| Author | Message | ||
| Prinsen Registered user Username: Prinsen Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2005 |
Dear FAF brothers and sister! This is my first post and it is a statement but I will surely most be posting questions later on... What I found was that the difference between Adventism and Evangelicalism is based in the difference in systematic theology (the foundational theology statement which all theology is derived from). The Adventist systematic theology is based upon ìThe Universal battle between good and evilî (God and Satan). The Evangelical systematic theology is based upon ìChrist and the crossî. This difference influence both what interpretation rules you use when you study the Bible and of course also the whole theology. Do I need to say what is obvious to me, what the core of my faith is? Christ of course!!! The whole Bible points to the Cross, doesnít it? My point is that it is important to have this in mind when you talk to or study the Bible with Adventists. Most of them will surely not see that it is such a big difference but it is. -------- Since it is my first post here I thought Iíd give a short testimony of who I am: a Swedish Adventist in transition who has come far enough to be looking for a new local church to belong to. I was not born into Adventism or Christianity but come from a secular family. My faith has always felt like ìborrowedî from what other people said, not entirely my own. As I some years ago went through a personal crisis I started to question my faith and found a deep yearning to make my faith my own. I started on page one (is there a god or not) and I just kept going. So I found that Christ is alive and he is my Saviour (because of faith alone). But when I came to the Adventist beliefs I had been taught I discovered that they donít match the teachings of the New Testament. So here I am now, convinced that I need to find another church and still I need to make up with my Adventist past (and I guess that is why Iím here). /Martin | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2041 Registered: 3-2004  |
Martin, Welcome to the FAF. God has surely led you here. Ask any questions you want to ask and there will always be someone to help you find the answer. Jesus is all we need. Diana | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 369 Registered: 7-2004  |
Martin, what you point out about the systematic theology of SDAism is so true. Everything is filtered through the great controversy and it results in a very different picture than seeing everything through the cross. | ||
| Benevento Registered user Username: Benevento Post Number: 64 Registered: 4-2005 |
Martin WElcome--Do you still live in Sweden, or have you transitioned to North America? I was interested that you are looking for a new church, so am I, and my husbands family came from Sweden, some stayed with the state Church,Lutheran, and some went to the Baptist--In our area we have the Evangelical Covenant Church that was either started in Sweden or by Swedes in the Chicago area, I'm not clear on that, but it is based on the Bible only. I am curious if it is an active church in Sweden? Wondered if you knew? I hope this site will encourage and help you on your journey as God leads you!! Peggy | ||
| Prinsen Registered user Username: Prinsen Post Number: 2 Registered: 5-2005 |
Peggy, Yes, I still live in Sweden. I would guess that the Evangelical Covenant Church was started in the US, many swedes emigrated because the only church allowed in Sweden was the state church. Around one million swedes emigrated to the US during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, some because of poverty and some because of religion. /Martrin | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2965 Registered: 12-2003  |
Martin, welcome to the forum! So glad you've joined us. I agree--your insight about the SDA theology being based in the great controversy creates a completely different product than does Christ and the Cross. With prayers that God will guide you to the church where He knows you can grow and participate, Colleen | ||
| Pauls Registered user Username: Pauls Post Number: 50 Registered: 9-2005 |
forgive me, but i am confused. isn't the cross the central event of the great controversy--thus they are intricately related? without a controversy, you cannot have a fall, without a fall, you do not need a saviour.... (i acknowledge that while there is a controversy it is not "great" in the sense that God's sovereignty was ever up for grabs...the devil can't even wink or swish his tail without permissioin from God..and all things are held together and sustained by Christ at all times--so it was an unequal contest from the start--and since God, the Father wrote the book--He wrote Jesus in as Lord of Lords and sacrificial lamb simaltaneously. in a sense it was all finshed in God's mind when it started...but His victory needed to come down to us temporal beings...which brings us to the cross... | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 49 Registered: 7-2005 |
The great controversy theme says that GOD is judged, and BECAUSE of the accusation of Satan, He MUST respond, and He defended his character through the cross. The cross becomes a necessity, not something optional. The grace is what it is, name, free, springing from the loving heart of God, who freely chooses to save us, unbound by anything. GC says that god's grace is not so free, God must justify Himself, and if He don't he looses His case. So, in the cross, and in all He's doing God first is protecting His interest, because His character is at stake. And, consequently, He just acted partly from His love for us, and partly from self interest. More, because of the accusations, He must exonerated himself, through Christ, His life, dying, and resurrection, who perfectly kept the Law. No keeping perfectly the law, God loose his case. So, the mission of Christ is a must, He must kept the law, and died, to demonstrate that the law of God aare not opposed to His justice. I hope it helps | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 371 Registered: 7-2004 |
Jackob, you make a good point. The cross is a central point in the great controversy theme, but the controvery theme interprets the cross. The first and foremost principle for understanding everything is the great controversy. The fall of Satan is recast. Instead of the fall being about Satan's pride and desire to be like God, it becomes about a debate over the fairness of God's Law (try finding that in Scripture!). The role of the cross becomes obscured. The cross is more about God winning the battle with Satan than about God offering Himself as a sacrifice in our place. The life of Christ becomes a test of whether the law can be kept and introduces the idea that Christ could have failed. The emphasis is on Christ as our proof and our roadmap for how to also live a perfect live and obtain salvation instead of a substitutionary life lived in our place. So yes the cross is given an important place in the great controversy theme, but its meaning is changed. This subtle distiction can be witnessed in the imagery of the SDA church. You are far more likely to see the 3 angels on signs, letterhead, and stained glass than you will find a cross. And the core teaching of the three angels message, according to SDAs, is a call to Sabbath observance. In this great controversy theme where the central question is God's law, the emphasis of the church is also God's law--not the Cross. | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 489 Registered: 4-2000  |
Ric, An excellent analysis--you hit the nail on the head repeatedly. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2974 Registered: 12-2003 |
Ditto to Dennis, Ric! Incidentally, until the past several years Adventists not only used angels more frequently that crosses--they actually taught against the use of crosses. I grew up hearing that the cross should never be used in church because such use was Catholic. Only recently have Adventist churches begun to use crosses occasionally. While the Catholic excuse seemed "adequate" to explain our non-use of crosses when I was small, the underlying message I actually grew to believe was that the cross was a pagan symbol and had no place in a true church. Yes, I was taught Jesus died on the cross. No, I did not see the cross as the center of my beliefs and spiritual understanding. It was almost peripheral. Oh, yes--it had to be there; Jesus had to die that awful death for some reason...but once I "accepted" it, the rest of salvation's requirements began. Even though many Adventists today are taught the cross more centrally than I was, I know they do not (for the most part) really understand it for what it is. I know, because I lived in that evangelical, "Bible-Only" Adventist Land for years before I decided my beliefs had to match my practices. Colleen | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1072 Registered: 7-2003  |
I grew up believing that Christ's death on the cross gave us the theoretical opportunity to be saved. That is, the cross was the down payment that I couldn't afford, but it was still up to me to continue to make the monthly mortgage payments. A missed payment could still result in repossession of my salvation. Little did I know that Christ bought the whole thing and gave the title to me as a free gift, signed, Sealed, and delivered! Chris | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 372 Registered: 7-2004 |
Chris, that is a great analogy of SDA salvation by faith compared to the Biblical doctrine. | ||
| Insearchof Registered user Username: Insearchof Post Number: 24 Registered: 8-2005 |
Chris, I really like your analogy! I have used the example of the Holy Spirit as the 'earnest money' if you will for our salvation, but never thought about how true it is that as Adventists, if we 'miss a payment', our salvation could be repossessed. Thanks for the great thought! InSearchOf | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1074 Registered: 7-2003 |
InSearchOf, Interesting you should mention this. I was just looking at II Cor. 1:21-22 this weekend:
The interesting thing I discovered is that the Greek behind the word "deposit" does not suggest a deposit in the way we think of it in our society (i.e. some money that we put down on something we are buying or renting). Rather it suggest the first dispersement of an inheritance which guarantees that the rest of the inheritance will be given as well. Think of it, God has already given us the first dispersement of salvation, rigtheousness, eternal life, and His presence. These things will be more fully realized in the final state, but we are already in possession of these gifts in a very real, present-tense way now! It boggles the mind how blessed we truly are in Christ. Chris | ||
| Insearchof Registered user Username: Insearchof Post Number: 25 Registered: 8-2005 |
Amen and Amen! InSearchOf | ||
| Pauls Registered user Username: Pauls Post Number: 52 Registered: 9-2005 |
fascinating discussion. chris, i loved your analogy. very good point. of course the Bible does say that "he that shall endure to the end shall be saved". mat 24:13 leaving that same open ended conclusion.... but later, it also says that "IF it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." matt 24:24, implying that the elect cannot be decieved and thus lose their salvation. sometimes it seems to me that truth is like a circle--both extremes are often true, but no extreme taken by itself is true. somehow we have accept both inside a ring of truth. for example:the sovereignty of God and the free will of man. many people go to one extreme or the other (calvinist vs. armininan) when in fact the Bible speaks of both as true. We want to have our theology in a neat logic tight bundle. God's mind is above ours, His ways beyond comprehension. All we can do is see the shadow if the reality and guess at the truth. going back to the great controversy theme, the Bible seems to indicate God puts great importance on His glory--part of which is his character...Isa 42:08, 48:11, 43:07. 66:18, Mal 2:2, John 15:8 in 1 cor 10:31 we are told to do all to the glory of God---which seems to be the reason for the existence of a christian---and rev 4:11 clearly states that our existence is for God's pleasure-and His pleasure seems to be to reveal His glory in and through us-(Eph 1:6,12) to whom? paul seems to imply that we are made a spectacle unto angels, not just men 1 cor 4:9..so must not the cross and the christian walk be bigger than just saving us? must it not also be about Gods own glory? and if it is, then our salvation is actually secondary? Is this a unique adventist position. i don't think so consider these Oswald Chambers quotes: Our Lords primary obediance was to the will of His Father, not to the needs of people. The saving of people was a natural outcome of His obedience to the Father. My Utmost, 6/19 when we preach we are not simply to proclaim how people can be saved from hell and be made moral and pure, we are to convey the good news ABOUT GOD. My Utmost 5/5 Revelation calls it the "Everlasting" gospel. if the gospel is just about jesus dying for our sins so we can avoid hell and get to heaven, how is it everlasting? before sin and once we get to heaven its irrelevant. John 3:16 says "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son...." we tend to focus on the last part of the phrase, but structurally (i am not an english teacher) it seems to me that the sentence emphasis is about God's love--not about Him giving his son so whoever won't perish. His son given is an expansion of the concept of God so loved... how much did He love? what does this love look like? it looks like this: HE gave His only Son... So it does seem that the true purpose of the cross was to reveal that God is good, kind, and trustworthy beyond our comprehension--and the result is to lead us to re-connect to God (Rom 2:4). one could see our salvation as a consequence, not a purpose. And God's revelation about Himself in His Son ends dealing with the heart of the very issue raised by Satan in Gen 3:5-6 when Satan implied that God was untrustworthy because He was withholding some benefit from mankind in denying Eve the Tree. Now, after 6,000 years (or whatever your chronolgy) of controversy, we have now empirically proven that "Father knows best." and can be trusted. i used to think that God doing things for himself was somehow self centered or egotistical until i realized a couple things: PSa 18:25-26 says we see God as we are, not as He is. (Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God Matt 5:8--because He is pure, and of course, our iniquity has hid the truth about God from us. Isa 59:2) So i have to learned to discern spiritual things spiritually. Also, it occured to me that God being the very antithesis of self centeredness, accumulates glory, power, honor and wealth from all His creation, only to pour it back out on us in greater blessings--so in a sense, when we give glory to God it is returned to us in some form. He does not horde it like a dictator strips the wealth of his subjects. Do we warp the Bible and has the gospel been warped so that it becomes about our salvation and not about God's glory? it seems in the Bible we have many examples of people who warp truth around their own perceptions: Jobs friends insisted the answer for his suffering was in himself. Job 4:7-9,8:3-6,11:6) in fact, his suffering was for the glory of God....as was the death of lazuruz John 11:4 and the man born blind (john 9:3) How long was Jonah in the belly of the whale? Jonah 2:6 or Jonah 1:17? Jonah warped the truth by how he felt at the moment.... it seems to me that the "controversy" (i take out great because its not great in the sense God or His sovereignty was never at stake), is the backdrop against which God has chosen to play out the acts and scenes which will reveal Himself (his true nature and character) to the universe....salvation of man is only a result of it, not the reason for it--and I cite Chambers for that conclusion. Morever, Adventists get criticized for looking for a personal sanctification rather than an objective one (that they want to be made holy, not just declared holy ) what does it mean when Jesus says "Go and Sin no More" John 8:11 did jesus saddle this women with an unreasonable burden? How do you understand that statement? He also says (1 Cor10:13) that he will not allow us to be tempted beyond that which we are able to bear but will always make a way of escape and paul says "I Can do all things through Christ who strengthens me?" Phil 4:11 I do not think the understanding of these passages is limited to Adventists, once again, I quote Oswald Chambers (who to me often sounds like EG White)....If Jesus ever commanded us to do something that He was unable to equip us to accomplish, He would be a liar. If we make our weakness our excuse, then we are telling God that there is something He failed to take into account. My Utmost 5/5 Perhaps both the evangelical and Adventist positions are simulatanously true. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2994 Registered: 12-2003 |
Pauls, I see what you are saying. I want to address three ideas that shape this concept. Controversy: First, the Bible simply never pictures an ongoing controversy between God and Satan. Rebellion and being cast out of heaven, yes. Ongoing controversy, no. Satan fights with Michael the archangel and is defeated (Rev. 12:7-9); Michael and Satan have an altercation over the body of Moses (Jude :9); Satan arrogantly confronts God at the conference in heaven (Job 1 and 2), but NEVER is there a hint that Jesus and Satan are in any kind of ongoing controversy. On the other hand, the NT is full of statements of Satan's defeat being already accomplished--the final demise is just a matter of time. (see John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; Colossians 2:15) Jesus completely triumphed over satan and his cohorts, and their destruction is assured (see Matthew 12:29; Luke 10:17-20; Romans 16:20). Further, the Bible never describes Satan's original rebellion or explains the circumstances. Isaiah 14:12-15 is often thought to be a description of Satan's fall--and maybe that is an underlying layer of the passage's meaning--but in reality that passage is describing the king of Babylon. For a detailed "picture" of satan's original rebellion and "charges", we must rely on EGW. She gives details. They just aren't in the Bible, however--although some of them may be inferred from Scripture. The Bible, though, never says satan accused God of unfairness, of being unjust to mortals, of requiring more than they could deliver. Those things come from Ellen. I'm going to post this much and post the next two points in separate posts so each one is not so long! Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2995 Registered: 12-2003 |
The second point that I believe needs clarifying is the Vindication of God's Character. Adventism teaches that God's character must be glorified and exonerated before the watching universe. Ultimately, it teaches, God will prove He has not been too hard on humans or unjust in his cursing of sin and sinners. He will be proven righteous as opposed to unfair as Satan supposedly accuses. In reality, there is no question about God's fairness in demanding righteousness and exacting punishement. In fact, the Bible does hint that there could have been cosmic questions about God, but the issue is His JUSTICE, not His fairness. Romans 3:24-26: "[all] are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunishedóhe did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus." IOW, the fact that God allowed sinful humans to continue for generations, apparently unpunished when the wages of sin was death, created a sense that God was "soft" on sin. His pity overrode his justice. Jesus was God's answer to the questions about His justice. Jesus' death forever demonstrated that God IS just. His mercy is powerful because is it founded in absolute juistice. God is never shown in the Bible convincing anyone--angels, demons, men--that He is fair, that His requirements were not too hard, that He has a "right" to punish sinners. On the contrary, He is shown demonstrating that He is not soft on sin. He is shown eternally demonstrating that His justice requires paymentóand He Himself provided the payment at great cost. Adventism has completely twisted the Biblical picture. Adventism says God has to demonstrate His fairness to mankind. The Bible shows that He demonstrates not His fairness, but His justice. His right to exterminate sin and sinners is never an issue. His mercy is the issue the universe questions. The questions are not, Can we really trust God? Is He really "safe"? Is He fair? Does He ask too much of us? Rather, the Bible presents the questions to be: Is God really just? Will He really punish sin? Does He really demand righteousness, or will he benevolently let us slide by? God has already given His answers to those questions in Jesus. In Him we find perfect clarity: there is no doubt about God's justice or His righteous demands. Similarly, there is no doubt of His mercy and grace. Satan has done a great job deflecting the real issues. He has created a straw-man argument that places US at the center of the equation. We must know if God is worthy and trust-able. The reverse is actually true. God's sovereignty is a given. We are His subjects, and we dared to rebel against a just God and arrogantly challenge His authority. In Christ He reminds us that we are mere creatures. In Christ He demonstrates His justice and He mercifully restores us to Himself. Colleen | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2996 Registered: 12-2003 |
Finally, the gospel is everlasting because Christ shed His blood into eternity; it is the blood of the eternal covenant (Hebrews 13:20). By His blood he obtained eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:12). I believe the central point of John 3:16 is not simply God's love but that He sent His only Son. Our salvation IS God's glory, not a cause of it or an effect of it. Our salvation is God's glory because it is entirely about Him. He mends the othewise fatal tear in the universe called sin that did more than remove humans from His presence. Jesus and His shed blood IS the eternal gospel. Jesus' blood will eternally wash, defend, cleanse, change, and glorify creation. We the redeemed are brought through no contribution of our own into this glory, and we become part of God's glory. Our salvation wasn't just to "prove" God's goodness and worthiness. Our salvation is God's eternal purpose. Ephesians 3:10-11: "His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, accordng to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord." And this: Ephesians 3:20-21, "Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen." The gospel is everlasting because Jesus and His shed blood are eternal. The issue here is not merely our salvation from death or God's character. The issue here is that the eternal God made an eternal sacrifice to accomplsih something that places us in His family as part of His eternal purpose. This mystery brings Him glory; we become part of His glory; Jesus Is His Glory. The gospel is eternal because in Jesus and through His blood we are filled with the presence of the eternal God and become one with Him. We have been foreknown, chosen, called, and predestined by the sovereign God to bear His own presence and to glorify Him forever. Jesus and His blood are the glory of God and the demonstration of His sovereign, unchangeable, inscrutable justice and mercy. Jesus is Lord! Colleen | ||
| Pauls Registered user Username: Pauls Post Number: 53 Registered: 9-2005 |
thank you that clarifies a lot, but also gives me alot to think about. just goes to prove how theology concepts, when left unchallenged by the Bible are quietly twisted and altered in our minds over time. its good to review this stuff and make sure we don't get off to the right or to the left, but stay in the clear safe channel of the Word as it is written, not as we think it is. thanks | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 52 Registered: 7-2005 |
What do you think about Charles Hodge and his systematic theology? I will have the chance to read his work on this subject. What you know about him? |
