Beyond Belief: X-SDAs leaving for non-SDA doctrine

[BobRyan]

In thinking about my previous post, I think that not being able to find real freinds in the church is at least as big of an issue as disagreement with doctrine. In case you haven't noticed, I have some rather "eccentric" theological views.

The point of the article was that in 1998 the survey of ex-SDAs seemed to indicate that "it was all about the friends" and that doctrinal confusion only accounted for less than 20% of the people leaving.

But in 2011 that number shot up to almost 50%.

This is an indication that the formula "doctrinal confusion is ok - as long as I have friends here" - is not working the way some had hoped.

It is now the #1 reason for leaving according to that statistic.

Bob

[BobRyan]

Do you not know that Matthew 18:15-17, put in practice by faith working through love, required you and Bob to take up the issue of my phrase by PM in private first, instead of spilling out the hash before those who would ridicule the church?

You can't be serious.

I never stated anything about your statement - other than the fact that it was not accurate. That in fact Ellen White states the opposite. If every time some wanted to make a claim that something I quoted or claimed about the Bible or Ellen White or SDA doctrine - was not "accurate" - they had to PM me and open up a private counseling dialogue first - this would not be much of a discussion thread at all.

Now granted there is a lot of "Club you are evil ..." type statements that you can find on this thread - and some others. And you are right to point out that if those people are being serious and if they actually intended to comply with Matt 18 - they would have done that using some other language and via PM.

But issues of accuracy - or differences of POV are not matters of PM and Counseling.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: Ted Oplinger

you pull my words out of context as "proof" I have showered disrespect upon SoP.

I don't use words like "disrespect" - that is your term.

I simply "quote you" talking about Ellen white being " the greatest champion of pointing people away from her books"

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: Ted Oplinger

Do you not know such would more likely seize upon the "concern" of you and Bob for heaping even further disdain and ridicule upon a Church

Are you saying you have some quote from me where I claim to disdain or ridicule the Seventh-day Adventist church?

Or are you just saying you wish you had such a statement from me?

No, Bob. Indeed, there is a certain consistency in the lack of reading comprehension here on here part. Almost as good as Gibs' style.

Go back, re-read it, then try to figure it out. It's not exactly hard English to understand.

Blessings,

[BobRyan]

Ok I stand corrected - you were not imagining that I was the one disdaining and ridiculing the church, you were imagining that an imaginary person was doing that in response to my posts.

I am willing to be corrected on that point.

[ClubV12]

Street Xfmr blew, I'm on my generator for power...

Ted, I am "wondering" if indeed you are a victim of "Growing up Adventist". I don't know your background, but your posts seem to fit the symptoms. Just reasoning from cause to effect.

Slowly I am learning more about this problem, as I see it a lot in our Churches and here on the forum. People have been hurt, been beatup by improper use of Ellen White, as a "hammer". Particularly prevelant in the 70's-80's from what I can gather.

Adventists who grew up with this might not "hate" Ellen White anymore, though most did at some point, but now they are "marginalized" toward her work. EVERY quote goes up the cry, "Context". And we need that, but EVERY quote? We don't do that with the bible, EVERY verse, "We need context"! No, we don't, some verses and some quotes stand on their own, they mean just what they say. Context is to often used as a tool to dismiss and "make of no effect" the plain testimony.

Thus the members are led to believe that Ellen White has to be approached with caution and even doubt. Rightly so, the bible is held up in it's place. The gift was never meant to replace, it was meant to enhance. Like a commentary does, or an dictionary. Like the LAWS OF MOSES were to the ten commandments, so is Ellen White to our Church.

We need MORE emphasis on the gift, MORE people who find strength in it, who thank God for it with no "context" required. It is a HUGE gift to the Church, remarkable, out standing and it should be read and studied everyday along with the bible. This is ESPECIALLY true for new members. FIRST, get them reading the Conflict Series, Steps to Christ, etc. Bible study WILL be the result.

I know this because this is exactly what happened to me. I would read the KJV and not have a clue what I was reading. I would Desire of Ages and say, "Oh, I see it now, THATS whats happening." In time, the bible started to make sense and now I LOVE the pure word. But I started with a lesser light, that led me to a greater light. Oh how I love the spirit of prophecy!!!

[BobRyan]

Street Xfmr blew, I'm on my generator for power...

electric generator? Does it run the house? come on automatically?

[BobRyan]

WE have some warnings about what will happen at the end of time. Is that warning of the form "people will begin to place too much confidence in the messages God has given through the Testimonies to the Church"?

May call for some research to dig that one out.

I am not arguing that we cannot find someone unbalanced and "Bible lite" who reads Conflict of the Ages but not the Bible -- now and then. But the thing that apparently "Characterizes" the group at the end of time - is that they do not know either one.

in Christ,

Bob

[ClubV12]

It's been my experience that very few have read or do read even the conflict series. Including Ministers. I suspect that could be said for a majority of members and the bible as well. People just don't study in general. Folks in my Sabbath School class are well studied on the lesson, I find that encouraging!

Extension cord through the window, limited use.

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: Ted Oplinger

Do you not know that Matthew 18:15-17, put in practice by faith working through love, required you and Bob to take up the issue of my phrase by PM in private first, instead of spilling out the hash before those who would ridicule the church?

You can't be serious.

I never stated anything about your statement - other than the fact that it was not accurate. That in fact Ellen White states the opposite. If every time some wanted to make a claim that something I quoted or claimed about the Bible or Ellen White or SDA doctrine - was not "accurate" - they had to PM me and open up a private counseling dialogue first - this would not be much of a discussion thread at all.

Now granted there is a lot of "Club you are evil ..." type statements that you can find on this thread - and some others. And you are right to point out that if those people are being serious and if they actually intended to comply with Matt 18 - they would have done that using some other language and via PM.

But issues of accuracy - or differences of POV are not matters of PM and Counseling.

in Christ,

Bob

If your are going to be of the perspective to ignore the context of my words, and allow Club to take your position and express such great "concern" I am casting away the gift of prophecy, and leading others to do so - a very serious charge going far beyond a simple POV difference - then yes, that is what you and Club ought to have done.

While Club now must entertain such threads (both here and elsewhere), I don't think of Club - or you - as evil. As for the how each is portrayed here on this thread, it has all to do with who has done what to reach this point.

All I have ever asked of those responding to me is A) Use my words in the context I write them in, support the responding position well, and C) don't paint one's self into a corner should your argument not hold.

You failed on 2 of the 3 points. You necessarily parsed my words in post 624118 to make it appear I am making the case you portrayed. As you have been so assertive in repeating them, allow me to repeat them again - in their context:

"Ellen was the greatest champion of pointing people away from her books, and to the Bible itself, first and foremost for the testimony of Christ"

Indeed, Gail caught the intent and thrust of my statement quite clearly, in the very next post (624127). She understood my context, even if you did not, and even expanded upon it. I even built upon my position in post 624230, so as to set the stage to address any ambiguity. Never once did I denigrate the gift of prophecy, nor did I say we are at liberty to dismiss the Testimonies to go "by the Bible only". Those are assertions you and Club have tried to build into my words.

To cross swords as you did in post 625687 - first, in parsing my first statement, then asserting I could not support myself from the Testimonies - indicates a willingness to ignore both the intent and content of what I said. While at first a POV difference, to reach that difference meant you necessarily had to parse out Gail's affirmation and my follow-up in a rush to judgment.

My post in 625792 is a point-by-point rebuttal of your assertion that I could not back up my POV.

Yes, it is Club's assertion my work "added fuel to the fires of unbelief in the gift" - but his SOLE reference is your post 625687: your parsing of my words, ignoring everything else surrounding those words, and asserting I could not back up my position, made while I was composing the next post of rebuttal (post 625864). That is where the accusations begin - built upon your case.

All of these posts - my posts of 624118, Gail's post 624127, and my follow-up posts of 624230, 625792, and 625864, put my words into a very clear context. One has to work very hard to twist what I have said to build a case whereby I am on the one hand denigrating the gift of prophecy, while inconsistently saying I firmly support it, all the while my point-by-point Ellen White case solidly defended me up every step of the way. Yet, you continue to make your assertions.

Your argument has been unsustainable and untenable, yet, like Gibs in the Trinity thread, you keep repeating your unsupportable talking points. This is where your second failure is - painting yourself into a losing corner, fighting all the way.

It is here you have demonstrated you apparently cannot accept your assertions have been rendered null, and necessarily continue the fight. There very much appears a spirit that, once you have made your assertions, you must necessarily prove yourself right. It is this very habit others notice, and this is where they disagree with you and Club. It is not that you disagree with my POV, but do so continually ignoring both the content and rebuttal to your position, which has led to this point.

You said I could not back up my assertion - and I did. I did not even use all of what I could have, but it was enough to brush aside your basic position.

Your every response to me since then - whether long or short - continues to build upon only what you want to portray I said, rather the whole of what I actually said. Others got it; you did not. That is why no matter how many times you, or Club, continue this disagreeing position, you will be simply shooting yourselves in your own feet, and undermining your own case.

Blessings,

[Ted Oplinger]

Street Xfmr blew, I'm on my generator for power...

Ted, I am "wondering" if indeed you are a victim of "Growing up Adventist". I don't know your background, but your posts seem to fit the symptoms. Just reasoning from cause to effect.

As you reasoning abilities are a bit suspect, so also is your conclusion. I have given plenty about my background scattered through other threads over the past 10+ years; maybe some day, you will understand.

Blessings,

[Ted Oplinger]

It's been my experience that very few have read or do read even the conflict series. Including Ministers. I suspect that could be said for a majority of members and the bible as well. People just don't study in general. Folks in my Sabbath School class are well studied on the lesson, I find that encouraging!

Extension cord through the window, limited use.

Sorry for the blown transformer - real pains.

I have the SoP, the Testimonies, Selected Messages, and the Conflict series - in bound and electronic forms - and enjoy them every time I read them. In bound form, I have many more of her writings, as they are not available on Kindle just yet.

I have read them all - and continue to read through them again. Once is simply not enough.

Blessings,

[ClubV12]

I'm sure your well versed in the SOP Ted, never questioned that.

Your statement about Ellen White pointing people away from her work is typical of those I've met who live with the curse "Growing up Adventist", and for some, it is a curse. It is reasonable to consider the question due to the possible connection.

I could speak with CONFIDENCE and ASSURANCE of some here who live with the curse of "Growing up Adventist", there is no question that syndrome exists. And it has left people bitter, angry, hurt and marginalized. Perhaps THESE are the kinds of people your trying to reach in your ministry? I never met anyone with the curse who denied the gift, nor do I see you denying the gift. They just don't want to hear about the gift anymore, there sick of hearing it. Even the mention of her name is enough to cause people to "go off" on you!

We know Ellen Whites prophecy is that Adventists WON'T deny the gift, just make it of little of no effect. Regardless of how sincere you may be and well meaning you may be, this thread took a rather sudden and nasty turn with that opening statement, she a champion of "pointing people away from her work". Absolutely false, not at all consistent with the body of her work, very misleading.

Full. Red. Alert! Bob recognized the immediate danger, as did I. In my opinion the fruit we have seen bears testimony to the danger recognized, the damage done.

This thread, from practically page one, has damaged the gift FAR MORE than helped to encourage it.

My work for the past thirty years has been of a forensic investigation manner, internationally. If I was on the job, it was because something went seriously wrong. Reasoning from cause to effect is what I do.

[BobRyan]

No, Bob Ryan; in your above statement you say yourself, people >left because of doctrinal differences<. That, is not, as a 'result' of >doctrinal confusion<; that is people leaving because or as the result of DOCTRINE--doctrine per se --- because of CLARITY on doctrine!

Gerhard -

I fully agree with you that those who choose to differ with the Bible doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist church - no matter their beliefs - will all claim they have clarity and their other ideas no matter how varied are all the right ones on any doctrine where we differ.

But from the standpoint of the Seventh-day Adventist - they are landing in a Babylon of confusion on Bible doctrine instead of finding "Clarity". I think you will agree here that this is the view from an Adventist Bible student POV.

But think about this survey and results for a minute. If all the ex-SDAs are being dismissed as "they are just people that could not be happy, that found someone against whom they could take offense" - is to marginalize and belittle the serious nature of the issue for those ex-SDAs that are leaving over doctrine. This 2011 survey is actually giving them some validation.

(This is the point where the liberal SDA probably swallows hard.)

in Christ,

Bob

[Ted Oplinger]

I'm sure your well versed in the SOP Ted, never questioned that.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

Context is to often used as a tool to dismiss and "make of no effect" the plain testimony.

Your continued disdain for context shows your lack of understanding how to study and your desire to continue the miss use of words and phrases to support your opinions when context will not do such.

context

noun

the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood and assessed

• the parts of something written or spoken that immediately precede and follow a word or passage and clarify its meaning:

Quote:

FIRST, get them reading the Conflict Series, Steps to Christ, etc. Bible study WILL be the result.

This statement is so wrong that one hardly know where to begin. It exactly sums up your position

Quote:

I would read the KJV and not have a clue what I was reading. I would Desire of Ages and say, "Oh, I see it now, THATS whats happening." In time, the bible started to make sense and now I LOVE the pure word. But I started with a lesser light, that led me to a greater light. Oh how I love the spirit of prophecy!!!

, making me wonder if you truly understand your words. All of your comments, opinions, etc, leave out the work of the Holy Spirit. What works for you many not be the best method for others! You obviously don't believe the Bible can be understood w/o EGW!

You simply do not understand your own position, you contradict your self with your own words.What do you stand on, plain and simple!

Your judging of others is really getting tiresome, the constant attack on members, church leaders and pastors that don't do things your way. You are not a supporter of the church as it exists at this point. You only support what you think it should be! Please don't insult me by using Bible verses to support your constant judging. I know that when it is pointed out the context does not support your position, you will be disdainful but also equally disdainful when texts are used to show that your judging is not for you to do. Could it be those using those texts will be tasked for their use by saying 'not in context!"

[ClubV12]

My position mirrors the Church doctrine, theology and the writings of Ellen White CoAspen.

Context has it's place, as I have always said. It is overused and often used to avoid the straight truth. CA has had many discussions on various counsels from the SOP. When that counsel cuts to close to home, people start dragging out "context" as a means of escaping the plain, easy to understand, counsel. There is no mystery on these things, people simply love to take something simple and shroud it in mystery. People do the same thing with the bible, this is nothing new.

The Great Controversy, one of Sister Whites books, was meant to go to the whole world. Why not the bible instead? Surely we need to get the bible into the hands of the whole world more than her book? I've had a bible for decades, it took a lesser light leading to the greater light for me. And for thousands of other like me! First the blade, then the ear, then the full corn. First the Great Controversy then the bible, in many, if not most, cases when reaching the world, this is a solid plan. It is a solid plan for new members, it is a solid plan for old members. It is a timeless book that should not only be read, it should be studied! For it brings much light to the word.

All of us, you included, are commanded by the bible to "judge". You cannot idly stand by when false doctrine is being taught, or you become part of the problem, not the solution.

As it concerns doctrine:

I am reasonably certain Ted, Bob and I agree on the foundations and pillars of the Church. The questions raised here are, "What, when, where, how should those truths be presented?" Even the pioneers had fierce discussions over THOSE issues! I don't know where you and many others stand on doctrinal points, so I can't make a judgment on that. I do sense a continual kind of anger from you that is apparent in a number of your posts. I don't know where that comes from.

[Gibs]

It sure is not beyond belief why so many are leaving the SDA church, maybe not so much for non SDA doctrine.

But that depends on doctrine before or the present doctrine of Adventism.

I left SDAdventism because of new doctrine coming in to get back to the true doctrine it had in yester years.

I've posted the following here before and this was fought against like a bunch of tigers trying to kill it,

"We have no hesitancy in telling you that in order to obtain the immortal inheritance and the eternal substance, you must be overcomers in this probationary life. Everything that blots and stains the soul must be removed, must be cleansed from the heart. We must know what it means to be a partaker of the divine nature, having escaped the corruptions that are in the world through lust. Are you willing to wage war against the lusts of the flesh? Are you ready to battle against the enemy of God and man? Satan is determined to enslave every soul if he can; for he is playing a desperate game to win the souls of men from Christ and eternal life. Will you permit him to steal from you the graces of the Spirit of God, and plant in you his own corrupt nature? or will you accept the great provision of salvation, and through the merits of the Infinite Sacrifice made in your behalf, become a partaker of the divine nature? God has given His only-begotten Son, that through His shame, suffering, and death, you might have glory, honor, and immortality."--Signs of the Times, June 15, 1891. {TDG 175.2}

I fought with several Pastors here that taught that none can overcome all sin!

All I have to say is that if you want the SDA church awakened to ever be turned around there will have to be so great a coming out that the hierarchy will see it better change back or certain death will be.

Nine tenths of you could maybe make it happen, but you cannot by being go alongers with all the errors that have come in!

SDA's Awake!

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 didn't leave because of "new doctrine" Gibs, you left because you have your own doctrine which neither the pioneers nor the present Church supports.

Your doctrine has nothing at all in common with the Adventist Church at any point in time. For instance, your views on the triune God. James White, Loughborough, Bates, Jones, pick a name, any name of a pioneer, not ONE of them believed as you do on that point.

So don't blame the Church for your removal.

[Gibs]

Yes Bro. ClubV12, I did leave because of new doctrine and apostate and occult coming in.

At that time it was NLP, Lab 1, 2, 3,. Lab 1,2,3 was about we were to bring in to the programmers the "sheaves" and they would program them with there oily expertise!

Smooth slick well orators of deceit! These practices were already incorporated into many of the other so called protestant churches and church numbers were said to be exploding.

Oh yes we had to do the same, the end product justified the means! Well it didn't work, the church began to loose and has been since.

But now tons more of stuff, the false has invaded the teachings, now we are all ONE!

YEP, Emerging church deal and all that came in it with a SDA wrapper on it but almost word for word the teachings of Ignatius Loyola!

"There is hope for every one of us, but only in one way—by fastening ourselves to Christ and exerting every energy to attain to the perfection of His character. This goody-goody religion that makes light of sin, and that is forever dwelling upon the love of God to the sinner, encourages sinners to believe that God will save them while they continue in sin and know it to be sin. This is the way that many are doing who profess to believe present truth. The truth is kept apart from their life, and that is the reason it has no more power to convict and convert the soul. There must be a straining of every nerve and spirit and muscle to leave the world, its customs, its practices, and its fashions. . . . {CTr 81.2}

The lives of many show that they have no living connection with God. They are drifting into the channel of the world. In reality they have no part or lot with Christ. They love amusement and are filled with selfish plans, hopes, and ambitions. They serve the enemy under the pretense of serving God. They are in bondage to a taskmaster, and this bondage they choose, making themselves willing slaves of Satan. . . . {CTr 81.3}

Are there not reasons the Spirit of God does not work with His people? Truth is kept in the outer court. Communion with God is forfeited to please worldly relations and friends whose hearts are constantly in opposition to the truth. . . . {CTr 81.4}

God’s blessing was upon Abraham because he would cultivate home religion. He who blesses the habitation of the righteous says, “I know him, that he will command his . . . household after him.” There will be no betraying of the truth on his part. . . . {CTr 81.5}

Yes it has come to a "goody goody" religion as she states above!

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.

[BobRyan]

Gibs - you didn't list anything in the actual 28 Fundamental Beliefs as being a problem or change.

[ClubV12]

Not ONE of the items you mention are doctrines of the Church Gibs, NOT ONE.

You know the first thing people are taught when they are in therapy? Quit blaming others, take personal responsibility. You continually point the to Seventh-day Adventist Church and it's "false doctrine" as the cause of your problems. It is not, any problem you have is between you and God, blame Him if you must blame someone.

The truth is Gibs, your doctrine is the problem, it is not in harmony with what the pioneers taught or what is taught today. If you have something to present, fire away. If all you have is condemnation, accusation and finger pointing to a Church you don't even belong then preach YOUR doctrine instead of faulting and tearing down others.

Adventist believe a different doctrine than you, so what, as Jesus said, "What is that to you?" What business is it of yours?

[OzarkWoman]

My position mirrors the Church doctrine, theology and the writings of Ellen White CoAspen.

It does not at all. Only in your warped mind does it.

[BobRyan]

Even the mention of her name is enough to cause people to "go off" on you!

We know Ellen Whites prophecy is that Adventists WON'T deny the gift, just make it of little of no effect. Regardless of how sincere you may be and well meaning you may be, this thread took a rather sudden and nasty turn with that opening statement, she a champion of "pointing people away from her work". Absolutely false, not at all consistent with the body of her work, very misleading.

Full. Red. Alert! Bob recognized the immediate danger, as did I.

[Gibs]

Well Bob R and ClubV12, I'm not for the 28 fundamental statements of the SDA church as I prefer the scriptures first hand. Those 28 are what men have made of certain doctrines they want to hold in their church.

The ones to hold to in His Church is His Word, not of men. Trinity doctrine for one is not scriptural.

Either get hot and go after the false that has come in and put an end to "emerging church" and the other occult stuff yrs before and all that has come in with it, "emerging church" or you better come out of her is the best advice I know of.

The book of creed to follow is the Bible, we are not to follow the building of men, and that is what the 28 are.

Do you know that NLP, SNLP, Lab 1,2 and 3 never were rescinded, still used big time to program the people to see it their way. Programing is the name of the game you all. Resist it and it will flee from you, it is not of God.

The only right way is to present just Love and the plain unadulterated TRUTH. That is God's way. That other is from beneath!

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.