| Author | Message | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12610 Registered: 12-2003  |
Hi, all—Wretched Radio has given us the file of the hour I spent talking to Todd Friel today about Adventism. (Thank you, Wretched Radio...) You can listen to the segment (free) on both this website and the Life Assurance Ministries website. You can hear the hour by clicking on the "Wretched" link on either of these pages: www.FormerAdventist.com www.LifeAssuranceMinistries.org Colleen | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 9196 Registered: 3-2004  |
More answer to prayer as now SDAs can listen to this. Ohhh, God you are awesome!! Diana L | ||
| Jim02 Registered user Username: Jim02 Post Number: 1162 Registered: 5-2007 |
Hi Colleen, Just listened to your interview on the radio show. Very interesting. I am interested in expanding upon your statement that God made the new covenant within the Godhead and not between God and man. ie: not dependant upon our promises to keep our part. How did you construct that realization. I would like to understand this insight. Thanks, Jim | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12612 Registered: 12-2003 |
Jim, it is the fulfillment of God's covenant with Abraham, Genesis 15, where God promised Abe seed, land, and blessing...and then put him to sleep so he couldn't participate in cutting the covenant. Abraham had to prepare the sacrifice and lay out the cut animals...but God in the image of a smoking oven and flaming torch (Father and Son—foreshadowing the smoke and fire of Sinai which is the symbol of God's presence...a consuming fire) moved among the pieces and made the covenant. No single promise of Abraham's was part of the deal. Only God's sovereign promises. Fast forward to the new covenant. Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, came to earth clothed in a mortal body, representing both God (He is God) and man (Jesus is a man). Because He fully IS both God and man, He is the one mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). As a man, he lived sinlessly—our substitute perfect human. He took our sin and died our death—our substitute Sacrifice. He rose to life, thus being a fully satisfactory propitiation of God's demand of death for sin (Romans 3:26-27). He was the Substitute for our life, for our death, and He IS our eternal life—because He died, rose, and ascended, He gives us His Spirit and gives us His eternal life. Hebrews 8:6-7 says this:
The old covenant was based on God's promises and Israel's promises. The New Covenant is based on God's promises—alone. He promised in Jeremiah 31:31-33 that He would write His law on the hearts of men. Jesus came as a man, our total Substitute, and did everything Adam and the nation of Israel (and all of us) failed to do BESIDES taking on our sin. The promise of the new covenant is God's promises that He would make our hearts new AND Jesus' total fulfillment of the old covenant. When Jesus did the Lord's Supper with the disciples before His death, He said that he was giving them "the new covenant in my blood" (Luke 22:20; 1 Cor 11:25). Jesus blood IS the new covenant; it is the "better promise" that assures God's acceptance and blessing of His people. We don't keep ourselves in the covenant; we simply place our faith in the Lord Jesus, and His blood IS our promise to the Father. God demanded death for sin; Jesus died the required death for us all. Hebrews 13:1 calls His blood "the blood of the eternal covenant". The human side of the new covenant was taken care of by the Lord Jesus. He shed human blood, and God was satisfied. His blood is the eternal promise that we are right with God when we are in Christ. There is absolutely no hint of anything on our part that God answers or rewards. Our security is not AT ALL based on our obedience or demonstrated loyalty/good works. If we trust the Lord Jesus for our forgiveness and covering with His blood, God looks at Jesus instead of at us. We are hidden in Christ. Jesus' blood is the eternal promise that we are accepted by God and are the recipients of His grace and gifts. Only Jesus' blood—the blood of the eternal covenant. The New Covenant is entirely consummated between the Father and the Son. We enter the covenant when we receive the Lord Jesus. All He did then becomes ours. God does not make an agreement with us in the new covenant; He fulfills His promises to the Lord Jesus and in the Lord Jesus—and because He became a man, we receive all the Father's faithfulness when by faith we receive Christ and are hidden in Him. If we're in Christ, the Father loves us. He loves us because He loves His Son, and if we receive His Son, the Father lavishes all His love for the Son onto us—because we are in the Son. It's the fulfillment of God's covenant with Abraham. Colleen | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 1428 Registered: 12-2007 |
Colleen, I very much enjoyed your interview on wretched. You did a great job !  One thing you mentioned on there that I have never heard before is bothering me..... it was the comment on the SDA view about people with learning disabilities, that they are considered somehow (I think you said 'less human'?) and that instead of being saved or lost, they will be dealt with as if they had never been born...? I have never heard a discussion on that among SDA's. But if that is a general understanding in Adventism, then it gives me yet another reason to be very upset with them. Personally I have always just assumed that when Christ comes that those with infirmities that limit their ability to understand fully about Christ would be considered as innocent children and will at that time be made "whole". I don't have any scriptural basis for thinking that way, I guess I just assumed it. I am wondering if this position is known to you from discussions with members, or is it found somewhere in Ellens writings ? Or ? Can you please clarify this ? Francie | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12613 Registered: 12-2003 |
Francie, I can't put my hands on an EGW quote (Jeremy?), but I learned this idea from childhood on. Richard also learned it, and one young former (30's) in our group admitted today that he learned it. It's not a rare idea; it's just not one of their "public" ones. I know that Ellen at one time said that the slaves would be as if they never had been because (in her early years, at least), she believed they were less cognitively acute than caucasians. This notion also applies to babies and unborn babies. If a human doesn't have an immaterial spirit, an unborn baby is not yet a fully functional human, not having breathed yet. Abortion sorta "makes sense"...it's not like a full person. Ditto children. Children that die early will be carried by angels to their mothers' arms if the parents are saved; if the parents aren't saved, the babies will be as if they never were. So much heresy... Colleen | ||
| Skeeter Registered user Username: Skeeter Post Number: 1429 Registered: 12-2007 |
According to Ellens reasoning that people who are "less cognitively acute " would be "as if they never were"..... I would say that pretty well includes herself. Considering her head injury, her (3rd grade ?) education, her admitting that she could not understand scripture unless she was in "vision" etc. The more I learn of her,, the more I understand that she was a very ignorant woman who willingly allowed herself to be manipulated by those around her who wanted to promote their ideas and used her and her "visions" as a means to accomplish that. | ||
| Jlondon81 Registered user Username: Jlondon81 Post Number: 42 Registered: 6-2004 |
Colleen, I listened last night as well. I found your explanation of the health message intriguing as I've never heard it described that way before. That you need your health in order to properly receive (their version of) the gospel makes sense in their construct. Having come from a Pentecostal background in my youth, this teaching is very similar to the idea that if you are sick that it's because of some sin. I like that you were able to expound enough on each topic given the limited time you had. And, just stating, that interview reaffirms my desire to see some sort of podcast/audio blog. I know you have limitations, but given the response to just this interview, I think it'd be an outstanding ministry tool! Joel | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 9198 Registered: 3-2004 |
EGW may have had a brain injury and was in a comma right after, but she was not dumb. In her later years she knew enough that there was money in her writings. She knew how to read some good books and which ones to copy from. She knew how to manipulate and control. She and James made a good team. Diana L | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 9200 Registered: 3-2004 |
Did not check my spelling. Meant to write "coma" not comma. | ||
| Mjcmcook Registered user Username: Mjcmcook Post Number: 23 Registered: 2-2011 |
~Colleen~ I just finished listening to your segment on the Wretched Radio show~ As I listened I knew the Holy Spirit was giving you the words to say~ I will give the link to my Christian friends in my Bible study that have questions about sda teachings~ Thank-you~ ~*~mj~*~ | ||
| Rossbondreturns Registered user Username: Rossbondreturns Post Number: 173 Registered: 10-2009  |
It's great stuff. I've done posts at the Bible Runner and Undercover Adventist...and it went to Twitter...and also to Facebook. This could be huge! Praying to God for eyes to be opened. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12617 Registered: 12-2003 |
Joel, Richard and I talked again about doing a podcast. It's actually a possibility. We'll see what we can do. (We actually just got a spare bedroom cleaned out and boxes of stored books shelved so we have some room to work...) We'll keep you posted. Colleen | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 672 Registered: 2-2003  |
Well done Colleen, Very clear and pulls no punches. I hope this manages to warn people against getting involved with Adventism. Adrian | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1589 Registered: 7-2003  |
Very well done Colleen! You even made the host stop and think about the difference in the covenants! I've listened to several of his podcasts now and see that he uses the 10 Commandments as God's standards when he's witnessing to people. I listened to one where he dialoged with a college kid and asked him if he's perfectly kept the Sabbath (which he then defined as going to church every Sunday). Friel seems pretty solid to me otherwise, but the Church at large sometimes seems a little confused on the Covenants. Thanks for being such a great witness. | ||
| Wiredog Registered user Username: Wiredog Post Number: 171 Registered: 8-2010  |
Can't say more than has already been said. Bravo & Amen! I am curious if Todd know fully comprehends how pernicious this teaching is to those who are unaware. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12621 Registered: 12-2003 |
I'm praying Todd will study the covenants and discover how completely new the NC is. He did tell me via email that he is going to rerun the interview next weekend on a "chain of stations". Colleen | ||
| Michaelmiller Registered user Username: Michaelmiller Post Number: 355 Registered: 7-2010  |
As a frequent listener of Wretched (and occasional watcher the Wretched TV program) for many months, I've always had the impression that Todd has a rather acceptable understanding of the new covenant (in fact, I learned some about it from his show during my study out of Adventism). His use of the 10C in witnessing is not to prove their applicability to Christians today, but instead as a standard to prove to the unbeliever that they are not as worthy of heaven from their own effort as they might believe they are. If the person being witnessed to is receptive (most of the time they are not) then Todd proceeds to share how Jesus paid it all because we can't keep that standard... we have to rely on Him and not ourselves. He has stated on the program before that his belief is that there is a completely new covenant (not just a change of the old one). Todd frequently defends the gospel and speaks against any "do do do" legalistic theology. His stated opinion has been that too many churches try to add personal efforts to the gospel message (or replace the gospel message entirely with personal effort). The result is people leaving to seek out more strict churches (legalism). That is the reason he asked Colleen about whether people are seeking a more legalistic church when they find and join the SDA church. It appears to me that his covenant confusion was not at the new covenant being completely new (because he has repeatedly said things to agree with that position on the show), but instead at Colleen's specific presentation of the parties involved in the new covenant. In fairness, despite having studied the covenants a lot, I myself wasn't well educated in that specific aspect so Colleen's words have given me a new area of the covenants to study as well. It is entirely possible to have a proper understanding of the covenants and to not know everything about them. Michael | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1591 Registered: 7-2003 |
Yeah, I totally get that he is using the 10Cs with unbelievers to demonstrate that they have fallen short of God's standard. I'm really, truly not bringing forward any kind of strong critique of Friel here. He sounds pretty solid to me. I just don't think that asking a modern day gentile if they have perfectly kept the Sabbath and then transferring the command to Sunday is the most solid biblical approach. It's a relatively small critique and I readily admit I am overly sensitive to sabbatarianism of any stripe (including relatively non-legalistic Sunday sabbatarianism). My background makes me hyper-sensitive to these things so you have to take it with a grain of salt I guess. | ||
| Michaelmiller Registered user Username: Michaelmiller Post Number: 356 Registered: 7-2010 |
Chris, I missed that one. What podcast date was this on? I would like to check it out. Check out his 10/22/2010 podcast (presently on page 38 but it will probably roll to page 39 later today) for his perspective on Sabbath keeping (Jesus is our Sabbath rest). Michael |
