Dr. Shane Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Quote: homosexual marriage should be banned This is a political issue and not something an Adventist preacher is likely to say from the pulpet. The religious view of the issue is whether an Adventist pastor would marry two gays or an Adventist congregation would rent the church facility for a gay wedding. Whether or not gays should be allowed to marry is a civil or political issue and something not likely to make it into many sermons. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted January 25, 2006 Author Moderators Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: bevin said: If you are going to stand in the pulpit and yell out "God created the Earth in 7 days, in 1844 Jesus went into the Heavenly Holy of Holies, homosexual marriage should be banned, and people who don't believe these things are on the side of the Devil", don't expect me to waste my time sitting in the pews. Bevin/ That seems like an uncharacteristic response even though I don't claim to know you well. I think everyone would agree that to leave a church because one has serious theological differences between what is preached and what you believe is understandable. What you have described is not cultural. I guess one man's yelling is anothers preaching with passion and conviction...I guess thats cultural and a matter of preference. why would anyone say that you are a racist in the above senario? Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: That seems like an uncharacteristic response even though I don't claim to know you well. I think people will sit through an occassional program that irks them, but as the frequency rises it crosses some threshold and they begin to look elsewhere. There are definite cultural styles in churches, and while it does not follow strictly racial lines, there is enough commonality for people to confuse the issue. In the SDA church, I notice that AS A GENERALISATION WITH ACKNOWLEDGED EXCEPTIONS the Hispanic and Black preachers tend to be louder than I like, more ignorant than I like, and more illogical than I like. Now - there are also loud, ignorant, and illogical White preachers also. Indeed the two SDA that finally drove me far enough up the wall to quit my membership were my white local pastor, and Clifford Goldstein. But if the influx of a particular cultural group into an existing congregation changes the style of that congregation, then one should expect some kind of rift. It is not racism, it is not even cultural conflict, it is an ignorance v knowledge conflict. The truth is that Christian conservatives - regardless of culture - act in a very obnoxious "I am right because I am closer to God because I am willingly and deliberately stupid and ignorant" manner. They do not tolerate thinkers. The second truth is that the Black and Hispanic SDA, as a group, fit this category. They are much more ignorant and much less tolerant about a range of issues from EGW to evolution to women's roles. Unfortunately it has shifted the center of discussion in the SDA church thirty years into the past, and the church is going to have to go through the pain of the 1970's and 80's all over again. As the Hispanics and the Blacks discover just how far the SDA denomination has misled to them about the origins of the EGW writings, about the 1844 theology, and about the theory of evolution they will become a lot more like the white NAD members. It will be interesting to watch. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted January 25, 2006 Author Moderators Share Posted January 25, 2006 So I can diduce from your post Bevin that you are neither Spanish or Black. I thought you were black! Quote: ......They are much more ignorant and much less tolerant about a range of issues from EGW to evolution to women's roles. Quote: ...they will become a lot more like the white NAD members. So.......to be a white SDA in America is to be generally the more Knowlegeable, Tolerant and currently at the highest level on the "SDA spiritual evolutionary ladder" Maybe I should pray that God make me "whiter" in my thinking or maybe when we get to heaven we'll all be white just like Jesus! Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Reminds me of an AA meeting I was once in. A woman was ranting on and on about how much she hated religion and stated that she would never worshop an anglo-saxon god. After a few others spoke it was another man's turn to talk. He was a blue-collar, factory worker that lacked refined speaking skills. He had crooked teeth and didn't dress real well. He simply said, "I won't worship an algo-saxon god either. My God is a Jewish Carpenter." Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: Hispanic and Black preachers tend to be louder than I like, more ignorant than I like, and more illogical than I like. But that is not a racist statement. "I am white. I am knowledgable. Blacks and hispanics are more ignorant and illogical than me" Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 What are the statistics of Adventism in North America? How long has the majority of Adventists been Caucasian? How "new" to Adventism are most non-Caucasians? In general, newer Adventists--no matter what race--are, indeed less tolerant of free-thinking. They have found new truths and are excited about embracing them. Truth is exciting, is it not? As with any new love, finding love in the Lord is something so wonderful, so fantastic, that the "lover" desires to keep the feeling for ever. Over time, the "newness" wears off and one begins to question his/her faith. A continuing growth process ensues. Caucasians are not superior to non-Caucasians; equally, African-Americans are not superior to non-African-Americans; not to be excluded, Mexicans are not superior to non-Mexicans. New-in-the-faith members are able to glean much from the elders-in-the-faith. This is why even in the field of education there are mentors. People learn from people. Is it wrong, then, to say that an organization that has been operating for a great length of time has knowledge that a newer organization might benefit from learning? It would be wrong, however, to say that the older organization has knowledge through experience because it is predominantly composed of a single race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted January 25, 2006 Author Moderators Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: Cricket said: In general, newer Adventists--no matter what race--are, indeed less tolerant of free-thinking. What is this free thinking of which you speak, please give examples. Quote: Is it wrong, then, to say that an organization that has been operating for a great length of time has knowledge that a newer organization might benefit from learning? What organisation are we talking about? are we saying that the NAD is somehow a diffenerent organisation than the TED or other divisions. Don't they have generally the same policies and the same doctrines??? Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 When I speak of "free-thinking", I am referring to questioning authority; to the ideas that other people's Biblical interpretation might be more correct than what was originally presented. Other free-thinking occurs in conversations like this one: you asked a sincere question at the beginning of this thread, "What does it mean to be white in the SDA church?" From that question, I presumed you wanted some free-thinking, non-inhibited answers. I presumed you wanted Caucasians to answer the question directly and without using "politically correct" responses. I assumed it was a query of an exploratory nature, one in which you wanted to learn from others' experiences. In my opinion, this is free-thinking. It is not simply regurgitating what one has been told is truth. When I spoke of the organizations, I spoke in general terms as I do believe the concept could be applied to any organizations. I had hoped that it would be clear that it could easily apply to the organization of individual churches--not necessarily the NAD, TED, IAD, SPD or the like. It was mentioned previously that "AS A GENERALISATION WITH ACKNOWLEDGED EXCEPTIONS Hispanic and [African-American] preachers tend to be louder..., more ignorant..., and more illogical..." I propose a counter-argument. I submit the idea that new-to-the-faith preachers tend to be louder, less knowledgeable and less logical. This is why I asked the questions, "What are the statistics of Adventism in North America? How long has the majority of Adventists been Caucasian? How "new" to Adventism are most non-Caucasians?" If the answer is that most non-Caucasian ministers and congregants are new-to-the-faith, then does it not logically follow that "newness" and not race, is the reason they are perceived as louder, less knowledgeable and less logical? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: So.......to be a white SDA in America is to be generally the more Knowlegeable, Tolerant and currently at the highest level on the "SDA spiritual evolutionary ladder" Remember we are talking generalities here, not specific individuals. There is a VERY wide range of knowledge, experience, and tolerance in all cultures. A white SDA in the USA are more likely to be a multi-generational middle-class well-educated SDA than an Hispanic SDA in Honduras is. A multi-generational middle-class well-educated BLACK SDA is more likely to be knowlegeable and tolerant than a brand new white convert. Remember also that the NAD and GC leadership is, to a fortunately diminishing extent, ignorant and intolerant white males. There are plenty of examples of ignorant and intolerant whites contributing to various SDA forum. There are even more examples of ignorant and intolerant whites preaching on the religious channels on my TV every day - some of them SDA but mostly other denominations. Statistically speaking, as shown by the way their congregations and leaders behave, the areas of growth in the SDA church over the last 30 years have resulted in groups that are not aware of and actively discussing and contemplating changes in the issues I mentioned earlier, (creationism, EGW, 1844, evolution) and which are not generally tolerant of those individuals and parts of the church that are. When the Third World delegates at the GC won't even let the each Division decide for themselves the role of women... When the Third World delegates at the Faith and Science conference and say that evolution is not an important topic in their areas... This will change. Within these areas of growth the awareness of the problems and the knowledge of the areas will grow - and then they will face exactly the same issues that the 3rd and 4th generation well-educated SDA are facing in NAD/NZ Australia/Western Europe now. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: Quote: Hispanic and Black preachers tend to be louder than I like, more ignorant than I like, and more illogical than I like. But that is not a racist statement. "I am white. I am knowledgable. Blacks and hispanics are more ignorant and illogical than me" Correct. My statement was not racist. Your rewording of it was racist. You changed a statistical statement about myself(a widely read, B.Sc/M.Sc, 48yo, SDA-for-40 years person) with personal preferences (quiet, knowledgeable, logical) into an absolute statement. This, by the way, demonstrates that YOU are more ignorant and illogical than I am. YOu have just added your weight to the statistic ... /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted January 25, 2006 Author Moderators Share Posted January 25, 2006 Bevin/ I'm interested to see what kind of data you have to support your bold assertions. I assume there is some study, some survey. Surely you are not basing your assertions on anecdotal evidence, supposition, feelings and perception........ Then again i just re-read one of your previous posts! Quote: I notice that AS A GENERALISATION WITH ACKNOWLEDGED EXCEPTIONS the Hispanic and Black preachers tend to be louder than I like, more ignorant than I like, and more illogical than I like Since when does what YOU like become the basis for making statements about a race or group of people? Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: Since when does what YOU like become the basis for making statements about a race or group of people? On Wed Jan 18 2006 08:22 AM. Why? Because Lazarus asked, Quote: What does it mean to be white in America? I'm really interested to know if anyone would be willing to answer this intriguing question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: Since when does what YOU like become the basis for making statements about a race or group of people? The statement was about my reaction to a style that some of a group of people used some of the time. The few times I have been to a predominantly Black SDA church the people there have been friendly, enthuisastic, loving and lovable Christians. However the styles that irked me did not irk them. Do I tell them "stop doing that?" No. Instead I go somewhere else. When the NAD wants to ordain a female pastor, do the non-NAD SDA Divisions allow them to? No. They voted at the GC not to allow this freedom. When the Faith and Science Conference concludes that creationism lacks a scientific basis, are they allowed to publish this? No - instead the GC [mainly a bunch of scientifically ignorant white males concerned about a world-wide constituency of scientifically ignorant naive believers] issues a statement supporting creationism. Is the fundamental issue race or culture? No. The fundamental issue is ignorance. It just so happens that the majority of the better informed SDA people are well-educated multi-generational SDA, which happens to be largely white-western because of the SDA history. To understand this aspect of the issues facing SDA'ism you need to read 1844 - Des Ford's Glacial View material EGW - The White Lie and the follow-on materials Evolution - A good selection of modern pro-evolution material Women's Roles - perhaps someone can recommend a good source for this I don't think you understand how frustrating it was to watch the SDA church moving in the right direction down the right road in the 1990's - and then to be jerked literally 50 years into the past by the arrival of a large ignorant enthusiastic group who had been misinformed by a group of ignorant enthusiastic evangelists. The SDA church is still on the right road - but it is now going to have to re-walk the 1950-2000 period. It is going to be painful. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 What we need to understand is that others cannot read our minds. They will interpret what we say by the words we use. Often times those that are not racist, make statements which are racist. Instead of trying to defend the racist statement, it would do us well to backpeddle and explain further what we were trying to say and why the words we used fail to communicate the thoughts behind them. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quote: What we need to understand is that others cannot read our minds. They will interpret what we say by the words we use. This is very true - although I would go further... They will read into our words what they want to hear in them. I suspect you have had a lot of personal and family experience with being stereotyped, and probably had many painful experiences caused by it. This appears to make you very sensitive about the issue. I really wish the SDA church would actively encourage more tolerance to a wider range of beliefs, and an understanding of the causes and effects of differences. Do you think that I should be an SDA, given that... I prefer a quiet presentation of facts and options to loud pronouncements of certainty. I think the facts clearly show that the world got here by millions of years of evolution I think it is not possible to support the day-year principle or the 1844 date from scripture I think the facts clearly show that EGW received a lot of help from others in writing her books, and that there are numerous errors of fact and theology in them I think that men and women should be allowed to perform all the same roles in the denomination's structure. Not that I want to impose these beliefs on you or your congregation - I just don't want preachers in my congregation and magazines I am forced to pay for telling me I am going to hell because of these beliefs. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Shane Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Quote: They will read into our words what they want to hear in them. This is a fact we have to deal with. We cannot change others. So we have to change ourselves. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 That brings us back then, to the whole notion that I proposed in the initial answer to the question: What does it mean to be white in America? It means Caucasians have to treat people of other color better than they would (treat people of the same color) out of fear of being labeled racist. Also, it is out of fear that their words/actions will be misread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Naomi Posted January 26, 2006 Administrators Share Posted January 26, 2006 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> Cricket said: That brings us back then, to the whole notion that I proposed in the initial answer to the question: What does it mean to be white in America? It means Caucasians have to treat people of other color better than they would (treat people of the same color) out of fear of being labeled racist. Also, it is out of fear that their words/actions will be misread. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> Yes, you are quite correct. And, it is sad because a person should be responded to because of who they are as an individual, not because of their color. Yet, I have been told by Christian friends who are people of color that they don't like caucasians in their clubs, establishments, etc. Tell me what that says to all peoples of all colors. Naomi Quote If your dreams are not big enough to scare you, they are not big enough for God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kountzer Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Quote: Naomi said: Quote: Cricket said: That brings us back then, to the whole notion that I proposed in the initial answer to the question: What does it mean to be white in America? It means Caucasians have to treat people of other color better than they would (treat people of the same color) out of fear of being labeled racist. Also, it is out of fear that their words/actions will be misread. Yes, you are quite correct. And, it is sad because a person should be responded to because of who they are as an individual, not because of their color. Yet, I have been told by Christian friends who are people of color that they don't like caucasians in their clubs, establishments, etc. Tell me what that says to all peoples of all colors. Naomi What part of texas do you live in? Where ever it is I hope it is not close to me. DB Quote I prayed for twenty years but received no answer until I prayed with my legs. Frederick Douglass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 The question was asked. I dared answer from a personal, Caucasian standpoint. Am I complaining that Caucasians have to treat non-Caucasians differently? No. Rather, I am simply stating, matter of factly, how some Caucasians live. If you feel that my posts have been of a complaining nature, I apologize. It was never intended as such. Contrariwise, I find it rather fulfilling to go the extra mile in my relationships. As Naomi pointed out, it is a sad situation. Sad, in that people of all races cannot treat each other as equals. Due to the history of the relationship between Caucasians and non-Caucasians, today's society faces a unique challenge in achieving the balance as it should have been all along. For centuries, non-Caucasians have been treated poorly. When time and effort are weighed in the balances, an equal amount of time and effort must be put into effect to realign the scales. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kountzer Posted January 28, 2006 Share Posted January 28, 2006 my bad. db Quote I prayed for twenty years but received no answer until I prayed with my legs. Frederick Douglass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted January 29, 2006 Author Moderators Share Posted January 29, 2006 Quote: bevin said: The statement was about my reaction to a style that some of a group of people used some of the time. The few times I have been to a predominantly Black SDA A few post earlier you made some blanket stamtents about certain races bases on what seems now to be a style ....that some of a group used some of the time. And then you admit that you have only been to a predominantly black church a few times . Where do the conclusions you draw come from..... Quote: To understand this aspect of the issues facing SDA'ism you need to read 1844 - Des Ford's Glacial View material EGW - The White Lie and the follow-on materials Evolution - A good selection of modern pro-evolution material Women's Roles - perhaps someone can recommend a good source for thi I've read it and I understand that stuff. Don't equate my disagreement with you ignorance. The issues that challenge you are not issues that have been decided upon by ignorant blacks or hispanics. These issues were largely decided upon by White men years ago. It is only recently that people of color have been in a position to effect change and that is in itself relatively small. How dare you stick a label on black and hispanics because of what whites have done. Don't forget these whites in the church were educated, 3rd-4th generation adventists. I guess if we had baptised a few hundred thousand white Americans then the SDA church would be this progressive, toleranct free-thinking church. But wait a minute, what happened when white educated SDAs totally dominated the church.....we had a segregated, Review and herald, no blacks in certain schools, segregated GC and people routinely turned away from churches. Thank God for these ignorant black and spanish people. I see that you backed away from some of your earlier statements....somehow trying to soften them. I appreciate that but when we draw broad strokes from narrow perceptions thats stereotyping some would call it racist! Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cricket Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Lazarus, Why did you ask the question in the first place? I'm more and more baffled each time I read your responses to others' opinions. Did you want to challenge the opinions of others, or did you want to listen openly to what they have to say? I really thought this was a thread about finding out how others felt--not about criticising them for how they have experienced life. To be honest, I do not think you are open-mindedly reading the things that Bevin has posted. In the previous post, you stated, "The issues that challenge you are not issues that have been decided upon by ignorant blacks or hispanics. These issues were largely decided upon by White men years ago. It is only recently that people of color have been in a position to effect change and that is in itself relatively small." To wit, "it is only recently" that non-Caucasians have been in a position to effect change. Wholeheartedly, I agree. To wit, it is only recently that Caucasians have been effecting change as well. Caucasian or non-Caucasian: none are perfect. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." From my viewpoint, I have read nowhere in Bevin's posts that he feels that Caucasian people are superior to African-Americans or Hispanics. I have read that he believes Caucasians have had earlier opportunity to study and learn from the forefathers of Christianity; henceforth, these people have had longer opportunity to draw a wider range of opinion. This opportunity ultimately leading to free-thinking and tolerance of new ideas. "When white [sic] educated SDAs totally dominated the church" they operated under a set of beliefs that most Caucasians do not believe any longer. Yes, these men and women were educated. However, they were not perfectly educated. There were fallacies in their theories, beliefs and ideals. Praise be to God that these men and women did not continue in some of their beliefs, but instead embraced new ones over time. Even so, some of these original beliefs that many disagree with are being taught in the Sabbath Schools, in the worship hour, and in the church schools. These are taught because they are in the textbooks, and they represent what has been taught in the past. Until free-thinking open-minded people interrupt the continuity of these teachings, they will continue to be taught. The idea, then, is that Caucasians have had the greater opportunity over time, to be more free-thinking and open-minded. Change can begin. Indeed, as evidenced by this discussion and others like it, change is beginning. I truly hope that this conversation can continue in the spirit of open-minded sharing of experiences. Cricket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators lazarus Posted January 30, 2006 Author Moderators Share Posted January 30, 2006 Quote: Cricket said: Lazarus, Why did you ask the question in the first place? I'm more and more baffled each time I read your responses to others' opinions. Did you want to challenge the opinions of others, or did you want to listen openly to what they have to say? I really thought this was a thread about finding out how others felt--not about criticising them for how they have experienced life. This forum is about sharing ideas, having a discussion, a debate. If I express and opinion or share an experience I would expect someone to challenge it if they have a problem with it. thats the nature of a message board. Are you baffled by what I say or by the fact that I am challenging what is being said? Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.