Another Question For Tall73

[tall73]

Maybe God should have an openmind to listen to your new theologies than insisting "I change not".

You do realize no one ever believed in the IJ until after 1844 right? That is why we say it is the only unique Adventist doctrine.

So who has the new theology?

 

[NightEternal]

I think this is the post that is causing all the controversy with Woob's demands for a rule change and others in the Trad section:

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41124818&postcount=89

They blame us for this. They think we have poisoned and influenced Crimson in a wrong direction.

She should set the record straight and end this brouhaha before it escalates.

 

[NightEternal]

Hey Tall, care to address this preposterous, slanderous charge? Thanks.

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41165073&postcount=3

 

[OntheDL]

and you have shown us that you are completely open-minded? That has not been my observation..... and we need not even contemplate if the author of this particular thread shares in your open-mindedness...

Tall, continue asking the critical questions.... and suggesting possible answers cause some "open-minded" people refuse to ask, review, investigate what the church believes in an honest manner.... IMO.....

If by that you meant I don't subscribe to the general 'anything goes' approach, then I'm glad you don't consider me openminded.

And don't try to insite anything between me and Wooba. I don't expect everyone to agree with me on everything. But there are things I will not compromise on.

 

[Adventtruth]

And he has a right to present whatever topic he wants and conclude whatever he believes. And we have the right to agree or disagree. The section is not called discuss and debate for nothing. I can't believe people are questioning a members right to discuss and debate in the discuss and debate section (sigh). Maybe I should start a thread on do people know what discuss and debate mean?

that was my first thought when I read the op, but knowingmy history with woob, I thought it would not be good to jump into the argument.

AT

 

[moicherie]

Reminder for Woob and all others who have forgotten the purpose if this section.

3. Debate/Discussion Sub-forum (Effective September 16, 2007)

3.1 The majority of the Debate/Discussion Sub-forum users will identify as Seventh-day Adventist, so discussion will probably be in a Seventh-day Adventist context though there is a diversity of opinions held by Seventh-day Adventists.

3.2 Other Christians and non-Christians are also allowed to debate respectfully.

3.3 Topics can include, but are not limited to, SDA theology, history, culture, and personalities.

3.4 To help avoid possible confusion when people come to the SDA forum to ask what SDAs believe, if any answer that is given does not concur with what the church officially identifies as SDA doctrine, it should be noted that the answer isn't an official SDA belief, but merely an opinion. For example, a person could say: "This is not a belief that is acknowledged by the SDA church as one which constitutes official doctrine; rather, it is my personal opinion on the matter."

3.5 Those inquiring about Adventist beliefs should be directed to the main Adventist forum. Only Adventist members are allowed to explain what Adventists believe in the main Adventist forum. These statements, as outlined above, should be in accordance with official church statements. Non-Adventists who wish to debate Adventist beliefs, as opposed to sincerely inquiring about those beliefs in order to gain more information, should post in the debate section.

 

[tall73]

Hey Tall, care to address this preposterous, slanderous charge? Thanks.

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41165073&postcount=3

I am not sure what it is about. Is it about our secret forum to talk over the CF happenings, or are we now part of the larger Jesuit plot? lol

 

[tall73]

She had that position from the beginning that she was unsure about EGW. If actually reading what the church's stand on the issue was the problem then maybe the church should worry about that.

I think this is the post that is causing all the controversy with Woob's demands for a rule change and others in the Trad section:

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41124818&postcount=89

They blame us for this. They think we have poisoned and influenced Crimson in a wrong direction.

She should set the record straight and end this brouhaha before it escalates.

 

[tall73]

Question for Woob--if I couldn't ask questions as a pastor and couldn't ask them after being a pastor and can't ask them after not being a member--when can I?


Waiting on you to answer my question woob.

 

[tall73]

As I can now see that you are rejecting basic truths of the Bible that are clearly spelled out in black and white, it has become evident to me that you are apostatizing from the faith.

Therefore, I will no longer try to address your posts as it is evident that you are only interested in your own view. Anything that I have to say to you at this point will only fall on deaf ears.

So I won't waste any more of my time with this.

Just keep in mind that if you are shown to be in error and repent at some point later on, you will not be able to undo the damage that you have caused if you lead others astray from the truth. You will answer to God for this. Thus this is a much more serious matter than you must realize.

Just as I can not undo it if I led people astray for 10 years in the Adventist ministry.

But I can't stop reading the Bible for all that or believing what I am convinced of.

 

[tall73]

Now that I have clarification I will answer.

Here is what I am referring to DL. They both have friends in 'high places' and know whats going on behind the scenes.

http://christianforums.com/t6478828&page=4


Tall—
Anyone interested in some off -site discussion about these issues?

pm for details.

Night—
I don't know how I accessed it! It was through one of the links in the 'staff appeal' section.

But, yes, I can access both the archived and present reports.

I would be very interested that discussion Tall.

Actually I thought too that he might be getting info from someone. Turns out they just changed the system and you can view reports you made. Not sure why they did that, but it is the way it is. So no, he didn't get any info from anyone.

As to our discussions we are going over the current rules at CF and how they have changed as well as how the current report system is problematic.

Sophia has not even asked to join the forum so I am not sure what she has to do with it. We have no information that a normal member would not have.

Woob asked me not to discuss him there so I have not.

 

[NightEternal]

Lol. Inside information. That is rich.

No, the truth of the matter is much more mundane and non-clandestine than Honor's paranoid conspiracy theory.

I was in the Staff Appeals section where links galore were posted throughout the exchanges. I don't even know how I got there, but I somehow ended up in the reports section through one of those links, which suprised me at the time because I though we did not have access.

So, we have a good example here of what assuming does.

As for secret meetings and inside information from mods, no, that is not happening. How ridiculous. Yes we have a private forum away from this place where we can discuss issues that pertain to the rules here, but Sophia has not been a participant.

Last I heard, it was a free country and we are allowed to have a private forum if we want.

So, yes, Honor did bear false witness and made unsubstantiated claims.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Exactly.

I think we know who the closed-minded SDA subgroup is, and it ain't us.

"Resisting the report response=-resisting the report response........"

Red--can you address this insult please?

 

[NightEternal]

Interesting how you do not rebuke DL for making the same charge about us.

I'll agree on this with Wooba. Tall, you do not keep an openmind no matter what's presented before you. I've noticed this for quite some time. That's why I don't normally participate in your discussions. It's fruitless.

This is only my observation. It's expected with others here. But I thought you were better than this.

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41164848&postcount=9

 

[NightEternal]

As I can now see that you are rejecting basic truths of the Bible that are clearly spelled out in black and white, it has become evident to me that you are apostatizing from the faith.

Therefore, I will no longer try to address your posts as it is evident that you are only interested in your own view. Anything that I have to say to you at this point will only fall on deaf ears.

So I won't waste any more of my time with this.

Just keep in mind that if you are shown to be in error and repent at some point later on, you will not be able to undo the damage that you have caused if you lead others astray from the truth. You will answer to God for this. Thus this is a much more serious matter than you must realize.

Simply unbelievable.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Lol. Inside information. That is rich.

No, the truth of the matter is much more mundane and non-clandestine than Honor's paranoid conspiracy theory.

I was in the Staff Appeals section where links galore were posted throughout the exchanges. I don't even know how I got there, but I somehow ended up in the reports section through one of those links, which suprised me at the time because I though we did not have access.

So, we have a good example here of what assuming does.

As for secret meetings and inside information from mods, no, that is not happening. How ridiculous. Yes we have a private forum away from this place where we can discuss issues that pertain to the rules here, but Sophia has not been a participant.

Last I heard, it was a free country and we are allowed to have a private forum if we want.

So, yes, Honor did bear false witness and made unsubstantiated claims.

Read what I said again Night--I got that idea from YOUR own posts--I didn't make it up! Dang you are so quick to judge me!

 

[woobadooba]

...

 

[NightEternal]

Read what I said again Night--I got that idea from YOUR own posts--I didn't make it up! Dang you are so quick to judge me!

Whatever Honor. You made the charges. You should be big enough to take responsibility if they are proven false. Don't try and pass the buck onto me.

 

[OntheDL]

You do realize no one ever believed in the IJ until after 1844 right? That is why we say it is the only unique Adventist doctrine.

So who has the new theology?

The prophecy was sealed in Daniel until the time of the end. It was unsealed in Rev 10.

Yeah the revelation was new to the adventists. But it's been in the bible and certain IJ was built-in in the biblical calendar.

 

[Sophia7]

Sophia has not even asked to join the forum so I am not sure what she has to do with it. We have no information that a normal member would not have.

As for secret meetings and inside information from mods, no, that is not happening. How ridiculous. Yes we have a private forum away from this place where we can discuss issues that pertain to the rules here, but Sophia has not been a participant.

This is correct. I am not a participant in such discussions, and I won't be. And I don't give people information that would violate my confidentiality agreement as a staff member here.