Non-SDA Speakers banned?

[CoAspen]

I don't even know who Jakes is. My concern is a trend, it seems to me, of deciding who is of equal in the right type of spirituality. Is the new admin taking more of an 'entrenchment' look at the world? Be careful of contamination? Membership is too weak in thier faith? Pew warmers have no discernment, what ever is spoken, is GC approved?

My impression from the video is that Ted is saying in 'de facto', non SDA's are not spiritualy equal to us. Many will take this and 'run with it', feeling they have full authority to make decisions about others spirituality. If he did not mean it in that manner, it should be clarified.

The remarks about "do you want your children....", I deem a 'red herring' of avoidance to the real issue.

[CoAspen]

In the past our SS class at church has had speakers from the Greek Orthodox, Quakers, Babtist Seminary, other faiths as well. Yes, they all spoke on spiritual matters and no our SS class didn't join any other churches.

[Gail]

In the past our SS class at church has had speakers from the Greek Orthodox, Quakers, Babtist Seminary, other faiths as well. Yes, they all spoke on spiritual matters and no our SS class didn't join any other churches.

I have no qualms about some speakers on some subjects (I like Giglio and Andy Stanley) but really prefer our own speakers.

I like anyone who is able to get "deep".

[phkrause]

In the past our SS class at church has had speakers from the Greek Orthodox, Quakers, Babtist Seminary, other faiths as well. Yes, they all spoke on spiritual matters and no our SS class didn't join any other churches.

Our SS class at AUC didn't have any speakers from other churches, but we did study many books from authors not of our church.

[CoAspen]

We did this as a way of learning about/from others.

Why are we or do we, become fearful of others speaking to us, but yet we would applaud one of our pastors being allowed to speak in an other church?

[Dr. Shane]

I think we have some absolutely great Adventist speakers that are being passed by in favor of big names from other denominations. I think we should do more promoting from within and use the local talent.

[fccool]

While you are at it, don't shop at non-adventist bookstores, don't eat non-adventist food, don't listen to non-adventist music, and don't go to non-adventist events ... where speakers are non-adventists.

I hope you can see through nonsensical nature of this appeal. I can respect it, and I understand what he's trying to do, but in the end it does more damage than it does harm. It emphasizes superiority of "knowledge" over understanding and love. That's a very proud clapping in the audience. Pride is still one of the greatest pitfalls of Adventism. We need to approach this and other issue in a more humble manner.

[John317]

I don't think that's the point of the president. He is not suggesting any of those things.

His purpose is not to keep SDAs from being exposed to those things. His purpose is to keep clear what the church teaches and supports. If the church often has non-SDA speakers talking to SDAs about spiritual matters, there could easily come a point where SDAs are even more confused than they already are about what the Church teaches and stands for. I really believe that is where he's coming from. I don't think it's any more than that.

[fccool]

I don't believe that I'm misinterpreting what you or he is saying.

Yet, I don't really see a difference between listening to non-SDA speaker, reading a Christian book written by non-SDA author, or listening a radio sermon by non-sda preacher.

When you understand the context, it's a person communicating in some way a set of ideas. If one is to advocate that non-SDA speakers should not speak from pulpit in order to avoid "spiritual confusion", why would they stop there? Should non-SDA books be read or promoted by the members? The principle is the same.

I hope it makes sense. The setting makes very little difference IMO. It's just a formality. It's Microsoft banning Apple employees as speakers at their events .

[John317]

Yet, I don't really see a difference between listening to non-SDA speaker, reading a Christian book written by non-SDA author, or listening a radio sermon by non-sda preacher.

When you understand the context, it's a person communicating in some way a set of ideas. If one is to advocate that non-SDA speakers should not speak from pulpit in order to avoid "spiritual confusion", why would they stop there? Should non-SDA books be read or promoted by the members? The principle is the same.

.

I think it makes a huge difference whether I watch, say, the pope on TV or whether I see him in an SDA church because he was invited there by the conference.

Also, it makes a big difference if I read a Playboy or Playgirl magazine in my home or if I read it in church after it's been given to me by the pastor.

(I don't read Playboy or Playgirl any more.:-))

[teresaq]

When you understand the context, it's a person communicating in some way a set of ideas. If one is to advocate that non-SDA speakers should not speak from pulpit in order to avoid "spiritual confusion", why would they stop there? Should non-SDA books be read or promoted by the members? The principle is the same.

I understand your point, I think. I know of particular members, who are devout ------- listeners. Instead of checking the biblical context and meaning for themselves they believe that person's interpretation, then bring it into the church as gospel.

But then again I see the same from many, many others who are devout listeners of "approved" SDA speakers who never check with God to see if what they are devouring hook, line and sinker, is really in keeping with God's Spirit and/or the truth.

Then there are those who listen to pick...

Whatever we do whether privately or not will eventually come out of our mouths and influence others.

[teresaq]

I see your point also, J.

------

I think what the speaker will speak on would have a lot to do with it. I know the pioneers had no qualms about reprinting articles by non-SDAs. Quite honestly it shocked me when I first saw that, having been raised the way I was.

According to the mentality I was raised in non-SDAs had no light. With some it seems we have gone to the other extreme in that non-SDAs have all the "light".

At the risk of offending not a few, I believe that if we were truly converted and spiritual we wouldn't be having these problems one way or the other.

[fccool]

Quote:

I think it makes a huge difference whether I watch, say, the pope on TV or whether I see him in an SDA church because he was invited there by the conference.

Also, it makes a big difference if I read a Playboy or Playgirl magazine in my home or if I read it in church after it's been given to me by the pastor.

(I don't read Playboy or Playgirl any more.:-))

John, I think we can safely agree that when "non-SDA" speakers was uttered... Pope was in anyone's mind at that point. The context is not the Pope, and no... there's no difference in both cases.

It makes no difference whether you read playboy at home, or if you read it in church. In fact, you are better off reading it in church, because you can get some sort of reproof and correction there.

Either way, both examples are somewhat extreme in context of most SDAs listening and reading non-SDA devotionals and non-SDA writers and speakers.

My point was evaded :)

[John317]

... My point was evaded

Hyperbole, they call it. Kind of like A Modest Proposal. Extreme! lol :-)

[CoAspen]

Quote:

At the risk of offending not a few, I believe that if we were truly converted and spiritual we wouldn't be having these problems one way or the other.

Agreed!!

But the elephant of 'spirituality' superiority is still sitting in the room. Did he say or not say non-SDA's is less? What do you think? Appreciate your points of view.

[fccool]

But then again I see the same from many, many others who are devout listeners of "approved" SDA speakers who never check with God to see if what they are devouring hook, line and sinker, is really in keeping with God's Spirit and/or the truth.

Then there are those who listen to pick...

Whatever we do whether privately or not will eventually come out of our mouths and influence others.

That's true, but the assumption is that the SDA speakers are tried and know what they are talking about.

Either way, it's somewhat a close-minded and cultist mentality that we urge the other non-SDA churches to stay away from, while we try to convince them to join us.

I think that the origin of the statement is the experience of mass exodus from North-American SDA churches, which are entering growth stagnation and recession. It's unfortunate, but I doubt non-SDA speakers are to blame here.

[teresaq]

I only read the two posts I responded to and just now saw the "context". I so agree with your assessment of us as a people, something I struggle with on a daily basis. Rev. 3:17, 18 comes to mind as well as Matt. 21:31. Either God is telling the truth...or He's lying.

... I can respect it, and I understand what he's trying to do, but in the end it does more damage than it does harm. It emphasizes superiority of "knowledge" over understanding and love. That's a very proud clapping in the audience. Pride is still one of the greatest pitfalls of Adventism. We need to approach this and other issue in a more humble manner.

[teresaq]

Thank you CoAspen, you are kind.

Quote:

At the risk of offending not a few, I believe that if we were truly converted and spiritual we wouldn't be having these problems one way or the other.

Agreed!!

But the elephant of 'spirituality' superiority is still sitting in the room. Did he say or not say non-SDA's is less? What do you think? Appreciate your points of view.

[John317]

I see a big difference between watching a Catholic priest or someone like T.D. Jakes on TV or whether we see them in SDA churches.

There is certainly nothing wrong with watching those people on TV, but there would be something wrong with watching them in person teach in an SDA church.

Similarly it would be one thing to read a novel in my home and quite another to see the same novels being sold at the ABC.

Let's say the novel was Crime and Punishment or Vanity Fair. Would it be appropriate to sell those books in the ABC? It should be obvious that it wouldn't be. Yet I see nothing wrong with reading them in my home or at an SDA university.

[Kevin H]

I have also enjoyed hearing Tony Campolo preach at Loma Linda, and different scholars who spoke at Andrews. I wish I was there when Abraham Joshua Heshel preached there. I don't know for sure if she preached in Adventist Churches or not, but in the Adventist Preachig series looking at sermons of our pioneers, one of the presenters portraied Mrs. J. H. Kellog, how even thought she was a Seventh-day baptist, that she was very popular with Adventists.

Also. Mrs. White grew from being a shut door Adventist to being a very popular Sunday morning preacher in Sunday keeping churches.

I know I wish that Dr. Jim Fleming would speak more in Adventist Churches.

[ClubV12]

There was indeed a "shut door". What that meant was revealed to Sister White in vision within weeks of Ocober, 1844. It changed her understanding of the shut door, not the belief in it.

It would be ridiculous to allow a non-SDA speaker to present this topic to an SDA gathering. The typical Adventist barely has a good understanding of the subject, the last thing they need is to be further confused on the issue!

[teresaq]

There was indeed a "shut door". What that meant was revealed to Sister White in vision within weeks of Ocober, 1844. It changed her understanding of the shut door, not the belief in it.

You misunderstood what Kevin was saying.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Seems like there're so many varieties of Adventism today, probably no one would even notice if TD Jakes said something "peculiar" from an SDA podium..

I would do what I do with SDA and non-SDA speakers and authors: take what I perceive as being good and truthful, and dump the rest..

[Nan]

I would do what I do with SDA and non-SDA speakers and authors: take what I perceive as being good and truthful, and dump the rest..

[fccool]

Quote:

I see a big difference between watching a Catholic priest or someone like T.D. Jakes on TV or whether we see them in SDA churches.

Yet, you are failing to make a distinction between Catholic Priest and T.D. Jakes, by sort of throwing them in the same sentence.

Quote:

There is certainly nothing wrong with watching those people on TV, but there would be something wrong with watching them in person teach in an SDA church.

This sort of sets the double standard that I believe is another problem with Christianity all-together. If "wrong" can't be standard, then it's really a relative issue. If it's not wrong to watch something at home, then it should not be wrong to watch it in church, be it for educational or illustrative purposes.

We can't just show up in church with our mask of holiness, and say, "We must behave more holy here". That's sort of hypocritical in a way. I hope you can see that.

Sure, you would not play with dirt in your living room, but that's not what we are talking about here. We can't simply auto-equate every non-Adventist to be "dirt", which is not worthy to be brought into our living room and paid attention to.

Quote:

Similarly it would be one thing to read a novel in my home and quite another to see the same novels being sold at the ABC.

I don't think that would be an honest comparison and analogy as to what's going on. There's time and place for everything. ABC store is a very selective book store that cells certain books, many of which could be non-Adventist, because they barely touch (or don't even mention) distinct Adventist theology. A book on Paul's life written by Adventist would not automatically become an "Adventist Book". I hope you see what I'm talking about here.

Quote:

Let's say the novel was Crime and Punishment or Vanity Fair. Would it be appropriate to sell those books in the ABC? It should be obvious that it wouldn't be. Yet I see nothing wrong with reading them in my home or at an SDA university.

No, Neither Crime and Punishment or VF would be appropriate for the reason of the "misplaced section". You don't put sports books in religious section, for example, for a very plain reason.

This is not an issue here.

I'll outline it using questions for you:

1) Do these leaders follow Christ in terms of loving people and loving God, even though their knowledge and understanding of certain things are not on the same page with Adventist theology?

2) Could they possibly have something to teach and share that Adventists can benefit from?

3) If Adventist theology is very clear, then why the fear that one speaker may lead someone away from Adventism?

I know you are not going to change your mind on the issue. And I can respect that. We can agree that Adventist denomination is Adventist because of distinct theology. Yet, the issue here is that of fear and resentment. Not of love and understanding.

I can't tell you how many times I hear Adventist speakers misrepresent the beliefs of other, thinking that one speaker they've heard somewhere somehow represents the state of protestantism today.

If we are so proud that we are going to say that, "We are better qualified than anyone else to teach this world about Christ and God", then perhaps we are arrived at the point of arrogance that Jews did back in those days. God does not need us to teach people about himself, if that's the way we are going to go about it.

I'm going to conclude with this:

Adventism in itself is not a standalone phenomenon. It borrows a lot of different understandings from different people and denominations. It's a composite of different beliefs, and it builds on the road paved by the predecessors.

It learns to selectively filter through a lot of its own teachings in order to fit into certain historical setting and ignore the outdated historical context of previous ones.

The #1 problem in Adventist community is not lack of love. It's not lack of understanding of doctrine. It's not liberalism. It's not evangelism tactics.

The #1 problem is pride. The pride that comes from realization that we are God's chosen, and we keep the law properly, and people come closer relationship with God through us. And that in the end we will be persecuted by these other protestant heathens because of that.

Ironically, I think if Christ himself would walk into our churches on Sabbath and started preaching, he would be chased off with a broom, for not being SDA enough.