Leaderboard

For those interested in the development of SDA understandings of doctrine, the following article, even if dated, will be of value: http://conversation.spectrummagazine.org/t/beyond-fundamentalism-a-short-history-of-adventist-old-testament-scholarship/13340

Why is the smallest thing to you - like accepting our salvation and repenting of evil we have done - such a "work"? Yet you claim we must overcome evil with good. I don't even know what that means. Does that mean striving for sinlessness? To me, that's a HUGE work! Is it simply "accepting Christ"; and waiting in laborless passivity to die so we can go to heaven? That's laziness. We must choose who and what we will serve - God and goodness or the devil and evil. Or is "choosing" a work? Was Joshua seeking works-based salvation when he said: "choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.” (Josh. 24:15) Is "Serving the Lord" a "work"? When Jesus said "Then he said to them all: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23) was He talking about some effortless walk in the park (or is effortlessly walking a work as well)? From what happened to Jesus on the cross, that sounds like a HUGE work. I am not saying that we can trust and obey our way into heaven. But I do think we can distrust and disobey our way out of heaven! If someone gives me a 5 front-row tickets to the super bowl on the 50 yard line with all transportation, meals and 5-star hotel accommodations included, I still must choose to show up to accept and use my gift. If choosing to do any "work" at all disqualifies me from obtaining the gift, I'd never get to the game.

See: http://spectrummagazine.org/article/2017/04/20/could-looking-beyond-adventist-students-solve-adventist-higher-ed-enrollment-prob

Hmmmm. Then why would Paul write: Romans 16:7 [Paul writing] “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.” Here Paul says that Andronicus and Junia were “in Christ” before Paul was. Sounds like an EVENT which happens in time. Sure doesn't sound like every descendant of Adam was born already "in Christ". We are baptized INTO Christ. That is our "new" birth. Only when we are "born again" are we "in Christ". Romans 6:3-7 “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?” Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together [with Him] in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be [united with Him] in the likeness of His resurrection. For he who has died [by baptism] has been freed from sin.”

God the Father was NOT separated from Jesus, back at the "foundation of the world". The Father and His Son were not "separated" until that moment when Jesus hung on the cross. Yes - they knew it was coming - that moment of separation. They knew it from the moment Adam ate the fruit. But it did not happen until the cross. Where the text says that Jesus is "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev 13:8), it does NOT SAY that Jesus was slain at the foundation. He was not actually "slain" (killed) until Calvary. The chain of events - which would end in His DEATH - began with the creation of mankind. But it ENDED at the cross. God promised a "Lamb". God's promise is sure. But a PROMISE is not the same as the FULFILLMENT, as anyone still living in this dark world will attest.

So Gregory, We all draw LIFE from God. The spirit of God, flowing through all creation, keeps living beings ALIVE. Do you see God's continuing provision of LIFE as "salvation"? If so, then Satan and his angels were also "provided with salvation". I don't believe that. And such a definition of "salvation" would mean we loose "salvation" as we grow old and die. I think this all depends upon one's definition of "saved" and "salvation". If it means a temporary continuation of "life" (in order to allow a choice for-or-against God), I don't see THAT as "salvation". My understanding of man's present state: God is the judge. His created human race of beings have committed crimes of rebellion. The sentence of death has been pronounced against them. Rather than execute the sentence of eternal death, God commutes the sentence to probation. IF - during the probationary period, individual humans show a desire for change, and show actual change of behavior (committing fewer and fewer acts of rebellion against God, and fewer acts of selfishness which harm other beings) THEN the sentence of eternal death, along with the record of their crimes, is expunged from the record. Jesus Christ died to provide us with the probationary period, during which He could seek to help us, and hopefully bring us to full restoration - with our records clean.

IMO Samie, you are just wrong. Humans MUST "participate" in order to be "saved". It takes 2 to make a relationship. Humans must respond to God's grace, in order to be "saved". They do not begin life in a "saved" condition, and remain "saved" until/unless they fail to DO good works. That is just NOT what Christ taught, and NOT what Paul taught. I just read a verse this morning as part of my devotional. "If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture." John 10:9 These words do NOT say the one who "enters" is already saved, BEFORE he enters. NO. He has to "enter" before being "saved". There would be no reason to teach the Gospel if everyone is already "saved". Just leave folks in ignorance, and that way they will automatically be "saved" and in the kingdom.

Pivotal point in this writing responding to Pastor Finely, two sections of quotes following. "To so vividly turn away from Jesus and to abandon reliance on the Holy Spirit and instead advocate for church policy and governance and authority to enable unity is utterly demoralizing. You put it this way: “The unity of the church is maintained … when the mutual agreements or policies of the church serve as the foundation for a system of church governance and authority.” As a long-time minister in New York volunteered to me the last time we were together: the vicar of Christ is the Holy Spirit, not the Pope or the General Conference executive committee." and then.... "The General Conference leadership can initiate just two possible courses of action it it believes it necessary to secure compliance with its policies. It can dissolve a Union Conference’s membership in the Seventh-day Adventist denomination and in effect walk away, or it can attempt to turn a Union Conference into a mission and place it under the direct management of men appointed by the General Conference. The General Conference has never attempted either option by way of discipline, at least in my memory—now in my eighth decade of life. And with good reason. The risk is that the General Conference could be legally required to dissolve its relationship with the current Union Conference and start over by establishing new local Conferences or a new Union Conference and then set about to evangelize congregations and members to join the ‘real Seventh-day Adventist’ Local and Union Conferences. In short, what a mess this would be. Perhaps the reason this has never happened before is that it has always been utterly unthinkable. But after the last Annual Council action, I find it alarming that the church appears to be considering such an action with one or more more Union Conferences. And I fear some will read your article in support of such action." It is my view that the urge to control is our danger. ... to be an Uzzah and reach out and touch the ark to control it and keep it from falling is our nature. God is in charge of His Church and His people. in the absence of God's clear direction we naturally attempt to fill in the gap, rather that wait on the Lord. Administrators are there to serve not to Lord over. The place of tension between leadership and constituency is a place where we especially need the Holy Spirit. We are an organization that relies on the present supernatural working of God in order for us to represent Him. Without that we will be building steps to approach the alter of sacrifice and our nakedness will be exposed. the implication is this.... just as the children of Israel were to come into submission to Moses, because if they were not they were in rebellion, we today are to be in submission to the authority of the GC or we will be in rebellion. Is the GC the mouthpiece of the Holy Spirit as Moses was? Is this submission the test of loyalty to God? For those who are in this submission the answer is yes. So what is in their experience and faith that informs them of this? Is this truly the filter that determines who is the faithful and who is not? Are we like Israel when they demanded a King so they could be as other nations? This way they could be competitive in the national landscape among all the nations? Israel sinned by asking for a King. If they had not asked for a king would Jesus ever have been called the king of Israel? Because they were looking for a king to give them national glory they utterly failed to recognize and accept Jesus.

I never gave it much thought that our schools were considered 'exclusive', since I had gone to school with non-SDA's since Academy. Granted they were only a few. Other Christian schools market themselves to all seeking a unique christian based education, why not us? Would this not be considered 'spreading the good news'?

Biblical doctrines are often complex and composed of a number of parts, all of which are valid. People often focus on one part and ignore other aspects. Some people believe that the following brings the various parts together on this issue: * On the cross, with the death and resurrection of Christ all of humanity were reconciled with God and provided with salvation. * The issue today is for all people to make an individual choice as to where they want to spend eternity--either an eternity with God, or an eternal separation outside and apart form God. * Those who chose to spend eternity with God will understand that part that they had in their separation and they will as a part of their choice to spend eternity with God repent of their rebellion. * Those who chose to spend eternity separated from God will not repent. God will accept their choice and not force them into an eternity that they do not chose. * As God is the source of all life and humanity does not have an inherent immortality, their choice to separate for eternity from God, will also separate them from the power that keeps them alive and they will go out of existence, eternally.

I believe repentance is a WORK of man, ENABLED by God. "REPENT ye and BELIEVE the gospel." Mark 1:15 Those who refuse to believe - also refuse to repent. BOTH are enabled by the spirit of God. The spirit of God is THE GIFT which comes to all mankind BECAUSE of Christ's victory over Satan. During the OT period, the spirit came to men because of God's promise - that His Son would come to be tested unto death. The GIFT is available for ALL MEN. But not every man will receive the spirit. Most will RESIST the gift. That being said, men still need some information - to show them WHO to believe in, and WHO to obey.

YOU repent - because the spirit of Christ is flowing through your heart enabling that repentance. YOU could not do it without HIM. But you CAN refuse to do it. Just as you can resist His spirit.

Perhaps there is not a one correct answer that all should follow. Rather this may simply be an issue that the local congregation should address and determine what works in their situation.

From what I read and understand of his belief reagarding this issue, I can only understand that he believes by becoming a christian you are no longer a homosexual. He also presupposes what is going on betwen that person and God. I guess when a black person becomes christian they are no longer black. Same for a hispanic christian or any other individual. Of course he doesn't say that or believe that, only when you use orther prefixes such as gay. Sorry, I do not appreciate those who judge others by their own beliefs. One is free to believe what they come to the conclusions on, but only God dedides if it is right or wrong.

I have not had time to review the videos that are linked to the above threads. So, I do not know what those are about and my following comment should not be taken as a comment about the videos. I will say this: Any attempt to say that people can chose whether or not to be homosexual is simply false and destructive to building relationships with homosexuals. One may be able to chose how they express their sexuality. But, their sexuality is determined by factors over which they had neither control nor choice.