| Author | Message | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1437 Registered: 3-2004  |
To those from the R/S web site who lurk here: The reason for the success of the Willow Creek church and those who follow this style, it is not so much the music and the format of the service, it is the message preached. It is the gospel of Jesus Christ, his birth, life, death and resurrection that are emphasized, with no extra Biblical teachings. A church can follow the format, but if they do not preach Jesus Christ, it will come to naught in the long run. All I need is Jesus. God you are awesome. Diana | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1791 Registered: 11-2002 |
I just went and read the entries on the Pastor O'Fill site under the heading, A New SDA Church Starts Up. He makes sure to say this new church will hold fast to the core SDA fundamentals. Therefore I can only conclude as the saying, "a rose by any other name is still a rose" in this case a SDA church by any other name is still a SDA church. It took me well into old age before I was able to call a liar a liar. Just because someone or an organization tells you it speeks the truth doesn't mean iot really does speek the truth. The JW's not only claim to be Christian, they claim to be the onlt Christians on the entire planet. Yet, because they deviate from so much that true Christianity hold as basic truth I can only conclude the only thing Christian about them is that they use the word Christian to describe themselves, which just then makes them non)Christian, therefore liars. The onlt thing about the Mormons that seems Christian to me is that in their name they have the words Jesus Chrisy, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Just because a person or an organization makes a particular claim does not mean they are speeking the truth. therefore, this new SDA church is still SDA. Actions speek louder than words. Lipstick on a pig. | ||
| Pheeki Registered user Username: Pheeki Post Number: 546 Registered: 1-2003 |
I just posted over there the Ellen quote about how the ministers who didn't participate in the sin of date setting had the blood of souls on them and didn't love Jesus enough and their lives would not stand the test. I will probably get banned now. To me, that quote alone qualifies her as an imposter. She claims God showed her that they didn't love Him enough and their lives wouldn't stand the test and the blood of souls was on them...all the while they were in the right and she was sinning by setting herself up as an idol! | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 382 Registered: 7-2004 |
I'm proud of you Pheeki. Someone has to say a few enlightening things to those people. It pains me to see how enmired they become when they only have each other to talk to. They are always looking for for people to remain true to the truth though the heavens fall, yet when the truth is right before them they want to argue about it. Which thread did you post that on? Statements of that sort tend to be short-lived on R/S. Belva | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 386 Registered: 7-2004 |
Under "Issues In Contemporary Worship" my protagonist Colporteur posted the following comment: ---------- Sometimes I wonder if a recovering legalist might be the biggest threat to the church of today. By "recovering legalist" I mean, someone who only thinks they are recovering while giving sin ground. My experience has been that the majority of folks that most aggressively promote new theology, rocklike contemporary music & dancing, ecumentical worship styles, immodest dress etc. etc., give testimony of their past bout with legalism. Whether they were truly legalistic or not probably matters little because this is how they perceive their former selves. These folks feel they were extreme and have now come to a proper balance. I suppose if we all sought balance with the same starting points we would be in proper balance together. The trouble is, the idea of what is extreme is only a matter of opinion if we do not prayerfully allow the Holy Spirit to guide our surrendered hearts through Inspired Council as a way to determine sanctified balance. What we each consider to be extreme often depends on how seriously we are walking with the Lord and where we are at on our journey. I have a very close non SDA friend who seems at times to be coming around in terms of accepting the truth. He admittedly has a lot of surrendering to do yet. We have always talked about Sabbath keeping in a general sort of way. Today he threw out a question about buying a coke on the Sabbath. With him the issue was not the coke at all but the buying of one on the Sabbath. Mentally, I took issue with the coke itself (ug) before even addressing the Sabbath. I knew if I gave an answer from what was on my mind it would blow my friend out of the saddle, so to speak. He likely would have thought me taking issue with the coke as extreme. I give him alot of room since he is a baby Christian and very leadable. The "recovering legalist" may be more dangerous than the actual legalist because the latter continues to want to uphold God's law. All they need to do is come to the realization that the only way that that can happen is through God's power added to our efforts as we surrender and strive to please God and do His will. When and if this victory takes place the heart will be humbled and soft while maintaining a deep love for the character and law of God. On the other hand, the person who thinks by marching down the wide rode of exceptance of sin, that He has the proper balance, is hard to reach because he cannot see obedience to the law as possible or anything other than legalism. Since the carnal heart loves sin this new supposed balance is very soothing and attractive and tends to be much more palatable then struggling with the seemingly impossible. Sometimes the legalistic heart learns a truth. It decides that it cannot obey God. Since it cannot obey God, the thinking is that God does not expect it. Then these folks comfort one another while harboring sin and condemning those who preach,teach or talk about perfection of character. Statements in the SOP that God's people in the end will not sin even in thought, are like thorns in their flesh because it seems that God is unreasonable in expecting the impossible. Apparently, for many of our more liberal friends their failing experince in legalism has led them to think that reaching a point of complete obedience cannot happen therefore grace must cover sin that is still retained in the heart and life. Phillipians 4:13 is a great comfort at this time when the idea permeates society that sin has the victory. ---------- This so-called recovering legalist is simply the result of the rope being drawn too tight and when it breaks it rebounds. I'm not certain if these "recovering legalists" have discovered grace or not--it is hard to tell when reading Colporteur's descriptions of them. My experience of him is that he is a true legalist and would view anyone who takes a little leeway at all as being a threat. The rest of the comments on that thread are very interesting and supportive of Col's assessment, though. That would fit nicely with Colleen's statement that she would rather see Adventists practicing the historical viewpoint. Col would, too. Belva | ||
| Bmorgan Registered user Username: Bmorgan Post Number: 40 Registered: 7-2000 |
Belva, that you are even able to decipher what Mr Colporteur has written is remarkable. Thanks for trying to interpret his comments. Sorry, but reading his SDA and many other Adventists convoluted thoughts and expressions literally gives me a headache. Besides, my heart ache for them. Oh, to know joy and peace being in Christ Alone. Bmorgan | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1442 Registered: 3-2004 |
Bmorgan, like you, I do not understand the convoluted thought process of the SDA doctrines. I just read a little and stop as it is to confusing. All I need is Jesus, even a child understands that. He is awesome. Diana | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 387 Registered: 7-2004 |
Yes, I agree that Col is often hard to follow. For instance in this statement: "On the other hand, the person who thinks by marching down the wide rode of exceptance of sin, that He has the proper balance, is hard to reach because he cannot see obedience to the law as possible or anything other than legalism. Since the carnal heart loves sin this new supposed balance is very soothing and attractive and tends to be much more palatable then struggling with the seemingly impossible." A person has to interpret what he meant, not what he said. I guess that being a good legalist he has lived with contradiction for so long that he has adapted his spelling to fit the disharmony. Here it is again, properly spelled (but still hard to swallow): "On the other hand, the person who thinks by marching down the wide road of acceptance of sin, that He has the proper balance, is hard to reach because he cannot see obedience to the law as possible or anything other than legalism. Since the carnal heart loves sin this new supposed balance is very soothing and attractive and tends to be much more palatable than struggling with the seemingly impossible." Mr. Colporteur is very concerned with the width of the road he is on, and wants to make sure he's on the narrow one. He doesn't seem to understand that measured against the general populace, all Christians are on "the narrow road." I'd love to see his focus move from traveling surfaces to the beautiful Saviour he says he is traveling with. Maybe that is why I keep going over there to see if anything has changed. To date, nothing has. Belva | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1443 Registered: 3-2004 |
Belva, I go to the R/S site frequently also, hoping that something one of us said will get through to one of them. So far I see nothing. It is a shame we were banned, because at least it got the folks there to think and hopefully read the Bible differently. I have to remember it was not us, but God working through us, especially people like you, Stan, Greg, Justin, Jeremy and I cannot name all of them. God is still in charge and He will work on each of them. I trust Him for that. He is so awesome. Diana | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 238 Registered: 3-2005 |
I think Bill Mead is doing very well presenting the evangelical gospel to those cultists over there. Now, the cultists are attacking each other. On the "New Pope" thread, onagiri attacks colporteur like this "Your zeal in writing is evident, but your spelling finesse and grammar often leaves a blot on the cause of Christ." Then Larry Lyons gets on onagiri for those comments as being too extreme! Wow, now that they don't have us to kick around anymore, they kick round each other. Stan | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 360 Registered: 5-2002 |
"Now, the cultists are attacking each other" Just like the Pharisees and Saducees... This is a good thing, for a house divided against itself cannot stand! | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 72 Registered: 2-2005 |
Maybe onigiri thought Ellen's idea of mandatory perfection includes spelling. After all, it "leaves a blot on the cause of Christ." | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 240 Registered: 3-2005 |
Yes! Heretic! You are right on! She even gives a whole bunch of EGW quotes to defend her position of attack on Colporteur! Quotes about spelling and writing correctly. Unbelievable! Stan | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 392 Registered: 7-2004 |
It's okay, fellas, Col has already told her that spelling doesn't matter when the expediency of the message is at stake. He's just writing fast so he can get it all down, and he leaves it to his readers to decipher. I actually agree with onigiri, the man should show some pride of authorship. He confuses the H*** outa me. Belva | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 617 Registered: 10-2004  |
But EGW herself wrote very sloppily, illegibly and used incorrect grammar, even in some of the "edited" published materials!!! Just imagine what poor grammar EGW used before her "book makers" (assistants) edited her writings! In fact, she used such poor English in her own manuscripts that sometimes it cannot even be comprehended what she is trying to say! Jeremy | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 394 Registered: 7-2004 |
Then Colporteur is simply following in her footsteps. We know that he admires her because he has chosen to make the sale of her materials his life's work. I can forgive Ellen because she never finished grade school. She also had a brain injury that had to incapacitate her to some degree, and her history seems to bear that out. Those of us who have completed high school should do our best to make certain that what we write reflects what we are trying to communicate to others. Spelling is a great part of that. English is a difficult language to be sure, but if you were awake in 8th grade you know the difference between to, too, and two--rode and road, except and accept, and so forth. I'm not saying that my posts are perfect because they are not. I send them through and notice typos all of the time and am forever smacking myself in the forehead as a result, but we should try to communicate as clearly as we can. That being said, I still don't think I would go so far as to say that good spelling and good grammar are salvational issues. Belva | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 620 Registered: 10-2004 |
Yes, he is following in her footsteps, but he doesn't seem to care about what she wrote in the quotes that onigiri posted. And her own quotes condemn herself (as happened all the time). Jeremy | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 270 Registered: 3-2005 |
Well, I just checked R/S site again, and there is so little happening, and so boring. However, for good times sake, I just re-read the "Where do we go from here" thread, and especially focused on the prayer Belva posted, that got us banned. It is a prayer we should all pray, as the upcoming GC session in St. Louis approaches. Stan | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1470 Registered: 3-2004 |
I just went over there also and read that prayer, Stan. What puzzles me is that Pastor O said he had been on this site and that we were colluding with each other as to who would write what on the R/S site. I have not seen that, unless he means my asking everyone for their prayers and help, before I got banned. Talk about people who put words in our mouths that are not there!!! So, I continue to pray for the folks there and I do pray for the GC session that will be held in St Louis. When will that be?? God is doing wonderful, awesome things in the SDA church and bringing people to Him. It is so awesome to see that happen. I recently received a post card from the last SDA church I attended. It was just a post card saying we miss you with all the pastors signatures. I had written them a year ago to ask that my name be taken off their mailing list, but in a way I am glad it was not, because I got to write a 4 page letter to the pastor telling him what I have learned about the Sabbath, tithing, my relationship with Jesus and the covenants. I said in closing that I would not attend an SDA church again, that I did not like the deceit practiced by the church since it began and that EGW is a false prophet. I said I prayed for all SDAs, that each one would learn to know Jesus and develop a relationship with Him as He is all we need. Maybe this will get me off their mailing list. Oh, a couple months ago the church secretary sent me a bunch of tithe envelopes, so I could pay tithe to them. I threw these away. I was so disgusted. I keep on praying for all SDAs. God, you are awesome. Diana | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 275 Registered: 3-2005 |
Diana, GC session will be about June 29 or so. I enjoyed reading about your courage in writing your 4-page letter. That is really commendable. Stan |
