Leaderboard

fc and laura, I am enjoying your conversation from the sidelines. You are both approaching this as a debatable issue rather than turning it into an argument. I feel strongly both ways - I don't know what the "right" answer is. My personal feeling is that anyone who comes to the church should be accepted "as is". Once they are adopted into the family of God (not correlated with being accepted by a church congregation), God begins teaching them the Family values and the Family business. He has different priorities for different people. As we children learn the Family values and business (some of us kids learn slower than others), God will show us the next issue in your life He needs to deal with. If a person is a promiscuous obese gay substance abuser with suicidal tendencies, and likes to beat people up, which issue does God deal with first? It's up to Him. The church's duty is to offer support, encouragement, and community to anyone seeking God, regardless of their current state. The only reason for excluding them is if their "issues" clearly cross the line and threaten the safety and security of the church. That line is probably different for every church.

One Sabbath when our son was about 4 yo, my wife caught him standing up on the pew and looking back making all kinds of faces at the audience. She calmly took him to the restroom and spanked him. He never did it again. Pain or the threat of it can be a useful tool when used properly.

Should children be spanked (hit, whooped, skinned alive, given a good thrashing, paddled, get whats-coming, and all the like-euphemisms that get laughs during the children's story at church when the adult storyteller is trying to drive home the cost of disobedience)? I grew up in the 50s in a home where kids were spanked (not a religious home, by the way). Like the boy who was bullwhipped in a comment above, I didn't realize that there were alternatives and was shocked and inflamed with indignation when I read the book by Swiss psychiatrist, Alice Miller, called "For Their Own Good: Hidden Cruelty in Child-Rearing and the Roots of Violence" in the early 80s. I had never been subjected to a bullwhip or anything of that extreme, but spanked with my father's hand. Nonetheless, the reasons for the spankings were usually our inability to settle down to sleep when our tired parents were trying to have a private conversation after my workaholic Dad (whom I got to know and love in the last 10 years of his life) arrived home, after dark, from the office. I was likely only spanked three or four times as a child, but it seems, in my mind's eye, to have been a nightly occurrence. Some kids have a strong sense of justice-- they just have-- and I, for the life of me, could not understand why I was singled out for correction (as the oldest, and the 'girl') and why it had to be an undignified wallop on the backside when we were only talking (okay, maybe giggling as well). And lest you think I'm just a whining "First-World-Problemizing" wimp, you may find it interesting that my Dad apologized three or four times when he was in his 60s and 70s for spanking us, realizing that it really would have made more sense for him to have set aside some five or ten minutes every day-- as little as that-- to get to know us. And because we didn't spank our kids and had the luxury of not working 15-hour days away from home, and had the privilege of learning about discipline that "really works" to promote a good relationship of respect and support, we can attest to much of what has already been spoken to above and in the Spectrum article: i.e., that might does not equal right, that children grow up to be parented as they were parented, that a complex multiplicity of social problems today go into the mix that produces the behaviours of kids and young adults, and a lack of corporal punishment can not be singled out as THE reason for the "selfish" behaviours we see today. I have had many a debate with my peers (majorly with persons within my own Christian communion) about this topic and no longer have the energy or interest to sit up until midnight doing the blood pressure hokey pokey. In my work life I counseled women and children who had experienced profound abuse (physical, emotional, spiritual), worked as a counselor in a sexual assault center and in a women's shelter, worked in a social services day care center as the social worker in charge of all diapering, facilitated pre-parenting programs (set up for parents who had no idea how to parent because they themselves had been badly and repeatedly abused / neglected all along their lifespan-- women and men), facilitated parenting programs, and co-ordinated parenting programming for the city of Saskatoon. And for eleven years we were also a foster family to teens who had gone off the rails and fallen through the cracks. We were far from perfect parents / foster parents (you could ask some of the "kids"-- most now in their late 30s and 40s on my Facebook page), but I personally experienced several situations where the loving, gentle, tender hand of the Master trumped the violent, coercive, soul-hammering, shaming "traditional discipline". My loving partner of 44+ years helped me to heal all the heartache and confusion of an emotionally-abused childhood, and I know now that my very kind and supportive, non-violent grandparents were boons to my safety and confidence. Jesus worked hard with his disciples to teach them what they would have to know to be strong spiritual leaders when He was gone. Unlike the cruel military leaders, nasties in all the high places, who beat their subjects into submission to maintain a place of fearful respect, Jesus continually modeled acceptance, patience, compassion, and forgiveness for those who stumbled as they followed him. Is there even one line in the Bible that suggests/implies/infers that Jesus pushed, hit, whipped, pilloried, or in any way physically assaulted anyone? When he said "turn the other cheek," did he mean only in situations where you, an adult, were being humiliated or assaulted by someone attacking you, or could he also have meant to take a look at how one treats precious young ones? There are lots of ways to develop a mutually-respectful, mutually-beneficent relationship with one's offspring. Study with the Master

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f60mjxYmBo#t=427

HCH, let me give you a little background about me. I volunteered to serve in the U. S. Army under provisions of the statute that allowed me to serve in the Army with the same rights as did you when you were drafted (if that is how you served). Included in this was the right to be a Conscientious Objector. That is how I served. There was no agreement between the military and the SDA denomination. That was simply the law as passed by Congress. Years later I reentered the U.S. Army as a Chaplain and a Commissioned Officer and served in that capacity for some time in the Reserves and then for 18 years on active duty. During that entire period of time my official records stated that I was a Conscientious Objector. Again, that was not due to any agreement between the military and the SDA Church. That was due to the Geneva Convention Protocols. you may correctly tell me that the U.S. Government has not signed those Protocols. However, during the entire period of time that those Protocols have been in existence, the U.S. Government has stated that it would abide by those Protocols that apply to military chaplains and their conscientious objector status. This means that I have never been trained in the personal use of weapons of personal defense. I have never been sent to the firing range to fire a weapon and I have never had a weapon assigned to me. Yes, I have experienced crawling under live machine gun fire at a firing range. Yes, I am trained in the use of biological and chemical agents in a manner that allows me to protect myself from them. Yes, I am trained in the theory of the employment of nuclear weapons and understand well what I need to know in order to provide ministry on a nuclear battlefield. But, I never had any training to prepare me to push the button that sent a nuclear weapon down range. With a few exceptions, such as for chaplains, the military is not the place for a conservative SDA with so-called traditional beliefs.

The problem with Obama is, and always has been, is that he puts his political power, ideology, and race ahead of what is good for the country. Obama has deliberated divided people in his push for his political agenda. Carson, as his actions show, is doing what is right for the nation before his own political stance. Obama has often sacrificed truth and what is right on the altar of his political agenda. Carson is doing exactly the opposite. Obama's leadership problems have not been because of inexperience but because of character issues. Carson doesn't have those faults. He says and does what needs to be said and done, and then lets the chips fall where they may. In other words, Carson is avoiding the issues that have doomed Obama's presidency to one of failure.

50th Birthday: Well, that would be November 26, 1877. At that time she was living in Northern California. So, she and her husband probably took a carriage ride. I have never heard of James White being much of a cook. I have not heard of EGW eating much in a restaurant. So, I would suppose that she fixed her own birthday dinner. That dinner might be mush, eggs and cold gems, I suppose. If I were to really stretch my imagination, I would say that she fixed her own birthday dinner while holding a baby child in one arm on her hip. Well, enough of mere speculation, tell us what you discovered.

The physical punishment I received mostly just made me angry, after the fear and pain subsided. That your wife took your son to the restroom was a positve compared to my father who seemed to capitalize on the humiliation of public discipline. And again the embarrassment and shame only made me resentful and angry. I vowed I would not repeat that with my own children.

Have you considered all of the things considered to be an abomination in Scripture? if we treated everything that is described as an abomination the same as we do homosexuality, our churches would be empty and silent. It is the Scriptural equivalent to the teenage expression, " Ooooh gross! That's disgusting!" It has no more specific meaning to distinguish one sin from another than if we used the word "bad". Lying lips are an abomination. Pride and arrogance is an abomination. Mischief making is an abomination. Cheating in business is an abomination. Cats and dogs are an abomination. A crooked smile is an abomination. Physical flaws in a sacrifice are an abomination. Associating and eating with Gentiles is an abomination. And that is the short list.

Can you be a practicing adulterer/murderer/embezzler/etc and be a real follower of Christ?

Unfortunately according to Jews, there is no such thing as half Jewish. You're either a full Jew or not a Jew. Personally I don't buy that argument! If you have Jewish blood running in you, you are Jewish, period.

"Prophecy has been fulfilling, line upon line. The more firmly we stand under the banner of the third angel's message, the more clearly shall we understand the prophecy of Daniel; for the Revelation is the supplement of Daniel. The more fully we accept the light presented by the Holy Spirit through the consecrated servants of God, the deeper and surer, even as the eternal throne, will appear the truths of ancient prophecy; we shall be assured that men of God spake as they were moved upon by the Holy Ghost. Men must themselves be under the influence of the Holy Spirit in order to understand the Spirit's utterances through the prophets. These messages were given, not for those that uttered the prophecies, but for us who are living amid the scenes of their fulfillment." {2SM 114.2} "The dream of the great image, opening before Nebuchadnezzar events reaching to the close of time, had been given that he might understand the part he was to act in the world's history, and the relation that his kingdom should sustain to the kingdom of heaven. In the interpretation of the dream, he had been plainly instructed regarding the establishment of God's everlasting kingdom. "In the days of these kings," Daniel had declared, "shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. . . . The dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure." Daniel 2:44, 45." {PK 503.1} Daniel 7:17 "These great beasts, which are four, [are] four kings, [which] shall arise out of the earth." 12:4 "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, [even] to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." 12:9 "And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words [are] closed up and sealed till the time of the end." Revelation 6:1-8 6:1 "And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see. 6:2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer. 6:3 And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see. 6:4 And there went out another horse [that was] red: and [power] was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword. 6:5 And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand. 6:6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and [see] thou hurt not the oil and the wine. 6:7 And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see. 6:8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth." "After these seven thunders uttered their voices, the injunction comes to John as to Daniel in regard to the little book: "Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered" (Revelation 10:4). These relate to future events which will be disclosed in their order. Daniel shall stand in his lot at the end of the days. John sees the little book unsealed. Then Daniel's prophecies have their proper place in the first, second, and third angels' messages to be given to the world. The unsealing of the little book was the message in relation to time." {1MR 99.2} [iMHO the little book in Revelation 10 is Daniel chapter 11.] "The books of Daniel and the Revelation are one. One is a prophecy, the other a revelation; one a book sealed, the other a book opened. John heard the mysteries which the thunders uttered, but he was commanded not to write them. The special light given to John which was expressed in the seven thunders was a delineation of events which would transpire under the first and second angels' messages. It was not best for the people to know these things, for their faith must necessarily be tested. In the order of God, most wonderful and advanced truths would be proclaimed. The first and second angels' messages were to be proclaimed, but no further light was to be revealed before these messages had done their specific work. This is represented by the angel standing with one foot on the sea, proclaiming with a most solemn oath that time should be no longer." {1MR 99.3} [Daniel 11 begins with the 3 kings in Persia who begin the 2300-year prophecy (457 BC) and it ends in 1844 when Christ stands for His people to commence the Investigative Judgment.] “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book” (Daniel 12:1). “Jesus rose up, and shut the door, and entered the Holy of Holies, at the 7th month 1844; but Michael’s standing up (Daniel 12:1) to deliver His people, is in the future.” (WLF 12.4) “We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.” (13MR 394.1) [After Michael stood in 1844 much of the history in Daniel 11 has repeated, but not the time that ended in 1844]

In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error....Lev 20 I'm aware of men who have found the strength to escape after years of behavior such as this, purely by placing their lives in trust to Jesus. Considering the fact that nothing that shall defile will enter the Kingdom, the better part of wisdom would seem to seek that solution, whatever the reason given for practicing the lifestyle. …15And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. 16"He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned....Mark 16 God is Love! Jesus saves!

Great message. My respect for Charles just doubled.

fccool Alcoholism is something for which the tendency may be both inherited and cultivated. In that way they are similar. It begins inwardly and both are mental emotional and spiritual rather than solely physical. In this way they are also similar. Blindness is in most cases a physical condition first and does not begin with the emotions or inner man. Jesus said it is the things that proceed from inside the man that defile him. And both practicing alcoholism and homosexuality are behaviors that are incompatible with the standards of the early Christian church as well as the church today. I concur with these standards. Even though different methods have been used to explain away Biblical texts on Christianity and homosexual behavior, one can give examples of Gentile believers who will be in the kingdom, or of women who were spiritual leaders, but there are no records of those openly living a homosexual lifestyle whose actions were condoned by any true prophet or by the church as a body- not one in the whole Bible and not one in the Spirit of Prophecy, not ever present or past. For those not acquainted for the standards supported by the Seventh day Adventist Church, they may be found here http://books.google.com/books?id=uJYR7LG5JFYC&pg=PA195&lpg=PA195&dq=adventist+standards+adultery+alcohol&source=bl&ots=cE506TAmop&sig=ZhDgR3YPqHkM1tKPRpDJzL7WRLk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PVtdVPnwJoeYNqrJgJAK&ved=0CEMQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=adventist%20standards%20adultery%20alcohol&f=false Paul said regarding homosexuality along with many other sins, and such were some of you , but you are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. It says elsewhere that the name of Jesus will cleanse us from all sin. Homosexual behavior is a sin. Jesus can cleanse us from it. The blood of Jesus Christ can cleanse us from all sin- all but the sin we will not give up or acknowledge as sin, because if we do not acknowledge it as sin and go for cleansing, we cannot be cleansed.

The fundamental issue here is that which is related to the nature of the Church: Is the Church a haven for people who have reached a specified level of sanctification and if that is true, what is that level? Or, is the Church a hospital for the sinners who are broken and bruised? NOTE: While one can take a position at either extreme end, there are also positions in-between the extreme ends. It should also be noted that acceptance of a person into membership does not imply acceptance of issues that they may be facing in their life.

And what business is it of the Review to "clarify" the statements made by the pope? If the pope thinks he has been misquoted then its his responsibility to make sure he is correctly understood. So far I have heard nothing along that line from him. That tells me he doesn't have a problem with how his words have been reported.

There really isn't any comparison between the two men. The man that Dr Carson so far has shown himself to be and the man Obama has proven himself to be

Discipline, yes, beating them with a stick, no. Sadly the context of the verse has been read out of the verse over the centuries. The verse was written to an agrarian society familiar with the life of shepherds and the rod they carried to keep their sheep together, to keep them in line and to even rescue them from harm. The rod was used to guide the sheep to extend the reach of the hand of the shepherd. It wasn't used to beat them or punish them for going astray. But the shepherd could use it as a weapon against threats to his sheep by wild animals.

It indicates that disciplined discipline is a good way to raise your children.

It is TRUE! The Bible gives us everything we need to know. But from my experience; the 'red books' (when rightly understood) are a blessing that will endure till Christ comes in glory.

1st question. Yes that's right. 2nd question. Since I find it necessary to shut the TV off manually at the receiver of the TV as a result of a defective off TV button on the remote, and also follow that procedure most evenings, more often using the remote for the satellite receiver but sometimes the manual on/off button on the satellite receiver which has a light right on the button that indicates off/on, I've eliminated the possibility of inadvertent standby as a normal oversight. Also when I turn it on the next day, it has changed from an active program of the night before at shut off time, to a static motionless design channel. It is my understanding that any electronic communicable piece of equipment, with present means of compressing information into an unimaginable small space, knowing man's propensity towards believing control of others is a means to solve our problems, that equipment may be developed with good in mind but someone will eventually, nowadays sooner than later, find out how to use it for evil, if for nothing else than personal gain although in this present age, just to satisfy the lust of the flesh. How else can you explain a serial killer, or even the dropping of a bomb for supposed good reasons, that will extinguish the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, irregardless of the innocence or guilt of the majority who perish. But then I digress. It's almost time for the Lord to come. God is love! Jesus saves!

And that will be the most merciful thing to do. Mercy does not force repentance. I think we err when we bind forgiveness and repentance. God forgives. We are to repent. God never fails to forgive, for He has already forgiven before we even know it or respond. We may refuse to turn around and accept it.

Just out of interest, how does the Bible end in the book of Revelation? - Rev 22:19 "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book". It is a gross assumption to suggest that I have to realize that God has "Given in to us" and that there is some type of implication that He has "Given In" and changed the words of the New Testament. Like it or lump it the New Testament clearly states that Sodomy is a sin and a sin along with several others that exludes people from the kingdom. Nothing can ever change the words of Scripture irrespective of how it becomes that they are seen as no longer being politically correct. It is exactly the way that the anti Christ attacks the church by attacking its beliefs and having doctrines changed accordingly. By all means be accepting of all people, just do not try and suggest that God has somehow changed his mind, and no longer means what He states in Scripture on any given subject. Your speaker above seems to have gone to a great deal of effort to create a straw man arguement that side steps the given issue of what Scripture actually says..

Thank you for that recommendation, Johann! It is the second recommendation I have seen in the last few days. I grabbed one from our shelf. :)