Why I am a former SDA

[ClubV12]

Well of course it goes for all us Overaged. While in vision Sister White was reminded by the angel that IF she remained faithful....

It applys to everyone, God is no respector of persons in that regard and prophets are no exception. It is the KEY element to understanding God. Be faithful to the light (understanding, knowledge of God) you have been given. By rejecting that knowledge, and to do so consistently and over time, you are rejecting the Holy Spirit. From which no recovery is possible. God has written these things on our heart. Faith, the ability to understand truth is something every human being is given a portion of. It goes beyond logic and reason, it comes from the heart. By rejecting the "still small voice" that you KNOW is right, you sear your conscience, is how Paul said it. That voice of truth grows fainter, more quiet, until finally it is gone. The voice's of man takes precedence over the voice of God.

[Gibs]

If you or any other member of the SDA church thinks that way now-- when the times and conditions are good-- what will they do when the Time of Trouble comes?

Think of being told that if you are SDA, you will be killed! That will happen.

So if we quit the Church because of getting "hurt," what will we do when we're REALLY HURT BAD under constant persecution and when it looks like we will be killed?

"Oh, the irony," is right!

Compare our easy way of life now with the rough times that millions of other Christians have lived through-- and died in-- over the last 2000 years. Compare it with the suffering endured by our pioneers.

We should be ashamed to talk about how we were hurt and therefore left the church. We should instead count ourselves blessed to "suffer" for the sake of Christ.

[miz3]

If you or any other member of the SDA church thinks that way now-- when the times and conditions are good-- what will they do when the Time of Trouble comes?

Think of being told that if you are SDA, you will be killed! That will happen.

So if we quit the Church because of getting "hurt," what will we do when we're REALLY HURT BAD under constant persecution and when it looks like we will be killed?

"Oh, the irony," is right!

Compare our easy way of life now with the rough times that millions of other Christians have lived through-- and died in-- over the last 2000 years. Compare it with the suffering endured by our pioneers.

We should be ashamed to talk about how we were hurt and therefore left the church. We should instead count ourselves blessed to "suffer" for the sake of Christ.

[ClubV12]

Gibs says,

"...we have to go only 3'1/2 years more..."

From that I gather your theology also includes "time setting" for unfilled prophecies? The 1260, 1290, 1335 days as literal days applied in the future? I call this false theology, these various groups, the "1335 Futurists". A typical scenairo is that the "counting" begins with passage of the Sunday law. Of course there are variations on the theme, which is typical when you have so many different groups that believe basically the same thing (Babylon comes to mind). There is no unity among them as to how to do the counting, when it begins, when it ends. Some go to the extreme of actually setting a date for the 2nd coming based on this theology. Something like, seven years after the Sunday law, etc. Another typical mistake is arguing over the day for a year principle. Once you remove THAT principle, your theology collapes like a house of cards. Strangely, they somehow manage to keep the basic 2,300 year prophecy intact, while ignoring certain time sections within that prophecy (like the 1335 years).

Whew,,, your pretty far removed from Seventh-day Adventist theology Gib's.

This kind of false theology is particularly dangerous to those within the Adventist church. It strongly appeals to the sense of propehcy that Adventist hold so dear. It is intellectually stimulating, it is considered "new light". I've seen it trap even those who are deep bible and SOP students, the most sincere among us, the most learned, the most "spiritual". The path of error in this appears to lay VERY close to the path of truth. Discernment can be quite difficult for the those who have not studied for themselves.

[ClubV12]

Pastor Chick did not believe in the "1335 Futurist" theology, he had different issues with doctrine that caused him to leave the church. Every one of these groups have found some "good reason" to depart and use the bible AND the Spirit of Prophecy to make their case. Dr. Kellogg did the same, used SOP quotes to back up his false theology (and A.T. Jones followed him in that delusion). Which shows us that NO ONE is safe from this kind of thing, if possible, even the very elect. This isn't aimed at unbelievers, this is aimed specifically at Adventists.

[Gail]

Scary, isn't it?

[Gibs]

ClubV12,

Where is the support for the 1260,1290,1335 days being a yr. for a day. Dan. in Chap. 12 is giving the very last end time view there. What time is this? Time for that many years?

Mt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

What do you think this event is? The scroll wasn't yet fully unrolled to SDA's and have they unrolled it any further from EGW's day. No! This is something that they will not have until they come out of the apostasy of saved in sin which is a structure of man's cobbling. Don't tell me this is not what is actually being taught as I know better. I fought it for years before I left it and I was in a conference church.

The time is too short now for that to happen, the change out of that theology, and you call me a time setter and I am not, I do know the season and I see most do not, yes I know closely but not the day and hour and none will until, EGW speaks, Read it carefully and slowly,

"Others rashly denied the light behind them and said that it was not God that had led them out so far. The light behind them went out, leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and lost sight of the mark and of Jesus, and fell off the path down into the dark and wicked world below. Soon we heard the voice of God like many waters, which gave us the day and hour of Jesus' coming. The living saints, 144,000 in number, knew and understood the voice, while the wicked thought it was thunder and an earthquake. When God spoke the time, He poured upon us the Holy Ghost, and our faces began to light up and shine with the glory of God, as Moses' did when he came down from Mount Sinai'. {CCh 33.1}

Who is the most learned among us? I tell you now it is not any who have gone through the seminaries. Who has God always picked? EGW for one with 3 grades of this worlds corrupted education which in those days was kosher to what it is now. You may listen to those "learned" men all you want but I'll listen to my God and Saviour for my education and enlightenment. I encourage all to quit following men and get with it of following him only.

Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

"let God be true, but every man a liar"

We of a surety must be overcomers,

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

Gib says,

"Where is the support for the 1260,1290,1335 days being a yr. for a day." "What do you think this event is?"

I know exactly what this event is Gib's, your the one who appears to be confused on it. Why don't you start a new thread on the topic in Theological Townhall.

Confirmed: "1335 Futurist".

I won't be drawn into a discussion that has no merit, no future, no point. But others may wish to discuss it. We've seen many such discussions on these issues in Theological Townhall.

By the way, I've never been to a seminary or any Adventist school. But I sure have a lot of respect for those that have, I've learned a bunch from them.

[Bravus]

Based upon some discussions that we have had, I'd tend to think that you agree more with the SDA position than disagree with it...

Those are 'for starters"...I am curious...are you saying that you have major disagreements with these questions?

I'll have a go at answering these, though I suspect some might use it as ammunition... I want to be honest and as clear as I can be.

Quote:

1]For example, God exists....right?

Yes. This is something I continue to wrestle with... I'm firm in the belief that God exists, but at the same time the God that most SDAs believe in fairly clearly does not exist. The interventionist, miracle-doing, prayer-answering God, as far as I can tell from all the evidence and experience I have accumulated, does not exist. We've had this discussion here in the past, and I've also written a number of blog posts on the issue, over a number of years, some of which I'll link here.

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=2580

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=2364

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=2331

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=2257

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=1994

I certainly don't believe in the vengeful God, waiting to pounce on those who don't do it exactly the way he wants, that is being implicitly portrayed in many of the comments here. If the words of Jesus and the Bible as a whole tell us anything, it's of a God who is eager and desperate for salvation and reconciliation, not destruction and 'gotcha'.

Quote:

2]Ten commandments was given by God to the world...right?

See below on the Bible.

Quote:

3]Bible is the clearest expression of God's will for mankind, as opposed to ...oh, say...the Koran?

Nope, I'm afraid not. *Everything* on earth, including the Bible, includes something of Eden and something of the Fall. Some God and some humanity (and perhaps even some Satan). The Bible, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, the oral traditions of the animist tribes of New Guinea, Zoroastrianism, the narratives of the Greek and Roman gods... all can point us toward God, and all can also cause harm.

It really does boil down to a form of prejudice, this conviction that the tradition into which we were born - through the purest historical and geographical accident - is higher than all others. All it really takes is lifting our eyes enough from our own ethnocentrism to realise that everyone in every other tradition believes the same thing, and that it's arrogant to raise our own historical accident above theirs.

http://www.bravus.com/blog/?p=2273

Quote:

4]Seventh day is God's Sabbath...right?

See above. The notion of a Sabbath is an awesome one, and something I still keep, even though perhaps not along the lines of the SDA rules. But the whole 'Sabbath as the seal of God, Sunday as the Mark of the Beast' argument was a branding exercise in the early SDA church, a point of difference from mainstream Christianity. There is less and less likelihood of even a national Sunday law in the US, let alone a universal one. Again, lifting our eyes outside the bounds of our own culture helps us realise that these claims simply do not gibe with reality. But I still enjoy my Sabbath rest.

Quote:

5] God created mankind...right?

Yes, I believe he did. But he used the mechanisms of the Big Bang and evolution to do so. The evidence is pretty much irrefutable on those points. Now, *to me*, that should not put me beyond the pale of Adventism, but you have seen here - and it's been over many, many years - that I have been told very firmly and clearly that there's no place for me in the SDA fold if I believe in evolution (biologically and cosmologically). Apparently I have to limit God's creative power and majesty to a particular literalistic take on Genesis...

Apologies for all the links out to the blog, but these are not simple issues and simple questions, and I've put in the work and thought over the years to wrestle with them. I'd rather point people in the direction of those on-going wrestles... by all means skip the blogs and just read what's here if you like.

I don't mean to disparage the beliefs of others, either: if it sounds like it, please recognise that it's unintentional... if I'm occasionally disparaging it's actually toward my own former self and former beliefs.

[Bravus]

ClubV12, that might also help to explain why your 'resisting the light you have' comments are so far off the mark.

I know for some former SDAs it's the case that they still believe the same things, they are just choosing not to live by them, for whatever reasons.

For me it's something quite different: I believe differently, I live differently. It's not a case of rejecting something as much as a case of embracing something.

In case it's not clear, what I'm embracing is a broader view of God and of humanity: a God who is bigger than the tribal deity of the bronze age Israelites. A God who is, in reality, omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, eternal.

[ClubV12]

I understand your position Bravus, it is in keeping with the message to Laodecia in Revelation. I would that thou were hot or cold. Tis a far more dangerous position for those who know and believe the light but then decide it is to diffcult or bothersome to keep it. Literally, for heavens sake, get in or get out of the church. The WORST thing you can do is continue to proclaim to be a believer and yet deny the power of that belief, to pick and choose what parts you will or won't follow when it's convenient.

[Bravus]

You've missed it, again, completely, but I'm unsurprised and unperturbed... you're working within a framework that's too narrow to actually understand the words I'm saying. I don't say that as an attack but as a description. You're comfortable with your framework and it's working for you, and I'm not going to challenge that, for you. But I'm also not going to accept your judgement of me, since it's based in a fundamental misunderstanding of who I am and what I stand for.

[ClubV12]

In my framework, I haven't missed anything. I believe what the bible says, you don't. I'm not making a judgment, that is what the bible is doing. Some folks accept what it says, most don't. Those who openly reject it are in a better position to perhaps one day see it and accept it. Those who accept it partially, kind of, sort of, are Laodecia.

It's simple, though heart breaking, if I accept the bible as the word of God, I have to accept the fact the those who don't will not find their way into the Kingdom. Now as heartless as that may sound, I didn't author the bible, I just believe what it says. While I respect your opinion, I don't agree with it in the least, I can't condone it in any way.

[Alchemy]

Bravus wrote; "Yes, I believe he did. But he used the mechanisms of the Big Bang and evolution to do so. The evidence is pretty much irrefutable on those points." (bold emphasis mine)

Blessings Bravus,

Could you share with me some of this irrefutable evidence?

It would help me a great deal in understanding your position.

[Bravus]

The discussion has been occurring over many years in the Origins forum, and it would be well worth your while spending some time reading through the threads there.

There are a million different pieces of evidence, but let's focus on just one for the moment to make things simple: radioactive dating.

Its very, very clear that living things have been on this planet much, much longer than 6-10,000 years.

See how you go with that one for a start: I realise there are a variety of positions within Adventism and that may not faze you, but we need to start somewhere.

[Bravus]

A friend of mine once expressed his experience, which paralleled mine, as having grown up within the shelter of a building, the church (Seventh-day Adventist Christianity). It had nurtured and supported him, and that was valuable. But at some point he had climbed up and broken out through the roof, and was now sitting on the roof, looking out at the vast universe. The church and his past still supported him, but it would feel claustrophobic to crawl back inside.

That's how I feel.

[ClubV12]

Jesus was on a high mountain, overlooking the world and all it had to offer, and it could all be His. But He chose to go down the mountain and live a life of poverty and sacrifice. Even the foxes had holes, the Son of Man had nothing but the love of His Father, it was enough.

[phkrause]

You are also a person who is susceptible to "conspiracy" theories. That is clearly evident.

I'm not so sure that he is susceptible to "conspiracy" theories per say? More like susceptible to the new "Theology" he is saying is infiltrating the church.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

5] God created mankind...right?

Yes, I believe he did. But he used the mechanisms of the Big Bang and evolution to do so. The evidence is pretty much irrefutable on those points.

[Bravus]

Not best, simplest.

There's no point rehashing all the origins arguments here: start a new thread if you want but I'm very much over it.

Alchemy asked for the second time, so I obliged. I'm happy to discuss with him, but I see no purpose in going over all the same old ground with all the same old people who have convinced themselves that they can't believe in God and reality at the same time.

[Dr. Shane]

I certainly would not want to go over the same ground again.

I see no purpose in going over all the same old ground with all the same old people who have convinced themselves that they can't believe in God and reality at the same time.

I think that unfairly characterizes those that disagree with you.

[BobRyan]

the God that most SDAs believe in fairly clearly does not exist. The interventionist, miracle-doing, prayer-answering God, as far as I can tell from all the evidence and experience I have accumulated, does not exist. .

Now you speak your mind freely.

It is much easier to debate/discuss compare notes with someone that is doing that because all the heat and fuming is left behind.

in Christ,

Bob

[Bravus]

Disagreeing with me is fine, it's disagreeing with reality I have a problem with. And I think that's a fair description. It's not meant as an insult.

[Dr. Shane]

Disagreeing with me is fine, it's disagreeing with reality I have a problem with. And I think that's a fair description.

I don't think it is fair. Do you think any of the thousands of scientists holding PhDs that disagree with you on creation would agree with you that they have a problem with reality? Do you think Dr. Tim Standish or Dr. Elaine Kennedy would agree with you that they have a problem with reality?

[Bravus]

It's not a direct comparison, but do you think a billion Muslims would agree with *you* that they have a problem with reality? Yet their reality and yours are dramatically different.

The fact that people themselves cannot identify that they have a problem with reality is no guarantee that in fact they do not have a problem with reality.

There is legitimate debate around the Big Bang mechanism, but I was using it as shorthand for cosmological evolution and the idea that the universe is over 10 billion years old. There is no legitimate debate around that. There are some people who either lie or are seriously deluded.

The reality is that the universe is old. The reality is that life is old. These are empirical matters. There is vast evidence that this is the case. There is no evidence that contradicts it: though there are people who will claim differently.

It's fair to say that people have a problem with reality. It's not fair that they *have* a problem with reality, but that problem is not within my ability to solve.