
Cathy, sometimes I get the feeling that if you reject EGW you're "rejecting" God. If that's the case, does that mean that she is God? Attitudes like that make me absolutely crazy!! Leigh Anne | ||
| Cathy2 Registered user Username: Cathy2 Post Number: 202 Registered: 2-2006 |
Yes, Leigh Anne, to my dad, that is what it is--rejecting God. It is crazy-making. (I have dents in my head) You should hear and see how frustrated my 16 y/o daughter gets when my family gets into Ellen-speak. She gets that way because she knows, sees and hears how they crave to convert her so much, change her, disapprove of her, think she is a little pagan, and wasn't raised right (by guess who). Oh well, she just tells them what scripture says or challenges them to find it in scripture. I just change the subject or ignore it all, by now, saying, "Really? Hmmmm". They know what I believe because I've emailed them stuff. I've learned the hard way because nothing will change people (but the HS) and they never give up. No, to SDA's, Ellen White is not God, but she spoke for God to the inth detail. Kind of like Prime Minister for the King. Oh blek. It's too nice a day to start it out with Ellen. See ya'll later! Love in Christ, Cathy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4558 Registered: 12-2003  |
Cottrell was one of the editors/compilers of the SDA Bible Commentary. He was also an assistant editor of the Adventist Review a few decades ago. Raymond Cottrell was one of the two founding editors of Adventist Today in the 90's. He was a brilliant man and a brilliant scholar. His "paper" is a farily long scholarly work which he didn't publish during his lifetime (he died in the early 2000's) because, I guess, he feared repurcussions. (It's too bad, because by the time it was published, several other people had already published the same findings.) At any rate, he explains how the entire 1844-IJ "thing" is not in the Bible. Cottrell was also on the "secret committee" appointed by the church in the 60's, I believe it was, to settle once and for all the Biblical support for the IJ. The committeed reached no consesnsus (so surprise there!), and never did publish an official report of their discussions. They did issue a "unanimous" vote endorsing the IJ, but the way they arrived at "unanimous" was that the dissenters, including Cottrell, left the room when the vote was taken. I always admired Cottrell when I sat on editorial committees with him for ATóbut I have an indelible memory of him sitting across the table from me, month after month, with sad eyes. Of course, other things could have been going on in his life as well, including simply agingóbut I always looked at him and thought, there is a man who has sadness and regret for the rationalizing he has done in order to maintain his reputation and position. Of course, I was merely conjecturingóbut I know he wanted to publish that paperóhe talked about itóbut with regret andówas it fear?óhe decided not to. Colleen | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2336 Registered: 11-2002 |
Randy, How come it is o.k. for SDA's to play golf but they aren't supposed to play competition sports? Do those SDA's play golf just for the fun and exercise of it or do they actually keep score? I'm courious. Yes, Leigh Anna, it can give a person a headache if one trys to make SDA's logical and rational when explaining the SDA religion. It just can't happen. For that to happen the SDA would have to admit his religion is a pick and choose religion of EGW's writings and they just won't come right out and say that. | ||
| Lisa_boyldavis Registered user Username: Lisa_boyldavis Post Number: 215 Registered: 3-2005 |
The thing that is so crazy making is that there are some topics that do not allow for logic, fact finding or clarity of thought or discussion. Theology is one topic, politics another. I have often thought, if only I could have a rational conversation with this Adventist or that, they'd get it, but I've learned that the "blinders" or the "veil" arenít see through, but made of woolen heavy and back, so that there is no way for even the most obvious "fact" to change one's mind. Thatís why I so value and LOVE the Holy Spirit! Lisa | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2793 Registered: 3-2004 |
And the Holy Spirit is the only one who can tear that veil in two so the person can see, hear and understand the Gospel. Thank You God for the Holy Spirit. You are awesome. Diana |
