Leaderboard

it's taken me six decades to assert my life is not going to be ruled by the standards, dictates, or opinions of others... never, ever again...

Supremacy, correctness, not my neighbors keeper...unless, manifest destiny, straighten out the heathen, etc etc. The weapon has always been seen as the persuader, even in religious matters. People see the final 'hell fire' as giving Gods people the right to enforce their will on others. Gods going to do it, so why can't I! Historical, from the OT, an angry God, laying waste the land so that the righteous would be safe and inherit.

I have attended a few weddings on the Sabbath. Pretty much all my niece's got married on Sabbath. None of them are SDA. I looked at it as, this is something that was acceptable to God. Since he instituted this at creation. I just didn't participate in some of the activities.

Yes: claimed that the fascist Nazis were socialist demonstrates ignorance of the meaning of the term... or mischief. "The term "National Socialism" arose out of attempts to create a nationalist redefinition of "socialism", as an alternative to both internationalist Marxist socialism and free market capitalism. The Nazis sought to achieve this by a "people's community" (Volksgemeinschaft) with the aim of uniting all Germans as national comrades, whilst excluding those deemed either to be community aliens or of a foreign race (Fremdvölkische). It rejected the Marxist concept of class struggle, opposed ideas of class equality and international solidarity, and sought to defend private property and businesses." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism

Killing Cecil The Lion: Does God Care How We Treat Animals? » What People Really Mean When They Say “But I Believe The WHOLE Bible” July 27, 2015 by Benjamin L. Corey 159 Comments “But I believe the WHOLE Bible.” It’s a very common phrase I hear in Christian circles. In the course of teaching others to live how Jesus lived, to do what Jesus did, and to follow what Jesus taught, there are no shortage of objections to the idea. Sadly, those who most often object to the radical notion we should actually follow what Jesus did and obey what he taught, are fellow Christians. While we may love to sing, “I have decided to follow Jesus, no turning back, no turning back,” when we get into the nitty-gritty of emulating how Jesus lived and obeying the things that he taught, we stumble upon things that just don’t seem sensible to us. Love your enemies? Die for enemies instead of killing them? Blessed are the meek? Put away your sword? It’s just too much for some Christians. And so, those who are struggling with the commitment to follow Jesus pull the ace from their sleeve: “But I believe the whole Bible.” I’ll admit, it sounds good on the surface, but here’s what it really means: it means, “I don’t particularly care for what Jesus said in this passage, but I do know of one from the Old Testament which would contradict that, so I’ll go with the Old Testament.” I’ve heard it expressed a little more directly at times. “Yes, Jesus did say to love your enemies, but Jesus is the SAME God who commanded we slaughter the Canaanite babies, so certainly he didn’t mean we can’t kill our enemies. I’m going to go ahead and believe the WHOLE Bible, thanks.” It’s an easy game to play because you have plenty of text to choose from. As my friend Brian Zahnd recently told me, “the cleverest way to hide from Jesus is behind a Bible.” Sadly, this is true. If you want to completely run away from the example and teachings of Jesus you can do so without ever leaving the pages of Scripture. Hiding from Jesus and using a Bible to do it is nothing new– it’s been that way since he walked among us. In fact, in John 5:39 we find Jesus rebuking the religious leaders for using the Bible as a shield to avoid this radical new way of living he was proposing. In that exchange he tells them that they had missed the entire purpose of scripture: himself. Jesus warns that one can know the Old Testament inside and out, but still miss the point of it all. He warns that if one uses Scripture to avoid his new way of living, if one uses Scripture to find reasons not to follow his teachings and example, they will have missed out on life itself. Jesus went onto explain it using an analogy of house building– a story many of us learned by song when we were kids. There was a wise man who built his house upon a rock, and a foolish man who built his house on sand. As the story goes, the “rains came down and the floods came up, the rains came down and the floods came up.” Which one lasted? The one on the rock, of course. At the end of the analogy Jesus explains, “Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.” (Matthew 7:24) Notice he didn’t say, “everyone who reads the law of Moses and puts it into practice is like a wise man…” but said, “everyone who hears these words of mine…” When someone stumbles upon something Jesus said and responds with, “But I believe the whole Bible” they are engaging in a 2,000 year-old tradition of using the Bible to hide from Jesus, and become the foolish builder of the story who refused to build their house on the only thing that was worth building on: the example and teaching of Jesus. Later in the New Testament, we even find a warning that the only proof one is of God, is that they emulate the example of Jesus: “Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.” (1 John 2:6) Notice the evidence we belong to God isn’t that we live like Moses or Joshua, or anyone else in the Bible– but Jesus. You see, the point of God’s story is Jesus. It’s always been a story about Jesus. It’s never been about anything else. The moment we miss that truth is the moment we become the ancient religious leaders who used the Old Testament to hide from the new thing God wanted to show them. The entire purpose of the Christian life is to live and be like Jesus– right here, right now. Not anyone else in the Bible, but Jesus. Is the Old Testament useful? Certainly. But whenever there is tension between something Jesus said and something from elsewhere in the Bible, the tiebreaker always goes to Jesus. ALWAYS. That’s because Jesus said the entire point of the Old Testament was to bring us to the place where we’d follow him. Just him. No one and nothing gets to share his place. Not other characters from the Bible or even the Bible itself. If Jesus is Lord, nothing else can be. So, when someone responds to the teachings of Jesus with, “But I believe the whole Bible” it’s usually a sign that one is on the run from Jesus and using the very tool designed to point us to Jesus as a get-away car. But it is our job to keep pointing people back to Jesus– even fellow Christians, as unpopular as that may be. Because following the teachings and life example of Jesus has always been the point of it all. ............................................................................................................................................................................................. If asked why Jesus had to die on the cross, most Christians today would immediately answer, “To pay for my sins.” Jesus certainly paid the price for our sins, but it might surprise some reader to learn that this wasn’t the way Christians would answer this question for the first thousand years of Church history. The main reason Jesus died on the cross, according to this earlier view, was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished, including paying for our sins, was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory. This earlier understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. In my estimation it captures the profound beauty of the New Testament account better than the view that focuses exclusively on what Jesus did for us. The Christus Victor motif is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came into this world to “drive out the ruler of this world” (Jn 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (I Jn 3:8), to “destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14-15) and to ultimately “put all his enemies under his feet” (I Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who holds the world in bondage and to work with his children to “plunder his house” (Lk 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal and kill and destroy” the life God intended for us (Jn 10:10). Jesus came to earth and died on the cross to disarm “the rulers and authorities” and make a “public spectacle of them” by “triumphing over them on the cross” (Col 2:15). Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaims that Jesus in principle conquered all God’s enemies (Ac 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all God’s opponents. (Pslams.110 is quoted or alluded to Mt 22:41-45; 26:64; Mk 12:35-37; 14:62; Lk 20:41-44; 22:69; Ac 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; I Cor 15:22-25; Eph 1:20; Heb 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15,17,21; 8:1; 10:12-13; I Pet 3:22; and Rev. 3:21) According to the great New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.” The Incarnation of the Son of God fulfilled God’s original dream of uniting himself to humanity to acquire a bride and co-ruler. But it’s clear from the Christus Victor motif we’ve just examined that, because of our rebellion, the Incarnation also involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness. Image by Lawrence OP via Flickr. - See more at: http://reknew.org/2015/07/why-did-jesus-die-on-the-cross/#sthash.uxCWclZl.dpuf eKnew / Blog / Miscellaneous / Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross? Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross? 28 Jul 2015 Posted By: Greg Boyd If asked why Jesus had to die on the cross, most Christians today would immediately answer, “To pay for my sins.” Jesus certainly paid the price for our sins, but it might surprise some reader to learn that this wasn’t the way Christians would answer this question for the first thousand years of Church history. The main reason Jesus died on the cross, according to this earlier view, was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished, including paying for our sins, was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory. This earlier understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. In my estimation it captures the profound beauty of the New Testament account better than the view that focuses exclusively on what Jesus did for us. The Christus Victor motif is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came into this world to “drive out the ruler of this world” (Jn 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (I Jn 3:8), to “destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14-15) and to ultimately “put all his enemies under his feet” (I Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who holds the world in bondage and to work with his children to “plunder his house” (Lk 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal and kill and destroy” the life God intended for us (Jn 10:10). Jesus came to earth and died on the cross to disarm “the rulers and authorities” and make a “public spectacle of them” by “triumphing over them on the cross” (Col 2:15). Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaims that Jesus in principle conquered all God’s enemies (Ac 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all God’s opponents. (Pslams.110 is quoted or alluded to Mt 22:41-45; 26:64; Mk 12:35-37; 14:62; Lk 20:41-44; 22:69; Ac 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; I Cor 15:22-25; Eph 1:20; Heb 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15,17,21; 8:1; 10:12-13; I Pet 3:22; and Rev. 3:21) According to the great New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.” The Incarnation of the Son of God fulfilled God’s original dream of uniting himself to humanity to acquire a bride and co-ruler. But it’s clear from the Christus Victor motif we’ve just examined that, because of our rebellion, the Incarnation also involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness. Image by Lawrence OP via Flickr. - See more at: http://reknew.org/2015/07/why-did-jesus-die-on-the-cross/#sthash.uxCWclZl.dpuf Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross? 28 Jul 2015 Posted By: Greg Boyd If asked why Jesus had to die on the cross, most Christians today would immediately answer, “To pay for my sins.” Jesus certainly paid the price for our sins, but it might surprise some reader to learn that this wasn’t the way Christians would answer this question for the first thousand years of Church history. The main reason Jesus died on the cross, according to this earlier view, was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished, including paying for our sins, was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory. This earlier understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. In my estimation it captures the profound beauty of the New Testament account better than the view that focuses exclusively on what Jesus did for us. The Christus Victor motif is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came into this world to “drive out the ruler of this world” (Jn 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (I Jn 3:8), to “destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14-15) and to ultimately “put all his enemies under his feet” (I Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who holds the world in bondage and to work with his children to “plunder his house” (Lk 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal and kill and destroy” the life God intended for us (Jn 10:10). Jesus came to earth and died on the cross to disarm “the rulers and authorities” and make a “public spectacle of them” by “triumphing over them on the cross” (Col 2:15). Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaims that Jesus in principle conquered all God’s enemies (Ac 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all God’s opponents. (Pslams.110 is quoted or alluded to Mt 22:41-45; 26:64; Mk 12:35-37; 14:62; Lk 20:41-44; 22:69; Ac 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; I Cor 15:22-25; Eph 1:20; Heb 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15,17,21; 8:1; 10:12-13; I Pet 3:22; and Rev. 3:21) According to the great New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.” The Incarnation of the Son of God fulfilled God’s original dream of uniting himself to humanity to acquire a bride and co-ruler. But it’s clear from the Christus Victor motif we’ve just examined that, because of our rebellion, the Incarnation also involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness. - See more at: http://reknew.org/2015/07/why-did-jesus-die-on-the-cross/#sthash.o2oKFgpe.dpuf Why Did Jesus Die on the Cross? 28 Jul 2015 Posted By: Greg Boyd If asked why Jesus had to die on the cross, most Christians today would immediately answer, “To pay for my sins.” Jesus certainly paid the price for our sins, but it might surprise some reader to learn that this wasn’t the way Christians would answer this question for the first thousand years of Church history. The main reason Jesus died on the cross, according to this earlier view, was to defeat Satan and set us free from his oppressive rule. Everything else that Jesus accomplished, including paying for our sins, was to be understood as an aspect and consequence of this victory. This earlier understanding of why Jesus had to die is called the Christus Victor (Latin for “Christ is Victorious”) view of the atonement. In my estimation it captures the profound beauty of the New Testament account better than the view that focuses exclusively on what Jesus did for us. The Christus Victor motif is strongly emphasized throughout the New Testament. Scripture declares that Jesus came into this world to “drive out the ruler of this world” (Jn 12:31), to “destroy the works of the devil” (I Jn 3:8), to “destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14-15) and to ultimately “put all his enemies under his feet” (I Cor 15:25). Jesus came to overpower the “strong man” (Satan) who holds the world in bondage and to work with his children to “plunder his house” (Lk 11:21-22). He came to end the reign of the cosmic “thief” who seized the world to “steal and kill and destroy” the life God intended for us (Jn 10:10). Jesus came to earth and died on the cross to disarm “the rulers and authorities” and make a “public spectacle of them” by “triumphing over them on the cross” (Col 2:15). Beyond these explicit statements, there are many other passages that express the Christus Victor motif as well. For example, the first prophecy in the Bible foretells that a descendent of Eve (Jesus) would crush the head of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The first Christian sermon ever preached proclaims that Jesus in principle conquered all God’s enemies (Ac 2:32-36). And the single most frequently quoted Old Testament passage by New Testament authors is Psalm 110:1 which predicts that Christ would conquer all God’s opponents. (Pslams.110 is quoted or alluded to Mt 22:41-45; 26:64; Mk 12:35-37; 14:62; Lk 20:41-44; 22:69; Ac 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; I Cor 15:22-25; Eph 1:20; Heb 1:3; 1:13; 5:6, 10; 6:20; 7:11, 15,17,21; 8:1; 10:12-13; I Pet 3:22; and Rev. 3:21) According to the great New Testament scholar Oscar Cullman, the frequency with which New Testament authors cite this Psalm is the greatest proof that Christ’s “victory over the angel powers stands at the very center of early Christian thought.” The Incarnation of the Son of God fulfilled God’s original dream of uniting himself to humanity to acquire a bride and co-ruler. But it’s clear from the Christus Victor motif we’ve just examined that, because of our rebellion, the Incarnation also involved a rescue mission that included a strategy for vanquishing the powers of darkness. - See more at: http://reknew.org/2015/07/why-did-jesus-die-on-the-cross/#sthash.o2oKFgpe.dpuf

The WO ordination vote was also a NO to continued Colonialism in the church. Colonialism: the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically. The analogy does not extend fully but I'm sure you get my meaning. For decades Adventists in the western nations have dominated and controlled the rest of the world. The tide has turned. The Global South is saying you have to listen to us now.

no one puts themselves through the loop of the seat belt. but they said it was a defective belt so maybe it didn't click to put it on correctly, and they were experimenting. Regardless this guy is funny, and they had lots of fun shooting this clip.

I've seen bigger people have no problem!!

Okay, Ted please tell me what is happening Two times I have went to your link and both times I get the "Slashdot is ... due to .... long running script ...." and computer is being really weird. I am close to using bad, bad words.

The problem I see with that, is, you'd not have enough people to hire!! Most Adventist Hospitals have more non Adventists working there than Adventists. Many are standing outside smoking up a storm at break time!! Oh and lets not forget about the foul language!!

First Resurrection: Righteous Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years. (Revelation 20:6) And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. (Revelation 20:4-5) Second Resurrection: Wicked And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. (20:1-3) And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. (20:7-9)

I'm with you Tom!! Not only that, I think its staged. My grandson does the same thing, he puts his arms through the same way this guy has done. He doesn't have that same belly so its easy to get his arm back through, were it belongs. Still, its pretty funny.

I think in a public hospital which is only trying to make people better physically it is of course appropriate to hire a variety of people. If we are in a facility whether school church or hospital that is Seventh day Adventist we should seek to hire those whose lives are in harmony with our message, message of the soon return of Jesus and of our duty to be ready to meet him without sin. Those who are knowingly and willfully continuing in flagrant open sin without any repentance or seeking to do better, are not those who should be first chosen to work in our facilities. Nor is it doing them any favors to do so. It is approving of their lifestyle, which God does not approve of. It is not preparing them to meet God. It is like telling someone who has cancer, they are fine. And I have had cancer, and the one thing worse to a cancer patient than having cancer and knowing it, is having cancer and not knowing it. We human beings are sinners. Life is about yielding ourselves to God and giving up our sins. Yes there are people who act like they have it all together and look down their noses at various sins. Yes we should avoid doing that. But if we have friends who are doing these things, we should be kind and pray for them, but we should not be so enamored of their friendship that we want to act like their lifestyle does not matter, because this will hurt them.

I think people toss too much flack at Christians, Muslims and Jews. We may have bloody histories, but pagans have their own bloody histories as well. In my opinion we only stand out in the limelight because of the fact that Christians, Muslims and Jews have more members and converts than most other religions. And since that's the case: Our beliefs are held more responsible for a lot of things throughout history The chances of violence occurring and actually being recorded is higher Due to the fact that we are larger groups, we receive more attention inevitably (especially since we dominate 1st world powers) Nothing special, in my opinion. Things probably would be looked at differently if Christians, Muslims and Jews were fewer in numbers and if we were put in situations where we have to actually depend on each other more to survive (hence the necessity for persecution to cleanse the church). On a spiritual level though, I think that the Devil works within the Abraham belief systems the most because we are the closest to the truth and it would suit his purposes to make the ones closer to God appear unappealing and the least like God. We're people with spiritual targets on our bodies for demons to pick with us. And then we're held to higher standards too because our beliefs require a certain kind of composure from us. So because demons know that we ought to be on our best behavior, they have a field day tempting us and high-fiving each other about it.

I shouldn't... But I can't help it...

That is one of the strange ironies, or logical disconnects in this whole matter. These areas are asserting their voting strength to push back against NAD running the Church and telling them what to do. Not learning from that domination by NAD, they turn around and repeat the very same mistake by essentially asserting that they are in charge and and free to do their own thing according to their own ways, but insisting that NAD and the other pro-WO Divisions cannot do likewise and attempting to force their point of view on those Divisions in favor of women in ministry. Backlash against colonialism by creating a new form of it.

Jealousy, envy and covetousness.

Your Pastor Harold is looking thru the world with a foggy lense.The biggest atrocities of our time have been committed by non-religious ideologies. Communism and Nazism shed the most blood in the last 100 years. The communist movement in south east Asia seen horrible outcomes and the Chinese mantra of eat the rich was not just a slogan-it was carried out. Joseph Stalin killed many, over 20 million Ukrainians were systematically starved to death. Hitlers Nazi ideology butchered millions of people. The secular west is no more bashful as it crushes the heads of the unborn and uses the bodies for medical research. Islam does not believe in the God of the Old Testament no matter how hard they try. Yet ideologies attached to Judaism and Christianity do also cause untold grief for people in the middle east. Zionism with its violence and systematic colonization of a people because of race has inflamed an ideology in Islam that has been mostly amateur until ISIS came along. The common denominator is placing a certain group above or below another group with an ideology Ideologies are attached to the Bible, and then the Bible is read in light of the ideology, instead of the other way around. The message of the Bible not to embrace death, but to embrace life is completely ignored.

When one believes that the other fellow is not among God's people, then it is relatively NOT difficult to do injury to the person he believes is of the devil. The teaching of exclusivity prevalent among existing religious groups add fuel to the fire. Just stating events, and not to be understood as degrading John Calvin, why was Calvin in favor of executing Servitus? I think Calvin believed Servitus is not among the elect. But if one believes that people are born with their names written in the Book of lIfe, then it is really difficult to harm the other fellow, since he is a brother, a co-member in the household of God. This is why we need to preach the Gospel that our Lord wanted preached to the world before He comes again. I call this the Pure Gospel.

Those faculty members of UNH are either stupid or have too much time on their hand and do not know what to do! Soon they will come out with some other prohibitive terms such as you may not call some female as "beautiful" or "attractive" as these words are discriminatory. You may not call someone "tall" as this is also discriminatory against the shorties. These guys are being paid by the tax payers of New Hampshire to come up with such a foolish and ridiculous ideas! From a U.S. citizen not a foreigner!

I was invited to an extended family photo shoot last Saturday. The event was scheduled right at the time worship started at my church. I went to church. Schedule conflicts like this happen all the time. Saturday is viewed by the majority none sabbath keepers as the great utility day. They schedule all types of events on the sabbath day that they dare not attend on Sunday. Funerals, more funerals, weddings, family reunions, parades, graduations, you name it. If I attended every special event scheduled on Saturday that I have been invited to I never would go to church. I would not have time to.

Matt 24 "Immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days... He will send forth His angels and they will gather His elect" -- it happens after the tribulation not before or during 2 Thess 2 "regarding our gathering together to Him... that day will NOT happen until after" the falling away AND the man of sin is reveal Rev 19 is AFTER the Rev 16 plagues -- not before. Rev 20 the FIRST resurrection is AFTER the Rev 16 last plagues - not before. ANd the "dead in Christ rise FIRST" 1Thess 4 - at the FIRST resurrection.

When I worked at a hospital in South Miami, FL, (years ago) and the issue of same sex relationships never appeared to be a problem. Just as if a person was married in the 'conventional' manner or widow/ed or single. Sexual relationships just does not enter in the equation. What matters is, are they dependable to show up when scheduled or stay over 15 minutes because a situation came up as the morning shift was coming on.

really that is your knowledge of socialism? Canada is a socialist country, as is Denmark and the rest of the Scandinavians. Several developed countries are.. You might want to try reading a book sometime.

I've never found EGW to contradict Scripture. She has blown away false interpretations and clarified things that were not well understood. But I have also seen folks misinterpret her clear statements or prefer their views to hers.

Very good questions Pam, I agree. Our biggest witness that we can give to others is out behavior. I would say that if asked why we don't do certain things, than we can speak up and say what we believe and leave it at that. Must relatives, friends, etc., will have much more respect for what we believe it we actually walk the talk

So, what would you do if the nonSDA relatives kept asking you to do things that weren't good to do on the Sabbath? And what if they nagged you about your religion being a nuisance to their plans?

Being a poor house guest would not be witnessing. Be a good 'witness' is more about who we are vs what we say.

Two of my friends posted this separately on Facebook tonight and I thought it was food for thought given the present situation. "We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinions, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement. These resolutions may conceal the discord, but they cannot quench it and establish perfect agreement. Nothing can perfect unity in the church but the spirit of Christlike forbearance. Satan can sow discord; Christ alone can harmonize the disagreeing elements. Then let every soul sit down in Christ's school and learn of Christ, who declares Himself to be meek and lowly of heart. Christ says that if we learn of Him, worries will cease and we shall find rest to our souls." (Ellen G. White, Manuscript Release, 11, 266).

Good.

To remain silent when another we know is rapidly heading in the direction of a precipice they will be unable to recover from, speaks more of cowardice than concern. God is Love! Jesus saves!

I don't think Matthew necessarily quoted Jesus' words verbatim.... meaning, there was probably a lot more in between some of those verses. My inclination about the "casting pearls before swine" quote means "be careful and use caution" in how you share the most precious and important things you have, be it money, love, or whatever...

Jimmy Carter has made some changes to his spirituality, it seems. Last night I read an interview with him where he said that he parted ways with the Southern Baptist denomination over its attitude toward women. Because of his advanced age he may be finding himself where Solomon was when he admitted that, "all is vanity." And because he is so old he has earned the right to say whatever he wants Old people do anyway.

Bob, you asked me to clarify a point that I made. O.K. What I am saying is this: You made a statement about infallible Roman Catholic Canon law. in the posts that I have made in response to your statement, I have said that you neither understand Roman Catholic Canons, which are not infallible, nor do you understand the term "Canon Law," which is a modern term and is not infallible. Roman Catholic Canons and Canon Law are quite different and are not the same. However, both can be changed as neither are infallible. In the history of the Roman Catholic Church, both have been changed in some cases. Bob, to stop using the argument as to VFD and 666 does not change our fundamental position as to the place of the Roman Catholic Church in prophecy. It is simply one argument that should not be used. The VFD argument is a dated argument that is 100 years old, this year. It is an argument that is flawed in that it is believed by many to lack historical support. There is reason to reject it as a factual argument. You may disagree with what I have stated. You may believe that the VFD position is historically accurate. Fine. Believe it. But, find better arguments upon which to base your position on the Roman Catholic Church. I am reminded of a time when the United States landed a human on the Moon. I, along with many others watched this take place on television. As I was a congregational pastor at that time, I visited one of my members the next day.. He promptly informed me that the televised video was a fraud and he could prove it. I asked him how he could prove it. He informed me as to the reasons that he was satisfied that it was a fraud. NOTE: For those who might be interested as to how he demonstrated it to be a fraud: He correctly pointed out that at one point in the televised program the moon was presented as a round globe in the sky as it was approached by the rocket. He then correctly pointed out that If I were to go outside that night, I would see that the moon was not a round globe. Rather it was crescent shaped. An obvious fraud, he said.

The 666 belief is problematic. To "get rid of it" does not get rid of any other belief about the Pope, Rome and last day events. We should move on to other issues. Folks, it is problematic to base our position on one, article that is 100 years old. It is less than honest to do so knowing that the author of that article admitted that it was based upon a factual error.

Here's another fun interpretation of 666: Take the word C-O-M-P-U-T-E-R ..... Assign number values in increments of 6 to the alphabet .... (A=6, B=12, C=18, etc.)..... C-O-M-P-U-T-E-R = 666 !!! And then, if you recall, back in 1982 TIME Magazine awarded its "Man of the Year" Award to.... the COMPUTER! Cue the Twilight Zone theme music....

​I have to read Ellen White in light of the Bible, just like any other person. Where she comes up short, then the bible is the authority. If this is not so, then we have propped up another Pope.

and then there are some here who are sheep in wolves' clothing... I kinda have an affinity for them... :)

Quote: I appreciate your concern here; but I also have a concern. There are some of us here (me for one) that consider ourselves practicing Adventists; but others consider us wolves in sheep's clothing. It's mostly because I question the infallability of EGW and certain SDA interpretations of prophecy. Yet, as I read them, I conform to all 28 pillars of faith. What constitutes a "practicing Adventist" - church attendance, sinlessness, doctrinal purity, all of the above? I'm a little sensitive to this; cuz a member of this forum called me out in public as a wolf in sheep's clothing a while back. It was a time of spiritual crisis for me and I needed professional help, which I recognized and so I got it. But, one aspect remained: What was I going to do about my relationship to the SDA Church That answer came to me when I determined that I would not allow others to define what it meant for me to be Seventh-day Adventist. Yes, the Church must have standards and the Church has just exercised it right to have standards, this week. But, beyond that, the Church is not a group of people who agree on every aspect of doctrine. It is not a group of people who have exactly the same life style. It does not mean that every person could live happily with every other person, in the same home. Each person will have to determine the boundaries that define the word "church" make their decision accordingly. No one can make that decision for another. I came out of my time of spiritual crisis with a personal decision and I remain a part of the Church, sometimes in spite of a few people here who would like to exclude me.

I think this is a personal decision. In the family I grew up in, my dad and brothers all hunted, so there were always rifles in the closets--not the same closets that had our clothes in them though, my dad also had handguns--we were taught at an early age not to touch. Now in my dh's family, rifles were normal at his grandparents house but not so much in his own home. When my dh was about 20, he had a little brother around 11, the 11 year old and a buddy, were out playing and they found a gun, neither knew how to handle one and dh's little brother got shot in the neck, he bled to death before the ambulance got there. Now at this time my dh was a prison guard and had to train regularly with both handguns and rifles. After we were married and he was no longer a guard he sold his guns when I got pregnant. He couldn't bare the thought that one of his kids might end up like his little brother. Does this mean that we don't have weapons in the house? Oh no, we have swords and blades everywhere--the kids were taught at an early age not to touch. They also are being taught how to handle them as they get older. So this was a long winded response to "it's a personal decision".