Idea discarded!!!!!!!!!!!!!A proposal regarding conflicts in the Adventist section

[tall73]

The proposal is not going to work. I think it is a bit too complicated. Also, those who wish to who are Adventists could just debate in the main forum anyway.

 

[reddogs]

Since I am literally the 'bull in the china shop', I will give an answer and see how it comes out. God is very fierce to defend his truth and Christ did come down hard on the Pharisees and the moneychangers that knew in their hearts they were doing wrong and still continued in their evil ways. You have to test everything when it comes to the divine truth, those posting here are 2 classes those that know and those that want to know. If they have picked up a wrong idea, incorrect belief or doctrine, they must run it past the body of believers to see if it is holds true and is correct, it needs to be tested with the guidance of the spirit and then use scripture alone to verify. Logic and rational and history can then be applied, and we can see whether it stands the test. Most importantly if there is error or danger in false prophets, religions, leaders, or cult we must make the others aware. Then there is also the poster who do not come to seek understanding or truth, who only want to confuse, misdirect, and are agents of evil and must be exposed.


Red

 

[Adventist Dissident]

i guess I am in favor of the proposal of Tall73. some of the issues are for the more mature in the faith. I am really concerned with the with the lack of generosity of spirit that occurs when ALL or MOST of the threads posted by some are of a controversal nature. either those people have a problem or we need to have a place for them to discuss. It makes life miserable for the rest of us. controversial discussions are for discussion not debate. debate is about winning and losing, discussion is about understanding and learning. It seems that there is a lack of people who want to learn but only teach. That is a problem.

 

[Jimlarmore]

I think open debate among adventists is ok as long as it stays within the fundamental beliefs of our church, however, if someone who claims to be adventist challenges the very validity of scriptures or the literalness of its' historicity then I think that debate on those issues needs to go to the denominational debate forum.

Just my two cents worth.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[reddogs]

Amen

 

[freeindeed2]

Since I am literally the 'bull in the china shop', I will give an answer and see how it comes out. God is very fierce to defend his truth and Christ did come down hard on the Pharisees and the moneychangers that knew in their hearts they were doing wrong and still continued in their evil ways. You have to test everything when it comes to the divine truth, those posting here are 2 classes those that know and those that want to know. If they have picked up a wrong idea, incorrect belief or doctrine, they must run it past the body of believers to see if it is holds true and is correct, it needs to be tested with the guidance of the spirit and then use scripture alone to verify. Logic and rational and history can then be applied, and we can see whether it stands the test. Most importantly if there is error or danger in false prophets, religions, leaders, or cult we must make the others aware. Then there is also the poster who do not come to seek understanding or truth, who only want to confuse, misdirect, and are agents of evil and must be exposed.


Red

Hey Red, which body of believers are you referring to here? The larger, universal body of Christ, known as God's Church where Christ is the head (all Christians everywhere), or only the body of SDAism (especially those in North America)?

 

[freeindeed2]

First of all, please note I am NOT a moderator in the Adventist section. I moderate in the theology section. This is just an idea I had to help with the ongoing debate in the Adventist forum.

The congregational forums are primarily for the purpose of fellowship. As of late we have had a lot of debate threads. This is not the primary purpose of the forum here, though between Adventists it is not forbidden. However it can also be a stumbling block to those young in the faith . And some just don't appreciate that kind of thread. It also leads to accusations that certain members are not really Adventists because they engage on debate on Adventist teachings.

I would propose that those wishing to debate start threads in Denominanal Specific Theology. It is a debate forum for discussion of theology from a specific denominational perspective.

This would also allow former Adventists or those interested in Adventism to participate.

We could have one sticky thread in the Adventist section called "Debate Adventist Theology." Posts in this thread would be links to discussions in Denominational Specific Theology that deal with Adventist issues.

That way we leave the main forum for its main purpose, can still discuss issues that matter to us, and open it up to anyone on the boards interested.

It also keeps the discussion out of the heavy traffic of the main GT forum.

Weigh in with your opinions please.

Hi tall73. I think it's a great idea for those like me that wish to discuss SDA doctrines/teachings/beliefs but don't have an SDA icon (because we were honest, even though our names are still on the books). For me it's the culture I knew and was raised in for 35 years and worked for for 10 years. I understand SDA's wanting to keep their forums clear of anyone who would disagree with them, it makes it easier to discuss among like-minded SDA's (a relative term). It would give a place for those willing to discuss/debate/defend (apologetics) the truth of the Bible as it relates to SDA beliefs.

My 2 cents.

 

[g85]

I agree with Tall73... I believe its a good idea... Every1 could fellowship in the SDA main section, that would be nice and could be fun!

 

[freeindeed2]

"My purpose", as you say, is to lift up Jesus and Him crucified as our Savior, Redeemer, and Lord. The body of believers are all around you and they all have the same Spirit, who is the Spirit of Christ, living in them. That's what gives the body unity...HE lives in us. The Scriptures pointed to Christ, God's final and ultimate Word, the exact representation of Himself.



May Jesus be lifted up!

 

[Adventist Dissident]

I think open debate among adventists is ok as long as it stays within the fundamental beliefs of our church, however, if someone who claims to be adventist challenges the very validity of scriptures or the literalness of its' historicity then I think that debate on those issues needs to go to the denominational debate forum.

Just my two cents worth.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

The problem with this quote it that there is discussion with in the SDA community as to the validity of the interpation of some of our belief, the historical accuracy of some of the happenings. if every one agree with what you say then there is no debate or discussion. it is just an affirmation club.

There are a number of branches in the SDA Chruch

The
a. Historics - pre-1888,Christ Had a fallen nature, righetous by the law. ect. EGW prophet. 1844 christ entered the sancturary for pre advent judgment, lifestyle important, sabbath, state of the dead important
b. Conservatives/traditional - Post 1888, Righteousness by faith, 1844 Christ entered the sancturary or PAJ EGW inspired,lifestyle important, sabbath state of the dead importan.
c. Evanglicals - post 1888, 1844 something/may or may not have happened, question the pre-Advent Judgemnt. Lifestyle important. Salvation by grace through faith. dicipleship is important. Sabbath stil binding, state of the dead. personal salvation is most important.
d. Liberals - question the validity of the bible, the historical reality of the bible is 6000 years old and some stories are myths. Social concerns, lifestlye not nessarily important.
E. Cultural - grew us sda but not really christian.

With those branches there is going to be conflict and disagreement. I just don't think that some understand that

the sabbath, state of the dead and the second coming are what make us Adventist. the rest is up for discussion.
When the Historics and the traditionalist can come to grips with that not every one who disagrees is a rebel, but may have legitmate question, and are not disloyal. the SDA doctrines are not lock tight in there interpation,neither is prophecy. the SDA postion has changed many time on prophecy. Most Historics and traditionalist don't know that. and need to be more gracious and don't attact people personally and don't take it personally if some one disagrees.

 

[reddogs]

True, but there is only one Gods truth, so we must come together and reach for it and become as one, Gods remnant, ready for his Second Coming......

 

[Adventist Dissident]

True, but there is only one Gods truth, so we must come together and reach for it and become as one, Gods remnant, ready for his Second Coming......

true redgod, but you assume you have it. your preception and understanding of truth is what is in question. the different groups are at different places in there understanding of truth. The problem with your faction is that they think that there positon is solid and won't even take a look at the information that contradicts it and give legitimatie response. truth is about what is real. you use facts to determine that, different group use different facts. untli you invalidate there facts you can't even beging to get them to look at your facts.

 

[reddogs]

Sorry, I claimed nothing of the sort....

Gods truth is what it is, we must, reading the testimonies of Jesus Christ and with the Holy Spirits guidance, seek to gain understanding and increase in knowlege of his truth......

 

[Dasdream]

it's a collision of opinion. We are all SDA's however we have different views on things. I guess what we need to do is stop questioning the Bible and start questioning our faith.

 

[reddogs]

Sounds a bit drastic like throwing out the baby with the bath water, if we have our faith firmly anchored in Jesus Christ, not mans fables and traditions, all is well. Gods truth doesnt change and we can rely on his scripture. That is the telling sign, whether it is of God or of the evil one, when they try to throw out the scriptures (whether the OT, the Commandments, the Sabbath...) as the truth in it condemns them.

 

[DrStupid_Ben]

I like the idea of this proposal. Maybe a sub-forum specific for discussion of issues, leaving the main area for some well needed fellowship.

It's hard to imagine that there was a time when all Christian's agreed with each other - even Peter and Paul went at it. Maybe at pentecost? I'm quite comfortable with the fact that I don't agree 100% with all SDA's. It actually kinda affirms me. In the world of human's, we can only approach such absolutes as "Truth" through a limited understanding.
Most of us agree that perfection is impossible for humans, I also believe that intellectual perfection is impossible for humans as well. (Read what Fritz Guy has to say about that in Thinking Theologically - a book that everyone here should read, sold at all Adventist bookstores)

 

[tall73]

A sub-forum is a near impossibility at this point. It takes forever to get one through, and there is a back-log of months.

Moreover a sub-forum would only include Adventists, not formers, not interests, etc. in the discussion.

The idea here is that we work with the resources we currently have under the rules to try to make both sides a bit happier.

 

[Sophia7]

Yes, I think this proposal would alleviate a lot of the tensions in our forum and also give people who otherwise wouldn't be able to debate an appropriate venue to discuss Adventist beliefs while avoiding some of the heavy traffic of GT.

 

[Jimlarmore]

I'm willing to open pandora's box here and challenge any adventist or ex-adventist to debate the validity and historicity of the scriptures on a denominational specific forum. Let me know if you are game for it. One last question is this debate to be conducted in the denomination specific theology forum which is a sub forum of GT or denominational debate forum a forum all it's own?

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Strongcuppajoe]

I am in favor of this action I think it is needed. the demoninational forums should be for fellowship and learning ONLY! A place of debate between the denominational lines would be a good thing I think

Robert