Leaderboard

Nutritional health has long been a part of the SDA Message. "Nutrition Action" has long been a publication on this subject. I read it in printed forum. However, it also exists on the Internet. (NOTE: I am not certain if the Internet forum constitutes the entire printed forum.) I believe that the March/April current issue has a lot for Adventists to consider. The following is a link to Internet editions. https://www.cspi.org/page/nutrition-action-archive Gregory Matthews

My wife and I have just finished watching a movie recorded from the Eternal Word TV Network. It was on the life of Polycarp, an early leader in the Christian Church who gave his life that Christ might be advanced. Well worth watching, if you ever have a chance.

Stan has posted the following link at another place in this forum. https://religiousliberty.tv/before-the-beginning/ I will suggest that it needs another look here. It says what I have thought for years. However, it is 100 times better than I would have said it. I support it at least 90%, having potentially a small issue that is of little consequence in comparison to the overall presentation. I suggest that it be read by all interested in the Biblical account of creation. It is of great value.

Well here is a post I made on this issue... How Easter was used to replace the Sabbath We see how the name "Easter" never appears in the Greek New Testament. Easter is not a Christian name. It is Chaldean (Babylonian) in origin, a variation on the name Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven. It is to be noted that the apostolic church never gave attention to either the date of Christ's birth or the date of His resurrection, other than to note that the latter occurred on a Sunday. Neither of these days was observed by early Christians but as the pagan influence came into the church so did its festivals. In the third and fourth centuries a tremendous debate arose among Christian churches as to when Easter was to be observed. For the Roman Catholic branch it was largely settled at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325) with a formula still followed to this day, which cannot possibly be commemoration of the actual resurrection. In current practice Easter always falls on a Sunday and the Sunday chosen wanders over a period of four weeks ranging from March 22-April 25. Here is a good explanation.. “Easter occurs on different dates each year because, like the Jewish Passover, it is based upon the vernal equinox, that dramatic moment when the hours of the day-light and the hours of darkness at last draw parallel and then the light finally and triumphantly wins out. Thus Easter is always fixed as the first Sunday after the first full moon following the spring equinox. It's a cosmic, solar, and lunar event as deeply rooted in religious traditions originating from sun-god worship as one could conceivably imagine.” ~ Tom Harpur “The Pagan Christ”. The point is that the early Christians gave no attention to commemorating the resurrection day of Christ. If they had been serious they would be observing the 17th day of the Jewish month, Nisan, which begins with the first new moon following the spring solstice. Passover among the Jews begins with the 14th day of Nisan. It would not be possible to commemorate the actual day of the month and have it always on Sunday, so the choice was made to have it on Sunday, adjusting the day of the month for convenience. Given this information, although the resurrection of Jesus is a historical event of huge importance, we have no biblical precedent for making Easter a special day of celebration. Now the fact that Sabbath was supplanted by the church at Rome and even the anti-Judaism stirred up by Jewish revolts is well known and documented, and the claim that came out that it was from the 'resurrection', but scripture does not give any change nor was there any 'tradition' from the apostles. The truth is it was used to supplant the Sabbath, and the first day, Sunday has no basis for worship except for pagans as their festival day to the sun. Nothing of Easter was about Christ or His being risen, it was sun worship, 'the sunrise service tradition', is bowing and praying to the rising sun as you can see today. Here is even more on this: "The author of the "Epistle of Barnabas" adduces the occurrence of the Resurrection on the first day as the reason for the observance of this "true day" (xv.). In the meantime the attitude of the Roman authorities had become intermittently hostile to the Jews; and after the rebellion under Hadrian it became a matter of vital importance for such as were not Jews to avoid exposing themselves to suspicion (Huidekoper, "Judaism at Rome"). The observance of the Sabbath was one of the most noticeable indications of Judaism. Hence, while in the first Christian century more or less regard and tolerance for the Jewish day were shown in Rome, even by non-Jewish Christians, in the second century the contrary became the rule (Justin Martyr, "Dial. cum Tryph." ii., § 28). In the East, however, less opposition was shown to Jewish institutions. Saturday and Sunday both were celebrated by "abstaining from fasting and by standing while praying" (Rheinwald, "Archäologie," § 62), In the West, especially where Roman influence dominated, Saturday was turned into a fast-day (Huidekoper, ib. pp. 343-344). The name "Sunday" is used for the first time by Justin Martyr ("Apologies," i. 67) in accommodation to a Roman nomenclature, but with reference to the circumstances that the light was created on the first day (noticed also in the Midrash; Gen. R. iii.: "ten crowns adorned the first day") and that the "light of the world" rose from the night of the grave on the first day of the week. The Christians, accordingly, were obliged to defend themselves against the charge of worshiping the sun (Tertullian, "Apologeticus," xvi.). The celebration of two days (by the Judæo-Christians?) is attested by Eusebius ("Hist. Eccl." iii. 37) and by the "Apostolic Constitutions," which advise the keeping of Saturday as a memorial of the Creation, and of Sunday, the Lord's day, in memory of the Resurrection (ii. 59). Originally, then, Sunday and Sabbath were kept sharply distinct. But, like the Jewish Sabbath, Sunday was deemed not merely a holiday, but a holy day, and hence fasting thereon was interdicted (Tertullian, "De Corona Militis," § 3). Ease of mind (ευφροσύνη, which corresponds to "naḥat ruaḥ"; "Epistle of Barnabas," l.c.) was the proper condition for the day. One should not kneel at prayer (Irenæus, "Fragm. de Paschate"; "Apostolic Constitutions," l.c.); the standing posture, being at first a protest against mourning and ascetic rites (such as were forbidden on the Jewish Sabbath), came to be explained as suggestive of the Resurrection.".... SABBATH AND SUNDAY - JewishEncyclopedia.com Some try to say it was changed by the disciples or their actions or the resurrection, but Sunday has nothing even after the resurrection as the disciples continued with the Sabbath as it was before and Christ tells it it would continue so you have to really bend scripture to fit Sunday as the day of worship. It isnt there.......

Not just in Adventism, but in the world as a whole, Satan is trying to get people to extremes. Often, it is one side for people who don't like something, and the other extreme that looks like it fully supports something. Both extremes tend to clutch on to parts of the truth and use that part of the truth against a better understanding of the truth. Putting us into these two extremes makes it easier for him to give only a few last great deceptions where the two sides need to join together to face the final crisis, and where the refusal to look for other aspects of truth blinds us to balanced views that can see us though. Woman's Ordination has some people look at their "proof-texts" and think they are faithfully following the Bible. They look at the liberal churches who do not take the Bible seriously as ordaining women, and jump to the conclusion that those within Adventism who want to ordain women wants the church to just become one of these other liberal churches that do not take the Bible seriously. Thus they see themselves as faithfully clinging to the Bible, while those who want to ordain women are rejecting the Bible and we need to save the church from rejecting the Bible. While others studying the Bible sees that the literary and historical context of these "proof-texts" does not fit what tradition has read into those words. They find evidence of women's ordination in the Bible, and find that within Adventism there has been an openness to women's ordination, and having developed a "temporary" back door way of ordaining women without using the word "ordained" which was only to last until more of our members could understand that women's ordination was indeed Biblical. Thus this pro-WO group does not care about what those "liberal" Biblically Minimalist churches teach, and see the Anti-WO people as stuck on non-Adventist traditions, thus that if we are fair to the Bible and to Adventist History that we need to change our back door ordination of women to coming out and being honest that we do ordain women, and that we need to save the church from having tradition blind our Bible reading.

Even more so now. The division has never been greater in North America. We cannot forget the division of Vax vs Non-Vax Now we have a divide about illegal immigrants and ICE. In Lake Union this has become a problem. My friends tell me that church attendance is down in many white churches, and people are watching on the internet. I can see a correlation to the controversial issues. The next dividing topic will be the war in Iran. It seems like lots of shaking in North America. Let us not forget, the NAD makes up less than 10% of the Adventist Church.

I have not heard that before. I know many Adventist who believe it was in the first week. Very interesting. How do we know that? I believe they did have sex before sin, and that is partially why Adam sinned. He understood Eve had sinned and that the serpent was the one they were warned about, but he did not want to lose Eve, so he ate the fruit too. But I could be wrong. The bible is not specific about when.

Beyond the Remanent: Meditations on Identity, is a book that probably should not be read by our members. It will likely provide more challenges than they are prepared to consider. In any case, it cannot be dismissed. To be clear, the author cannot be dismissed as an unfaithful member. Read the article linked below only if you are willing to be challenged. https://atoday.org/beyond-the-remnant-major-surgery-for-seventh-day-adventism/

Well, I think the church is thriving without this author. There are 90% of the Adventists who don't think the church needs any surgery. These people think and believe they are contributing to something. But the church marches on without them.

Well, its the same question with Passover. We join with our Jewish in laws, but Ellen White says it not only pointed to the exodus from Egypt, but to Christ and His sacrifice and He instituted the Lords Service in its place.

The most important message people need to hear is about the death and resurrection of Christ in its various dimensions.

I recommend the book by HMS Richards, "Feed My Sheep" . It changed my preaching. It was compiled from his training for pastors.