Leaderboard

Yes our early SDAs were incorrect. on some levels as to their Theology. Yes we are not perfect today as to our Theology. This is one reason why on most issues we SDAs have a range of viewpoints on many aspects of doctrine.

It's an interesting question. And it challenges many of the old axiomatic assertions about "truth". But let's take a look at what we do know. (a) The revelatory writings which now comprise the Bible were revealed progressively. A person reading exclusively the Old Testament would not have the same understanding that we have; (b) As we gain greater knowledge about the natural world, we have had to re-evaluate certain textual interpretations. For example, certain Christians held to the flat earth and/or geocentric theory on the basis of many texts (e.g. the stars being "placed" in the sky; the sun being created after the earth; Christ's coming being seen by every eye simultaneously, the notion of a single universal sabbath, Joshua commanding the sun to stand still, etc.). We've had no problem re-evaluating those texts to harmonize them with a spherical earth and heliocentric solar system, understanding that the Bible was written from the point of view of men without this knowledge. We even retain many of these notions in our language as figures of speech (e.g. sunrise, sunset, shooting star), knowing full well that the figure of speech doesn't describe a literal reality. We allow these figures of speech to try to shoehorn certain prophecies to conform to certain preconceived notions (e.g. many SDAs see the 1833 Leonid meteor shower as a fulfillment of the "falling stars" prophecy, even though we know full well that no stars we involved in that phenomenon - we recognize that Jesus wasn't giving a lesson in astronomy, so we allow Him to refer to meteors as "stars" without calling Him a false prophet). Our understanding of God has also changed. Certain passages in Genesis portray God as less than omniscient. In Genesis 18:21, God has to set out on a fact finding mission to see if the messages that have reached Him are true. As the Bible was revealed, a different view of God emerged. A similar process involves our growing knowledge of the natural world. Today we know about light refraction and rainbows. We know that given the dimension of the Ark described in the Bible, there is no possible way that 2 of every species known to man could have fit on the ark. We know that the sun predates the earth. We know that the stars predate the earth. Despite EGW's comments on "amalgamation of man and beast", we don't condemn an entire race on the basis of Ham's curse. We know that none of the modern romance tongues (French, Italian, Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese, etc.) were created at Babel, but rather grew out of local variations and dialects of Latin. Jews and Christians re-evaluated our understanding of days and the Sabbath in light of the spherical earth and the International Date Line. SDAs had no problem adopting a spherical earth understanding of the Sabbath. Men re-evaluated their understanding of God based on the progressive revelation of the Bible. We re-evaluated our understanding of "falling stars" and "moon to blood" based on our knowledge of meteors, comets and lunar and solar eclipses. We re-evaluated our understanding of Biblical texts governing slavery based on a quasi-universal condemnation of slavery as evil. We re-evaluated OT capital punishments against adultery and sabbath-breaking based on modern notions of justice and separation of church and state. Protestants re-evaluated the Eucharist despite the clear text "this IS my body", since we know full well that the wafer stays a wafer and the "wine" stays "wine". We re-evaluated the interpretation of "wine" in the wake of the temperance movement and witnessing the ravages of drunkenness in 19th century America. But there remains certain beliefs, teachings, traditions that have risen to the level of "sacred cows". I fear that the SDA church, despite its relatively small size, recent vintage and relative unimportance within Christianity, is still far too institutional, inflexible and laden with tradition and inertia to adapt.

HCH: Your quotation comes from a statement that EGW made about people at the time of the First Advent of Christ. It was not made about people who attempt to predict the time that events will take place related to the Second Advent of Christ. The witness of Scripture is clear that people who do such are false prophets, regardless of whether or not they claim to be a prophet. While you may not claim to be a prophet, your claims have repeatedly been demonstrated to be false. The fundamental problem actually is not with what you say will happen. Sometimes you will be correct. Probability math tells us that will sometime happen. Sooner or later someone will die. Sooner or later other things will happen. We may, or may not, go to war with Iran. The fundamental problem with your predictions is with your claim that the Bible predicted such. It is that which demonstrates your basic ignorance as to how to understand the Bible and what the Bible says about End Time events.

Promise Thy faithfulness reacheth unto the clouds Psalm 36:5 Thy mercy, O Lord , is in the heavens; and thy faithfulness reacheth unto the clouds.

5 Things You Didn't Know About "The Empire Strikes Back" On May 21, 1980, The Empire Strikes Back was released in theaters. This was the second film in the Star Wars series although it was technically the fifth film in a planned saga. Here are 5 things you didn't know about The Empire Strikes Back... It Has One of the Best-Known Misquoted Movie Lines. The most well-known line in the film is often the commonly quoted plot twist, in which Darth Vader says, "Luke, I am your father." However, the line has actually been misquoted for decades. The real quote from The Empire Strikes Back is "No, I am your father." Either way, the news that Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father remains one of the most devastating moments in the entire saga. Yoda Almost Had A Very Different Name It's not unusual for scripts to undergo major changes in each draft, and names usually get rearranged and changed, too. In an early draft of the film, Luke was going to travel to the planet of Bog (instead of Dagobah), and receive training from a frog-like Jedi named Minch. In later drafts, Minch was renamed to Yoda. The name "Minch" however did end up making an appearance in Star Wars comics and was used by another member of Yoda's species. He was much older, with his story taking place seven hundred years before the events in the Skywalker Saga. George Lucas Self-Funded The Whole Movie Swimming in cash thanks to the success of the original Star Wars, George Lucas opted to fund all subsequent sequels out of his own pocket. If his strategy seems impressive today, it seemed very radical way back in 1979 when Empire rolled into production. Lucas also retained sequel rights from Fox, who saw no future in the series. We’d imagine someone lost his job over that one…Lucas had fought to maintain sequel rights as a way of guaranteeing himself total creative freedom with the Star Wars universe. By paying for everything himself, it would be easier for him to keep all the rights, as well as all the profits. Jim Henson Turned Down The Voice Of Yoda To create Yoda, George Lucas knew it would require some innovative techniques. He consulted with Jim Henson, who’s Muppets had become cultural icons. Lucas and Henson became fast friends, and Lucas asked Henson to play the role of Yoda. Henson declined his offer to direct "The Great Muppet Caper." Henson did, however, suggest his frequent collaborator Frank Oz for the part. Oz accepted, performing Yoda's voice. Lucas Tried To Get Oz An Oscar Nomination Yoda has become one of the best-loved characters in the Star Wars franchise. His performance was so important to the film's success that George Lucas spent thousands of dollars campaigning to get Frank Oz a Best Supporting Actor nomination at the Oscars. Unfortunately, the Academy declared that puppeteers were not actors, and ineligible for the award. Lucas made the snub up to Oz by bringing him back for the next four Star Wars films.

5 Things You Probably Didn't Know About Blue Jeans_3 On May 20, 1873, Levi Strauss and his partner Jacob Davis received a patent for riveted pants that became known as blue jeans. Here are 5 things you probably didn’t know about the history of these iconic jeans in America… Blue Jeans Were The Creation of Two Immigrants Although Levis are an iconic symbol of America, two immigrants were involved in their original design. Jacob Davis, an immigrant from Latvia, who was living in Reno, Nevada, came up with the idea of placing copper rivets at particular points in work pants to make them stronger. He contacted Levi Strauss, a German-born wholesale dry goods merchant, who supplied his fabric. Strauss financed the application for the patent and became the name of the popular denim jeans. There’s a Reason Jeans Have Rivets It wasn't just for style that Levi's jeans have had copper rivets on the pockets since the beginning. Copper rivets placed on the pockets made the seams more durable and prevented tearing, which was important to the miners who originally wore them. In the 1930s, the pockets were sewn to the pants so that the rivets were covered because of complaints that they scratched furniture. But they were returned to view in 1947. A small fifth pocket was added as a handy carrying case for a pocket watch. One Pair of Levis Sold for More Than $46,000 One of the world’s oldest pairs of Levi’s jeans - made in the 1880s and sold for around a dollar- was reacquired by Levi Strauss & Co. for $46,532. The jeans were found in an old gold mine in the Mojave Desert in California in 1999 and were reported to be 100 years old. In what is believed to be the highest price ever paid for denim, Levi’s bought the jeans during an online eBay auction. Levi’s historian Lynn Downey said the company would use the jeans as a template for part of a vintage collection. Historians for Levi Strauss examined the fabric and patented copper rivets and concluded the jeans were produced between 1880 and 1885. Jeans Weren’t Always Called Jeans What people know today as jeans were originally called waist overalls when they were first sold by Bavarian immigrant Levi Strauss and his partner Jacob Davis in 1873. People continued to call them waist overalls or just plain overalls until the 1960s. Jean (or jeane) was the name for the cotton corduroy fabric made in Genoa, Italy, that was used to fashion the pants. Hollywood Made Jeans Popular With Teens Originally, jeans were associated with the working class and Westerners such as cowboys, but Hollywood films changed that. It started first with Marlon Brando wearing jeans as a tough biker in The Wild One in 1953, and then with heartthrob James Dean in Rebel Without a Cause in 1955. By the time Marilyn Monroe appeared in The Misfits in 1961, everyone wanted to own at least a few pairs of jeans, including women.

Jer 8:8 "How can you say, 'We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us'? Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.

So there are at least three warning messages that should rouse the Laodiceans. This man claiming that the Latter rain began 31 May. Hch telling you that when President Pence is in office, he will be the last one and Christ will come during his term And Walter Vieth concluding from his study that Christ must come before 2027. The evidence is sufficient to warrant your attention and rouse folks to study the word. On the other side of the issue we have more skeptics claiming themselves to be SDA's that are crying peace and safety and saying that the warning messages are not from God. As it was in the days of Noah, only a few went into the ark while the masses scoffed from the outside. Has anything changed? The majority is still the majority! This is my link that puts the message together in a neat little package

Promise The Lord redeemeth the soul Psalm 34:22 The Lord redeemeth the soul of his servants: and none of them that trust in him shall be desolate.

It was not the scholarly theologians who had an understanding of this truth, and engaged in its proclamation. Had these been faithful watchmen, diligently and prayerfully searching the Scriptures, they would have known the time of night; the prophecies would have opened to them the events about to take place. But they did not occupy this position, and the message was given by humbler men. Said Jesus: "Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you." John 12:35. Those who turn away from the light which God has given, or who neglect to seek it when it is within their reach, are left in darkness. But the Saviour declares: "He that followeth Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." John 8:12. Whoever is with singleness of purpose seeking to do God's will, earnestly heeding the light already given, will receive greater light; to that soul some star of heavenly radiance will be sent to guide him into all truth. 313 {GC 312.3}