Now, w-a-a-i-i-t a minute....

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Edit Profile

Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post   Start New Thread

Author Message Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 1080 Registered: 5-2009 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 5:47 pm:        In a current "Signs of the Times" "special supplement" entitled "2012--Doomsday or Distraction" is an article called "God's Not Into Date Setting". It begins this way: "What do the years 1248, 1306, 1689, 1792, 1836, 1914, 1936, 1960, 1974, 1977, 1981, 1988, 1992, and 1994 all have in common?" OK, everyone, we all know what these dates are, right? It just happened that one particular date just kind of "slipped by" the SDA writers, editors and publishers of this "award-winning monthly magazine" (quote on back cover). Oops! Rossbondreturns Registered user Username: Rossbondreturns Post Number: 340 Registered: 10-2009 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 6:18 pm:        Oh that's just a classic I'll have to try and find a scan of that or something for my blog. Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 13445 Registered: 12-2003 Posted on Saturday, February 25, 2012 - 11:41 pm:        What??? That is absolutely unbelievable and not surprising, all at the same time. Good grief! Who do they think they're kidding? (Christians, right?) Colleen Foofighter Registered user Username: Foofighter Post Number: 213 Registered: 7-2005 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 11:00 am:        Nowisee, I get "Signs" in the mail too. Not sure how I got on the list. I didn't really read through it, and tossed it away. Wish I had it now. Amazing how 1844 was conveniently left off the list. Adventists are so dishonest...which is very odd, you know, being the remnant that keeps the commandments and all. Carol Leonie Registered user Username: Leonie Post Number: 48 Registered: 10-2011 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 11:16 am:        Just unbelieveable....... Rossbondreturns Registered user Username: Rossbondreturns Post Number: 341 Registered: 10-2009 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 11:31 am:        Well good news I have been provided with a copy of the supplemental magazine in question and will take a picture of the mentioned article. And then I'll do a write up for my Undercover Adventist blog. Just holding it and seeing it in print is surreal. Rain Registered user Username: Rain Post Number: 39 Registered: 9-2011 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 12:11 pm:        What? Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't many Adventists teach that the whole 1844 fiasco is a primary example of why people shouldn't date-set the Second Coming? Why would they leave it out, then? I feel like I missed something here. Also, they left out last year! When that radio guy predicted the Rapture. I remember all those poor people lined up at the churches with their suitcases and I, being Adventist still, just shook my head and felt sorry for them in my superior way. Ugh.... Rossbondreturns Registered user Username: Rossbondreturns Post Number: 342 Registered: 10-2009 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 12:26 pm:        Because they don't want people to see that date...people might research the dates and then find out that one is attached to Adventism. The're trying to be the voice of reason and discernment while they are in fact founded on a lack of discernment. Rossbondreturns Registered user Username: Rossbondreturns Post Number: 343 Registered: 10-2009 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 12:56 pm:        Exposing Adventism: Date Setting As promised. Ross Mjcmcook Registered user Username: Mjcmcook Post Number: 393 Registered: 2-2011 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 4:29 pm:        ~Thank-you, Ross~ ~mj~ Rain Registered user Username: Rain Post Number: 41 Registered: 9-2011 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 6:51 pm:        Oh. I was thinking more that they seem to know and say that the Millerites, their foundation, were wrong in their date-setting but instead build the IJ from that failure. I've heard it referred to as a "bittersweet" disappointment by SDAs. I can see why they wouldn't publish it now, though, since they have readers who aren't SDA. Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 9660 Registered: 3-2004 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 7:54 pm:        Thanks Ross. Diana Rossbondreturns Registered user Username: Rossbondreturns Post Number: 344 Registered: 10-2009 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 9:04 pm:        My pleasure guys it came through other friends involved with FAF and Apologetics. Glad I could be of service. Truman Registered user Username: Truman Post Number: 83 Registered: 1-2012 Posted on Sunday, February 26, 2012 - 9:16 pm:        Ross said: "They're trying to be the voice of reason and discernment while they are in fact founded on a lack of discernment." Ross, your comment perfectly captured the typical SDA position.