Description of site

Welcome with open arms fellow believers who don't see things the way you do.
And don't jump all over them every time they do or say something you don't agree with
- even when it seems that they are strong on opinions but weak in the faith department.
Remember, they have their own history to deal with. Treat them gently. Romans 14.1: The Message

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#353855 - 04/22/10 03:47 AM Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided?
Reddogs Offline
I have already made 100 posts

Registered: 05/12/08
Posts: 293
I was trying to find the lastest on Desmond Ford and it seems they are trying to paint a picture of him as a loyal Adventist who the church beauracracy defrocked for little reason. Just to go over what occured, in August 1980, a group of Adventist theologians and administrators convened at Glacier View Ranch in Colorado to examine Desmonds Ford's views. According to sources, he "made the case that Ellen White's 'sanctuary' explication of 1844 no longer stood up in the light of the Bible, and that 'investigative judgment' undercut the whole basis of Protestantism: belief in salvation by God's grace apart from good works." The culmination of this event was Ford controversially losing his employment with the denomination as a minister and theology professor. After counsel from the General Conference, the Australasian Division withdrew Ford's ministerial credentials. Subsequently many supporters of Desmond Ford and his views left the church, and some became the most bitter opponents of Adventism as one can see on many websites. But lately it seems that in the Adventist churches there is very little of his views or controversy still being debated, rarely does it come up and few pastors or church theologians openly support him or his views, and the members have moved on and new church members dont even seem to know of him. What are everyones thoughts?



Top
Sponsors
#353858 - 04/22/10 04:31 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Reddogs]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA


I have mixed feelings and views about this. I used to be a supporter and admirer of Dr. Ford, and I still enjoy reading his very worth-while book on Daniel, but I don't believe he was/is right about the Investigative Judgment. Having said that, I believe the situation could have been handled better and more fairly. In some ways, I believe Dr. Ford did our church a favor by bringing the IJ to our attention and making us study it in order to see what we believe and why we believe it.

I think it's a misaken idea that Dr. Ford's teachings have lost their influence on the SDA church. I believe it is directly due to his teachings that most SDA pastors seldon teach the Investigative Judgment and many in our church either don't undersand it or don't believe in it, and usually it is a combination thereof.

By the way, there's an outstanding book about the IJ, The Silencing of Satan the Gospel In the Investigative Judgment, by Bradley Williams. If interested, it can be ordered or purchased at the ABC. It shows the Bible evidence for the IJ and is probably the best book of its kind. It proves Dr. Ford's thesis is wrong that the IJ is not biblical. Williams also shows that, when rightly understood, the IJ does not undercut the gospel of the grace of Christ. Ford wrote a brief review of the book, but basically ignored its primary significance. If you Google the author's name and title of the book, you should be able to read online Ford's book review as well as a discussion various people had with Brad Williams.

Top
#353894 - 04/22/10 10:49 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Reddogs]
Neil D Offline
Today, I ain't for sale. Check back tomorrow.


Registered: 08/10/00
Posts: 18264
Loc: Ca., Id, Wa., Or. or somewhere...
Originally Posted By: Reddogs
But lately it seems that in the Adventist churches there is very little of his views or controversy still being debated, rarely does it come up and few pastors or church theologians openly support him or his views, and the members have moved on and new church members dont even seem to know of him. What are everyones thoughts?


If you compare what SDAs were saying before 1970 to what they are saying now in terms of theology, I would say that Ford made a definate contribution to the SDA gospel of redemption. As a whole, the church, since his defrocking, has moved toward his theology on salvation and explaination of salvation by grace and works. This is also a distinct de-emphasis of the sanctuary system and the explination of 1844.

So, what thoughts are you looking for?
_________________________
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.

George Bernard Shaw

Top
#353897 - 04/22/10 10:54 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Neil D]
Nan Offline
Benevolent Physician


Registered: 04/07/00
Posts: 8270
Loc: Sydney,Australia
Without getting into the theology of Dr Ford, the whole controversy made a lasting impression in
this division. The departures from the ministry left quite a hole for years.

Top
#353920 - 04/22/10 12:41 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Nan]
karl Offline


Registered: 04/18/09
Posts: 2752
Originally Posted By: Nan
Without getting into the theology of Dr Ford, the whole controversy made a lasting impression in
this division. The departures from the ministry left quite a hole for years.


His views are very much being promoted today, especially by members in Australia.

Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary (currently including the Investigative Judgment) is completely unnecessary if Christians have no part to play in salvation.

Salvation is a cooperative work between man and God (Phil 2:12,13.) For the Christian, Christ's ministry in heaven is vital to that cooperative work.

Top
#353939 - 04/22/10 01:52 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Dr. Rich Offline
RIP Dr Rich, you are missed


Registered: 02/12/08
Posts: 4008
Loc: California
Yes John317, I tend to agree as I attended these meetings at Glacier View (living at our Ranch just a mile away). Looking back, this event may have been the spark that ignited my desire to know the real truth. At the time, I remember thinking that this issue about the IJ was not the foundational issue because the overwhelming view by those from the GC who attended was this: "If Dr. Ford was right, then EGW couldn't be right, and we can't have that!"

What was suppose to be an honest debate by leaving doctrine at the door turned out to be nothing but a prejudicial debate against those who did. Yes, pastors and teachers today hesitate to talk about this issue any more for fear of losing their job as Dr. Ford did. In fact, because of this, they tend to avoid anything that might rub the GC the wrong way-unless they have a backup plan for work.

As you John317, I live and work in the Loma Linda area and know many who do not agree with EGW, (such as with this issue), but because of their bond with the GC or the University, they don't dare talk about it.

But I also see a danger in moving in the direction Dr. Ford did in that some folks don't even want us to preach and teach keeping the ten commandments any longer. Hence the problem: Either take the words of Jesus as your foundation or the words of others who came after Jesus and claimed they were/are of Jesus.

Top
#354015 - 04/22/10 08:39 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Dr. Rich]
Gerry Cabalo Offline



Registered: 03/20/00
Posts: 15422
Loc: Wilkesboro, NC
I have been studying the subject of the IJ on and off since the 1970s. The more I study it, the more I'm convinced that if we did not have this doctrine, we would have to invent it to explain the separation of the sheep from the goats, the wise from the foolish virgins, the separation of the tares from the wheat, the sincere from the actors, the genuine from the counterfeit, those who have the robe of Christ's righteousness from those wearing their own filthy rags.

Someone in a former church we used to attend made a statement that we (SDAC) can/could not sustain the doctrine of the sanctuary and the IJ without SOP, so I proceeded to do that during a prayer meeting without one reference or hint of EGW .

I don't believe for one nanosecond that the choice is either Ford or EGW as Dr. Rich seems to indicate. To me both the sanctuary & the IJ doctrines are as soundly based on the Scriptures as the other doctrines.

Yes, I bought William's book a year ago, and he makes very good case for it, even more convincingly than I had ever thought myself.

We should not be afraid to study the sanctuary or the IJ. If they are true, the truth will shine. If we cannot sustain these doctrines from Scripture ALONE, the sooner we ditched them, the better off we would be.



Edited by Gerry Cabalo (04/22/10 08:47 PM)

Top
#354024 - 04/22/10 09:01 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Gerry Cabalo]
Gerry Cabalo Offline



Registered: 03/20/00
Posts: 15422
Loc: Wilkesboro, NC
PS
Ford & Walter Rea did shake a lot of SDAs out. It won't be the last shaking because the time is coming when everything that can be shaken will be shaken. So we'd better know now whether we are standing on the Rock or on quicksand.

Top
#354073 - 04/23/10 12:56 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Gerry Cabalo]
wayfinder Offline


Registered: 06/27/09
Posts: 1456
Loc: California
You are absolutely right on, Gerry.

Top
#354161 - 04/23/10 12:57 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Reddogs]
LynnDel Offline
Possibility person


Registered: 03/17/00
Posts: 4049
Loc: In transition
Those events, in my view, fundamentally changed our church, and lost to us many bright lights. It's not a healing that has happened, but a change - in some areas bitterness, in others a better understanding of grace.

LynnDel

Top
#354164 - 04/23/10 01:16 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Neil D]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Yes, Ford did indeed make a contribution to SDA doctrine. He influenced many not to believe in the Investigative Judgment and to reject Ellen White. I have seen this influence first hand. Many SDA ministers left the ministry and some even joined churches keeping Sunday because of Ford's influence.

Have you studied Ford's document on the heavenly sanctuary?

Top
#354167 - 04/23/10 01:26 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Gerry Cabalo]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
Gerry Cabalo: I don't believe for one nanosecond that the choice is either Ford or EGW as Dr. Rich seems to indicate. To me both the sanctuary & the IJ doctrines are as soundly based on the Scriptures as the other doctrines.

Yes, I bought William's book a year ago, and he makes very good case for it, even more convincingly than I had ever thought myself.

We should not be afraid to study the sanctuary or the IJ. If they are true, the truth will shine. If we cannot sustain these doctrines from Scripture ALONE, the sooner we ditched them, the better off we would be.



Very good post, Gerry. I completely agree.

By the way, Pastor Williams in the minister of the SDA church at Chula Vista and conducts seminars on the Investigative Judgment.

Top
#354222 - 04/23/10 06:52 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Dr. Rich Offline
RIP Dr Rich, you are missed


Registered: 02/12/08
Posts: 4008
Loc: California
To clear this up, I was speaking only about the issue of the IJ. I will agree that both Ford and White agree with each other on many points and issues.

When I was there (Glacier View) while eating with others, what stuck in my mind was the common sense understanding among those I was eating with is that Jesus said He was going to be with His Father, so this is exactly what He did. As for being in the 'most holy place' or not, there isn't much to go on by using the bible. Hebrews has Jesus sitting on the throne with His Father, so I just don't see anywhere that the IJ can be sustained from Scripture alone.

Top
#354236 - 04/23/10 08:50 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Dr. Rich]
Gerry Cabalo Offline



Registered: 03/20/00
Posts: 15422
Loc: Wilkesboro, NC
Quote:
As for being in the 'most holy place' or not, there isn't much to go on by using the bible.


Lev 16 & Heb 9 talk about the Holy & Most Holy Places and two phases of Christ's ministry.
Quote:


Hebrews has Jesus sitting on the throne with His Father, so I just don't see anywhere that the IJ can be sustained from Scripture alone.


If you hear in one of your cities, which the Lord your God is giving you to live in, anyone saying that some worthless men have gone out from among you and have seduced the inhabitants of their city, saying, ‘Let us go and serve other gods’ (whom you have not known), then you shall investigate and search out and inquire thoroughly. If it is true and the matter established that this abomination has been done among you," Dt 13:12-14 NASB

“A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed. “If a malicious witness rises up against a man to accuse him of wrongdoing, then both the men who have the dispute shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges who will be in office in those days. “The judges shall investigate thoroughly, and if the witness is a false witness and he has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him just as he had intended to do to his brother. Thus you shall purge the evil from among you. Dt 19:15-19 NASB

These are just a couple among many references to show you that God's MO is to investigate a case thoroughly BEFORE a judgment/verdict is rendered. If this is not done then someone could rightfully declare a mistrial or charge prejudice.

In God's church on this earth, there are wheat and tares, wise & foolish virgins, those who are faithful and those who are presumptious, the sincere and the actors, those with Christ's robe of righteousness and those with their own filthy rags, those who have built on the Rock and those who built on quicksand, the wheat and chaff, those who call Him, "Lord, Lord" with their lips but deny Him with their deeds, those who have a form of godliness but denying its power, etc. etc.

Does God take them all to heaven? No? By what method does He separate one from the other? The answer is very obvious.

Top
#354256 - 04/23/10 09:48 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Dr. Rich]
RLH Offline
Mr. Murphy's daddy


Registered: 07/07/09
Posts: 22239
Loc: North Carolina
Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich
To clear this up,


Rich, I'm not trying to be harsh, but I've never seen words from you clear up anything. ..........EVER.

Top
#354258 - 04/23/10 09:56 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Reddogs]
Rudy G Offline
Getting the hang of posting

Registered: 06/17/08
Posts: 61
Reddogs,

I would like to know a bit more about your thoughts.

What exactly is the damage you refer to? or What exactly was damaged and in what way was it damaged? Do you believe that Ford caused the damage or was the damage caused by the way the Ford experience unfolded? Did anyone besides Ford and his sympathizers cause any of the damage? Who are "they" who are painting Ford as a loyal Adventist? and finally Why are you concerned about it now?

Since you asked for them, here are my thoughts:

I believe that Ford was just the catalyst that brought long existing problems in Adventism to the surface. Generations of Adventists have been taught to reverence the Adventist pioneers as courageous truth seekers who studied their way into “THE” truth which was then confirmed by a prophet of God. But, the picture that is “painted” is not supported by the real history.

The fanatic traits that characterized the Millerites and their descendants, the early Adventists, is seldom acknowledged. Unfortunately the early Adventist embraced ideas and points of view that SDA Christians in last couple of generations would not entertain for a minute (including the most conservative SDAs). Gradually the early Adventists quietly set aside a variety of peculiar and flawed beliefs. These were not errors that they brought from the former churches (who were decried as apostate Protestants), but the errant views taught by the Adventists.

To the degree possible these errors were set aside without fanfare and certainly no apologies to anyone who had protested the errors along the way. In some cases the errors were treated as having never existed. In other cases, where it was obvious that scriptural interpretation had changed, it was “painted” as march toward the truth. In some cases this picture may have been accurate. But, in some cases it would have been more accurate to portray it as a return to the truth as held by maintstream Protestants. Unforutnately, many Adventists through the years have focused more on “possessing” the truth than “searching” for it.

Students of scripture should not be surprised. “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked.” We are all capable of great self deceit; convincing ourselves we are one step away from perfection. Dogmatism and self righteousness have plagued Adventism from its beginning. This also should not be surprising when you see how many of our distinctive beliefs serve to put us on a pedestal above other Christians.

Adventism began with an error in scriptural interpretation despite the Lord’s clear statements about no man knowing the hour of His coming. Many decades later, despite all the wonderful things that can be said about Adventists and Adventism, we have never weaned ourselves from scriptural interpretations that serve to bring us honor and glory instead of God. And if we don’t give ourselves honor and authority that belongs to God, then we give it to a human that we claim to be a prophet.

If one takes the time to study the prophets’ and their writings it becomes abundantly clear that prophets are flawed human beings. If one truly studies the writings of Ellen White then how is possible that we do not see the great changes in her interpretation of scripture. If God sent her to canonize Adventist doctrine why didn’t she point out all the flaws at the very beginning that were gradually expunged through the years? If Ellen White was God’s authoritative spokesperson for the truth then why did Jones and Waggoner present the message that she embraced and clearly changed the focus of her spiritual leadership?

We have invested ideas and people with authority and significance that feed our own selfish egos and then pretend that we are honoring God and his messengers. God in his grace allows flawed human beings to serve him and even speak on His behalf, but when we give human messengers greater authority than “THE SPIRIT” of prophecy that dwells in the heart of every born again Christian we are in dangerous territory.

I believe that for a few years an honest seeker of truth, Desmond Ford, aroused a church drunk on its own egotistic interpretations of scripture. True to their character the egotists protected their interests and drove the threat to their power and authority from their ranks along with anyone who appeared to be part of the threat. Yes, the damage to that power and authority has “subsided”. We are once again a slumbering and dying church.

Top
#354266 - 04/23/10 10:28 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Dr. Rich]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
Dr. Rich: Jesus said He was going to be with His Father, so this is exactly what He did. As for being in the 'most holy place' or not, there isn't much to go on by using the bible. Hebrews has Jesus sitting on the throne with His Father, so I just don't see anywhere that the IJ can be sustained from Scripture alone.


Check out Daniel 7: 9-14. What's happening here? Notice the wheels on God's throne. What is being pictured?

Of course he went to His Father. God accepted Christ's sacrifice.

The book of Hebrews isn't about the IJ. That's not the topic or theme. The thesis of Hebrew is that we now have full access to God the Father and that Christ is our High Priest in the Heavenly Sanctuary, a real place that God built and not man. From there, Christ provides us power by His Spirit to help us resist and overcome sin. We don't need to keep sacrificing animals because our Passover has been sacrifice once for all. Therefore we shouldn't fall back into that old Sacrificial system of this earth because it is useless. It no longer has any salvific significance except as it illustrates what is going on in heaven. Let us therefore keep our eyes focussed on the Lord Jesus Christ our Mediator who will come for His purified church.

It doesn't contradict the IJ but at the same time it doesn't deal directly with the questions we're asking about the IJ. For that we need to study Lev., Daniel, and Revelation.

Top
#354269 - 04/23/10 10:37 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Rudy G]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
Rudy G: The fanatic traits that characterized the Millerites and their descendants, the early Adventists, is seldom acknowledged.


Hey, Rudy G., thanks for joining us and welcome to the Forum. Hope you enjoy it and make lots of friends.

What do you consider "fanatic"? And how did this "fanaticism" affect our church? Could you please give examples with references? Thanks. :-)

happysabbath

Top
#354300 - 04/24/10 12:05 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Neil D Offline
Today, I ain't for sale. Check back tomorrow.


Registered: 08/10/00
Posts: 18264
Loc: Ca., Id, Wa., Or. or somewhere...
Originally Posted By: John317
Yes, Ford did indeed make a contribution to SDA doctrine. He influenced many not to believe in the Investigative Judgment and to reject Ellen White. I have seen this influence first hand. Many SDA ministers left the ministry and some even joined churches keeping Sunday because of Ford's influence.

Have you studied Ford's document on the heavenly sanctuary?



I was at PUC at the time that Ford was defrocked...It was a troubling time for me. The church treated him badly, and what the church said to the teachers and workers at PUC was totally different than what was said publically in the church...But, after a couple of months, Ford said that EGW was NOT a prophet, and I closed my ears to him...

I would rather study that which was I have time for...I dont want to study other stuff...
_________________________
Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.

George Bernard Shaw

Top
#354305 - 04/24/10 12:39 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Neil D]
olger Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 11618
Loc: Ohio
Ford was defrocked because he insisted on multiple fulfillments of one time historical prophecies. Today he believes that Antiochus Epiphanes is the "little horn" (Daniel 8:9).
_________________________
"Please don't feed the drama queens.."

Top
#354307 - 04/24/10 12:44 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Rudy G]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
Rudy G:
I believe that Ford was just the catalyst that brought long existing problems in Adventism to the surface. Generations of Adventists have been taught to reverence the Adventist pioneers as courageous truth seekers who studied their way into THE truth which was then confirmed by a prophet of God. But, the picture that is painted is not supported by the real history.


Quote:
Rudy G: Unfortunately the early Adventist embraced ideas and points of view that SDA Christians in last couple of generations would not entertain for a minute (including the most conservative SDAs).


The very early Adventists didn't even agree on much else besides the Sabbath and the Second Coming. And yes, some of them had all kinds of different ideas.

But what specific ideas that the church embraced do you have in mind? Could you give a reference?

Am I right to guess that you don't consider yourself a conservative SDA?

Quote:
Rudy G: Gradually the early Adventists quietly set aside a variety of peculiar and flawed beliefs. These were not errors that they brought from the former churches (who were decried as apostate Protestants), but the errant views taught by the Adventists.


Please tell us what errant views and when this occurred? Who accepted them?

It's a good thing to give examples and, if it's not something widely known, include a reference.

Quote:
Rudy G: To the degree possible these errors were set aside without fanfare and certainly no apologies to anyone who had protested the errors along the way. In some cases the errors were treated as having never existed.


What errors were treated as having never existed?

Quote:
Rudy G: In other cases, where it was obvious that scriptural interpretation had changed, it was painted as march toward the truth.


Example and reference, please?

Quote:
Rudy G: In some cases this picture may have been accurate. But, in some cases it would have been more accurate to portray it as a return to the truth as held by maintstream Protestants.


When did this occur and what truths do you refer to?

Quote:
Rudy G: Unforutnately, many Adventists through the years have focused more on possessing the truth than searching for it.


It's certainly true that we need to search for truth and also study the Bible to see what we believe and why we believe it.

Quote:
Rudy G: Students of scripture should not be surprised. The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. We are all capable of great self deceit;


Indeed. That is one reason it's always good to ask for examples and references.

Quote:
Rudy G: convincing ourselves we are one step away from perfection.


Any writers or individuals you're thinking of in particular?

Quote:
Rudy G: Dogmatism and self righteousness have plagued Adventism from its beginning.


Not only Adventists. In fact, not only Christians. A common human trait? But no excuse, I know.

Quote:
Rudy G: This also should not be surprising when you see how many of our distinctive beliefs serve to put us on a pedestal above other Christians.


Which distinctive doctrines would you like to see our church jettison because they only serve to put us on a pedastal above other Christians?

Quote:
Rudy G: Adventism began with an error in scriptural interpretation despite the Lord’s clear statements about no man knowing the hour of His coming.


Did William Miller ever state that he knew the hour of Christ's return?

Remember that Wm. Miller taught that Christ was coming "about 1843-1844." It was only later that some of his followers began to teach that Christ would come on a particular day. In fact, it wasn't until Oct 20, 1844, that William Miller accepted the date of Oct. 22 as the time of the Lord's coming. William Miller himself was very relunctant to say the very day when Christ was to return.

Have you never read William Miller's explanation of the text you quoted? He wrote about it and discussed it because it was something that was commonly said and given as a result some people did not accept Miller's message.

Quote:
Rudy G: Many decades later, despite all the wonderful things that can be said about Adventists and Adventism, we have never weaned ourselves from scriptural interpretations that serve to bring us honor and glory instead of God.


Who is doing this? What interpretations? Please be specific.

Quote:
Rudy G: And if we don't give ourselves honor and authority that belongs to God, then we give it to a human that we claim to be a prophet.


Do you believe she was a prophet, assuming you're speaking of Ellen White?

I've no doubt myself. If she wasn't, I'm in the wrong church. I wouldn't have anything to with a church that was co-founded and as greatly influence by a false prophet as the SDA church was-- that is, if indeed Ellen White was a false prophet.

However, it is very important for every person to study this for themselves and come to their own conclusion. As Paul says, Let every man be persuaded in his own mind.

Continued

Top
#354314 - 04/24/10 01:23 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Gerry Cabalo]
Dr. Rich Offline
RIP Dr Rich, you are missed


Registered: 02/12/08
Posts: 4008
Loc: California
Thanks Gerry for the scripture on how to deal with these issues. It sure would have been nice to have the GC deal like this with David Dennis. As an investigator, what I saw the GC do to David Dennis was downright awful and it appears that NO one who was involved is willing to talk about and provide ANY evidence at all that would officially put to sleep what happened.

What is interesting, is Dr. Ford is still talked about while hardly anyone knows the real story on David Dennis who was the head Accountant for the GC who blew the whistle on what was going on with Niel Wilson and Flconberg. Hmmm? Come on GC (Tom W.) show us the evidence!

Top
#354319 - 04/24/10 02:10 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Neil D]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
Neil D: But, after a couple of months, Ford said that EGW was NOT a prophet, and I closed my ears to him...


Do you have a reference for that, Neil?

When were you at PUC? You must have been there from about 1977 to 1979. I was there in 1972-1974 and then transferred to Loma Linda U.

Here is what is on the Adventist Reform website concerning Dr. Ford:

Quote:
....the leaders mischaracterized Dr. Ford's positions. They dishonestly led the church to believe that he had repudiated the Three Angels Messages and the ministry of Ellen White, when that is exactly what they were doing. But Dr. Ford was not guilty as charged.

... He supports Historic Adventism and the Gospel. He supports Ellen White and the Pioneers. ....


Listen to his call for Adventist Reform:

"God raised up the advent movement to proclaim the three angels' messages to the world, a proclamation which would have the everlasting gospel at its center with warnings against its counterfeits and perversions. "
....Desmond Ford, July 2004 .....

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform

Original: http://www.adventistreform.com/DrDesmondFord.html


You will see that Dr. Ford has never said Ellen White is not a prophet. He said that she was not a canonical prophet, but that is different from saying she is not a prophet. He used the term "pastoral prophet." Is this what you had in mind?

To this day, I don't believe Dr. Ford as ever renounced Ellen White as a prophet.

Perhaps someone has documented evidece that he's recently renounced her, and if they have I wish they would post it. I try to keep up with his teachings. I onced admired him and believed his teachings on the Investigative Judgment but no longer do.



Top
#354320 - 04/24/10 02:23 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: olger]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
olger:Ford was defrocked because he insisted on multiple fulfillments of one time historical prophecies. Today he believes that Antiochus Epiphanes is the "little horn" (Daniel 8:9).


That is true, and Ford successfuly rebuts his own argument in his book, Daniel, which he wrote a few years before he changed his mind.

Antiochus Epiphanes couldn't possibly be the "little horn" power. He was a footnote in history, but the Bible said the little horn power would become "exceeding great"-- that is, greater than Greece, the previous power, which was called "very great." Dan. 8: 8, 9. Obviously he failed to fulfill that part of the prophecy. There are other reasons he can't be the little horn power.

Top
#354321 - 04/24/10 02:47 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Rudy G]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Continued from previous post--

Quote:
Rudy G: If one takes the time to study the prophets and their writings it becomes abundantly clear that prophets are flawed human beings.


Sure, they're all fallen human beings, from Enoch and Moses to John the Beloved to Ellen White. No question. All of them confessed their sinfulness and their defects. None were infallible men, and neither were any infallible women.

Quote:
Rudy G: If one truly studies the writings of Ellen White then how is possible that we do not see the great changes in her interpretation of scripture.


Can you please give several examples and give references?

Quote:
Rudy G: If God sent her to canonize Adventist doctrine why didn't she point out all the flaws at the very beginning that were gradually expunged through the years?


Examples and references, please? Where are you getting your evidence of this?

I hate to keep asking you for examples but I need to know what exactly you're talking about. It's not clear to me as it stands.

Quote:
Rudy G: If Ellen White was God's authoritative spokesperson for the truth then why did Jones and Waggoner present the message that she embraced and clearly changed the focus of her spiritual leadership?


Can you give Bible evidence that shows us Ellen White could not have been a true prophet under the circumstances as they were at the time you speak of?

Jones and Waggoner were never prophets of God, of course. God can use more than one person to bring truth to His church.

In what way do you understand Jone & Waggoner clearly changed the focus of Ellen White's spiritual leadership?

Quote:
Rudy G: We have invested ideas and people with authority and significance that feed our own selfish egos and then pretend that we are honoring God and his messengers.


I believe that God invested Ellen White with authority as His messenger. At least she tells us that Christ Himself ordained her as His special messenger, or prophet, to give His messages to the church and occasionally to the world. Prophets, of course, are God's mouthpiece. That is their work.

Have you read Selected Messages, Vol. 1, pages 24-46? She writes there of how Jesus declared her to be His messenger and then talked to her about her work of writing His messages for the church.

Quote:
Rudy G: God in his grace allows flawed human beings to serve him and even speak on His behalf, but when we give human messengers greater authority than THE SPIRIT of prophecy that dwells in the heart of every born again Christian we are in dangerous territory.


Are you saying that all of us who believe we have the Holy Spirit have as much authority as a genuine prophet of God?

Does every person who has the Spirit also by definition have the Spirit of prophecy and hence is able to speak with prophetic authority?

Quote:
Rudy G: I believe that for a few years an honest seeker of truth, Desmond Ford, aroused a church drunk on its own egotistic interpretations of scripture.


OK, this is what you believe, but can you show clear evidence of this? What "egotistical interpretations of scripture" do you have in mind?

Can you show that it is "egotistical," is false and not based on Scripture?

Quote:
Rudy G: Rudy G: True to their character the egotists protected their interests and drove the threat to their power and authority from their ranks along with anyone who appeared to be part of the threat.


Who are/were "the egotists"? It sounds like you mean the men who drove Desmond Ford out of his position of teacher and minister. Who were these men? Do you have proof or strong evidence that they were "egotists"? Your language is very strong, so I assume you feel that you have convincing evidence of it.

Are you sure these people weren't completely sincere in their belief that Dr. Ford was wrong and that he was wrongly attacking a fundamenal doctrine of the Bible and of the SDA church? How can you be sure this was not the case?

Quote:
Rudy G: Yes, the damage to that power and authority has subsided. We are once again a slumbering and dying church.


A slumbering and dying church? Perhaps in North America but certainly not in South America and Africa. Just since I was baptized the SDA church has grown from about 6 million to 16 million. Of course that does not prove that the church is spiritually healthy or correct doctrinally, but it does show that it's hardly a dying church, although it's not growing in North America and in Europe like it should.

Could you please answer a couple of questions?

Do you believe in the Investigative Judgment?

And

If not, why don't you?

Thank you, Rudy, and I look forward to exchanging messages and ideas with you. God bless you in your search for truth. :-)


Top
#354331 - 04/24/10 05:48 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
karl Offline


Registered: 04/18/09
Posts: 2752
Quote:
Rudy G: If Ellen White was God's authoritative spokesperson for the truth then why did Jones and Waggoner present the message that she embraced and clearly changed the focus of her spiritual leadership?


Didn't she said she had believed and preached the message brought by J&W for years? I'll look for that quote.

She was just grateful that God had laid the message on J&W to preach with boldness to the brethren.

This could be another argument against WO, incidentally.

Top
#354332 - 04/24/10 06:16 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: karl]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
karl: Didn't she said she had believed and preached the message brought by J&W for years? I'll look for that quote.


I think maybe you're thinking of the passage where she says that when she heard J&W preach, it was the first time she heard it spoken except when she and James White had conversations with each other about it. Those aren't her very words but it's close.

Ring a bell?

Quote:
karl: She was just grateful that God had laid the message on J&W to preach with boldness to the brethren.

This could be another argument against WO, incidentally.


That's true. I hadn't thought of that. That actually makes sense, though. Ellen White was not biblical scholar, and what those men gave the church came out of Bible study, not dreams and visions. It really had to be based on the Bible, and Ellen White wasn't able to do that same kind of work they could do. They were pastor-teachers, as mentioned in Eph. 4: 11. In that text, the two gifts seem to be combined in one individual, which is the way it may have been in the cases of J&W. It seems to me a good possibility that God chose those two men because they were more suitable to that particular work than Ellen White. There are other ways of explaining it but that is one of them.

I'm going to ask Herbert Douglass. He should have some interesting thoughts about it because he wrote a major biography and study of Ellen White called The Messenger of God. I could also ask Robert Olson, who lives not too far from me. I wonder if he'll remember me from when I took a class by him just before he left PUC for the White Estate.

What part of the country do you live in? I'm in Southern CA.

Top
#354340 - 04/24/10 07:24 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
karl Offline


Registered: 04/18/09
Posts: 2752
Originally Posted By: John317
[
What part of the country do you live in? I'm in Southern CA.


I live in Ola, Arkansas where we understand Southern humor.

Why did the chicken cross the road? To prove to the armadillo it could be safely done.

Top
#354347 - 04/24/10 07:47 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Gerry Cabalo Offline



Registered: 03/20/00
Posts: 15422
Loc: Wilkesboro, NC
Thanks for raising all those questions for Rudy. I was going to raise just a few; yours was more extensive. I'll be looking forward to his responses.

Top
#354352 - 04/24/10 08:31 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Gerry Cabalo]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA


Yeah, I don't mean for him to answer all of them; only a few would do; whichever he feels like answering. I just wanted him to see that someone took his post seriously and actually read it carefully. offtobed

Top
#354353 - 04/24/10 08:34 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: karl]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA

LOL-- yes, good.

I have family in the South-- in Chattanooga area. My daughter and family are now in Little Rock.

Still going, really this time: offtobed

Top
#354375 - 04/24/10 10:03 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Rudy G]
Woody Offline
Swiss n Swedish American


Registered: 12/09/06
Posts: 32151
Loc: A citizen of Heaven
Quote:
Rudy G: Gradually the early Adventists quietly set aside a variety of peculiar and flawed beliefs. These were not errors that they brought from the former churches (who were decried as apostate Protestants), but the errant views taught by the Adventists.


Are you referring to Adventists or Seventh day Adventists? Excuse me if I missed it if you indicated.
_________________________
May we be one so that the world may be won.
Christian from the cradle to the grave
I believe in Hematology.

Top
#354377 - 04/24/10 10:11 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Rudy G]
Woody Offline
Swiss n Swedish American


Registered: 12/09/06
Posts: 32151
Loc: A citizen of Heaven
Quote:
Rudy G: If one truly studies the writings of Ellen White then how is possible that we do not see the great changes in her interpretation of scripture.


Yes, that would be true. She was human and grew in her understanding of scripture. And also ... as time went on ... God revealed more to her in visions. But, it's all in scripture. It's just that sometimes we need a boost in understanding.

I believe that we as individuals and we as a church will continue to grow in our understanding of scripture. WE have much to learn and much to unlearn. WE will never have full understanding of truth on this earth. WE will continue to learn ... even in Heaven.

So yes. There will continue to be "changes in interpretation of scripture."
_________________________
May we be one so that the world may be won.
Christian from the cradle to the grave
I believe in Hematology.

Top
#354380 - 04/24/10 10:20 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Woody Offline
Swiss n Swedish American


Registered: 12/09/06
Posts: 32151
Loc: A citizen of Heaven
Quote:
In what way do you understand Jone & Waggoner clearly changed the focus of Ellen White's spiritual leadership?


I happen to be reading "1888 Re-examined" as we speak.

It is clear that Ellen White told us that J+W were the first to grasp what she had been preaching. And what she had been preaching ... was the Gospel.

To this day ... there are still many SDAs who struggle with understanding the Gospel ... the precious message. Our church as others ... struggle with the traditions of legalism. It is a curse that we will struggle with long. The Devil is using it in a sly way to get even devout SDAs.

Praise God there are some SDA pastors who have devoted their ministry to preaching the 'precious message' of the Gospel that Ellen White taught and that Jones and Waggoner briefly understood in part.

Our job is to get back to the simple message of the Gospel. Ellen White said our message was as simple as ABC. Even a child should be able to understand it.
_________________________
May we be one so that the world may be won.
Christian from the cradle to the grave
I believe in Hematology.

Top
#354385 - 04/24/10 10:45 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Kevin H Offline



Registered: 01/23/02
Posts: 2927
Loc: New York
Dr. Ford is a thinker and a scholar of Reformation Theology and the traditional study of Paul, which has been tradition for centuries. Like all of us, Ford is a mishmash of the facts and the particular traditions from his quality world. Ford saw some things that he and I wold interpete differently from our perspectives. Ford's education comes from the Old School study of Paul. In recent decades there has been new interpetations of Paul and while I won't pretend to be a Pauline scholar, I tend to understand Paul from the new understandings of Paul.

Dr. Ford tends to see the cross as the foundation of Biblical interpatation and as I've had him presented in our Bible classes at college and how I understand him is reading the Bible backwards and having the cross read back. While I believe that the cross is the foundation for our lives, I believe that Deuteronomy is the foundation of Bible study and we need to read the Bible forward to see how it builds.

Dr. Ford tends to be a Fundamentalist with a devotion to his understandings of his key texts that can hinder deeper study. As you can probably tell from my posts, that while I'm sure I'm still tainted with Fundamentalism I try as far as I am aware to be an anti-fundamentalist.

Dr. Ford's background once again is the traditional study of Paul in his day, and is very steeped in the thoughts of the reformers. This is his stron point. But from this perspective he has tried to interpet the Old Testament. His work on the Old Testament and Investigative Judgement can be somewhat compaired to someone who is an outstanding cardiac surgon passing himself off as a brain surgon, and the people who follow him saying "He is a brilliant doctor, why is the medical boards upset that he wants to opperate on the brain as well as the heart?" Dr. Ford does not have the background in Old Testament Theology and worst yet, does not have the background in the archaeology and culture of the ancient world to do the Old Testament justice. Actually this last point here is where I have my biggest dissagreement with Dr. Ford, and where I feel that the church was right to defrock him. I would be fine with him (granted I mean fine like in not feeling comfortable with him and agreeing to dissagree) if he was to have said "I do not see how the Investigative Judgment fits in, but my field is not Old Testament, let them work it out and I'll just teach what I understand." Instead of him anouncing that there is no Investigative Judgment, no year-day principle and that we only can get the Investigative Judgment from the writings of Mrs. White. Also it's unethical to want to have the church pay you to openly dissagree with a central doctrine.

There is more I'd like to write here but don't have time if I want to catch a little of Church before going into work but let me try to just end with a quick summery how my perspective would be different in conclusion from Fords:

Both Ford and I see the potential for multible fulfillments of a text: We differ in that Ford would see the Bible writer as having ALL of these in mind when he wrote and that each is as valid as the other. I see the principle of exogesis and analogy: that the prophet had something very specific and local in mind and that we apply the text to similar or analogious situations. We have to understand the exogesis to make sure we are making the correct analogy.

Both Ford and I would see different roles of prophets; but while he has his canical prophet with their overwhelming authority as understood by Fundamentalists and Pastorial prophets with lesser authority; I see no distiction in prophetic authority. All prophets are authoritive, but that it is a oneness of supernatural and natural and that they don't have to fit the Fundamentalist's mold of what a prophet should be. In the ancient world there were prophets with a more universal message: i.e. the writings of the Bible; but also local prophets who are to apply the Bible to their local situation. I see Mrs. White as fitting in to the archaeologist's discription of the local prophets in ancient Israel.

Ford does not see how the Investigative Judgment would fit with Reformation Theology and Old School Pauline studies. He's right. However I am not limiting my perspective to Reformation Theology or Old School Paul, I'm coming from Old Testament Theology and ancient history, the Baal myths, and from the New School Paul, and the Investigative Judgment fits nicely in this perspective.

Most importantly we need to trust in Jesus. We all see through a glass dimly. We need to realize that there are different perspectives. We all have much to learn and much to unlearn, and yes, it is OK to have questions to ask Jesus in the 1000 years. What Ford did that I really am irked about is his pushing his perspective as the ONLY true perspective. I understand where he is coming from but let me point out where I am coming from too. Because of this spirit of "I can't see how the investigative judgment fits in with the great Christian thinkers over the years, especially Reformation Theoloyg and what I have been taught about Paul, then it is simply not true." the church was right to defrock him, just as a medical board would have the right to defrock the world's greatest heart surgon if he insisted on doing brain surgery.

Top
#354386 - 04/24/10 10:57 AM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
Woody Offline
Swiss n Swedish American


Registered: 12/09/06
Posts: 32151
Loc: A citizen of Heaven
Quote:
"I believe that God invested Ellen White with authority as His messenger. At least she tells us that Christ Himself ordained her as His special messenger, or prophet, to give His messages to the church and occasionally to the world. Prophets, of course, are God's mouthpiece. That is their work."


During Ellen White's time ... it was general practice to call pastors by the Biblical title of 'messenger of God'. See EY 227 and 190 and elsewhere.

Scripture calls priests 'messengers of God' just as the prophets. See Malachi 2:7 .

It is not men who appoint pastors/messengers/prophets ... it is God. God appoints whom he pleases. In Jeremiah 3:15 it gives the job description of pastors/messengers ... which is to 'feed the flock' with knowledge and understanding.

At times in Biblical history ... men would appoint pastors .... but they ended up being evil. Men also appointed Kings. But often the Kings were evil and lead them astray and apostasy. See Jer.3:15 .

As a messenger/pastor/prophet ...

Ellen White was clearly called by God to do the following - that all apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers were called to do:

He called them:

Quote:
Eph. 4:12 "For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"


_________________________
May we be one so that the world may be won.
Christian from the cradle to the grave
I believe in Hematology.

Top
#354405 - 04/24/10 12:01 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
pkrause Offline


Registered: 03/24/00
Posts: 57868
Loc: Deltona, FL
Originally Posted By: John317


Yeah, I don't mean for him to answer all of them; only a few would do; whichever he feels like answering. I just wanted him to see that someone took his post seriously and actually read it carefully. offtobed


I agree with Gerry, John. And Rudy did bring up some good questions based on his knowledge of that time. Also I think that the Devotional by GK last year could answer many questions.

pk
_________________________
phkrause

Romans 5:8: But God demonstrates his own love for us in that the Messiah died on our behalf while we were still sinners.

Top
#354475 - 04/24/10 04:09 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Kevin H]
Gerry Cabalo Offline



Registered: 03/20/00
Posts: 15422
Loc: Wilkesboro, NC
Instead of him anouncing that there is no Investigative Judgment, no year-day principle and that we only can get the Investigative Judgment from the writings of Mrs. White, he could have stated it as a personal opinion. IMHO, it is quite arrogant to say that there is no IJ or year-day-principle and expect the rest of us to change our views just because he said so!
Quote:



Most importantly we need to trust in Jesus.


And here's the rub. It strikes me very odd that the very one who is teaching grace, "Good News Unlimited," and assurance does not feel assured enough of grace that he feels threatened to have his assurance of grace investigated?






Edited by Gerry Cabalo (04/24/10 04:15 PM)

Top
#354477 - 04/24/10 04:28 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: Woody]
John317 Offline



Registered: 11/13/05
Posts: 33718
Loc: near Loma Linda,CA
Quote:
Rudy G: Gradually the early Adventists quietly set aside a variety of peculiar and flawed beliefs. These were not errors that they brought from the former churches (who were decried as apostate Protestants), but the errant views taught by the Adventists.


Quote:
Woody: Are you referring to Adventists or Seventh day Adventists? Excuse me if I missed it if you indicated.


I think that's a good question, because the context doesn't make it clear whether it's before or after 1863. It makes quite a difference.

The early SDA church was also still going through changes, just as the early church did in the book of Acts and afterwards. The fact that a church changes some of its beliefs and practices is not of itself a bad thing. It depends on what the change is and how it comes about.

Top
#354480 - 04/24/10 04:44 PM Re: Has the damage from Desmond Ford subsided? [Re: John317]
pkrause Offline


Registered: 03/24/00
Posts: 57868
Loc: Deltona, FL
Originally Posted By: John317

I think that's a good question, because the context doesn't make it clear whether it's before or after 1863. It makes quite a difference.

The early SDA church was also still going through changes, just as the early church did in the book of Acts and afterwards. The fact that a church changes some of its beliefs and practices is not of itself a bad thing. It depends on what the change is and how it comes about.


Good points John

pk
_________________________
phkrause

Romans 5:8: But God demonstrates his own love for us in that the Messiah died on our behalf while we were still sinners.

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >

If you purchase from Amazon, please purchase here.


Shout Box

Featured Member
Registered: 04/01/09
Posts: 8421
Random visitors over the past few minutes
Amazon Store
Top Posters
pkrause 57868
dgrimm60 55071
John317 33718
Woody 32151
Gail 29727
Shane 26567
Robert 23638
RLH 22239
Amelia 20635
Neil D 18264
Bravus 15522
Gerry Cabalo 15422
bonnie 12635
Naomi 11766
olger 11618
LifeHiscost 10846
Gregory Matthews 9895
rudywoofs 9372
news 8614
teresaq(sda) 8421
Nan 8270
skyblue888 7452
CoAspen 7067
Tom Wetmore 6929
BobRyan 6678
Please help out with the expenses. Only takes a minute.
Amazon Gift Cards
Newest Members
VT Otieno, what3david, Mark Andrews, ladysda, ThomasW
5474 Registered Users
Forum Stats
5474 Members
96 Forums
52268 Topics
629889 Posts

Max Online: 4163 @ 03/31/12 01:09 PM
INTERnational Christian Education & Relief Society
(Views)Popular Topics
The Law 10233178
Weekly Bible trivia quiz! 7319141
Word of the Day 5043435
2012-13 NBA Season 4007157
Daily Bible Trivial facts 3985318
Today in Jewish History 3947152
Daily Lift by Rabbi Zelig Pliskin 3865503
Today's Bible Reading 3750572
WHAT IS RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH? 3643499
Lily Pads, by John 317 3423308
Top Posters (30 Days)
pkrause 638
dgrimm60 467
Gregory Matthews 157
Gail 118
rudywoofs 108
LifeHiscost 93
bonnie 91
Sojourner 77
JoeMo 69
Samie 67
debbym 63
8thdaypriest 57
CoAspen 49
Aliensanctuary 42
Kevin H 39
Suzanne Sutton 37
Naomi 35
Tom Wetmore 31
lazarus 30
genesis7 30
Bravus 27
Stan Jensen 26
hch 26
Gerry Cabalo 25
M. T. Cross 24
Adventist Dating
More sponsors
Today's Birthdays
Alonzo Mccants, seanmcg1234

ClubAdventist, is a division of the Kingdom of Adventistan,
and is not part of, or affiliated with, or endorsed by The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland or any of its subsidiaries.
Copyright © 1999 - 2014 ClubAdventist