Gerry Cabalo

Hiding the SDAC sign

48 posts in this topic

The Wanderer said below:

If I understand you correctly, I think I have not been clear and you had misunderstood me.  What you describe below is probably in conformity with denominational practice.  It all may happen so fast that people may not realize that a vote has been  taken for the person to be baptized, to join the SDA denomination, subject to their baptism.

As to Profession of Faith:  This is an accepted method of joining the SDA denomination.  The intent of this practice is for people who have been baptized previously by immersion and to recognize that while that person may not have been SDA, that baptism was a valid baptism and the person's commitment to Christ, at that time, is not denied. 

The rules & policies that I reference have been in existence for many decades.  It does not mean that they are   followed 100%, but, they have been in existence.

 

Gregory; I have not usually seen baptisms separated from joining the church. That is a new one for me. Most crusades I have seen offer a dual appeal to both join the denomination, and to be baptized all in the same breath. You mentioned "policies" or "rules" of some kind that do not allow this? I am not so sure how widely practiced those policies or rules are. I have seen the odd "profession of faith" without baptism, but also as a way of "joining the church." Its always confused me, and when I was doing Literature Evangelism, I got into hot water a few times, because I did not get enough people "joining the church." Seems that my apriori of helping people to know Jesus was somewhat taboo, without the dual appeal for both joining and being baptized. What rules or policies are you referring to, and are they current rules, or recently made ones?

The Wanderer likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gerry Cabalo said:

What is the purpose of concealing the sign initially?  Is it because we are ashamed of the name?  Is it to deceive people?

 

From your description it appears that the evangelist thought that the Adventist name would turn people off and reduce the interest in coming to hear him.

The question then is-"Is the Adventist name a hindrance to our message?" If so, then the next question is-"Why did Go.d give us this name?" 

The SOP days that the name is important and has a peculiar appeal sanctioned by God.

   The banner of the third angel has inscribed upon it, "The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." Our institutions have taken a name which sets forth the character of our faith, and of this name we are never to be ashamed. I have been shown that this name means much, and in adopting it we have followed the light given us from heaven. . . . The Sabbath is God's memorial of His creative work, and it is a sign that is to be kept before the world. {2SM 384.3} 

I don't think the evangelist was either ashamed or guileful, but perhaps lacking faith or knowledge in the significance of the Adventist name and God's counsel establishing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SDA have, in some theological areas, made a bad name for itself.  Just look at all the ex-SDAs on You Tube for example.   

The most frequent complaints have to do with Ellen White and the law of God.  Most non-SDA Christians view Adventists as belonging to a cult.

How do we get from under this?  Who knows....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the blame lies with our own members, and it makes relations hard all the way around. When people bulldoze others with a spirit of "rightness" and dogmatism, that is not generally well-accepted. When members focus on outward behaviours of others and try to correct them or fix them or complain about them- tell me, how long would you endure such treatment?

As far as EGW goes, the early membership was far less dependent on her work and better Bible students. I understand that changed about the 1920s, where leaders and membership dubbed her work with inerrancy and infallibility, and she was no longer around to defend herself. In doing that they in essence created a pope.

I am sorry that in these modern times we are left with more prejudice that we need to fight. But we need to fight the battle with the weapons of God's warfare which are not carnal but mighty. And before them all comes love. That is how God deals with us. Love, freedom of conscience, and time to allow the Holy Spirit to do its work.

GayatfootofCross likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So those of you who think that concealing the SDA sign is deceptive, was God being deceptive in Ex 5, 1 Sam 16, or Jn 7?  Anyone?

The Wanderer likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.

The Wanderer and JoeMo like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry:  Even if we were to say that God was deceptive, that would not justify our being deceptive.

 

To say that God was deceptive would not be a  blanket justification to be deceptive everywhere, at all times.

 

Aubrey likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2016 at 6:27 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

The Wanderer said below:

If I understand you correctly, I think I have not been clear and you had misunderstood me.  What you describe below is probably in conformity with denominational practice.  It all may happen so fast that people may not realize that a vote has been  taken for the person to be baptized, to join the SDA denomination, subject to their baptism.

 

A little communication goes a long ways...thank you. I bolded the part of your comment that explains where I was coming from. Ill never forget the last crusade I helped with...two pastors arguing over who gets to do what baptisms in the church office. My only point being here is that "baptism" even when using the correct method, seems to be misunderstood, and not practiced in the right spirit. If the right spirit is not explained and manifested then we usually end up with the "dunk em and leave em" stories.

GayatfootofCross likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aubrey said:

God sees not as man sees, for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.

it's a good thing isn't it? :)

phkrause and Aubrey like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gerry Cabalo said:

So those of you who think that concealing the SDA sign is deceptive, was God being deceptive in Ex 5, 1 Sam 16, or Jn 7?  Anyone?

God does not practice deception. There are several Bible examples where jesus healed someone and clearly stated "tell no man" who did this. Jesus knew the "prejudice" that such testimonies would be met with and thus were His reasons, at times, to be quiet about Him. It is not "wrong" or "deceptive" to do evangelism the way Jesus did it. But many think they must attack the devil under their own steam, and end up with revengelism.

(I just made up a new "Adventist word" at the end of this post. lol)

Edited by The Wanderer
phkrause and JoeMo like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a different way to look at it rather than just saying if it is deceptive-  is it the best possible practice for us to do at this time. I guess the thing I would do is prayerfully consider the overall situation and the relevant counsel. To me the quote about not concealing who we are appears to be highly relevant. In the past I have helped rent public buildings for the beginning of a crusade for this reason. We would tell anyone who asked who we were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Partner and I were enjoying pizza night with a few of our lovely close church members and I brought up this topic.

Wanting input from Real Faces that  I do know are quite extensively more than their opinions. (as all are)

I  then  had  vague  flashback to my home church as a  kid ..that we actually did that (!)..and even had a special cover made to fit  over the sign.

It was a work of art made out of wood... yes thank you, My Home Church

So us!

The memory gets stronger every time I think back after.

 

Of course the knee jerk reaction at our lil Pizza and Salad Party was the Church was ashamed.

I brought up it was probably done to increase the people attending or at least getting a peek.

Due to uhhh,, cultish judging behavior close by or unfavorable press of people and groups linked to our Church.

Media etc.

Then they told me that our Church (my current) did things differently.

They held the meetings in a Hall then moved it to the Church  at the time the Sabbath Message.

neeto!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 5:57 PM, Gregory Matthews said:
On ‎9‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 5:57 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

Gerry:  Even if we were to say that God was deceptive, that would not justify our being deceptive.

 

To say that God was deceptive would not be a  blanket justification to be deceptive everywhere, at all times.

 

Gerry:  Even if we were to say that God was deceptive, that would not justify our being deceptive.

 

To say that God was deceptive would not be a  blanket justification to be deceptive everywhere, at all times.

 

Greg, I am very surprised by your response. Are you saying that on occasion God uses deception only as a matter of convenience?

If we cover up the SDA sign ONLY during the pre-Sabbath presentation, that is not a blanket use of deception is it?

 

ESV | ‎Nu 23:19 God is not man, that he should lie.

ESV | ‎Heb 6:18  it is impossible for God to lie,

If the above statements are true, then it seems to me that we must question or reexamine our ideas about what is deception/lie and what is not.

As Jesus said, NIV84 | ‎Jn 7:24 Stop judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment.”  

And the right judgment, it seems to me, is to look at the heart (motive) as the Bible says.  What is the reason/motive for God telling Moses to tell pharaoh that he was leading the Israelites only 3 days journey into the wilderness to sacrifice to Jehovah?  What was His motive in telling Samuel not to openly declare David as the new king?  Why did Jesus say that He was not going to Jerusalem and then privately go there? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry:  Please read what I said.  Never did I say that God was deceptive.  In the quoted post, I simply left that argument alone.  I went to the next step when I said " IF . . .

By the way, thank you for asking.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry asks below:

1)  Just maybe that was the original request--to go three days journey.

2)  Just maybe, if Pharaoh had let them go, they would have returned?  The request of Moses may have been honest.

3)  But, God knew that Pharaoh would drive then out--Exodus 6:1.

4) With the refusal to let them go and sacrifice, the plagues came.

5)  The death of the first born, in the 10th plague, the people of Egypt, including Pharaoh rose up and drove the people out, as God has said.

7)  Yes, God knew ahead of time that the outcome of the request would be deliverance--see Exodus 3:8.  But, that does not mean that the original request to go and sacrifice was false..  Therefore, it dos not mean that God was deceptive. 

 

What is the reason/motive for God telling Moses to tell pharaoh that he was leading the Israelites only 3 days journey into the wilderness to sacrifice to Jehovah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry asked, see below:

1)  Your question has several aspects.  So, take your pick.  NOTE:  You can read about this in 1 Samuel 16:

2) David was not to immediately become the king.  Saul reigned as King for some time after this.

3)  Samuel actually did more than anoint David.  He consecrated Jessie and David's brother's--see verse 5.

4) As future events took place, it is clear that both Saul and the people believed that David was intended to replace Saul as king.  This argues against the idea that God was deceptive. 

 

What was His motive in telling Samuel not to openly declare David as the new king? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerry asked, below:

1)  I can think of a couple  of incidents that might be your reference.

2)  However, as you have not specified the exact Biblical reference, I prefer not to speculate.

 

Why did Jesus say that He was not going to Jerusalem and then privately go there? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just an update.

Although the attendance was nowhere close to our expectations, we did have 3 baptisms last Sabbath.  There was supposed to be two more today but came down with a bug.  I believe there were supposed to be 3 or 4 coming in on profession of faith.  I had to leave early for my clinic, so I wasn't there for the whole service.

phkrause, LifeHiscost and Lauralea like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The banner is not real the problem.

The problem is presentation; we always start with all kind of "beast" and scary stuff.

Why not start with Gods love, Problem of Sin, Jesus as only way to salvation then all the old fashion method .

We are small outreach in Allentown, PA; we do this approach; church (SDA)does not like our method and we do not get positive support from them ( I mean local church ); even saying the method is wrong..

The higher hierarchy ( GC, Conference and Union ) support us and we still going strong.

The name is Simplicity, check it out. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bimo:  The One Project begins with a center on Christ, love and salvation.  Check it out, as you said.

As to "simplicity:"  It would be nice if you would give the actual URL that we     could access.  Checking it out is not easy to do as   it is actually a parachurch movement that embraces many denominations.  A few, as there are more, include: the Mormons, a large number of Pentacostal groups, the Church of Christ and Presbyterians.

 The group is so large, and unorganized, that it is not easy to determine  exactly what is involved, although there are some general characteristics.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Pam.

It would have been a better choice for those who chose the name "simplicity" for them to have not chosen a name that is clearly connected with  Pentacostal parachurch group.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2016 at 9:27 AM, GayatfootofCross said:

My Partner and I were enjoying pizza night with a few of our lovely close church members and I brought up this topic.

Of course the knee jerk reaction at our lil Pizza and Salad Party was the Church was ashamed.

 

Sounds like The Pizza Cult. lol I cant believe the chatter some people choose to get upset about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

Mega Footer

You can configure this content inside your ACP under Customization > Edit > Mega Footer.

Mega Footer

You can configure this content inside your ACP under Customization > Edit > Mega Footer.