Coffee is good for U

[Twilight II]

ClubV12,

You have not said anything offensive to anyone.

Some people do not like having their beliefs challenged or questioned.

They usually reserve that right for themselves to operate.

At some point you will be called a "bigot, close minded, ignorant, unscientific", or your character and "tone" will be called into question.

This is usually a sign that a button is being pressed.

But I have not seen anything in any of your posts to support the claims made against your posts.

Maybe I missed them?

[CoAspen]

I really doubt that you think any of us are 'insecure' in our beliefs. We are not proclaiming you are wrong in your beliefs or using words to suggest that you are condenming yourself by disbelieving a certain way. It has been said several times by several individuals, you can believe your way, it's okay! Can you allow others to believe their way? What has emphasized many times is the differences in belief systems, one says I will choose the science and you have choosen to not believe the science, but rather EGW and your interpretation. Don't get hung up on being right!

No one and I repeat, no one has the knowledge of any other persons relationship with God as to make judgement on that individuals understanding. If any of us are not making our selves completely understood, PM us!

[ClubV12]

Let Ellen White speak for herself, if you won't hear what I have to say on the matter.

She, EGW, referrences coffee 114 times in 87 articles. Here is yet another instance of those 114 times.

"Those who persist in the use of tea, coffee, and flesh meats will feel the need of drugs, but many might recover without one grain of medicine if they would obey the laws of health. Drugs need seldom be used."

White, Ellen Gould: Selected Messages From the Writings of Ellen G. White, Book 2; Selected Messages, Book 2. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1958; 2002, S. 281

Your are certainly free to believe whatever you want, allow me to do the same, to state my opinion on the matter. Thank you.

"Those who have received instruction regarding the evils of the use of flesh foods, tea and coffee, and rich and unhealthful food preparations, and who are determined to make a covenant with God by sacrifice, will not continue to indulge their appetite for food that they know to be unhealthful. God demands that the appetites be cleansed, and that self-denial be practiced in regard to those things which are not good. This is a work that will have to be done before His people can stand before Him a perfected people...." {RY 129.2}

White, Ellen Gould: The Retirement Years. Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1990; 2002, S. 129

[shelly]

Re-read all of the posts. He is accusing some in the thread of things they never said or stated they believe. He even through in the word "hate" about what he had to say. I have no issue with his position-just his putting words in others mouths and falsely accusing them in order to make his point. But I am tired of this silly back and forth. It is no longer a fruitful conversation. God Bless!

[JawgeFromJawja]

Club V12: "Wow, it's amazing how guilty so many feel just because I have an opinion on the matter which is different from yours. WHY does that bother you, TOM? Shelly? CoAspen? Jawge? Are you people that insecure?"

You are one presumptive person to assume that I feel guilt over your opinion about coffee drinking. Guilt? Hardly. I just feel sorry for, appalled about, even sourly amused over, your exaggerated stance, concern and energy expenditure over such a trivial matter. By the way, you haven't indicated how strongly you feel the matter of coffee use effects the ultimate destiny of Adventists and other Christians, that is, what does it really finally matter whether anyone, Christian, Jew, Hindu, atheist, or what have you, drinks coffee or not? I know God intimately, and He is not at all concerned about yours, mine, or any other Christian's attitude about such piffles. God's concern is about love and compassion. God's concern is over your level of support for your neighbor who lost her job over a year ago, your support for the truly deserving Haitians and Japanese devastated by earthquakes and the consequences, and your expressions and acts of sympathy for victims of criminally despotic regimes around the globe.

Yes, I'm preaching at you and others who are irrationally embroiled in such petty issues. Wake up. You will be judged for matters far weightier in this life.

JawgeFromJawja

[Overaged]

I know God intimately, and He is not at all concerned about yours, mine, or any other Christian's attitude about such piffles. God's concern is about love and compassion. God's concern is over your level of support for your neighbor who lost her job over a year ago, your support for the truly deserving Haitians and Japanese devastated by earthquakes and the consequences, and your expressions and acts of sympathy for victims of criminally despotic regimes around the globe.

Yes, I'm preaching at you and others who are irrationally embroiled in such petty issues. Wake up. You will be judged for matters far weightier in this life.

JawgeFromJawja

I don't know how to say this Sir - but I will aim to do it respectfully.

1/ Usually, if someone has to announce that "I know God intimately;" there is a problem.

2/ I disagree that God is not concerned about "little things;" for the Bible has a number of accounts of people losing their salvation over "little things," that no one else even sees.

3/ the baleful charge of not doing enough to help the poor or the suffering is often a holiness smoke screen to cloud the fact that God is indeed very interested and concerned about our attitude with "littlle things."

Luk 13:21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

The "leaven" therein can be a very "little thing;" but it will infiltrate throughout the whole barrel of flour.

It is not true that if someone is concerned about coffee drinking that they are "wrong" or that they are in the wrong spiritual standing with God. A "little thing" done over a long enough period of time can do A LOT OF DAMAGE; it can even KILL.

[Twilight II]

A "little thing" done over a long enough period of time can do A LOT OF DAMAGE; it can even KILL.

And usually it is not just "one little thing".

If someone is disobeying health laws in one area of their life, you can pretty much guarantee that they are not following it in another and usually many areas.

Overcoming the flesh is a difficult matter for all of us, but as a Christian it is essential:

Gal 5:24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Being a temple of the Holy Spirit means withdrawing from all addictions and harmful indulgences.

Will we be drinking coffee in heaven?

Somehow I doubt it.

But what is clear here, is that the "flesh" with its "lust and desires" (add addictions in here), cannot be reasoned with.

It pays no heed to basic common sense.

And will wave any banner to support itself.

Even "science falsely so called"...

Science is not science because someone has tried to make some conclusions that support their own ideas, science is science when it agrees with inspiration...

Science is science when it reports the universe as God made it.

Not how man wants it to be...

[CoAspen]

Eh, we do like to find those motes!!!

[ClubV12]

Coffee should not be at the forefront of a christian life anymore than a detailed analysis of the 144,000. The less said, the better, the counsel is clear, whatever choice you make is between you and God. In that regard, there will be no "excuse", in the end, you are right, or you are wrong. There is no halfway salvation.

So what all the fuss on this thread? Why all the controversy? Because to much of this thread made light of the subject, as if it didn't matter at all. As if it played no roll what so ever in the question of salvation. As if it were a minor detail. But that is a lie, and the continual cry of "peace and safty" and nothing to worry about, all is well and coffee is not harmful,,, is a lie.

Let each man be persuaded in his own heart, but let each man be fully aware of the consequences of his decision. This is not a small and trivial matter. This is the "public meeting" Ellen White talks about to deliver the health message God has given to His people.

[JawgeFromJawja]

Overaged: I don't know how to say this Sir - but I will aim to do it respectfully.

It would not matter were you to be disrespectful. If you were, you would be showing character traits that could hurt only you. However, your post was quite restrained considering your announcement that it would take an effort on your part to be respectful.

1/ Usually, if someone has to announce that "I know God intimately;" there is a problem.

No problem. Not as much of a problem as your revelation of the effort it took to be respectful, and even that announcement did not reveal a real problem.

My statement was a reminder to those forum members who radiate the attitude that only they know God intimately, because only they follow what they consider the proper doctrines. My statement was just a reminder that I, too, am a beloved child of God, as are most of those who disagree with your position, which is questioned even by committed Adventists.

St. Paul, in 2 Corinthians 12: 1 - 5, said he was afraid he would be considered boastful should he relate an episode of ecstasy such as he witness some 14 years earlier. Many scholars think Paul himself was the man he wrote about.

I was assured of my salvation and intimate relationship with God years before my ecstatic experience of Christmas Day 2010.

As a professional grounded in science, it is my privilege and

duty to witness my relationship to God. All too many atheists and agnostics think that some one with a background in science cannot possibly believe in God.

Last Christmas Morning, while I was experiencing my first and only episode of ecstasy so far, God visited me in person. For weeks, I was afraid to relate that visit to more than a few close individuals for fear of being considered boastful, crazy, a zealot, a liar, deceived by Satan, or worse: "what will my colleagues think?". After much prayer, I have been Spirit led to relate the episode so that Christians may know what ultimate joy even the least person in The Kingdom of God can experience.

Knowing myself, I consider the visit totally unmerited. However, I have researched the experience of spiritual ecstasy, and found it to be a relatively common phenomenon. My Christmas Day 2010 experience is related on this forum:

Forums » Personal Christian Experiences » Something GREAT Happened to Me Today >> Personal Epiphany

2/ I disagree that God is not concerned about "little things;" for the Bible has a number of accounts of people losing their salvation over "little things," that no one else even sees.

I did not say God is not concerned about "little things", but that He has no use for "piffles" - meaning nonsense. God considers concern about such trivial things as concern over coffee drinking nonsense. If you consider it to be a concern, make your vow to God about it. But realise, that documented in the Pentateuch, God does not expect others to practice your vow.

3/ the baleful charge of not doing enough to help the poor or the suffering is often a holiness smoke screen to cloud the fact that God is indeed very interested and concerned about our attitude with "littlle things."

God's concern is one thing, and only one: love. God is concerned about our constantly demonstrating love. Decrying such trivialities as the use of coffee as "wrong" shows a misdirected focus that many Christians are not willing to assume. Again, I just feel sorry for those taking on such an unnecessary burden. We who do not practice your self denials need no smoke screen. We have no guilt in not taking on your burdens. If you feel such a burden necessary, God strengthen you.

Luk 13:21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.

The "leaven" therein can be a very "little thing;" but it will infiltrate throughout the whole barrel of flour.

This passage concerns the Kingdom of God. It says nothing about the elements of God’s Kingdom. The passage is irrelevant to the discussion. If you want to equate not drinking coffee as a requisite element of that Kingdom, your prerogative, but that trivializes the concept of The Kingdom of God, and is not Biblical.

It is not true that if someone is concerned about coffee drinking that they are "wrong" or that they are in the wrong spiritual standing with God. A "little thing" done over a long enough period of time can do A LOT OF DAMAGE; it can even KILL.

It can not be credibly demonstrated that coffee drinking is harmful. I had full many a lifetime coffee imbiber in my practice who was over ninty years old, but very few of that age who smoked. If you want to campaign against a real issue, campaign against smoking and tobacco. Again, concern over coffee drinking is not wrong, just terribly unfocused on the true meaning of Christianity and Love, and a focus on an unproven factor in achieving robust good health.

JawgeFromJawja

[ClubV12]

"It can not be credibly demonstrated that coffee drinking is harmful."

Ellen White disagrees with that statement, 114 times in 87 articles. As you've made it clear, Jawge, you don't agree with Ellen White, your statement is understandable. Based on the science as you understand it today, I don't have a problem with your position based on those circumstances.

It becomes considerably more problematic for those that do acknowledge the inspired status of Ellen Whites testimony, and yet, reject her counsel on coffee in favor of science.

My position on matter of doctrine and truth (as I see it) is that we are held accountable to God for what we know as well as that which we COULD have known. Could have known being a substantial issue for me. If I'm going to be held to that which I could have known, I don't want to lie to myself, to hide it from myself. I'd rather know, understand and make a choice straight up, yes or no, accept or reject, so that at least I know where I stand on an issue.

Now I see LOTS of things I am convicted of being "truth" and I recognize that I fall short of attaining those things in my life. I recognize I am essentially rejecting that "truth" at this time. But I am not discouraged, I am not condemed. I am making progess toward the goal(s) of incorporating those things within my life. Making a decided effort to move toward that goal, carefully, thoughtfully, prayerfully. Truly, the counsel on how to live the fullness of a Seventh-day Adventist life style is vast and a bit over whelming. It is a worthy goal(s) and I'm thankful for the counsel. I move forward, pressing toward the goals, thanking God for the light.

[JawgeFromJawja]

"It can not be credibly demonstrated that coffee drinking is harmful."

Ellen White disagrees with that statement, 114 times in 87 articles. As you've made it clear, Jawge, you don't agree with Ellen White, your statement is understandable. Based on the science as you understand it today, I don't have a problem with your position based on those circumstances.

Not only do I not agree with Mrs. White on the use of coffee, my professional experience bolsters my opinion. She did not practice medicine daily for forty plus years.

It becomes considerably more problematic for those that do acknowledge the inspired status of Ellen Whites testimony, and yet, reject her counsel on coffee in favor of science.

Obviously, that could be a problem. Those who partially agree with the inspired status of Mrs. White must do quite a hoola hoop dance about doctrine. I realize this statement will generate flak from those who attempt such a doctrinal dance. May God give them strength.

My position on matter of doctrine and truth (as I see it) is that we are held accountable to God for what we know as well as that which we COULD have known. Could have known being a substantial issue for me. If I'm going to be held to that which I could have known, I don't want to lie to myself, to hide it from myself. I'd rather know, understand and make a choice straight up, yes or no, accept or reject, so that at least I know where I stand on an issue.

"Could have known" is so broad as to make it impossible for those not espousing the correct party doctrine to be included in the process of salvation.

"Lying to one's self" is a problematic issue. The unconscious mind has multiple mechanisms for circumventing truth, such mechanisms being inaccessible to the conscious mind.

Now I see LOTS of things I am convicted of being "truth" and I recognize that I fall short of attaining those things in my life. I recognize I am essentially rejecting that "truth" at this time. But I am not discouraged, I am not condemed. I am making progess toward the goal(s) of incorporating those things within my life. Making a decided effort to move toward that goal, carefully, thoughtfully, prayerfully. Truly, the counsel on how to live the fullness of a Seventh-day Adventist life style is vast and a bit over whelming. It is a worthy goal(s) and I'm thankful for the counsel. I move forward, pressing toward the goals, thanking God for the light.

Overwhelming? Meaning impossible? God makes allowances for our not overcoming the impossible. God can overcome anything, but we? Hardly.

[Guest]

Now I see LOTS of things I am convicted of being "truth" and I recognize that I fall short of attaining those things in my life. I recognize I am essentially rejecting that "truth" at this time. But I am not discouraged, I am not condemed. I am making progess toward the goal(s) of incorporating those things within my life. Making a decided effort to move toward that goal, carefully, thoughtfully, prayerfully. Truly, the counsel on how to live the fullness of a Seventh-day Adventist life style is vast and a bit over whelming. It is a worthy goal(s) and I'm thankful for the counsel. I move forward, pressing toward the goals, thanking God for the light.

Keep moving forward ClubV12, thanking God for the light, and for the help to move.

[Overaged]

Your "spiritual ecstasy" sounds like someone slipped some mescaline into your food.

You have the nerve to allege I had to make some effort to be respectful; when you yourself are very rude and disrespectful to forum members here, you just showed who really has the problem here.. You should clean your own house first before you try cleaning someone else's.

[phkrause]

Jorge as you know I have a lot of respect for your opinions. But the problem I see is you are talking with SDAs, some that except EGW and others that don't. Most SDAs consider her a Prophet, a person to respect and heed her words of wisdom. I agree that she never had a doctors degree or what ever. But we or most of us believe that she got her information from God. My problem with those SDAs that have no use for her unless they agree with her makes no sense. Why would she write all this information for the church?? Did she have an agenda, or just write stuff for the hell of it. There are lots of things that she wrote that is very hard for me to just accept but if I'm gonna accept this or that well I have to give her the benefit of the doubt on other stuff to. Just as the Bible, there are things there as well that are not easy to understand! Should I throw those out because I can't believe that God would do that. No! Most that don't understand some of the text in the Bible look in EGWs writings to see what God told her about those passages. Anyway that's my 2 cents worth of opinions.

[Parade Orange]

i agree

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

off topic note to JawgeFromJawja: when you post, could you please use the "quote" tool that is supplied? I have a difficult time trying to figure out what you're writing vs the quoting you do.

******

Aside from the topics related to "legalism," this topic on coffee is one of the most inane ones I've seen on the forum for a long time....as if coffee was a salvational issue! If people put half the energy (no pun intended) into "walking the talk" as they have into writing the White, a lot of people would be hearing/seeing the Gospel...

[CoAspen]

[CoAspen]

[Overaged]

Aside from the topics related to "legalism," this topic on coffee is one of the most inane ones I've seen on the forum for a long time....as if coffee was a salvational issue! If people put half the energy (no pun intended) into "walking the talk" as they have into writing the White, a lot of people would be hearing/seeing the Gospel...

Can you show us which post/poster said that coffee is a "salvation issue," whatever that is!

[John317]

off topic note to JawgeFromJawja: when you post, could you please use the "quote" tool that is supplied? I have a difficult time trying to figure out what you're writing vs the quoting you do.

Speaking as the moderator:

I agree. I as well as Gail have asked JawgeFromJawja many times to do the same. I've also told him that if he needs help in learning how to use the "quote" tool to let me know and I will do what I can to help him. No response.

To JawgeFromJawja: if you don't begin following my instructions, you won't be able to post in theology threads or in Townhall. The "quote" thingy is easy to use and it's there for a very good reason.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

Aside from the topics related to "legalism," this topic on coffee is one of the most inane ones I've seen on the forum for a long time....as if coffee was a salvational issue! If people put half the energy (no pun intended) into "walking the talk" as they have into writing the White, a lot of people would be hearing/seeing the Gospel...

Can you show us which post/poster said that coffee is a "salvation issue," whatever that is!

OA, I did not say anyone said that. Why the smart aleck attitude??? I don't get it...

(but you don't know what "salvational issues" are??? I'm spiritually stupid, and even *I* know what's important and what isn't..)

[Bravus]

There's a bit of a twist that happens. It becomes not about the specific issue, but about EGW. So then it's 'if you disagree with EGW you are disagreeing with God' - which of course is a salvation issue. (It's also cultic thinking, but leave that aside.)

[JawgeFromJawja]

There's a bit of a twist that happens. It becomes not about the specific issue, but about EGW. So then it's 'if you disagree with EGW you are disagreeing with God' - which of course is a salvation issue. (It's also cultic thinking, but leave that aside.)

And of course, such an attitude is a no win situation. Mrs. White can be terribly confusing.

Jawge

[ClubV12]

Come on Bravus, it's no more "cultic" to believe Ellen White is a prophet than it's cultic to believe in any of the prophets of old.