| Author | Message | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 363 Registered: 7-2005  |
I decided to start a new thread as a response to WOW challenge, because the subject on the original thread deviated to other concerns. I hesitated to post an answer because I tried to understand WOWís perspective. I looked myself in his mirror and I came to a different conclusion than him. Basically, his challenge can be resumed in this way: former Adventists suffer a personality disorder, because they hate and love Adventism at the same time. The idea is that we are here trying to distance ourselves from the Adventist identity, but at the same time we are retaining it. With an eye we weep, with the other we laugh. WOW said
I believe that this common trait is the most important thing formers have in common with HCA. And this is because both groups share a common view of inspiration, the belief that inspiration is linked with innerancy. Inspired writings, the books of the Bible, are innerant, 100% accurate. Comparing truth with white and untruth with black, the Bible is entirely white, without black spots. Also, because all is white, there are no gray areas in the Bible, areas where the truth is combined with what is false, or innacurate. Iím using the words black, white and gray because WOW used these terms. If we believe that the Bible is entirely white, obviously what we see as opposed to the Bible is black. It is not even gray, meaning that we are convinced that what we believe is true, not that what we believe may be true, or that what contradicts the Bible may be true. We are sure of what we believe, and donít see things as gray where the Bible is clear. But this view about the innerancy of the Bible is not shared only by Hyper-Conservative Adventists. It is the view which the protestant world upholded in general, until the arrival of modernism, with itís relative approach to the knowledge of truth, and the high criticism of the Bible. As a reaction, the movement of american fundamentalism tried to battle with the liberal approach. Believing in the innerancy of the Bible and not allowing for gray areas in it is not at all a particular trait of adventism. It is not a part of the identity of adventism. Itís a part of the identity of christianity. The adventist identity is given by those doctrines and practices which makes them different than the rest of the christians. Especially the Investigative Judgment is what gives adventism identity. Someone can keep the sabbath, donít eat pigs, donít smoke, but still not be an adventist, but a seveth day baptist or a messianic jews. Believing in the IJ is what makes someone adventist, and the interpretation of the rest of the doctrines through IJ lens gives him the identity as adventist. My conclusion is that if the innerancy of the Bible which former adventists have in common with the Hyper Conservative Adventists will be a particular adventist trait, like the IJ, or like the idea of Sabbath being the last day seal of God, WOW will have good reasons to believe that formers retained their adventists identity. But this is not the case. Many adventists today are forced to abandon their belief in the innerancy of the Bible, because obviously Ellen White made many innacurate statements in her supposed inspired writings, not to mention that she contradicted the Bible many times. A belief in an innerant Ellen White is more and more an isolated view, shared only by conservative adventists, or historic adventists. Adventists, for remaining adventists, are forced to believe that there are also gray areas in the Bible, and their thinking is entirely changed, toward relativism and a type of irrational mysticism. Mysticism because they believe that something is truth without no reason. If something in the Bible can be a mistake, you may believe with all your heart that what you read in the Bible is truth, but in reality, according to your belief, it can also be wrong. Believing in the existence of gray areas in the Bible and plunging in relativism is the inevitable result for someone who still wants to retain the identity of adventism, to continue to believe in Ellen White as a prophet. WOW said that we remind him of adventists, that we retained our adventist identity. I will use an illustration, to make myself clear. Girls abused sexually by their fathers encounters many problems in relating to men when they grow up. Every man reminds them of their abuser. It doesnít matter if the man is full of love and compassion, just because he is a man, because he shares his gender with the abuser, this arouses fear and distrust in the victim. But itís irrational to see in a man the abuser just because he has something in common with the abuser. There are many men who are loving. Being a man is not a part of the identity of the abuser. To be an abuser, to be criminal, this implies to have some particular traits, not common with the rest of the people. The same I believe about what formers have in common with the Hyper Conservative Adventists. What we have in common with them is what we have in common with the rest of the christians. I will adress the less important issues in future posts. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4881 Registered: 12-2003  |
Jackob, what good insights. You are so rightóthe issue boils down to one's view of the inerrancy of Scripture. Without the "gold standard" of absolute truth as revealed in Scripture and as made alive in Jesus, no person's opinion is more accurate than another's. If truth is absolute, however, there IS truth, and we must know that Truth! Colleen | ||
| Susans Registered user Username: Susans Post Number: 76 Registered: 8-2006 |
Amen, Jackob! As we say in America, you are right on the money! Susan | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2975 Registered: 3-2004  |
I am always awed when an Adventist leaves the SDA church and thinks they are the only one out there. Then they discover this web site and discover that the truth God taught them, on their own, is the same truth God taught each one of us when we left adventism. This is also what the Christian community, that we have been taught is part of Babyon, believes also. I like to say that this truth has given us a large family of brothers and sisters. I am so thankful for that. God, you are so AWESOME. Diana | ||
| Pheeki Registered user Username: Pheeki Post Number: 831 Registered: 1-2003 |
Here is a personality disorder for you! http://www.sdadefend.com/Report-Ohio/Organized%20Apostacy.htm Typical SDA nutjob! | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 366 Registered: 7-2005 |
Precisely because of our view about inspiration many adventists will mock formers. Adventists apologists created a straw man, claiming that we believe in a dictational model of inspiration. Adventists apologists are on the way to discredit former adventists precisely because of their view of inspiration. The dictational model claims that inspired writers listened to a voice which told them exactly what to wrote, giving them the exact words. Because this model, which is not true, sustains inerrancy, it is supposed to be the real view of those who believe in inerrancy. This is simply not true. We believe that the words are inspired, because words defines the content of communication, and the content is without error. Changing a word can easily change the message, the content. But inspired words is not equal with dictated words. I insist on this point because it's the easiest way to discredit a former believer in Ellen White "Oh, you believe that words are inspired, that the Holy Spirit dictated them. Don't you know that Peter has a different writer style than Paul? Or than John?" And they really believe that we are ignorant, or dishonest because we don't recognize the obvious: that there are different styles of writing in the Bible. A dictational model fails to acknowledge the human part in the writing. Adventists assume that because the biblical authors used their own words, these words reflect their personal interpretation of what God revelead to them. For them, the content is altered by the human filter, it's still an inerrant message but transmitted throgh human lens. Their view allows Elen White to change the words and even alter the content on the basis that she corrected her human understanding of the inerrant revelation given her by God. God gave her ideas, these ideas passed through her mind, and arrived on the pages altered by her human thinking. So, it's not a mistake to change the words. Even if it's correct to believe that the authors used their own words, we can believe that the Holy Spirit preserved the content of the revelation for us. The writings of the Bible does not need improvement, correction, because the Holy Spirit is not improving His ability to communicate. he is not in need to correct bible writers after they delivered their message telling them "Wait, try to speak clearer next time" | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4891 Registered: 12-2003 |
So true, Jackob! Colleen |
