At least three categories of sda ministers/leaders

[StormyOne]

Something RC said in the other thread triggered a thought I've had for a while. What do sda ministers really know when it comes to the beliefs promoted by the church?

I think there are at least 3 categories of leaders/ministers.

First category: They honestly believe what they are preaching/teaching when it comes to the church. They believe it all, the remnant, the special status, the spirit of prophecy everything....

Second category: They know the belief system is tenuous, that much of it cannot be supported biblically, BUT they continue giving lip service because they are getting paid and the life that they lead is not too bad... in essence they are lying but getting paid well to perpetuate the lie....

Third category: They are not sure about everything, they may have their doubts, but they are not going to search too deeply because it might force them into a decision they are not willing to make at the moment, especially if they have families and need to provide for them.....

That's what I think... and I think that way because there is no way that these folks who have gone on to get their Masters degree and/or their Phd's can ignore the glaring problems with some of the doctrines... I refuse to believe that they cannot see what regular folks who have been studying this stuff see... I mean it is obvious after a while... but that's just me....

Thoughts?

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Something RC said in the other thread triggered a thought I've had for a while. What do sda ministers really know when it comes to the beliefs promoted by the church?

I think there are at least 3 categories of leaders/ministers.

First category: They honestly believe what they are preaching/teaching when it comes to the church. They believe it all, the remnant, the special status, the spirit of prophecy everything....

Second category: They know the belief system is tenuous, that much of it cannot be supported biblically, BUT they continue giving lip service because they are getting paid and the life that they lead is not too bad... in essence they are lying but getting paid well to perpetuate the lie....

Third category: They are not sure about everything, they may have their doubts, but they are not going to search too deeply because it might force them into a decision they are not willing to make at the moment, especially if they have families and need to provide for them.....

That's what I think... and I think that way because there is no way that these folks who have gone on to get their Masters degree and/or their Phd's can ignore the glaring problems with some of the doctrines... I refuse to believe that they cannot see what regular folks who have been studying this stuff see... I mean it is obvious after a while... but that's just me....

Thoughts?

My $.02 is merely anecdotal.

I've known a few SDA pastors who made some sacrifices to go to the SDA seminary. They went in with the best intentions, fully believing that SDAism had "present truth." Somewhere during the course of their education, a light began to dawn. As they moved into their early years of ministry, that light grew stronger and they woke up to the startling reality that they were preaching something they no longer believed. At that point, they were faced with an awful choice.

I'm sure that stories vary greatly. These are merely a few stories that I know about from interaction with those affected.

BFA

 

[Avonia]

Samir Selmanovic may be in a fourth category. The recognition that more than one thing may be true - even if those things seem diametrically opposed at first glance.

At a higher level of abstraction, opposites may be reconciled.

 

[StormyOne]

Samir Selmanovic may be in a fourth category. The recognition that more than one thing may be true - even if those things seem diametrically opposed at first glance.

At a higher level of abstraction, opposites may be reconciled.

perhaps.... I guess my issue is with the people who have studied, come to the realization that something is amiss, and choose to continue preaching ideas that they know are not 'truth."

 

[Sophia7]

Something RC said in the other thread triggered a thought I've had for a while. What do sda ministers really know when it comes to the beliefs promoted by the church?

I think there are at least 3 categories of leaders/ministers.

First category: They honestly believe what they are preaching/teaching when it comes to the church. They believe it all, the remnant, the special status, the spirit of prophecy everything....

Second category: They know the belief system is tenuous, that much of it cannot be supported biblically, BUT they continue giving lip service because they are getting paid and the life that they lead is not too bad... in essence they are lying but getting paid well to perpetuate the lie....

Third category: They are not sure about everything, they may have their doubts, but they are not going to search too deeply because it might force them into a decision they are not willing to make at the moment, especially if they have families and need to provide for them.....

That's what I think... and I think that way because there is no way that these folks who have gone on to get their Masters degree and/or their Phd's can ignore the glaring problems with some of the doctrines... I refuse to believe that they cannot see what regular folks who have been studying this stuff see... I mean it is obvious after a while... but that's just me....

Thoughts?

I would suggest a fourth category, similar to your second category but with less mercenary motives. Some pastors know that the belief system is tenuous and that some of it cannot be supported biblically, but they stay in order to continue ministering to people and perhaps in the hope of reforming the church. Some among them may fit into your third category as well, if they avoid digging too deeply into certain topics for fear of jeopardizing their ministry.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

perhaps.... I guess my issue is with the people who have studied, come to the realization that something is amiss, and choose to continue preaching ideas that they know are not 'truth."

I understand why you struggle with this. I do too. However, I remember a time when my confidence in the things I was beginning to realize was very weak and my fear of the ramifications was very strong. I had a clue that something was amiss, but I had a long way to go to accept it. Perhaps certain pastors are still within this growth curve.

BFA

 

[StormyOne]

I would suggest a fourth category, similar to your second category but with less mercenary motives. Some pastors know that the belief system is tenuous and that some of it cannot be supported biblically, but they stay in order to continue ministering to people and perhaps in the hope of reforming the church. Some among them may fit into your third category as well, if they avoid digging too deeply into certain topics for fear of jeopardizing their ministry.

I can see that..... so from a relationship standpoint its about the people, but from a doctrinal standpoint they are treading water until critical mass occurs....

 

[StormyOne]

I understand why you struggle with this. I do too. However, I remember a time when my confidence in the things I was beginning to realize was very weak and my fear of the ramifications was very strong. I had a clue that something was amiss, but I had a long way to go to accept it. Perhaps certain pastors are still within this growth curve.

BFA

I would hope... however I get the sense sometimes that the pastors know they are preaching "another gospel" and their heart is really not into what they are preaching...

 

[Sophia7]

I can see that..... so from a relationship standpoint its about the people, but from a doctrinal standpoint they are treading water until critical mass occurs....

Yes, that was the dilemma that my husband and I experienced in deciding whether to stay or leave.

 

[StormyOne]

Yes, that was the dilemma that my husband and I experienced in deciding whether to stay or leave.

You all were honest enough to step down as opposed to continue taking the money and faking it, and that is commendable...

I think this issue is the main reason I opted not to become a minister even though I am a generational sda. When I was considering the possibility at 20 yrs of age (and already a rebel without a cause), it occurred to me that I might through studying arrive at a conclusion that was at odds with the church. I knew I would preach/teach what I believed to be true and not necessarily the party-line, and if employed by the church, that employment could be terminated.... I figured it was better for me to work in another field and have the ability to say exactly what was on my mind without fear of losing my job....

 

[Byfaithalone1]

You all were honest enough to step down as opposed to continue taking the money and faking it, and that is commendable...

I think this issue is the main reason I opted not to become a minister even though I am a generational sda. When I was considering the possibility at 20 yrs of age (and already a rebel without a cause), it occurred to me that I might through studying arrive at a conclusion that was at odds with the church. I knew I would preach/teach what I believed to be true and not necessarily the party-line, and if employed by the church, that employment could be terminated.... I figured it was better for me to work in another field and have the ability to say exactly what was on my mind without fear of losing my job....

Wise beyond your years!

BFA

 

[Sophia7]

You all were honest enough to step down as opposed to continue taking the money and faking it, and that is commendable...

I think this issue is the main reason I opted not to become a minister even though I am a generational sda. When I was considering the possibility at 20 yrs of age (and already a rebel without a cause), it occurred to me that I might through studying arrive at a conclusion that was at odds with the church. I knew I would preach/teach what I believed to be true and not necessarily the party-line, and if employed by the church, that employment could be terminated.... I figured it was better for me to work in another field and have the ability to say exactly what was on my mind without fear of losing my job....

I understand. Although there are things that I miss about our old life, I'm glad that we're not in that position anymore.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

I understand. Although there are things that I miss about our old life, I'm glad that we're not in that position anymore.

Well said.

BFA

 

[Hotpepper]

Something RC said in the other thread triggered a thought I've had for a while. What do sda ministers really know when it comes to the beliefs promoted by the church?

I think there are at least 3 categories of leaders/ministers.

First category: They honestly believe what they are preaching/teaching when it comes to the church. They believe it all, the remnant, the special status, the spirit of prophecy everything....

Second category: They know the belief system is tenuous, that much of it cannot be supported biblically, BUT they continue giving lip service because they are getting paid and the life that they lead is not too bad... in essence they are lying but getting paid well to perpetuate the lie....

Third category: They are not sure about everything, they may have their doubts, but they are not going to search too deeply because it might force them into a decision they are not willing to make at the moment, especially if they have families and need to provide for them.....

That's what I think... and I think that way because there is no way that these folks who have gone on to get their Masters degree and/or their Phd's can ignore the glaring problems with some of the doctrines... I refuse to believe that they cannot see what regular folks who have been studying this stuff see... I mean it is obvious after a while... but that's just me....

Thoughts?

I agree with you Stormy, I think many of these evangelists on television fall into your second category. They embrace the fame as well as the money. The third category is 'willing ignorance' which is just as bad "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being My priest. Since you have forgotten the law of your God.." (Hosea 4:6) The first category is hard to find. Our local church pastor seems to hate coming in to do his brief 5 minute sermon every weekend. The majority of service is announcements and music. We stopped going because his attitude was horrible. My family stays home and listens to sermons online now. There are some really good ones on the internet.

 

[M-Class]

Yes, that was the dilemma that my husband and I experienced in deciding whether to stay or leave.

Given what I just went through from the perspective as a volunteer planting a church, I can't even begin to imagine what it must be like for a pastor & family to go through this.

 

[AzA]

I think this issue is the main reason I opted not to become a minister even though I am a generational sda. When I was considering the possibility at 20 yrs of age (and already a rebel without a cause), it occurred to me that I might through studying arrive at a conclusion that was at odds with the church. I knew I would preach/teach what I believed to be true and not necessarily the party-line, and if employed by the church, that employment could be terminated.... I figured it was better for me to work in another field and have the ability to say exactly what was on my mind without fear of losing my job....

You too, Stormy?
I still wonder if I will end up at a seminary somewhere. But if I do, it wouldn't be Andrews. I know some wonderful professors at that seminary but it is also a niche seminary, and if your calling is not for a niche community, it is probably not the best tree for you to sit under.

I also think that one can do tremendous service with the people of any church without holding bureaucratic posts. And that, very often, not holding such posts gives one a different kind of influence. Not necessarily greater, but different.

 

[Sophia7]

I also think that one can do tremendous service with the people of any church without holding bureaucratic posts. And that, very often, not holding such posts gives one a different kind of influence. Not necessarily greater, but different.

I agree.

 

[StormyOne]

You too, Stormy?
I still wonder if I will end up at a seminary somewhere. But if I do, it wouldn't be Andrews. I know some wonderful professors at that seminary but it is also a niche seminary, and if your calling is not for a niche community, it is probably not the best tree for you to sit under.

I also think that one can do tremendous service with the people of any church without holding bureaucratic posts. And that, very often, not holding such posts gives one a different kind of influence. Not necessarily greater, but different.

Yeah AzA, I contemplated the possibility for a while, but the reality of the situation made hit home.... had I chosen that path, I would not be employed by the denomination now, I do know that...

I agree with you, holding posts outside the church is a better way for some...

 

[AzA]

I agree with you, holding posts outside the church is a better way for some...

Yes, for some. And for others, holding position within allows them to directly impact the structure -- become part of the structure itself.
It's this same reasoning that says that people with a calling to public service may choose to work in formal federal, city, or local government roles, or work in the less-formal spaces between these structures. Both options still serve the public even though one is more direct and/or visible than the other.
I strongly sense that every role has its purpose. As I said somewhere else recently, the church is part of the world even if it doesn't know it yet. As such, working in the context of the church is also working in the context of the world. The sets are, um... what's that word for things that share the same space? I'm thinking of a circle enclosed in another circle: part of the larger plane is doing double duty.

This is, after all, one world.

 

[sentipente]

At some point one has to decide whether it is the people or the institution that is more important.