Sabbath Sermon: Adam and Steve

[Gerr]

If you interpret text "traditionally", then you have to essentially run to Catholics and ask them for forgiveness and acceptance, because tradition will only get you thus far.   Some actually care about original context, and not the traditional interpretation.

 

By "traditionally" I was not referring to Catholic doctrine, rather I meant to the way most people who read the text interpret it.  

 

Please point out your post that has not been addressed by me or someone else.

 

 

[NJK Project]

   My quote was from your post...correct...and would your post not be considered judging and accusing? Do you understand what you are saying? Read the high litghted portions, what do you call that? Sounds alot 'an accuser of the brethern', or are your statements just truth?

 

Seriously/Honestly??!! What’s that hard to understand...unless you just can’t, or want to. I clearly said/specified in that my (conclusionary) statements were based on hours of observation, reading and study in the TOSC deliberations. I, again, had given the ling to that “supporting analyzing documentation”...If you just won’t, even merely, read it, then that is the reason why YOU are not understanding what I am saying. That’s you issue/problem, not mine. I would not even need to “accuse”, as if wishfully imputing something that is not based on facts and evidence, I simply have to “report”... You obtusely resorting to ‘shooting the “messenger(s)”’ (16MR 31.3-32.1) just won’t make any difference to the independently transpired, and indifferently standing, truth of this matter!!

And I just can’t help but be and stay on the side of those who “sigh and cry” rather than those who prefer to ‘(variously, self-preservingly,) keep their heads in the sand’ (5T 209.3-211.1; 16MR 32.2)

[Gregory Matthews]

Post # 206:  Obtuse.

[fccool]

I believe most churches would provide all those things to anyone who comes through the church door.  But  for the sake of the flock,  there comes a point of separation when someone continues to cling to a lifestyle that is anathema to church dogma. The same thing is done with schismatics.

 

   So, when does this "point of separation" happen, "for the sake of the flock"?   1 year?  2 Years?

[fccool]

Seriously/Honestly??!! What’s that hard to understand...unless you just can’t, or want to. I clearly said/specified in that my (conclusionary) statements were based on hours of observation, reading and study in the TOSC deliberations. I, again, had given the ling to that “supporting analyzing documentation”...If you just won’t, even merely, read it, then that is the reason why YOU are not understanding what I am saying. That’s you issue/problem, not mine. I would not even need to “accuse”, as if wishfully imputing something that is not based on facts and evidence, I simply have to “report”... You obtusely resorting to ‘shooting the “messenger(s)”’ (16MR 31.3-32.1) just won’t make any difference to the independently transpired, and indifferently standing, truth of this matter!!

And I just can’t help but be and stay on the side of those who “sigh and cry” rather than those who prefer to ‘(variously, self-preservingly,) keep their heads in the sand’ (5T 209.3-211.1; 16MR 32.2)

 

  You realize that your approach lacks what made Adventism what it is today - a discussion surrounding the progressive approach to truth and understanding.   Simply quoting "proof texts" and "proof documents" is irrelevant to the point that you can successfully defend as you understand it.  Simply saying "I believe everything this book/manual says" seems like a cop-out in context of what a belief is.  You can't off-load it to a book... since it's a personal concept that drives your worldview.   You should be able to explain it clearly, and actually demonstrate what it looks like in your reality, when you say that you believe.

 

   It would seem to me that Adventists today have already tackled all of the personal issues in their congregation, and achieved the moral uprightness and perfection in both thought and action.    It would seem to me that the perception is that Adventists are doing enough to focus on the core concepts of Christian faith... like sticking up for people who are on the margins of society, people who are poor, destitute, broken, sick, and in need of help.  

 

  What does your documentation say about that? 

[Gerr]

   So, when does this "point of separation" happen, "for the sake of the flock"?   1 year?  2 Years?

I believe most SDA churches would welcome anyone to worship/fellowship with them for as long as one wishes and as long as one is not disruptive.  If the person is living a lifestyle that is contrary to church doctrine, that person just can't be accepted as an official member.  If a member falls into sin and continues in that sin that the church considers  to warrant disciplinary action, then that member is counseled .  If the person accepts counsel and correction, well and good.  If not, the person is disfellowshiped. I can't give you a timeline for this process.

[fccool]

And... why would people like that take that seriously? Especially when rhey never really joined as members...

Then what?

[NJK Project]

Post # 206:  Obtuse.

Nah... ‘clear and honest thinking’ reveals that it is the quibbling objection which I was responding to that is obtuse...But I do get it that things are to be ‘maintained’ at a “Clubbing” level here.

[NJK Project]

  You realize that your approach lacks what made Adventism what it is today - a discussion surrounding the progressive approach to truth and understanding.   Simply quoting "proof texts" and "proof documents" is irrelevant to the point that you can successfully defend as you understand it.  Simply saying "I believe everything this book/manual says" seems like a cop-out in context of what a belief is.  You can't off-load it to a book... since it's a personal concept that drives your worldview.   You should be able to explain it clearly, and actually demonstrate what it looks like in your reality, when you say that you believe.

 

   It would seem to me that Adventists today have already tackled all of the personal issues in their congregation, and achieved the moral uprightness and perfection in both thought and action.    It would seem to me that the perception is that Adventists are doing enough to focus on the core concepts of Christian faith... like sticking up for people who are on the margins of society, people who are poor, destitute, broken, sick, and in need of help.  

 

  What does your documentation say about that? 

 

 

a) A mere “approach” is not substantive pivotal here....the disregard of (responsive) substance is what is at fault...don’t be fooled by vacuous pretenses of substantiveness

If you think I am not “truth-progressive” then you just have not read through my ”Theological Views blog...Most SDA’s have issues with it because, as they assume: ‘it does not stick with what SDA pioneers thought’, when the reality and truth is that, when further/better proof and/or light is available, it then has not remained with the level of understanding, or method/substance of proofing of SDA pioneers. (=1T 262.1)

c) I have always been open to discussion, it is just that no one, not even from the educated professional wants admit and engage in doing the required foundational research work[/url, [or even any pondering/deeper thinking], that still needs to first be exhaustively done, and be made most readily and efficiently accessible, to all and any: I.e. to Scholar or Layman, Believer or Unbeliever. (2 Tim 4:1-5)

d) The “torpedoing” issue with your stance/argument is that this book/manual, and even the SOP is of Divine Origin. So until God changes His stance (=Amos 3:7) on such things that “believers” today have, through societal peer-pressuring, become ambivalent about, I see no reason to disregard Scripture.

That is indeed the pointed problem with those who deludedly claim themselves to be “Progressive SDA/Christians”, they think the problem is with the Bible,* when God has already, and persistingly, made it clear when changes to prior Biblical teachings and understandings can and should be done. E.g. He had done so with the OT restrictions on the role of women in leadership and ministry and He has not done so with homosexuality, and clearly has not intended to change. (Jude 1:6-7)

*[As I say within here, “Progressive SDA” should instead honestly call themselves “Redactive SDAs” because that is actually only what they do to (also) Biblical Truth itself.]

Pseudo-preacher like Jonathan Henderson want to make people believe that: ‘God has looked at the (unforeseen) 20th/21st insistence on a homosexual lifestyle and has defeatedly decided to “call and audible” and give in’. That premise is so easily soundly refuted by Scripture that it is just telling of the state of the Church that Henderson has not been severely disciplined for this outright heresy.

And btw, this most agreeable, decrying comment is an accurate deeming of Henderson’s preaching...Indeed several people before had, as he himself relates, (as if that then invalidates the claim), that he does act/speak as if he is demon-possessed when preaching...The Devil does also need his deceiving mouthpieces within the SDA Church (=Gen 3:) who preach another form of his Spiritualistic messages.

e) If you think that SDAs have “tackled all of the personal issues in their congregation, and achieved the moral uprightness and perfection in both thought and action” , which is to inherently involve: at God’s own standard, then, seriously, you need to view this 12-part “Apostasy” series by Ernie Knoll, (also already “tested” (=1 Thess 5:19-21) here in this forum), which I have found ca. 10.5 of the 12 to be Biblical. [cf. 5T 707.3|DA 400.2|Ezek 14:1-5ff]

f) In regards to how the NJK Project is “sticking up for people who are on the margins of society, people who are poor, destitute, broken, sick, and in need of help”, just see its ministering&ministry objectives and church-worldview as e.g. it Aborting-Abortion plans. Dealing with those who are actually daily dying from preventable, curable and/or intentional causes is the first objective of this Biblically further-seeing&reaching ministry.

(And the specific “documentation” that I had referred to was in regards to the Women Ordination issue...and it too brings out the Biblical view of how God is, (pointedly in the better state of (religious) affairs in the (achieved) New Covenant), “sticking” up for them, and their fullest, even most authoritative leadership & ministry contribution in/for His Israel. E.g. Ellen G. White ....)

[NJK Project]

Supplemented edits of posting #213 above, (since I can’t do so otherwise..can’t even preview before posting...):

c) required foundational research work

f1) Ellen G. White

[fccool]

a) A mere “approach” is not substantive pivotal here....the disregard of (responsive) substance is what is at fault...don’t be fooled by vacuous pretenses of substantiveness

 

  Well... I'll take someone who attempts to treat people with Christ-like attitude over a theology paper tiger any day of the week. 

 

 

If you think I am not “truth-progressive” then you just have not read through my ”Theological Views blog...Most SDA’s have issues with it because, as they assume: ‘it does not stick with what SDA pioneers thought’, when the reality and truth is that, when further/better proof and/or light is available, it then has not remained with the level of understanding, or method/substance of proofing of SDA pioneers. (=1T 262.1)

c) I have always been open to discussion, it is just that no one, not even from the educated professional wants admit and engage in doing the required foundational research work[/url, [or even any pondering/deeper thinking], that still needs to first be exhaustively done, and be made most readily and efficiently accessible, to all and any: I.e. to Scholar or Layman, Believer or Unbeliever. (2 Tim 4:1-5)

d) The “torpedoing” issue with your stance/argument is that this book/manual, and even the SOP is of Divine Origin. So until God changes His stance (=Amos 3:7) on such things that “believers” today have, through societal peer-pressuring, become ambivalent about, I see no reason to disregard Scripture.

 

 

   "Disreguard for scripture" claim is irrelevant in the scope of what you are actually doing every single day.   Christianity is not a belief system, it's a belief system in action.    If you think that Christianity calls for actively condemning homosexuals, and chastizing people who say that we should love them and welcome them prior to attempting to direct their lives...  I won't have much more to say.

 

That is indeed the pointed problem with those who deludedly claim themselves to be “Progressive SDA/Christians”, they think the problem is with the Bible,* when God has already, and persistingly, made it clear when changes to prior Biblical teachings and understandings can and should be done. E.g. He had done so with the OT restrictions on the role of women in leadership and ministry and He has not done so with homosexuality, and clearly has not intended to change. (Jude 1:6-7)

*[As I say within here, “Progressive SDA” should instead honestly call themselves “Redactive SDAs” because that is actually only what they do to (also) Biblical Truth itself.]

Pseudo-preacher like Jonathan Henderson want to make people believe that: ‘God has looked at the (unforeseen) 20th/21st insistence on a homosexual lifestyle and has defeatedly decided to “call and audible” and give in’. That premise is so easily soundly refuted by Scripture that it is just telling of the state of the Church that Henderson has not been severely disciplined for this outright heresy.

 

 

  And... preachers who rain down the wrath of God, and practice "the theory" with "26 things you should know to be a good Christian", instead of spending the same time in a homeless shelter... where they will more about Christianity than in their lifetime of sitting in the pew, reading the EG white literature, or "worshiping God".... are the ones we should look up to?

 

And btw, this most agreeable, decrying comment is an accurate deeming of Henderson’s preaching...Indeed several people before had, as he himself relates, (as if that then invalidates the claim), that he does act/speak as if he is demon-possessed when preaching...The Devil does also need his deceiving mouthpieces within the SDA Church (=Gen 3:) who preach another form of his Spiritualistic messages.

 

  First, you need to look up Spiritualism, and stop expanding semantics to "Spiritualism is everything I disagree with", and secondly you need to start other thread if you want to discuss this topic

 

e) If you think that SDAs have “tackled all of the personal issues in their congregation, and achieved the moral uprightness and perfection in both thought and action” , which is to inherently involve: at God’s own standard, then, seriously, you need to view this 12-part “Apostasy” series by Ernie Knoll, (also already “tested” (=1 Thess 5:19-21) here in this forum), which I have found ca. 10.5 of the 12 to be Biblical. [cf. 5T 707.3|DA 400.2|Ezek 14:1-5ff]

f) In regards to how the NJK Project is “sticking up for people who are on the margins of society, people who are poor, destitute, broken, sick, and in need of help”, just see its ministering&ministry objectives and church-worldview as e.g. it Aborting-Abortion plans. Dealing with those who are actually daily dying from preventable, curable and/or intentional causes is the first objective of this Biblically further-seeing&reaching ministry.

(And the specific “documentation” that I had referred to was in regards to the Women Ordination issue...and it too brings out the Biblical view of how God is, (pointedly in the better state of (religious) affairs in the (achieved) New Covenant), “sticking” up for them, and their fullest, even most authoritative leadership & ministry contribution in/for His Israel. E.g. Ellen G. White ....)

 

 

  So, you think that helping the poor, destitute, and broken amounts to drawing up "plans" on a site and "how to literature"?     

[Tom Wetmore]

Ahhh... A disciple/follower/fan of Ernie Knoll. Say no more.

[fccool]

Ahhh... A disciple/follower/fan of Ernie Knoll. Say no more.

 

  I actually decided to ignore it, because that's the only proper response to something of a sort IMO.  Debating it merely lands it some potential legitimacy.

[CoAspen]

 

Christianity is not a belief system, it's a belief system in action.

Plain, simple and to the point!

 

Thanks for that observation.

[CoAspen]

Mr NJK is simply another anti-SDA person. The following is from his/her/whomever web site:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W.O.E. to You Seventh-Day Adventists...

 

‘Warning of Evil’ (Isa 45:7; 28:5-13, 14-22) to You All Seventh-Day Adventists... (Zeph 3:1-17ff|Matt 23:1-36|DA 610.1-620.4)

...whether core-rotten mainline or sapless offshoot replicates, you have ‘the indifferently oblivious false “hope” that Jesus is coming back soon to save and reward you for your works’ when you are quite wanting in God’s balances as the works that you actually have in the light of your much greater knowledge, blessing, capability, opportunity and responsibility will only provide you your actually long-ago Divinely fashioned, decreed and most craftily sustained reward to burn in Hell at least just shy (if not justly twice) as long as the generation of those who rejected Jesus Christ when He was here on Earth in Person.

 

            As saying anything more, and/or more plainly/detailedly, is now not at all ‘needed’, (cf. DA 611.2), indeed in our knowledgeable day and age, and would only serve to help you (most mercifully) ‘potentially’ avert this firmly decreed judgement of yours, -which you have by now well validated, then I’ll certainly not do so, now....

...Really....you just can’t be that “STUPID” unless it’s (conditionedly) clinical, or you are doing this on purpose!!???... Or you’ve indeed been purposefully, most Masterfully, “successfully”, truly/fully, and thus justly, actionably (self-)duped, and that directly (i.e., indifferently left to the natural outcome of your own waywardness = Heb 12:8) indeed as the rotten fruit of your own willfully/awarely, reveredly-maintained spurious/vacuous/moronic mal-understandings (=Matt 24:8|Isa 42:14-25; 28:5-13ff; Isa 29:6-16; Ezek 14:1-5, 7-8). You are thusly, “hands down”, the world’s biggest/worst MORONS. Keep up your “great” non-workings!!

 

Could takes some courses in sentence structure, grammar and and over all writing lessons, and a dictionary!!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

and another quote from NJK's page - a public declaration of fighting against the SDA church (not sure why he - Ronald - is posting here on a stated SDA forum):

 

 

Ashamed of Their Own Gospel

            All the while that I was doing these researches and coming up with more of such useful and intriguing “probing entry” information, I could not help but feel impressed that this was actually the “final straw”. Up to then I could not believe why various people and ministries in the Church with whom I had tried to get my pre-Net ‘98 ministry going did not step up to do so. The planned ministry, advertising most prominently the upcoming Net ‘98 series would be significantly preparing this ground with literally the best that SDAs had to offer in terms of our message books and ministries all packaged in an attractive, Christ-centered magazine. The whole things was just as odd and suspect to me as a car dealer vehemently refusing, though financially capable, to buy any of the new, high end cars that he is selling to others, also despite a company discount. Above all things, “there was a cause” (1 Sam 17:28-30 NKJV) with the potential, targeted audience and the Gen Xers meetings coming up in Net ‘98. All this senseless, ultimate indifference and opposition was clearly fueled also by a ‘Joseph’s jealous brothers’ attitude (Gen 37). I mean ‘why should the prophetic SOP statement in EV 35 and 36 be fulfilled by me in this ministry,’ they manifestly, innermostly felt.

My Cursing of this Fig Tree (6T 370.3)

            And so quite drastically, and with cause, and paramountly in faith that God would never honor such a base attitude, punctuatedly (i.e., after now over a year of fruitless anticipated fig fruit seeking), deliberately began my “Cursing of the Fig Tree” episode for me vs. the SDA Church (DA 580-588). No longer would I from then on be so sacrificing myself and fighting to help bring people to the SDA Church, but, at the very “least,” would now instead just present Biblical Truth without any encouragement to join the SDA Church. I had made this vow in the righteous and self-evident light that surely there was something much better than this whole, quite widespread, and sanctioned, base, “Who is the Greatest”, sectarian demeanor, and thus effectively, substantive ‘House-of-Card’ masquerading as God’s ideal in reaching the world. It did not take long for me to get the first of many, many Signs of God’s providential approvals in this judicial choice.

[CoAspen]

 

 

 

grandiose

                   

adjective

1.

affectedly grand or important; pompous:

grandiose words.

2.

more complicated or elaborate than necessary; overblown:

a grandiose scheme.

  

4.

Psychiatry. having an exaggerated belief in one's importance, sometimes reaching delusional proportions, and occurring as a common symptom of mental illnesses, as manic disorder.

 

Tis the best description I could come up with.

(are the dragons hungry.....)

[JoeMo]

(sung to the tune of "Chestnuts Roasting")

 

Sad sacks roasting in a dragon's fire;

Crisp flesh wafting up your nose.

Posting quotes from the evil one's choir

Just thrills the devil to his toes!

 

(After all, it is Christmas)

[NJK Project]

I most certainly don’t have the time, and especially not a ministry-mandate (Isa 6:8-13|Matt 13:10-17|John 12:39-40), to waste with you all answering your patently/necessarily inane claims and objections. (Neh 6:3) You all are, evidently self-obliviously masters of self-serving misconstruing =Lying/False Witnessing. Good Luck with that (also “Spiritualistic”) stance (=John 8:44).

(Really fccool, you don’t know what is Spiritually involved in Spiritualism....And “pompously” so much so, that you don’t even need to read up on it. I guess that too is beyond your “elementary” level of knowledge&comprehension!!.....That all speaks volumes about you, and well-contextualize/explains the nature of the rest of your likewise “uninformedly-pompous” spurious objections. And waybelow my “pay-grade to have to deal with...)

Funny how you all alike foundationally think that your laughable (willful) ignorance must be right. All of the (already-referenced) answers to your spurious and vacuous objection are available throughout my blog. I am not at all responsible for your relished deficiencies in Spiritual discernment. (2 Cor 3:7-18; 1 SM 108-111). Indeed I don’t need to convince you, but just notify/inform you enough to make you conviction-liable. (=John 15:22 = John 9:41).

So, do, also keep living that SDA-popular safe, “small”, will-fully myopic, capitalistic Church & Mission life (contra. e.g. DA 20.3-21.1)....I’ll keep planning and walking according to God’s injunctively-present greater plans (Rev 7:1-3|15MR 292.3-4; TDG 193.4)!!!

[NJK Project]

By the way, fccool, as per Pro 26:5: when you find that Wishful Text which says that: e.g. Jesus called even those sinners, drunkards, prostitutes, etc, to ‘not repent of their sins, but instead first join His Church (contra. e.g. Mar 1:15; Acts 17:30; Matt 3:2, 7-10)...do (Historically) True Christianity a “favor”, and let it know....Medieval “Christianity” tried, and is still attempting, your desperate approach with pagans, and hint, hint, only went on to form Spiritual Babylon (Rev 17+18)...

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

NJK, when you make condescending and wild-eyed statements such as those above against others on the forum as well as against the Adventist church in general, it does nothing to further your veracity or believability.  Furthermore, your histrionic writing style is peripatetic and unimpressive. Perhaps you need to be voted off the island...

[CoAspen]

 

Perhaps you need to be voted off the island...

Naw....no need, the hole has been dug, so deep that we can no longer see the digger of it. The sides will soon cave in.

[CoAspen]

Has this topic died also?

[fccool]

And waybelow my “pay-grade to have to deal with...

 

 

You are actually getting paid for doing this ?

[fccool]

By the way, fccool, as per Pro 26:5: when you find that Wishful Text which says that: e.g. Jesus called even those sinners, drunkards, prostitutes, etc, to ‘not repent of their sins, but instead first join His Church (contra. e.g. Mar 1:15; Acts 17:30; Matt 3:2, 7-10)...do (Historically) True Christianity a “favor”, and let it know....Medieval “Christianity” tried, and is still attempting, your desperate approach with pagans, and hint, hint, only went on to form Spiritual Babylon (Rev 17+18)...

 

I think you have your claims messed up here.  People have to come first, and then they change.   They don't come because they have changed.    And the change takes time, and for some will not happen... they may struggle with certain issues for the rest of their lives, while they'll have a clear change in other aspects of their life.

 

I think you need to revisit your place in it all, and what exactly you "job" is.   It's certainly not to stand on the corner, calling out people's sins and tell them their need of immediate repentance.   Your job is to provide a safe environment in which they can come and have room for change, and do so with attitude of encouragement, and not that of accusation and condemnation.

 

You seldom will see the change in people, who are constantly demoralized by the high-horse mentality that somehow manages to find specs in other people's life from behind the logs of their own.   It really takes tremendous effort to do so... first to delusionally convince yourself that you are in a high-enough position to judge someone's situation... and judge it in such a manner that seems to eliminate any need for disclosure of of one's own pitfalls.

 

You know, there was a guy who wrote a book about his sins.  I'd take some criticism from someone like that... certainly not from a faceless blog making sweeping generalizations, and demoralizing condemnations.