| Author | Message | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1358 Registered: 11-2002 |
My parents even to this day say the story of Jesus sending the demons from the demon possessed people intio the pigs and then sending the pigs into the sea proves 100% that pork and then it is implied all unclean meats are forbidden by Jesus. After all, it's not beef cattle that Jesus made demon possessed. And, no, I'm not making this up. That really is the story I learned proves the unclean/clean meats issue from Jesus Himself. | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 934 Registered: 3-2004 |
Bob, That is a funny one. But it is so true. Thanks. Diana | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 177 Registered: 7-2004 |
Weimarred, you said:
That wasn't the answer I learned in my academy Bible class. I was taught that the reason the food laws still apply is because God knew how He made the human body and what was okay for it. In the same way you need clean, proper gasoline and oil for your car, there are certain things for the body that are acceptable (clean meat), certain things that are optimal (vegetarian diet) and certain things that are completely unacceptable (unclean meat). Did anyone else hear that explanation? | ||
| Tdf Registered user Username: Tdf Post Number: 35 Registered: 11-2004 |
Raven, I heard the same explanation, except in the specific congregation where I grew up the explanation was even more conservative: certain things are acceptable (vegetarian diet), certain things are optimal (vegan diet) and certain things are completely unacceptable (any meat). | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 265 Registered: 6-2004 |
Jeremy...that list was great. I pulled an "Ellen White" and copied it to post elsewhere. It makes me crazy to think that other denominations look at the SDA's as just another Christian denomination. They really have no clue on how deep the deception really is. | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 100 Registered: 7-2004 |
Did you ever stop to think that SDA is a very well crafted deception. You sometimes do hear Jesus preached from the pulpit. You sometimes do hear about grace. All of the Christian elements are mentioned, at least in passing, so that if you are not being cautious you would think you are truly sitting in a Christian church. We who have been through the mill of SDA, family-church-school-even employment, know how all-encompassing that way of life is. I remember a joke I heard several years ago, and it still applies. It went something like this: St. Peter was giving a newcomer a tour of heaven, and he was to choose which part of heaven he would inhabit after the tour was over. First he went to the Catholic part, and he heard the sounds of a bingo game, then he was taken to the Baptist part and there was some firey preaching to be heard, and on and on throughout the whole of heaven until St. Peter and the newcomer were walking past this very high wall and you could hear lots and lots of singing coming over the wall. The newcomer asked St. Peter who these people were, and St. Peter cautioned him to be quiet, "These are the Adventists and they don't think there is anyone else up here." At first sight Adventism can look very Christian, it's only when you get mired in all of the do's and dont's that you begin to understand the way the religion invades every aspect of a person's life. It dictates dress, diet, behavior, even for some when they can make love. I've known some who wouldn't think of desecrating the Sabbath by being intimate on that day. Most of the Adventists I've known have all of the Ellen White books lined up on their bookshelves, because that is what is expected of them, and some have even tried to read them, but have put them back on the shelves when the got into sections where Ellen was moralizing. Did you know that you can tell when Ellen was contributing to the contents of her books by the level of moralizing you encounter? The people she borrowed her material from were, for the most part, celebrating gospel, so that makes their portions easier to read. Then Ellen would strip the joy out of the passages by moralizing and indicating that the faithful had things to do to lock in the gift of God. I know because I doggedly read through several of her books and found them to be put together in just that manner. Anyway, what I'm saying is that the best lies (cults) are mostly based on truth. All you have to do is add in a little bit of a lie to make it suit your purpose. That is how SDAism was crafted. | ||
| Praisegod Registered user Username: Praisegod Post Number: 200 Registered: 3-2004 |
Yes, I'm amazed at how little other Christians really know about Adventists. I had another friend ask me about that yesterday. <sigh> I'm finding out that it is very important to be able to explain the language differences. If we can't explain this, then we end up looking like we are just out to "get" the Adventist church. Didn't Walter Martin catch on to that after some years? Is there any proof that he understood he was tricked by SDAs and the Questions on Doctrine book? Oh, and while on that book, I thought there was an article on this site comparing the new Q on D book but I couldn't find it. Was it removed? On one forum the SDAs are so stuck on Sabbath as their only focus that it really gets so old. That and perfectionism that comes from keeping all the law. Some of the old names seem to have dropped out and new ones are taking their place and refusing to admit to being SDA. (I think that's right. At least Gambit and I have asked and I never saw an answer.) But what I see happening is that some of the moderators are now recognizing what's going on when you point out to them where SDA doctrine is being promoted without being identified. Praise God... | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 267 Registered: 6-2004 |
Yeah, they will contend the issue of the Sunday vs. the Sabbath til the end of time. They believe that man changed the day and will not even budge on the fact about the disciples keeping the first day. Also they keep bringing up the issue that the ten commandments are still binding and feel that those outside the SDA church are guilty of doing away with them. There is one poster who even goes so far to say that Paul was demonized and his teachings are invalid because he was constantly tormented by Satan due to the thorn in his flesh. He believes his words contradict the actual sayings of Jesus. Crazy. | ||
| Bob Registered user Username: Bob Post Number: 33 Registered: 7-2000 |
Belvalew, you are right on about the composition of EGWs books. Researchers such as Walter Rea and Fred Veltman found that she and her staff plagiarized as much as 80% of her total published materials, including her beloved "Desire of Ages." As you personally discovered, the other 20% of her own writing is blatant nit-picking condemnation of other people. So we are left with this conclusion - on the one hand, she was a rabid legalist; on the other, she was a blatant and unapologetic plagiarist. How her loyal adherents can say, in the face of this, that she was a "sincere and godly woman" is ludicrous. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1263 Registered: 12-2003 |
PraiseGod, thank you for saying something about the Q on D article. It's there--Richard forgot to make it visible on the study page. He'll fix that. Meanwhile, here's the link to it: http://rtinker.powweb.com/discus/qod/html And I'm equally frustrated with the perception that Adventism is OK. Just yesterday I heard from a former (who attends our Friday night Bible study as well as Trinity Church where are group is a church-supported ministry) that at a visit to her doctor last month, also a fairly new Trinity member, she mentioned to her doctor that she attends the FAF Bible study. The doctor replied, "Oh, that's a very controversial group among the members. After all, Adventism is not a cult." Of course, this comment brought the old familiar heaviness to the pit of my stomach. I praise God, first of all, that our pastor supports us and, I suspect, runs interference for us more often than we know. Secondly, I want so badly for people to take this Adventist problem seriously. I just want to shout, "Do you think we would have a ministry for Former Adventists if they were "just another Christian denomination?!! Why would we divide the body of Christ this way? As Christ-followers, we would never try to besmirch other Christ-followering denominations. Why do you believe the denomination's official public statements more than our large and growing corporate personal testimony about it? Why do you believe former Mormon's stories but not ours? How could we possibly make up the stories of shunning, of fear, of a twisted gospel, of a not-quite-sufficient Jesus? How could we all have exactly the same stories of bondage, of no assurance, of an incomplete atonement????" They KNOW the Mormons have a public face and a public "gospel" they present--why can they not believe the Adventists are the same? I'm totally at a loss to explain how they totally discount our experiences--which are so astonishingly similar no matter where in the world we live--and actually have the nerve--or ignorance--to look us in the eye and say, "But really, they ARE a Christian church--what is your problem with them? A lot of Christian churches have some problems with legalism--that's nothing new!" PraiseGod, your comments about the language are exactly right on. Adventists get away with total deception because they shamelessly use all the Christian vocabulary but privately retain sectarian meanings for the words, and they don't tell Christians about it. They'll have conversations with them, use the same words, agree with them--and in their heads they KNOW they see the words with different nuances than the people they talk with. It's all deception. And you're right, Pw and Bob-to say Ellen was "a sincere and godly woman" when she stole other's intellectual property and inserted her own unbiblical teachings into those stolen works is a travesty. Dear Father, I pray that You will expose and break the spirit of Adventism. Please help the truth about the denomination to become known, and help all those who are blinded by deception to be able to see the gospel clearly and to choose Jesus in truth and with understanding. Thank You. Amen. Colleen | ||
| Dd Registered user Username: Dd Post Number: 311 Registered: 7-2004 |
Colleen, A few months ago at the College Church at WWC, Karl Haffner, the senior pastor, had a 3 part sermon on "Why I am a SDA". The first sermon was actually fairly good...what SDA has in common with other Christian denominations (all the SDA truths that are really Biblical truths)...the second ...SDA misconceptions (EGW, Sabbath is SDA salvation, vegetarianism, etc...). One of the misconcepts that he brought up was the thought that Adventism is a cult...the crowd gasped, some laughed, others shook their heads in disgust. My blood boiled. I am with you, Colleen. I want everyone, other Christians and those I love that are blinded by SDA "truths" to know and understand that it is a cult. (BTW, the third sermon was basically a "motivational speech" ...rah rah go Adventists...blah, blah...) Karl Haffner has written many good books on grace. Many of his sermons are grace based. I had thought I could attend the "celebration" service since I felt most of the people who attended were like me...Christian first and SDA somewhere down the line. This sermon series openned my eyes...I am very thankful that Karl spoke up and gave me the extra confidence to continue on my journey... GIVE ME JESUS! | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 268 Registered: 6-2004 |
I think the main reason the SDA's are not recognized as cult is because they are not as well known as others like the Mormons and JW's. I never even heard of them when I was deceived at the Revelation Seminar and later joined. The other aspects is that people do not know the secretive doctrines that are practiced behind closed doors. It's usually too late to evaluate the truth because you've been "hooked" by the time you join. | ||
| Praisegod Registered user Username: Praisegod Post Number: 202 Registered: 3-2004 |
((((Colleen)))) You need a hug and all our support and prayers for all that you do. I just can't imagine the pressure that is put upon you each and every day with running the FAF group at church, editing Proclamation, dealing with us here, plus myriads of phone calls and e-mails from all sorts of people. You must be very busy. Thanks for the Q on D link. I need to look at it again as Iím hoping this may help with the language problem. Colleen stated, ìThey KNOW the Mormons have a public face and a public "gospel" they present--why can they not believe the Adventists are the same? I'm totally at a loss to explain how they totally discount our experiences--which are so astonishingly similar no matter where in the world we live--and actually have the nerve--or ignorance--to look us in the eye and say, "But really, they ARE a Christian church--what is your problem with them? A lot of Christian churches have some problems with legalism--that's nothing new!" This is my frustration, too. I never wanted to be involved in being ìantiî anything as a focus. I was out of the Adventist church without checking this site or the others because I had to do it just with the direction of the Holy Spirit and the word of God. But there is some reason why once I was out, that then the Holy Spirit sent back to examine these very issues. And I agree with something LoneViking said a week or so agoóI suspect it also has something to do with the New Covenant. About a month ago I responded to an e-mail from a national ministry figure who wanted to know what Adventists believe. I prayerfully told him and asked him to let me know what he thought. Well, heís totally ignored that subject although weíve been in e-mail communication on other things. I believe it may be because I remember him saying he has connections in Celebration, Florida (Disney town near Orlando) and has used the SDA church for meeting rooms. I suspect heís made acquaintances with some gracious, evangelical SDAs there or in the hospital near there. Thus whatever I may say comes across as me badmouthing his friends. Heís flying into my area next week and I believe Iíll get a chance to speak to him so Iíve got to prayerfully figure out how to break through this very wall that weíre talking about here. Iíve been amazed at how many people have started asking me about Adventists so that must be coming about through the Holy Spirit. However, I feel so inadequate because of all the reasons Colleen has mentioned. It just doesnít seem like people Iíve been meeting lately really grasp what Iím trying to communicate. Maybe we need to continue to discuss and refine the ìlanguageî problem. That is the only thing that I can think of that is keeping Christians from understanding what we mean. If that is a huge part of it, I would like to refine the list, print it out and keep it handy for future use! Praise GodÖ | ||
| Tracey Registered user Username: Tracey Post Number: 136 Registered: 9-2004 |
Hi Fam! Didn't really want to start a new thread.. C and I are technically broken up. He and I talked and he wants to "work things out" between us. I so want that as well. I still see no answers to our dilemma except the time alone just him and the Lord. He gave me back my DVD on the Spirit behind the Church. He only said it was interesting. I find that the more I push the more he holds on. So I didn't try to discuss the issues brought up in the documentary. I do see subtle changes, but more time is needed. Changes like <believe it or not> him just doing nothing but relaxing. It may sound odd, but that's not how I know him. It was like he always had to be doing something or being productive (except Sat.) I have also noticed he refers to Jesus more and more in conversation and when he praises God. It used to be more "God" now I think perhaps his relationship with our Savior is becoming more real to him like, a real true friend that died for him now. There is still a huge expanse between us and with my hands off since the new year, it seems that I have enjoyed my life more without pressure of this whole thing and C hasn't had to fight to defend what he isn't sure he believes. Please continue to pray for us. I am in school and haven't been online as much <i graduate this quarter> but I think of you all often and love you so much! GBU! Tracey | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1264 Registered: 12-2003 |
Tracey, it's good to hear from you! Congratulations on being so near to graduation! Good for you for staying "hands off". That is the only way you will know whether or not C will really change. I'm also happy to read that you've had some times of enjoying your life more. That is, after all, how life should be--although there are many difficulties, trying to "fix" one you love is a burden that will truly drain your joy. A healthy relationship should not produce more pain than contentment. With prayers for you and C, Colleen | ||
| Weimarred Registered user Username: Weimarred Post Number: 13 Registered: 1-2005 |
All this talk on the cult-like status of the SDA church got me to thinking, what precisely is it that we believed as SDAs? What follows is a laundry list of beliefs. Admittedly, this list is filtered through my personal experiences and by the fact that I am no longer an SDA. But I imagine that many of you will find some or all to be accurate. (I apologize in advance for the length. I was ìclearingî my mind of some things!) Itís difficult for non-SDAís to understand this, but no matter how artfully SDAs craft their statements, the simple facts remain: 1> SDAs believe that EGW was inspired in the same Divine way as Biblical authors were. Now when it comes to infallibility, a> Some believe that both the Bible and EGW are infallible, b> Probably the majority believe that the Bible is infallible, while EGW is fallible. (Thusly, they can skirt issues of plagiarism, inconsistencies, and contradictions.) c> A certain fringe may believe that both are fallible, but these are probably on their way to either leaving or being kicked out. 2> SDAs generally believe in the COMPLETE infallibility of the Bible, and even more so, in the LITERAL reading of the Bible. They believe that: a> If science disagrees with the Bible, then science is either flat out wrong, or it hasnít ìcaught upî to the science interpreted from scripture. b> Every historical account is accurate. c> Every miracle is just that, a miracle. d> Every prophecy can be unlocked by anyone who has the Holy Spirit in his mind and a calculator in his hand. e> There are no genuine inconsistencies in the Bible. f> Some may accept that there are ìhumanî errors in the Bible, but even these can be overcome with intense logical study, particularly if we strive to go back to the original source. g> The Protestant Canon is complete, accurate, and closed (but not to further church-approved Revelation). 3> Due in large part to the idea of complete Biblical infallibility, SDAs make no practical distinction between scientific logic and inspired spirituality. Examples: a> You MUST read the Bible with a Vulcan mind set. b> There are no gray areas. It is never permissible to kill, eat pork, or GASP work on the Sabbath. Should you commit any of these sins, there can be no ìextenuatingî circumstances. c> Since the Bible is so very straightforward, the church can interpret dogma correctly, and it is only the churchís dogma that can be correct. d> While members are admonished to search the scriptures for themselves, should they come to contrary conclusions, they will be ignored first, and ìprayed forî second. e> Every single aspect of our daily lives is regulated in some way by some scripture. As opposed to WWJD, an SDAís question is more along the lines of WDBS, ìWhat Does the Bible Say (as interpreted by the church)?î 4> Because SDAs take such a dry, logical view of the Bible, they are more prone to entertaining or even accepting some rather unconventional beliefs. These beliefs fulfill a need for the ìmythosî or ìunexplainableî that is at the heart of spirituality. Examples: a> At least subliminally, SDAs believe that the Bible is incomplete and EGW extended the Revelation. b> The church can impose doctrine that is shaky in Biblical origin, or that completely lacks any foundation in scripture. (But only as long as the church doesnít contradict scripture. That would be a very ìCatholicî thing to do!) Further, the church doesnít need to coherently explain to its flock why it is adding extra-Biblical doctrine, unless its members start clamoring for a reason why. c> All non-SDA churches are evil, or at least spring from evil seed. The Beast is the Papacy, and the final climactic battle will center around the Sabbath issue. d> Though the Bible is ìlocked and loadedî to enlighten us, further Revelation is continuous. (Iím just waiting for the church to eventually find an ìEGW ñ the Sequelî. Until then, they content themselves with parsing EGWís writings, separating the wheat from the chaff. That is, when theyíre up to that task.) 4> SDAs believe that the seventh-day Sabbath always has been and always will be THE central issue of grace and eternal life. a> Those who of have been exposed to the ìtruthî MUST accept it to be saved. b> Those who havenít been exposed to the ìtruthî might still be saved, depending on their acceptance of what they have been exposed to. 5> Again, alluding to their strict logical interpretation of the scripture, SDAs believe that a person who accepts Jesus Christ as his personal Savior will provide ample and ongoing evidence of his salvation. While heís technically saved by faith alone, he has to PROVE his faith. To do this: a> He will continually strive towards perfection, as defined by both the church, and as a ìlogicalî extension, as defined by EGW (at least the parts of EGW that are still acceptable). b> He will assiduously confess all of his sins in a never-ending confessional to God. c> He will immediately spread the good news to others, and in no instance will he subvert the teachings of the church. d> Any lesser behavior bears the taint of delusion, or even, of the Devilís hand. e> Any mode of behavior prior to salvation is suspect, no matter how innocuous or even pious that behavior might have been. In other words, there is no dignified life outside of the churchís teachings. f> A saved person can not cling to any repeated sin. To do so indicates an incomplete faith, and hence, that person isnít truly saved. Example: smokers canít be saved if they continue smoking after hearing the ìgood newsî! 6> SDAs embrace the concept that everything in life must be viewed through the Great Controversy filter, and that this Controversy extends beyond the cross. a> All humans are pawns in a giant chess game being played by God and the Devil. While we can choose which side to be on, we can never leave the board. b> The church can make some absurd predictions about the end times, but this is acceptable as long as we donít lose sight of the fact that there IS an end time coming. c> Every single blessed thing that we do in life either enhances the forces of Light, or it enhances the forces of Darkness. There can be no neutral actions, even if weíre unaware of the consequences of our actions. d> Since a ìsavedî person will unhesitatingly take up the gauntlet, ultimately, the Great Controversy becomes more important than individual salvation. Remember, according to SDA ideology, all the universe is looking at the earth to see if Godís graceful intentions are true and pure, in contrast to the claims of the fallen angel, Satan. Therefore, God, the omnipotent being, needs us to justify His actions. The cross should have been a resounding response to this question, but what good is the cross if everyone demonstrates incomplete faith? Anyways, thatís my list. Please let me know what Iíve left off, or if you disagree with any item. Looking at the overall picture, I would say that many of these beliefs would characterize a group as being a cult. SDAs certainly do provide an all-encompassing ideology that overtakes every aspect of an adherentís life! I didnít compose this list to be mean-spirited, but rather to really dig into what it is that I personally ingrained into myself as an SDA. Itís tough to admit that I was part of a cult, or that I thought the way they did. But I think that was the case. Thanks for bearing with me, - Tom | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 270 Registered: 6-2004 |
Tom, you pretty much stated the obvious. One thing I always wondered about. The pastor at the SDA church was married to a nurse. Now if she was scheduled to work at the hospital on a Friday night or on Saturday, she would do so. How is this justified? I think they usually hide behind the quote "It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath". | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 575 Registered: 7-2003 |
Tom, interestingly enough, I have developed a higher view of scripture since I left Adventism and began to seriouly study the Bible (and study about the Bible). In Adventism I subscribed to the idea of "thought inspiration" (i.e. God gave the writers the thought, but the words they used to record the thought might contain some human errors). I probably would have used the word "infallible", but only in the sense that scripture is dependable for teaching and doctrine. Since leaving Adventism I have spent much more time studying the claims the Bible makes for itself, the statements Jesus and the apostles make about the Bible, and the implications of these assertions being true or false. I've also spent considerable time researching the evidences for the Bible and the process by which it came together. Based on study, research, and I believe the conviction of the Holy Spirit, I now believe the Bible to be both infallible and inerrant. I also believe the Bible presents objective truth in *words* that are inspired. The Holy Spirit helps us understand this truth and apply it to our lives, but no secret knowledge or undefinable existential experience is required to comprehend the basic objective truths presented in scripture. In my experience (albeit limited) the former SDAs I know here in Lincoln and elsewhere have generally followed a similar pattern, going from a realtively low to moderate view of scripture to a higher view of scripture. I'm sure there are many exceptions though. I would be interested to hear the thought processes and the journey others have taken in their view of scripture. Chris | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 307 Registered: 7-2000 |
Same as yours Chris. It's interesting that on the offical E.G.White estate site they address the subject of inspiration. They state that 'thought inspiration' is what SDA's believe. Why? Basically, that's what E.G.White taught! They also state that the Bible is NOT inerrant, but that the errors are not something that would affect doctrine. Wiemarred---I love that handle! You know folks, even the 'contemporary' services where grace is preached are marred. I wound up (long story) attending the Palo Cedro church this last Saturday where the conference president was speaking. Great speaker, seems to be saying all of the right things.....except for the handful of references to E.G.White and that stained glass window with three angels staring down at the congregation. How ironic! The 3 angels message as interpreted by SDA's is as cultic as it gets, while the sermon tries to be grace oriented. The two just don't mix. You're right about the language too. The preacher said that are sins are forgiven at the cross----mentally, I was thinking 'o.k., and when are they blotted out? I.J.?'. He continued on about the need for grace and how wonderful grace is----and I'm thinking 'yep, so that we can keep the Ten Commandments perfectly and thereby bring about the return of Christ'. SDA's sound soooo good, BUT................ | ||
| Esther Registered user Username: Esther Post Number: 112 Registered: 5-2004 |
I must remark as well about how my views of scripture have altered in the last year. Being a rather young, SDA devotee prior. I was confident in my beliefs and hadn't really taken the initiative to think out my view of scripture. But now, looking back, I believe my views on the Bible were limited. I knew enough doctrine to get by, and could win a game of Bible trivia with no contest...but I didn't really KNOW the Bible. Recently though, when I read and study, I find myself absorbed by the words. It seems every text has new meaning. The depth of thought in each passage is totally new to me. Shortly after we started studying the new covenant, I remember thinking how beautifully the WHOLE book fit together. The picture is complete...it amazes me how reading and contemplating the truths I find there now, drive me to worship my God as both Creator and Redeemer. This is also the very thing that breaks my heart as i try to explain it to my SDA friends. They don't get it...and that feeling of looking at this complete picture and a God that is so much bigger than the realm of adventism lets you imagine...and that's not something you can explain or give them. They have to open up to the reality, even the possibility, before that feeling dawns on you. God truly is amazing! It's unfathomable |
