Dealing with Church Errors

What is apostasy? If you were to consult a dictionary, you would be told that apostasy is "a departure from one's religion, principles, or values." With the message of the Church's apostasy being pounded from the pulpits of the "Historic" Adventists, many people are wondering. Is the Seventh-day Adventist Church in apostasy? What does that mean? How does it affect us?

No logical person will tell you that the Church is free from errors. But how many errors are we talking about? If the General Conference brought lawsuits (opposed by early Adventists) against those outside the Church, would we notice the apostasy? If we presented a medallion of honor to the Beast of Revelation, would we notice the apostasy? If we started preaching that we can be saved in sin, would we notice the apostasy? If the Church joined ecumenical organizations, would we notice the apostasy?

Friends, we can expect that in the last days more errors will creep into God's Church than you will wish to admit. Let us not forget that we live in the message of Laodicea: "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." Revelation 3:15, 16. But what does this apostasy mean? First, never let anyone tell you that the Church is beyond reformation. In the days of Israel, even in the nation's darkest hour, even when the sins were grievous and many, the Jews were not beyond reform.

Reform? How? What about the "Historic" Adventists?

We must be weary of these groups as well. I believe that these Christians are well-meaning, but many can not discern the fine line between defending the Truth and hate-mongering. Laodicea needs to hear the message of apostasy, but the "sighs and cries" of the Remnant must not allow us to be overcome with passion. Sometimes, when we become overzealous, we lose sight of our Savior. So back to the first question. How do we reform?

To be continued...

Sunrunner said:

Part One: Apostasy? Where?!​

What is apostasy? If you were to consult a dictionary, you would be told that apostasy is "a departure from one's religion, principles, or values." With the message of the Church's apostasy being pounded from the pulpits of the "Historic" Adventists, many people are wondering. Is the Seventh-day Adventist Church in apostasy? What does that mean? How does it affect us?

No logical person will tell you that the Church is free from errors. But how many errors are we talking about? If the General Conference brought lawsuits (opposed by early Adventists) against those outside the Church, would we notice the apostasy? If we presented a medallion of honor to the Beast of Revelation, would we notice the apostasy? If we started preaching that we can be saved in sin, would we notice the apostasy? If the Church joined ecumenical organizations, would we notice the apostasy?

Friends, we can expect that in the last days more errors will creep into God's Church than you will wish to admit. Let us not forget that we live in the message of Laodicea: "I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth." Revelation 3:15, 16. But what does this apostasy mean? First, never let anyone tell you that the Church is beyond reformation. In the days of Israel, even in the nation's darkest hour, even when the sins were grievous and many, the Jews were not beyond reform.

Reform? How? What about the "Historic" Adventists?

We must be weary of these groups as well. I believe that these Christians are well-meaning, but many can not discern the fine line between defending the Truth and hate-mongering. Laodicea needs to hear the message of apostasy, but the "sighs and cries" of the Remnant must not allow us to be overcome with passion. Sometimes, when we become overzealous, we lose sight of our Savior. So back to the first question. How do we reform?

To be continued...

Click to expand...

This is good food for thought! I look forward to the rest.

This is good food for thought! I look forward to the rest

Click to expand...

I think we all are.

"At the time when the danger and depression of the church are greatest, the little company who are standing in the light will be sighing and crying for the abominations that are done in the land. But more especially will their prayers arise in behalf of the church because its members are doing after the manner of the world." 5T 209-210.

The biggest threat to Laodicea is not the spiritual condition that they possess. The biggest threat to Laodicea is that they do not realize their spiritual condition. Amidst the growing seeds of corruption Satan has planted in our Church, the Spirit of God has not been lax. When Satan has reared his ugly head into the Church, faithful men and women, both leadership and laity, have been moved by the Spirit in response to mounting deception. We are called, as the Body of Christ, to be diligent watchmen who cry out when wolves are in sight. How is this accomplished?

Some will tell you that to be critical of the Church is to go against "the Christian Spirit". A common response to an exposure of treachery or error in the Church is often met with a call for love and Christian brotherhood. In truth, does a Christian ignore the issues, or does he warn and inform his brethren out of love? What of Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Elijah? Were they in the wrong for preaching an unpleasant message?

In this hour we need to be constructive critics. We need to uphold our Biblical principles but at the same time not lose sight of our mission. What is constructive criticism?

"Constructive criticism is the process of offering valid and well-reasoned opinions about the work of others, usually involving both positive and negative comments, in a friendly manner rather than an oppositional one," defines Wikipedia. Most importantly, our criticism of the Church and its leaders must come solely out of love and kindness. Galatians 5:15 warns, "But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another." Now that we have defined the source of our criticism, there are more questions to be answered. Who do we criticize?

No one. Constructive criticism does not focus on an individual or their personality. Instead, constructive criticism responds to actions and the product of those actions. If I were to be critical of the Church presenting a medallion of honor to the Pope, I would not slander Dr. Beach or the Conference leaders personally. I would explain my reasons for not accepting the action [medallion presentation] and then lament/rebute the product of that action [Papal-GC relations]. Remember never to despise or hate an individual for their actions. That is not our place.

How do we criticize? First, we must avoid sarcasm, mockery, and disrespect. By failing to treat our brethren with respect and humility, we become no better than the error they promote. Secondly, the people of God must avoid rumors! Our arguments must be based on fact and honest information, not gossip.

Where do we criticize? In this day and age, the Internet, but more importantly we need to inform our local brethren of Conference apostasy. The prayers of the people must be enlisted in order for us to avoid being "spued out" (Revelation 3:16).

When do we criticize? There are appropriate times for everything, and so we must not constantly be spewing a message of apostasy whenever we meet with fellow Adventists. We can't forget evangelism, worship, and fellowship. Don't let the sins of a few deprive you from normal church life.

Okay, we know how to be responsible critics. What else?

To be continued...

It is hard to get really worked up over giving a medallon to the Pope along with a book of Adventists missionary work. I suppose the GC could simply ignore the worlds largest Christian denomination but it does not sound to me like the best way to deal with them.
See the following for information on the topic:
http://www.truthorfables.com/SDA_Clasp_Hands_With_rome.htm

RC_NewProtestants said:

It is hard to get really worked up over giving a medallon to the Pope along with a book of Adventists missionary work. I suppose the GC could simply ignore the worlds largest Christian denomination but it does not sound to me like the best way to deal with them.
See the following for information on the topic:
http://www.truthorfables.com/SDA_Clasp_Hands_With_rome.htm

Click to expand...

You don't see anything wrong with honoring the Man of Sin?

There is not much benefit to the Adventist Church--and more specifically the GC leadership--in doing things that would serve only to give ammunition to the critics. However, look at what was actually on the medallion:

And here is what the Adventist Review printed at the time:

(EDIT: This article was printed in the August 11, 1977, Review.)

The front of the medallion shows Jesus coming in the clouds with the angels. The critics' claim is that He is standing on the earth, but that's not what the picture shows. They also speculate that the depiction of eight angels is a symbol of the Catholic view of Sunday as the "eighth day," that the lightning bolts coming out of the cloud are symbolic of Satan and mystery religions, etc.

You can decide for yourself whether such claims are legitimate or just wild speculation. Personally, I don't see anything in this that honors the Pope at all; I think it was meant as a witness about Adventism, though perhaps not the wisest way to do so. How do a book about Adventist missionary work around the world and a medallion that includes a picture of the Ten Commandments, with the fourth (which is actually the third commandment in the Catholic numeration system) spelled out, honor the Pope when this is a blatant reminder of the Adventist claim that the Catholic Church changed the law of God? I think the Jesuit-conspiracy theorists have blown this way out of proportion.

Also, please note that the Adventist Church issued an official statement explaining that the medallion was not specifically crafted for the Pope:

Circumstances of Papal Visit

Bert Beach—1977 Statement regarding the papal visit and the medallion.

In May of 1977, there was a meeting of Christian World Communions held in Rome. This conference is not an organization in which one has membership, with a constitution and dues, et cetera; but it is simply an informal forum that meets in order to discuss issues of mutual interest.

In connection with the conference, there was a meeting with the pope. Dr. Beach was one of fifteen people who attended this meeting. The other fourteen were non-Adventists. This was not a meeting of our church with the pope but simply a meeting of the participants in the conference with the pope. It was felt that it was of interest to meet with the man who is the religious leader of some 700 million people around the world and head of the Vatican and a person with great world influence. At that time, Dr. Beach was the religious liberty director for Northern Europe and West Africa, and he felt that this meeting would be of PR and religious liberty interest to our church. In connection with the meeting, he gave the pope one of our missionary books, which gives a pictorial presentation of our work around the world and at the same time also presents some of our beliefs. In addition, he gave him one of the medallions that were available in the office and that were given from time to time to statesmen or other significant world figures.

--from http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/Papal Visit.htm

Click to expand...

Finally, this happened in 1977. What has come of it? Have we as a church really moved that much closer to "clasping hands with Rome"? Not in my observation.

"At the 1990, General Conference Session in Indianapolis, a Catholic priest spoke and prayed from the pulpit. The conference communications director told a local newspaper that we no longer believe what we did a hundred years ago concerning comments in the Great Controversy about the papacy. A condensation of "The Great Controversy" was handed out in Indianapolis. "Shirley Burton, a spokesperson for the denomination, told the Indianapolis Star Daily newspaper the tract was 'trash.'...The main body of the Church has moved away from an anti-Catholic position. The new position of co-operation with the Catholic Church was exemplified by the invitation from the Seventh-day Adventists to the Vatican to send an official observer to the conference." Arkansas Catholic 7-29-90.

"Though Adventist officials conceded the history of the denomination has an anti-Catholic bent, they said the modern church is trying to move from that stance. 'They (the dissidents) want us to be like we were 100 years ago.' said Herbert Ford, news director for the 6.2 million-member church. 'But, the church has to move not away from the eternal principles of God, but things do have to change. 'These people are a thorn in the flesh, but the church tolerates them. United States in Prophecy [Great Controversy] which was sponsored by Adventist Layworkers Affiliate of Tennessee, calls Catholicism a pagan religion and refers to the pope as a beast. Adventists who want to cling to the church's historic anti-Catholic beliefs represent only about 1,000 in the North American division of 750,000 members,' Ford said."
The Indianapolis Star, July 14, 1990.

The Vice President of the Conference, Neal C. Wilson, verbalized the conference position regarding the papacy, "Although it is true that there was a period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint...that attitude on the church's part was nothing more than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative Protestant denominations in the early part of this century, and the latter part of the last, which has now been consigned to the historical trash heap as far as the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned." Merikay McLeod lawsuit, Docket entry #84: EEOC vs PPPA, c-74-2025-CBR. Feb. 6, 1976

"Two Colorado health care providers, one Catholic and one Adventist, have joined forces to become one of the state's largest health care systems and employers." Our Sunday Visitor, January 7, 1996. Our hospitals are merging with Catholic hospitals, with the Catholics controlling them (since they have given the most assets).

On the contrary, I do believe there is cause for alarm.

Sophia7 said:

There is not much benefit to the Adventist Church--and more specifically the GC leadership--in doing things that would serve only to give ammunition to the critics. However, look at what was actually on the medallion:

Click to expand...

Sophia7 said:

d here is what the Adventist Review printed at the time:

The front of the medallion shows Jesus coming in the clouds with the angels. The critics' claim is that He is standing on the earth, but that's not what the picture shows. They also speculate that the depiction of eight angels is a symbol of the Catholic view of Sunday as the "eighth day," that the lightning bolts coming out of the cloud are symbolic of Satan and mystery religions, etc.

You can decide for yourself whether such claims are legitimate or just wild speculation. Personally, I don't see anything in this that honors the Pope at all; I think it was meant as a witness about Adventism, though perhaps not the wisest way to do so. How do a book about Adventist missionary work around the world and a medallion that includes a picture of the Ten Commandments, with the fourth (which is actually the third commandment in the Catholic numeration system) spelled out, honor the Pope when this is a blatant reminder of the Adventist claim that the Catholic Church changed the law of God? I think the Jesuit-conspiracy theorists have blown this way out of proportion.

Also, please note that the Adventist Church issued an official statement explaining that the medallion was not specifically crafted for the Pope:

Finally, this happened in 1977. What has come of it? Have we as a church really moved that much closer to "clasping hands with Rome"? Not in my observation.

Click to expand...

The front of the medallion depicts a resurrected Christ, not a returning Christ.

Revelation depicts the returning Christ having crowns, and having the angels with Him in the air. But these eight angels appear to be worshiping Him on earth.

We note Christ was resurrected on Sunday or the 'eighth' day of creation in Catholic account.

The thunderbolts are coming from the cloud, not Christ. The thunderbolts are weapons of the many pagan deities. You decide what was trying to say.

The hands of this Christ was outstretched as in many Catholic pictures of the saints.

When did it become ok for Christians to make pictures of the living God?

On the back of the medal, we see an unknown book, the 10 commandments with 4th spelled out, however it does not say the 7th day sabbath, it merely states the Catholic 3rd commandment.

The book, the cross (another pagan symbol) and 10 commandments are supported by a maltese cross.

The maltese cross is found worn by the pope and pagan gods.





Here the pope and the assyrian god Ashur both are wearing the maltese cross: a symbol of the sun.

How any of us wants to interprete the medallion is up to us. But we should note some important events that took place about the honouring the pope with the medal by B Beach at the World Confessional Families.

Dr. Bert Beach wrote a document called 'So Much in Common' 4 years earlier. Beach was later appointed as the leading ecumenist of SDA denomination and served as a representative at World Council of Churches which was founded by two jesuits after WWII aimed at bringing about a one world religion.

Here's a picture from AV.


Notice the masonic handshake: a 33 degree grip and thumb touching the knockles.


In the 'So Much in Common' document, Beach commented on how our involvment in WCF has brought WCC/SDA conversation. Beach was at the Christian Unity Conference in Rome 1976.

In a statement sworn to federal court in 1976, president of North American Division N. Wilson testified "Although it is true that there was a period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint. . that attitude on the church's part was nothing more than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative Protestant denominations in the early part of this cen­tury, and the latter part of the last, which has now been consigned to the historical trash heap as far as the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned. "

I posted in an earlie thread in traditional forum a document that showed GC had been in secrete dialog with Rome to bring SDA church 'home' by compromising on the anti-pope teachings.

Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.

"The time was when Protestants placed a high value upon the liberty of conscience which had been so dearly pur­chased. They taught their children to abhor popery and held that to seek harmony with Rome would be disloyalty to God. But how widely different are the sentiments now expressed!" Great Controversy, p563.

"It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy." ST, 02-19-1894.

Now I have not left the SDA church. Where would I go if I did? I just know that not one cinder block of the church will go to heaven, save the individual true believers. We must carry on the work of the end ourselves regardless what GC does. The latter rain will not be given to the church as a whole but only to those who seek it earnstly.

OntheDL wrote:

The front of the medallion depicts a resurrected Christ, not a returning Christ.

Click to expand...

No it is the second coming notice below the art it says: Behold He Cometh Every Eye Shall See Him.

In fact it is very similar to the Harry Anderson Painting of the second coming except for the angels are playing horns.

http://www.picturesofjesus4you.com/images/second_coming_anderson_l.jpg

RC_NewProtestants said:

OntheDL wrote:
No it is the second coming notice below the art it says: Behold He Cometh Every Eye Shall See Him.

In fact it is very similar to the Harry Anderson Painting of the second coming except for the angels are playing horns.

http://www.picturesofjesus4you.com/images/second_coming_anderson_l.jpg

Click to expand...

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe he meant it doesn't look the Second Coming should be according to the Biblical account.

P.S. - if this is turning into a debate, we should split it to the main forum in order to comply with the rules.

Sunrunner said:

"At the 1990, General Conference Session in Indianapolis, a Catholic priest spoke and prayed from the pulpit. The conference communications director told a local newspaper that we no longer believe what we did a hundred years ago concerning comments in the Great Controversy about the papacy. A condensation of "The Great Controversy" was handed out in Indianapolis. "Shirley Burton, a spokesperson for the denomination, told the Indianapolis Star Daily newspaper the tract was 'trash.'...The main body of the Church has moved away from an anti-Catholic position. The new position of co-operation with the Catholic Church was exemplified by the invitation from the Seventh-day Adventists to the Vatican to send an official observer to the conference." Arkansas Catholic 7-29-90.

"Though Adventist officials conceded the history of the denomination has an anti-Catholic bent, they said the modern church is trying to move from that stance. 'They (the dissidents) want us to be like we were 100 years ago.' said Herbert Ford, news director for the 6.2 million-member church. 'But, the church has to move not away from the eternal principles of God, but things do have to change. 'These people are a thorn in the flesh, but the church tolerates them. United States in Prophecy [Great Controversy] which was sponsored by Adventist Layworkers Affiliate of Tennessee, calls Catholicism a pagan religion and refers to the pope as a beast. Adventists who want to cling to the church's historic anti-Catholic beliefs represent only about 1,000 in the North American division of 750,000 members,' Ford said."
The Indianapolis Star, July 14, 1990.

The Vice President of the Conference, Neal C. Wilson, verbalized the conference position regarding the papacy, "Although it is true that there was a period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint...that attitude on the church's part was nothing more than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative Protestant denominations in the early part of this century, and the latter part of the last, which has now been consigned to the historical trash heap as far as the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned." Merikay McLeod lawsuit, Docket entry #84: EEOC vs PPPA, c-74-2025-CBR. Feb. 6, 1976

"Two Colorado health care providers, one Catholic and one Adventist, have joined forces to become one of the state's largest health care systems and employers." Our Sunday Visitor, January 7, 1996. Our hospitals are merging with Catholic hospitals, with the Catholics controlling them (since they have given the most assets).

On the contrary, I do believe there is cause for alarm.

Click to expand...

These quotes certainly do not represent the thoughts of the majority of Adventists. I would dispute the assertion that only 1,000 Adventists in North America "want to cling to the church's historic anti-Catholic beliefs." In many of our churches, there is widespread Catholic-bashing going on on Sabbath mornings; I've seen it in just about every church I've attended. It bothers me because my brother-in-law is a Catholic, and he is often offended by what people say about Catholics when he visits my sister's Adventist church. He's not likely to want to keep going if all he hears from Adventists is that the head of his church is the beast of Revelation and that he is lost in Babylon.

I guess I just don't see it as such a bad thing to be nice to Catholics and not have our church leaders accusing them of being apostate Christians or worse. That doesn't mean that we don't disagree with many Catholic doctrines and that we can't explain our beliefs to them, but we can't continue to address Catholics the way we have historically, with condemnation and scorn, and expect them to be convicted to turn away from their deeply held religious beliefs.

The main problem that I have with historic Adventists and most independent groups is that they are more concerned about attacking Catholics as well as Adventists who remain in the "apostate" Adventist Church than they are about spreading the gospel to those who don't know Jesus.

Whatever our GC leaders do--and I disapprove of some things as well--it doesn't really affect what our local pastors and church leaders do to reach people for Christ. My husband could still do his job just fine if all of the levels of Adventist hierarchy disappeared. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't think it is profitable to attack our church leaders--though we can still disagree with their decisions and their methods--and accuse them of leading our whole church astray when I don't really see them as having much influence at all on our general membership or on our pastoral leadership.

Sunrunner said:

P.S. - if this is turning into a debate, we should split it to the main forum in order to comply with the rules.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. I'll take care of it.

Sunrunner said:

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I believe he meant it doesn't look the Second Coming should be according to the Biblical account.

Click to expand...

Actually, this is what he said:

OntheDL said:

The front of the medallion depicts a resurrected Christ, not a returning Christ.

Revelation depicts the returning Christ having crowns, and having the angels with Him in the air. But these eight angels appear to be worshiping Him on earth.

We note Christ was resurrected on Sunday or the 'eighth' day of creation in Catholic account.

Click to expand...

I would say that the engraving depicts both a resurrected and a returning Christ. As RC pointed out, the inscription clearly indicates that this is supposed to be at the second coming. I don't see any evidence that these angels are worshipping Him on earth or that He is standing on the earth (as the independent groups claim); rather, He is standing on a cloud, and the angels are coming with Him from heaven, just as the Bible says.

And an "unknown book" on the back of the medallion? Come on, people--what do you think that book is if not the Bible? There is no evidence to show that it is anything else.

Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication...

We are called to preach the Three Angels' message. How can we preach the Second Angel's message if we seek a spirit of cooperation (see first quote I posted) with the Papacy?

Now, I am not saying we should be anti-Catholic. We should be anti-Catholicism. We must have the spirit of love, but with that love for others comes an urgency to preach the whole truth.

Sophia7 said:

Actually, this is what he said:



I would say that the engraving depicts both a resurrected and a returning Christ. As RC pointed out, the inscription clearly indicates that this is supposed to be at the second coming. I don't see any evidence that these angels are worshipping Him on earth or that He is standing on the earth (as the independent groups claim); rather, the angels are coming with Him in the clouds, just as the Bible says.

And an "unknown book" on the back of the medallion? Come on, people--what do you think that book is if not the Bible? There is no evidence to show that it is anything else.

Click to expand...

I commented on this before...when we paint an impressionist picture, not every color or line is accurate.
But when enough color and strokes are laid down on the painting, we usually can make out quickly what the painting is all about.

How about the maltese cross?...Is there an explaination for everything? The symbols may not mean much to you. But behind them, there lies the doctrines of the occultism.

And what about the other pictures and quotes I provided?

My God loves the sinners but hates sin. We are supposed to love the Catholic people but expose the satanic system.

On the contrary, the 1 billion catholics do not know the Jesus of the Bible.

One of my best friend is Catholic. You think it's easier for me to tell him the system he grew up in is the babylon than to leave him where he feels comfortable? But I did because of love. And he's still my friend.

'My sheep knows my voice and they follow me'. If your brother-in-law is a child of God, he will come out of Babylon in time. How do we love them but do not tell them the truth. Which one of the prophets was loved and welcomed in Israel when they rebuked and called for their hearts to return to God?

The compromises are made in subtle steps. If the evil suddenly manifests in its true form, it will be abhorred by the lame and humble. But it always comes in as innocent and well-intended under detection.

Do you look at thing in black and white or in shades? The bible says we are to have no fellowship with the works of darkness but rather expose them.

So measure yourself with these words.

OntheDL said:

I commented on this before...when we paint an impressionist picture, not every color or line is accurate.
But when enough color and strokes are laid down on the painting, we usually can make out quickly what the painting is all about.

How about the maltese cross?...Is there an explaination for everything? The symbols may not mean much to you. But behind them, there lies the doctrines of the occultism.

And what about the other pictures and quotes I provided?

My God loves the sinners but hates sin. We are supposed to love the Catholic people but expose the satanic system.

On the contrary, the 1 billion catholics do not know the Jesus of the Bible.

One of my best friend is Catholic. You think it's easier for me to tell him the system he grew up in is the babylon than to leave him where he feels comfortable? But I did because of love. And he's still my friend.

'My sheep knows my voice and they follow me'. If your brother-in-law is a child of God, he will come out of Babylon in time. How do we love them but do not tell them the truth. Which one of the prophets was loved and welcomed in Israel when they rebuked and called for their hearts to return to God?

The compromises are made in subtle steps. If the evil suddenly manifests in its true form, it will be abhorred by the lame and humble. But it always comes in as innocent and well-intended under detection.

Do you look at thing in black and white or in shades? The bible says we are to have no fellowship with the works of darkness but rather expose them.

So measure yourself with these words.

Click to expand...

My concern is not with standing up for truth but with how we present it to people.

Sophia7 said:

My concern is not with standing up for truth but with how we present it to people.

Click to expand...

You just said you don't think there is anything wrong for the SDA GC to befriend the papacy.

God has called us to be set apart. How do you present it if you are mingled with them together? Where do you call them out to be?

This is exactly why the protestant world had laid down the differences and joined the RCC across the abyss.

OntheDL said:

You just said you don't think there is anything wrong for the SDA GC to befriend the papacy.

God has called us to be set apart. How do you present it if you are mingled with them together? Where do you call them out to be?

This is exactly why the protestant world had laid down the differences and joined the RCC across the abyss.

Click to expand...

See, I just don't believe that this was an attempt to "mingle them together." I think they had good intentions of sharing our beliefs with the Pope, though their methods may be debatable. No one is trying to merge the Adventist Church with the Catholic Church. And there is nothing wrong with befriending Catholics or even the Pope; that doesn't mean that we have to compromise our beliefs or not discuss our differences.

OntheDL said:

You just said you don't think there is anything wrong for the SDA GC to befriend the papacy.

God has called us to be set apart. How do you present it if you are mingled with them together? Where do you call them out to be?

This is exactly why the protestant world had laid down the differences and joined the RCC across the abyss.

Click to expand...

Well I do see your point here...There is a very thin line. If one is not grounded in what he/she believes, then one must not go and give them the truth of the gospel. One must have orders to take the gospel to them in tight focus. But to take the gospel to them is no different than taking it to any other group in Babylon. The only thing we must consider when befriending the Papacy is that it is God that converts and not us...we are only the mail man with a message...and I have seen many a Adventist think they where doing the converting, oh no...that's the Holy Spirits Job.


1Co 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. 1Co 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; 1Co 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. 1Co 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.


Telling them to come out from her is a must...and while we are set apart from that system in holiness we still are to be like Paul...Become as one in friendship that we might gain them in holiness of the truth.

Adventtruth