ATTENTION MEMBERS need your assistance :)

[VictorC]

A place for Seventh-day Adventists who do not insist on acceptance of all 28 fundamental beliefs. Others who wish to discuss Adventist issues are also welcome.

That might work. Careful consideration of language designed to avoid alienation of contributers would polish it. I don't know exactly what would work best, but this seems like a workable draft.

 

[VictorC]

No problem ... this could also be defined ...

It becomes really hard to define people and contributions while we're going the extra mile to avoid defining them out of the forum. This is what I see several others mentioning, and I hope you're seeing these comments appearing where they do.

 

[Laodicean]

A synthesis of one and three? Hm....I was thinking about that but it is hard to pull off. The best I could get was a slightly different combination of two sentences. Not as pithy though.


A place for Seventh-day Adventists who do not insist on acceptance of all 28 fundamental beliefs. Others who wish to discuss Adventist issues are also welcome.

Works for me. Count my vote for this. -Admin edit -

This option accomplishes a couple of things.

a. It gives emphasis to the fact that the forum is designed for those who are still in the church but do not insist on all 28 fundamentals.

b. Others are still welcome, but the focus is on progressive Adventist thought.

 

[Edial]

It becomes really hard to define people and contributions while we're going the extra mile to avoid defining them out of the forum. This is what I see several others mentioning, and I hope you're seeing these comments appearing where they do.

I understand.

What you have is this -

SDA who question the 28 points.

Folks with SDA ties who also question the same thing.

These 2 groups of folks are the core of this fora.

THEN, come all other voices (folks that have no ties with SDA whatsoever) who could participate in discussing these issues WITH the first groups.

The FIRST group is the core.
They run this forum.
This forum belongs to them.

Then the SECOND group - non-SDA guests who are welcome.

 

[Edial]

Works for me. Count my vote for this. -Admin edit -

Edited out last part ... Laodicean, this was not necesary.
Please let's keep this on track.

 

[VictorC]

I understand.

What you have is this -

SDA who question the 28 points.

Folks with SDA ties who also question the same thing.

These 2 groups of folks are the core of this fora.

THEN, come all other voices (folks that have no ties with SDA whatsoever) who could participate in discussing these issues WITH the first groups.

The FIRST group is the core.
They run this forum.
This forum belongs to them.

Then the SECOND group - non-SDA guests who are welcome.

I think that if you recognize "traditional" Adventists who insist on adherance to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs as a secondary group (along with the "no ties whatsoever"), you'll understand the reason for this forum a little better.

 

[Laodicean]

Originally Posted by Laodicean

Works for me. Count my vote for this. -Admin edit -
​

Edited out last part ... Laodicean, this was not necesary.
Please let's keep this on track.

Yes, Edial, you are right. May I learn from your patient and Christian spirit...

 

[Edial]

I think that if you recognize "traditional" Adventists who insist on adherance to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs as a secondary group (along with the "no ties whatsoever"), you'll understand the reason for this forum a little better.

You are absolutely correct.
You would have tremendous pressure from the Mother Ship.

(But I wanted YOU to say it ).

But you are a believer and have freedom in Christ.

Lutherans understand a lot more than you might consider.

Even now, 100s years later, we challenge all types of Synodal decisions.

Thanks,
In Christ,
Ed

 

[StormyOne]

How about this for 1 and 3 and ending with 2?

A place for Seventh-day Adventists and those with ties to Adventism who do not insist on acceptance of all 28 fundamental beliefs.

Other voices are also welcome to participate in discussing these beliefs.

That works for me....

 

[Tishri1]

VictorC, no bias is indended here.
Tishri1 is working with you.

If she would have had bias against you, this forum or your vews, and would have acted on the bias, she could have dissolved this place.
She is an Advisor.

Please, let's not change the direction of this conversation.

In Christ,
Edial

Ed is right, It was part of my work(and a host of other staffers) that gave you this place a few years ago, I do want to help

The whole point for my giving an example is to show one way the MJ forum keeps themselves from being challenged and harassed in their own forum, and its only one.... there are others in all the forums in this area and if needed i will get other staffers from other denominations and faith groups to share as well to provide a picture of how this area functions ok?

 

[Joe67]

How about this for 1 and 3 and ending with 2?

A place for Seventh-day Adventists and those with ties to Adventism who do not insist on acceptance of all 28 fundamental beliefs.

Other voices are also welcome to participate in discussing these beliefs.

Edial,

Will this be a debate forum or a discussion forum?

Joe

 

[Tishri1]

It exists as a place where we can openly compare those Fundamental Beliefs with Scripture, and in many cases a choice needs to be made between Scripture and the Fundamental Beliefs where one can't be reconciled with the other.

something like this is what we are looking for, this is good

and if a unity of the one faith entrusted to us is to be attained, we need a place where we can discuss all the traits inherited that caused division in the first place.

this is also what we are looking for , it shows the purpose of this place quite well


and to further answer your question about a supposed bias on my part concerning my own MJ forum....actually i facilitated the writing of their SOP but did not participate in offering any suggestions for it... I only took from the members(and all the forums in this area)their own words thru discussion to produce a SOP that would help them be free from harassment and create a place where they could be relaxed and free from constant contention and judgment

I want only that for this group as well

 

[Edial]

Edial,

Will this be a debate forum or a discussion forum?

Joe

Good question.

How do you want it?
I, as an Admin, obviously propose "discussion", the word is less flammable.
And ... the line between debate and discussion on occasions gets blurry.

However, one certainly recognizes strong debate when one sees it.

 

[Tishri1]

so very well put Tall this is something that can go right into a SOP

does everyone else here like what Tall has expressed about this group?

A. I am not a progressive Adventist.

B. I was for a time a progressive Adventist. Before that I was a traditional Adventist, and an Adventist pastor for 10 years.

C. I still agree with a lot of views of progressive Adventists.

You have to understand some things about the Adventist Church to understand this forum.

The Adventist church did not always have 28 fundamental beliefs spelled out as they do now. They had certain "pillars" or key teachings. But in recent years Adventism has sought to spell out in more specifics a greater number of teachings.

Those joining the church before 1980 were not required to hold to the set of beliefs that is now required. Many of the beliefs would be the same. But the notion of fundamental beliefs that take on a creed-like identity is more pronounced in recent years.

Progressive Adventists see that the Adventist church has a role to play in the world. They value the elements of Adventism's history that allowed people to diverge from the common views and study for themselves. But they do not value the dogmatism that has developed at various periods of Adventism, and they do not value defining a great number of topics so that everyone must subscribe to the party line.

The Adventist church started out with the notion that creeds are bad. Corporate agreement with a creed limits examination of closely held beliefs.

The best way I can put it is that Adventism in its early days re-examined many things and focused on "present" truth. Ie. they thought truth progressed. Progressive Adventists hold to this spirit of continued advancement in truth rather than focusing specific historical Adventist beliefs. Many of the historical Adventist beliefs they find may not be correct after further research.

They like the original spirit of Adventism. But they often find some of the beliefs of early Adventism to be wrong, simplistic, proof-texted or in some cases downright wacky.

The reason progressive Adventists and former Adventists who have left over doctrine have so much in common is that they have all wrestled with the same questions regarding their Adventist faith and have found some aspects of the traditional interpretation lacking. They just take different paths to dealing with that in their daily life.

Formers feel they are better off with another church. Progressives still value their experience in the church enough that they remain. Some seek to change the church from within. Others just enjoy the cultural aspects and still worship along with Adventists without necessarily feeling a need to change the system. Some feel that the church still has a larger purpose, that it can contribute to Christianity, but not necessarily in the area of Adventist disctinctives.

But they all have wrestled with the doctrine and found things that they can no longer agree with in the overall fundamental beliefs of Adventism.

 

[Edial]

so very well put Tall this is something that can go right into a SOP

does everyone else here like what Tall has expressed about this group?

We are pretty close to honing this down in the posts below.

Yet we certainly need few more days, since some expressed that some regulars post weekdays.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Tishri1]

"Adventists Gone Wild??"

LOVE IT!!!

 

[Tishri1]

Purpose: A place for Adventists who do not insist on acceptance of all 28 fundamental beliefs

And I love the short version as well(Sophia can testify to this drive i have to be short and sweet) but a few more sentences would be awesome I like all you have said, you really know how to describe this group Can we get maybe a single paragraph or 3-4 bullet points about this group?

 

[Tishri1]

I think the above purpose statement is succinct and captures the essence of the forum. There may be many variations on progressive Adventism......They see value in Adventism, but reject its sometimes narrow focus on questionable historical distinctives.

this is good too

 

[Tishri1]

I suppose a common sense edit would be to spell out Seventh-day Adventist, as they are not the only Adventists.

Purpose: A place for Seventh-day Adventists who do not insist on acceptance of all 28 fundamental beliefs

good edit as well

 

[Tishri1]

I thought that pulling up a chair and watching the type of conversations that take place here was a good idea. The purpose would become intuitive once observation fills in the blanks for you. There are also other members who post here only on weekday mornings (BFA comes to mind), and their input would be good to see.

we are not trying to exclude folks that is not what this area is about(we did have that "air" quite a few years ago but has definitely changed ) What we wish to do is provide an open space that acts like a family room of sorts for you all....Respect for your ideals and beliefs and a general view of what you all represent in this area of CF