Adventists Too Liberal?

[Dr. Shane]

Pro-Choice McCain = Moralist to the Church?

Quote:

It just seems to me that the Seventh-Day Adventists are going too far over the leftist line by having these liberal speakers at their arranged gatherings. Is it an attempt to impress the public that the Seventh-Day Adventists are so open minded and goodwill oriented that they will invite anyone to sit at their tables? If that is so, they need to reread the Gospel records. Jesus sat at tables with sinners in order to convert them to heaven’s ethic, not to appear hospitable to all, regardless of moral base.

Goes to show what I always have said, those in the extreme ends of the spectrum will always see moderates as being too far across the line to the other side. I find the Adventist church to hold a healthy, middle position on most all political issues that confront us.

[bevin]

It certainly is hilarious to see McCain categorized as a liberal left speaker.

/Bevin

[Neil D]

As one who would like to see context, I have decided to post the whole article to let the reader decide where that "middle position" actually is. The article came from the American Daily, a self described conservative newspaper.-nd

[color:#FF6600]American Daily was created in 2002 by Justin Heiser to provide news and commentary from the conservative side of things. In June 2005, Justin decided that the workload was just a bit too much due to life and work demands.

Thus American Daily is now operated by MoveOff, LLC. We intend to essentially maintain the look and feel created by Justin. As time permits, we are extending the offerings. As you can see, we have added "Important items recently found!" and 3 news headline feeds on the main page.

The core value of American Daily is the contributing columnists and we provide them with timely support and encourage more contributors.

Pro-Choice McCain = Moralist to the Church?

By J. Grant Swank Jr. (05/28/06)

Watch out for liberal politicians taking on the moral cloak in order to gain the vote of devout Christians.

When US Senator John McCain of Arizona preaches to Seventh-Day Adventists about morality, it’s time for Seventh-Day Adventists and all genuine Christians to filter out what that man has to say about Christian ethics.

First, McCain is for killing womb babies. That’s right. He defends the mother’s right to murder the child within her womb. Right there McCain stops being a Christian moralist, let alone one who stands behind a lectern to speak to a crowd of Christians who sincerely believe in the divine revelation.

God prohibits killing womb babies. Therefore, McCain works against God in his pro-choice stance. He thereby has no legitimate right to tell Christians anything regarding their moral base.

He spoke to 300 who attended the dinner provided by International Religious Liberty Association, Liberty magazine and the North American Religious Liberty Association — all three organizations overseen by the Seventh-Day Adventist Church.

"’We wish to free, not to enslave; to trade, not to steal; to enlighten and learn, not to dominate and convert. ... Our moral standing is directly tied to our ability to maintain America's preeminent leadership in the world,’" declared McCain.

McCain is correct on that last point. America will only be as strong as its Judeo-Christian morality. That is our heritage. Liberals seek to demolish it for the devil never sleeps. However, sincere believers will continue to wave the Christian morality banner till the end of time.

However, for McCain to speak out of two sides of his mouth is hypocritical. With that, he should have never walked on stage at the Seventh-day Adventist sponsored conclave. In fact, it was a mistake for that church to invite him to speak, realizing his killing-womb-babies blessing.

Is it true that the Seventh-day Adventist Church did not examine his moral positions before inviting him to speak to them about ethics? Could be. But the next go-round must be better planned when it comes to the featured speaker.

"McCain's remarks were the keynote of the fourth annual religious liberty dinner sponsored by the IRLA, NARLA and Libertymagazine; each has been held in the historic Senate Caucus Room on Capitol Hill, where some of America's most important hearings have taken place. Last year Hillary Clinton was the keynote speaker," the church’s news service states.

One now wonders how the Seventh-Day Adventists can request the presence of such a one as Hillary Clinton. It boggles the thought processes. Are the Seventh-Day Adventists seeking to be "all things to all people"? If so, that’s not God’s way of getting out the gospel.

"’It's no surprise that the many Seventh-day Adventists here tonight seek the freedom to practice their faith -- after all, Adventists have often faced serious discrimination around the world,’ McCain said. ‘What is remarkable, what is truly impressive about your work is that you seek freedom not just for people of your faith, but also for those of all other religions. Your work on behalf of religious freedom and human rights is vital, it is transforming, and it is inspiring. And for it, the world owes you a deep debt of gratitude.’"

McCain stroked the Seventh-Day Adventist sponsors with such words. But it won’t play before the heavenly throne. God, being God, can only tolerate the true, He being the source of truth. Therefore, though some Adventists in attendance may have been moved by McCain’s soothing overflow, God was not.

"Along with Adventist religious liberty activists were representatives of other faiths, including Islamic, Jewish, Catholic and Protestant groups, as well as Congressional staffers.

"According to John Graz, public affairs and religious liberty director for the Seventh-day Adventist world church and secretary-general of the IRLA, the annual dinner has taken on a measure of importance as a valuable human rights forum."

It just seems to me that the Seventh-Day Adventists are going too far over the leftist line by having these liberal speakers at their arranged gatherings. Is it an attempt to impress the public that the Seventh-Day Adventists are so open minded and goodwill oriented that they will invite anyone to sit at their tables? If that is so, they need to reread the Gospel records. Jesus sat at tables with sinners in order to convert them to heaven’s ethic, not to appear hospitable to all, regardless of moral base

[Dr. Shane]

I don't see that any context was added there. My point is this. The Adventist church is a moderate church, for the most part. Those on the extreme conservative end of the perspective look at her and consider her too liberal. That is demonstrated in this article. Those on the extreme liberal end of the perspective look at her and see her as too fundamentalist - which obviously is not the opinion of the article's author.

Perhaps one of the reasons I am politically moderate, is because of the influence on my church. The Adventist church did not invite McCain and Clinton to speak to them because we agree with every aspect of their politics. They were invited to speak to us in an attempt for them to embrace the concept of religious liberty with us.

[Woody]

Quote:

God prohibits killing womb babies. Therefore, McCain works against God in his pro-choice stance. He thereby has no legitimate right to tell Christians anything regarding their moral base.

God is pro choice. God has never been one to restrict free will and choice. We have freedom of choice because it is God given. God wants us to look at the evidence and make our decision. God looks at our heart. He wants our heart pure. He gives us the choice to love Him or reject Him. The "Choice" is ours.

Trying to impose the Sabbath with legislation would not be right. God would not be impressed. He wants your heart not pure legalistic actions.

Our laws are a reflection of the will of the people. McCain prefers to allow the individual to decide. There can be lots of reasons for this. What is moral or right may not be one of the reasons. He believes in choice. He does not believe in imposing his belief on others. This is called Choice.

Personally I believe that abortion is a sin. But, there is much debate on this and I do not favor Big Brother determining this for others. If it was black and white and most Americans agreed ... then this would be a different matter.

By the way ... McCain is the most moderate politician out there. He is certainly not liberal. Far from it.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

God is pro choice. God has never been one to restrict free will and choice.

So God will permit me to steal my from my neighbor? Should the civil government permit that too?

Quote:

Trying to impose the Sabbath with legislation would not be right.

The civil government has authority to regulate behavior between man and other men. It does not have authority to regulate behavior between man and his or her god. Imposing the Sabbath with legislation would be crossing that line. Banning murder of unborn children does not pass that line - even if it would be a mistake to do so.

Quote:

Our laws are a reflection of the will of the people.

Not our abortion laws. Abortion was made legal by the Supreme Court. I agree that it should be decided by the people. It should be put on the ballot and the people should decided, state by state.

I favor keeping abortion legal but with restrictions and adopting public policy of discouraging it. The reason I believe that is because areas that have adopted this policy like Wisconsin, Arkansas, Belgium and the Netherlands have lower abortion rates than countries that continue to ban abortion like Mexico and Kenya. If banning abortions actually reduced the number of abortions performed and thus saved the lives of innocent babies, I would favor it, as I have in the past. However the evidence is that these desperate and scared women that seek abortion will not be deterred by the law. Thus, I believe, the best policy is to keep it legal and seek to discourage it and provide others services to desperate women in these circumstances so they might choose to carry the child rather than terminate it.

[Woody]

Quote:

So God will permit me to steal my from my neighbor? Should the civil government permit that too?

Yes ... God does permit you to steal. It is your choice. And the government does not allow this.You will be put in Jail. It is a black and white opinion that society does not want to allow this. There is a clear united black and white decision and support for laws against stealing. This is very much unlike abortion.

Quote:

Thus, I believe, the best policy is to keep it legal and seek to discourage it and provide others services to desperate women in these circumstances so they might choose to carry the child rather than terminate it.

This is a much better option.

[Gerr]

Quote:

God is pro choice. God has never been one to restrict free will and choice. [

While I believe that what you said is true, He is also for justice, i.e. defending the weak, the downtrodden, & helpless. What could be weaker & more helpless than a fetus that did not ask to be conceived? Who will plead for mercy & justice for them?

Gerry

[Gerr]

Oh, should we ask for speakers that only agree with us or reflect or views? IMO, that is dangerous.

Gerry

[Woody]

There are a lot of injustices on this earth. Why should young children starve? Why should hundreds of thousands die in a tidal wave. Why should millions be killed in wars?

Does God stop this? NO. He continues to allow us choices . The consequences of sin will be shown. The consequences of abortion is clear. It is sinful. Yet ... God wants the consequences of sin to be clear to the Universe.

[Gerr]

Quote:

So God will permit me to steal my from my neighbor? Should the civil government permit that too?

Yes ... God does permit you to steal. It is your choice.

I beg your pardon? If God has given you permission to steal, why then does the Law say, "Thou shalt not?"

There is a world of difference between God giving you the freedom to choose whether to steal or not to steal from giving you permission to actually steal.

Gerry

[Woody]

Gerry ... It is very clear. He gives you the freedom to steal. He does not prevent you nor does he punish you if you steal.

The civil law does punish you if you steal. It will actually try to prevent you by force from stealing. This is in stark contrast to God.

[Gerr]

There are a lot of injustices on this earth. Why should young children starve? Why should hundreds of thousands die in a tidal wave. Why should millions be killed in wars?

Oh, so, since there are a lot of injustices, we should just turn our heads? Turn our heads from lynching injustices, Jim Crow laws, no voting rights for women?

Quote:

Does God stop this? NO. He continues to allow us choices . The consequences of sin will be shown. The consequences of abortion is clear. It is sinful. Yet ... God wants the consequences of sin to be clear to the Universe.

And because God does not directly & overtly involve Himself in the correction of injustices we should do the same? I suggest you study Isaiah 58, and for good measure Lk 4:18,19, which also a quote from Isaiah.

Gerry

[Woody]

You are free to involve yourself in the punishment of sin as much as you desire. God has given you freedom. You can even make laws requiring people to worship on Sabbath. I would just advise that when you make civil laws ... that you make sure they are supported by the vast majority of the citizens.

[Gerr]

Gerry ... It is very clear. He gives you the freedom to steal. He does not prevent you nor does he punish you if you steal.

The civil law does punish you if you steal. It will actually try to prevent you by force from stealing. This is in stark contrast to God.

If you can't see the difference between giving you the freedom to exercise free will from actually giving you permission to do a heinous deed, then I can't help you. If He has given everyone the permission to steal, He would not have said, "Thou shalt not steal."

God does not punish stealing? What happened when Adam & Eve took something that they were not given permission to take?

Gerry

[Woody]

Gerry ... HE has not given ANY one "permission" to steal. But He does permit us to do so.

Quote:

Yes ... God does permit you to steal. It is your choice.

[Neil D]

Quote:

I don't see that any context was added there.

I merely posted the whole article, Shane. While you may know what the whole article was about, those who saw your chosen cut and paste excerpts know that they were were chosen by you, and thus, biased, with your opinion driping all over it, inbetween the text. I merely showed the whole article...without your opinion. I also showed where the article came from and where these people's roots came from. I figure that ALL points need to be out on the table for all of us to make intelligent judgements.

Quote:

My point is this. The Adventist church is a moderate church, for the most part. Those on the extreme conservative end of the perspective look at her and consider her too liberal. That is demonstrated in this article. Those on the extreme liberal end of the perspective look at her and see her as too fundamentalist - which obviously is not the opinion of the article's author.

[sigh] If the spectrum of opinion were neo, conservative, moderate conservative, moderate, moderate liberal, liberal, leftist, and a news orgainization claimed it allowed people to decide/choose which is right based upon articles from only the neo, conservative, moderate conservative, moderate, moderate liberal, while ignoring the liberal and leftest, AND it renamed the neo, conservative, moderate conservative, moderate, moderate left to right, conservative, moderate, liberal and far left, would you not have shifted the political spectrum to the conservative bent?

If you walk like a duck, quack like a duck, float like a duck, eat like a duck, fly like a duck, one would think that you are a duck. And Shane, you walk too much in conservative circles. You can say all you want that you are a "moderate", but that is according to a shifted political spectrum of your and Fox news making.

I am sorry if you believe that this is inflamatory or accusitory. It is not meant to be...It is just an explanation that, at least, I have to filter out your posts and get rid of the conservative jetsom that continues to permiate your posts.

As for the Advenstist church being a moderate church.... I would perfer that it keep it's political leanings out of fray...I would perfer that the church become apolitical....and just encourage it's members to vote and if it asked one canidate to come speak to it's members, that the opposing canidate(s) would also be encourage to speak.

But this article where some neoconservative newspaper calling the Adventist church liberal is somewhat slanderous in my opinion and yet, it also fosters that fundelmentalism that permiates conservatism in our church.

[Gerr]

Gerry ... HE has not given ANY one "permission" to steal. But He does permit us to do so.

You'll have to explain this one. No permission but you are permitted?

Quote:

Yes ... God does permit you to steal. It is your choice.

According to Webster, "permission" = giving formal consent, authorize someone to do something.

God has in no way shape or form given formal consent or authorized anyone to steal, kill, or whatever evil the deed may be.

Gerry

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

those who saw your chosen cut and paste excerpts know that they were were chosen by you, and thus, biased, with your opinion dripping all over it

I paste a link and a few quotes to keep my posts short and to use less of C/A's server space - sometimes things really slow down in here. Those that are interested can follow the link and even quote from the original source.

Quote:

I also showed where the article came from and where these people's roots came from.

Of course, I made reference to that. I don't know if they are conservative or neoconservative. Neocons are actually to the left of conservatives.

Quote:

I would prefer that it keep it's political leanings out of fray...

The church's political leanings is the topic of this thread. Those that don't want to discuss it do not have to participate.

Quote:

You can say all you want that you are a "moderate"

I spelled out my position on abortion earlier in this thread. Is it not a moderate position?

[Parade Orange]

whats is the problem of having non SDA's that dont agree with us on every little or big matter?

What is the deal?

I have the excructiating task every Sabbath to sit at potlucks at church with fanatics and wingnuts who blab on about politics, recipes,twisting scriptures and gossip of people. I rarely agree with these people.

It would be nice to Always sit with people and have speakers that agree with me. but alas..

it is not so.

who is the IDIOT that has a problem with speakers that dont agree with them?

If I dont agree with this idiot does that mean I dont have to sit with him at my next potluch lunch at church!

I wont hold my breath.

And JESUS sat with people who didnt agree with him cause HE LOVED THEM!

Just like I have to sit with people who espouses different politics than mine!

[Parade Orange]

dont get me started

[olger]

There are some liberal elements in leadership positions in the SDA church.

When a president gushes about how "inclusive" the church is because they place a woman in a VP position, and offers no affirmation whatever to the thousands of faithful mothers & wives who sacrifice to stay home for their family, it sends a very sad message down the communication pipe. (2005 St. Louis - I was there).

It gets a little stale..

G

[Parade Orange]

well I wasn't there but I dont think he was trying to exclude domestic dainties and sacrifices.

as i've said -I wasn't there.

and I dont know the guy either who gushes.

[olger]

It went on and on.. After it was over, I turned to the fellow next to me and asked "what did you think?"

"He could have said a lot of things that needed to be said instead of being PC" he replied. I guess I felt the same way.

This is OLGER signing off..

[lazarus]

There are some liberal elements in leadership positions in the SDA church.

When a president gushes about how "inclusive" the church is because they place a woman in a VP position, and offers no affirmation whatever to the thousands of faithful mothers & wives who sacrifice to stay home for their family, it sends a very sad message down the communication pipe. (2005 St. Louis - I was there).

It gets a little stale..

G

I dont get the criticism. I was there, why would the GC preseident at that point need to give affirmation to women who stay at home? Did the women who stay at home feel left out or slighted becasue he didn't metion them. My wife was there and she was encouraged by the new female VP . She is a stay at home mom. Its not a sacrifice to her but a blessing we have that she's able to do it.