Hard to watch this happen...

[NightEternal]

No, not just you. Why would you think that? There have been others as well, such as Doc, OnTheDL and YourNeighbour. Not to mention those who felt the same way but just never voiced thier opinion.

As for your explanation, no, I do not agree in the least. My opening post explains why. You can't have a free- thinking minister and a party-line towing denominational lackey in one package. It is one or the other. Are we so arrogant that we refuse to see what a seminary trained minister can plainly see? No. Just as with Ford, the evidence is ignored and the questioner is silenced.

By all means, let's get rid of the questioning pastors rather than squarely facing up to the doctrinal problems and issues facing our church with EGW. It just makes so much more sense...

All of you, with your clergy-cleansing mentality, make me ill.

 

[woobadooba]

All of you, with your clergy-cleansing mentality, make me ill.

When you were hired for your job you agreed to perform in a certain way, right?

If you didn't agree to do what your job description dictates you wouldn't have gotten hired.

Now if all of a sudden you no longer believe you should perform according to such dictates, would it be fair to your employer if you continued to take his money, while not doing what he wants you to do to earn that money?

That's the point. Tall no longer felt comfortable receiving an income from an employer with whom he could no longer in good conscience follow the dictates of.

I don't think we should be cursed because we believe that it is wrong to not do what your employer wants you to do, while receiving his money, and making it appear as though you are doing what he wants you to do.

It's a moral issue, Night. There is no reason to be angry with people because they agree that Tall made the right decision in being honest. I have a great deal of respect for Tall for his honesty on this.

 

[NightEternal]

No Woob, you miss the point completely. There are problems. Big ones. Huge ones that could have major ramifications for the church. Tall saw them. Sophia saw them. Many ministers can see them, they have confided in me. I know of one pastor who admitted to me he hasn't considered EGW a prophetess in over 15 years. Freeindeed will tell you that pastors have confided in him. Scholars are questioning, Bacchiocchi and Cottrell are only the tip of the iceberg.

The difference is, some come forward and speak up, some keep silent. The memory of the post-Glacierview purge (over 100 SDA pastors either sacked or resigned at the time) has made very sure that the silent ones will stay silent. Either way, the questions are still there, waiting for the church to step up to the plate and deal honestly with them. They will not go away, much as the admin would like them to. They will always be there, waiting. And we will keep losing good men like Tall until the problems are dealt with, once and for all.

You think I am exaggerating my case? This is only a few:

104 Adventist Pastors fired for rejecting the inspiration of Ellen G. White!

1. I dropped my membership in the SDA church in 1981, of my own volition. I was never fired. The actual number of people who either resigned or were fired because of loss of faith in the SDA mission, I believe is a far higher number than what you list below. Few people, relatively speaking were fired. Many more, like myself, decided on our own that this was no place to be. (A.R., Virginia, May 2005)
2. "Hi, My name is Les Stambaugh, though I have never been an Adventist pastor myself, I did study to become one. I had my SDA church membership transfer from Astoria, Or. where I had been an elder in good standing, to Dillingham, Ak. where I moved in 1980, was blocked from taking place (Ironically I believed staunchly in EG White at that time.) The issue holding up my transfer had to do with my father, R. Glen Stambaugh. Dad had been the longest serving and much loved missionary pastor in the Alaska Mission of SDA ,and served as a pastor in Oregon and Washington states as well. But, Dad was at that time being called to give assurance of his belief in Ellen White in the Gold Hill, Or. church he was pastoring then. I was surprised to NOT see his name on your list of fired pastors, as the ultimate result for him was that he was fired (about 1982) by the Oregon Conf. of SDA., who, (also ironically), are responsible for telling him about the LIES about EG White. My father's story is a remarkable one reminiscent of Martin Luther and the diet at Verms. His congregations voted to reinstate him as pastor after he was" censured. " Surprisingly even a panel fellow SDA Denominational workers who examined his doctrinal beliefs voted to reinstate him. However at his reinstatement ceremony the Or. Conf. Pres asked him to reaffirm his belief in Ellen White and her writings stacked on top of the Bible in front of his congregation. After all they had told him, and all he had leaned in the process of the events he went through, he was amazed he could be asked such a thing and told them plainly so." (Submitted Feb. 2004)
3. Neal C. Wilson, President General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists and Life Member Ellen G. White Estate Board: "...when we come to the point as to whether one has to believe in Ellen White, to some degree or another, or accept her visions as real or simply an imagination or parroting what somebody else said - that one has to believe that these things were real visions in order to be a Seventh-day Adventist or to experience salvation - this church has never taken that position. I hope it never does... " (Neal Wilson, Pacific Union College Campus Chronicle 5/27/82)

The list:
Attached is a partial list of former SDA workers, mostly ordained ministers, who have been fired, pressured to resign, or reassigned voluntarily because they could not conscientiously "believe in Ellen White to some degree or another, or accept her visions as real". Their refusal to preach extrabiblical church doctrines led to excruciating circumstances and decisions for many who loved their church and wished only to proclaim God's Word unhindered by human traditions and creeds.
We ask our readers to supply us with any additions or corrections to this list

1. Albertson, Ivan, Teacher: Central California Conference
2. Bailey, Mike, Pashr: Oregon Conference
3. Barren, Grahem, Pastor: New Zealand
4. Bassch, Eric, Pastor: South Africa
5. Bassch, Eugene, Colporteur: South Africa
6. Bean, Harvey and Marlie, Teachers: Oregon Conference
7. Broad, Ray, Teacher: New Zealand
8. Broomhaul, Rod, Pastor: North Queensland, Australia
9. Bruington, Dean, Pastor: Iowa Conference
10. Campbell, Francis: President South African Union
11. Cannaday, Ron, Arizona
12. Cary, Tom, Pastor: South Africa
13. Chambers, Joe, Pastor : Western Australia
14. Champaign, Gary, Pastor: Arkansas-Louisiana Conference
15. Coon, Glenn 111, Pastor: West Virginia - Mt. View Conference
16. Crandall, Alan, Doctoral Student: Andrews University
17. De Villiers, Brian, Worker South Africa
18. Dennis, Travis, Pastor Texas Conference
19. Dorsey, Ruth, Teacher: Washington Conference
20. Douglas, Gary, Pastor: West Virginia Mt. View Conference
21. Edwards, Calvin, Pastor: Missouri Conference
22. Ernesto Hernandez, CaliforniaAgafonoff, Sergie, Pastor,: Brisbane, Australia
23. Fahden, Lyall, Pastor: Oregon Conference
24. Finney, Conrad, Pastor: Oregon Conference
25. Ford, Desmond, Religion Professor: Australasian Division
26. Fredericks, Richard, Maryland
27. Garrison, Gary, Pastor: Central California Conference
28. Geddes, Charles, Teacher: Colorado Conference
29. Greenley, Ray, Pastor: Ohio Conference
30. Harper, John, Pastor: Oregon Conference
31. Harris, Ed, Pastor: Washington - Upper Columbia Conf.
32. Helppi, Rauno, Pastor: Manitoba-Saskatchewan Conference
33. Higby, Bob, Pastor: Wisconsin Conference
34. Higby, Wally, Pastor: Northern California Conference
35. Honeycutt, Ronald, Pastor: Florida Conference
36. Hood, Paul, Pastor: Arkansas-Louisiana Conference
37. Howard, Turner, Pastor: Georgia- Cumberland Conference
38. Howell, Dan, Teacher: Florida Conference
39. Huston, Ed, Pastor: Washington Conference
40. Jenner, Loren, Pastor: South Australia
41. Johnson, Rick, Teacher: Missouri Conference
42. Kaikainahaule, Bill, Pastor: Southern California Conference
43. Kellar, Don, Pastor: Northern California Conference
44. Kluzit, Victor, Pastor/Lit. Evang.: Texas Conference
45. Knight, David, Teacher: Colorado Conference
46. Kress, Michael, Graduate Student: Andrews University
47. LaBrecque, Alexander, Pastor: West Virginia-Mt. View Conference
48. Lamp, Herschel, M.D.: St. Helena Hosp. (Calif.)
49. Lawson, Chris, Teacher: Ontario Conference
50. Lemon, Duane, Pastor: Southern California Conference
51. Ludwig, Doug, Pastor: Kansas Conference
52. Luster, Chuck, Pastor: Arkansas-Louisiana Conference
53. Maraccini, Rocky, California
54. Martin, Colin, Pastor: England
55. Martin, J. Mark, Pastor
56. Mason, Noel, Pastor: Oregon Conference
57. Masters, George, Teacher: Central California Conference
58. McCauley, Norman, Pastor: Northern New England Conference
59. McCormack, Kevin, Pastor: Southern California Conference
60. McHarg, Winston, Pastor: Australia
61. McMurphy, Elmore, College Professor: Pacific Union College
62. Merrill, Ben, Pastor: Oregon Conference
63. Moorehead, Doug, Teacher: Florida Conference
64. Moran, Don, Literature Evangelist: Central California Conference
65. Newman, Ray, Pastor: New South Wales, Australia
66. Palmer, Bob, Pastor: Northern California Conference
67. Pangborn, Tom, Pastor: Oregon Conference
68. Parkin, Herb, Pastor: Western Australia
69. Patterson, Mark, Pastor: Northern California Conference
70. Peck, Clay, Colorado
71. Peisert, Greg, Pastor : Iowa Conference
72. Pitman, Hughie, Pastor: Florida Conference
73. Pobke, Wayne, Pastor: South Australia
74. Polglase, John, Pastor: Western Australia
75. Pursley, Mkhael, Pastor: Pennsylvania Conference
76. Ralph, Kevin, Pastor: Australia
77. Rapp, Jim, Pastor: Southern California Conference
78. Ratzlaff, Dale, Pastor: Central California Conference
79. Rea, Walter, Pastor: Southern California Conference
80. Rendalen, Aage, Editor: Norway (actually withdrew from church over doctrinal reasons, not fired)
81. Retief, P.J., Pastor: South Africa
82. Rollings, Dean, Pastor: Queensland, Australia
83. Ruppert, Greg, Pastor: Northern California Conference
84. Saladino, Joe, Pastor: Kansas Conference
85. Schafer, Gary, Pastor: Oregon Conference
86. Schuster, Craig, Pastor: Alabama-Mississippi Conference
87. Sellers, Dennis, Evangelist : Washington - Upper Columbia Conf.
88. Shumate, Gordon, Pastor: Singapore
89. Smith, Neville, Pastor: South Australia (Victoria)
90. Stambaugh, R. Glen: Oregon Conference of SDA
91. Suessenbach, Heinz, Pastor: Western Australia
92. Summers, Lloyd, Pastor: Oregon Conference
93. Swanepoel, Martin, Pastor : South Africa (Transvaal Conf.)
94. Taylor, Greg, North Carolina
95. Toews, John, Pastor: Southeastern California Conference
96. Van Rooyen, Smuts, Religion Prof.: Andrews University
97. Vorhies, Wayne, Pastor: Colorado Conference
98. Waterhouse, Wayne, Pastor: Texas Conference
99. Waterworth, David, Pastor: South Australia
100. Weaver, Bruce, Pastor: Arkansas-Louisiana Conference
101. Wells, Dan, Pastor: Southeastern California Conference
102. Willruth, Bart, Doctoral Student: Andrews University
103. Winger, Nordon, Pastor: Northern California Conference
104. Zapara, John, Pastor: Northern California Conference

Location
Number of SDA Pastors fired
Alabama -Mississippi
1
Andrews University
4
Arkansas -Louisiana
4
Australia/New Zealand
17
California
21
Canada
3
Colorado
1
England
1
Florida
4
Georgia-Cumberland
1
lowa
2
Kansas
2
Missouri
2
Northern New England
1
Norway
1
Oregon
11
Ohio
1
Pennsyluania
1
South Africa
8
Singapore
1
Texas
3
Upper Columbia
2
Washington
2
West Virginia
3
Wisconsin
1

Woob, you are dreaming if you don't believe that pastors everywhere can see the problems. Burying one's head in the sand is not going to help, individually or corporately. Your reasoning, if applied across the board, would gut almost half of our ministerial workforce.

So sad. People actually believe that flushing out and forcing a few ministers here and there to give up thier livelihood is rectifying the problem. Unfortunately, they are not even close to dealing with the root issues. It's like continuing to blow one's nose instead of taking something for the cold itself. The symptoms are being focused on instead of the illness.

You, Woob, have questions and concerns with some of our doctrine. Would you deny a minister the right to also ask questions? Possibly come to different conclusions? What gives the lay people the right to question and search for answers all they want, but declare such endeavors off-limits to pastors just because they are denominational employees? What logic drives such reasoning?

I don't know, and I don't particularly care at this point. All I know is that it is one fine mess of a corner the church has painted itself into, and we have become no better than the RCC in the way we treat our clergy.

I've said my peace. We most likely will never agree on this anyhow.

I had better stop here before this turns into a rant.

 

[woobadooba]

Woob, you are dreaming if you don't believe that pastors everywhere can see the problems. Burying one's head in the sand is not going to help, individually or corporately. Your reasoning, if applied across the board, would gut almost half of our ministerial workforce.

So sad. People actually believe that flushing out and forcing a few ministers here and there to give up thier livelihood is rectifying the problem. Unfortunately, they are not even close to dealing with the root issues. It's like continuing to blow one's nose instead of taking something for the cold itself. The symptoms are being focused on instead of the illness.

You, Woob, have questions and concerns with some of our doctrine. Would you deny a minister the right to also ask questions? Possibly come to different conclusions? What gives the lay people the right to question and search for answers all they want, but declare such endeavors off-limits to pastors just because they are denominational employees? What logic drives such reasoning?

I don't know, and I don't particularly care at this point. All I know is that it is one fine mess of a corner the church has painted itself into, and we have become no better than the RCC in the way we treat our clergy.

I've said my peace. We most likely will never agree on this anyhow.

I had better stop here before this turns into a rant.

I hear you, and am aware of the things that you are saying. However, the bottom line is that Tall did what any honest person would have done.

I would have done the same thing. In fact, I know that I could never agree to be a pastor in our church because I have issues with some of the things that I would be expected to inculcate in order to be a paid minister of the SDA church.

 

[happy1sda]

No Woob, you miss the point completely. There are problems. Big ones. Huge ones that could have major ramifications for the church. Tall saw them. Sophia saw them. Many ministers can see them, they have confided in me. I know of one pastor who admitted to me he hasn't considered EGW a prophetess in over 15 years. Freeindeed will tell you that pastors have confided in him. Scholars are questioning, Bacchiocchi and Cottrell are only the tip of the iceberg.

The difference is, some come forward and speak up, some keep silent. The memory of the post-Glacierview purge (over 100 SDA pastors either sacked or resigned at the time) has made very sure that the silent ones will stay silent. Either way, the questions are still there, waiting for the church to step up to the plate and deal honestly with them. They will not go away, much as the admin would like them to. They will always be there, waiting. And we will keep losing good men like Tall until the problems are dealt with, once and for all.

You think I am exaggerating my case? This is only a few:

Coon, Glenn 111, Pastor: West Virginia - Mt. View Conference

is this the same person that wrote the ABC's of prayer

 

[tall73]

No Woob, you miss the point completely. There are problems. Big ones. Huge ones that could have major ramifications for the church. Tall saw them. Sophia saw them. Many ministers can see them, they have confided in me. I know of one pastor who admitted to me he hasn't considered EGW a prophetess in over 15 years. Freeindeed will tell you that pastors have confided in him. Scholars are questioning, Bacchiocchi and Cottrell are only the tip of the iceberg.

The difference is, some come forward and speak up, some keep silent. The memory of the post-Glacierview purge (over 100 SDA pastors either sacked or resigned at the time) has made very sure that the silent ones will stay silent. Either way, the questions are still there, waiting for the church to step up to the plate and deal honestly with them. They will not go away, much as the admin would like them to. They will always be there, waiting. And we will keep losing good men like Tall until the problems are dealt with, once and for all.

You think I am exaggerating my case? This is only a few: is this the same person that wrote the ABC's of prayer

]
Looks like that is supposed to be the third? Maybe a son or grandson?

 

[OntheDL]

NE,

How many theologians and religious leaders embraced Jesus when He was on earth? How many people were with Jesus when He was hanging on the cross? Count them all with one hand.

Counting the numbers does not help your case. Sanity is never statistical.

 

[NightEternal]

We continue to ignore the issues facing us as a church at our own peril.

 

[woobadooba]

We continue to ignore the issues facing us as a church at our own peril.

I agree that there are issues. However, a lot of people make issues out of non-issues if you know what I mean.

 

[OntheDL]

We continue to ignore the issues facing us as a church at our own peril.

Not at all ignoring here. Tall had brought them up in number of threads over the past year. We have had 'in-depth' discussions over them.

 

[NightEternal]

When I say 'we', I am referring to corporate Adventism, the admin, the White Estate. The sand will only hold heads for so long...

Woob, if you think the theological crdeibility of EGW is a non-issue, you are sadly mistaken.

As for the discussion with Tall, I have followed it. I have not contributed, because I see the same things Tall is seeing and he is outlining the concerns excellently. I can add nothing to it.

From my perspective, the exchange was pointless and futile. Everyone who opposed Tall's research merely went into it with the full intent to defend the traditional positions. No desire was manifested to seriously consider what he was presenting as a having some merit. It was about as laughable as the Glacierview fiasco where the admin supposedly 'considered' Ford's research. I suspect Tall's conference will most likely take the same stance, as will the scholars he is going to meet with. I see Tall's resignation as a foregone conclusion, because it is evident the corporate church will never give one inch on the 'old landmarks' which are sealed in stone as a result of SOP endorsement.

 

[woobadooba]

Woob, if you think the theological crdeibility of EGW is a non-issue, you are sadly mistaken.

Did I say it is a non-issue?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

First that list has names that I know left over doctrines that are not there, so clearly there are many more that have left over EGW and doctrines.

Second I don't know what Tall said to the conference people. Personally I would not have suggested resigning but expressed my concerns and leave it to them to ask for a resignation if they indeed felt that Tall could no longer function as a Pastor. The reason is that as Tall and others have done when studying a doctrine they can present their reasons against an SDA doctrine and why they could no longer believe or teach something that they felt was wrong. A good Conference person would have a hard time telling you to just go ahead and teach what you are convinced is wrong, while in general the doctrine would have nothing to do with anyones salvation but is a peripheral issue. On top of that in most of these things we can find current SDA pastors and theologians employed by the church who will also disagree with these things.

The idea that any Christian denomination would simply demand that someone teaches what the denomination tells them to believe whether the person believes it or not is horrible. It is hypocrisy and it sets up the denomination as if they were the representative of what is true or not. That is what the Roman Catholic Church did and it brought forth the Reformation. The argument that you do what the company wants is fine for a simple business but it is horrible for those who are working for God.

 

[NightEternal]

The argument that you do what the company wants is fine for a simple business but it is horrible for those who are working for God.

Exactly what I was thinking but wasn't able to verbally formulate properly.

 

[woobadooba]

First that list has names that I know left over doctrines that are not there, so clearly there are many more that have left over EGW and doctrines.

Second I don't know what Tall said to the conference people. Personally I would not have suggested resigning but expressed my concerns and leave it to them to ask for a resignation if they indeed felt that Tall could no longer function as a Pastor. The reason is that as Tall and others have done when studying a doctrine they can present their reasons against an SDA doctrine and why they could no longer believe or teach something that they felt was wrong. A good Conference person would have a hard time telling you to just go ahead and teach what you are convinced is wrong, while in general the doctrine would have nothing to do with anyones salvation but is a peripheral issue. On top of that in most of these things we can find current SDA pastors and theologians employed by the church who will also disagree with these things.

The idea that any Christian denomination would simply demand that someone teaches what the denomination tells them to believe whether the person believes it or not is horrible. It is hypocrisy and it sets up the denomination as if they were the representative of what is true or not. That is what the Roman Catholic Church did and it brought forth the Reformation. The argument that you do what the company wants is fine for a simple business but it is horrible for those who are working for God.

I think you have a valid point here.

 

[OntheDL]

When I say 'we', I am referring to corporate Adventism, the admin, the White Estate. The sand will only hold heads for so long...

Woob, if you think the theological crdeibility of EGW is a non-issue, you are sadly mistaken.

As for the discussion with Tall, I have followed it. I have not contributed, because I see the same things Tall is seeing and he is outlining the concerns excellently. I can add nothing to it.

From my perspective, the exchange was pointless and futile. Everyone who opposed Tall's research merely went into it with the full intent to defend the traditional positions. No desire was manifested to seriously consider what he was presenting as a having some merit. It was about as laughable as the Glacierview fiasco where the admin supposedly 'considered' Ford's research. I suspect Tall's conference will most likely take the same stance, as will the scholars he is going to meet with. I see Tall's resignation as a foregone conclusion, because it is evident the corporate church will never give one inch on the 'old landmarks' which are sealed in stone as a result of SOP endorsement.

I (we) am not responsible for what GC does/did. Nor should I.

I don't have a problem with what you want to believe. If you have specific theological problems post them here (without cut-and-paste'ing from anti-SDA sites) when the debate forum is opened up.

I cannot respond to your generalized statements.

 

[OntheDL]

Exactly what I was thinking but wasn't able to verbally formulate properly.

These issues were what made us who we are today.

When you question the issues of 1844, EGW, sanctuary doctrines...you are in effect put the very existence of SDA movement in question. You have no where to go.

 

[NightEternal]

My doctrinal concerns have been posted many times on other forums and here and the dialogue can be found in the archives. The exchanges went pretty much the same as Tall's did. Two sides look at the same texts and come to totally different conclusions.

That is how any such future endeavors will eventually end up, so, like I said already, it is futile and pointless.

It absolutely amazes me how we see this pattern play itself out again and again in Adventism. All the proof texts for the IJ are laid out, two people consider them. One comes to the conclusion that it is plainly not Biblically defensible, the other sees it as clear as day as being Scripturally sound. Same texts, absolutely opposite conclusions. How in the world does that work anyhow?!

We say let the Bible speak for itself. Well, what if the Bible is saying two diferent things to two different people? It's never that simple and cut and dried.

I'm pretty much done with theological fencing and proof text/EGW quote tennis matches for the most part. I have not experienced anything productive come from it in my past 20 years of doing it with the Traditionalists.

So, I'll pass on the offer, thanks.

 

[OntheDL]

My doctrinal concerns have been posted many times onother forums and here and the dialogue can be found in the archives. The exchanges went pretty much the same as Tall's did. Two sides look at the same texts and come to totally different conclusions.

That is how any such future endeavors will eventually end up, so, like I said already, it is futile and pointless.

It absolutely amazes me how we see this pattern play itself out again and again in Adventism. All the proof texts for the IJ are laid out, two people consider them. One comes to the conclusion that it is plainly not Biblically defensible, the other sees it as clear as day as being Scripturally sound. Same texts, absolutely opposite conclusions. How in the world does that work anyhow?!

You should know better. Jesus said you are either for me or against me. No middle ground. 1 Cor 2 tells us the spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Ever wonder why people read the same bible and come to conclusion that it's full of errors and contradictions? Works the same way.

We say let the Bible speak for itself. Well, what if the Bible is saying two diferent things to two different people? It's never that simple and cut and dried.

I'm pretty much done with theological fencing and proof text/EGW quote tennis matches for the most part. I have not experienced anything productive come from it in my past 20 years of doing it with the Traditionalists.

So, I'll pass on the offer, thanks.

That's fair. Such discussions usually lead to no where anyways.

 

[NightEternal]

You should know better. Jesus said you are either for me or against me. No middle ground. 1 Cor 2 tells us the spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Ever wonder why people read the same bible and come to conclusion that it's full of errors and contradictions? Works the same way.

So then, you basically have just contended that Tall is against God and has no spiritual discernment because his interpretation of the texts differs from the Traditional one and the one you hold to. I am sure he will be happy to know this.

It never seems to even remotely occur to TSDA's that it may be thier understanding that lacks spiritual discernment.

But I digress. This dogmatic mind-set is exactly what causes every theological discussions to plateau and stall.

Everytime.