An Ellen White Quote...For your consideration

[tall73]

I hope you will all take this to heart. I posted this passage shortly after coming to the Adventist forum, nearly a year and a half ago. There was a big fight, bigger than the current one, about who was a true Adventist.

As Adventists there is nothing wrong with examining our positions. Some may be at other point in their walk than you. Some may be doubting. Some may have even left the church but still hang around. Some may be contesting with those who oppose us, and wondering if their answers are sure. But our doctrines, if true, lose nothing from investigation. But if we do not search and do not test we lose much by failing to.




Peter exhorts his brethren to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." Whenever the people of God are growing in grace, they will be constantly obtaining a clearer understanding of His word. They will discern new light and beauty in its sacred truths. This has been true in the history of the church in all ages, and thus it will continue to the end. But as real spiritual life declines, it has ever been the tendency to cease to advance in the knowledge of the truth. Men rest satisfied with the light already received from God's word and discourage any further
investigation of the Scriptures. They become conservative and seek to avoid discussion. {5T 706.2}

The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God's people should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition and worship they know not what. {5T 707.1}

I have been shown that many who profess to have a knowledge of present truth know not what they believe. They do not understand the evidences of their faith. They have no just appreciation of the work for the present time. When the time of trial shall come, there are men now preaching to others who will find, upon examining the positions they hold, that there are many things for which they can give no satisfactory reason. Until thus tested they knew not their great ignorance. And there are many in the church who take it for granted that they understand what they believe; but, until controversy arises, they do not know their own weakness. When separated from those of like faith and compelled to stand singly and alone to explain their belief, they will be surprised to see how confused are their ideas of what they had accepted as truth. Certain it is that there has been among us a departure from the living God and a turning to men, putting human in place of divine wisdom. {5T 707.2}

 

[djconklin]

Until thus tested they knew not their great ignorance.

It doesn't even take a test sometimes! I was going to jump in on a debate ab't the trinity. But, the good Lord pulled me up short and told me: You don't know anything about it! I had to admit that was true. Been a "Christian" for 40 years now and could tell which texts support the concept! Like many other things: if you haven't studied it in-depth (not just cursory reading, either; or, looking for "ammo" to use in a debate) then you don't know, period. Listen and learn from those who have done the work.

 

[tall73]

[/color]

It doesn't even take a test sometimes! I was going to jump in on a debate ab't the trinity. But, the good Lord pulled me up short and told me: You don't know anything about it! I had to admit that was true. Been a "Christian" for 40 years now and could tell which texts support the concept! Like many other things: if you haven't studied it in-depth (not just cursory reading, either; or, looking for "ammo" to use in a debate) then you don't know, period. Listen and learn from those who have done the work.

Lol, I hear ya!

I got into an interesting discussion on the ancient Christological heresies the other day and was thinking...where is my decoder key!

Fortunately I found it The internet is a wealth of information!

I had discussed the issues before, but didn't have the proper terminology.

And I thought I knew a lot about the law. But did I ever learn while discussing in GT. I learned from my friends, enemies, and everyone else, but especially from digging out things I had never thought to dig before. It was a great blessing. The same situation was true when studying out the Sabbath in early church history. And I am more convinced on both from the process. But I wouldn't have done it without a push

Now I am reading Fudge's "The Fire that Consumes" about the conditionalist view of hell. He has some things that most Adventists don't mention. Very good stuff.

I am also reading Peterson's work on the traditional view (a response to Fudge) to compare notes.

 

[djconklin]

I learned from my friends, enemies, and everyone else, but especially from digging out things I had never thought to dig before.

I had the same experience when stduying Col. 2:161-7. I was amazed at hopw much was out there. All I really had to do was to pull it all together in one place.

In the seminary I took a course on Revelation under Dr. Pauilien--only remember one thing from the whole course! He noted that he learned more from those who oppose than those who support us because they questioned his assumptions that we would have glossed right over!

And I am more convinced on both from the process.

Same here! I learned that lesson when I dealt with the Bible critics--another thing I learned: when they can't prove even simple stuff, why should I believe them on the more complex?

 

[tall73]

I had the same experience when stduying Col. 2:161-7. I was amazed at hopw much was out there. All I really had to do was to pull it all together in one place.

In the seminary I took a course on Revelation under Dr. Pauilien--only remember one thing from the whole course! He noted that he learned more from those who oppose than those who support us because they questioned his assumptions that we would have glossed right over!



Same here! I learned that lesson when I dealt with the Bible critics--another thing I learned: when they can't prove even simple stuff, why should I believe them on the more complex?

Oh, incidentally, I recently got that copy of Ron du Preez's book on Colossians 2. I will let you know my review when I get to reading it!

I am looking forward to this one.

 

[djconklin]

I didn't know that he did a book on Colossians 2!

He was the one who saw my work and wrote an email saying that as far as he knew I was the only one who had it right--which is pretty bad since all I really did was to just pull stuff together from disparate sources! I may have made a few "breakthroughs"--to the best of my knowledge I'm the only one who has looked to see what was covered by the term "heorte" in the LXX--which bascially proves the traditional SDA position.

 

[tall73]

It is entitled "Putting the Sabbath to Rest" A Scriptural Study of Colossians 2:16. The book has a REALLY homely green cover with some gold text!

There are endorsements from Paulien and Davidson.

It lists the following web addres, but it appears to not be up yet:

http://www.omegamedia.info/

Apparently it is a draft, the 5th one, of the view. He is still doing research and is looking for comments/critiques.

 

[djconklin]

Do you have his email address?

 

[tall73]

Yes, but not sure I can put it publicly. He did put it in the book cover though, so I assume it is for marketing.

I will pm you with it.

 

[OntheDL]

Peter exhorts his brethren to "grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." Whenever the people of God are growing in grace, they will be constantly obtaining a clearer understanding of His word. They will discern new light and beauty in its sacred truths. This has been true in the history of the church in all ages, and thus it will continue to the end. But as real spiritual life declines, it has ever been the tendency to cease to advance in the knowledge of the truth. Men rest satisfied with the light already received from God's word and discourage any further
investigation of the Scriptures. They become conservative and seek to avoid discussion. {5T 706.2}

The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God's people should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition and worship they know not what. {5T 707.1}

I have been shown that many who profess to have a knowledge of present truth know not what they believe. They do not understand the evidences of their faith. They have no just appreciation of the work for the present time. When the time of trial shall come, there are men now preaching to others who will find, upon examining the positions they hold, that there are many things for which they can give no satisfactory reason. Until thus tested they knew not their great ignorance. And there are many in the church who take it for granted that they understand what they believe; but, until controversy arises, they do not know their own weakness. When separated from those of like faith and compelled to stand singly and alone to explain their belief, they will be surprised to see how confused are their ideas of what they had accepted as truth. Certain it is that there has been among us a departure from the living God and a turning to men, putting human in place of divine wisdom. {5T 707.2}

I find it ironic that while you do not accept EGW's writings as authoritative, you'd quote her when you think it might help your case.

But what's more ironic is how fitting these testimonies describe your situation, how easily you give in and forsake the distinctive doctrines that made us a beacon of light in these dark days.

I know you said you have been studying these issue. I want to be gracious. But again from your latest posts I sense no willingness. What you need is a paradigm shift.

 

[TrustAndObey]

I'm not going to jump into the middle of anything, because I have bad knees.

However, something DL said reminded me of something that happened recently.

It's a little off-topic, but not really.

I chat on another message board occasionally and it's just a fun place to go (we actually exchange recipes, not theology). One of the posters mentioned one day that she's atheist. I didn't say anything to her about it because it's really not the place.

A few months later, when The DaVinci Code came out, she posted thread after thread about what Christians must think NOW.

It was so odd to me that someone who claims NOT to believe in Christ at all, was now suddenly very interested in something that might tarnish His "reputation."

 

[tall73]

I find it ironic that while you do not accept EGW's writings as authoritative, you'd quote her when you think it might help your case.

But what's more ironic is how fitting these testimonies describe your situation, how easily you give in and forsake the distinctive doctrines that made us a beacon of light in these dark days.

I know you said you have been studying these issue. I want to be gracious. But again from your latest posts I sense no willingness. What you need is a paradigm shift.

The quote covers two groups, so I am pretty sure I do fit into one or the other.

1. Those who want no discussion.

2. Those who do.

Those who want no discussion are characterized as being unable to defend their position in the time of trial, when they are all alone and have to make sense of what they believe.


Now, the only issue I have really said I was studying AND HAD DOUBTS ON, was the sanctuary. And I posted months ago, which was the last time I really said much in this forum, that I was taking a turn back toward the traditional view.

If you are upset about my views on the Sabbath, I see no reason for you to be. I have not in any way questioned the Sabbath but have defended it in GT for nearly two years now. If you feel that I am wrong for saying that we need to try to address the claims of well known documents that all the world knows exists, then why not go yourself into GT and see how your arguments fair? We must address the real issue, which is when did Sunday come about.


Fortunately it is possible to address it by looking at the factors that brought about the change and noting the various rationales for Sunday keeping in the early church.

Even you have admitted that there was a practice of Sunday keeping long before any papal action. And so the real claim to be dealt with is whether the teaching was original. That is the only issue that will convince folks who know history.

And do I feel that I have been unsupportive of the church here? Not at all. Over my time here I have gotten numerous pm's saying that people were investigating our church because of what they read in GT.

 

[reddogs]

People say they believe this or that, but what they actually hold close is what they truly believe and you only find that when they are faced with some test to challenge it. Thus are Christians forged by God who allows them to be tested like Job........