Should we ignore some churches and peoples?

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: Nan

I guess the whole tenor of the discussion could be summed

up in not casting your pearls before swine.

This is exactly it. Ellen White, as the Bible, doesn't encourage us to spend lots of time working with people who've known the truth and rejected it. Her advice is to move on to people who've never yet heard the truth instead of giving one's time and strength to talking with people who've got their minds made up to reject it. We could spend all our life trying to persuade them and in the meantime many others who are hungering and thirsting for truth would be lost because we're neglecting them in order to throw the pearls before swine.

I'm right here being called a swine. Are you people brain dead?

So this quote "I saw that the stewards of the Lord have no duty to help those persons who persist in using tobacco, tea, and coffee." 1 T 225" is what you call pearls?

The ability to rationalize nonsense is amazing. LOL

[John317]

So this quote "I saw that the stewards of the Lord have no duty to help those persons who persist in using tobacco, tea, and coffee." 1 T 225" is what you call pearls?

The ability to rationalize nonsense is amazing. LOL

Ellen White is talking about people who already know the truth concerning the wrong use of those things but who persist in using them anyway. I used to be one of those. When I was doing those things, it would have been a waste of anyone's time to come to me and tell me why I shouldn't be smoking a pipe (which I loved) and drinking coffee and tea. I knew it in my head but I wanted to do those things anyway, despite my better judgment that they were bad for me. In that sense, I was a "swine" before whom it would have been a waste of time for the brethren in the church to throw their pearls.

[John317]

I'm right here being called a swine. Are you people brain dead?

No one is calling you a swine. Jesus wasn't referring to people as swine. He is using an illustration. He is saying that just as it is foolish to throw pearls to the swine, so we are foolish if we waste our time and effort telling people the truth who already have heard it (perhaps hundreds of times) and have decided to reject it.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Quote:

I saw that the stewards of the Lord have no duty to help those persons who persist in using tobacco, tea, and coffee. 1 T 225

Instead of the word, "using," I wish she had written, "abusing." just imho

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

So this quote "I saw that the stewards of the Lord have no duty to help those persons who persist in using tobacco, tea, and coffee." 1 T 225" is what you call pearls?

The ability to rationalize nonsense is amazing. LOL

Ellen White is talking about people who already know the truth concerning the wrong use of those things but who persist in using them anyway. I used to be one of those. When I was doing those things, it would have been a waste of anyone's time to come to me and tell me why I shouldn't be smoking a pipe (which I loved) and drinking coffee and tea. I knew it in my head but I wanted to do those things anyway, despite my better judgment that they were bad for me. In that sense, I was a "swine" before whom it would have been a waste of time for the brethren in the church to throw their pearls.

I would never refuse to help you if you smoked, drank tea, or coffee. It's a non issue even if you were abusing them. The effects of abusing them are punishment enough without being abandoned.

Plus when people use natural forms of all of these substances in moderation there are less side effects and even a few benefits. So, to me, there is no reason to refuse to help those in need because they do any of these.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Perhaps it depends on what EGW meant when she wrote "help".... I wouldn't refuse to feed, shelter, clothe, work with, or associate with people who smoked, drank tea or coffee. That would rule out nearly all of my own relatives.

[Woody]

I've known many a strongly addicted smoker who has come to Christ. If these instructions claiming we have no duty for them were not ignored ... there would be less redeemed in heaven.

[Dr. Shane]

She is talking about people that know right but refuse to do it. I have many friends that smoke but they are not convinced it is morally wrong. It is a very wise principle that she is getting at which is the same principle Christ gave the disciples when He sent them out. If someone doesn't want our message, dust off your feet and go else where. Don't waste your time on them.

[cardw]

She is talking about people that know right but refuse to do it.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

If someone doesn't want our message, dust off your feet and go else where. Don't waste your time on them.

Yea, verily... I agree.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Shane

If someone doesn't want our message, dust off your feet and go else where. Don't waste your time on them.

Yea, verily... I agree.

I prefer to stick around and remain friends. I have many good friends who have rejected Adventism.

[Dr. Shane]

She is basically saying that God won't hear your prayers if your children eat eggs.

Not at all. I will admit that there are some extremist, off-shoot ministries that would interpret that passage that way. However they are few in number and far between. The Testimonies are copies of letters written to specific people at a specific time. The principles behind what is written are still applicable today however much of what we find in the Testimonies was applicable only to the person being addressed in the letter.

The principle I see here is that the person who was being addressed in the letter was convicted that it was wrong to use butter, eggs and meat (or at least as a staple in one's diet). Therefore that individual was violating her own conscience. If we are convicted something is wrong, and go against our own conscience, then indeed we ought not expect God to hear our prayers - that is the principle being expressed.

[Dr. Shane]

I prefer to stick around and remain friends. I have many good friends who have rejected Adventism.

I am friendly to everyone. However friendship to me means a bit more than just being friendly. I visit my friends in their homes. I practice guitar with my friends. I go bowling with my friends. I do missionary work with my friends. I go camping with friends. I go out to eat with my friends. I go to ball games with my friends. I go to concerts with my friends. I go to county fairs with my friends.

For me, I have to prioritize. Which of my friends am I going to spend the bulk of my time with? For me the decision is easy. My Adventist friends. My second choice are my 12-step friends. My free time spent with non-Adventist friends needs to be spent in a way that I am witnessing to them the love of Christ. I don't feel a heavy burden to convert other Christians to Adventism. However I do feel a burden for show my non-Adventist Christian friends, by example, how to live a sanctified life. In my case, most of my non-Adventist friends are unchurched or non-religious, ex-Catholics. I certainly would see no reason to spend an afternoon fishing with a "friend" who has rejected Christianity and has no interest in a Christian worldview. That same time could be spent with someone else to the betterment of both of us.

[phkrause]

Not at all. I will admit that there are some extremist, off-shoot ministries that would interpret that passage that way. However they are few in number and far between. The Testimonies are copies of letters written to specific people at a specific time. The principles behind what is written are still applicable today however much of what we find in the Testimonies was applicable only to the person being addressed in the letter.

The principle I see here is that the person who was being addressed in the letter was convicted that it was wrong to use butter, eggs and meat (or at least as a staple in one's diet). Therefore that individual was violating her own conscience. If we are convicted something is wrong, and go against our own conscience, then indeed we ought not expect God to hear our prayers - that is the principle being expressed.

Excellent post Shane, I agree. This was my thought

[John317]

Ellen White is talking about people who already know the truth concerning the wrong use of those things but who persist in using them anyway. I used to be one of those. When I was doing those things, it would have been a waste of anyone's time to come to me and tell me why I shouldn't be smoking a pipe (which I loved) and drinking coffee and tea. I knew it in my head but I wanted to do those things anyway, despite my better judgment that they were bad for me. In that sense, I was a "swine" before whom it would have been a waste of time for the brethren in the church to throw their pearls.

Originally Posted By: cardw

I would never refuse to help you if you smoked, drank tea, or coffee. It's a non issue even if you were abusing them. The effects of abusing them are punishment enough without being abandoned.

Plus when people use natural forms of all of these substances in moderation there are less side effects and even a few benefits. So, to me, there is no reason to refuse to help those in need because they do any of these.

She didn't say not to love them or not to offer help when they need help. God loves everyone, including those who will die at the end because of their choices. God doesn't stop loving those who reject Him and are lost. But the point is that God doesn't force Himself on those who reject Him. Nor should we. When people who have known the truth reject it and make it known that they don't want it, it is time to move on and to help others learn the gospel. This was Ellen White's message. The Bible teaches the same thing.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

So it is clear that we are to ignore both entire church organizations and their people ... and also those individuals who ignore and reject our health message.

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

Originally Posted By: Shane

If someone doesn't want our message, dust off your feet and go else where. Don't waste your time on them.

Yea, verily... I agree.

Then we get this:

Originally Posted By: Woody

I prefer to stick around and remain friends. I have many good friends who have rejected Adventism.

Here is a prime example of manipulative posting. Look at the quote from the OP.

I assumed you were referring to active witnessing and forcing someone to listen to you talk about your beliefs. Neither of us said we would not be friends with people. YOU wrote that "it is clear that we are to ignore both entire church organizations and their people ... and also those individuals who ignore and reject our health message"

Why do you keep posting things like this???

[fccool]

So it is clear that we are to ignore both entire church organizations and their people ... and also those individuals who ignore and reject our health message.

Or, perhaps, we should ignore individuals who think the above is approach that is backed by core Christian values

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

She is basically saying that God won't hear your prayers if your children eat eggs.

...

The principle I see here is that the person who was being addressed in the letter was convicted that it was wrong to use butter, eggs and meat (or at least as a staple in one's diet). Therefore that individual was violating her own conscience. If we are convicted something is wrong, and go against our own conscience, then indeed we ought not expect God to hear our prayers - that is the principle being expressed.

How do you get that out of this letter? It seems obvious that Ellen White is stating the these things excite their animal passions. The only extremist I see here is Ellen White.

[John317]

Or, perhaps, we should ignore individuals who think the above is approach that is backed by core Christian values

Titus 3:10-11

As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, [11] knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

Matthew 18:16-17

But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. [17] If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

Matthew 10:13-14

And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. [14] And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town.

Luke 10:10-12

But whenever you enter a town and they do not receive you, go into its streets and say, [11] 'Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet we wipe off against you. Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has come near.' [12] I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town.

[fccool]

I did not know that these verses are talking about health message!!!! AMAZING! Thank you for interpreting these for me.

I will certainly add footnotes in the Bible where we are asked to help the least of us....

*** Unless they smoke, drink coffee, or use alcohol

[Tom Wetmore]

In the interest of truth and accuracy you need to use "and" in your footnote and not "or". That does change the meaning of what she said. I take it exactly as she wrote it. It is only those that use all three that we must ignore. Tea drinker are OK if they don't use tobacco. Coffee drinkers are OK if they don't drink tea. Smokers are OK if they don't drink coffee. Three strikes your are out...

:smilewink:

[fccool]

So, what you are saying is that we should not treat coffee drinkers as IRS unless they smoke and drink too? But that would make the coffee drinkers seem like they are as good and as holy as we are! What's next? Should we begin allowing people to wear jeans in church, allow women wear pants, and have special music with drums in it????

One strike is enough in God's baseball game. If you can afford a pack of cigarettes, then you can surely afford to feed your starving family of four! You get not help from us IRS man.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Woody, from OP

So it is clear that we are to ignore both entire church organizations and their people ... and also those individuals who ignore and reject our health message.

[Twilight]

I suspect Satan used a tactic in heaven, that pretends to support whilst seeking to pull down God.

All the time trying to garner support for his rebellion against God.

Pretend to be reasonable, whilst planting seeds of suspicion and doubt in the other angels minds about God.

Pretending to be looking out for their good, whilst seperating them from the truth.

Using what we would call "slyness" in England.

Satan is the master of "sly" behaviour.

His servants will of course show the same methods when trying to lead others astray.

Especially those that are "purposed" to destroy the 3 Angels Message.

Some will have a character flaw, that God can fix, but some will just be serving Satan in the full awareness of what they are doing.

[Gail]

Wow- I guess it must be the work of some to put EGW in the worst possible light that they can!

I think that common sense would tell us that if a person persists in a behaviour then they are either holding on to it or not yet convicted of it. That is their choice and we can allow them that freedom. To continue to bring up the matter would be wasted breath and probably not wise use of timing. I don't know of anyone who likes to be nagged!