| Author | Message | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3129 Registered: 10-2004  |
I want to preface this post by acknowledging that I understand that many former Adventists have great respect for Dr. Desmond Ford and that what I am about to say may be uncomfortable for some. But I feel that the truth must be spoken. I was saddened recently to find out even more so how much Desmond Ford still believes and promotes Adventism and its heretical teachings. As many are aware, Dr. Ford has refused to reject Adventism's false prophet, Ellen G. White, and the demonic spirit associated with her (see 1 John 4:1-6). The article I came across recently was at the website of Spectrum magazine (an independent SDA journal), written by Dr. Desmond Ford, entitled "Atonement at the Cross," and was a commentary on the official SDA quarterly lesson for November 29-December 5, 2008 (4th quarter, Lesson 10). The fourth quarter 2008 lessons were written by Angel Manuel Rodriguez, director of the GC's Biblical Research Institute. I found just about every paragraph of Dr. Ford's article to be quite disturbing. He starts out with the following comments:
In the above comments, Ford is addressing the heresy of the Moral Influence Theory (MIT) of the atonement (which is taught directly by some in Adventism, especially at Loma Linda). But notice his very disturbing comments that the teachers of the MIT, which he acknowledges is "another gospel," are still Christians and will be "too near the throne" for him to see! What is even more perplexing is that he even references Galatians 1:6-9 which explitly says that those who teach "another gospel" are "eternally condemned." They are not Christians, they are not saved, they will not be in heaven. But what is even more disturbing is his own view of the gospel, as written in that last sentence. He makes it sound like we are saved by having "wholehearted love toward" God and men--that this is enough to gain entrance to heaven, and that theology--even whether one believes in the true Gospel or not--does not matter. This itself is a false gospel and also seems to be nothing but a thinly-veiled salvation by works. He goes on to say:
I don't know how he can be reading the same lesson and come away with such a conclusion, as this particular lesson has some of the worst instances of such teaching that I have ever seen anywhere. But as we'll see later, Ford obviously has a different meaning in mind when speaking of "separating the Father from the Son," as he endorses the lesson's teaching of this. He goes on to write:
Interestingly, he leaves out the sentence which immediately precedes his quote from the Lesson, which shows that they do not believe that the atonement was completed on the Cross. They say: "'It is finished' meant that the perfect atoning sacrifice had once and for all been offered and that heaven and earth had been reconnected through it." Notice that they say that "the perfect atoning sacrifice had once and for all been offered"--but not that the atonement itself had been completed. There is nothing in this lesson that indicates the atonement was completed and finished on the Cross, or that our salvation is secured by Christ's atonement on the Cross. Then later on, Ford writes:
First, notice that he repeats the false SDA teaching that the sin-bearing atonement of Christ began in Gethsemane (which, by the way, is similar to the Mormon teaching on the atonement occurring in Gethsemane). He also says that the "weight of the sin of the world" began to "deprive" Christ of life in Gethsemane. This contradicts Jesus' own testimony that He laid down His own life and took it up again. Notice also that he says that Christ experienced the penalty of "the second death." This would mean that Jesus Christ ceased to exist (and was forever annihilated--"the second death" in SDA theology) on the Cross and that the Resurrection was instead a "re-creation." This is absolute heresy. Ford then concludes his article with the following comments:
So he tries to get around the issue of Christ's deity "dying" or ceasing to exist, by saying that it was only "quiescent." But in practical terms, this is essentially the same as saying that He ceased to exist. If His deity was "inactive," then it was dead--gone. This teaching necessitates a belief in multiple gods ("God the Son" who was inactive/ceased, and "God the Father"/"God the Holy Spirit" who continued to run the universe). This is polytheism and a denial of the deity of Jesus Christ and the Trinity. Here are some excerpts from this Lesson 10 that Ford praises so highly, most of which are from page 84 which he references specifically in the above quote:
In the above excerpts from Lesson 10 of the 4th quarter 2008 official SDA quarterly, there are many incredibly heretical statements. They are teaching a totally polytheistic "Godhead," saying that there was a "sundering" of the "divine powers" (gods) when "Jesus" was on the cross. They also show their teaching that Christ ceased to exist when he died and was separated from their other two gods during those three days, saying, "He went to sleep, trusting in the goodness, benevolence, and love of the Father"! By endorsing this Sabbath School Lesson and writing what he has in his review, unfortunately Desmond Ford shows very clearly that he is still very much SDA in his theology, and in bondage to Adventism's heretical, anti-gospel, anti-christ teachings. I'm sure he helped many people start wonderful journeys out of Adventism, especially several decades ago, but he himself is still stuck in it. And nowadays it seems that most of his "followers" have tried to reconcile his teachings with Adventist doctrine and have remained in Adventism, much like he has also done. Jeremy | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5928 Registered: 9-2006  |
Wow Jeremy, The false teachings of the SDA church leaders are so convoluted that, for me as a never been, it is hard to follow all the rabbit trails that have some shades of truth, only to lead to death. They are like the piper who whistles a tune to the gullible, “Come my little ones, follow me to the chopping block, it will only hurt a second, and its good for you.” Thank you for having the guts to bring this out in the open, so that it can be examined in the light of scripture. This sort of thing is so weird, it is reminiscent of the day when I began to examine closely what was said by Adventist as they professed love, but in the back currents, lies that lead away from Christ and not too Christ. It was then that I began to get suspicious of the Adventist religion, then downright alarmed, then downright flabbergasted. As time went on I had visitors from the Adventist themselves, and as we visited that true spirit that led them kept cropping up its evil head right there in my own living room. I was blown away as this spirit tried desperately to hide itself, but would, in spite of itself, crop up in the whisperings and back biting of mutual friends who were not there to protect themselves. It was like watching a Jeckle and Hyde drama as this thing would catch itself exposing itself, then pull the blinds to try to keep me from seeing its true nature. It was really something to watch. At one time the Holy Spirit perhaps was dealing with Fords heart in a mighty way, but perhaps he finally came around to the same decision than Dale Ratzlaff faced when he was faced with following truth or accepting error. The day they told him, “Dale, just take the job and the money. Don’t make waves.” If Dale had rolled over and said, “Yes, I’ll take the job security and the money, and I will not make waves.” There would be no Dale Razlaff fighting against the heresy that the Adventist church is steeped in, no books called “Truth Led Me Out.” Or “The Truth About Adventist Truth”. I am satisfied that if Dale had met the demands of acquiescence and squelched what his heart told him for the sake of ‘the job’, you would be reading the same convoluted thing you are witnessing from Ford. I believe it is possible for one to be honest at heart, but still mistaken, but it is another thing to find oneself to be mistaken, and squelch truth, once discovered for the sake of job and position. Once a person puts his hand to the plow of truth residing in the Bible, he best not look back, or he can expect a certain judgment and destitution of heart and soul to take place. I am most appreciative of those like you Jeremy, who continues to expose the stink hole of Adventism, and who hit it hard and head on. Its like I keep telling them about by job in management, it ain’t popular, but somebody’s gotta do it. Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision. I’ll tell you what I think Jeremy, if God is leading people out of Adventism by his Spirit, they best not let their shirt tail hit them in the back until they are out the door. Its nothing to play with, and mess around with, it is poisonous and it is deadly. Alarmingly so. And further more, yall best not be going back down there and petting the old snake, there just ain’t no profit in it. Anybody that goes back in there and sits with them slocking on their water bottles and back slapping them needs a two by four upside his head, and knocked into the middle of next week. Now this character is sitting down there back slapping with one another about how good a job they are doing when he had a chance to deny it and come on out, now lookit’ him, just another dead skunk in the middle of the road! I read somewhere where some guy said, “The bible is a dangerous thing to handle.” I agree with him if you’re set up on mishandling it. River | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3131 Registered: 10-2004 |
Thanks, River. I appreciate your support and response. I just think that we just can't compromise with this stuff/heresy, or soften our response to it, no matter who the person is. It's dangerous stuff, as you said so well. Jeremy | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1972 Registered: 5-2007  |
Jeremy, What I don't get is the logic of Dr. Desmond Ford. He could see that the IJ is false. Since Ellen indorsed this 'cornfield' doctrine with a 'vision from God'..... You would think he would conclude she was a false prophet. Therefore: Adventist teach "another gospel" which is no gospel at all. I just don't see how he can be on both sides of this issue. Fearless Phil | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1865 Registered: 4-2000  |
To his credit, Dr. Ford no longer uses quotes from Ellen White in his articles on his website (www.goodnewsunlimited.org), magazine, etc. Also, his associate, Ron Allen, does the same. Pastor Allen was delighted when my wife and I left Seventh-day Adventism in 2000. Moreover, Dr. Ford is now a former Adventist at his own request--although he says that it was primarily a political necessity in enable him to teach part-time at an Australian Baptist seminary. His ministry served as an important bridge for us as we were leaving Adventism. Admittedly, former Adventists come in many different stripes with a vast asortment of beliefs. It is important to remember that no single former Adventist speaks for all formers. Unfortunately, Dr. Ford's SDA background still shines through his presentations--often too boldly and too obviously (i.e., his sabbatarianism, vegetarianism, soul sleep, etc.). It seems to me that he acts more like an Adventist whenever he is in SDA circles. This tactic gives him additional exposure and credibility with them. In this respect, he still acts like an Adventist to an Adventist audience. Good speakers often try to fashion their comments to please their audience and/or to align with them in some meaningful way. Ethically, however, Dr. Ford should not be doing so theologically. Without any doubt, many former Adventists still cling to some aspects of their former belief system. It typically takes several years to fully sever one's connection with a cult. Still others never find themselves able to fully transition to biblical Christianity. Indeed, this is what Adventism really does to people as they linger in a self-inflicted limbo (becoming unchurched, agnostics, atheists, etc.) Dudley Canright, Adventism's most notable heretic, sadly noticed this even in his day. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 1974 Registered: 5-2007 |
Dennis, I understand what you are saying. My first cousin, once removed (mother's cousin) is Donald Mote who was a critic of Ellen White who took over where the Ballinger's left off. Don never completely dropped the SDA line though and at times still sounded like an Adventist. In reviewing some of his publications, I find his thinking to be contridictory. But, I repeat, it is hard for me to understand why a person doesn't "connect the dots" and reach logical conclusions. Either Ellen was a true prophet or she was a false one. You can not have it both ways. Fearless Phil | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1866 Registered: 4-2000 |
Phil, I wholeheartedly agree with you that it is hard to understand why Dr. Ford can't "connect the dots" theologically. On the other hand, it took me over 50 years to see the gospel light. Truly, our sovereign God never goes on a rescue mission that fails. With His own timing, God called my wife and I out of the darkness of Adventism. To God alone be all the glory! Dr. Ford deserves our prayers as he step by step transitions out of the deception and stronghold of Adventism. Dennis Fischer | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5930 Registered: 9-2006 |
I think, just from what I've read of his stuff, and I'm not saying it for sure, but I think the sucker just rolled over Phil, he probably connected the dots, then looked away, and the next time he looked back, the dots were conveniently at a more tolerable distance from his check book. But long spills won't cover the puss filled stink hole of the Adventist leadership. I don't feel soft enough to gather up the time to pray for him, just right now at least. But yall go ahead if you got it in you. I ain't saying he don't need prayer, but Adventist leadership disgust me. As for as him deserving prayers, I got my doubts. I won't beat around the bush and say I feel all mushy for Adventist leadership, because I don't, every time I get really thinking about it, I get really mad and I ain't near in a praying mood. River | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 493 Registered: 12-2007 |
Dennis said : Dr. Ford deserves our prayers as he step by step transitions out of the deception and stronghold of Adventism. " I agree. I have read and listened to many of Desmond Fords talks and I believe him to be a man with a heart for God and a man with much knowledge and while I cannot understand why someone of his intelligence has not yet "connected the dots" in some areas concerning Adventism... I believe God is using Mr Ford in a way he cant use most of us "formers". God is using the Ratzlaffs, the Tinkers, and others in the way He knows is best, and I believe that He is also using Mr Ford to reach those Adventists that perhaps cannot be reached by someone else. While most of us I believe will benefit in getting completely out of Adventism and as River says "dont go back and pet the snake"... Just maybe God is using Mr Ford in the way he will be able to reach the most people,, and just because I cant understand it doesnt make it wrong. (IMO) I still dont understand a LOT of things but I believe God is teaching me as I am able to comprehend it. (Guess I am a slow learner) LOL BUT I try to learn from the mistakes of the past and let go of error and hold tightly to truth as it is revealed to me. That's why my favorite saying is : When a man who is HONESTLY mistaken learns TRUTH, he will either quit being mistaken, or quit being honest." I have been "honestly mistaken" about a lot of things. I believe we are all on our own journey with the Lord and He has His own special way of dealing with each of us and on His timetable, not ours. Francie | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 494 Registered: 12-2007 |
River I am sure that is true that Mr Ford is NOT "deserving" of prayers. I am not "deserving" of anyones prayers either,,, but I sure hope you will pray for me anyway. :-) Skeeter/ Francie | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 120 Registered: 9-2006 |
Dr. Ford has long been a hero of mine, ever since Glacier View in 1980. His refutation of the IJ, and preaching on justification by faith greatly helped my understanding, and prepared me to leave that religion. I admire the courage he displayed at that time. However, his glowing critique of the Quarterly is disturbing, and I am wondering if he has actually made any changes in his theology since 1980. He still is a staunch Sabbatarian, holds on to Ellen's inspiration and her tritheism, and it appears that his vegetarianism flows from a belief in EGW's materialistic "health message." He seems to have reached a very flat theological plateau and been comfortable to stay there for 30 years. I am not questioning his salvation, but I am questioning his obedience. This man must experience some real cognitive dissonance, yet he is squelching it for the sake of "witnessing" to, and reforming SDA's. I'm sure that he is trying to praise and encourage what he perceives is positive, but he is merely trying to find a jewel in the swine's snout. There are questions of integrity here. I would be glad to hear that he has actually made significant progress away from the SDA core heresies, so please enlighten me. Martin C (Message edited by MartinC on January 31, 2010) | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 497 Registered: 12-2007 |
I guess I just had not thought of it that way.... "I'm sure that he is trying to praise and encourage what he perceives is positive, but he is merely trying to find a jewel in the swine's snout. There are questions of integrity here." I have been told before (more than once) that I tend to want to see and believe the best in everyone. I know that is true (until they prove me wrong at least) I guess that is just one more flaw in my character. :-/ Maybe part of it is that I know Mr Ford to be a talented speaker and a man of intelligence,, so I just keep hoping that what he is doing is somehow in Gods plan to help bring some out of Adventism. I hope I am not wrong but it certainly is possible..Unfortunately it wouldnt be the first time I have been mistaken and dissapointed to find that someone I respected ended up being someone practicing outright deceit. dont know what to do about it but pray for the man and hope that God will convict him of the errors he wants to hold onto in such a way he will not be able to resist letting go and embracing truth and sharing it with others. I hate to see talent such as his wasted on error instead of being used for Gods glory. (Message edited by skeeter on January 31, 2010) | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5932 Registered: 9-2006 |
I am not angry with Ford, no more or less than I am angry with Adventist leadership in general, he's just another cog in the wheel. In particular the ones who know there is heresy in there, but roll over for the sake of keeping the job, but wait! There's more, with this you get job firings, leaving ministers who do have a heart for God instead of the job, destitute of housing, unemployment etc. But wait, if you order today you get workers who are raised up in Adventism and work in the system! They make a move from the status quo, they get fired from university jobs and black balled, with a big foot set on their head and they are left destitute with no place to go. Ministers and workers have to walk out the door having been fired, and its like stepping out of a space capsule into vacuum for them. The leadership could help them make the transition, but I haven't heard of them doing that, have you? In one case even accusing the employee of taking equipment. Leadership turns on them like mad dogs. Do I sound angry? Even if the good Lord allows it so they don't turn around and go back in when they face the outside world (Which I suspect is the case) the offense is no less and those leadership will be held no less accountable. You don't believe me? Read the story of Moses and you will begin to get the idea. I don't stay all angry and scruntched up about it, but right now I am following on the heels of Keri's case, and I am just having a hard time getting up a case of feel sorry's for that mess. I guess, more than anger, it's just my heart gets to grieving and I can't tell the difference. River P.S Skeeter you got a soft heart, cultivate that soft heart and God can work with that. | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 1867 Registered: 4-2000 |
Francie, I jotted down your excellent statement: Thanks for your insight in creating a meaningful and powerful gem. Truly, those who are intent upon accurate answers will no longer remain in a toxic-faith system. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 10893 Registered: 12-2003  |
I'm on my way out the door for women's Bible study, but I just read this thread for the first time. Jeremy--THANK YOU!! Dr. Ford's comments are totally revealing. He is still Adventist in his sympathy, and he's adjusting his theology to fit. Those comments are untenable, and the SS Lesson he commented on is heresy. I totally agree with you re: the moral influence theory that came out of Loma Linda. It is bloodless atonement, and it is completely heresy. 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are FULL of Paul's commands to rebuke false teachers and to protect the church from insidious heresy that arises. There is no excuse for cutting slack for false teachers. Sincerity and "niceness" do not substitute for the new birth. We cannot assume that people are saved just because they are sincere. Oh, my goodness... I could go on... Gotta go... Colleen | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 1156 Registered: 7-2007 |
My brother flew over here to the western U.S. for our dad's birthday. I got to talk to him for awhile concerning what he believes. I think he also knows that Ellen White contradicts the Bible in a few places, but he still is an SDA. He told me that he preached a sermon at his church recently about not being dogmatic. He thinks people should "accept everyone" - meaning not try to tell them they're wrong - whether they're Adventist, Islamic or Mormon! I told him that the Bible is dogmatic. It says that the ONLY WAY to be saved is through Jesus! He agreed with that and then said "but we don't have to be dogmatic." It was frustrating to talk to him. (He preaches once a month - I think he's an elder at his church.) I said something like: "so you just read Ellen White to get the "nuggets of truth" in between the false things she wrote. Right?" His face lit up in a big grin as he replied "yes." How do you tell someone like that, that if Ellen White was wrong on SOME things, then she's a false prophet and there AREN'T ANY nuggets of truth!!?? I think that if I'd asked him if Mohammad or Joseph Smith had "nuggets of truth," he would have said yes. I'm wondering if Desmond Ford is in that mindset? | ||
| River Registered user Username: River Post Number: 5935 Registered: 9-2006 |
Is this the same brother I know Dianne? | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 1160 Registered: 7-2007 |
Yes, the very same one; River. |
