Disfellowship of "Futurists"

[ClubV12]

There has been increasing "static" of various groups promoting future end time events. Groups I have coined a term for, "1335 Futurists". Those that attempt to apply various time frames of the 2,300 year prophecy into the future, our modern day as literal days instead of years. Sometimes as a singular event, as if the time sections of the 2,300 years never happend or as a "dual fulfillment". The first time as literal years the second future time as literal days.

One variation on this theme are the proponents of the ALLEGED 2520 year time slice.

Jeff Pippenger and his followers have been preaching/teaching this in Newport, Washington for some time. It has caused significant disruption within that church. To the point where the Church Board has finally taken action.

Recant, withdraw from Church membership or be disfellowshipped.

Of course the usuall rhetoric then follows: The Church is acting like the "Pope", freedom of speech is being curtailed, etc.

The fact is, removing such from Church membership is the only alternative. Those "fighting against" the fundamental beliefs of the Church cannot be allowed to continue to be a part of the body. At some point, action has to be taken.

It's about time, I applaud the Newport, Washington Adventist Church finding the courage to take a stand.

In my local church area (4 or 5 Adventist Churches) we are dealing with similiar issues from those advocating and teaching "Futurist" concepts. One man, in particular has openly stated he would rather be disfellowshiped than change his views.

Here is a link to the Newport, Washington 2520 issue:

http://www.webelievesda.com/

[Gibs]

ClubV12,

There is prophecy yet that is not fulfilled and you should see that.

As far as the 1290 and 1335 days goes I see that probably they will not come to fruitition as they are not mentioned by John in his prophecy. He gives us the 1260.

"As the scroll is further unrolled, we read, "O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountains; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! Behold, the Lord God will come with strong hand, and His arm shall rule for Him; behold, His reward is with Him, and His work before Him. He shall feed His flock like a shepherd; He shall gather the lambs with His arms, and carry them in His bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young." {ST, June 17, 1903 par. 4}

You of course do not agree the 42 mos. of Rev 13 cannot happen until the deadly wound is healed. The text makes it solid, you have to wrest it to disagree.

Mt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

Mt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

I think the 1290 and1335 days are literal and these are the days to be shortened.

Like that, no!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

You know, I gave up dicussing these points with those folks who are "1335 Futurists". This delusion is very deep.

I have studied this issue backwards and forwards, at one point I ALMOST believed it. The path of error here lies very close to the path of truth. Once you SEE the path of error the path of truth becomes so clear you wonder how you could not see it earlier!

Some error is very tough to see, it will take much prayer, a humble spirit and the counsel of the brethren to understand it. It will take time. It will require every ounce of energy and every tool at your disposal to to see it. When you do, it will become clear.

[Lysimachus]

ClubV12,

There is prophecy yet that is not fulfilled and you should see that.

As far as the 1290 and 1335 days goes I see that probably they will not come to fruitition as they are not mentioned by John in his prophecy. He gives us the 1260.

"As the scroll is further unrolled, we read, "O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountains; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! Behold, the Lord God will come with strong hand, and His arm shall rule for Him; behold, His reward is with Him, and His work before Him. He shall feed His flock like a shepherd; He shall gather the lambs with His arms, and carry them in His bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young." {ST, June 17, 1903 par. 4}

You of course do not agree the 42 mos. of Rev 13 cannot happen until the deadly wound is healed. The text makes it solid, you have to wrest it to disagree.

Mt 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

Mt 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

I think the 1290 and1335 days are literal and these are the days to be shortened.

Like that, no!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

#1. Ellen White does not even hint that the 1260 is future.

#2. I have already revealed how careful exegesis forces the deadly wound to be prior to the 1260 time frame, as sound evaluation of the text reveals that it is not written in chronological order.

To argue with the 2 points above is to exercise a boastful/prideful spirit of private interpretation, and not accept the Spirit of Prophecy.

The argument that Ellen White is only correct when she says "I was shown", is, I emphasize, complete hogwash in light of how the prophets wrote in the Old and New Testaments.

[Gibs]

Lysimachus,

Before you condemn me because of my view I beg of you to look at the text of scripture on this in Rev 13:

When was the deadly wound healed? 1798.

Re 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Re 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

Then notice,

Re 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

Now I got a question for you, If this time ended 1798 tell me why the beast can continue after that? He is only given power to continue 42 mos. and no more power.

No this is all the further the beast is given to make war with the saints AFTER the deadly wound is healed.

There was no more "time", year for a day prophecy after 1844.

Chapter 13 all falls after the deadly wound is healed, these scriptures prove it.

This is not the only prophecy not opened to those in EGW's day as it wasn't time to yet.

I gave you the truth of this and I hope you and others can receive it.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[John317]

... I beg of you to look at the text of scripture on this in Rev 13:

When was the deadly wound healed? 1798.

Re 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

The deadly wound wasn't healed in 1798. That was the year that the deadly wound was made.

The truth is that the deadly wound is NOW in the process of healing, and has been in the process of healing since 1929.

Originally Posted By: Gibs

Re 13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

Then notice,

Re 13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

The events in this chapter aren't given in chronological order.

Remember that Daniel and Revelation must be studied TOGETHER.

Daniel 7: 25 says--

He shall speak words against the Most High,

and shall wear out the saints of the Most High,

and shall think to change the times and the law;

and they shall be given into his hand

for a time, times, and half a time.

The 42 months is the same time period as the "time, times, and half a time," both being symbolic, or prophetic, time.

[olger]

Quote:

The deadly wound wasn't healed in 1798. That was the year that the deadly wound was made.

The truth is that the deadly wound is NOW in the process of healing, and has been in the process of healing since 1929. \

This is absolutely true. The "wound" occurred in 1798. Healing comes much later...

[skyblue888]

I agree with the last posts. In addition to this, as far as I know those who re-apply these time prophecies have the Sunday Law enactment as the starting point. That being the case we would be in a position to know when the loud cry would begin and end and when probation would close but those who push these ideas have no choice but to ignore the clear declarations of the Spirit of Prophecy.

"God has not revealed to us the time when this message will close, or when probation will have an end." 1 S.M.191.

Plus, we are also told that after 1844 "there never will again be a message for the people of God that will be based on time." Ibid, 188.

So, Gibs, I invite you to read 1 S.M.188-191 very carefully.

sky

[Dr. Rich]

Please allow me to step into this issue. NONE of you are truly correct on this issue because your investigation started off on an assumption or presumption that needed to dwelt with correcty.

Can someone please tell me correctly who the 7 heads with mouths that speak blasphemy really are?

[Gibs]

I agree with the last posts. In addition to this, as far as I know those who re-apply these time prophecies have the Sunday Law enactment as the starting point. That being the case we would be in a position to know when the loud cry would begin and end and when probation would close but those who push these ideas have no choice but to ignore the clear declarations of the Spirit of Prophecy.

"God has not revealed to us the time when this message will close, or when probation will have an end." 1 S.M.191.

Plus, we are also told that after 1844 "there never will again be a message for the people of God that will be based on time." Ibid, 188.

So, Gibs, I invite you to read 1 S.M.188-191 very carefully.

sky

Sky "based on time", yes after 1844 "time" yr. for a day no more. And this scripture says the same and I invite you to see what EGW says of this verse.

She made it clear that the scroll wasn't fully unrolled yet.

Re 10:6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

Dan 12:6,7 shows the same event and message but reveals more.

According to the historic view we been in the dark for many many years. I must tell you, not so!

The main and last most important of the prophecies are happening now when it should be seen and is not. There is a reason.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

Sky, most of the "1335 Futurists" do use the Sunday law as a starting point, but not all. The are many variations on this basic theme. Dr. Rich's view is yet another variation, there is little harmony between these groups. I'm not real clear on Gib's take on it, nor do I care to know, but it appears his view is fairly typical. Dr. Richs views are not typical. The 2520 crowd is yet another variance on a theme. Locally I am dealing with a group who proposes a fairly specific date, 2027, for the start date.

The ONE thing ALL these groups seem to have in common is this: They are SO convinced they are right they are willing to be disfellowshiped rather than change their views. Some say this is NOT an issue of salvation, but I believe that is a smoke screen for the most part. When you get into the theology deep enough at some point it BECOMES a salvation issue, to the point where if you reject it, you are lost.

There is a righteouss fear of being lost that is acceptable, the fear of the Lord being the beginning of wisdom. There is also fear as a tool, used by fanatics, belive their error or literally be damned.

Very dangerous stuff this whole issue, regardless of the specific and finer points of the "1335 Futurist" application among the various groups.

[John317]

The ONE thing ALL these groups seem to have in common is this: They are SO convinced they are right they are willing to be disfellowshiped rather than change their views. Some say this is NOT an issue of salvation, but I believe that is a smoke screen for the most part. When you get into the theology deep enough at some point it BECOMES a salvation issue, to the point where if you reject it, you are lost.

...Very dangerous stuff this whole issue, regardless of the specific and finer points of the "1335 Futurist" application among the various groups.

Well put. I've found the same thing.

[Lysimachus]

EDITED SIGNIFICANTLY. PLEASE RE-READ

Gibs,

Revelation 13 is not written in perfect chronological order. Look closely:

• 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

  13:4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who [is] like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

  13:5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

Notice that verse 5 is going BACK again to the time before the wound. Notice that power was not given unto him "AGAIN" to continue 42 months, but simply "given to him". If these 42 months were future and different from the time frame given in Daniel 7, it would not say "given to him to continue 42 months", but "given unto him again".

Proof? After verse 5, you have:

• 3:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

Are we to conclude that another beast comes up after the 1260 years in verse 5? How is this possible, as the whole idea is that Jesus comes practically right after the tribulation.

Also you have verse 10 which states:

• 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

It mentions the "sword" here, and "captivity". This verse is transpiring after verse 5 which mentions the 42 months. Then you have verse 12:

• 13:12 And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

This places the wound of the Sea Beast as happening before the arrival of the Lamb Like Beast, but after the 42 months. We already know the Lamb Like Beast is the United States of America, and this beast is NOT future, but has been around for over 200 years.

Then you have verse 14:

• 13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the WOUND BY A SWORD, and did live.

The wound was by what? by the sword. Where is the sword mentioned before? In verse 10 where the beast is killed with the sword (the state), and goes into captivity. Verse 10 was an event that comes after the 42 months in verse 5.

Thus we see that these passages are not strictly listed in chronological order. Yet the correct chronology can be deduced by comparing the written words with historical events.

Gibs, how an we get you to be a little more flexible here, and not so rigid, tight, and absolute about this? Why are you so dogmatic? Lay it down Gibs, please do. Strive to be in harmony with your brethren, and lay down all theological pride. It can keep us out of heaven, and we all have to fight that!

If the 42 months have a re-application in the future, then so be it! It's not for us to worry about. But when you are presenting a Revelation Seminar to new people, do not confuse people with this 42 months business, as they will suddenly find you so inconsistent.

They will wonder "so why are you applying the day-year principle to the 70 weeks and time, times and dividing of times in Daniel, but suddenly now with the 42 months it's literal?

We as Adventist Historicists will SHOOT ourselves in the foot, and Dispensational-Futurists will HANG US form the HIGHEST MAST IN CHRISTENDOM!!

Let's stay consistent, and apply the 42 months to the 1260 years of the Dark Ages, and not confuse the matter. We will be far better off, and we will do far better in preventing a lot of confusion.

I believe the Future Tribulation will be short, but it will NOT be based on a "test of time", whether it happens to last 42 months or not.

[tall73]

The fact is, removing such from Church membership is the only alternative. Those "fighting against" the fundamental beliefs of the Church cannot be allowed to continue to be a part of the body. At some point, action has to be taken.

I am going to focus for a moment on this thought, rather than the specifics of the prophecies. I voluntarily removed myself from the church once I no longer could agree with the fundamental beliefs.

But do you think that wholesale purges are on the way over each of the fundamentals?

I would say very few in the church accept the sanctuary doctrine for instance, or even know how to explain it. Yet they are not usually removed from fellowship. Would you favor their removal?

Also, will the shaking of Adventist happen by removal, from your point of view, or just God's doing?

[Dr. Rich]

No, the 'lamb like beast' is NOT the United States, what ever made someone think it is for goodness sake? This beast is lamb like because it speaks like Jesus would speak to deceive the whole world! It was NOT a lamb like beast at all--it merely had two horns LIKE a lamb--(both speaking like Jesus would speak) but really speaking as the dragon since this beast is Satan himself!

The fatal wound happened to the Jews as they lost their way of worship and have not had it re-established yet, but it will. But HEY, what's all the fuss over this anyway? This beast does not appear until the start of the last five months of this earth's history and by that time NO ONE can change again. So why fuss about it?

[ClubV12]

tall73, Thank you for addressing this important issue head on.

There are lots of folks in the Church, good members, good people, who don't necessarily accept or are convinced of all the doctrines. You mentioned the Sanctuary for one. My experience has been that there is a high percentage of good Adventist members who have only a basic knowledge of this fundamental belief. Like some other doctrines they accept it for the most part without really understanding it. Then there are some that openly reject it and more. They actively preach and teach against it. Those who do so are promoting "heresy" as it concerns the fundamental beliefs of the Adventist Church. They have crossed a line, the error must be "met", it must be dealt with in some significant way. Up to and including disfellowship or voluntary removal of membership.

Likewise there are many Adventists who are not sure where they stand on the issue of Ellen White and her status as a messenger of the Lord. This position is NOT a test of faith!!! But again, some folks have decided, their mind is made up, they do not believe she is inspired AND take the next step. Openly preaching and teaching against the Spirit of Prophecy. At that point the "heresy" has to be "met", up to and including disfellowship.

Those who insist on preaching/teaching false doctrine and do so within the Church simply cannot be allowed to continue to be members in good standing. There have been occasions in the history of the Church where there have been "wholesale" disfellowship, splits in the Church and mass exodus over some issue. While it is very sad and no one takes any joy in the process, it is necessary, it must be done.

I've heard that some 150 Seventh-day Adventist PASTORS left the Church along with Dr. Desmond Ford when he was disfellowshipped for his preaching/teaching error concerning the Sanctuary message. Sad, but it had to be done.

In World War 1 there was also a HUGE split among the Church in Europe primarily. Thousands left and today remain an "off shoot" of the Church. There is no doubt we will see this again, in HUGE numbers. To the point where it appears the Church will fall, but it will not fall, it will go through to the end. Purified and in perfect unity.

The "shaking", for the most part, will be individuals who will make a choice to leave the Church. As you did, over some particular issue or doctrine or somebody made them mad or what ever. I suppose some will be disfellowhshipped. But frankly, I think when the shaking comes it will be such a dark time, most will leave of their own accord. A terrible ordeal the Church will have to go through, but it must be done.

[tall73]

I've heard that some 150 Seventh-day Adventist PASTORS left the Church along with Dr. Desmond Ford when he was disfellowshipped for his preaching/teaching error concerning the Sanctuary message. Sad, but it had to be done.

Just a fact check, he was not disfellowshipped. He still retained membership until he voluntarily relinquished it much later. Perhaps you mean his ministerial credentials being removed.

[tall73]

Those who insist on preaching/teaching false doctrine and do so within the Church simply cannot be allowed to continue to be members in good standing. There have been occasions in the history of the Church where there have been "wholesale" disfellowship, splits in the Church and mass exodus over some issue. While it is very sad and no one takes any joy in the process, it is necessary, it must be done.

With a more conservative president at the head of the GC, do you see this happening more often?

Or is this more of a grassroots movement at the local level where the actual discipline would happen anyway?

[ClubV12]

The G.C. President has no power to change the Church Manual. It applies to him, to the local Pastor and to the local church janitor or member equally.

As to what any given local Church may or may not decide to do, that is up to them. If the issue becomes serious enough and the local Church is unable or unwilling to deal with it, the Conference may step in and take action. Up to and including dissolving the entire local Church!

The Church Manual will not be adjusted based on "numbers" or the whims of leadership at any given moment in time. Even if an entire Division withdraws from the Adventist Church it will not change the Church Manual or the fundamental doctrines of the Church.

To some degree, Seventh-day Adventist Pastors not only have a moral and ethical obligation to the Church, they also have legal obligations they have to meet. State and Federal laws may come into play in some instances.

[ClubV12]

Since the 1880's when Canwright left the Church about every 15 or 20 years we have seen some prominent member leave the Church. In MOST cases they chose to do so, in lieu of being disfellowshipped. In a few cases they refused to leave and were actually disfellowshipped. The end result is the same, the method used is inconsequential.

Desmond Ford was just another guy in a long string of those preaching heresy "dismissed" from the Church over the last hundred years and more.

Who knows how often this has happened at the "local" level, we generally only hear of it when it happens at the higher levels of leadership. Or it becomes notorius for some other reason, like David Koresh. What is happening in Washington state right now is just another instance of a local Church dealing with heresy. Happens all the time and will no doubt increase as we approach the end.

Fasten your seat belt, troubled waters lie ahead.

[Gibs]

Lysimachus,

You are wrong on your assumptions. Reason is the crowns are now on the horns of this new beast rising up out of the sea of peoples. Not one bit of Rev 13: does not go back of 1798. The beast then had the crowns on the heads. You will find that Rev. 13:1-10 are in order and not mixed up and Rev 13:11-18 are in order also.

The beast before 1798 was the OWO with the crowns on the heads, the one in Rev 13: is the NWO and the 10 horns are crowned and these are puppeting the world and none but few see it. It is playing out before your very eyes and is very soon to be completed and still no see.

I've posted how the prophecy is and still it isn't seen even though it is about finished, amazing.

Historicism is the stumbling block that closes up the view of it. It is a mystery to you to see it for youself either way, you just accepted the historic view because you relie on men and not the word and what it says.

None will have many years now to see the truth of it as it is finishing now.

His Blessings for all to see who will.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[tall73]

Since the 1880's when Canwright left the Church about every 15 or 20 years we have seen some prominent member leave the Church. In MOST cases they chose to do so, in lieu of being disfellowshipped. In a few cases they refused to leave and were actually disfellowshipped. The end result is the same, the method used is inconsequential.

Desmond Ford was just another guy in a long string of those preaching heresy "dismissed" from the Church over the last hundred years and more.

You still have it wrong. He was not dismissed. He didn't drop his membership until around two decades after Glacierview.

[ClubV12]

Gib's, do you have a chart posted somewhere or could you email the chart you use for end time events if you have one? If you don't want to share a link with the community to such a chart.

[tall73]

The G.C. President has no power to change the Church Manual. It applies to him, to the local Pastor and to the local church janitor or member equally.

[phkrause]

With a more conservative president at the head of the GC, do you see this happening more often?

Or is this more of a grassroots movement at the local level where the actual discipline would happen anyway?

In all my years as a SDA, I know of not one non-conservative president of the church.