Leaderboard

Pam; I appreciate what you said, not trying to add or subtract from it; but the part I disagreed with is the first paragraph, before the "problems list" The following list is meant to simply remind us from where we have fallen and to encourage us to renew our commitment to the culture of heaven. IF the succeeding list is actually "from where we have fallen" then Ill eat my skullcap. For me, this is a poor "interpretation" of Rev 2:5 I cannot wear a tie around my neck because of burn scar contractures. I literally feel like I am suffocating if I try to wear a tie. YET, there are churches where I could never stand up front and even just read a Bible verse, let alone preach, and why? Because I don't want to wear something that makes me feel like that. I tried to appease the "leaders" in one church and wore a tie to preach there. I saw stars and passed out. Its a good thing two elders were sitting behind me watching for mistakes, because they caught me before my head hit the floor. I asked for a glass of water, took my tie off and preached the sermon...it was something to do with "be sure your sins will find you out..."

One big problem I have with the article is that no footnotes were given to point to the source of allegations. The end result makes the whole article come across as rather histrionic, and reminds me of how anyone can proffer any sort of accusations about anyone (or any institution), and get away with it in communities of readers who subscribe to the same beliefs.... much like the Salem Witch Trials. Bottom line (for me): give extant proof of the allegations — otherwise, don't bother me with insinuations and innuendos.

When Did It Become Acceptable? The church of today is not the church I grew up in. In some cases that is a good thing, in other cases it is definitely not good. http://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2020/2/7/when-did-it-become-acceptable

Here is a video I produced 13+ years ago..

You claim that the Trinity was saying the exact opposite? But yet there's is not one word in these statements from the Trinity????? This is an angel not the Trinity either and in the second statement where is the link, because I doubt very much that EGW said it that way??

Any Christian would do the same thing. The Bible tells us that Jesus alone "is the way, the Truth, and the Life..." John 14:6. The RCC tries to tell people that they need Mary, along with Jesus to be fully "saved" and have the "fulness" of truth. According to my understanding, Mary is projected by The RCC as a competitor to Jesus, directly competing for our attention, our filial devotions; and for our souls. The only thing worse than not having any hope in Christ, is to have a false hope in Christ. Mary is NOT needed for salvation; any more than EGW is, yet, the RCC tells us differently. From the book called "The Glories Of Mary": "“I endeavored to collect, from as many authors as I could lay my hands on, the choicest passages, extracted from Fathers and theologians, and those which seemed to me to be the most to the point, and have put them together in this book, in order that the devout may with little trouble and expense be able to inflame themselves with the love of Mary, and more particularly to furnish the priests with matter for their sermons, wherewith to excite others to devotion towards this divine Mother.” (The Glories of Mary, p. 30.") This book consists of several chapters. In each, Lioguori seeks to prove a certain point about Mary. At the end of each chapter, he gives an illustration of the point and ends with a prayer to Mary based on the content of the chapter. The edition I am using here was published by the Redemptorist Fathers in 1931 and bears the imprimatur by Patrick (Cardinal) Hayes on April 16, 1931. The wild statements about "Mary" in Liguori’s quotations come from all of the "church fathers," over all of the years; and most of the quotations rightly apply to wisdom personified (Jesus) or to Solomon’s bride (the church). BUT they are applied to Mary because the RCC has said so. In writing about Mary; many texts are persistently torn out of their contexts. Just as your posts do with that one sentence from EGW. In this book "The Glories Of Mary" texts from the Old Testament are used without any New Testament corroboration. They originally apply to Jesus and they are widely applied to Mary: Liguori, p. 101: Im pretty sure that EGW is not the woman we should be looking at here. What The Bible says About Mary: Mary was a sinner who needed a Savior. There is no record IN THE BIBLE of her being conceived immaculately or living without sin. She was a virgin before Jesus was born but there is no evidence that she was perpetually a virgin after he was born In one sense Mary was the mother of the God/Man because she brought the God/Man into the world but she was not the mother of God in SUBSTANCE, as in the strictest sense of the word because Jesus was her Creator! Your posts seem to favor a pointed attack on EGW, but I would suggest that we are looking at the wrong woman here. Maybe it's time for us to examine the Immaculate Deception? Adventist Evangelism will always oppose the RCC teachings of Mary because the RCC teaching on Mary takes away the need for a Savior; its like the RCC is trying to get us to believe that Jesus did fail; and that Jesus needed a little help with/through Mary. THAT is the very thing here that would definitely say to the world: Apparently, the RCC teaches that no salvation exists for anyone who refuses to "obey the Bishops and Priests:" (especially regarding "Mary.") Cyprian of Carthage [200-270 AD] Epistle 61 "Let them not think that the way of life or salvation exists for them, if they have refused to obey the bishops and priests, since the Lord says in the book of Deuteronomy: ‘And any man who has the insolence to refuse to listen to the priest or judge, whoever he may be in those days, that man shall die’ [Deut. 17:12]. And then, indeed, they were killed with the sword , but now the proud and insolent are killed with the sword of the Spirit, when they are cast out from the Church. For they cannot live outside, since there is only one house of God, and there can be no salvation for anyone except in the Church" (Letters 61[4]:4 [A.D. 253]). I think you likely have much more explaining to do before you can start attacking EGW, and an entire denomination over just one sentence.

Hey prophet HCH, didn't you prophesied that Pence was going to be president? Tell us great prophet what happen? Don't you think it is time for you to retire and leave the prophecies to THE ALMIGHTY ONES, like what the Bible says. Like the Pastor said and I changing your theme somewhat; who's really fooling YOU! Peace!

I wont reply to anything where square bracket emphasis is added to embellish one's biased; you can be biased if you want to. I'm not understanding what you're saying. It wasn't the Virgin Mary that postulated Jesus could have sinned, Is there any sense in replying to you here? I didn't criticize anything "Mary said;" I did say specifically that it was what the RCC says about Mary, which is NOT in Scripture anywhere. What the Bible says about her, and what the RCCs say about her are two different things.

the voice was a voice actor we hired on Vancouver Island, I believe he was a Baptist Minister.

One last (?) comment: 1) The SDA denomination is a world-wide church. but, standards differ from place to place. The standards are not the same as to dress, food and Sabbath observance. 2) When people move to the United states from other countries, they bring with them the standards of their own country. "So, you will see flesh foods served at potlucks, typically identified as such. You will see different standards of Sabbath observance and different standards of dress.

I understand that there are examples in the article that actually happened. 1) I am aware of some in which the SDA Church took action, even to the extent of a pastor either resigning or being fired. But, the critics do not tell us that. Or they may say that such did not happen as quickly as it should have happened. Well, in many cases the critics simply do not know all of the facts. Folks, they do not need to know all. 2) If an unmarried woman become pregnant, we do not need to publish to the world that she was raped. I am aware of such. She should have the privacy that she needs. 3) If the charge is false, as I have seen, the Church may not be able to tell the true facts. Folks, the SDA Community at large, worldwide, does not have to know everything. 4) I am thinking of a scandal that has gone around the world. Action was not taken quickly. An investigation occurred. What is not known is that two (2) people were found to have culpability. Action occurred for both, commensurate to their individual responsibility. But, the critics only had it partly correct.

Let me address another complaint, that I quote below: 1) I attend a large SDA congregation. The pastoral staff sometimes preaches in jeans, and sometimes not. There is a reason for doing so. The pastoral staff is attempting to use the Sabbath services an evangelistic tool to reach the community that is living next door to the church building. In fact, one of the pastors has the specific job description of reaching out to that community. The Sr. pastor wants the person leaving the coffee shop next to the church building to be able to walk into the Sabbath services, wearing jeans and a plaid shirt, and feel welcomed. NOTE: Wake up and smell the roses folks. Some people just do not have "proper" clothing to wear. I once baptized a woman who had been wearing a dress to church that certain of my members found offensive, due to the length of the dress. [NOTE: It actually was not that short.] I informed them that it was the only dress she owned and she would attend church in jeans and a plaid shirt if she wore anything else. [NOTE: They took her shopping and purchased additional dresses for her.] 2) Today is Sabbath. I will wear a suit and a tie to church today. Two weeks ago, I wore jeans and a plaid shirt to church. I did so as part of my witness for Christ. You may not understand. You do not have to understand. If I had been on the platform that day, I would hae worn the jeans and plaid shirt. My wife wore similar attire to church that day. It was part of her witness for Christ. She gave a partial explaination to some people that day. The bottom line is: We ought to be more concerned about what happens on Sabbath morning than on what the pastor is wearing. If you attend a SDA Church than usually never has a community visitor attending, you should worry about that.

The author of that article has listed more than 50, if my count is correct, issues that he implies are present in the SDA Church today. I wonder, how many of those has he investigated to see if they are actually true. I wonder, how many has he studied in an attempt to determine the actual facts of the individual case. I ask this due to the fact that as I have often studied charges against the SDA Church, I have often found them to be based on falsehoods, at least in part. Yes, in some cased, I have found them to be true, and that the SDA denomination took appropriate action. As an example, the following quote is one of the charges that the author makes. Let us look at it to se what is true and what is false. What is true: A SDA School (Walla Walla University) did participate in a sporting event, during a time period that SDAs consider to be the Sabbath. But, that time period was NOT the Sabbath in the geographic location where the sporting event was played. Rather, it was the Sabbath in another part of the world where the person making the charge first lived.

A sound mind ? 2 Tim 1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

5 Things You Probably Didn't Know About Cuba On February 7, 1962, the United States imposed a trade embargo on Cuba. The ensuing embargo effectively restricted all trade between Cuba and the United States. Here are 5 things you didn't know about Cuba... Cubans Were Only Recently Allowed to Buy New Cars Cuba’s cars are world famous, and it’s a popular tourist attraction to go for a ride in these old American cars. Many of them are from the ’50s before the import ban, and because of the import ban, Cubans couldn’t get spare parts to their cars. In 2014, Cubans were finally able to buy new cars without government permission. Unfortunately, the roll-out of the new car-buying world was greeted with disgust as dealers offered cars at a 400 percent markup. Coca Cola is Officially Not Sold in Cuba Only two countries in the world are known for banning Coca Cola, and that’s Cuba and North Korea. Coca-Cola moved out of Cuba in the early 1960s and has never returned. Currently, the United States holds a financial, economic, and commercial embargo against the Republic of Cuba. Therefore, no American firm including Coca-Cola is allowed to trade with Cuba. Until 2008, Cubans Were Not Allowed to Own Cell Phones The same goes for computers. Since this law changed, many Cubans have gotten either a cell phone or laptop. Especially since the Wi-Fi hotspots came in 2015. Most Restaurants Are Owned by The Government There are also privately owned restaurants, called Paladares. However, these are quite rare, and most of the restaurants are owned and operated by the government. Cuba Banned Christmas for 30 Years. Yep. Fidel Castro declared Cuba an atheist country when he came to power and didn't even allow the day off. Given that most Cubans were (and are) Catholic, that didn't sit well. When Castro finally unbanned Christmas and allowed the Pope to visit the country, citizens rushed out to buy Christmas items even though it was already after Christmas. The Average Cuban Earns Roughly $20 per Month in Salary Although things are slowly developing and becoming more modern, the average Cuban still earns roughly $20 per month – that’s less than 1 dollar a day.

5 Things You Didn't Know About Phoenix Arizona On February 25, 1881, Phoenix, Arizona, was incorporated by the 11th Territorial Legislature. Phoenix is both the capital of Arizona and its most populated city, with around 1.6 million inhabitants. Here are 5 surprising facts about the city known as the “Valley of the Sun.” Phoenix Is The Most-Populated State Capital in the U.S. Phoenix is easily the most-populated state capital. At almost 1.5 million people, Phoenix is much larger than the second-biggest capital, Indianapolis, which is home to about 850,000 people. It Gets Really Hot in Phoenix Phoenix holds the number one spot in the nation for the number of days where the temperature in a major U.S. city is above 100-degrees Fahrenheit. In fact, the average high temperature in Phoenix in July is 106.1 Fahrenheit. The highest temperature in Phoenix ever recorded was in a balmy June in 1990 when it reached a scorching 122-degrees Fahrenheit. Snowfall in the city is a rare event indeed, with the record being only .04 inches back in 1939. Phoenix Received Its Name From an English Lord Phillip Darrell Duppa was a member of the committee chosen to select the name of the new town. Duppa, who preferred to be called Lord Duppa, spoke seven languages and had royal relatives. After the discovery of irrigation canals from a prehistoric period when the Hohokam lived on the land, Duppa made an eloquent argument that the town should be named Phoenix after the mythological bird that arose from ashes. It was certainly better than suggestions made by other committee members — which included Stonewall and Pumpkinville. Wild Love Birds Can Be Seen There They were first seen in 1987, and, of course, are popular pets for bird lovers. In 2010, Phoenix was thought to have a wild lovebird population of around 950, which may be borne from a pair of birds that were released or escaped and bred like crazy. The “Sunshine State” is a More Accurate Nickname for Arizona Than Florida. Meteorological statistics don’t lie. Arizona is the sunniest state in the country. (Florida comes in fifth.) Yuma is sunny 90% of the time, and Phoenix and Tucson tie at 85%. No city in Florida even makes the top ten.