| Author | Message | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 364 Registered: 5-2009  |
In a paragraph or less, how would you describe the Great Controversy worldview? I'm finding that I don't even know where to begin with explaining it to Adventists and never-been SDAs alike. Can anyone link me to a from-the-horse's-mouth (SDA) summary of it? The key here is the length...I don't want an explanation that is equal in length to reading the GC book... | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 711 Registered: 5-2002 |
How about straight from the horse's official Fundamental Beliefs website? 8. Great Controversy: All humanity is now involved in a great controversy between Christ and Satan regarding the character of God, His law, and His sovereignty over the universe. This conflict originated in heaven when a created being, endowed with freedom of choice, in self-exaltation became Satan, God's adversary, and led into rebellion a portion of the angels. He introduced the spirit of rebellion into this world when he led Adam and Eve into sin. This human sin resulted in the distortion of the image of God in humanity, the disordering of the created world, and its eventual devastation at the time of the worldwide flood. Observed by the whole creation, this world became the arena of the universal conflict, out of which the God of love will ultimately be vindicated. To assist His people in this controversy, Christ sends the Holy Spirit and the loyal angels to guide, protect, and sustain them in the way of salvation. (Rev. 12:4-9; Isa. 14:12-14; Eze. 28:12-18; Gen. 3; Rom. 1:19-32; 5:12-21; 8:19-22; Gen. 6-8; 2 Peter 3:6; 1 Cor. 4:9; Heb. 1:14.) | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1637 Registered: 3-2009 |
The funny thing is that they give a big list of verses to proof their "fundamental belief", but did you notice that none of those verses refers to the great controversy? This is a very favorite trick of SDA, starting with EGW. They give a list of verses that may refer to something said, but which do not refer to the point in case. Thus, people see all those verses and believe that the doctrine is Bible based, but if you just take the time to read the verses, you'll realize that they are not even "proof-texting" their doctrine, but supporting the secondary point. A simple example: Jesus is not God, but He sent the Holy spirit to guide us and to explain the truth to us. (John 14:26; John 16:13; Mat 12:18) I have given three verses that talk about the Holy Spirit, but they don't talk about the principal concept which is that Jesus is not God. But when people see all those verses, they say, oh the concept is well based on scriptures. Same thing happens with the Great Controversy doctrine and its list of verses. Unless the reader goes to the Bible and check out those verses, she will believe that the doctrine is based on the Bible. They do that so much, that one cannot trust any list of verses they give without going and reading them first. Hec | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 365 Registered: 5-2009 |
Good point, Hec. Several people have told me that the doctrines are Bible-based because the church lists all those texts at the end. They know that the majority of people aren't going to look them up, much less, read them in context. The organization did something similar when they tried to answer the accusations made in THE SPIRIT BEHIND THE CHURCH. They give some lame response and then give you SDA resources to back up their claims, but they only cite them, so you have to spend hours and hours verifying...or just take their word for it, which is what most people do. Thanks Freeatlast for the info. I guess I shoulda checked there first. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12296 Registered: 12-2003  |
I haven't distilled it into a simple paragraph before, but I'll give it a stab. Great Controversy Worldview: God is defined by the Law—the "transcript of His character". His main purpose with regard to His creations is to defend their free will; this purpose results in His limiting His own foreknowledge so they will have perfectly "free choice". The central figure of the GC worldview is Jesus engaged in an ongoing battle with Satan. The outcome of this battle depends upon which opponent garners the most followers: Jesus or Satan. Satan has the advantage of strength; Jesus has the advantage of the cross as an example of His willingness to suffer for the sake of exposing Satan's selfishness. Humanity will help Jesus win the battle by choosing to follow His example and honor the Law. When a generation of humans finally honors the law, Jesus wins and thus vindicates God (defined by the Law). In this model, all reality is defined by Law; humans are on God's side when they embrace the Law, and Satan is defeated by humans honoring the Law. In a Biblical worldview, God is defined as the I AM with attributes such as holiness, justice, mercy, wrath, grace, and righteousness. The center of the biblical worldview is Jesus, the cross and the empty tomb. Satan is not a player in the "salvation game". The issue is human sin and God's personal intervention to rescue us from ourselves. Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3604 Registered: 10-2004  |
Colleen, You wrote:
I'm not sure that's what they teach. If so, they are in big trouble! Their "Remnant" has only 0.017 billion followers, which must mean that "Satan" has 6.885 billion followers! Jeremy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12299 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hmmm...you're right, Jeremy. I guess they actually teach that Jesus wins if and when a "remnant" manages to perfectly keep the law. In other words, Jesus and Satan continue in reality's defining battle until a remnant finally honors the law. So the issue of who garners the most adherents isn't part of the equation. It's whether or not a group of people will actually keep the law...er...honor God... This view subtly puts the Law over God instead of making the Law something God gives Israel. The law defines/explains/reveals God. We honor Him when we finally bow the knee to the law. Jesus is the means of honoring the law; we look to Him and follow His example. Thanks, Jeremy...that sentence was wrong! Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3605 Registered: 10-2004 |
Yes, they claim that by their "perfect obedience to the Law" they will prove that the Law can be kept by man (which they claim Jesus already did as only a man...but that proved nothing I suppose? hmmm...), thus proving Satan wrong for claiming the Law cannot be kept and vindicating God's "character" and showing that He is not "unfair." However, I have read SDA literature where they do claim that all created "beings"--men, angels, and the aliens--have to eventually all "vote" (unanimously, I think) that God is "right" in order to keep God on the throne instead of Satan! Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on March 01, 2011) | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 366 Registered: 5-2009 |
It amazes me how much SDAism revolves around the LAW. I wonder how many times she writes "Law" compared to the times she talks about "Jesus." It's really hard to get out of your head, the importance of keeping the law. One of EGWs repeated warnings is that people will try to persuade you that the law is obsolete and done away with and that is one of Satan's schemes. When in reality, keeping us under the law, contrary to Scripture, is Satan's scheme! Thank y'all for your worldview overview. | ||
| Dljc Registered user Username: Dljc Post Number: 369 Registered: 7-2010 |
I have to say this is a very interesting thread. As a never been, I don't know much about "The Great Controversy" doctrine that the SDA teaches. From what you all have said so far though, it shows how it doesn't line up with Scripture. Especially what Jeremy wrote here: "However, I have read SDA literature where they do claim that all created "beings"--men, angels, and the aliens--have to eventually all "vote" (unanimously, I think) that God is "right" in order to keep God on the throne instead of Satan! " Voting God off the throne? This is a lie from satan himself. It's an impossibility! Besides, don't they know the prince of this world [satan] has already been judged? Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. (John 12:31) If man could have kept "the whole law" there would have been no reason for Jesus to come in the first place! The law is not what saves us, Jesus saves us, because we couldn't keep the law. I hope they know that "perfect obedience to the Law" means keeping the whole law and not just the 10C's. And they think the rest of the Christians are lost! Boy are they going to be surprised. Their vote will mean nothing. It's sad to see this kind of teaching when the Bible itself says just the opposite. An angel is never greater than God. Satan was an angel, God created the angels just as He created man. The creation is never greater than the Creator. Not even by majority!!! | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 721 Registered: 7-2004  |
I'll take a stab at a short description. Satan's fall included an accusation that God was unfair and that His law could not be kept. The whole universe is watching this world to determine if Satan's accusation is true or not. God must be vindicated from this charge brought against Him by Satan. If God is not vindicated, Satan will win the battle. This idea of God needing a further and future vindication beyond the life and death of Jesus harkens one back to the writings of M. L. Andreasen "In the last generation God gives the final demonstration that men can keep the law of God and that they can live without sinning. God leaves nothing undone to make the demonstration complete. The only limitation He puts on Satan is that he may not kill the saints of God. He may tempt them, he may harass and threaten them; and he does his best. But he fails. He cannot make them sin. They stand the test, and God puts His seal on them. Through the last generation of saints God stands fully vindicated." . The Sanctuary Service, Review and Herald, 1969 printing, pp 318-19. Ultimately within SDAism, it isn’t God who saves man, but man who saves God from Satan’s charges. This is why God isn’t even fully vindicated by Christ’s death. According to SDA teaching, man must achieve perfect obedience to God’s law in order to save God’s government and keep Satan’s rebellion from being effective. This is, in my mind, the most blasphemous teaching within SDAism. | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 871 Registered: 7-2008  |
Awesome post Ric. You hit the nail on the head. Its all about the "remnant" saving God from the claims of Satan. Then He rewards us with a ticket to heaven that has to be "validated" thru the process called "The Investigative Judgment". Oh how I wish I had this understanding to deliver me from adventism so many years ago...sigh. ....Animal | ||
| Dljc Registered user Username: Dljc Post Number: 370 Registered: 7-2010 |
I have a couple of questions, although they are intended for the lurker that may read this thread, but not post. Anyone can answer it if they can. If "perfect obedience to the Law" was possible, wouldn't EGW have been able to achieve it? If she was a true prophet wouldn't she have been able to achieve this? | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 722 Registered: 7-2004 |
Thanks Animal. A couple more quotes from the same book. "In the remnant Satan will meet his defeat." p315. Notice it isn't Christ who ultimately defeats Satan, it is the remnant. Sick, sick, sick... "In order for God to sustain His contention, it is necessary for Him to show that He has not been arbitrary, that the law is not harsh and cruel in its requirements, but contrawise, that it is holy, just, and good, and that men can keep it. It is necessary for God to produce at least one man who has kept the law. In the absence of such a man, God loses and Satan wins. The outcome therefore hinges on the production of one or more who keep the commandments of God. On this God has staked His government." p316. | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 723 Registered: 7-2004 |
Perhaps if EGW had been born into SDAism she would have had a better change to achieve perfect obedience to the law. Particularly if she had been raised from an infant in the gospel of the health message. Then she wouldn't have had to struggle with so many animal urges. | ||
| Dljc Registered user Username: Dljc Post Number: 371 Registered: 7-2010 |
Ric_b you just described Romans 3:10 & 23 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: (Romans 3:10) For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (Romans 3:23) Which is exactly why we needed a Savior. Because we know the wages of sin are death (Romans 6:23) But the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. It doesn't say keeping the law, it doesn't say by our deeds, but through Jesus Christ our Lord. | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 367 Registered: 5-2009 |
Dljc, What's crazy about this trap that EGW constructed is that even she was unable to live up to the own standards that she erected. She fell for in the trap that she, herself, set. She, too, lived in spiritual bondage...of her own making. | ||
| Dljc Registered user Username: Dljc Post Number: 372 Registered: 7-2010 |
Cloudwatcher, if you look at what the Scribes and Pharisees did what you just said, applied to them as well. They set the bar higher than they themselves could keep. That's the whole point of Matthew 23. (Message edited by dljc on March 01, 2011) | ||
| Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2 Post Number: 2753 Registered: 8-2004  |
Yes, Cloudwatcher, that is what's crazy, and also what is achingly tragic - so many people living in bondage thinking it will somehow work out freedom in their future . . . | ||
| Free2dance Registered user Username: Free2dance Post Number: 238 Registered: 2-2010 |
Ric_b, thank you for your quotes! Do you mind if I share some of your comments anonymously with my dad (saved out of SDAism a week and a half ago) or in my notes on fb? Not sure if I would have the courage to post to FB or not, but I bet my husband would! If not, I can just use the EGW quotes. |
