Quackventists

[BobRyan]

Am I to understand from your post that strict adherence & obedience to established doctrine is conservatism and legalism? And that those who discover living under grace somehow are less strict in their adherence & obedience to established truth?

Gerry

There is a school of thought that goes down that road.. kind of a "no matter what the Bible says -- evolutionism is true" and that same group many times is arguing against what Ellen White might say about Creation and against the "SIX days you shall labor... for in SIX DAYS the LORD MADE..." view of origins.

Many times it is considered to be "rigid conservatives" that are backing the 28 FB just as they read -- AS IF those statements are generated by a small group of mostly conservatives that has chosen to gather every 5 years for some odd reason.

Did you see Mark Finley's program last night on the Ten Commandments? When he got to commandment 4 -- he contrasted that with evolutionism -- showing how the attack on that commandment is mountiing both within the church and outside it.

when he got to the 6th commandment he spoke of the value of human life -- and the modern idea of killing infants.

It is instructive that he adds at that point that ministers need to be very clear about these matters when they speak on them from the pulpit.

You can just imagine how well those statements would go over in some circles.

in Christ,

Bob

[Woody]

I think they are stuck in the mud ...

(Perhaps Dr. Kellogg suggested mud treatments. Did he?)

[Bravus]

Oh Bob, give it a rest man. Evolution is not even the issue here. Obsessed much?

[Woody]

I'm not Bob ... but I agree. So you noticed that Bob snuck in that evolution info in there. Interesting how it just slid in. But it does look ever so familiar.

The motto is :

If you repeat something long and loud enough ... maybe it will be believed.

[carolaa]

Am I to understand from your post that strict adherence & obedience to established doctrine is conservatism and legalism? And that those who discover living under grace somehow are less strict in their adherence & obedience to established truth?

In my opinion, the difference between legalism and living under grace is where your focus is. If your focus is on obedience to the doctrine, then you're a legalist. If your focus is on Jesus and being like Him, then you're not a legalist.

[John317]

If we focus on Jesus, it means focussing on what He taught and who He is and on what He is doing now.

[carolaa]

Which means what?

I can't tell if you're agreeing, disagreeing, or just adding on.

[Woody]

If we focus on Jesus, it means focussing on what He taught and who He is and on what He is doing now.

It is the preoccupation with ones legal standing with God ... that is the concern here.

[Guest Bruno]

OK, so what if someone wants to never eat pickles? Really, why would you have a problem with that. They are taking what Ellen White said seriously. How is that an issue?

Makes sense to me.

I think it's an issue when you tell someone something that is not true. I can't find any evidence for pickles making the blood feverish and impure.

If you really believe that pickles create fevers, please go to your local ER next time you have a fever. Just ask the doctor for the anti-pickle drug, they'll know what you mean. But you have to ask quietly, since it's still a big secret that there finally is a drug to reverse the ever so dangerous pickle fever. And you have to take it right away, or pickle fever can lead to a pickled brain, which limits your ability to think rationally in the face of knowledge.

Really, you sincerely believe that eating pickles will give you a fever?????

You honestly buy into the statement, and believe with all your heart and soul, that pickels will make your blood "impure"????

Please find the clinical definition of "impure" blood in any text that medical students use. Please, I beg you, find a modern medical doctor, state licensed, board certified, in good standing in the medical community, that will tell you that pickles cause fevers. Because when you do, I've got some land and a bridge to sell him/her.

It's always an issue when you give mis-information. At the time, it was commonly believed that blood could be "impure" and that pickles could cause fever. However, in this day and age (you know, genome mapping, space ships to mars, stuff like that) we know, KNOW, that pickles don't cause fevers. So, to take every word of SOP literally, to the letter of the law, is to use information incorrectly, and that's harmful.

Using SOP in context of current medical knowledge is very different. And that's knowledge that she helped start. Even though she origianlly shunned doctors, she helped start Loma Linda Medical School after realizing that doctors aren't bad, but mis-information is.

[Woody]

[LifeHiscost]

Otherwise, what saves us from reading "And Judas went out and hanged himself" followed by "go and do thou likewise", and taking it as newly revealed truth?

Point well taken. Maybe I'm too insulated from the real world. However the danger of such fallacious reasoning coming from anyone that has even a modicum knowledge of the Scripture or any desire to know Truth, has never happened from any of the people of which I've been acquainted, believer or unbeliever, not to say someone else might have had such an experience.

Regards!

[rush4hire]

If you really believe that pickles create fevers

[rush4hire]

However, in this day and age (you know, genome mapping, space ships to mars, stuff like that) we know, KNOW, that pickles don't cause fevers.

[rush4hire]

So, to take every word of SOP literally, to the letter of the law, is to use information incorrectly, and that's harmful.

Law is one thing. Counsel is another thing. There's no law against alcohol, for instance. You can go get drunk and you have not sinned. But there is alot of counsel that suggests it's safer not to drink.

[color:#BF0000]Prov. 31:4 [it is] not for kings, O Lemuel, [it is] not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink:

31:5 Lest they drink, and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted.

Drinking is lawful, but it does not edify.

[color:#BF0000]1 Cor. 10:23 All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

It can lead to sin, and often does.

[color:#BF0000]Prov. 23:31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, [when] it moveth itself aright.

23:32 At the last it biteth like a serpent, and stingeth like an adder.

23:33 Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things.

Drinking can very easily become an addiction, which is alot like idolatry.

[color:#BF0000]Prov. 23:35 when shall I awake? I will seek it yet again.

Doing something that increases your chance of falling prey to the enemy, is not wise:

[color:#BF0000] 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:

Alcohol, is for those who are perishing, for the unsaved:

[color:#BF0000]Prov. 31:6 Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.

31:7 Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.

But for God's people to be getting drunk bears false witness. It's gives the message that we don't care about saving souls, or anything.

[color:#BF0000]Titus 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

Law and Counsel. And then there's Covenant, which is another thing. In order to have a covenant with God, one has to adhere to the precepts of that covenant. Such as the observance of Baptism and Communion. If you're a Nazarite, then part of your covenant, not just counsel, would be to avoid wine, and vinegar.

[color:#BF0000]Amos 2:11 And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazarites.

[LifeHiscost]

Using SOP in context of current medical knowledge is very different. And that's knowledge that she helped start. Even though she origianlly shunned doctors, she helped start Loma Linda Medical School after realizing that doctors aren't bad, but mis-information is.

I appreciate your trust in the medical community to give the truth re; remedial medicine. Perhaps you might find an avenue to inform them in a way they might accept, of alternative natural cures for cancer that don't require poisoning, cutting or burning, and don't cost thousands of dollars to merely extend life for a few years or months under less than quality living without any cures.

Of course the cures for complimentary therapy cannot be patented and so won't cost the dollars and therefor suggests little interest in mainstream medical practice. However I guess this is a subject for another thread.

Regards!

[LifeHiscost]

One has to wonder...

So many of these folks, have a religious experience that tells them to stay away from 212 Century Medicine, and do alternate medicine from the early 1900's.

Why is that???

It could be that modern medical practices have a failure rate that has links to over 160,000 deaths yearly, while the alternative methods, in the same period of time, have possible links of 400 deaths. Now that could be partially because of less oversight in the alternative medicine arena. OTOH what other industry, the first above, could have that amount of risk and remain in business. Hope springs eternal.

Regards!

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Am I to understand from your post that strict adherence & obedience to established doctrine is conservatism and legalism? And that those who discover living under grace somehow are less strict in their adherence & obedience to established truth?

In my opinion, the difference between legalism and living under grace is where your focus is. If your focus is on obedience to the doctrine, then you're a legalist. If your focus is on Jesus and being like Him, then you're not a legalist.

I sure would like for Guibox to answer my question so as to remove any possible misunderstanding on my part about what he said.

Gerry

[Guest Bruno]

[quote name='rush4hire

She said those things irritate the stomach' date=' and cause the blood to be feverish, and impure.

Feverish blood is not the same as a fever.

"Feverish and impure blood" is like intoxication. It's like the warm feeling a drunk person feels. They say "Have a drink of this. It'll keep you warm."

[/quote']

Can you please give a link, or provide a source, for your definition of "feverish and impure" blood which equals to intoxication?

In the modern medical world, there is no current usage of the term "feverish and impure" blood. When you have a "fever", your body tempeture is above 100.5. When you have "impure" blood, you have septicemia. Neither of these are caused by eating pickles.

When you do a quick google of the term "feverish and impure blood" you will find links to the buddhist diet and the astrological magazine, neither of which would I put any faith in as having the correct definition of "feverish and impure blood".

If you do some research of the medical knowledge of the mid 1800's you'll find that was a common term, and a total lack of knowledge regarding how the body works.

When you "have a drink to warm you up", you are actually doing the exact opposite. Alcohol is a vasodilator (that means it makes your blood vessels get bigger), thus, allowing more blood and core heat go to your external body. This in turn makes you "feel" warm, when in fact, you are cooling your body.

[Neil D]

Quote:

If you do some research of the medical knowledge of the mid 1800's you'll find that was a common term, and a total lack of knowledge regarding how the body works.

Thank you, Bruno for clearing up some of these ticklish problems...There are times when my arm chair gets abused due to frustration with those who grab the public mike just to talk and to re-interate nebulous cultural values.

That said, I do think that there is a continuity in EGW statements that does indicate a caution in certain foods. How much of a caution is something that need to be assessed with the individual....IOWs, I can not speak for you when it comes to MY body...as MY body ain't YOUR body. My body reacts differently than your body would to various foods and medicines and environments. Granted, there a lot of foods and medicines and enviorments that you and I would commonly react nearly the same....but not always. And I think that EGW is attempting to, in her writing, give warning to us about those things which MAY cause problem...

Otherwise, great post to Rush...

[Guest Bruno]

[quote name='rush4hire

"Mustard' date=' pepper, spices, pickles, and other things of a like character", stimulate you. That's why people use them. Also people are addicted to too much salt. Because salt is stimulating. And it's bad for you. Also people like grease, because it's stimulating.

[/quote']

"Chloride and sodium ions, the two major components of salt, are necessary for the survival of all known living creatures, including humans. Salt is involved in regulating the water content (fluid balance) of the body. Salt cravings may be caused by trace mineral deficiencies as well as by a deficiency of sodium chloride itself."

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

If you think you can live without salt, please have a medic standing near by, or be prepared to buy a plot of ground 6 feet deep. When people drink too much water in a short period of time, they decrease the amount of salt in their blood, thus causing hyponatremia.

"Hyponatremia is an abnormally low concentration of sodium in your blood.

When your blood sodium is too low, your cells malfunction — causing swelling. In chronic hyponatremia, sodium levels drop gradually over several days or weeks — and symptoms are typically moderate. In acute hyponatremia, sodium levels drop rapidly — resulting in potentially dangerous effects, such as rapid brain swelling, which can result in coma and death.

Hyponatremia occurs when the sodium in your blood is diluted by excess water. Hyponatremia may result from medical conditions that impair excretion of water from your body, or by a significant increase in water consumption, such as by athletes competing in marathons and other high-endurance events."

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hyponatremia/DS00974

When you make a statement like "salt is bad for you", it clearly shows just how little you know about the inner workings of the human body you inhabit, how sad. Anything that is overdone is harmful to the body, even too much water. But salt is absolutely necessary for life, just try living without it.

[Guest Bruno]

To suggest that God raised up real prophets, thousands of years ago, but could only give us a "pseudo-prophet" today... Well, there's just no logic to such thinking.

Rush,

I think it would be very refreshing if you would start using logic in your thinking.

Now, I agree, but I didn't say that, nor did I imply that, so I hope you were not referencing me in that statement.

Do you believe that every single thing that SOP wrote is 100% absolutely correct? Do you believe that SOP was a perfect human being?

I don't think SOP was a "pseudo" anything.

[rush4hire]

In my opinion, the difference between legalism and living under grace is where your focus is. If your focus is on obedience to the doctrine, then you're a legalist. If your focus is on Jesus and being like Him, then you're not a legalist.

I examined the topic of "legalism". The word is not in the Bible, and Ellen White uses the word only one time. How does she define "legalism". The answer might surprise you:

The Various Definitions of Legalism

[rush4hire]

One has to wonder...

So many of these folks, have a religious experience that tells them to stay away from 212 Century Medicine, and do alternate medicine from the early 1900's.

Why is that???

On behalf of "these folks", I would say cost might be a factor. Doctors these days charge an arm and leg to sew on the tip of a finger. It's getting out of hand.

It may be that drugs are shunned as well, because EG White says drugs are bad, generally. One might consider that back they where bad, generally. They did prescribe some highly toxic things back then, like strychnine, mercury, and other things that I can't think of off hand.

[rush4hire]

When you make a statement like "salt is bad for you", it clearly shows just how little you know about the inner workings of the human body you inhabit, how sad.

I never said "salt is bad for you". I said too much salt is bad for you, and it's a common problem, similar to too much grease.

Hanz Deil is a doctor, and he says too much salt is bad, and that it's enough of a problem that people need to be informed about it.

[rush4hire]

Do you believe that every single thing that SOP wrote is 100% absolutely correct? Do you believe that SOP was a perfect human being?

The Spirit of Prophecy is not a person, but a spirit.

[color:#BF0000]Rev. 19:10 I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

The spirit of prophecy, or the testimony of Jesus, is one of the things that identifies the Remnant Church.

[color:#BF0000]Rev. 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

So that's why we call the writings of Ellen White, "The Spirit of Prophecy".

No prophet has ever been infallible. But the doctrine of their writings, their teachings, where. Such teachings where carefully selected as being undeniably canonical. That's what we call "Scripture".

The prophecies are reliable. The counsels are reliable. I'm not convinced that there's any difference between Ellen White and the Bible prophets, in this capacity.

You could say that she retracted some things, but so did the Bible prophets.

You could say she paraphrased from other Christian authors, but the Bible prophets did the same thing.

You can't say that she didn't know what she was saying, because she says something is bad, but the doctors say it's OK. It just depends on what you call impure. Obviously God will consider things impure for His people, while worldly doctors will say those same things are OK, for the people of the world.

[color:#BF0000]Lev. 11:43 Ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby.

11:44 For I [am] the LORD your God: ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for I [am] holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Can you say that Moses was wrong, because the doctors today say that those things are OK? Doctors have published books about the beneficial properties of certain unclean beasts. Who will you believe?

Not that unclean things is comparable to vinegar.

Like I said, it's not law, but counsel. If your diet is closer to what God set it up in the beginning, (Genesis 1), without all the refinement, and fermentation, and other unnecessary processing, then I think you will be healthier, and happier. And that might cause you to be a better witness for Christ.

The best foods are not always available. But we can try and do our best with what we have.