The Doctrines of Babylon...

[Twilight]

Sky and Mark, let's talk about some of the other Babylonian doctrines that we need to be aware of.

For instance, what about the belief that Christ saves us IN our sins rather than FROM our sins?

Indeed, this is Babylonian.

Freedom to sin is not biblical. :-)

[skyblue888]

[Twilight]

I think you are right on many things Sky, and wrong on many others.

That you often take your points to extremes and do not cope very well when people disagree with you...

And this makes it difficult for people to accept the truth you do have, because it is often mixed up with fanaticism and intolerance for those that do not agree with you.

That has been my own personal experience with you.

When I accepted the light you had on the merits of Christ, you where as close as a brother.

But the moment I disagreed with you, from that point on, I was little more than a heretic it seems...

That deeply saddened me, but taught me to be very wary of people like yourself, that can only cope with those that conform to their views and try to establish "truth" from a bias without careful consideration of other peoples perspectives, or even acknowledgement of them.

I am still your friend though Brother, although I supsect you do not believe that, I am challenging you out of love.

If I have sinned against you, show me and I will confess it to the Lord, I do not hold myself faultless by the way.

[skyblue888]

Mark, you asked, "If I have sinned against you, show me and I will confess it to the Lord."

It is not about sinning against me or me sinning against you. Isn't it rather about sinning against the Lord by rejecting light?

Warning someone not to reject light is not being intolerant or being fanatic or being extremist.

Please show where I have been intolerant or a fanatic or an extremist. Please give clear references of that from the last discussions, since I came back to the forum late October.

I would appreciate that very much. Thank you.

sky

And I would appreciate it if we would stick to the issues without getting personal.

[skyblue888]

[THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH WAS ORGANIZED IN 1863 WITH 3,500 MEMBERS, HALF A DOZEN LOCAL CONFERENCES, ABOUT THIRTY MINISTERIAL LABORERS, AND A GENERAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE OF THREE. THE GENERAL CONFERENCE PRESIDENT WAS WELL ABLE TO PROVIDE THE LEADERSHIP AND COUNSEL REQUIRED BY SUCH A SMALL ORGANIZATION. HE COULD PERSONALLY ATTEND EVERY IMPORTANT MEETING AND IN ADDITION GIVE PERSONAL ATTENTION TO MUCH OF THE BUSINESS CONNECTED WITH THE PUBLISHING WORK. HOWEVER, BY 1896 THE WORK OF THE CHURCH HAD GREATLY EXPANDED IN THE UNITED STATES, AND EXTENDED TO EUROPE, AUSTRALIA, AND AFRICA AS WELL. IT WAS NO LONGER POSSIBLE FOR ONE MAN TO GIVE ADEQUATE SUPERVISION AND DIRECTION TO SUCH A WIDESPREADING WORK. ELLEN WHITE URGED A DIVISION OF THE FIELD, SO THAT OUR CHURCH MEMBERS AROUND THE WORLD WOULD NOT LOOK TO JUST ONE MAN FOR COUNSEL. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY THE CREATION OF UNION CONFERENCES AND WORLD DIVISIONS.] {LDE 50.1}

Mark

_____________________________

To beging with, this is not a quote from Ellen White.

It says that "ELLEN WHITE URGED A DIVISION OF THE FIELD, SO THAT OUR CHURCH MEMBERS AROUND THE WORLD WOULD NOT LOOK TO JUST ONE MAN FOR COUNSEL."

So those who wrote this are saying that it is okay to look to men for counsel?

The 1888 message was also a warning not to look to man for counsel. We may counsel together but we are not to look to man for counsel.

"Now it has been Satan's determined purpose to eclipse the view of Jesus and lead men to look to man, and trust to man, and be educated to expect help from man. For years the church has been looking to man and expecting much from man, but not looking to Jesus in whom our hopes of eternal life are centered." T.M.93.

It is for this very reason that "Many had lost sight of Jesus and needed to have their eyes directed to His divine Person, to His merits, and to His changeless love for the human family." T.M.92.

Consequently, "God gave to His servants a testimony that presented the truth as it is in Jesus, which is the third angel's message in clear, distinct lines." T.M.93.

For giving this message in demonstration and power of the Holy Spirit, brother Jones, especially, was stoned with stones of sarcasm and ridicule and eventually was tried, judged, sentenced by the men of General Conference Executive Committee having made themselves judges in their own case. Brother Jones was never given a chance to be heard. And two years after that, the General Conference endorsed this unjust action on the part of the Executive Committee and again without giving brother Jones a chance to be heard.

sky

[John317]

.... we are repeating the history of Ancient Israel. I am not talking from the point of view of an outsider but from an insider. This is who we are. ....In Volume 3 of the Review and Herald of August 1, 1893, p.69, Mrs. White speaks of us as a people who have had great light, a people who, in point of privilege, have been exalted unto Heaven but, she explained, we have failed to walk in that light and because of that, she says that we shall be brought down to hell!!! .... In every generation God has His faithful few and they are usually misunderstood and finally persecuted by their own brethren.

"Of those who boast of their light, and yet fail to walk in it, Christ says, 'But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum {Seventh-day Adventists, who have had great light}, which art exalted unto heaven (in point of privilege), shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for thee."

One has only to remember and re-consider what happened shortly after 1844, falling into the Laodicean condition and delaying the second coming of Christ (G.C.457,458);

One has only to remember and re-consider what happened at the Minneapolis General Conference in 1888, our rejection of the most precious message of the righteousness of Christ through faith in His all-sufficient merits, (1 S.M.234,235; T.M.96,97,93);

One has only to remember and re-consider what happened between 1901 and 1903, our rejection of the principles of organization which would have instituted Gospel Order in our ranks(as shown in the General Conference Bulletins of those years) how in 1903 we put God aside and accepted the devisings of men and how this order of things has been continued ever since;

One has only to remember and re-consider what happened between 1955 and 1957 (18 secret meetings with the Evangelicals which resulted in compromising and repudiating the pillars of our faith in order to be recognized by them as Christians)

....Human methods and plans are the order of the day because we continue to reject God's methods and plans and I believe this will continue until He comes in the clouds of heaven.

And that is why we have been told that when the Lord finishes the work it will be in a manner very much out of the common order of things and in a way that will be contrary to any human planning. (T.M.300)

... God will finish the work through men and women of His own choosing and we will be surprised at the simple means He will use to finish that work for a short work will He do upon the earth and it will be in righteousness. (Rom.9:28; T.M.300).

What say you?

sky

..... Speaking of Christ's disciples, we read, "Their only fear should be lest they surrender the truth, and thus betray the trust with which God has honored them." D.A.356.

sky, I completely agree with you on everything you posted above.

[skyblue888]

Amen! How refreshing, John! I thank God for your courage and for your witness. To God be all the credit and all the praise and the glory!

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:Musicman 1228

Jasd said, "Wouldn’t there have to be a substantiating text showing that Gd divorced the House of Judah before their return as exiles?—and wouldn’t that have gone directly against the Mosaic laws should Gd have remarried the one whom He had already divorced?"

>>Hosea was a contemporary of Isaiah and prophecied just before the Captivity in Babylon. You can read his prophecy in a few minutes, and when you do please note chapter 1 and the names of his children as directed by God. Here is what he said regarding the status of Israel at that time:

When she had weaned No Mercy, she conceived and bore a son. And the LORD said, “Call his name Not My People, for you are not my people, and I am not your God.” Hosea 1:8-9.

If that doesn't indicate divorce I don't know what does.<<

It does – and more – Gd, flat-out states that He divorced Aholah; that is, the Northern Kingdom Israel.

Jer 3:8 And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce;

Hosea was prophet to the Northern Kingdom Israel.

>>If Israel as the Kingdom of Heaven had never been divorced from God then why the offer from God to have her return? Would not returning to God require a marriage?<<

The fact that Gd had already divorced the Kingdom of Israel meant that He could not have remarried her. He would have to die first –after which, He may marry Israel – should that be the plan. In any event, as there is no record of Gd divorcing Judah – He is stuck with her.

>>Israel REFUSED to marry her suitor after returning from captivity in Babylon,<<

I think it more correct to say that it was Judah who returned from the Babylonian Captivity – Israel had gone through the Caucuses to emerge onto the Pontic-Caspian steppes (EurAsia), after which they drifted Northward and Westward – becoming known to history as the Caucasian peoples.

You are, in likelihood, both Gentile and COI.

>>...which is why God needed to raise up a group of people that would get His Bride ready for the wedding. That is the purpose of the SDA church.<<

The Gd-ordained purpose – or the self-proclaimed purpose?

>>We are the Bridesmaids (not the Bride) that Jesus needs to prepare the Bride (people from ever kindred, tongue and nation) for the coming of the Bridegroom.<<

I thought I’d read that Gd was to marry the land...

>>Unfortunately, the Bridesmaids are ALL sound asleep and unable to do anything (Matt.25:1-13).<<

Though they may ‘sleep’ their hubrism is unaffected, never slumbering - oil or lack of it - notwithstandingl

[FLO]

Another point.

The Roman Church has managed to infiltrate many of its pagan doctrines into its daughters, the fallen protestant churches.

But not one pagan doctrine has gained a foothold in the only true Protestant and Apostolic Church that is left on this earth.

The Seventh Day Adventist Church.

But what is really important here, is that the pagan doctrines have been inserted into the churches through the direct activity of the Roman Catholic Church.

All except one.

And she strives to capture that one at every opportunity as well...

I wouldn't be so sure... Unfortunately, the SDA church has fallen prey to the Roman Catholic Church as well.

One of the two biggest pagan activities in the world today are also celebrated by almost every SDA congregation.

Can you guess what they are? Christmas and Easter.

If you think they are innocent Christian Holidays, you are sadly mistaken.

Everything from the dates on which they are worshiped to the activities held on those days are all derived from paganism.

Don't take my word for it, do your own research. If you don't know where to start, you can start with the two websites below.

http://www.eastertruth.info

http://www.christmastruth.info

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Just to toss in a round peg to see if it fits in a square hole: wearing a necktie has pagan origins.

[Tom Wetmore]

In the same line...

Baptism by immersion and baptism by washing or sprinkling were practiced by pagans before Christianity started.

Hand and foot washing before prayer/worship was a pagan practice and still is very much a part of Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist prayer rituals.

Rituals of purification by blood and water were of ancient pagan origin.

The temple rituals and religious festivals of the Israelites have very distinct parallels among the other ancient contemporary cultures of the Middle East.

[Dr. Waite]

The SDA fundamental belief No. 2 states: "There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons."

The official teaching of the General Conference Biblical Research Institute is that "co-eternal" means that each of these "Persons" did not have a beginning or an end in the absolute sense.

The teaching of the pioneers was that the "Son" had a beginning of days in eternity, but this beginning cannot be calculated in man's figures. But, because it cannot be calculated in man's figures, it does not mean that the "Son" did not have a beginning when he was "begotten" which is different than "created".

Also, teaching of the pioneers was that "Son" actually died both as a divine person and as a human person and thus he had an "end" and then when he was resurrected on the day after the Sabbath, he had a beginning and is now alive for evermore.

[Dr. Waite]

I don't get that from our Fundamental Beliefs as they are written today. Do you?

What other infallible standard besides the Bible is there? As a church and a people we've never believed that Ellen White is infallible, although individuals have believed it. She denied this herself. She said God alone is infallible. According to the Bible, even the Bible prophets were not infallible.

I get from reading the Fundamental Beliefs that by leaving out the word "only", it leaves open the concept that there are other infallible standards besides the "Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments". I go by the original statement of the pioneers of the SDA church and do not accept what was voted upon in 1980 in Dallas at the general conference session.

[skyblue888]

It was never about Mrs. White being infallible or whoever it might be but about the Word of God, the truth, being infallible.

"God help us have a knowledge of the truth, and if you have seen the truth of God, press right to the light and put up the bars behind you." Ellen G. White.

sky :)

[JawgeFromJawja]

Sky and Mark, let's talk about some of the other Babylonian doctrines that we need to be aware of.

For instance, what about the belief that Christ saves us IN our sins rather than FROM our sins?

I'm a little late commenting on this post. Being a new member, I still have the enthusiasm that goes with new toys, and I am frantically trying to review all significant posts of the recent past. Not that this forum is a toy for me. It has meant much to me spiritually.

I disagree with John317's entire statement. I believe that Christ saves us from the consequences of sin, not FROM our sin, and not IN our sins.

Paul of Tarsus said,

Rom 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Wow! My old Baptist bones just quiver in reading or hearing that verse. Salvation is a gift, it cannot be earned, and it is not acquired through a dole of "cheap grace". The sacrificial death of Jesus Christ was anything but a cheap offering. Our payment itself takes a leap of faith - the payment is our faith in God.

Praise God!

(The wife of my youth says I sometimes get carried away. But at heart I am a Charismatic. Psa 150:5 Praise Him upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals.

Psa 100:1 A Psalm of praise. Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands.

Psa 100:2 Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing.

Loudly and noisily, in accordance with the Word of God,

JawgeFromJawja

[JawgeFromJawja]

The Roman Church has managed to infiltrate many of its pagan doctrines into its daughters, the fallen protestant churches.

But not one pagan doctrine has gained a foothold in the only true Protestant and Apostolic Church that is left on this earth.

FLO, this comes across so arrogantly and sanctimoniously. You need to tone this down if you truly want to convert, and convert permanently, members of those "fallen protestant churches". Such a come on immediately raises the ire of those nasty, sinful, fallen protestant groups wallowing in Babylonian filth.

I have survived being on the immediate outskirts of the SDA church for 51 years. My first slight was from the pastor of my wife's local SDA church, who refused to marry us in his church because I was a member of a church espousing Babylonian apostacism. Never mind that my fiancée was a devout Adventist. She was deeply hurt, and I was deeply offended and angered.

I survived, my wife survived, our marriage survived, and we both grew in God's Grace.

Because The Lord's Prayer teaches "forgive us out trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us", I did learn and practice forgiveness years ago. In the past, I even frequently attended the SDA church with my wife.

I love my SDA family.

I love most SDA individual church members. (There are some people in any group who are just not particularly lovable.)

I love this forum for everything it has taught me.

I could never love the SDA Church. I have forgiven all actual and perceived slights, but my feelings for that church remain numb. At least numbness is better than pain and anger.

Jawge

[John317]

...I disagree with John317's entire statement. I believe that Christ saves us from the consequences of sin, not FROM our sin, and not IN our sins.

An angel of the Lord himself announced:

Matthew 1:21

She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."

Jesus does more than save us from the consequences of sin. He also saves us from the power of sin (Romans 6), and one day He will save us from the presence of sin.

[Dr. Rich]

Penalty for sin--not consequence. Adam's penalty was NOT from dying a natural death, but being executed by God on the same day he ate from the tree of wisdom=hence the 'second death'.

And John, of course it is Jesus who saves HIS PEOPLE from the penalty of their sins--but only when He comes in the clouds. Question is==who are "HIS PEOPLE"?

[John317]

...And John, of course it is Jesus who saves HIS PEOPLE from the penalty of their sins--but only when He comes in the clouds. Question is==who are "HIS PEOPLE"?

John 1: 11, 12 answers:

He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. [12] But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, [13]who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

1 John 3:1-3

See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not know us is that it did not know him. [2] Beloved, we are God's children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. [3] And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure.

Romans 8:14-17

For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. [15] For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, "Abba! Father!" [16] The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, [17] and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

Galatians 3:29

And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise.

[Dr. Rich]

AMEN

[Dr. Waite]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Are you very sure of this? I have seen the case made that we took our trinity doctrine from the Roman church.

Yes, that case has been made, and is still being made by some. The idea that we should go back to the anti-Trinitarianism of most of our pioneers is gaining some ground among SDAs.

However, I believe that both the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy do teach that the Father is God, Jesus Christ is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Fundamentally, the Trinity doctrine is simply the teaching that One God is manifested in three Co-equal, Co-eternal Persons.

The view of the Trinity by SDAs is different from the view of the Roman Catholic Church. The CAtholic Church doesn't have the right to define the doctrine of the Godhead, or the Trinity. Many protestant churches don't accept the same view as the Roman Catholic Church takes of the Trinity, yet their doctrines are just as genuinely Trinitarian as the Catholic Church.

The anti-trinitarianism of most of our pioneers is gaining some ground among SDAs because there are statements showing that Ellen G. White never fully accepted the trinity doctrine as now taught by the SDA church in its fundamental beliefs. Such statements in regard to the pre-existence of Jesus Christ such as Proverbs 8:22-30 where Christ is speaking of Himself in these verses. And the Son of God declares concerning Himself: "The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting. . . . When He appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by Him, as one brought up with Him: and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him." Proverbs 8:22-30. {PP 34.1} and "the existence of Christ before His incarnation is not measured in figures" LHU 17:3 and

"Although we may try to reason in regard to our Creator, how long He has had existence, where evil first entered into our world, and all these things, we may reason about them until we fall down faint and exhausted with the research when there is an infinity beyond." 7BC 919.5 and "the Father and the Son alone are to be exalted" Youth Instructor 7 July 1898.

and "Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally; therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He should leave them, go to His father, and send the Holy Spirit to be His successor on earth. The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof. He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit, as the Omnipresent"

14MR 23