Adventist pastor converts to Catholicism...?

[phkrause]

Awesome post! I saw the movie and did indeed see that. I feel the same about the Adventist Church. But for me I don't care if the people in the church don't except for who I am. I just pray and hope that God does. And I'm sure he does. But also like Gerry mentioned the SDA church is the only church that goes by the bible. Just keep on doing what you're doing and keep the faith because God loves you.

pkrause

[John317]

Here are some of the beliefs of Quakers.

The various branches have widely divergent beliefs and practices, but the central concept to many Friends is the "Inner Light". Accordingly, individual Quakers may develop individual religious beliefs arising from their personal conscience and revelation coming from "God within"; further, Quakers feel compelled to live by such individual religious beliefs and inner revelations.

Many Quakers feel their faith does not fit within traditional Christian categories of Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant, but is an expression of another way of experiencing God.

Although Quakers throughout most of their history and in most parts of the world today consider Quakerism to be a Christian movement, some Friends (principally in some Meetings in the United States and the United Kingdom) now consider themselves universalist, agnostic, atheist, realist, humanist, postchristian, or nontheist, or do not accept any religious label.

Early Friends rejected the mainstream Protestant idea of Sola scriptura and believed that Christ, instead of the Bible, is the Word of God; Robert Barclay wrote in his Apology that the scriptures "are only a declaration of the fountain, and not the fountain itself, therefore they are not to be esteemed the principal ground of all Truth and knowledge, nor yet the adequate primary rule of faith and manners".[10] Similarly, George Fox recounted an incident in his Journal in which a minister claimed that the scriptures were authoritative, Fox "...was commanded to tell them God did not dwell in temples made with hands. But I told them what it was, namely, the Holy Spirit, by which the holy men of God gave forth the scriptures, whereby opinions, religions and judgements were to be tried; for it led into all Truth, and so gave the knowledge of all Truth".[11]

Early Friends believed that Christ would never lead them in ways that contradicted the Bible; this belief prevented conflicts between Friends' leadings and their understanding of the Bible.

As time passed, conflicts between what the Bible appeared to teach and how many Friends believed they were being led by the Spirit began to arise. Some Friends decided that in these cases the Bible should be authoritative. Today Evangelical Friends believe the Bible is authoritative, for the Bible was inspired by God's Spirit and this belief is affirmed in the Richmond Declaration.

Other Friends, partly under the influence of movements such as liberal Protestantism, decided that it was possible to be truly led in ways contrary to scripture, and that in such cases scripture should give way. Still other Friends rejected (or neglected) the Bible altogether; hence in many liberal Friends meetings one might encounter non-Christian Friends or those who question some or all of the traditional doctrines of Christianity. In nearly all cases, modern Friends believe in the necessity of being continually guided by God. Divine revelation is therefore not restricted to the Bible, but rather continues even today; this doctrine is known as continuing revelation.

Quakers have historically expressed a preference for understanding coming from God's Spirit over the knowledge derived from objective logic or systematic theology.[12] Eschewing notions of "authoritative" doctrines, diverse statements of "Faith and Practice" and diverse understandings of the "leading of the spirit" have always existed among Friends. The leading to lay down all sense of authoritative theology (notions thereof) results in broad tolerance within the Society for earnest expressions of "the light within".

Most Friends believe a formal creed would be an obstacle — both to authentic listening and to the recognition of new insight. On the other hand, some Friends have enumerated and subscribed to a set of doctrines, such as the Richmond Declaration or the "Beliefs of Friends" stated by Evangelical Friends International, which are comparable to mainstream Protestant confessions of faith.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Society_of_Friends

[FoundByLove]

Well, that's it then... BeliefNet was right... I'm a "Quaker" alright. See, here's the deal. I'm a child of God forever, first and foremost. So much of what you wrote above there, John 3:17 rings 100% true with me and always has, behind closed doors, and even in the open at times, especially when I was younger and didn't know any better. Goodness, I'd even already decided that in marriage, people should be (sexually attracted) friends... And that in every other kind of relationship, friendship is best... And that God and I are Friends...

But I think what wraps this conclusion up for me is how I've known for about 3 years now, internally and indisputably, that I'm some kind of "Child of the Light." I didn't know anyone else thought of themselves that way. I just internally Knew this for myself. And it's proven true over and over again. Well, that, and how I've always noticed how, historically, the Bible builds on itself as far as telling God's story is concerned, but how it just abruptly quit being written almost 2,000 years ago, and how it really doesn't make any sense at all to think that God somehow stopped working directly in people's hearts and lives ever after that point in time or something. And I've always sensed Him leading me personally down different Paths, and at times, I've been sure I sensed Him Telling me things that were only for me personally that wouldn't even make sense for other people, and that had nothing to do with "Is this Biblical or not?" at all even...

The Bible, in my opinion, is just a book. The Author has always been more important to me to focus on, and He is not an author of personal confusion, but rather of personal clarity, and He does make all things clear to us when we need them to be, etc. Remember, in the NT, when the men on the road to Emmaus said, "Didn't our hearts burn within us as He spoke?" They didn't have to go get some book to check His words against before they believed Him as He spoke to them about how the OT pointed to Him personally. They just Looked at Him, Heard Him, and Knew that He was the one they should Listen to - they didn't need to pull out some scroll first and make sure He was telling them the truth. They just Knew that He was who He said He is.

[aldona]

Thank you all for your encouraging words, it's definitely time for a group hug...

:grouphug4:

If I don't post much in the next couple of days, I have a busy period ahead of me with work and stuff - may check in now and then to read, but will definitely surface again on the weekend.

Just a thought from "FAQ" on a Quaker website:

Q. Do Quakers believe that the Bible is the word of God?

A. Yes. But not God's final word.

(i.e. He still speaks to us today, in many different ways!)

aldona

[John317]

.... God and I are Friends... But I think what wraps this conclusion up for me is how I've known for about 3 years now, internally and indisputably, that I'm some kind of "Child of the Light." I didn't know anyone else thought of themselves that way. I just internally Knew this for myself. And it's proven true over and over again. Well, that, and how I've always noticed how, historically, the Bible builds on itself as far as telling God's story is concerned, but how it just abruptly quit being written almost 2,000 years ago, and how it really doesn't make any sense at all to think that God somehow stopped working directly in people's hearts and lives ever after that point in time or something. And I've always sensed Him leading me personally down different Paths, and at times, I've been sure I sensed Him Telling me things that were only for me personally that wouldn't even make sense for other people, and that had nothing to do with "Is this Biblical or not?" at all even...

I don't believe that God stopped working directly on people's hearts and lives after the apostle John laid down his pen 2000 year ago. Some people may believe this, but the Adventist church certainly does not believe this, and of course Ellen White's life and work proves without question that she didn't believe it either.

I think, though, that some people's emphasis on the gift of prophecy as seen in Ellen White's life has unfortunately and tragically given the wrong impression, and made people feel that God is no longer active in people's lives today. But that is the opposite of what Ellen White herself taught and believed. That belief actually does great harm to the church because if it is believed, it will keep members spiritually stunted forever.

Quote:

The Bible, in my opinion, is just a book. The Author has always been more important to me to focus on

One thing's for sure, and that is that the Bible is not to be worshipped but the God of the Bible is. I believe the Bible is God's written Word, just as Christ was/is God's Word in the flesh. They can both be depended on. The Bible is the test of all teachings about God and the way God saves us. There are many things that God may reveal that are not in the Bible, but I believe that if something contradicts the Bible, I would be wise to trust the Bible. It's proved itself worthy of my trust over and over again.

Quote:

and He is not an author of personal confusion, but rather of personal clarity, and He does make all things clear to us when we need them to be, etc. Remember, in the NT, when the men on the road to Emmaus said, "Didn't our hearts burn within us as He spoke?" They didn't have to go get some book to check His words against before they believed Him as He spoke to them about how the OT pointed to Him personally. They just Looked at Him, Heard Him, and Knew that He was the one they should Listen to - they didn't need to pull out some scroll first and make sure He was telling them the truth. They just Knew that He was who He said He is.

I like that a lot. Very well put, I think.

[olger]

It is not the Bible that is on trial by the spirits, but the spirits that are on trial by the Word (1 John 4:1).

oG

[FoundByLove]

How can anything known to a person to be from God contradict the Bible, unless we're willing to admit that even portions of the Bible contradict themselves (for example, an interlinear study of the 4 Gospels will show "different perspectives" written of [in hind-sight] regarding numerous stories, sometimes having one Gospel author step on the toes of another...)

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't believe God is limited to a book - it's merely a human attempt, over the span of about 1500 years, to act on the then-Leading of the Holy Spirit to attempt to record the things God wanted recorded. I can't imagine for one minute that every word in that Book is written -exactly- the way God would have written it Himself if He had so chosen to do that. I think it's better to gain general knowledge and general principles from the Bible than it is to get caught up in the minutia of details over specific words or phrases. Does the Bible say to Love others as God has loved us and as we love ourselves? Does it define Love, not only in the Love Chapter, but also as giving others Freedom to choose and be their true selves, and to not condemn others? Well, then, that's what it says, in general. To me, that's more important than trying to memorize myriads of specific texts word for word, location for location, in specific Biblical versions, etc.

The only practical value I can see in using the Bible in discussions is that it's the one thing that multiple people can choose to agree to use as a text-book as the Spirit Leads them - if they choose to do that. But I don't think it's right at all to use it as a hammer to nail someone to the cross with. I think it's sad that this happens far too often. I don't think that's what God intended it for at all.

[olger]

The enemy quoted Bible to Jesus during the wilderness temptation. How did Christ know it was wrong?

The enemy quoted it out of context, in opposition to the will of God. Christ put the quote in context by appealing to another passage of the word.

In like manner, if we place confidence in our feelings, urges, and impressions, we can go down a lot of wrong roads (and over the cliff). That is why the Bible counsels us to test all things by the Word (Isaiah 8:20). God is safeguarding us from deception.

oG

[Woody]

Quote:

That is why the Bible counsels us to test all things by the Word (Isaiah 8:20). God is safeguarding us from deception.

Which version and interpretation do you use? I hope you would use my interpretations ... but somehow I doubt it. So, is your interpretation accepted since it is different from mine?

[Planey]

Red, I believe that what Olger is saying is that when we look at one passage of the Bible, we can test our interpretation of this passage by seeing whether it conflicts with other parts of the Bible.

If there is apparent conflict we need to check carefully and prayerfully. I strongly believe that the Holy Spirit will guide us to Truth if we open our minds to be guided.

Why do we then get different people with different ideas, when both seem to be sincere in studies and both seem equally willing to be guided? The best I can come up with is that the Holy Spirit leads people at the speed He knows that they can deal with, and each persons journey may follow a different path. (But what do I know?)

Graeme

[CyberGuy]

My results to that test is.

1. Orthodox Quaker (100%)

2. Seventh Day Adventist (84%)

3. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (76%)

4. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (74%)

5. Liberal Quakers (71%)

6. Taoism (58%)

7. Unitarian Universalism (58%)

8. Secular Humanism (56%)

9. Theravada Buddhism (55%)

10. Neo-Pagan (54%)

11. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (52%)

12. Eastern Orthodox (52%)

13. Roman Catholic (52%)

14. Mahayana Buddhism (51%)

15. Jainism (50%)

16. Reform Judaism (47%)

17. Sikhism (47%)

18. New Age (45%)

19. Bahá'í Faith (44%)

20. Hinduism (40%)

21. Orthodox Judaism (38%)

22. Nontheist (37%)

23. Islam (34%)

[Gerr]

My results to that test is.

1. Orthodox Quaker (100%)

2. Seventh Day Adventist (84%)

3. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (76%)

4. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (74%)

5. Liberal Quakers (71%)

6. Taoism (58%)

7. Unitarian Universalism (58%)

8. Secular Humanism (56%)

9. Theravada Buddhism (55%)

10. Neo-Pagan (54%)

11. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (52%)

12. Eastern Orthodox (52%)

13. Roman Catholic (52%)

14. Mahayana Buddhism (51%)

15. Jainism (50%)

16. Reform Judaism (47%)

17. Sikhism (47%)

18. New Age (45%)

19. Bahá'í Faith (44%)

20. Hinduism (40%)

21. Orthodox Judaism (38%)

22. Nontheist (37%)

23. Islam (34%)

You are one confused man!!!

Gerry

[CyberGuy]

Yeah I think I got one question wrong. LOL

[Woody]

Red, I believe that what Olger is saying is that when we look at one passage of the Bible, we can test our interpretation of this passage by seeing whether it conflicts with other parts of the Bible.

If there is apparent conflict we need to check carefully and prayerfully. I strongly believe that the Holy Spirit will guide us to Truth if we open our minds to be guided.

Why do we then get different people with different ideas, when both seem to be sincere in studies and both seem equally willing to be guided? The best I can come up with is that the Holy Spirit leads people at the speed He knows that they can deal with, and each persons journey may follow a different path. (But what do I know?)

Graeme

Thanks Graeme. I very much like the thoughts that you have presented here. This is the reason I feel it is so important for us to have tolerance for those who believe differently than us. After all ... the Holy Spirit is in control.

[FoundByLove]

The enemy quoted Bible to Jesus during the wilderness temptation. How did Christ know it was wrong?

The enemy quoted it out of context, in opposition to the will of God. Christ put the quote in context by appealing to another passage of the word.

In like manner, if we place confidence in our feelings, urges, and impressions, we can go down a lot of wrong roads (and over the cliff). That is why the Bible counsels us to test all things by the Word (Isaiah 8:20). God is safeguarding us from deception.

oG

That's just a common Christian fear-based perspective, no offense intended. Would any of us here said such things to Abraham, Isaiah, Elijah, or John the Baptist? It was by Faith that they lived and acted, wrote and preached. It wasn't by the former writings of others. In Abraham's case, there were no former writings to begin with. To use the Bible as an end-all (based on our personal or even sub-culture collective interpretations) is to delete the Working of the Holy Spirit on the individual hearts of men, women, and children everywhere. Besides, anyone read the Bible in French? Heh. Horrible translation, once the French is transliterated into English anyway. If I were to go word-for-word on the way that version is translated, um, I'd be a Zionist for sure, I know that much.

[olger]

The fact that Abraham and the patriarchs had no "Bible" does not devalue the gift for us, but rather increases it's value for today.

In times past, God spoke through His prophets, but has in these last day spoken to us by His Son (Hebrews 1:1). Abraham was one of those prophets. Said he "My son, God will provide himself a Lamb" as he prophesied of the world's Redeemer. "Abraham saw My day and was glad."

My concern is that you seem to overestimate the value of personal impression and underestimate the value of revelation. If anyone had the right to go on personal impression, it was Jesus, alone in the wilderness. Yet He reached not for personal impression but for the written word. He quotes from Deuteronomy all three times.

The danger in straying away from the Word for our benchmark is that we lose our magisterium of life. The Holy Spirit is the interpreter of the Word, and the comforter. Christ's statement that the HS would not speak of himself reveals that the Spirit too is dependent upon another (Christ).

"He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you" (John 16:14-15).

Fearless Regards,

oG

[ChildofChrist]

Someone sent an email regarding this 'change of heart.'

My aunt would say, "Another bright light gone out!"

Pendleton stated that he found joy in the catholic church after studying it. I too have been studying it and feel only fear as to what they are capable of doing.

[FoundByLove]

My concern is that you seem to overestimate the value of personal impression and underestimate the value of revelation.

[kathwi2]

Romans 9:21 --Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?Romans 9:22

What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: Romans 9:23 --And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

[kathwi2]

Closely connected with Christ’s warning in regard to the sin against the Holy Spirit is a warning against idle and evil words.

Words are an indication of that which is in the heart. “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.” But words are more than an indication of character; they have power to react on the character.

People are influenced by their own words. Often under a brief thought; prompted by Satan, they give utterance to jealousy or evil thinking, expressing that which they do not really believe; but the expression reacts on the thoughts.

They are deceived by their words and come to believe that which was spoken at Satan’s instigation as true.

Having once expressed an opinion or decision, they are often too proud to retract it, and try to prove themselves in the right, until they come to believe that they are.

It is dangerous to utter a word of doubt; dangerous to question and criticize divine light.

The habit of careless and irreverent criticism reacts on the character, in fostering irreverence and unbelief many a man indulging this habit has gone on unconscious of danger, until he was ready to criticize and reject the work of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus said, “Every idle word that men speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified and by your words you will be condemned.” {DA 323.1}

Then He added a warning to those who had been impressed by His words, who had heard Him gladly, but who had not surrendered themselves for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is not only by resistance but by neglect that the soul is destroyed.

“When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man,” said Jesus, “he walk through dry places, seeking rest and find none. Then he said, “I will return into my house from where I came out” and when he is come, he found it empty, swept and garnished. Then go he, and take with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself and they enter in and live there.” {DA 323.2}

There were many in Christ’s day, as there is today; They rejoiced in the love of God; but, like the stony-ground hearers of the parable, they did not stay in His love. They did not surrender themselves to God daily that Christ might live in the heart and when the evil spirit returned, with “seven other spirits more wicked than himself,” they were wholly dominated by the power of evil. {DA 323.3}

[Raphael]

Ahah.. I turn out to be SDA...

Seventh Day Adventist (99%)

Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (98%)

Eastern Orthodox (92%)

Roman Catholic (92%)

Orthodox Quaker (81%)

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (69%)

Hinduism (68%)

Jehovah's Witness (67%)

Orthodox Judaism (62%)

Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (61%)

Islam (52%)

Jainism (41%)

Sikhism (39%)

Liberal Quakers (38%)

Unitarian Universalism (36%)

Baha'i Faith (34%)

Mahayana Buddhism (32%)

Reform Judaism (31%)

Theravada Buddhism (31%)

Neo-Pagan (31%)

Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (26%)

Scientology (24%)

Secular Humanism (22%)

New Age (21%)

Nontheist (20%)

New Thought (15%)

Taoism (11%)

[BobRyan]

For a short time at La Sierra Campus, now a separate university from Loma Linda University in California, he was a pre-med student. But Pendleton soon switched to a history and political science double major with a theology minor. He went on to receive a master’s in religion from Loma Linda and became a Seventh-day Adventist minister.

As part of his graduate studies, Pendleton learned about various Christian religions. He remembers being fascinated by the documents of the Second Vatican Council, particularly the ones that focused on religious freedom, which he found to be “kind of the borderline between law and religion, government and religion, state and church.”

At the time, he was debating whether the best way to serve in his career was as a minister or in public service. Pendleton decided to get a law degree from the University of Southern California.

Legislative days

In 1995, Pendleton moved back to Hawaii and worked as a lawyer for a year before running for the State House of Representatives. He was elected and eventually served four terms as a Republican for Kailua and Kaneohe. During his time in office, Pendleton was minority whip, assistant minority leader and minority floor leader.

A couple of points for perspective.

1. No such thing as "once an SDA minister ALWAYS an SDA minister" like there is in the RCC where they claim that a RC Priest "retains the magic powers" to turn bread into God EVEN if that priest apostatizes.

This guy left the ministry long before he became a Catholic according to that text above.

2. This guy went to La Sierra - and they have been making a lot of news lately about the things they have been teaching for the past 20 years or more.

While it is a sad story it appears that the downward path had already started long before he became RCC - I don't think we can blame Catholics or Catholicism for this one.

in Christ,

Bob

[phkrause]

Interesting Olger, I have a Pastor friend that went to school with another Pastor who also converted to RCC and than just a few years ago or so I understand this Pastor is now converting back to the SDA church. Not sure of the name, but he was also intrigued by the RCC.

[olger]

Something tells me that converting to RCC wouldn't be a good idea...

[Kevin H]

I may be wrong but I wonder if this is the result of taking a truth to an extream: I understand the Papacy to be a key part of the 5th head, but the whole beast, is any orginized group that replaces Christ in our life, with the 7 heads being the 7 periods of Babylon, Medio-Persia, Greece, Rome, the Holy Roman Empire/Papal supremicy, the deadly wound, and the wound being healed with Revelatioin 18 picturing it being rather than like the heads of the past, here it is the world united by economic cooperation, power over everyone's buying and selling at a time where the sea is about to (and ends up) not longer able to support life and where there is the scorching sun (global warming).

However we tend to make the WHOLE beast the papacy, everything that comes from the Vatican we see as coming from hell. As we discover that there are truely Christians in the Catholic church, it can be confusing, which could have played a role in these pastors changing. Again I may be wrong.