Why I am a former SDA

[doug yowell]

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

[2. Ellen White may not have been mentioned during your Bible studies however the views expressed doctrinally to you were in fact based on Ellen White's interpretation of those Scriptures. Thus, you may have thought you were getting Sola Scriptura when in actual fact you were not. You were instead getting Ellen White's interpretation of the Scripture.

That's just plain nuts!! Unlike your incorrect caricature of my experience the SDA church did not teach me either the Bible or what I should believe. Believe it or not I never took any SDA Bible studies I was actually quite an active Bible student on my own.When I read what SDA's taught it clicked with what I already had discovered in my journey. I concluded that "they believe what I believe" not "I believe what they tell me to believe". NO EGW.No Revelation Seminars.Just me and my concordance.Why does EGW always get all the credit? Besides Adventism is mostly a continuum of traditional Protestant teachings that existed hundreds of years before EGW's birth. Can't blame her for that can you?

I will agree that Ellen White just basically spouted the current and previous Protestant line of Biblical interpretation. Such interpretation is mainly founded on the unique experiences of Western Civ. As such it is a very narrow view and interpretations based on the Western Civ experience are so parochial and thus sooooo wrong.

In spite of your stated experience if you study the Bible from a Western Civ/historical perspective you find yourself back at the Ellen White model again. SDA come out of that Western Civ model and are based on such a model.

The main thesis of the Western Civ model is the RCC/Pope is the main evil and the main tool of satan. Such a model tends ignore all the other world experiences throughout history that are far greater threats to Christianity than the RCC/Pope entity.

Uriah Smith in his day began to see other threats such as the Ottoman Empire. Although he was wrong in his specific, he was right that there were other more major threats than the RCC/Pope to Christianity.

Today Christianity faces not only such physical threats such as Islam etc. but more insidiously faces threats from all the worldviews, philosophies, isms, etc. that abound in the world of today. Such threats make the RCC/Pope pail into nothingness by comparison.

Thus regardless of how you slice it as an SDA stalwart you get your authority and theology from Ellen White and it is upon her that all your stuff rests. SDAism cannot escape from the Ellen White box.

Are you saying that Ellen White has no authority in your (Doug's) belief system?

[doug yowell]

I have variously described myself as post-Christian, panentheist and even as a 'quantum theist'. No label I have found fits neatly. I believe in an infinite God, and believe that all religious traditions are in part revelations of God and in part human projections onto God. I believe that to be true of Christianity, so while the label 'Christian' also does not fit neatly, Christianity has formed and informed my thinking and understanding of God. In particular, I aspire to 'Christ-ianity': following the teachings and example of Jesus.

This is just one example from this post that I find unclear. How can you accurately follow the teachings and example of Jesus if you can't trust the historical or Divine accuracy of the only evidence of what He taught and how He acted? On what basis do you reject or accept any of His teachings as being anything more than the human projection of possible ill-informed historians?

[doug yowell]

[Are you saying that Ellen White has no authority in your (Doug's) belief system?

No, I'm saying that EGW is neither the author or finisher of my faith in Christ and His Word. Prophets do not determine truth, truth determines prophets.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

[Are you saying that Ellen White has no authority in your (Doug's) belief system?

No, I'm saying that EGW is neither the author or finisher of my faith in Christ and His Word. Prophets do not determine truth, truth determines prophets.

Interesting. Most SDA believe that the Prophet determines truth because such Prophets get their truth direct from God.

It appears that you are saying that if a human being has the truth then that human being is a prophet which is directly contrary to SDA teaching in regard to Ellen White.

Since you believe that you have the truth does that make you, Doug Yowell a prophet?

[doug yowell]

In spite of your stated experience if you study the Bible from a Western Civ/historical perspective you find yourself back at the Ellen White model again. SDA come out of that Western Civ model and are based on such a model.

The main thesis of the Western Civ model is the RCC/Pope is the main evil and the main tool of satan. Such a model tends ignore all the other world experiences throughout history that are far greater threats to Christianity than the RCC/Pope entity.

All this is only partially true if you equate Adventism with a strictly prophetic worldview. I didn't study prophesy until later in my SDA experience. My commitment to the church is not based on a pecular view of prophesy but rather a pecular lifestyle which is threatened today by things other than the Papacy.Things such as the thrust of this thread.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

In spite of your stated experience if you study the Bible from a Western Civ/historical perspective you find yourself back at the Ellen White model again. SDA come out of that Western Civ model and are based on such a model.

The main thesis of the Western Civ model is the RCC/Pope is the main evil and the main tool of satan. Such a model tends ignore all the other world experiences throughout history that are far greater threats to Christianity than the RCC/Pope entity.

All this is only partially true if you equate Adventism with a strictly prophetic worldview. I didn't study prophesy until later in my SDA experience. My commitment to the church is not based on a pecular view of prophesy but rather a pecular lifestyle which is threatened today by things other than the Papacy.Things such as the thrust of this thread.

Are you referring to Bravus world view?

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

In spite of your stated experience if you study the Bible from a Western Civ/historical perspective you find yourself back at the Ellen White model again. SDA come out of that Western Civ model and are based on such a model.

The main thesis of the Western Civ model is the RCC/Pope is the main evil and the main tool of satan. Such a model tends ignore all the other world experiences throughout history that are far greater threats to Christianity than the RCC/Pope entity.

All this is only partially true if you equate Adventism with a strictly prophetic worldview. I didn't study prophesy until later in my SDA experience. My commitment to the church is not based on a pecular view of prophesy but rather a pecular lifestyle which is threatened today by things other than the Papacy.Things such as the thrust of this thread.

OK, if what you say is true then you came into the SDA Church in a way that is not typical.

[doug yowell]

Interesting. Most SDA believe that the Prophet determines truth because such Prophets get their truth direct from God.

It appears that you are saying that if a human being has the truth then that human being is a prophet which is directly contrary to SDA teaching in regard to Ellen White.

Since you believe that you have the truth does that make you, Doug Yowell a prophet?

Wrong assertion. Wrong interpretation. Wrong question.Truth exists apart from the gift of prophesy."Believe in the Lord God and you will be established. Believe His prophets and you will prosper"." ..."prophets, for the equipping of the saints for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God,that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried aabout by every wind of doctrine..." Those who know the truth of God's Word determine whether the "prophet" is getting their information directly from God or not(Deut.18)But I shall no longer sidetrack this thread with this subject.Sorry.

[doug yowell]

OK, if what you say is true then you came into the SDA Church in a way that is not typical.

Perhaps, but perhaps not. Alchemy and many others that I know would probably disagree.

[doug yowell]

My commitment to the church is not based on a pecular view of prophesy but rather a pecular lifestyle which is threatened today by things other than the Papacy.Things such as the thrust of this thread.Are you referring to Bravus world view?

What do you think?

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

OK, if what you say is true then you came into the SDA Church in a way that is not typical.

Perhaps, but perhaps not. Alchemy and many others that I know would probably disagree.

You could disagree but then you would still be wrong.

[John317]

The Seventh-day Adventist Church is not healthy spiritually. Personally, I believe it is degrading itself as time goes by.

It may look like it from what you see on this Forum, but I think it's a mistake for us to judge the SDA church by what we find posted here. The Forum attracts all sorts of people who aren't SDA or who aren't active, committed SDAs, and many others who are downright anti-SDA and/or anti-EGW and anti-Bible. It would be helpful if people would identify themselves as SDA or non-SDA, etc., but very few will do it for some reason.

I for one am grateful that Bravus has come open and honest and told us he's a former SDA.

[doug yowell]

In particular, I aspire to 'Christ-ianity': following the teachings and example of Jesus.

Here's another statement I'm having difficulty reconciling with your previous statements. Jesus never asserted that the OT was a book filled with a hodgepodge of human distortions and Divine revelation but rather validated it's overall authority on almost every occasion He spoke("The Scriptures cannot be broken"..."They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them...if they don't believe Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe though one rose from the dead" "they are they that testify of Me" "Do not think I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you---Moses...for if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, but if you don't believe his writings,how will you believe My words?" ect...ect... Given these assertions by Jesus as to the reliability of the writings of Moses (incuding Numbers 31)how can you dismiss the stories and teachings of the Bible (in this case, the OT) as a conflicting moral statement? Can you find one example where He casts doubt on the total Divinity of the Bible record? And how can you then say that you are following the teachings of Jesus? Can you clarify this?

[miz3]

My commitment to the church is not based on a pecular view of prophesy but rather a pecular lifestyle which is threatened today by things other than the Papacy.Things such as the thrust of this thread.

[doug yowell]

Mum's the word.

[John317]

... John, I agree - once in the church, we should be looking to fill the needs of others; and in such a way we will find to our surprise that OUR needs will be filled.

Matthew 16:25

For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

Quote:

The grace of God is made manifest in the exercise of the love which dwelt in the bosom of Jesus, and which bringeth salvation to the lost. The kingdom of God cometh not by observation. Unselfish love is to work through every plan that is made, and the fruit of unselfish love is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. {1888 Materials, Chapter 163, page 1374}

[doug yowell]

[This is why the .org SDA on this Board are sooooo threatened by Bravus and his views and seek to discredit them. This is why they say Bravus cannot be an SDA and hold the views he does.

Perhaps you should read Bravus' own statements again. His main issues seem not to be with any unique SDA views.Why he is not an SDA is a secondary issue.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

[This is why the .org SDA on this Board are sooooo threatened by Bravus and his views and seek to discredit them. This is why they say Bravus cannot be an SDA and hold the views he does.

Perhaps you should read Bravus' own statements again. His main issues seem not to be with any unique SDA views.Why he is not an SDA is a secondary issue.

Like you said it is late. Maybe tomorrow we can chat again. I like you Doug. Our differences in my mind do not change that I like you as I know you on this Board.

[John317]

...

This is why the .org SDA on this Board are sooooo threatened by Bravus and his views and seek to discredit them. This is why they say Bravus cannot be an SDA and hold the views he does.

I disagree with your assumption that people who support the SDA church are "sooooo threatned by Bravus and his views." God is in control of the SDA Movement and there's really nothing that anyone can do to stop it. That includes the introduction of false beliefs. Just like in the early church, God allows false teaching for a reason. One of them is that it causes a shaking.

[Bravus]

'Shaking' is a convenient concept, isn't it? It got a run at Adventist Today, too.

It immediately defines all who leave as the chaff and all who stay as the wheat.

Pretty sure it ain't always that simple...

[Rudy G]

Just read bits and pieces of thie thread. There is much that I have not absorbed, but I am very sympathetic to Bravus' perspective. I am still active in my SDA church despite deep personal conflicts with the bulk of what most people identify as Adventism and the thinking that surrounds it. The biggest problem for me is how little "loyal" Adventists examine the beliefs.

Consider the two previous posts.

I am sure John317 knows what the Bible has to say, but why don't we consider it applicable to Adventism. Never has God invested more in a movement than He did the Isrealites as a people to represent His truth to the world, but when God appeared in the flesh the religious instituion put him to death. It was those who the institution would have viewed as the chaf that accepted him.

Bravus comments on the SDA concept of a shaking and how those who leave the organization are always considered the chaf. But, Jesus clearly withdrew from the "God established establishment" of his day and called the people to "follow Him". Was he calling them to be chaf? The protestant reformation resulted in a shaking and many left the Roman Catholic church. Were they the chaf?

I think when Paul said "we wrestle against principalities and powers" we should interpret this to include institutions and organizations. History teaches us that in this world institutions and organizations will eventually be shaped by those who put their own agenda before God's. No matter how righteous they might appear, spirtual leaders who have substituted a personal agenda for God's will, lose the ability to respect the conscience of the truth seekers because the themselves have given up the search.

[BobRyan]

Right vs wrong has never been determined by "who leaves" - nor do you find in the SDA set of voted beliefs that "anyone that leaves any group must be wrong".

The standard, the test of all faith and doctrine is the Bible. All doctrines of the SDA church are proved, and tested via the Bible.

If you have a Bible case against them - then make it.

If your position is that you simply do not but that must faith, trust, stock in the Bible - then you would be making the right observation to note that such a world view is not compatible with Seventh-day Adventist beliefs.

in Christ,

Bob

[Dr. Shane]

Bravus comments on the SDA concept of a shaking and how those who leave the organization are always considered the chaf.

In my experience the chaff doesn't normally leave the church. Bravus certainly isn't chaff. He has a PhD, is a published author and a respected professor. I don't think anyone is calling him chaff.

[BobRyan]

Interesting. Most SDA believe that the Prophet determines truth because such Prophets get their truth direct from God.

It appears that you are saying that if a human being has the truth then that human being is a prophet which is directly contrary to SDA teaching in regard to Ellen White.

Since you believe that you have the truth does that make you, Doug Yowell a prophet?