Butt out...

[Guest]

We do feel sorry for him. Not in a condescending way, but only in the sense that we truly are concerned for him.

You are very kind and very patient. But I don't know that I feel sorry for him. He seems to always distract the conversation with things that are so backwards and absurd that they are not even a real issue. His main goal seems to be just to distract any serious conversation away from anything resembling the truth. In every thread and every topic he posts on.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Finally after it took "forever" to get people to admit that I am correct in what I say you admit that there was a change from Sabbath Saturday worship to Sunday worship. Then you say that such a FACT is obvious----and I concur.

That change came by way of the Catholic Church. The people in Noah's day didn't try to change the Sabbath, some of them just departed from it, and went a different way. Which eventually led to paganism.

I would call that a change. I would call that a huge change.

What planet do you live on again?

Talk about avoidance syndrome. You got it brother.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Finally after it took "forever" to get people to admit that I am correct in what I say you admit that there was a change from Sabbath Saturday worship to Sunday worship. Then you say that such a FACT is obvious----and I concur.

That change came by way of the Catholic Church. The people in Noah's day didn't try to change the Sabbath, some of them just departed from it, and went a different way. Which eventually led to paganism.

This quote of yours RLH should be in the "dictionary" or the "encyclopedia" as an example of a "extremely weak" if not as an example of "extremely absurd". (It would be funny if it were not soooo tragic).

They "just departed from it and went a different way". That is indeed "change" my friend. The "departed ones" who went a "different way" CHANGED THE SATURDAY SABBATH TO SUNDAY WORSHIP.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Finally after it took "forever" to get people to admit that I am correct in what I say you admit that there was a change from Sabbath Saturday worship to Sunday worship. Then you say that such a FACT is obvious----and I concur.

That change came by way of the Catholic Church. The people in Noah's day didn't try to change the Sabbath, some of them just departed from it, and went a different way. Which eventually led to paganism.

Then maybe the RCC/Pope didn't "change" any day.

We must now say: "The RCC/Pope "departed" from their former ways regarding Saturday Sabbath and "went a different way" into Sunday Worship.

Thanks RLH for the new wording. Saying it this way sounds soooo much more "innocuous" and more politically correct.

[Lysimachus]

I would call that a change. I would call that a huge change.

What planet do you live on again?

Talk about avoidance syndrome. You got it brother.

Nope. That is not a change. It is not a change. Period.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: miz3

I would call that a change. I would call that a huge change.

What planet do you live on again?

Talk about avoidance syndrome. You got it brother.

Nope. That is not a change. It is not a change. Period.

They sure didn't change the Sabbath in the Christian church, which is what we are actually talking about here.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote;pkrause

And we have the Jews also. They are our greatest evidence of the Sabbath day. They've kept the same day for centuries.

>>...except that jasd is claiming that God made the Jews forget which day of the week it was.<<

jasd does no such thing. jasd proffered the text which provided the relevant fact that Gd removed the reckoning of the OT calendar from His people – for justifiable reasons.

>>There's no evidence for this, of course.<<

But of course there is:

Lam 2:6 ...the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest.

You guys are ignoring the important elements of the narrative. Remember?—the Assyrians removed the entirety of Israel from the Northern Kingdom together with the vast majority of Jews then living in the Southern Kingdom. Those of both Kingdoms who went into the Assyrian captivity lost their calendar containing the Sabbaths and the Feasts. Fait accompli. This fact has never been disputed – but has given rise to the ersatz dogma of “Spiritual Israel”.

Now reread Lamentations 2:6 re the Babylonian Captivity and notice that it contains no qualifying clause such as I’ve provided in red letters below – and which y’all seem to think is latent in the text.

Lam 2:6 ...the LORD hath caused the solemn feasts and sabbaths to be forgotten in Zion, and hath despised in the indignation of his anger the king and the priest; except that the smallest remnant thereof will remember that which I have caused to be forgotten.

Note especially “the king and THE PRIEST” – with whom the responsibility of creating the yearly calendar rested!

To say that somewhere there exists the text remedying that caused to be forgotten is to mock Gd.

The Apocrypha (which has some of the most accurate histories of the centuries before Jesus Christ), according to Esdras, relates that in the waning years of Assyrian influence, the Assyrian COI captives made the collective decision to cross the Caucasus – rather than return to Old Canaanland. Because of the numbers of them, it took two and a half years to journey through the mountains to the steppes lying beyond...

All the above aside..., forget that Gd said that He would cause the Jews to forget their Sabbaths. Let’s just stipulate that Gd changed His mind and everything went along with the Jews the morrow as it did the day before – for ensuing centuries. One, inexorably arrives at the 4th century AD when Hillel II created the present Jewish/Hebrew calendar – the which is admittedly but a facsimile of the OT calendar... What now brown cow?

How can a student of Writ be comfortable ignoring that admission?

Simple fact: the present Jewish/Hebrew calendar is not the OT calendar – and following it to observe an OT Sabbath is wishful thinking, at best.

>>God has never worked that way.<<

That is a preposterous thing to say. Gd caused almost the entire population of the COI to disappear from the pages of history for going-on three millennia. (that is, to those who were/are unfamiliar with the particulars...)

>>God doesn't manipulate the minds and memories of a whole people that way,<<

For the most part, the COI do not, even today, know who they are. Moreover, your assertion assumes that it was the common man in OT times that created each year’s calendar – rather than the priest(s) trained to do so. Moreover, you’re suggesting that that same common man was able to do so whilst enduring slavery.

>>and the verses which are used to support the idea are talking about the Babylonian exile.<<

After which..., I asked for anyone to supply the text showing that Gd caused the Sabbaths to be remembered. No one seems able to provide the text(s). There is no such text(s) to be found in all of Holy Writ. Gd’s word cannot be made void, for He swareth by Himself.

How can a student of Writ be comfortable ignoring that admission following?

“These facts are freely admitted by Jewish scholars. Rabbi

Louis Finklestein of the Jewish Theological Seminary of

America, was selected by the Kehillas (Jewish Communities)

of the World as one of the 120 top Jews who best

represented ‘a lamp of Judaism’ to the world. In a letter to

Dr. L. E. Froom, dated Feb. 20, 1939, Finklestein readily

admitted, ‘The present Jewish calendar was fixed in the

fourth century.’ Maimonides and most other Jewish

chronologers agree that the modern Jewish calendar is

based upon the ‘mean motions of the sun and moon, the true

[calendar] having been set aside.’ ” [ed.jasd]

You’ll notice that by admission – it was not just a day, but the entire OT calendar, which was set aside!

Jews admit that they inserted incorrectly placed postponements into this present Jewish/Hebrew calendar. That puts the kibosh upon the entire calendar. It remains no more than a facsimile of the original.

Check the bona fides of the above Rabbi Louis Finklestein... This ain not jasd forwarding the fact that the OT calendar has been set aside, but an elder of the International Kehillas admitting the fact.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

I would call that a change. I would call that a huge change.

What planet do you live on again?

Talk about avoidance syndrome. You got it brother.

Nope. That is not a change. It is not a change. Period.

Maybe in your fantasy world but in the real world that is exactly what change is.

[Guest]

Maybe in your fantasy world but in the real world that is exactly what change is.

Nope they never changed the Sabbath in the church. There never was a change until the Catholic Church changed it when they brought the pagans in and adopted many of their practices, including Sunday worship.

[John317]

The day of worship didn't change from Saturday to Sunday between Noah and Abraham, and there was no "Christian Sabbatarian Church" in Noah's time.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Are you saying that Noah was not a Sabbatarian?

No. Noah kept the Sabbath.

Originally Posted By: miz3

If Noah and his family were Sabbatarians then the day must have been changed by the "sun worshipers". There are no other possibilities unless you answer the question about Noah keeping the Sabbath as being that "Noah didn't keep the Sabbath"?

They didn't change the day. They changed religions.

They didn't remain worshipers of Yahweh or of the true God. They left the worship of God and became pagans. They didn't claim to be worshippers of the true God.

The Christians of the third century AD didn't change religions. Instead they brought "sun worship" and other false doctrines into the Christian church.

Satan changed strategies after the time of Christ. Instead of deceiving people into completely abandoning the truth and adopting a different religion, Satan deceived them into adopting false doctrines while remaining within the same religion.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Maybe in your fantasy world but in the real world that is exactly what change is.

Nope they never changed the Sabbath in the church. There never was a change until the Catholic Church changed it when they brought the pagans in and adopted many of their practices, including Sunday worship.

If this is the SDA position then SDA are in deeper trouble than I first suspected.

For you to deny so plain a truth in order to cling to your RCC/Pope hatred is indeed a fatal error.

The depth of hatred and antagonism SDA have for the RCC/Pope is indeed a very grave danger. You SDA are looking in one place while as we speak the very paganism you deny is at this very moment eating the inside of the SDA Church.

The same mistake that doomed the Children of Israel.

[John317]

Your own Prophet says that God has had His Church in "all ages" that includes the time between Noah and Abraham.

But Ellen White refers to the Church before the time of Christ as "the Jewish church," not the Christian Church. See the following paragraph:

Quote:

With the whole world before them in need of the gospel, professed Christians congregate where they themselves can enjoy gospel privileges. They do not feel the necessity of occupying new territory, carrying the message of salvation into regions beyond. They refuse to fulfill Christ's commission, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." Mark 16:15. Are they less guilty than was the Jewish church? {COL 303.2}

Here Ellen White refers to "early Christians," signifying the people living after Christ's ascension:

Quote:

But the early Christians began to look for defects in one another. Dwelling upon mistakes, giving way to unkind criticism, they lost sight of the Saviour, and of the great love he had revealed for sinners. They became more strict in regard to outward ceremonies, more particular about the theory of the faith, more severe in their criticisms. In their zeal to condemn others, they forgot their own errors. They forgot the lesson of brotherly love that Christ had taught. And, saddest of all, they were unconscious of their loss. They did not realize that happiness and joy were going out of their lives, and that soon they would walk in darkness, having shut the love of God out of their hearts. {SW, February 2, 1904 par. 11}

The Christian Church, properly so called, didn't begin until after the death of Christ. Jesus said, "I WILL build my church," not "I have built my church..."

Ellen White also does sometimes refer to all of God's true followers as part of the Christian Church, but only in the sense of their being a part of God's people from Adam to the second coming.

Any history book on the Christian Church begins with the time of Christ, not the time of Adam and Noah.

Originally Posted By: miz3

It was also during that time that the sun worshipers CHANGED SATURDAY WORSHIP TO SUNDAY WORSHIP.

But those were sun worshippers, not worshippers of the true God.

Since you evidently accept Ellen White as authority, see below what she taught in regard to the papacy:

Quote:

In the sixth century the papacy had become firmly established. Its seat of power was fixed in the imperial city, and the bishop of Rome was declared to be the head over the entire church. Paganism had given place to the papacy. The dragon had given to the beast “his power, and his seat, and great authority.” [Revelation 13:2; SEE APPENDIX, NOTE 2.] And now began the 1260 years of papal oppression foretold in the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation. [Daniel 7:25; Revelation 13:5-7.] Christians were forced to choose, either to yield their integrity and accept the papal ceremonies and worship, or to wear away their lives in dungeons or suffer death by the rack, the fagot, or the headsman's ax. Now were fulfilled the words of Jesus, “Ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake.” [Luke 21:16, 17.]

Persecution opened upon the faithful with greater fury than ever before, and the world became a vast battle-field. For hundreds of years the church of Christ found refuge in seclusion and obscurity. Thus says the prophet: “The woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.” [Revelation 12:6.] {GC88 54, 55}

The accession of the Roman Church to power marked the beginning of the Dark Ages. As her power increased, the darkness deepened. Faith was transferred from Christ, the true foundation, to the pope of Rome. Instead of trusting in the Son of God for forgiveness of sins and for eternal salvation, the people looked to the pope, and to the priests and prelates to whom he delegated authority. They were taught that the pope was their earthly mediator, and that none could approach God except through him, and, further, that he stood in the place of God to them, and was therefore to be implicitly obeyed. A deviation from his requirements was sufficient cause for the severest punishment to be visited upon the bodies and souls of the offenders. Thus the minds of the people were turned away from God to fallible, erring, and cruel men, nay more, to the prince of darkness himself, who exercised his power through them. Sin was disguised in a garb of sanctity. When the Scriptures are suppressed, and man comes to regard himself as supreme, we need look only for fraud, deception, and debasing iniquity. With the elevation of human laws and traditions, was manifest the corruption that ever results from setting aside the law of God. {GC88 55.1}

[John317]

Nope they never changed the Sabbath in the church. There never was a change until the Catholic Church changed it when they brought the pagans in and adopted many of their practices, including Sunday worship.

Originally Posted By: miz3

If this is the SDA position then SDA are in deeper trouble than I first suspected.

Any text-book on the history of the first five centuries of the Christian Church shows this to be the truth.

Have you taken a college-level course in the history of the church? Even a course in a public college will show the same thing. In fact, take a good look at H.G. Wells' History of the World. Or Will Durant's history of the church's early centuries. These things are well known to anyone who has studied the history of the church.

Originally Posted By: miz3

For you to deny so plain a truth in order to cling to your RCC/Pope hatred is indeed a fatal error.

The depth of hatred and antagonism SDA have for the RCC/Pope is indeed a very grave danger.

I personally don't hate the pope at all, nor do I hate the Catholic Church or Catholics. In fact, I love Catholics and want to see them saved in God's kingdom. If I didn't know the prophecies like I do, I would have probably already become a Catholic.

This is not about individuals in the Catholic Church or even about individual popes. We can't judge them. It's all about the papal system and the false doctrines.

Ellen White certainly didn't hate the pope or the Catholic Church. The fact is that the Catholic Church has millions of honest, sincere people of God who are worshipping God to the best of their knowledge and ability. God judges us according to our knowledge of the truth. The more truth we know, the more responsible God holds us to live the truth.

Originally Posted By: miz3

You SDA are looking in one place while as we speak the very paganism you deny is at this very moment eating the inside of the SDA Church.

What is the "paganism" you refer to?

Granted, the SDA church makes mistakes and is very imperfect. Yet God loves His church despite the errors and the sins of the church and its people.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: RLH

Nope they never changed the Sabbath in the church. There never was a change until the Catholic Church changed it when they brought the pagans in and adopted many of their practices, including Sunday worship.

Originally Posted By: miz3

If this is the SDA position then SDA are in deeper trouble than I first suspected.

Any text-book on the history of the first five centuries of the Christian Church shows this to be the truth.

Have you taken a college-level course in the history of the church? Even a course in a public college will show the same thing. In fact, take a good look at H.G. Wells' History of the World. Or Will Durant's history of the church's early centuries. These things are well known to anyone who has studied the history of the church.

Originally Posted By: miz3

For you to deny so plain a truth in order to cling to your RCC/Pope hatred is indeed a fatal error.

The depth of hatred and antagonism SDA have for the RCC/Pope is indeed a very grave danger.

I personally don't hate the pope at all, nor do I hate the Catholic Church or Catholics. In fact, I love Catholics and want to see them saved in God's kingdom. If I didn't know the prophecies like I do, I would have probably already become a Catholic.

This is not about individuals in the Catholic Church or even about individual popes. We can't judge them. It's all about the papal system and the false doctrines.

Ellen White certainly didn't hate the pope or the Catholic Church. The fact is that the Catholic Church has millions of honest, sincere people of God who are worshipping God to the best of their knowledge and ability. God judges us according to our knowledge of the truth. The more truth we know, the more responsible God holds us to live the truth.

Originally Posted By: miz3

You SDA are looking in one place while as we speak the very paganism you deny is at this very moment eating the inside of the SDA Church.

What is the "paganism" you refer to?

Granted, the SDA church makes mistakes and is very imperfect. Yet God loves His church despite the errors and the sins of the church and its people.

1. Taking a history course in "Western Civ" is not the point of this discussion. Of course a class in "Western Civ" will not have anything about Noah to Abraham. That is not what we are talking about. I know every "Western Civ" book is going to document correctly what the RCC/Pope did in regard to Saturday and Sunday. We are not saying that the RCC/Pope didn't do it. We are saying they are merely "copy cats".

It is indeed true they are minor copy cats. What they did had already been done before between the times of Noah and the times of Abraham.

So much for your "Western Civ" red herring.

2. You say you hate the papal system. Well I hate to tell you this but even your Prophet Ellen White agrees that the Pope and the Papal system are one and the same. That is why I have delineated it RCC/Pope. So for you to be a "good little SDA" you have to hate the Pope and the Catholic Church even if as you say you love all the little parishioners.

Again you are trying to soften what is/has been the SDA position and hatred of the RCC/Pope. In fact SDA are clearly at war based on your prophetic interpretations of Daniel and of Revelation.

The SDA hatred runs so deep and the paranoia so palatable that no one can miss it in regard to the RCC/Pope. This has been true since the SDA inception. One has only to read the "Great Controversy" written by Ellen White to get the depth and vastness of antagonism and hatred that exists in the SDA body for the RCC/Pope. I am sure Gustave and other good RCC can tell you how deeply the SDA position hurts and how they feel the SDA are at war with them.

After all if what only half of what Ellen White outlines about the RCC/Pope were true it would be thoroughly dishonest for the SDA to soft peddle their hatred and their fear of the RCC/Pope.

The clear irrational defense that you and others put up against my Noah to Abraham view is just more evidence of your fear and hatred of the RCC/Pope. If you did not view the RCC/Pope as being the "evil incarnate" as SDA clearly do and as you John317 and others on this website have so often demonstrated and defended then why are you so hot to shoot down my Noah to Abraham views. It is not because the RCC/Pope is just a simple misguided entity. In fact on this very discussion thread you said that the RCC/Pope is the "Big Kahuna" of human threat to God's People.

So do not try and soft peddle your fake love of Catholicism and individual popes because you don't love them you actually hate them for you believe they are "the devil in human form". The "beast". The dragon's (satan) beast (RCC/Pope), the Great Whore. The devil's big tool. Sounds hateful to me.

3. You do not know the "paganism" I speak of. You ask me what it is? If you really were a good Bible student and knew God and Jesus Christ as the Bible so clearly portrays them then and only then would you know easily who I am talking about.

Thus, you make my point in a stronger way then I could have ever made it. The fact that you do know the "paganism" I am talking about is proof that you are so focused on the RCC/Pope that you are not even aware of the clearest signs that exist of danger.

I just hope that you realize your danger before it is too late. If you reject my Noah to Abraham words then you are not ready for what you ask for yet.

[John317]

1. Taking a history course in "Western Civ" is not the point of this discussion. Of course a class in "Western Civ" will not have anything about Noah to Abraham. That is not what we are talking about. I know every "Western Civ" book is going to document correctly what the RCC/Pope did in regard to Saturday and Sunday. We are not saying that the RCC/Pope didn't do it. We are saying they are merely "copy cats".

It is indeed true they are minor copy cats. What they did had already been done before between the times of Noah and the times of Abraham.

So much for your "Western Civ" red herring.

We are talking about the history of the early church and the changes that took place in the first several centuries.

I didn't mention a history of Western Civ.

Here is what I said:

Originally Posted By: John3:17

Any text-book on the history of the first five centuries of the Christian Church shows this to be the truth.

Have you taken a college-level course in the history of the church? Even a course in a public college will show the same thing. In fact, take a good look at H.G. Wells' History of the World. Or Will Durant's history of the church's early centuries. These things are well known to anyone who has studied the history of the church.

[John317]

Well I hate to tell you this but even your Prophet Ellen White agrees that the Pope and the Papal system are one and the same. That is why I have delineated it RCC/Pope.

Where does Ellen White say that individual popes are the same as the papal system or the papacy?

Originally Posted By: miz3

So for you to be a "good little SDA" you have to hate the Pope and the Catholic Church even if as you say you love all the little parishioners.

This is false.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church does not hate either the popes or the Catholic Church.

I do love the Catholic people. Most of my wife's very large family are Catholics, and I love them. My wife was Roman Catholic when I married her, and if she were a Catholic today, I would still love her.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Again you are trying to soften what is/has been the SDA position and hatred of the RCC/Pope.

The SDA church does teach and believe that RCC false doctrines and the papal system is antichrist and evil and wrong, but we have never hated the pope as an indvidual or the Catholic people. In fact, the SDA church has many former Catholics, and these former Catholics do not hate the Catholic Church.

There's a real difference between hating false doctrines and hating the people.

Originally Posted By: miz3

In fact SDA are clearly at war based on your prophetic interpretations of Daniel and of Revelation.

As a church, we are at war againt Satan and against certain false teachings that Satan invented, but we are not at war with any people.

Originally Posted By: miz3

This has been true since the SDA inception. One has only to read the "Great Controversy" written by Ellen White to get the depth and vastness of antagonism and hatred that exists in the SDA body for the RCC/Pope.

Ellen White did not hate either the popes or the Roman Catholic Church or Catholics as individuals. What she hated were the false teachings which subvert the true gospel of Christ and Christ's work as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary.

Originally Posted By: miz3

I am sure Gustave and other good RCC can tell you how deeply the SDA position hurts and how they feel the SDA are at war with them.

They may think this but it doesn't make it true any more than your opinion makes it true.

My wife's sister is a Catholic and goes to Mass every Sunday. When she visits us, she attends the SDA church with us.

Originally Posted By: miz3

After all if what only half of what Ellen White outlines about the RCC/Pope were true it would be thoroughly dishonest for the SDA to soft peddle their hatred and their fear of the RCC/Pope.

Why is that? We have no hatred for the pope or for the Roman Catholic Church and the people. We do disgree with them and believe they are teaching falsehood, but you mistaken to believe that we hate the people. We don't hate the people in the fallen churches. God loves them and wants us to work for their salvation. That is what He has commissioned the SDA church to do.

[John317]

3. You do not know the "paganism" I speak of. You ask me what it is?

What I'm asking for is your idea of the "paganism" that you claim is in the SDA church.

Show the evidence; don't just make groundless, empty claims.

[miz3]

John317, no matter how good a face you try and put on it the hatred within SDA for the RCC/Pope is true and very evident.

SDA have to tried to make this "fine" distinction about "loving the individual" and hating the system.

The RCC/Pope cannot be separated from the "system" as you state it. The RCC Church and the Pope are indeed at the very heart of the "system. They cannot be separated as you are trying to state. The RCC and the Pope are the "system".

Your separation theory is just so much smoke. The evidence of SDA hatred for the RCC/Pope is irrefutable. You can deny it but it remains irrefutable.

[ClubV12]

What a strange concept, this idea that if you disagree with someone you "hate" them.

Let's try that, I "disagree strongly" with miz3, apply that as you will. :)

[Gail]

What a strange concept, this idea that if you disagree with someone you "hate" them.

Let's try that, I "disagree strongly" with miz3, apply that as you will.

[Guest]

The evidence of SDA hatred for the RCC/Pope is irrefutable. You can deny it but it remains irrefutable.

Every hair brained backwards idea you've ever had is irrefutable.

[phkrause]

What a strange concept, this idea that if you disagree with someone you "hate" them.

Let's try that, I "disagree strongly" with miz3, apply that as you will.

I most definitely agree Club12, I guess I hate my wife also, because we do have a few disagreements, my Mom, Brother and so on. It just bogles the mind.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: ClubV12

What a strange concept, this idea that if you disagree with someone you "hate" them.

Let's try that, I "disagree strongly" with miz3, apply that as you will.

I most definitely agree Club12, I guess I hate my wife also, because we do have a few disagreements, my Mom, Brother and so on. It just bogles the mind.

I agree. I guess that means I hate you too pk. But seriously, to point out where something is wrong is not showing hatred.

[miz3]

What a strange concept, this idea that if you disagree with someone you "hate" them.

Let's try that, I "disagree strongly" with miz3, apply that as you will.

I think that statement alone makes my very point.

[miz3]

I agree. I guess that means I hate you too pk. But seriously, to point out where something is wrong is not showing hatred.

You are clearly trying to "minimize" things by saying it is only a "mild" disagreement.

SDA believe the RCC/Pope is actually gunning for them and has the apparatuses already to in place to torture and kill SDA. SDA have clearly painted the RCC/Pope as the "devil incarnate".

My friends this is not mild disagreements on just a few points of doctrine.

SDA have always painted the RCC/Pope and themselves as being at War, which is why SDA and their Prophet Ellen White call it the "The Great Controversy".

Your attempts to paint it otherwise are clearly just not true.

I am indeed correct when I use the word "hatred". It is a deep and abiding "hatred". The "hatred" runs so deep and wide and long that SDA will not entertain any other facts. In fact if you offer other scenarios even if they are Biblical the SDA faithful will hoot you down and call an RCC/Pope Jesuit member and thus you become the enemy of the SDA Church. Either that or you are/have committed the Mark of the Beast.