• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

IceDragon Comment on Reinventing the Adventist Wheel.

RC_NewProtestants

Senior Veteran
May 2, 2006
2,766
63
Washington State
Visit site
✟25,750.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I just saw this comment on the blog mentioned above. Thought some might find it interesting.
http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com/2006/12/groupthink-of-former-sdas.html

icedragon said... Marcel
Hello,
I have recently decided to leave the SDA Church. I made the commitment about 2 month ago after 1.5 years of study. I don't want to come off as critical or harsh or use scare tactics, but the SDA theological picture is severely tainted with error.
Let me tell you it was a complete surprise to me to find these things. I just wanted to shore up my understanding of SDA history, so I started to read SDA sanctioned church history it was while reading the biography's of some of the leading figure I started to see the problems. I read books about AT Jones and WW Prescott. It was while reading Prescott that I came across a statement that made me stand up and take notice.
Prescott commented about the 1888 conference in Minneapolis that the fight was not so much over the message of Righteousness by faith as it was what Ellen white had said in vision 32 years earlier.
Uriah Smith and George Butler were at a Bible conference in 1856 and and the subject of the law in Galatians came up, this is central to understanding righteousness by faith (RBF). Well both Smith and Butler remember a vision from God in the form of testimony being produced by Ellen White to support the view that Smith and Butler had preached and endorsed for 32 years. The EGW vision Settled the matter. Now 32 years later she changes her position and goes back on her statement leaving Smith and Butler and the entire denomination out in the cold.

Lest you thing for a moment That Smith is just some side character to EGW you would be mistaken. Uriah Smith was Ellen Whites Chief apologists and Her primary defender. George Butler was also a primary supporter and it was largely on the statement made in vision that he held to the view he did. Both Smith and butler discerned correctly that if EGW changed her view then that would invalidate her claim to be a prophet.
After understanding what the issue was I want back and tried to understand what the issues were in 1856. J.H. Waggoner had written a book "The law of god: and examination of the testimony of the two testements" in this book he went on to show that that law was in effect all the way though the scriptures and that the law has always been the medium to bring a person to Christ who was the means of righteousness, the law was never a means of righteousness. This position was theologically correct, but it was voted out because of the vision EGW had. Then later EGW Changed her mind when E.J Waggoner the Son Of J.H. Waggoner came along saying the same thing. That is a problem. The prophet cannot have a vision endorsing a position that is theologically wrong. NEVER not acceptable. Lets you try to minimize this issue. This is the central pillar of All of Christianity, it is what separates Christianity from all other religions how to get to heaven, by your own actions or by faith in Christs Actions. The prophet should know this. That is what got me started. I began to dig and scratch and found that EGW had made numerous false predictions and had vision about theological positions which she later went back on.

The most blatant of these was in February 1845 it is found in Manuscript Releases vol 5 around page 93. It is a letter to Joseph Bates and it was written in EGW's own handwriting. Joseph Bates had asked EGW to explain some doubts that he had about EGW prophetic ministry and to clarify questions that had been circulating. The letter is only partially intact, but what is in tact is damaging enough to discredit EGW As a prophet.

After Oct 22 1844 there was much confusion in the Millerite ranks. The Millerite movement began to splinter into many factions. there were the Life and Death Adventist, the Age to come Adventist, the Evangelical Adventist, the Sabbatarian
Adventist, The Shut Door Adventist, there were at least 16 different groups that I am aware of that emerged. This gave rise to the Need for a conference held in April of 1845 Called the "The Mutual Conference of Adventist" it was located in Albany New York. It was there that the Millerite Body formally unified it's fractured body and accepted agreed upon points. One of the points agreed upon was that nothing of Salvation importance happened in 1844 and that the 2300 days had been misinterepted. Also stated was, that Since nothing happened, The claim that some had made that the William Miller had given the final Warning to the world and the Door of salvation was shut for any one who did not accept his message were lost, was retracted.
This gave a rise to a problem for some of the Millerites because some still believed that something of salvation importance happened in 1844 and that William Miller had given the final warning to the world and the door of mercy was shut to everyone accept the Milleritates. Among those groups were the Sabbatarian and the Shut-Door Adventists, which Ellen G.Harmon(White) was a part of.

After the initial disappointment Ellen believed Miller to be wrong and that Salvation was open to all, but as she began to have vision she began to change her mind. she eventually came to believe that that door of mercy was Shut and salvation lost to all who had not accepted Miller message. She also came to believe and to endorse time setting 46,47,49 51 for the return of Christ. It is here that the problems of her claim of inspiration and the letter from Joseph Bates comes into play. In the letter Ellen is asked to explain a vision she had. The the description of the vision is very damming to Ellen. In it there is a Sister in the faith who is having such a hard time believing that the door of salvation and mercy is shut to all but the shut door group, but when Ellen goes off into vision she has a message from God stating that the Door of Mercy was shut and this changed the sisters mind. Ellen would later abandon the Shut door movement and that salvation was still open to all, but what you see is Ellen leading people the wrong way, Hum?
That brings into question her claim to prophetic ministry. Can God accurately deliver a message to his people. Yes he did it through the child Samuel, but cannot get it right through Ellen. That is one of the problems and the tip of the iceberg. Other Doctirens such as The Investigative Judgement, and the 2300 day ending in 1844 are not valid. Jesus entering the Most Holy Place in 1844 is clearly contracted by Hebrews 8-10 and specificly in Chapter 9.
I hope you don't take offense to this but that is why I cannot accept EGW. You said that "formers" sound like a broken record and are subject to "group think" well let me tell you I never talked to anyone about this until I had seen the problems. As far as "group think" the reason we sound alike is that the issues are the same. It is amazing to me that some in Europe, Africa, Asia, North Dakota, California and Nebraska could come to the exact same conclusions and that people a 100 years apart could come to the same conclusions. I am not angry at the Church just cannot agree with it.
You say that we are abandoning ship let me address that. The Adventist Ship is predicated on the believe that it is the true Church and the "Remnant Church of bible prophecy" Just open up Adventist Review or Adventist World or turn on 3ABNor Loma Linda Broadcasting Network or Hope TV and you will see it over and over again. This belief is linked directly to the 2300 days, break the link you break the claim and identity of the SDA Church, it is just that simple. As far as Daniel and Revelation Go they are absolutely important to SDA theology, thinking and identity. With out them there is no SDA Movement, the Sunday law the 3 Angels message, Ellen white, investigative judgment, 1000 year reign, yada yada yada. These things are absolutely central to Adventist thinking. You cannot be an SDA with out them for no matter what your worldview it has been filter through and SDA lenses.

The reason people are leaving The SDA Church is because the lens is wrong and and to view life through this lens is deception. Sorry no 2 way about it.
My SDA training has taught me, BTW I have a degree in SDA theology, that error obscures the truth and destroys the picture of Christ and hurts people in some way. Well if the SDA church is in Error then it is obscuring the picture of Christ. Why should I stay in it. it hurts me in someway. Do you see that. The Ideas that some how there is going to be a change is a fantasy. Are you telling me you can stop Doug Batchlor from going around and say that 1844 is true? or that Sunday is the mark of the Beast? or that Ellen white is a prophet? No for the SDA Church to do that is to deny it's very identity. So do you see the problem? the SDA Church will not change it's beliefs why would I stay and support it?

Well any way. you guys seem nice and some of you I actually know in real life. it will be interesting to see the response. If you will be nice in return
Well thanks for letting me express my Self,. Oh please forgive any spelling errors and grammer errors

God bless you
 

RC_NewProtestants

Senior Veteran
May 2, 2006
2,766
63
Washington State
Visit site
✟25,750.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I can't say I disagree with him on his research but the question is how is it possible for him to re- decide a position yet it is impossible for the SDA denomination to change their position?

Is it true that no denomination can change from what they have believed. So that any church that believes in eternal torment in hell must always believe it? No denomination that holds to a particular belief can ever change because that belief is too important to be corrected? Would there be any hope for any Christian denomination or is there somewhere a denomination that really has it all right with no need to change anything? That would be an interesting study of an organization if it existed. Most denominations I can think of including groups like Mormons and Roman Catholics have indeed changed over time. How is it that the Adventist church must be so much more resistant to change? Or is this an incorrect view because like so many other denominations in fact the Adventist church has been changing? Is this just an over reaction to the slow rate of change?

Any thoughts (other the the traditionals lamenting the changes which they interpret as falling away)?
 
Upvote 0

NightEternal

Evangelical SDA
Apr 18, 2007
5,639
127
Toronto, Ontario
✟6,559.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Another one bailed out. :sigh: More apostasy ammunition for the Trads to use against those of us Progs who have remained. And they will use this against us, make no mistake. They will claim we are all headed in the same direction as Tall, Sophia, Free and Ice. It's a given.

I think Ice has nailed the issues dead-on though. He has clearly done his research and has not made this decision to leave rashly or without due consideration.

I am torn on this. I agree with you, RC, that it should not be true that a church cannot change. I agree with you that a church should not have to believe what it has always believed. I agree with you that you that there should be hope for any Christian denomination and that no church should claim they have it all right with no need to change anything.

Unfortunately, this is exactly what Adventism asserts, at least on an official level. No deviation from the 28.

There have been minor changes over the years, but they have been agonizingly slow coming. Nevertheless, they are peripheral issues that don't matter much. The major areas where change is most needed remain as they always have.

So, this is the dilemma I find myself in. Desiring reform with all of my heart and having spent the better part of 20 years fighting for it-and knowing, deep down in my gut, the church will never change. Most certainly not in my lifetime.

Indeed, it is only just recently that Doug Batchelor and Amazing Propaganda has reinforced and fired up Trad intolerance with the Here We Stand rallying cry.

One step forward, thirty steps back.

It's a tough one for sure. :sigh:
 
Upvote 0

mva1985

Senior Veteran
Jun 18, 2007
3,448
223
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟27,128.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Joel 2
"12 "Even now," declares the LORD,
"return to me with all your heart,
with fasting and weeping and mourning." 13 Rend your heart
and not your garments.
Return to the LORD your God,
for he is gracious and compassionate,
slow to anger and abounding in love,
and he relents from sending calamity.
14 Who knows? He may turn and have pity
and leave behind a blessing—
grain offerings and drink offerings
for the LORD your God."



Perhaps you should look for reform from within.
 
Upvote 0

RC_NewProtestants

Senior Veteran
May 2, 2006
2,766
63
Washington State
Visit site
✟25,750.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
J

Perhaps you should look for reform from within.
There is very little chance that the verse in Joel quoted has anything to do with the SDA denomination. That anyone thinks that a denomination is Christianity they are too uniformed to be relevant. which may explain why the comment did not deal with any of the substance of IceDragon's post but rather assumed the need for reform so that Ice conforms to SDA tradition.
 
Upvote 0

Sophia7

Tall73's Wife
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2005
12,364
456
✟84,145.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I can't say I disagree with him on his research but the question is how is it possible for him to re- decide a position yet it is impossible for the SDA denomination to change their position?

Is it true that no denomination can change from what they have believed. So that any church that believes in eternal torment in hell must always believe it? No denomination that holds to a particular belief can ever change because that belief is too important to be corrected? Would there be any hope for any Christian denomination or is there somewhere a denomination that really has it all right with no need to change anything? That would be an interesting study of an organization if it existed. Most denominations I can think of including groups like Mormons and Roman Catholics have indeed changed over time. How is it that the Adventist church must be so much more resistant to change? Or is this an incorrect view because like so many other denominations in fact the Adventist church has been changing? Is this just an over reaction to the slow rate of change?

Any thoughts (other the the traditionals lamenting the changes which they interpret as falling away)?

A denomination can change. An example of one that did is the Worldwide Church of God. However, I think it's unlikely that the Adventist Church will change so radically because the administration has no interest in considering moving even a millimeter away from any of the doctrinal pillars and risking the Adventist identity. Jan Paulsen's 2002 "Theological Landscape" address certainly doesn't reflect any desire to deal with the issues forthrightly or to encourage honest study. Change can't happen, at least not on a widespread level, when the GC president makes statements like this, revealing how dependent Adventism really is on Ellen White:
The historic sanctuary message, based on Scripture and supported by the writings of Ellen White, continues to be held to unequivocally. And the inspired authorities on which these and other doctrines are based, namely the Bible supported by the writings of Ellen White, continue to be the hermeneutical foundation on which we as a church place all matters of faith and conduct. Let no one think that there has been a change of position in regard to this. (http://www.adventistreview.org/2002-1524/story3.html)
Any change, I believe, has to start at the local level and be driven by the laity, not by the pastors and not by the administrators because most of them just don't have the freedom to dissent from the traditional Adventist views without jeopardizing their jobs. And change is happening in some places, but it's slow and limited. Eventually, maybe it will reach the top, or maybe the denomination will fragment, but I guess I don't want to wait around for that to happen when I think it's more important for me to focus my efforts elsewhere and to try to reach unchurched people with the gospel, rather than "converting" other Christians to Adventism, as is the goal of so much of their evangelism. Perhaps others have a calling to stick around and strive to reform Adventism, but as for me, I don't believe that should be my mission.
 
Upvote 0

Bourbaki

Visiting Seventh-day Millerite
Sep 9, 2007
427
1
Land of Zog
Visit site
✟23,592.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Green
The most blatant of these was in February 1845 it is found in Manuscript Releases vol 5 around page 93. It is a letter to Joseph Bates and it was written in EGW's own handwriting. Joseph Bates had asked EGW to explain some doubts that he had about EGW prophetic ministry and to clarify questions that had been circulating. The letter is only partially intact, but what is in tact is damaging enough to discredit EGW As a prophet.
I believe that citing evidence this haphazardly is proof of being victimized by the Seventh-day Adventist school system.

I think it's more important for me to focus my efforts elsewhere and to try to reach unchurched people with the gospel

And I too look forward to you moving beyond feasting on the husks of the perceived failures of Ellen G. White and doing something useful.
 
Upvote 0

Adventtruth

God is the Gospel!
Sep 7, 2006
1,527
40
Raliegh Durham North Carolina
✟25,683.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I think we saw something of a change, or at least a move or cover up from the hardline position of tradition/Historic Adventism when Martin and Barnhouse put pressure of the Church back in the 50's. It even started a small finger pointing fight with many of the churches hardlind traditional theologians. M.L. Andreasen had his license stripped because of his bitterness towards the church for moving away from some of the hardline legalism.

This all goes to show that if top evengelical theologians who are on par with Adventist theologians, and know how to speak the jargon, where to come and continue in applying pressure to the Adventist church through study to get the true meaning from scripture, as was done with the Armstongs group...The WWCG, I believe the Adventist Curch would have to move away from some of the very immature doctrines of the pioneers into a more orthodox view of scripture. The church may be far to big to be moved from the inside alone. I believe it has to come from without with support from within.


AT
 
Upvote 0

RC_NewProtestants

Senior Veteran
May 2, 2006
2,766
63
Washington State
Visit site
✟25,750.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The worldwide church of God changed from the top down and that caused a large split into the fundamentalist and evangelical sides. I do think the change needs to and will come from within. Already according to people like Alden Thompson the majority of college age Adventists in our schools do not know what EGW says and do not care a whole lot about what she says. Which means when they get into leadership roles they will have to look at the reasons for our beliefs and they will be at the stage we progressives are at now. Assuming of course they stay in the church which is a big if.
 
Upvote 0

Sophia7

Tall73's Wife
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2005
12,364
456
✟84,145.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The worldwide church of God changed from the top down and that caused a large split into the fundamentalist and evangelical sides. I do think the change needs to and will come from within. Already according to people like Alden Thompson the majority of college age Adventists in our schools do not know what EGW says and do not care a whole lot about what she says. Which means when they get into leadership roles they will have to look at the reasons for our beliefs and they will be at the stage we progressives are at now. Assuming of course they stay in the church which is a big if.

And assuming that if they do stay, they will get into leadership roles. There are still many fundamentalist young people as well who could fill those positions. I agree that change needs to come from within and that change initiated from the top down would cause a huge split, as happened with the WCG.

I read the other comments at Reinventing the Adventist Wheel, and there was a link to some further comments by Greg at http://www.forthegospel.org/forum/articles/a_challenge_to_former_adventists. He made a couple of points that I agree with, particularly in regard to the Paulsen speech that I quoted from earlier:
The investigative judgment is brought out by Marcel as the backdrop of former Adventist angst: “I know for many of you, you either leave the denomination altogether to flee the IJ as the ‘foundation of deception,’ or be branded cultic.” Here is where I must disagree with Marcel. The investigative judgment doctrine absolutely denies the biblical gospel of Jesus Christ and demeans the atonement he made on the cross, creating an incomplete atonement that flies in the face of Scripture. Marcel is no doubt aware of the monumental theological battles waged in the Adventist church over Desmond Ford's challenge of this doctrine, resulting in its reinforcement and the defrocking of Ford. Despite the lack of belief in this doctrine by “evangelical Adventists,” it is still official Adventist teaching and is subscribed to at the highest echelons of the church.

In a 2002 speech, General Conference president Jan Paulsen heartily endorsed the historic investigative judgment doctrine: “A further word needs to be said about our being ‘loyal to our heritage and to our identity.’ Some would have us believe that there have been significant shifts in recent times in regard to doctrines that historically have been at the heart of Seventh-day Adventism. Take specifically our understanding of judgment and Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary and the prophetic messages in which these teachings are contained. Some are suggesting that since the 1980 (Glacier View) meetings, the very teachings that the church affirmed that year at those meetings have been abandoned, and that the church has essentially moved to accept the very positions it rejected then. Such a claim is a distortion of reality, and nothing could be further from the truth. The historic sanctuary message, based on Scripture and supported by the writings of Ellen White, continues to be held to unequivocally. And the inspired authorities on which these and other doctrines are based, namely the Bible supported by the writings of Ellen White, continue to be the hermeneutical foundation on which we as a church place all matters of faith and conduct. Let no one think that there has been a change of position in regard to this.”

It should be obvious from this statement that the current president of the Adventist church is not in harmony with the brand of Adventism Marcel is practicing. It is not fair to criticise former Adventists, therefore, for the stand they have taken in seeing the inconsistency of the investigative judgment and the biblical gospel. This is not some obscure teaching that only the extreme right-wing of Adventism subscribes to. Whether you agree with them or not, it is unreasonable to accuse former Adventists of making mountains out of molehills when they are defending the biblical gospel against a doctrine that strikes at its heart. Taking a stand for truth matters and it is not without biblical precedent. Perhaps the best example we have is the apostle Paul, who also had very strong words for anyone who would tamper with the gospel (Galatians 1:8-9).
_____________________________________________________

Marcel then transitions to a discussion of “emergent Adventism,” a re-invention of the church he hopes to promote through his blog. He asserts that “the paradigm of the conversation [in Adventism] has changed,” and that attacking the old fundamentals is akin to propagating an argument that has long since grown stale. He says, ”If you paid close attention, you'd notice that the paradigms of our conversations have changed. We are deconstructing and reconstructing Adventist truth. We've moved beyond the griping and debates of historical fundamentalism, the interpretations of Daniel and Revelation, etc. Frankly, we'll leave that to you guys to debate with diehard SDA's because that stuff bores us out of our minds.”

Unfortunately as is demonstrated by the Paulsen quote above, the argument has not grown stale, and it is not some fringe wing of the Adventist church who believes in all 28 fundamentals. As further evidence, in William G. Johnsson's final editorial in the most recent Adventist Review, he wrote, “Sound theology is vital; it must never be compromised. But the Fundamental Beliefs draw the boundaries, and so long as any Adventist assents to them, he or she deserves respect and fellowship. Points of doctrine not spelled out in the Fundamentals must not be allowed to divide us.” What's clear is that this debate continues unabated and that serious divisions exist within Adventism. It is not realistic at this point, therefore, to make the broad assertion that the Adventist paradigm has changed.​
 
Upvote 0

honorthesabbath

Senior Veteran
Aug 10, 2005
4,067
78
76
Arkansas
✟27,180.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
In the famous words of Jerry Lee Lewis............

THERE'S A WHOLE LOTTA SHAKIN GOIN ON!!!!!!!
29_3_12.gif
 
Upvote 0

NightEternal

Evangelical SDA
Apr 18, 2007
5,639
127
Toronto, Ontario
✟6,559.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Wow, it didn't take long for the gloating to start, did it? :|

Honor, why exactly are you always posting in here other than to be a nuisance? I thought you hated this pig-stye of an area?

We must assume you enjoy rolling in the slop with the rest of us then.
 
Upvote 0

Sophia7

Tall73's Wife
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2005
12,364
456
✟84,145.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wow, it didn't take long for the gloating to start, did it? :|

You'd think that Adventist Christians would have more compassion toward those of us who have left the "remnant church" since many Traditional Adventists believe that we have apostasized and are on the path to hell. Where is their concern for our souls? Instead, some of them gloat over our having been shaken out because they think it's a fulfillment of prophecy.
 
Upvote 0

SoldierOfTheKing

Christian Spenglerian
Jan 6, 2006
9,242
3,050
Kenmore, WA
✟294,368.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
RC_NewProtestants said:
The worldwide church of God changed from the top down and that caused a large split into the fundamentalist and evangelical sides. I do think the change needs to and will come from within.

You have to take into account the structure of church government. WCG's church government was strictly top down. One man, the Pastor General, had the power to single handedly re-write church doctrine. I don't believe the president of the SDA General Conference has that kind of power.

Another major difference is that WGC did not exalt Mr. Armstrong to prophet staus as the SDA's do with EGW.


"Emphatically I am NOT a prophet, in the sense of one to whom God speaks directly, revealing personally a future event to happen or new truth, or new or special instruction from God--separate from, and apart from what is contained in the Bible. And I never have claimed to be" (Tomorrow's World, June 1972).

“Don’t believe me – BELIEVE YOUR BIBLE – BELIEVE GOD!”
Herbert W. Armstrong, Plain Truth magazine, Sept. 1963, Personal pg.1

Change will not come so easily with the SDA's.


 
Upvote 0

Sophia7

Tall73's Wife
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2005
12,364
456
✟84,145.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You have to take into account the structure of church government. WCG's church government was strictly top down. One man, the Pastor General, had the power to single handedly re-write church doctrine. I don't believe the president of the SDA General Conference has that kind of power.

Another major difference is that WGC did not exalt Mr. Armstrong to prophet staus as the SDA's do with EGW.


"Emphatically I am NOT a prophet, in the sense of one to whom God speaks directly, revealing personally a future event to happen or new truth, or new or special instruction from God--separate from, and apart from what is contained in the Bible. And I never have claimed to be" (Tomorrow's World, June 1972).

“Don’t believe me – BELIEVE YOUR BIBLE – BELIEVE GOD!”
Herbert W. Armstrong, Plain Truth magazine, Sept. 1963, Personal pg.1

Change will not come so easily with the SDA's.



That's true. Jan Paulsen doesn't have the power to single-handedly rewrite church doctrine, nor is there any indication that he would want to, even if he could. I really don't think that change is likely to come from the top down in the Adventist system anyway, though. The GC is too fearful of alienating the conservative members in other parts of the world. (Of course, they could always wait until those delegates are out to lunch so that they could vote in what they want.)
 
Upvote 0

Avonia

Just look through the telescope . . .
Dec 13, 2007
1,345
36
✟16,813.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
In Relationship
You'd think that Adventist Christians would have more compassion toward those of us who have left the "remnant church" since many Traditional Adventists believe that we have apostasized and are on the path to hell. Where is their concern for our souls? Instead, some of them gloat over our having been shaken out because they think it's a fulfillment of prophecy.

Thank you for saying this! Those who lash out do so because they feel vulnerable. Challenging their belief is challenging their life.
 
Upvote 0

Sophia7

Tall73's Wife
Site Supporter
Sep 24, 2005
12,364
456
✟84,145.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you for saying this! Those who lash out do so because they feel vulnerable. Challenging their belief is challenging their life.

Yes, I agree. Some people see any challenge to their beliefs as an attack on them personally.
 
Upvote 0