| Author | Message | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 6343 Registered: 9-2006  |
Concept…what is a concept? A theory, model, hypothesis, view, belief. I’ll try to simplify this thought a little bit if I can. One example might be a motor vehicle. There are many specific parts to a car, the starting system, the cooling system, engine, drivetrain, breaking system, and within those systems are subsystems containing many parts. We would classify the motor vehicle as a ‘conveyance’, and today we might think of a conveyance as a motor vehicle, we don’t normally think of each part of a motor vehicle when we think of our car. The concept of the car was a conveyance, and since Henry Ford rolled out the first model, there have been many improvements on the cars as we know it today. But the concept is still the same, it doesn’t fly or float, it rolls over the ground as it did when the first model rolled off the assembly line. In 1990, I started buying new cars, instead of running used cars, as soon as the warranty ran out, I bought or leased another one and I did this until around 2000, when I decided that it was over costing to run new cars. In the meantime I had let my skills drop, I hardly ever even raised the hood of my car in that time between 1990 and 2000. When I again started buying used cars, I needed to know at least if I was getting ripped off or not by the shops. I walked out and looked at the engine, and it was full of electronics, fuel injection, smog devices, and so on that I was not familiar with at all. So I had to go back and study the cars computer systems and smog devices to bring myself up to speed on these vehicles. But…the concept was still the same, so I only had to study the fuel systems, and the computer systems. I am used to not only studying specific parts, but concepts, and summer before last I wanted to develop a fuel saving device, and in order to do this I had to return to the concepts of fuel atomization. By doing this I was able to develop a device that gives me a few more miles per gallon of gasoline. How much depending on outside temperature, air inversion and many other factors. Well…the study of theology is much the same in principle, you study systems and subsystems (Well, kind of more or less  ) Lets take for example, Calvinism versus Arminianism. To properly study this, we would try to give a defense for Calvinism, and an equal effort at giving a defense for Armininanism. If you are only prepared to give a defense for, say Calvinism, it is difficult to find the concept of either. But both are subsystems within a system, the system of Christianity. Its like if I say I am only willing to study a cylinder, but not the gas molecules that make that cylinder go up and down, it is one sided, or skewed. Now I’m sure we have all studied the fundamentals of Adventism, all 28 of them. I have looked at them and examined them one by one. I haven’t looked at them in a while, but I remember agreeing with some of them. The fundamentals of Adventism as a whole is meant to be a conveyance of some sort. Its not that all the fundamentals are incorrect, it is the concept that is incorrect. In other words, if this thing was a car, it wouldn’t work, it wouldn’t function to the exact science of a motor vehicle. It is unserviceable. Like a car body on wheels, it looks somewhat like a car, but when you raise the hood and look, the engine and drive train is not there. The concept you had of a car is incorrect. You thought it was a car, until you lifted that hood and looked. The concept is missing. That is what Adventism looks like to borned again believer. Christianity is a concept that has a working whole, not hole… whole. What makes it function is Christ total and complete atonement, Without total and complete atonement, we have no working concept, and we have no salvation. We are totally and completely dependant on Jesus atonement. There can be no middle ground, and the total concept of Christianity is based on this. The concept of Adventism is based on a process. If a thing is in process, it is not finished, not yet serviceable, a car on the assembly line at Ford could be termed ‘in process’ and until it rolls off the assembly line, it is unfinished, not useful as a conveyance, not serviceable. But our Christianity is based on a finished atonement. That is the concept of our faith. It is a working concept, complete, finished. Gods word, from the beginning to end, contains precepts that lead to the concept of Christianity, and there can be only one conclusion, the complete atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross. Our life is in Christ or we have no life at all. The reason the concept contained in Christianity works is because it is a finished work of God. Christ finished work on the cross gives us life in him. The reason the concept of Adventism does not work is because it is based on a process, unfinished work or works. It strives for a finished product. It conveys nothing. In Christ, and through Christ atonement, our works has ceased and we are at rest in him. The concept is total and complete. I have endeavored to convey here, that it is not the incorrectnesses of Adventism, but that the concept of the whole is incorrect. Therefore no part of it is useful. There is nothing worth holding onto, and I suppose that is what I wanted to communicate to you today, River | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 2168 Registered: 5-2007  |
River, Let me say what I think you just said; only, let me say it my way. If a chemist were to correctly and completely analysis every physical component of the human body then put everything on his list into a pot apply some heat and an electrical charge, what would he have? Just this: Warmed up and ionized slug with a bad stink and nothing more….no life there! All Adventist theology gives you is a warmed up slug with an unpleasant smell to it. Fearless Phil | ||
| Yenc Registered user Username: Yenc Post Number: 118 Registered: 6-2008 |
While it is true that the "whole" of Adventism is defective and therefore doesn't work, it is also true that Satan's most effective technique is to mix truth and error, package it up and sell it as a bundle. In other words, he wants us to have an all-or-nothing mentality. This is as dangerous as accepting the erroneous parts one by one! We must examine what the Bible says and determine what is truth and what is error in any church's creed or any human teacher's collection of doctrines. I'm still searching for a church that I believe is closer to what I perceive to be a biblical creed than other groups, and until I am satisfied, I have to go with where the Holy Spirit and my prayerful studies are leading me. At this point, I don't trust anything else! I see a lot of things even here on this site that people adamantly claim as truth that I can see are unbiblical. These I have to reject, without hostility to the people who post, for I'm assuming (in charity) that we are all still on our journeys, just in different places on the road, some farther along, some farther behind, or just starting out, but all seeking truth, as I am, too. | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 8252 Registered: 3-2004  |
I am so glad God told me to go to the church I attend. The one thing I have found so far is the suggestion to tithe. I have spoken to our senior pastor about it and told him how the adventists use it. He does not say for us to tithe and does not harangue us from the platform. He or one of the other pastors mention it, especially the one that does the offering prayer. When them mention tithing, I tell myself that God loves a cheerful giver. I do not feel like walking out any more. Diana l | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 11333 Registered: 12-2003  |
River and Phil--I agree. There is nothing worth holding onto. Yenc, the difference between Adventism, for example, and other Christian churches if they are Bible-teaching churches, is that the Christian churches have their roots in the true apostolic gospel. Adventism was founded in heresy. It's not the superficial teachings that most accurately define a church—although those are certainly important. It's the founding root that determines whether or not a tree will bear good fruit. To be sure, many Christian churches have various differences regarding specific secondary doctrines such as baptism, eschatology, etc...but these things do not determine whether or not a church is teaching the true gospel. It is better to worship with a Christian body of believers, even if they differ with us on certain secondary doctrines, than to remain uninvolved while we look for a "good church". There is something profound that happens when we regularly rub shoulders with the body of Christ and sit under the teaching of people who have submitted their lives to the Lord Jesus as teachers of His word. If a church, however, doesn't have the cross and the gospel, the word of God, and the Trinity correct and central, then it is not a safe place to grow for sure! Colleen |
