Unprepared For Christ's Return?

[Woody]

All those statements that are voted on in a General Conference Sessions are official statements of belief in the SDA church.

You like to quote a lot of books that are just opinion.

[John317]

And the book you really love SDAs Believe ... is not an official statement of any kind. It was not voted on my any church authority. It is merely opinion. It was put together by Floyd Bresee who I know personally. I also know a number of its legalist contributors. I would not place much value or authority on this book. It is pure opinion.

If you insist on saying what SDAs believe ... don't quote "SDAs believe" but quote statements that have been currently approved by the Church in session. To do otherwise is very misleading and inaccurate.

You must be talking about a different book than the one I am reading. The book, Seventh-day Adventists Believe, describes the same beliefs found on the official website of the SDA, and agrees completely in the matter under discussion here with all the other books I have ever seen published by the Seventh-day Adventist church. It is the product of over 200 SDA scholars, theologians, leaders, etc., chosen from among all of the church's ten world divisions, and was done with the authorization and encouragement of the President of the General Conference.

P.G. Damsteegt, a highly regarded professor at Andrews University, was chosen to write the first draft. Each chapter was carefully examined and changes made by over two different committees. A partial list of those people were: Roy Adams, Samuele Bacchiocchi, B.B. Beach, C.E. Bradford, Raoul Dederen, Duncan Eva, E.R. Gane, Clifford Goldstein, Gerhard Hasel, R.R. Hegstad, Frank Holbrook, W.G. Johnsson, Jan Paulsen, W.R. L. Scragg, W.H. Shea, Leo Van Dolson, Werner Vyhmeister, and A.V. Wallenkampf.

The man you mentioned, W. Floyd Bresee, was Secretary of the Ministerial Association.

I will leave it to the reader of this post to decide whether the book produced is just one man's opinion or whether it is representative, as it says, "of the truth in Jesus that Seventh-day Adventists around the globe cherish and proclaim."

[John317]

All those statements that are voted on in a General Conference Sessions are official statements of belief in the SDA church.

You like to quote a lot of books that are just opinion.

Since you have not produced any evidence to the contrary-- beyond your mere personal opinion-- that these things do not represent the Seventh-day Adventist church's beliefs, we can go on from here and discuss the main issue of this thread.

What will happen to all those who remain in Babylon and do not respond to the messages of the three angels of Revelation 14: 6-12? Included in this issue is the question of what will happen to SDAs who also fail to accept the same messages before the pouring out of the seven last plagues and the Second Coming of Christ?

What do you-- anyone-- believe is the SDA position and do you have a different belief from the church and if so why?

After we answer those questions, we can take up what the Bible evidence is, whether it supports what Ellen White and the SDA church teaches.

[John317]

All those statements that are voted on in a General Conference Sessions are official statements of belief in the SDA church.

You like to quote a lot of books that are just opinion.

Redwood, I've asked you what you believe the SDA church's teaching on this subject is, but you haven't answered. Since you don't like Ellen White's views or any of the 11 or so sources I've given, why don't you tell us what view you do like? I would really be interested in knowing what your view is-- as well as your wife's, since she's an SDA pastor-- and where you find that view in any books published by the church or by an Adventist author. Maybe you don't know of any books that express your private view of these matters, and that is OK too. Whatever your opinion is, just feel free to throw it into the ring.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

All those statements that are voted on in a General Conference Sessions are official statements of belief in the SDA church.

You like to quote a lot of books that are just opinion.

Redwood, I've asked you what you believe the SDA church's teaching on this subject is, but you haven't answered. Since you don't like Ellen White's views or any of the 11 or so sources I've given, why don't you tell us what view you do like? I would really be interested in knowing what your view is-- as well as your wife's, since she's an SDA pastor-- and where you find that view in any books published by the church or by an Adventist author. Maybe you don't know of any books that express your private view of these matters, and that is OK too. Whatever your opinion is, just feel free to throw it into the ring.

I'm not addressing my individual view John 317. My point is that you consistantly state what you call to be the SDA view and quote individual sources. If you want to state the view of the church you have to quote an authorized source that is the voice of the church.

I will not get in a debate of what I believe. It is not important. I stand behind what the church believes. I would only point you away from mere opinion and direct you to the official stand of the church as voiced through the vote of the church at General Session.

I think this is a work that YOU should do. It would be a good exercise. Depending upon mere opinion and stating it as Church belief can be misleading. So ... I would point you to the official church positions in all doctrines. Not individual opinions.

[Woody]

Let me just clarify the danger of using private sources in place of an authorative vote of the General Session to speak for the Adventist Church.

Let's look at this book that John 317 likes to quote. SDAs Believe was compiled by Floyd Bresee. He used another person as his main scolar ...P.G. Damsteegt. They together combined a number of contributors to form the book SDAs Believe. Anyone who has attended the Seminary can tell you about Damsteegt. He and his wife who also helped ... are Conservative extremists. And they are rejected by the vast majority who attend the Seminary.

This book is merely opinion. If you want to be called a Bresee/Damsteegt follower ... then put your trust in this book. But as it clearly states ... it is not an officially voted statement. It is not representitive of the Church. It is representitive of Bresee/Damsteegt. It might be good to have an understanding of these people before you put your trust in this opinion. Many of the contributors are extremists and I would not put my trust in them. I would suggest you study the authors you are putting your trust in.

I have done this. I know both authors. I have served on Boards with Bresee.I've visited with him in his home. I would not put my trust in either authors. You may and that is your privilege.

I would reject this book even if the President of the GC at the time ... Neal C. Wilson himself had published it. It would only be HIS opinion. The church in session is the only source that represents the CHURCH.

So ... to say that the SDA church BELIEVES something and then to cite a private opinion of a certain author is only the opinion of that author. It is not representitive of what the church believes.

Lets say that we quote Ellen White as saying that we should not play checkers. OR we quote where she says womens skirts are to long. OR We quote her saying that bicycles should not be in an Adventist home. Are these statements blessed with the authority of the SDA church? I think not. The only voice of the church is the vote of the church in session.

My point is that when you make a statement that the SDA church believes .... then you should be able to back it up with an official church statement voted on by the church. ALL else is opinion. And opinion is fine. Just state it as so. It may actually look impressive to list 11 different sources. But it may or may not be what the church believes.

The church is world wide. And even if the best scolars in North America believe in something ... it does not mean that those in Hong Kong will agree. And to be an SDA belief ... it takes more than just a certain scolar from North America.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

Redwood' date=' I've asked you what you believe the SDA church's teaching on this subject is, but you haven't answered. Since you don't like Ellen White's views or any of the 11 or so sources I've given, why don't you tell us what view you do like? I would really be interested in knowing what your view is-- as well as your wife's, since she's an SDA pastor-- and where you find that view in any books published by the church or by an Adventist author. Maybe you don't know of any books that express your private view of these matters, and that is OK too. Whatever your opinion is, just feel free to throw it into the ring.

[/quote']

I'm not addressing my individual view John 317. My point is that you consistantly state what you call to be the SDA view and quote individual sources. If you want to state the view of the church you have to quote an authorized source that is the voice of the church.

I will not get in a debate of what I believe. It is not important. I stand behind what the church believes. I would only point you away from mere opinion and direct you to the official stand of the church as voiced through the vote of the church at General Session.

I think this is a work that YOU should do. It would be a good exercise. Depending upon mere opinion and stating it as Church belief can be misleading. So ... I would point you to the official church positions in all doctrines. Not individual opinions.

Five points here:

1) I assume you attended theology classes at an SDA college where you studied the issue we're talking about here. If you did, what did the teachers say in that class about this topic? If you studied a book on that topic, what did the book say?

2) Since the views that I have quoted are the only views published by the SDA church on this subject ever since its founding, most reasonable people would assume it is representative of the SDA church.

Does it seem reasonable to you, Redwood, for a Mormon to say that all of the books published by the Mormon church, including the writings of Joseph Smith, are mere opinion and do not reflect the beliefs of the Mormon church? What would you say if on top of that, the Mormon refused to discuss what he believed the true Mormon view is? This is what you are doing here. Your argument just simply does not hold water.

3) As much as you don't like it, if you cannot even point to single book published by the SDA Church that expresses a contrary view on this topic, any reasonable person would tell you that you must admit that these books do in fact show what the Seventh-day Adventist church teaches. It is simply absurd to say that all these books, including those produced by over 200 Adventist scholars and leaders, reflect someone's mere opinion. It is simply absurd to say that the Adventist church has never printed anything to show what it believes or teaches on this subject, and that everything it has printed about it doesn't reflect the church's beliefs. Yet that is what we must believe if we are to accept your argument.

4) So far, you have talked about your personal opinion that these books don't reflect SDA beliefs, but you have not shown a shred of documentary evidence to support what you say. On the other hand, I have not given my personal opinion anywhere on this thread but am only showing what the SDA church has published on the subject under discussion.

5) Please deal with the statement that has been passed by the General Conference, which says, "As the Lord's messenger, [Ellen White's] writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction." By what logic can you say that a book she wrote, The Great Controversy, which she viewed as her most important book and which is distributed today by the church all over the world in many languages is mere opinion and does not represent the church, especially in view of the fact that all the other books published by the church since 1861 give the same view?

[John317]

Let me just clarify the danger of using private sources in place of an authorative vote of the General Session to speak for the Adventist Church.

No private sources were used in this way. As anyone can see plainly, I have only used well known and well circulated books published by the church in order to express the church's views, not an individual's view or opinion. The following evidently bears repeating:

The book, Seventh-day Adventists Believe, describes the same beliefs found on the official website of the SDA, and agrees completely in the matter under discussion here with all the other books I have ever seen published by the Seventh-day Adventist church. It is the product of over 200 SDA scholars, theologians, leaders, etc., chosen from among all of the church's ten world divisions, and was done with the authorization and encouragement of the President of the General Conference.

P.G. Damsteegt, a highly regarded professor at Andrews University, was chosen to write the first draft. Each chapter was carefully examined and changes made by over two different committees. A partial list of those people were: Roy Adams, Samuele Bacchiocchi, B.B. Beach, C.E. Bradford, Raoul Dederen, Duncan Eva, E.R. Gane, Clifford Goldstein, Gerhard Hasel, R.R. Hegstad, Frank Holbrook, W.G. Johnsson, Jan Paulsen, W.R. L. Scragg, W.H. Shea, Leo Van Dolson, Werner Vyhmeister, and A.V. Wallenkampf.

The man you mentioned, W. Floyd Bresee, was Secretary of the Ministerial Association.

I will leave it to the reader of this post to decide whether the book produced is just one man's opinion or whether it is representative, as it says, "of the truth in Jesus that Seventh-day Adventists around the globe cherish and proclaim."

[Woody]

Any and ALL sources that are not from an authorative vote of the General Session ... are private sources and thus private opinions.

Again I will say that if you are going to make the statement that the SDA church believes .... then you need to have an approved statement to back it up.

I believe what the church has made statement about. But, I would caution about making statements beyond what the church has approved. Even though you THINK you have some impressive list of scolars ... it does not mean that the SDA church believes as these people believe.

I will not participate in throwing out a list of conflicting scolars. If the church has not made a statement that states what you or I say ... then it is not representitive of "what the church believes".

I would challenge YOU to prove that what I have said is wrong. My statement to you is that unless the church has voted on a statement ... the church can not be stated as believing what that statement says. And even IF the President of the Church believes it ... OR Ellen White ... if the church has not voted on the statement ... then it can not be stated that the Church Believes it.

Yes ... Ellen White along with others are an authoritative source. But that does not mean ALL they say is an approved statement of the church. And that is the topic at hand. The church does not believe everything Ellen White has stated to be what the Church Believes. If you disagree with this statement ... show me proof.

[John317]

... And even IF the President of the Church believes it ... OR Ellen White ... if the church has not voted on the statement ... then it can not be stated that the Church Believes it.

Yes ... Ellen White along with others are an authoritative source. But that does not mean ALL they say is an approved statement of the church. And that is the topic at hand. The church does not believe everything Ellen White has stated to be what the Church Believes...

I'll take that as your final statement on this subject, Redwood. You only have shown that you have a personal objection to the position of the church, both on Ellen White and about its teachings on the subject we are discussing here. I find it interesting that you personally object to those things, although you don't tell us what you believe to be the "true teaching" of the church about this. I have not given my personal opinion but have supported everything I've said with more than sufficient documentary evidence.

The question here is not whether something is an official position of the church. The question here is what the Seventh-day Adventist church believes, and I have demonstrated clearly what the Seventh-day Adventist church believes by showing the consistent view of its publications on the issue at hand. It's absurd to think that the church does not believe what every last one of its publications for over 150 years have stated on this subject.

I'm going to give further evidence of this, and show a few more points related to the question, and then move on to the question of whether the Bible supports what the Adventists say in their books.

[John317]

... And even IF the President of the Church believes it ... OR Ellen White ... if the church has not voted on the statement ... then it can not be stated that the Church Believes it.

Yes ... Ellen White along with others are an authoritative source. But that does not mean ALL they say is an approved statement of the church. And that is the topic at hand. The church does not believe everything Ellen White has stated to be what the Church Believes...

I'll take that as your final statement on this subject, Redwood. You only have shown that you have a personal objection to the position of the church, both on Ellen White and about its teachings on the subject we are discussing here. I find it interesting that you personally object to those things, although you don't tell us what you believe to be the "true teaching" of the church about this. I have not given my personal opinion but have supported everything I've said with more than sufficient documentary evidence.

The question here is not whether something is an official position of the church. The question here is what the Seventh-day Adventist church believes, and I have demonstrated clearly what the Seventh-day Adventist church believes by showing the consistent view of its publications on the issue at hand. It's absurd to think that the church does not believe what every last one of its publications for over 150 years have stated on this subject. Perhaps one day the church may change its views on this, and it is free to do so, but the object here is to show what our church teaches today and what it has always taught up to the present time.

I'm going to give further evidence of this, and show a few more points related to the question, and then move on to the question of whether the Bible supports what the Adventists say in their books.

[John317]

I appreciate your input, Redwood, and I will certainly keep it in mind throughout the discussion. But I hope you can see that the very fact that you object to these views but cannot show one piece of evidence that the church teaches something different from what I have put up here, shows that what I have posted on this thread is indeed representative of what the church has always said on this subject. You are actually helping to make that point.

What you are saying would be like a Catholic or a Mormon objecting to all the statements of their church, saying it is not an "official teaching," when the fact is that those statements obviously reflect the church's teachings. Clearly, just because the statements have not gone through a process of becoming "official" does not mean they don't speak for the church. But thank you for your contribution, Redwood.

[Woody]

My point has been from the beginning and remains ... that you have stated something to be an SDA belief that is not an official belief. You tried to quote sources other than official church sources to say it was a Church Teaching. I just feel that we have to be careful when doing that. We often give the church far to many teachings that it has not accepted actually. True ... many members in the church have accepted things. But that does not mean that the SDA Church has.

So as much as you would love to side track My issue ... I will keep the focus on what I have said. If I have accomplished one thing I hope it is to show that the SDA Believes is not an authoratitive source.

[D. Allan]

Quote:

What you are saying would be like a Catholic or a Mormon objecting to all the statements of their church, saying it is not an "official teaching," when the fact is that those statements obviously reflect the church's teachings. Clearly, just because the statements have not gone through a process of becoming "official" does not mean they don't speak for the church.

John, and all, I just looked at my baptismal certificate from 1955. It lists 27 fundamental beliefs. Not among them is any mention of the Catholic church or of 'Babylon.' Evidently it was not required that I believe certain things about 'Babylon' in order to become a member.

Certainly some Adventists believe as you do about Babylon - and some don't. You can't really say that the church believes as you do. Some do, some don't. The un-"official" church is made of people who have varying beliefs. If you believe Adventists should believe as you do - then you have to make it a requirement before baptism and acceptance into membership.

On the other hand, a lot of leaders and s.s. teachers do teach about Babylon. But there are people who teach all kinds of things that are not 'official.' Such as: eat no fat; "in these last days" you have to have a perfect character in order to be translated; the leadship of the church must aplogize to it members for not accepting the 1888 'message'; ..... and so on.

~d.allan

[John317]

Quote:

What you are saying would be like a Catholic or a Mormon objecting to all the statements of their church, saying it is not an "official teaching," when the fact is that those statements obviously reflect the church's teachings. Clearly, just because the statements have not gone through a process of becoming "official" does not mean they don't speak for the church.

John, and all, I just looked at my baptismal certificate from 1955. It lists 27 fundamental beliefs. Not among them is any mention of the Catholic church or of 'Babylon.' Evidently it was not required that I believe certain things about 'Babylon' in order to become a member.

Certainly some Adventists believe as you do about Babylon - and some don't. You can't really say that the church believes as you do. Some do, some don't. The un-"official" church is made of people who have varying beliefs. If you believe Adventists should believe as you do - then you have to make it a requirement before baptism and acceptance into membership.

On the other hand, a lot of leaders and s.s. teachers do teach about Babylon. But there are people who teach all kinds of things that are not 'official.' Such as: eat no fat; "in these last days" you have to have a perfect character in order to be translated; the leadship of the church must aplogize to it members for not accepting the 1888 'message'; ..... and so on.~d.allan

The bottom line is what does the weight of evidence show the Seventh-day Adventist church believes on the question we're discussing on this thread. You personally may not believe something and may object to certain beliefs, such as that Ellen White is a prophet or that Ellen White's book Great Controversy expresses the SDA view of last day events. But that is your own personal view and not the church's view. How do we know? By checking out the books published by the church and seeing a consistent teaching on a subject from the time the church was founded until the present.

Some of the church's beliefs have undergone a change since 1861, such as on the Trinity, but its beliefs having to do with Babylon and the Three Angel's Messages have not changed in any fundamental way at all since those times.

Near the end of the Introduction to the book, Seventh-day Adventists Believe, you will find this statement: "We [over 200 representative SDA scholars, teaches, leaders, etc.] have written this book to assist those who are interested in knowing why we [the SDA church] believe what we believe. This study, written by Adventists themselves, is not just window dressing. Carefully researched, it represents an authentic exposition of Adventist beliefs." (p. viii, 1988 edition.)

Also found in it are these statements, "We have written this exposition of our 27 [now 28] major beliefs to reveal how Seventh-day Adventists perceive God...And the beliefs expressed are not the product of a studious afternoon; they represent more than 100 years of prayer, study, prayer, reflection, prayer...In other words, they are the product of Adventist growth 'in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ' (2 Peter 3:18)."

It is, of course, possible that the church will change its view on the subject before us, but from 1861 to the present time, it has spoken clearly and consistently as the 11 books referenced on this thread plainly show. We are talking about a major teaching of the church related to end-time events, the giving of the Three Angel's Messages and the end of human probabtion just before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. To maintain that the church hasn't said what it believes on this or that what it has said is not what it actually believes is ridiculous on its face.

Anyone who says these books are merely individual opinions is simply not being honest with the facts. If you or anyone else here wants to dispute the views in these books, that is fine. But it is disingenuous to say that none of these books-- which speak consistently from the 1800s to the present, and include those written by God's spokeswoman to His church-- show us what the SDA church believes on the subject under discussion. All one needs to do is study the history of Adventist theology related to last-day events and one can readily see what the church teaches. I have provided 11 of the foremost sources here on this thread. If you cannot show any Seventh-day Adventist sources that teach contrary to all the books shown here, you must admit that these books that are posted represent what the SDA church believes on this subject.

[John317]

My point has been from the beginning and remains ... that you have stated something to be an SDA belief that is not an official belief. You tried to quote sources other than official church sources to say it was a Church Teaching. I just feel that we have to be careful when doing that. We often give the church far to many teachings that it has not accepted actually. True ... many members in the church have accepted things. But that does not mean that the SDA Church has.

So as much as you would love to side track My issue ... I will keep the focus on what I have said. If I have accomplished one thing I hope it is to show that the SDA Believes is not an authoratitive source.

Again, the point here is to show what the Adventist church believes and teaches, not to determine whether those beliefs have gone through the process of becoming technically "official."

And again, if you cannot or will not tell us what the "real Adventist belief" is on the subject we're discussing, we have to assume that those 11+ books referenced here, that have been published by the SDA church for the purpose of expressing SDA beliefs, do in fact represent the church's views.

You have given your private opinion that you don't agree with what the church has been saying for over 100 years in all of its publications, and that is fine; but now it is time to move on to look at whether the Bible supports what the church, including Ellen White, have been saying all these many years.

[John317]

If I have accomplished one thing I hope it is to show that the SDA Believes is not an authoratitive source.

I would be very interested to know if you have actually studied this book and what precisely it is that you disagree with. Give some examples please. Do you have any SDA publications that support your view? Perhaps you can show from the Bible that SDA Believes is wrong not only when it comes to what it teaches on Babylon but on another issue.

By the way, Redwood, did you study the lesson quarterly on The Gospel, 1844 and the Judgment back in July , August, and Sept.? If so, what did you think of it?

[Woody]

Quote:

Certainly some Adventists believe as you do about Babylon - and some don't. You can't really say that the church believes as you do. Some do, some don't. The un-"official" church is made of people who have varying beliefs. If you believe Adventists should believe as you do - then you have to make it a requirement before baptism and acceptance into membership.

Well Said D.Allen.

This is exactly what I have tried to say all along. John317 wants to get the issue off track but what you say is right on. John 317 you have tried to say what the church says by quoting books like SDA believes. I have only disagreed with your attempt to do so.

As an SDA ... I believe what the church officially believes and no more. You have tried to broaden the scope of what the church believes and I don't feel this is right.

It seems like you have added a lot to what the "church" believes because you want the church to fit your unofficial needs and beliefs. This is not wise in my opinion.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

If I have accomplished one thing I hope it is to show that the SDA Believes is not an authoratitive source.

I would be very interested to know if you have actually studied this book and what precisely it is that you disagree with. Give some examples please. Do you have any SDA publications that support your view? Perhaps you can show from the Bible that SDA Believes is wrong not only when it comes to what it teaches on Babylon but on another issue.

By the way, Redwood, did you study the lesson quarterly on The Gospel, 1844 and the Judgment back in July , August, and Sept.? If so, what did you think of it?

Yes John I did study it. I also bought the two supplements that went along with it. One included all the quotes from Ellen White. I thought it was a good topic of study.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

I would be very interested to know if you have actually studied this book and what precisely it is that you disagree with. Give some examples please. Do you have any SDA publications that support your view? Perhaps you can show from the Bible that SDA Believes is wrong not only when it comes to what it teaches on Babylon but on another issue.

By the way' date=' Redwood, did you study the lesson quarterly on The Gospel, 1844 and the Judgment back in July , August, and Sept.? If so, what did you think of it? [/quote']

Yes John I did study it. I also bought the two supplements that went along with it. One included all the quotes from Ellen White. I thought it was a good topic of study.

You will find as we study here that I am not saying anything that is not said in the Sabbath school quarterlies on that subject as well as the one on Daniel. It is the same thing that the editor of the Signs of the Times believes and that is found in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary. I'm going to reference about a dozen more sources for what has been stated thus far, and then we will look closely at the question whether SDA beliefs on this matter are supported by the Bible.

[John317]

Quote:

Certainly some Adventists believe as you do about Babylon - and some don't. You can't really say that the church believes as you do. Some do, some don't. The un-"official" church is made of people who have varying beliefs. If you believe Adventists should believe as you do - then you have to make it a requirement before baptism and acceptance into membership.

Well Said D.Allen.

This is exactly what I have tried to say all along. John317 wants to get the issue off track but what you say is right on. John 317 you have tried to say what the church says by quoting books like SDA believes. I have only disagreed with your attempt to do so.

As an SDA ... I believe what the church officially believes and no more. You have tried to broaden the scope of what the church believes and I don't feel this is right.

It seems like you have added a lot to what the "church" believes because you want the church to fit your unofficial needs and beliefs. This is not wise in my opinion.

Redwood, the church does not only believe what has been officially voted on and passed by the General Conference. It is perfectly legitimate and reasonable to examine the publications of the SDA church since its founding in 1863 in order to see what it believes and has taught, just it is to examine Catholic books to see what it believes over a period of years. As the evidence I've posted shows, the SDA church's belief on this has been consistent. Anyone looking at the evidence can readily see that this is true.

[John317]

I have only disagreed with your attempt to do so.

Yes, you have. Yet that is all you have done. What you seem not to understand, Redwood, is that we are showing what the SDA church believes, not what has gone through the process of being voted on by the General Conference. The church believes and teaches many things that have not been passed by the General Conference. We are talking here about what the SDA church has believed and taught in all of its publications on this subject, including the writings of Ellen White, and which is consistent with the statements passed by the General Conference, from the time of its founding until the present day.

[John317]

I received the following answer when I questioned the official SDA Website about what will happen to those in Babylon who refuse to flee out of Babylon before the close of probation and the falling of the seven last plagues:

Rev. 18:4 - (NIV) "Then I heard another voice from heaven say: '

'Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her

sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues.'"

You ask: What will happen to those who do not respond to the

call to "Come out"?

Presumably, all who are truly God's people will heed His voice

and come out. No doubt there will be many, almost until the close

of time, who have not previously heard the call or fully understood

the issues. And I'm sure the call of God will be clear and

impressive. Those who choose to remain in Babylon and partake

of her sins, will therefore have a share of responsibility for them.

According to verse 1, Babylon (symbol of opposition against

Christ; the united apostate religous organizations of earth) is fallen.

It has become the habitation of every unclean and hateful bird--

a metaphor describing Babylon's utter perversion and apostasy.

Jeremiah 51:6 tells of how God called His people out of ancient

Babylon. There is quite a parallel here. "Flee from Babylon! Run

for your lives! Do not be destroyed because of her sins. It is

time for the Lord's vengeance; he will pay her what she deserves."

Rev. 18:8 describes what will happen to Babylon and those who

have chosen to oppose God: "Therefore in one day her plagues

will overtake her; death, mourning and famine. She will be consumed

by fire, for mighty is the Lord God who judges her."

Add to that Revelation 20:15 -- "If anyone's name was not found

written int he book of life, he was thown into the lake of fire."

Only the names of the faithful will be retained in the book of life.

The names of those who do not remain faithful to Jesus until the

end will be blotted out. Of course, many never had their names

recorded there, for the book contains only the names of those who

at some time in their lives professed faith in Christ.

Finally, look at Christ's solemn statement in Matt. 7:21 - "Not everyone

who says to me 'Lord, Lord' will neter the kingdom of heaven, but only

he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say

to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name,

and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then

I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evil-

doers.'" These are religious people, but who refused to be obedient

to the will of the Father.

When the destruction of Satan and his angels takes place, those who

choose His ways will be destroyed and become as though they had

never been. This will be God's "strange act," but it is done in love,

for He guarantees us a new heaven and a new earth that will never

again be plagued with sin. It is guaranteed because He will take

to heaven only those who are safe to save.

God bless!

---------------------

Next to come will be further evidence regarding the identity of Babylon and more on what the SDA teaching is on this subject.

[John317]

Another response to the same question posed at the official SDA church website:

I have not read through "Seventh-day Adventists Believe . . . 27," but upon receiving your question, I picked up the book this morning and checked to see what it says. I went to the chapter on "The Law of God" and find that it teaches what I said and then it refers in that chapter to [color:#CC0000]chapters 12 and 19. These definitely identify the papacy as the little horn and expose many of their false doctrines. It goes briefly through what happened in the Reformation, etc. So, in general, it is very good.

There are all sorts of Seventh-day Adventists who believe all sorts of errors and practice many things that Christ is ashamed of. Our only safety is in having our personal passports to heaven in order, (the New Birth which leads to keeping the commandments--the character of God). Being members of the Seventh-day Adventist church does not assure salvation, that helps, but it is the born again experience that saves. Many on the church books are in apostasy. They will not be saved at last.

I would like to dialogue with those who are telling you that what I have presented and what "Seventh-day Adventists Believe. . . .27" is not the official teaching of the church and the Bible. May I suggest that they don't know and don't have their passports in order. I say this because when one has the Holy Spirit, this is the result:

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth. . .

Consider this: "It is as certain that we have the truth as that God lives; and Satan, with all his arts and hellish power, cannot change the truth of God into a lie."--4T595.4

And this:

"But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority--not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its support." GC 595

The basics are in the Bible and this must be our emphasis and not emphasis that the Seventh-day Adventist is the true church. It is, only as it follows the Bible. Let's not follow man or those that have the name, but are in apostasy. Unfortunately many apostates are in the church.

[Guest]

Hi John317

It is good that you added how that there are "many apostates in the Church." We know that to be true; but sometimes we don't like to admit it. But, conversely; we don't like to admit how that there are many of "God's people," within the folds of the Catholic Church.

Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Another point we tend to avoid is the following:

Matthew 21:43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

In what sense does/will this text happen in this day? In 2007? We know that the experience of God's people, back in the OT, is to also be the experience of God's people today. So how does "the message" we preach address this text, and all that it points to? How are Catholics potentially implicated in Mat.24:43?

To me; if Catholics were to know what we taught on this point I am making; they would be less likely to classify our literature as "hate."

Yes; I believe that the Adventist Church is the Remnant Church of Bible prophecy, I am just trying to do a reality check here.

What do you think?