| Author |
Message |
Jonvil
Registered user
Username: Jonvil
Post Number: 533
Registered: 4-2007
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 12:44 pm: |     |
Only after I started reading your posts on FAF
By the way, I don't think you look funny 
(Message edited by JONVIL on April 11, 2011) |
Indy4now
Registered user
Username: Indy4now
Post Number: 1034
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 5:11 pm: | |
I think that whether Ellen wrote that "innocently" or "not innocently" doesn't matter. The content of the message is unbiblical and therefore sinful. In the end, we are sinful whether we intentionally sin or unintentionally sin. As Colleen wrote above, God will judge us based on whether or not we know Jesus.
vivian |
Animal
Registered user
Username: Animal
Post Number: 915
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 6:49 pm: | |
Cauliflower... I happen to know (a reliable source) that root beer was a common drink of the holy lands. I highly recommend it to all to indulge and enjoy. Personally I think it would be good to serve at communion services. Might even increase attendance..lol lol
....Animal |
Indy4now
Registered user
Username: Indy4now
Post Number: 1035
Registered: 2-2008
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 6:56 pm: | |
... only if you make it a float Animal! |
Cauliflower
Registered user
Username: Cauliflower
Post Number: 37
Registered: 2-2011
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 8:11 pm: | |
I'm with Indy |
Hec
Registered user
Username: Hec
Post Number: 1727
Registered: 3-2009
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 10:23 pm: | |
What kind of animal are you? Why do you have to keep messing up with my mind? Here we go again. "Root Beer would be good to serve at communion services."
I once heard at a non-SDA church that one could have communion with any food and any drink. Now you come up with that to remind me of that. Sometime back I asked this forum about it, but there was not enough interest to answer. Maybe now, some of the new members, or maybe even old, may comment on that. Would it be proper to use any "element" to use in communion service?
Hec |
Cauliflower
Registered user
Username: Cauliflower
Post Number: 41
Registered: 2-2011
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 10:27 pm: | |
I say we use Mike's Hard Lemonade and burgers. :D |
Rossbondreturns
Registered user
Username: Rossbondreturns
Post Number: 152
Registered: 10-2009
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 10:36 pm: | |
Well Hec my pastor when I was up at Countryside Christian Fellowship (Calvary Chapel Eugene Oregon) did a fantastic service on Communion. One that my Dad attended no less...and loved.
ONe of his illustrations was that he went hiking into the mountains with some buddies and they were looking down on creation and were so awed they wanted to take communion. All they had was Reeses Pieces and Mountain Dew!
So that's what they used!
As long as you have what the symbols represent in mind I think Jesus will be cool either way.
The Spirit in me certainly wasn't flashing any danger signals that's for certain. |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12498
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2011 - 10:41 pm: | |
Hec, in Matthew 26 Jesus is quoted as He instituted the Lord's Supper. First, He used the bread and the wine of the traditional Passover meal. So we already know that the bread was unleavened and the wine was grape.
Verses 26-29 describe this new thing:
quote:Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.”
So Jesus was clear that communion is to be celebrated with bread and grape juice/wine. He even said that as His symbol of betrothal to them and the whole church, while they (and we) are remembering Him by drinking the wine, He will remember us by not drinking the fruit of the vine until He drinks it new with us in the Father's kingdom.
In other words, we will drink it with Him when we are reunited with Him in the kingdom. The wine is the symbol of Hi blood, and it is this that we are to drink. He honors this remembrance by NOT drinking until He is with us.
So yes, communion is specific: bread (perhaps not necessarily unleavened, but it must be bread) and grape wine/juice. It specifically represents Christ's body--the broken bread of life, and His blood shed to atone for our sins.
Just by the by, Mormons use water for their communion service. Interesting how they eliminate the symbol of Christ's shed blood...
PS--I just read Rossbond's post above...I agree that it's not necessarily sacrilegious to use whatever one has if they want to remember together. But in general, if there's a chance to plan, Jesus did specify the symbols.
(Message edited by Colleentinker on April 11, 2011) |
Animal
Registered user
Username: Animal
Post Number: 917
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 10:22 am: | |
I was only kidding....sigh.
This forum sometimes needs a little levity now and then to ease the burdens of life.
Indy...Amen on that root beer float concept. Now we got to work on unleavened popcorn too.
....Animal...can I hear an Amen?? |
Cauliflower
Registered user
Username: Cauliflower
Post Number: 46
Registered: 2-2011
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 10:45 am: | |
Amen |
Honestwitness
Registered user
Username: Honestwitness
Post Number: 1155
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 11:43 am: | |
*chuckle* Amen! (Thanks for the levity. I need all of that I can get.) |
Freeatlast
Registered user
Username: Freeatlast
Post Number: 754
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 12:11 pm: | |
So...Nuteena slices and Postum out of the question eh? |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12499
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 1:50 pm: | |
Hey, Animal--I know! I love your root beer and popcorn...I can't think of any situation it doesn't improve!
Colleen |
Hec
Registered user
Username: Hec
Post Number: 1729
Registered: 3-2009
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 2:29 pm: | |
I know you were kidding, Animal. But sometimes your kidding brigs out questions that are more difficult than the serious posts. As you notice in my reply post for you I was also kidding (What kind of animal are you..?
But I did have that question in mind for some time and you just brought it up.
Hec... Let's go to the zoo together |
Animal
Registered user
Username: Animal
Post Number: 918
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 12, 2011 - 2:35 pm: | |
Why do they put animals in cages and behind bars??
I think maybe humans need to be behind bars for how they treat us animals.
,,,,Animal...thinking out loud..lol lol |
River
Registered user
Username: River
Post Number: 7197
Registered: 9-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - 12:03 pm: | |
Jacob,
I enjoyed reading you post, I haven't read all the response as there are many.
What I want to say to you is that from the very beginning when I came to this forum it has been a great concern to me that so many formers considered practicing Adventist as merely deceived Christians. This has left them woefully weakened in fighting any spiritual battles they may incur.
But Jacob, I have seen tremendous growth in formers as a whole, formers as a whole are more quick to identify Adventism as a false gospel, a cult and all those formers are not necessarily associated with this forum nor with Trinity.
I really don't know how to explain this, but I do know the year it began to change and formers are beginning to actively fight for the faith. I know God is doing a great work here.
I just got my copy of Proclamation! today and look forward to reading the article, 'Why Seventh-day Adventism is not evangelical' Thanks colleen for sending it to me, I had not received one in many months, but I think this Addition will turn out to be one of the most important additions to date. Not to demean the others in in way though.
I don't know whether you care or not as to how I as a 'Never been' see things, but I wanted you to know that I think I see a great work being done among formers and I rejoice with them and you. keep up the good work my friend. Take care.
River |
Jonvil
Registered user
Username: Jonvil
Post Number: 534
Registered: 4-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 - 3:17 pm: | |
River
It does take time for it to sink in, It's a acceptance curve.
As a former, the more I read/investigate the more I realize just how poisonous Adventism is. I get to a point when I think it can't get any worst than this, then someone brings up another Adventist blasphemy, like a high profile senior Adventist pastor giving a Muslim friendly sermon, basically saying the Adventist God and the Muslim God are the same God.
After being out for four years I should expect anything from this anti-gospel cult but I'm still caught off guard when even more evidence is produced showing, once again, just how false it is.
It's quite difficult to transit from belief in a sqeaky clean image to aceptance that that image is corrupt at it's very core.
John Douglas |
Jackob
Registered user
Username: Jackob
Post Number: 585
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, April 14, 2011 - 8:56 am: | |
@All
Please excuse the silence of last days on a topic I started. I don't have the time I wish to interact with all that has been written.
@River
Thanks for your input coming from a different background.
I have something to add regarding former's struggle in assessing adventism.
As former adventist, we knew how bad this toxic system affected us. For a detox, we were forced, against our natural inclinations, to leave adventism behind. Sooner or later we understood that spiritual survival requires leaving this medium.
While we were conscious of our spiritual scars, in our interactions with our friends, relatives, at least those who still talked with us seemed either unaffected or only partially affected by their adventism. With other words, in our interactions, it was like the adventism we knew and practiced was different than the adventism they know and practice. And this creates confusion.
Let me use a real example. I have one adventist friend converted to adventism from eastern-orthodoxy, and in one conversation I disclosed the fact that I went through the standard stages of grieving when I discovered that Ellen White was not a prophet. It was like my spiritual mother died and it took me a lot of time to adjust.
I don't know if I made a mistake, it seems that it was, he jumped to tell me that this kind of relation to Ellen reveals an anomaly, for him Ellen never was and never will be a spiritual mother. The official position of the church, he told me, is that Ellen is not Virgin Mary.
I had no doubts that his position doesn't reflect accurately the real position Ellen White occupies in the church, what confuses me for a long time was the apparent lack of effect the indoctrination of the church had on him.
The problem was not what can be noticed objectively about the adventist system. As a system, for us, formers, I think it was clear that it's entirely corrupt. The problem was the subjective effect of it on individuals.
It seemed that many of adventists escaped the bad effects adventism had on us, formers. We took seriously Ellen White's testimonies, they didn't. We felt guilty for not being perfect, they didn't. We felt like a spiritual mess for petty things, they didn't pay attention. We had fears of having to stand before God without a mediator, they seemed to be assured that God's grace assured them of a swift passing through the judgment. We functioned with toxic shame in ourselves, they didn't.
While studying our way out of adventism, we were able to trace back the sources of our fears, toxic shame, to the theology of adventism. We understood the connections, but many adventists talk like they never believed or never experienced the logical consequences which we, formers, experienced.
What much later I understood is that adventists, like a dysfunctional family, live in denial. Just because they said so, X doesn't exist. Don't talk, if you don't talk, the problem is inexistent. The system as a whole doesn't leave anybody unaffected. People may be in denial, but this will not make the doctrines and the bad effects disappear. If you're exposed to poison, it will have the effects of poison.
Gabriel |
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker
Post Number: 12504
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 14, 2011 - 4:54 pm: | |
Gabriel, very well said. I have come to the same conclusion. Many Adventists deny "believing" EGW, or say they don't feel bound to the peculiar practices of historic Adventism...but it's self-deception.
What every single Adventist has in common is a worldview shaped by the Great Controversy. Even if they think Sabbath isn't "necessary" to be saved, they still believe it's eternal and important, and if they "know it", they'll be held responsible for it.
All Adventists hold Sabbath in common (even if they have different attitudes about it), and they have "soul sleep" or no-immaterial-spirit in common. They all believe EGW was at least used by God, even if they deny she was a prophet. They all believe Satan is the scapegoat. They all believe God needs to be vindicated and that the law is the transcript of His character. They all believe Jesus was "just like us"...hence, He, too, was a human without an immaterial spirit that existed consciously during death. They all believe it's God's obligation to preserve human and angelic (including demonic) free will, thus limiting Himself and His foreknowledge for the sake of the creatures.
No matter how different their external practices, they all hold a great controversy worldview that defines their view. The poison warps their worldviews in the same way...and they have no idea that see existence from a non-biblical, unreal perspective.
They think their external practices and conscious beliefs define them...but they don't. They are actually defined by the Adventist, EGW-generated great controversy worldview.
Colleen |
|
