My Thoughts On The "Split"..

[RC_NewProtestants]

Night you mean that discussion that ran from
28th July 2007, 10:47 PM

till a little after 28th July 2007, 11:58 PM

And then was closed and a new poll took it's place.

Ya that is a reasonable discussion almost 2 hours in the middle of the night.

And how did it start? Woob wrote:

A Separation...

It seems to me that there is no hope for unity between the Progressives and the Traditionals. So it has been suggested that we have separate forums (not to be confused with subforums) for the sake of putting an end to all of this animosty.

And he put up a poll with 3 whole votes before it was closed.

And according to the new poll which began at 12:22 AM, lets see that 10:47 to 12:22 oops not quite 2 hours of discussion of which most was about the poll that was closed with 3 votes. Now there seems to be a problem with polls, in that anyone can start one and I don't think that is the way we want to make our decisions. We need to have officially sanctioned rule or organization polls so we don't get off track like this again.

 

[happywiththelord]

Agreed upon points.
1. Jesus - as lord and savior
2Sabbath- most all branches agree on the
3. second coming - visible
4. State of the Dead
5. Spiritual Gifts - Although not egw
6. Scripture as the binding
7. the historicst Frame work of prophetic interpation
8. Most are 7 day creationist

So do tell me there is nothing that we don't agree with.

Its interesting Ice...you state those as things we have in common, but start a thread of anyone of those things and a fight will start. Because somehow in Theory we agree, but in practice we dont. There is always a fight in whatever thread gets started. It seems traditionals and progressives cant see eye to eye on ANYTHING! Even though we say we do, we dont.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Its interesting Ice...you state those as things we have in common, but start a thread of anyone of those things and a fight will start. Because somehow in Theory we agree, but in practice we dont. There is always a fight in whatever thread gets started. It seems traditionals and progressives cant see eye to eye on ANYTHING! Even though we say we do, we dont.

And lets see there are something like 9,000 denominations yet they seem to get along and many of them even acknowledge people in other denominations as Christians. So maybe the problem here is an attitude rather then the fact that people have different beliefs.

 

[StormyOne]

And lets see there are something like 9,000 denominations yet they seem to get along and many of them even acknowledge people in other denominations as Christians. So maybe the problem here is an attitude rather then the fact that people have different beliefs.

it has always been attitude... and the desire by some to declare who is adventist and who is not....

 

[NightEternal]

Night you mean that discussion that ran from
28th July 2007, 10:47 PM

till a little after 28th July 2007, 11:58 PM

And then was closed and a new poll took it's place.

Ya that is a reasonable discussion almost 2 hours in the middle of the night.

And how did it start? Woob wrote:
And he put up a poll with 3 whole votes before it was closed.

And according to the new poll which began at 12:22 AM, lets see that 10:47 to 12:22 oops not quite 2 hours of discussion of which most was about the poll that was closed with 3 votes. Now there seems to be a problem with polls, in that anyone can start one and I don't think that is the way we want to make our decisions. We need to have officially sanctioned rule or organization polls so we don't get off track like this again.

I agree, it was done in a slipshod, haphazard manner. I don't know what we were thinking. I was given the impression from Tall that Erwin was okay with this and there would be no problems on an CF administrative level.

Sophia started the poll, so I assumed things were kosher and this was the majority approved, CF sanctioned endeavor.

We should have left that thread up much longer and waited for more input from others.

What a mess.

 

[happywiththelord]

And lets see there are something like 9,000 denominations yet they seem to get along and many of them even acknowledge people in other denominations as Christians. So maybe the problem here is an attitude rather then the fact that people have different beliefs.

Attitudes flare because the difference of beliefs. And dont tell me that other demoninations get along when discussing beliefs. They get heated to.

 

[Mankin]

I agree, it was done in a slipshod, haphazard manner. I don't know what we were thinking. I was given the impression from Tall that Erwin was okay with this and there would be no problems on an CF administrative level.

Sophia started the poll, so I assumed things were kosher and this was the majority approved, CF sanctioned endeavor.

We should have left that thread up much longer and waited for more input from others.

What a mess.

Indeed. I am considering leaving this forum altogether after being called an invalid by one of the members for putting up a poll.

 

[sentipente]

Attitudes flare because the difference of beliefs. And dont tell me that other demoninations get along when discussing beliefs. They get heated to.

Maybe they are nasty in a nicer way.

 

[sentipente]

Indeed. I am considering leaving this forum altogether after being called an invalid by one of the members for putting up a poll.

Saying your poll is invalid is not to be interpreted as calling you an invalid. One is an adjective and the other is a noun.

 

[Mankin]

No, he did call me an invalid. He may not have said that exact word but he meant it.

 

[sentipente]

No, he did call me an invalid. He may not have said that exact word but he meant it.

Maybe you should have used the word he used. Still nothing to leave the forum over. One french fry does not make a Happy Meal.

 

[Mankin]

He said I was a child and I should be banned from polling. He said that I was not old enough to claim respect or authority.

 

[Mankin]

I post one "invalid" poll and I am called not worthy to post polls because of my age. Timothy was a young man and Paul did not attack him.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Interesting post from someone who is always accusing me of 'baiting'.

I won't take the bait though. I really don't have the desire to interact with you on any level.

I don't recall addressing YOU night. So stand down please.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I post one "invalid" poll and I am called not worthy to post polls because of my age. Timothy was a young man and Paul did not attack him.

Ice was wrong in what he said in the now closed forum. There is nothing in our rules of who can vote about age. Frankly there are older people here who have behaved immaturely. One thing you have to learn here is that just because one person says something does not mean that their sentiment is shared by the rest.

One more thing we really have to distinguish between officially sponsored polls used for the rules process and the casual I just want to know something polls.

 

[sentipente]

I don't recall addressing YOU night. So stand down please.

There is no need to drag things out unnecessarily. You made the original remark in response to a post in which it was stated that Night was Evangelical. Your post was clearly directed at him. To deny it now serves no positive purpose.

 

[IntoTheCrimsonSky]

Ice was wrong in what he said in the now closed forum. There is nothing in our rules of who can vote about age. Frankly there are older people here who have behaved immaturely. One thing you have to learn here is that just because one person says something does not mean that their sentiment is shared by the rest.

One more thing we really have to distinguish between officially sponsored polls used for the rules process and the casual I just want to know something polls.

Wow. I've agreed with you a heck of a lot lately, RC. What's the world coming to? Just kidding, of course.

I think RC's right here. We really do need to take notice of official polls and non-official ones. Since when was it a bad thing to make a poll that inquired people's feelings or opinions? I voted on Mankin's poll simply because I saw it as being curious, as even I was about who would go where. I care about all of you guys and would hate to see us split.

On a slightly different note, tensions are really strong right now around here. Even in this thread they are popping up. Please lets try not to fight. We are all God's children and allowed to have our own opinions. That doesn't mean we should point fingers or make hurtful remarks about eachother, though.

That old saying "If you don't have anything good to say, then don't say anything at all" is a very good one. I think we all should try it at this time, while things aren't calm.

Blessings and Love,
Sarah

 

[honorthesabbath]

Dearest Crimson, you said..
Quote:
Originally Posted by honorthesabbath
From the words of wisdom of the book..

Am 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?

There is no agreement here between the factions.

Until those who wish to change the doctrines of the SDA church learn to present their cases in a Christlike manner, and until they understand that we have rejected their 'enlightenment'--there can never be peace in this forum.

It's a sad step to be sure, but a neccessary one.

I also agree with this. To an extent. Obviously some people haven't rejected these progressive ideas, and who knows..maybe there's some truth to them. Who am I to judge?

I'm hoping that you really didn't mean this--are you saying that you agree with God's Word, "TO AN EXTENT"??

 

[honorthesabbath]

Agreed upon points.
1. Jesus - as lord and savior
2Sabbath- most all branches agree on the
3. second coming - visible
4. State of the Dead
5. Spiritual Gifts - Although not egw
6. Scripture as the binding
7. the historicst Frame work of prophetic interpation
8. Most are 7 day creationist

So do tell me there is nothing that we don't agree with.

HHmm lets see, where have I heard this idea before? Uniting on common points??

Ah yes—now I remember……………

The Great Controversy, pg 444-445

The wide diversity of belief in the Protestant churches is regarded by many as decisive proof that no effort to secure a forced uniformity can ever be made. But there has been for years, in churches of the Protestant faith, a strong and growing sentiment in favor of a union based upon common points of doctrine. To secure such a union, the discussion of subjects upon which all were not agreed--however important they might be from a Bible standpoint--must necessarily be waived.

Charles Beecher, in a sermon in the year 1846, declared that the ministry of "the evangelical Protestant denominations" is "not only formed all the way up under a tremendous pressure of merely human fear, but they live, and move, and breathe in a state of things radically corrupt, and appealing every hour to every baser element of their nature to hush up the truth, and bow the knee to the power of apostasy. Was not this the way things went with Rome? Are we not living her life over again? And what do we see just ahead? Another general council! A world's convention! Evangelical alliance, and universal creed!"--Sermon on "The Bible a Sufficient Creed," delivered at Fort Wayne, Indiana, Feb. 22, 1846. When this shall be gained, then, in the effort to secure complete uniformity, it will be only a step to the resort to force.

When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result.

V-E-R-Y I-N-T-E-R-E-S-T-I-N-G

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions,

That is the key phrase however, not that they hold certain beliefs in common which they have for over a thousand years. Yet even with certain points in common they have produced 9000 denominations. Pretty egotistical to claim this one denomination got it all right however, especially when our beliefs have changed so much that in my post on the semi-arian views being significantly increased There is a quote where George Knight says that most of our pioneers would not accept our 27 fundamental beliefs.