Leaderboard

A couple questions: 1) I've always wondered about the corporate accountability to the member conference churches... how does that work? There doesn't seem to be a lot of feedback circulating back as to what goes where, what changed, and what's expected or required (apart from conference fundraising goals and things like mission spotlight). Neither there seems to be precise knowledge of the local needs at the top. 2) Likewise, it's strange to me that SDA pastoral assignment is limited in time. Where there any considerations removing such procedures of re-assigning? One huge issue is different emphasis and mentality from pastor to pastor, and when the new leadership comes in, they tend to inadvertently dismantle previous focus to emphasize their own passion rather than congregational needs (since they don't really know the congregation enough to understand the needs yet). In case of our local church, we've had a circulation of one pastor that built up the church internally via getting people and members engaged in various activities that they are gifted in. His successor then came in with passion for evangelism, and strict idea that if it's not leading to some sort of evangelism goal... it's not important. So, the church fell apart from the inside, since it became more about door-to-door leaflet dropping and training for Prophesy seminars all year, instead of the activities that previously involved members and brought interest from the community. Now, yet another successor now comes in to fix the mess caused by the "everything evangelism" mentality, and he has to share the churches and here only every other week. I think that given our membership size, we can support our own pastor and some internally... yet it seems like the conference decides on the needs, and conference is never here or doesn't seem to know or care about individuals here. Neither do members know who the people at the top are, because they don't seem to travel, ask questions, talk about combined goals...etc. So, that process seems to be rather detached. I guess I understand the overarching justification for things being the way that they are.... but what happens when it doesn't work out so well? I'm not here to debate the validity of hierarchy. I just wonder if there are exceptions you aware of where more or less autonomous decisions for these issues are made at the level of churches themselves, and not the perceived view of conference level management, which seems to be rather detached.

Once again Shawn Boonstra nailed it. Well done Shawn Many hail social media as the next great frontier for outreach, and perhaps they're right. Twitter and Facebook, after all, provide the ability to touch peoples' lives immediately, constantly and personally, from anywhere on the planet. Can you witness on Facebook? Yes, you can ... but there are some important keys to remember. 1. It's a social network. People use the network as part of (or sometimes, in lieu of) their social lives. Advertisers have learned, the hard way, that people don't use Facebook for shopping. They're mostly looking for real contact with real people, and aren't likely to pay much attention to those who are forever posting announcements or ads, even if they are for church events. 2. Don't abuse tagging. Tagging is used to let someone (or their friends) know when he or she appears in a photo. Christians are sometimes tempted to take things a little further, unfortunately: they'll make a religious statement with a picture - say a graphic that promotes their favorite theological hobby horse - and then tag people in that picture in an effort to get them to look at it. Or, worse yet, fearing that their own friend list is too short for the picture to garner much attention, they'll tag people with longer friend lists in order to broaden their exposure. It's the modern day digital equivalent of stuffing religious tracts into the pockets of clothing in a store - a form of theft, because it takes something that belongs to someone else (be it shelf space or personal reputation) to promote your own views. Don't assume people will be excited by the same things you are. If you tag them, and they don't see it for weeks, it'll only create resentment, and instead of serving as a witness, it'll get you unfriended. 3. Don't hijack threads. When you insert a thought into a discussion that is unrelated to the topic at hand, you're hijacking a thread. It's considered rude, and looks especially distasteful when you post links to websites that promote your political or religious views. The same holds true for peoples' walls: someone else's wall is not free advertising space for you. It's his or her wall, and the place for you to advertise is on your wall. Using someone else's is the digital equivalent of telemarketing. Annoying, right? 4. Don't preach. I will never forget the day I posted that I had just discovered, to my delight, that Oreos are vegan. In the space of about twenty minutes, I had received more than eighty replies warning me of the dangers of sugar. I had eaten a single Oreo. One. The previous day, I had posted that we had baptized hundreds of people in a recent evangelistic effort - and that garnered eleven responses. Fortunately, I know the Adventist community and its obsession with checking peoples' plates, so it didn't strike me quite as negatively as if I had been an outsider, but it still resulted in a few people getting booted off my friend list. Yes, we're all about health - but pouncing on someone's statements and/or activities, especially in a public forum, is not likely to score you points. A casual statement that my wife had enjoyed something Lucille Ball had said scored me a couple of mini sermons about the entertainment industry, too. It's not witnessing, it's uninvited meddling. And invited is a key concept in evangelism. Before you post, picture a street corner preacher shouting people down as they pass by: "you're on your way to hell!!!" Then remember that, believe it or not, it's actually easier to come across that way online. Don't forget: it's a social network, and to succeed, you have to avoid being anti-social. Go ahead and treat your own Facebook account like a pulpit (let me know how it turns out), but never, ever use someone else's. 5. Don't add people to groups without asking. This is an offense related to thread hijacking and intrepid tagging. Facebook has now made it possible to add people to groups without first asking them, which means that someone could make a group that called "Charlie Manson is a True Prophet," and add you to it without your permission. You might not discover your participation for weeks, or months. What's that? Your group isn't offensive? You need to extend the courtesy of letting your invitees make that decision. Don't forget: just because Facebook lets you do something, it doesn't mean you should. 6. Protect a person's right to privacy. There is a generation that now assumes that everything is for public consumption. They record every event and put it up in cyberspace for all time. They hang their private lives out in front of the world every day, scarcely remembering that once it's on the web, you will never likely be able to retract it. Before commenting on something, ask yourself if it might not be better to send the message privately. If Sarah, a very close friend who confides in you frequently, posts, "having a tough day," the place to ask, "is that because you're still fighting with your mother-in-law?" is her private message box, not her wall. I know: in that instance, it seems obvious, but we ought to ask every single time we reply to a post whether our comments ought to be public. Most people instinctively known how to behave online, but alas, there is an alarming percentage of our church membership that doesn't have netiquette - so much so that I've taken to keeping my non-Adventist friends in a separate account to be sure that the "witness" they experience is positive. Perhaps it's time for churches to include netiquette in soul-winning workshops.

That ticket sounds good to me. It would ensure the election of a Democrat, regardless of who ran as a Democrat.

http://www.faithdefenders.com/church-life/WomenEldersintheEarlyChurch.html

What would be your opinion on a Republican ticket of Sara Palin Pres.; Ben Carson, VP. ???? Nuff Sed

I think it's interesting that most perspectives seem not to have identified religious reasons as important - the reasons relate more to past experiences or attitudes to alcohol itself. There seems to be a lot of assumption that to drink at all means to drink to excess... opposition to abuse of alcohol becomes opposition to use of it. I can definitely respect those who reject it strongly based on past bad experiences, either of drinking to excess themselves or of living with the consequences of others' alcoholism. Not sure whether you're interested to compare and contrast with the experiences and attitudes of someone who does choose to moderately use alcohol? If not, I think the thread has been a very interesting and valuable one, and am happy to leave it where it is.

American turned its back on God a long time ago: Legalized abortions= 80,000 v Native American Genocide = (let's be conservative) 10 million Bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed 135,000 men, women and children in a matter of seconds. CIA inspired coup's, Support of despotic regimes all over the world. When God was in schools and public places many Americans could not vote or enjoy simple human dignities. Reading the Bible in school did not bring the nation closer to God it just gave a veneer of religiosity. Sin isn't just about sex it is about injustice, mistreating the poor, lying (saying its the land of the free when people are not free), using God's name in vain, (saying God bless America as you drop bombs on innocents to further your own economic interests). Only now has American gone away from God? You're kidding right. This goes for all the other countries in the world too. Not one has clean hands.

i cannot say what is specific to any given individual in any sda church individually or corporately. the gift of the Spirit of prophecy within the SDA Church makes a difference in an individual basis and each person may say what they means to them. before Jesus came the first time the incarnate Savior, a prophet was sent to prepare the way. today before Jesus comes the second time a Prophet has been sent to prepare the way. we in this time of earths history before the return of Christ, we are facing a time and events that have never occurred before, and messages have been provided to prepare, guide, and protect God's people individually and cooperatively. personally for me, these volumes have taught me the vulnerability i have in my humanity to the power of selfishness, and the measure of deeper humility i need to walk in to keep my connection to Christ. I do not believe i could have comprehended this without the gift of the messages given in the Spirit of prophecy writings. this is one of many things i did not find in my experiences in other Christian denominations.

I would say that our Pastor is very well 'balanced' in his sermons. No fuzzies, no fear, just everyday practical application of the Bible.

Sis Rachel; You said: Quote Samie: Our Lord Himself said "All". Here: NIV John 5:28-29 28 "Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when All who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out- [end quote Samie] Rachel responds: IN CONTEXT, Jesus was speaking to Jews (Israelites) in John 5:28-29. Once again - He is not speaking to humanity in general. He is speaking to a specific group - Israelites (That is those who are in covenant, including all "grafted-in" Gentile believers.) All Israelites will come forth from their graves at the SC. All Israelites will be judged on THAT DAY, because the SC is Yom Kippur - Judgment Day. Those who have persisted in rebellion, without repentence, will be "cut off". They will rise to "everlasting condemnation". "The nations" were NOT JUDGED on Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement). They were "covered" by the morning/evening continual burnt offering. Their sins were those of ignorance, not those of rebellion. The "continual" was continued on Yom Kippur. It did NOT STOP because it was Yom Kippur. (THAT should tell us something.) ONLY ISRAELITES, and "mixed multitude" were judged on Yom Kippur. "The nations" consist of the uninformed - those who have never heard the "call" or the "message". Included in those who have "HEARD" would be foreigners such as Pharoah, Nineveh, etc., and all Gentiles who HEARD. These will be treated like those of the "mixed multitude" who HEARD the LORD from Mt. Sinai. Some accepted the LORD and were/are grafted in to Israel. Others rejected the LORD, and will be judged and destroyed at the SC. Only three men who left Egypt, survived the wilderness wandering: Caleb - who was a descendant of Esau and member of the mixed multitude. He became an Israelite - grafted in - to the tribe of Judah. (He represents Gentiles "grafted-in".) Joshua - who was of the tribe of Ephraim - the largest tribe of Israel. Eleazar - who became high priest after the death of Aaron. (He represents Jesus, who became our high priest at the "death" of the Aaronic priesthood.) Respectfully, Rachel Cory Prophecy Viewpoint

Well, then have we got a forum for you... http://clubadventist.com/forums/index.php?/forum/186-family-heritage/ It is brand shiny new, and moderated by Rudywoof. Rudywoof is always coming up with fascinating things about her family history and has discovered that she is even related to other forum members. I think it started off with a DNA sample, but she can explain all that. ENJOY this. http://clubadventist.com/forums/index.php?/forum/186-family-heritage/

Cawston, BC (crow)

The Spirit of Jesus, the expression of His character, unique ion the SDA Church, taught in writings of EG White's gift. We are gifted by these works, by being educated to what the Christian life entails.

Butte, Montana (mountain type)

it makes me wonder if the subjugation of women was the result of sin, and this is Adam's blaming just going on and on reechoed. Yes no one minds women serving in position of leadership in all kinds of fields today. This was not so over a hundred years ago. The struggle for women who wanted to vote, or to become scientists, and doctors, and lawyers is a part of our history. Nurses and teacher's were some of the accepted positions for women. And this was not because that was the only gifts and talents they had. The positive changes in society as in outlawing slavery, and outlawing child labor, and permitting women leadership positions are not against the will or law of God. Why do we make ado over women Spiritual laborers in positions of leadership in the church? It does puzzle me.

Great post, Pam. And I think you speak as a subject matter expert (SME in business-speak). It's a pagan holy day if you are a pagan who thinks it's a holy day; it's a reason for family, church, and neighborhood to have a get-together of you don't believe that. Wouldn't that make it a matter of faith? One should note that the following day - All Saint's Day - is or was a high holy day for Catholics for centuries. It was like Sunday - you HAD to go to Mass unless you were sick or dead. I don't know which came first - the pagan practice of Halloween or the Catholic practice of All Saints Day.

another way (but not the only way) to look at criticism is whether it was asked for, either explicitly (such as asking for a critique of a book or an outfit), or implicitly (such as posting a view or remark on a forum)... unasked-for criticism of a person or idea, unless it relates specifically to oneself, is often just a rude remark that adds nothing to understanding...

Why anyone would want a Democrat-run government is beyond me. They are for big spending, big government programs, central planning, and the resulting loss of personal freedoms that are guaranteed to come from these things. I think you need read some of Friedrich Hayek's books on the subject of economics and the problems that arise from central planning. He presents a compelling case.

Dying well must be in the eyes of the remaining family/friends. If there is friction and dissention in the air at the end of a person's life it is not dying well. So it behoves us to have our relationships in order so there will be no regrets when we are gone.

No, I don't drink. There's two reasons as to why. (1) I am an addict. (2) Alcohol consumption does not lead one closer to Jesus. It loosens inhibitions which has the effect of making one more likely to engage in behavior that leads away from God.

hch, For some reason, the system won't let me "like" your most recent post. I agree with you that there is more - much more - to Daniel 2 and 7 than meets the "official" eye of the church. There are applications of prophecy, which IMO is the current SDA view; and there is an ultimate fulfillment, which in the case of denieal 2 and 7, is yet in the future.

I'm not sure Palin is a good choice. She has very high negatives. That doesn't mean I don't like her spirit or how plain spoken she is. If she was to be part of a conservative ticket she would be much better as a VP candidate. I really like Carson. He's thoughtful, highly intelligent, and used to having authority. Not at the level of the presidency, but I don't know of a surgeon who doesn't expect someone to jump when they're told to. I'm saying that in the context of their job, not their personal lives. He's also a natural leader and is not intimidated by anything or anybody from what I've seen of him. He means what he says, and says what he means. His honesty is very refreshing. I think a ticket of he and Allen West would be very good. I'd vote for that ticket in a heartbeat as I see both them as high character people.

the Holy Spirit cannot be exorcised out of a believer by invoking Satan's powers. Certainly, the "church of Satan" is around... it's been around for years. We do not live in a theocracy now. It is not up to Christianity to "remove" people or systems that they see as corrupt, no matter how well-meaning that might be, as long as no laws of the land are being broken. that's my 2¢

I think It would be very entertaining and a great opportunity for the Dems. I think Carson would run mile tho'.

I can't believe you represent the political leanings of the Apopka (Florida) church people. Or is this just a pipe dream of yours? [sixty-five years ago I lived there myself. Didn't attend the Forest Lake Church; went to the "Sanitarium Church" on the campus of the Florida San (now the Florida Hospital). I was one of the church organists, in fact.] Of course, the Republican Party has changed a lot since then.

God "chose" EVERY human being. EVERY human being was "predestined" to salvation. But NOT every human being would chose Him in return. We CAN say "no" to HIM, because HE will NOT force! "Predestination" does NOT MEAN "destiny without choice".

I would like to think that within the denomination the common denominator would be our love, for Jesus, for man and for God's word. :)