Is the Adventist Church Really Pro-life?

[doug yowell]

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

Pam. What did you get your Ph.D in? How long did it take you to finish? Were you able to get it published? [/quote']irrelevant and off-topic.

Why am I not suprised at your answer??

[Nic Samojluk]

In his dissertation, Nic wrote:

Quote:

This leads the observer to wonder whether the SDA church has experienced a ninety-degree shift from the original pro-life position manifested by the founders of this religious movement.

Do you understand what a 90 degree shift means? This error in thinking is another reason why your hypothesis is invalid.

Yes, I think the Church is pro-choice. But your dissertation is so full of unprofesssional animosity and hostility (see Abstract and Appendices), it is fruitless to hold a discussion about the subject with you.

Pam,

I think I do understand what a 90 degree shift means. I was originally tempted to use the 180 degree phrase instead, but I realized that it would rather apply to those in the pro-abortion camp, so I chose the “90 degrees” instead. What is wrong with that?

Thank you for finally answering the question I have been asking again, again, and again. I am glad that you decided to admit what is hard to deny: that the Adventist church has compromised on the issue of abortion and has shifted its pro-life position to a pro-choice one.

This means to me that your suggestion that my investigation was worthless is unfounded because now you admit that my premise and my conclusions were on target.

[teresaq]

I am glad that you decided to admit what is hard to deny: that the Adventist church has compromised on the issue of abortion and has shifted its pro-life position to a pro-choice one.

you havent proved that the church was anti-abortion.

there is too little "evidence" to say one way or the other.

wanting to believe something is not proof.

[Nic Samojluk]

Nic, I've already posted the official position of the SDA church. We are not pro-choice.

[Guest]

Doug,

My opinion is that officially we are pro-choice, but in practice we are more pro-abortion than pro-choice.

This needs a clarification as well. My investigation revealed that 2/3 of those who expressed their opinions in our Adventist magazines between 1970 and 2006 seemed to be pro-life; while 2/3 of the authors of books and articles were siding with the pro-choice position.

What happened is that the responsibility for drafting the "Guidelines on Abortion" was delegated to the Ethics Department of the Loma Linda Univesity. This was akin to asking the tobacco industry to write the rules about the sale of tobacco products.

Yep

[Nic Samojluk]

What our hospitals do or don't do ... has little bearing on what our church stands for.

[Nic Samojluk]

rudywoofs was not beating around the bushes, you were. you made assertions, she asked for proof, you and "yours" did everything to evade an honest question.

Teresa,

Sorry to disagree. The moment you alerted me to the fact that I had attributed to James White what he had simply edited, I did thank you for submitting a valid criticism and I told you that I was planning to go to the Heritage Room in order to verify this alleged error of mine. Your criticism was constructive, while Pam’s criticism was of the destructive type. She was bent on making everybody believe that my investigation was worthless, but she finally admitted what was the focal point of my research: that the conclusion of my research had been validated and that she agrees that the Adventist Church holds now the pro-choice position on abortion. This admission invalidates her previous assertion that my research was worthless!

Pam has demonstrated an unwillingness to provide me with a constructive type of criticisms. She stated that my dissertation contains many grammatical errors, but when I asked her to identify them, she answered that she has no intention of complying with my request. She seemed to be on a mission to destroy my credibility. She could redeem herself by making a contribution to my effort by doing what you did. I am willing to correct my errors if they are identified and verified. I am as human as everybody else, and I am not making any claims to perfection.

[John317]

I was planning to go to the Heritage Room in order to verify this alleged error of mine. ..

Quote:

Few are aware of the fearful extent to which this nefarious business, this worse than devilish practice, is carried on in all classes of society! Many a woman determines that she will not become a mother, and subjects herself to the vilest treatment, committing the basest crime to carry out her purpose. And many a man, who has as many children as he can support, instead of restraining his passions, aids in the destruction of the babes he has begotten. The sin lies at the door of both parents in equal measure; for the father, although he may not always aid in the murder, is always accessory to it, in that he induces, and sometimes even forces upon the mother the condition which he knows will lead to the commission of the crime.

James White. Solemn Appeal (Battle Creek, Michigan: Stem Press, 1870), 100.

The above paragraph was written by E. P. Paul, a physician. The "murder" and "crimes" spoken of refer to the fact that the man would often satisfy his sexual passions at the expense of the wife's health, making her pregnant year in and year out, and consequently babies were not infrequently still-born.

James and Ellen White were not the only ones who contributed to the writings found in the Solemn Appeal. Ellen White's articles in the Appeal are clearly labeled as such.

This information was given to me this last Friday by the staff in the Heritage Room at the Ellen White Estate in Loma Linda.

Are you from the Loma Linda area? I live within a few miles of there. It's great to be so close to such a good source as the Heritage Room.

[Steve Billiter]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

I am glad that you decided to admit what is hard to deny: that the Adventist church has compromised on the issue of abortion and has shifted its pro-life position to a pro-choice one.

you havent proved that the church was anti-abortion.

there is too little "evidence" to say one way or the other.

wanting to believe something is not proof.

I really think all this business of the church, this, the church that on abortion is not edifying, kind of like getting lost in genealogies.

Why? The church is falling, but it won't quite fall all the way. As the SDA church continues to slide into apostasy, the true and faithful will still overcome by the blood of the lamb.

The Ohio SDA Conference once a year hosts the Innovation Infusion Conference. This was the 5th year I believe. Past speakers have been Leonard Sweet, who is a high occultist, And Samir Selminovic, a former SDA theologian who is now a New Age guru that runs the Faith House in NYC. This event has been featured on the Sunday oriented magazine Lighthouse Trails, who specializes in exposing contemplative spiritualism

So the Ohio SDA Conference has had the rather dubious distinction of making their list. It seems a bit difficult to preach the message to come out of Babylon when the Ohio Conference hosts occultists.Maybe thats why independents seem to be doing the real work.

Ordeal of the Sifting Time.--Satan will work his miracles to deceive; he will set up his power as supreme. The church may appear as about to fall, but it does not fall. It remains, while the sinners in Zion will be sifted out--the chaff separated from the precious wheat. This is a terrible ordeal, but nevertheless it must take place. None but those who have been overcoming by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony will be found with the loyal and true, without spot or stain of sin, without guile in their mouths. . . . The remnant that purify their souls by obeying the truth gather strength from the trying process, exhibiting the beauty of holiness amid the surrounding apostasy (Letter 55, 1886). {7BC 911.6}

[Nic Samojluk]

lets not muddy the waters. the issue was whether james white wrote it as claimed.

there has never been an official stance on abortion by the sda church.

nic has already given evidence of not being a legitimate sda, are you one?

in which case trying to manipulate and coerce sda members into your agenda is really not appreciated.

Teresa,

Again, you are right and wrong at the same time; right because at the time of the pioneers there was no official position on abortion. There was rather a consensus that killing the unborn was a violation of the Decalogue and the early pioneers described it as murder. This attitude was shared by all the Christian denominations and even by the general population. Of course, abortion was illegal at the time.

You are also wrong because, as I stated in my previous posting directed at you I documented the fact that the General Conference did approve the document entitled “Guidelines on Abortion.” Its nature is descriptive instead of being prescriptive, because every medical institution is free to draft its own guidelines. Actually, I should say that even the term descriptive is inappropriate as well, since several or our hospitals have been offering abortion services and even ELECTIVE abortions to their patients.

Regarding your claim that I am not an Adventist, I suggest that you check with the Loma Linda University Church and they will confirm that I have been a member since 1974. I did also serve the church for nearly a decade as chairman of the foreign language department at what today is known ad “Universidad Adventista del Plata,” Argentina, before emigrating to the U.S. I also hold diplomas from Adventist elementary, secondary, and College level institutions both in the U.S. and Argentina.

Please, stop making wild claims which will end embarrassing you!

[Nic Samojluk]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

...Really? Are you in agreement with Jesuits who say: "Don't look at what I do, but rather at what I say"?

this coming from a person who believes peter was the first "authority" of the church? aka "pope", right?

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

When Saint Peter acted against what was right, Paul reprimanded him publicly.

Peter was the maximum authority of the nascent Christian church,

yet a man inferior in position in the church reprimanded him.

perhaps you are confused as to which church you are speaking to?

Teresa,

Didn’t Jesus delegate to Peter the responsibility of feeding his sheep? [John 21:17] Didn’t Peter preach the sermon at Pentecost which resulted in the conversion of 3,000 people to the nascent Christian church. I believe that the biblical evidence is that Peter was initially the most influential leader of the church and was later replaced by James. But if you think otherwise, I have no problem. Does this make me a Catholic? Come on! Who are you kidding?

Why would I spend ten years working for the Adventist church, work as a colporteur for five summers plus an entire year, and contribute to the financial success of the Adventist Church for 70 years [i started tithing at seven] if I am in fact a Catholic. If I were a Catholic, I would have channeled my contributions to Rome. You seem to act like Pam now—attempting to engage in the personal destruction of an Adventist member.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Nic wrote:

Quote:

This means to me that your suggestion that my investigation was worthless is unfounded because now you admit that my premise and my conclusions were on target.

No. I still say your premise and conclusions were biased and your hostility and animosity shows up in both the Abstract and in the Appendices.

Quote:

Pam has demonstrated an unwillingness to provide me with a constructive type of criticisms.

No. You refused to accept what I was saying.

Quote:

She was bent on making everybody believe that my investigation was worthless.

I am interested in the truth, and you came onto this forum professing to be a person with an assumed *valid* PhD. I investigated and found out otherwise. Members here can draw their own conclusions from that.

Your manner of speaking about me here mirrors the kind of tone you set in your dissertation: very hostile and rude. That is not professional.

Stop the hysterics and have a nice Christmas.

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

lets not muddy the waters. the issue was whether james white wrote it as claimed.

there has never been an official stance on abortion by the sda church.

nic has already given evidence of not being a legitimate sda, are you one?

in which case trying to manipulate and coerce sda members into your agenda is really not appreciated.

Quote:

Teresa, one thing I will grant you and Pam. You both do an excellent job of distorting and misrepresenting not only what others actually write but also what they obviously intend to mean. Are you intentionally doing this? Or is that irrelevant too? Or is anyone's SDA legitimacy the real issue here? I'll tell you what, I'll answer your question if you answer mine. Fair enough? Here's mine: "If I believe that abortion (except to save the life of the mother) is murder,and that the SDA Church should come out and publically oppose it,am I a legitimate SDA?

Good question! I'll be watching for the answer!

[Nic Samojluk]

you havent proved that the church was anti-abortion.

there is too little "evidence" to say one way or the other.

wanting to believe something is not proof.

Teresa,

I cited clear and unambiguous references to the murder of pre-born children made by John H. Kellogg, J.N. Andrews, and Ellen White; and James White edited and published a pamphlet dealing with the same, and you are claiming that we have “too little "evidence" to say one way or the other”?

It is true that there was no official pronouncement by the Adventist church on the issue, but the individuals I cited were in charge of the nascent Adventist Church. James White held the position of president and he founded the Adventist publishing work. We are talking about the people who started the Adventist movement, and we have evidence that they were pro-life.

Besides, we are talking about a time when abortion was illegal. Notice the following reference to said period in the history of the American women’s right movement, and you are suggesting that there is little evidence that the early Adventist pioneers were pro-life? Are you attempting to re-write the history of our nation and that of our Adventist heritage?

“The early women's rights movement, which started in the 1850s, did not support abortions at all. In fact, Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906), the leading proponent of women's rights, condemned abortions.” http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/history-of-the-pro-choice-movement-faq.htm

[Steve Billiter]

Originally Posted By: Steve Billiter

Nic, I've already posted the official position of the SDA church. We are not pro-choice. What individual church members say and do may be different. I advise everyone to study the wheat and the tares parable in Matt. 13 and COL. PP. 70-76.

Steve,

I commend you for answering the fundamental question in dispute, which is the topic of my investigation, which Rudiwoofs has so far been refusing to answer. The closest she has come so far is when she said “you may be right,” but she is reluctant to take a clear stand.

Of course, I believe you are in error in your conclusion. Our “Ministry” magazine reported a few years ago that five of our hospitals were providing ELECTIVE abortions to their patients. Of course, elective means there is nothing wrong with the baby; the mother simply wants the baby killed. And you believe that our church is not pro-choice but pro-life?

Our church has granted our hospitals the freedom to draft their own guidelines on abortion, which is the reason some of our hospital are engaged in the killing of healthy babies. And you believe that our church is pro-life?

Our “Guidelines on abortion” teach that it is morally acceptable to kill innocent babies which have been conceived as a result of rape, incest, and malformation. And you think that the Adventist church is pro-life?

Our church condones the killing of the unborn when the pregnant female is a minor, and even when the woman is faced with an unwanted pregnancy and claims that this is impacting her mental health [a euphemism for “I feel depressed”]. And you believe that our church is pro-life?

Notice that all these stated reasons for accepting the killing of innocent human beings match the tenets of the abortion industry. How in the world can you believe that our church is pro-life? What is your definition of pro-life? How is it different from your definition of pro-choice? Can you explain?

Our guidelines on abortion even argue that Jesus died to grant us the freedom of choice. Do you believe that Jesus died to make sure we would have the right to kill our own children without suffering the consequences of violating the commandments which forbids the killing of innocent human beings? If that is the case, then I could also falsely argue that he died to grant me the freedom of choice to rape, steal, and sexually abuse little children.

I admit that our guidelines include lofty pro-life statements, but are negated by the many exceptions and especially by what our hospitals are doing. What we do speaks louder than what we preach.

Nic, I thought I posted the guidelines or official positions of the church on abortion. Where are the guidelines you mention that sanction abortion in cases of incest, etc.?

How critical is Pam's answer to you? It is her right to answer how she pleases, or not answer, I would not stumble over that.

I understand the blurred lines within SDA hospitals, I'm well aware of the apostasy at La Sierra on evolution as there is 4 professors there that teach that.As we know a belief in evolution will tend the cheapen the views upon the value of human life.

I still maintain it is the corrupt and evil human heart that chooses to kill unborn babies. I personally see no case for abortion unless the pregnancy is severely life-threatening for the mother. No one has the right to kill babies just because of convenience caused by the sin of fornication. Rape and incest, especially rape is a gross crime and should be punished with the max penalty; if the mother would have the baby and give him up for adoption, then a great blessing would result from an evil crime.

How do we deal with the evil tendencies of the human heart? call them baby killers until we are blue in the face? Use humanistic methods to convince them of their error? I don't think that works.

If abortion is a sin, and I say it is,then the only real answer is Jesus Christ;having the born again experience. having a renewal of the mind, a change in attitude. Of course there are those who profess Christ as Saviour and do all kinds of things and Jesus will at the end separate the wheat from the tares and to the tares He will say. "I never knew you," Depart from me you who work iniquity."

Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

So my answer to the sin of abortion as well as to all other sins is to preach and teach Christ Crucified!

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Then the person will obtain eternal life and I also believe that person will choose life in all regards.

2Co 5:17 Therefore if any person be in Christ, he/she is a new creation: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Holiday Greetings and Best Wishes for all! God Bless, Steve

The Conflict of the Ages Readathon starts Jan. 1, on Facebook. We start with PP and read one chapter a day for 10 months and all 5 books are read, and one can log in to the site and blog. It is led by Sandra Entermann, the Australian SDA recording artist. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=185208356614&ref=share

http://midnightcrymedia.com/

(Powerful ministry relating prophecy to current events)

www.sharpeningthesword.net.

(New link to put free EGW modules in E-sword)

http://www.spiritandtruth.org/download/eSword/index.htm ) free Download for the KJV2000 in E-sword)

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

Few are aware of the fearful extent to which this nefarious business, this worse than devilish practice, is carried on in all classes of society! Many a woman determines that she will not become a mother, and subjects herself to the vilest treatment, committing the basest crime to carry out her purpose. And many a man, who has as many children as he can support, instead of restraining his passions, aids in the destruction of the babes he has begotten. The sin lies at the door of both parents in equal measure; for the father, although he may not always aid in the murder, is always accessory to it, in that he induces, and sometimes even forces upon the mother the condition which he knows will lead to the commission of the crime.

James White. Solemn Appeal (Battle Creek, Michigan: Stem Press, 1870), 100.

Quote:

The above paragraph was written by E. P. Paul, a physician. The "murder" and "crimes" spoken of refer to the fact that the man would often satisfy his sexual passions at the expense of the wife's health, making her pregnant year in and year out, and consequently babies were not infrequently still-born.

John,

I have already posted the reasons I believe that the “still born” alternative interpretation of the quotation you cited does not fit the several references to the commission of the murder crime. Here are my reasons again:

1. The woman is described as determined to “not become a mother.”

2. She is referred to as “committing the basest crime to carry out her purpose.” If the reference were to a “still born” the woman would be blameless. She would not be described as “committing the basest crime.”

3. The man is described as an accomplice who “aids in the destruction of the babes he has begotten.”

4. His action is further detailed as follows: “Although he may not always aid in the murder, is always accessory to it.” The “still born” interpretation does not fit here. If this way of reading the text were right, we would have to conclude that the man is always directly responsible for the “murder” instead of “not always.”

Tell me, do you still believe that the text justifies the “still born” way of reading the text?

[Nic Samojluk]

I really think all this business of the church, this, the church that on abortion is not edifying, kind of like getting lost in genealogies.

Why? The church is falling, but it won't quite fall all the way. As the SDA church continues to slide into apostasy, the true and faithful will still overcome by the blood of the lamb.

The Ohio SDA Conference once a year hosts the Innovation Infusion Conference. This was the 5th year I believe. Past speakers have been Leonard Sweet, who is a high occultist, And Samir Selminovic, a former SDA theologian who is now a New Age guru that runs the Faith House in NYC. This event has been featured on the Sunday oriented magazine Lighthouse Trails, who specializes in exposing contemplative spiritualism

So the Ohio SDA Conference has had the rather dubious distinction of making their list. It seems a bit difficult to preach the message to come out of Babylon when the Ohio Conference hosts occultists.Maybe thats why independents seem to be doing the real work.

Ordeal of the Sifting Time.--Satan will work his miracles to deceive; he will set up his power as supreme. The church may appear as about to fall, but it does not fall. It remains, while the sinners in Zion will be sifted out--the chaff separated from the precious wheat. This is a terrible ordeal, but nevertheless it must take place. None but those who have been overcoming by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony will be found with the loyal and true, without spot or stain of sin, without guile in their mouths. . . . The remnant that purify their souls by obeying the truth gather strength from the trying process, exhibiting the beauty of holiness amid the surrounding apostasy (Letter 55, 1886). {7BC 911.6}

Steve,

Are you sure the Adventist will not fail? The same promise of not failing was made to God’s chosen nation—Israel of old. It was made subject to certain conditions. You cited a passage from Ellen White assuring us that the church will emerge victorious. You need to balance this prediction with the following from the same inspired source.

"In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the sentence: "Found wanting." By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged." {8T 247.2}

Do you think that our denominational participation in the violation of the Sixth Commandment is really equivalent to the irrelevant discussion about genealogies? If we re-write the clear meaning of the Sixth Commandment, aren’t we making the same mistake when the Catholic Church altered the true meaning of the Fourth Commandment? Do we still deserve the title of being God’s “Remnant” church that keeps God’s Commandments if some of our hospitals are engaged in the ELECTIVE abortion business with our knowledge and acquiescence?

[Nic Samojluk]

I still say your premise and conclusions were biased and your hostility and animosity shows up in both the Abstract and in the Appendices.

[Steve Billiter]

Nic, perhaps the quote where EGW says the church will not fall is more properly applied to the remnant people of God and not so much to an institution.The church is the people, if the institution becomes corrupt, we are not to take part in that, and I simply don't do it.

I send my tithe to Amazing Facts, Back to Enoch Ministries, It is Written, VOP, and my money stays there to forward the gospel.

They do not promote abortion.Nor do they promote New Theology and worldliness like most of the SDA churches do. I have a serious problem finding and attending SDA churches around here that do not disgust me so much I just walk out. And I have walked out many times in the last two years.

Some in these churches are in constant danger because the cares of this life and worldly thoughts so occupy the mind that they do not think upon God or heaven and the needs of their own souls. They rouse from their stupor now and then, but fall back again in deeper slumber. Unless they shall fully rouse from their slumbers, God will remove the light and blessings He has given them. He will in His anger remove the candlestick out of its place. He has made these churches the depositary of His law. If they reject sin, and by active, earnest piety show stability and submission to the precepts of God's word, and are faithful in the discharge of religious duty, they will help to establish the candlestick in its place, and will have the evidence that the Lord of hosts is with them and the God of Jacob is their refuge. {4T 286.2}

Nic, I made a point in my post today I hope you will see. That we cannot just beat the sinner over the head with their sins, but we should present the gospel to them.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

I still say your premise and conclusions were biased and your hostility and animosity shows up in both the Abstract and in the Appendices.

Quote:

Do you realize that you are attempting to obfuscate what is clearly evident? Do you realize that claiming that the premise and the conclusion of my investigation were “biased” is not equivalent to they being wrong? I did admit to “bias” which I described as “hunch.” All research is biased to a certain extend at the start. This is how our Adventist health study started. I started with the premise that the Adventist Church was in fact pro-choice now instead of being pro-life, and you did admit that my conclusion was correct.

I said your conclusion may well be correct. My personal opinion is that the church is pro-choice.

Quote:

The alleged “animosity” reflected in the Abstract and in the Appendices is a reflection of your belief that targeting the most innocent members of the human race is no big moral deal. I could also argue that all the Old Testament prophets were biased, John the Baptist was biased, and Jesus himself was tremendously biased against the religious leaders of his time. So, I plead guilty to the biased label and I am in good company.

irrelevant

Quote:

I am interested in the truth, and you came onto this forum professing to be a person with an assumed *valid* PhD. I investigated and found out otherwise. Members here can draw their own conclusions from that.

Quote:

I have to disagree. You gave evidence that you determined to hide the truth. I had to ask you whether you did agree that the Adventist Church was pro-choice six times before you answered in the affirmative. That was the main point of my investigation. That was important for me. Whether my Ph.D. program was accredited or not bore very little importance for me. I wanted the training and the degree, and I got both. When I discussed this with Dr. Gerald Winslow of LLU before signing onto the program, he brought the accreditation up, and I told him this was irrelevant for me, since I wan not planning to use the degree for a faculty position. I had my business and was happy with it.

irrelevant

Quote:

Your manner of speaking about me here mirrors the kind of tone you set in your dissertation: very hostile and rude. That is not professional.

Quote:

I plead guilty to the charge as far as it refers to my reaction to the tone you set for the debate when you described my work as “worthless,” in spite of the fact that you agreed that my conclusion was correct. If my conclusion was correct, how can you say that it was worthless? You were probably assuming that I wanted the degree with a faculty position in mind. If that were the case, then I would admit that it was worthless.

non sequitor I still think your dissertation is not PhD material, not only because the degree is worthless, but because it is unprofessionally written. I gave you examples, i.e. the Abstract and Appendices. I know you spent a lot of time on it. I'm sorry I can't say it's a good paper.

Quote:

Dr. Gerald Winslow did not feel that signing up for a Ph.D. program with the knowledge that the program was not yet accredited was worthless. Is your opinion superior to his? The worse part was that you vehemently continued to insist that my effort had been worthless after I explained to you why I felt that it was not worthless. This means that the hostility and alleged rudeness is a reflection of your behavior towards me and my work.

non sequitor My behavior towards your work was a reflection of what I found when I did my due diligence of researching your credentials.

Quote:

If you throw a ball against the wall it will bounce back. Well the ball did bounce back and you don’t like it. This is understandable.

Your sarcasm and animosity speak volumes. Have a nice Christmas.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

lets not muddy the waters. the issue was whether james white wrote it as claimed.

there has never been an official stance on abortion by the sda church.

nic has already given evidence of not being a legitimate sda, are you one?

in which case trying to manipulate and coerce sda members into your agenda is really not appreciated.

Again, you are right and wrong at the same time; right because at the time of the pioneers there was no official position on abortion.

my bad! i should have stated, the church has never had an official stance against abortion. expressing opinions by individuals is entirely different.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

this coming from a person who believes peter was the first "authority" of the church? aka "pope", right?

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

When Saint Peter acted against what was right, Paul reprimanded him publicly.

Peter was the maximum authority of the nascent Christian church,

yet a man inferior in position in the church reprimanded him.

perhaps you are confused as to which church you are speaking to?

[/quote'] I believe that the biblical evidence is that Peter was initially the most influential leader of the church

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

you havent proved that the church was anti-abortion.

there is too little "evidence" to say one way or the other.

wanting to believe something is not proof.

but the individuals I cited were in charge of the nascent Adventist Church.

i think you are very confused as to the difference between the papal church and the seventh-day adventist church.

there were several pioneers involved, all equal. no one was "in charge".

personal opinions are just that.

your research into ellen whites thoughts on bringing children into the world is apparently non-existent.

[John317]

John,

I have already posted the reasons I believe that the “still born” alternative interpretation of the quotation you cited does not fit the several references to the commission of the murder crime. Here are my reasons again:

1. The woman is described as determined to “not become a mother.”

2. She is referred to as “committing the basest crime to carry out her purpose.” If the reference were to a “still born” the woman would be blameless. She would not be described as “committing the basest crime.”

3. The man is described as an accomplice who “aids in the destruction of the babes he has begotten.”

4. His action is further detailed as follows: “Although he may not always aid in the murder, is always accessory to it.” The “still born” interpretation does not fit here. If this way of reading the text were right, we would have to conclude that the man is always directly responsible for the “murder” instead of “not always.”

Tell me, do you still believe that the text justifies the “still born” way of reading the text?

I think you make a good case and that the writer is probably talking about more than babies being "still born." I think several things are involved here, but it sounds like one of them are abortions. I'd be interested in what the staff at the Heritage Room in Loma Linda say. I doubt she'd disagree with you on that point. The main subject of conversation between myself and the Heritage Room was who wrote the article, not whether it dealt with abortions. The staff mentioned "still born babies" but that doesn't mean that's all the physician-writer was talking about.

Maybe some time we could meet there if you would like to. If so, send me a Private Message and let me know when you plan to be there. I live about half an hour away.