Adventists - What do you think about ex-Adventists?

[StormyOne]

bible reading and interpretation 101:

For truly, I will send a great flow of waters over the earth, for the destruction from under the heaven of all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything on the earth will come to an end. But with you I will make an agreement; and you will come into the ark, you and your sons and your wife and your sons' wives with you.
Gen 6:17-18

And God said to Noah, The end of all flesh has come; the earth is full of their violent doings, and now I will put an end to them with the earth. Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood with rooms in it, and make it safe from the water inside and out.
Gen 6:13-14

Gen 5:32 After Noah was five hundred years old, he had three sons and named them Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Gen 7:5 Noah was six hundred years old when he went into the boat to escape the flood, and he did everything the LORD had told him to do. His wife, his sons, and his daughters-in-law all went inside with him.

Gen 8:13 Noah was now six hundred one years old. And by the first day of that year, almost all the water had gone away. Noah made an opening in the roof of the boat and saw that the ground was getting dry.

Gen 6:3 And the Lord said, My spirit will not be in man for ever, for he is only flesh; so the days of his life will be a hundred and twenty years.



Based on the above, here is what I conclude. Noah DID NOT preach 120 years while building the ark. Based on Gen 6:17-18, God made a covenant with Noah and his family (wife, son's and son's wives). Gen 5:32 tells us that Noah had his children at the age of 500. Gen 7:5 tells us that Noah was 600 yrs old when he went into the ark. Gen 6:13-14 tells us that God told Noah to make an ark for himself... (nothing about saving people etc... just he and his family) Do the math.... 600 -500 is only 100 yrs.....

 

[TrustAndObey]

Noah never preached Red.... read the bible and stop reciting the foolishness you were taught.... The bible narrative is clear... are you ignoring it? You are perpetuating a LIE.... rightly divide the word or stop abusing it..... tiresome this is....

2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

 

[Mankin]

Trust how are you posting while offline?

 

[CaDan]

Trust how are you posting while offline?

The ways of the CF software base are deep and mysterious.

(That's the polite way of saying it's full of bugs. )

Anyway, it seems to me that leb is saying that the experience on the ground in individual congregations matters.

 

[juneil]

And how do you know he doesn't put God as his first priority? He studied it out himself! This is the problem with Adventism. We converge upon our own denomination so much that we basically refuse to listen to new ideas and facts.

how did I know? It simple really I just read his/her post and then i understand. Thats the big trick in studying bible who has motives, u are drive to find mistakes, bad is they SEEMS can find mistakes which is not mistake anyway. How? Because they study bible selfishly, meaning they make the bible fit what they want to be as interpretation.

 

[StormyOne]

2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

ummm nope..... one text does not negate the whole narrative in Genesis.... Peter wasn't there, and he too was repeating the myth..... nice try though....

 

[Lebesgue]

And how do you know he doesn't put God as his first priority? He studied it out himself! This is the problem with Adventism. We converge upon our own denomination so much that we basically refuse to listen to new ideas and facts.

Study out of Adventism is EXACTLY what I did.

Very astute observation.

Shalom,

Lebesgue

 

[TrustAndObey]

ummm nope..... one text does not negate the whole narrative in Genesis.... Peter wasn't there, and he too was repeating the myth..... nice try though....

You said he never preached, and the bible says otherwise.

I just keep forgetting that you don't think the Bible is the inspired word of God. My bad.

 

[StormyOne]

You said he never preached, and the bible says otherwise.

I just keep forgetting that you don't think the Bible is the inspired word of God. My bad.

excuse you.... the story in Genesis indicates that he never preached.... neither was the ark built large enough to hold any but Noah, his family, and the animals....So you quote Peter who says he did preach, but who was not there and who probably was quoting "scripture" not contained in the bible as it is now configured, and there you hang your hat... Fine with me, however, as the narrative in Genesis is more complete pardon me if I go with that one.....

As for your snide remark, really not necessary but not surprising....

 

[TrustAndObey]

excuse you.... the story in Genesis indicates that he never preached.... neither was the ark built large enough to hold any but Noah, his family, and the animals....So you quote Peter who says he did preach, but who was not there and who probably was quoting "scripture" not contained in the bible as it is now configured, and there you hang your hat... Fine with me, however, as the narrative in Genesis is more complete pardon me if I go with that one.....

As for your snide remark, really not necessary but not surprising....

I'll just be honest, I find it a little creepy that you think Peter and Jesus just "perpetuate myths" when they talk about Noah.

So you don't think Peter was inspired by God at all?

It's just odd that you take Genesis to be literal, but other parts of the bible you seem to pick and choose from...that's all.

 

[mva1985]

ummm nope..... one text does not negate the whole narrative in Genesis.... Peter wasn't there, and he too was repeating the myth..... nice try though....

Genesis 5 is a genealogy plain and simple. It does not screw up the math found in Genesis 6.

 

[mva1985]

excuse you.... the story in Genesis indicates that he never preached.... neither was the ark built large enough to hold any but Noah, his family, and the animals....So you quote Peter who says he did preach, but who was not there and who probably was quoting "scripture" not contained in the bible as it is now configured, and there you hang your hat... Fine with me, however, as the narrative in Genesis is more complete pardon me if I go with that one.....

As for your snide remark, really not necessary but not surprising....

Since God is a loving God I would imagine had enough of the antediluvians repented God would have repented of sending the flood.

Similar to Nineveh.

 

[StormyOne]

Genesis 5 is a genealogy plain and simple. It does not screw up the math found in Genesis 6.

the bible says Noah was 500 when he had kids. Sometime after having kids, God comes to Noah and makes an agreement to save him and his family in an ark. When Noah was 600 he entered the ark. When he was 601 he left the ark..... plain and simple...

 

[mva1985]

the bible says Noah was 500 when he had kids. Sometime after having kids, God comes to Noah and makes an agreement to save him and his family in an ark. When Noah was 600 he entered the ark. When he was 601 he left the ark..... plain and simple...

Genesis 6:1 - 3

IMHO I don't think this is a salvation issue.

 

[StormyOne]

I'll just be honest, I find it a little creepy that you think Peter and Jesus just "perpetuate myths" when they talk about Noah.

So you don't think Peter was inspired by God at all?

It's just odd that you take Genesis to be literal, but other parts of the bible you seem to pick and choose from...that's all.

who said anything about Jesus perpetuating myths? The issue is that some people read into the bible what they wish, not about what is or is not literal. It might surprise you that there is quite a bit in the bible that is not literal or even written by the people whose books bear their names. In this case, I have shown using the texts in Genesis that Noah did not preach for 120 yrs. Yet for some reason you and others believe I am mistaken..... fair enough....

As for picking and choosing, christians do that everyday, including you, but we don't need to go there.... bottom line, you think I am wrong so no need to continue.....

Most people are not ready to discuss the bible and how it came to be for various reasons.... no biggie..... pardon my interruption and digression regarding Noah....

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

A couple of things as I read through this thread.
First there is no record of Noah Preaching. The verse in Peter can just as easily be interpreted as the Expositor's Bible Commentary states:

5 Peter's second example is the Flood. He has referred to it in his first letter (3:18-22) and will do so again in the next chapter of this one (3:5-6). Noah was the "eighth" (ogdoos) meaning there were seven others saved with him (wife, three sons, and daughters-in-law). They were guarded or protected by God during the Flood that wiped out the ungodly antediluvian civilization. Noah was a herald (keryx) of righteousness. This could refer to his preaching activity not recorded in the OT or to the fact that his lifestyle condemned sin and proclaimed righteousness to his contemporaries (Gen 6:9).

RND said:

There is no such thing called "Levitical" laws unless those are describing the proceedures of the Levites in the sanctuary.

I believe what you are trying to communicate are "Mosaic laws." These laws applied to all the Children of Israel, not just to the Levites.

Odd, but I thought for sure, as a Messianic you would know this.

There is nothing wrong with saying Levitical Laws, it is accurate to use of the food laws.

1.of or pertaining to the Levites. 2.of or pertaining to Leviticus or the law (Levitical law) contained in Leviticus.

RND calls this a Rookie mistake. But the mistake is his. In fact you will find it used by Adventist Websites such as:
http://www.digging4truth.org/The%20Levitical%20Laws.html
as well as more scholarly material such as:
Judaism and Environmental Ethics: A Reader -


It is one thing to be new to the faith such as a Christian for two years it is another to pretend to know all about the Christian faith. Especially with respect to Adventism where RND said in answer to a quote:

Originally Posted by Lebesgue
Yes, I accepted Y'shua and was Baptised. But I was taught I couldn't know I was saved until I passed the Investigative Judgement.


I've never heard that and I never heard of anyone teaching that.

As someone new to Adventism it is not hard to understand that you don't know the history of the Church and have not lived under some of the extremes of teachings that have occured. If you read Clifford Goldstien's book "Graffti in the Holy of Holies" A book meant to defend the SDA view against Dale Ratzlaff's book. Goldstien writes on page 115:

My wife, raised in the Adventist Church, once described how, as a child, she had been taught the investigative judgment.
"Well," she said, her voice laced with sarcasm, "they tell you that the judgment is going on in heaven right now, and at any moment your name can come up. And when it does, if you're not perfect (you're at the movies, or something like that), then your name is blotted out of the book of life, and you are forever lost. The only problem is, you don't know that your name has been blotted out, and so you continue trying to be perfect. But it's too late; your probation has closed, and so you must, in the end, face the second death."

Good news huh?

With such an understanding of the judgment, it's no wonder that some people have entirely abandoned either the doctrine or the Seventh-day Adventist church which teaches it...

It does not help our church to have people deny the reality because they have not experienced something. That amounts to an argument our of ignorance. It does not work in the legal system and it does not work in religion or philosophy.

 

[StormyOne]

Genesis 6:1 - 3

IMHO I don't think this is a salvation issue.

I don't believe I was making it one.... however it goes to how some interpret the word... if you read and misinterpret something simple like the story of Noah and the ark, then it is likely that something more complex will also be read and misinterpreted.... but that's just me...

 

[honorthesabbath]

2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Oh now trust--there you go again, giving definitive scripture that blows the lid off the unbalanced and prejudice of those against EGW!

Have you no shame young woman??

 

[Lebesgue]

A couple of things as I read through this thread.
First there is no record of Noah Preaching. The verse in Peter can just as easily be interpreted as the Expositor's Bible Commentary states:
RND said:
There is nothing wrong with saying Levitical Laws, it is accurate to use of the food laws.
RND calls this a Rookie mistake. But the mistake is his. In fact you will find it used by Adventist Websites such as:
http://www.digging4truth.org/The Levitical Laws.html
as well as more scholarly material such as:
Judaism and Environmental Ethics: A Reader -


It is one thing to be new to the faith such as a Christian for two years it is another to pretend to know all about the Christian faith. Especially with respect to Adventism where RND said in answer to a quote:
As someone new to Adventism it is not hard to understand that you don't know the history of the Church and have not lived under some of the extremes of teachings that have occured. If you read Clifford Goldstien's book "Graffti in the Holy of Holies" A book meant to defend the SDA view against Dale Ratzlaff's book. Goldstien writes on page 115:

It does not help our church to have people deny the reality because they have not experienced something. That amounts to an argument our of ignorance. It does not work in the legal system and it does not work in religion or philosophy.

You nailed it again, RC. I wanted to give you some rep but the system said I had to spread it around.

I appreciate what you are trying to do to reform Adventism. G-d Bless you, brother.

As for me I know I made the right decision to leave and become a Messianic.

Shalom,

Lebesgue

 

[Lebesgue]

how did I know? It simple really I just read his/her post and then i understand. Thats the big trick in studying bible who has motives, u are drive to find mistakes, bad is they SEEMS can find mistakes which is not mistake anyway. How? Because they study bible selfishly, meaning they make the bible fit what they want to be as interpretation.

So it was selfish for me to want to have a closer relationship with Y'shua that I COULD NOT have as an Adventist because I was in such despair of my salvation I was ready to become an atheist? Then I really would have been lost. But I guess that wouldn't have been selfish by your defenition.

Do you realise how HARSH the parameters for passing the IJ that Ellen sets in Chapter 28 of the Great Controversy? I doubt she herself could even have lived up to that. WHERE's the hope? I didn't see any and you can't imagine the DESPAIR I felt at that point.

And WANTING G-d so BADLY and half of me wondering WHY I should even bother IF Ellen was right?

Shalom,

Lebesgue