Investigative Judgment

[Jon0388g]

Ha!!!

Considering the many people TSDA's have ruined in the church with thier spiritual manipulation and fear-mongering, I am letting the fundamentalists off lightly!

Come and talk to me about kindness when you read how those at the Revival Sermons and the Great Controversy website malign and trash Evangelical, Progressive and Liberal Adventists. Come and talk to me about kindness when you see the devastation that the right-wing causes in Adventism with thier EGW bludgeoning and gleeful destruction of assurance of salvation. Come and talk to me about kindness when you have looked in the pleading faces of impressionable, gullible new converts in the SDA church who are targeted by the Adventist Al Qaeda or legalistic independent ministries and offshoots and spiritually abused to the nth degree. Come and talk to me about kindness when you see innocent people in the church judged and condemned by the 'standards police' because of what they wear, watch, listen to, or eat. Come and talk to me about kindness when you see people discouraged and driven away from the church by heretical perfectionism.

Was Paul calm and controlled when he confronted the circumcision party and thier legalistic burdening of those who did not know better? Not even close.

Neither will the ultra-conservative SDA Pharisee party be spared my wrath.

Do you conservatives even have a clue? Why not go on the former Adventist forum and have a look at some of the rotten fruit your corrupt, anti-gospel spew is creating?

They won't be spared your wrath? Who do you think you are?

"A fool's anger is known at once, but a prudent man conceals dishonor." Proverbs 12:16

In the meantime, save your patronizing attempts at trying to discipline me as if I were were child. Your condescending words will not take attention away from the fact that what I type is true and the issues and the need for reform in the SDA church will no longer be ignored.

"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man is he who listens to counsel." Proverbs 12:15


Jon

 

[thecountrydoc]

Hello Nighteternal,

Just some observations from a fairly well educated old country boy.

There is little doubt that you enjoy "verbal gymnastics." It is also obvious that you hold your own opinions in very high esteem. Having said that, it would seem that you haven't studied a grat deal about the attitude and nature of Christ. Naturally thats just a guess. I would not want sit in judgement of you as it would seem that you you have of others.

I must ask one question; Is it possible that your screen name, Nighteternal, has been transposed? Is it possible that it should be Eternalnight? Or perhaps Eternal Darkiness?

Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc

Lord put your arms around my sholders and your hand over my mouth!

 

[NightEternal]

___

 

[thecountrydoc]

Hello once again Nighteternal,

I hadn't planned on returning to this thread because a confused mind always says no.
However you said:

"I am the TSDA's worst nightmare: A lean, mean SDA Evangelical machine with nothing to lose and a mind of his own who is not afraid to face the issues."

With the above statement, you have valiated my previous post. However, maybe, just maybe, I'm not a "TSDA," because you're certainly not MY worst nightmare.

You would do well to consider that it is just posible that you may indeed have something to lose. Eternal life.

Respectfully,
Doc

 

[NightEternal]

More attempted fear-mongering and spiritual abuse.

Is it a reflexive reaction by now for the fundamentalists or perhaps just a mindless mantra?

Regardless, the tactic is old and stale. I fear for my salvation about as much as I fear as being eaten by a big, green alien.

You cannot take my assurance away, so don't waste your time trying.

Thanks.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Speaking of verbal gymnastics don't you just love it when someone seeks to imply the evil of someone else in the form of a question? That seems to be the most amazing form of verbal gymnastics, and you can't say that they said the other person was evil because they were just asking a question. Then to top it off they say "respectfully" sort of a twist of the verbal gymnastic knife it seems.

I must ask one question; Is it possible that your screen name, Nighteternal, has been transposed? Is it possible that it should be Eternalnight? Or perhaps Eternal Darkiness?

Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc

 

[NightEternal]

Subtle and cunning yet typical. It appears new material will not be forthcoming from the conservatives after all.

The first reaction from people who are frightened of an honest, serious questioning of thier faith paradigm is to go into defensive attack mode.

Nonetheless, questions will continue to be asked and answers sought whether the TSDA's like it or not.

Progress marches on, and those who try to prevent or fight it will be crushed under its wheels.

 

[annie1speed]

Pardon my ignorance. Maybe I should be able to figure this one out but, what is TSDA?

 

[woobadooba]

Pardon my ignorance. Maybe I should be able to figure this one out but, what is TSDA?

My guess is that it means: Traditional Seventh Day Adventist

 

[Adventist Dissident]

Pardon my ignorance. Maybe I should be able to figure this one out but, what is TSDA?

Here are the catagories that I have come accross in my disscussions. Most of these have the 27/28 fundemntals in common. I have listed the major discinction of each groups. most of these will ascribe to a biblical lifestyle

All but the liberas have these areas in commom that make them "adventits"

1. Sabbbath
2. State of the dead
3. the visible second coming.
4. Historical method of dating.
5. Sancturary in heaven although what is happening and when it happened is up for debate.
6. spritual gifts

The divisions occur on a couple of line

1. the investigative judgement dan 8:14
2. the role of ellen white
3. Sabbath keeping - mainly the liberals will have a problem with looser sabbath keeping.
4. creation - when and how it happened. the liberal again will be the most extreme.
a. young earth-young universe,
b. young earth -old universe,
c. old earth -old universe. - usually liberal

5. lifestyle issues. -liberals being most loose , some say non christian too
6. The nature of christ.

you are the following if you meet the following creiteria

T/HSDA - traditional /historic SDA - this was the main-line body until 1950's question on doctrine. Now they are the independant ministery crowd.
a. post fall human nature of christ
b. last generation theology
c. characer perfecton
d. view of SDA remnant chruch of prophecy

CSDA -conservative SDA -main line sda
a. pre-fall human nature of christ
b. born again /no last genreation theology
c. remnenat chruch of prophecy

ESDA -evanglical sda
a. pre-fall
b. born again
c. EGW devotional/pastoral not prophetic and authoritive.
d. no investigative judgement.
e. not remenat chruch of prophecy, but special and most accurate view of scripture.

PSDA/RSDA- progressive SDA/Reformed SDA depending on the name they choose
a. pre-fall
b. born again
c. EGW devotional/pastoral not prophetic and authoritive.
d. no investigative judgement.
e. no 2300 days
f. possibly antioucs as the little horn.

LSDA - liberal SDA
a. post fall human nature of Christ
b. down play life style
c. old earth creationism
d. nothing unique of SDA chruch
e. no disicipleship
f. no EGW was not a prophet.

EX-sda
a. still christian
b. not christian.

 

[Jimlarmore]

Quote by Jimlarmore: NightEternal,

How do you reconcile the verses in the Bible that calls for man to confess and repent if it's not a necessary step in the plan of salvation?

Confession and repentance is necessary for our spiritual growth and a closer relationship with Christ. We are not justified by our confession or repentance any more than we are justified by keeping the moral law. These are mere outworkings of the soul that has been saved.

Salvation is an accomplished fact, something that is secured apart from anything we do.

I think nearly the entire Bible makes it very clear that we must consciously choose to be saved. God does not wish that any will be lost but unfortunately many will be because they choose death and sin over salvation and life. Salvation is contingent on a mental decision we must all make. Even though Christ has done all of the hard work that really matters we must use our free wills to choose Him. We must do this daily as the work of sanctification progresses.

I believe in righteousness by faith but I also believe God gave each of us a free will to choose which path we can travel.

And once we have made that choice, our destiny is sealed. Someone who has truly accepted Christ as thier righteousness by faith alone is ideally committed to that path and that choice.

Again my brother we must differ because the what the Bible says. The Bible says that a person has a free will to go back to the dark side if they wish. Many examples are in the Bible where this happened. Some came back to God and some didn't.

That puts us ( mankind ) intimately involved in the plan of salvation and each of us has a part to play in our salvation.

No, I categorically reject this statement.

Do you have a Biblical reason why you reject free will and a conscious decision to be saved? Please give it to us.

I was tempted by your philosophy once until I read what the whole Bible says on this subject.

What you mean is you once felt compelled to embrace the pure theology of salvation as outlined by Paul and the Reformers, but you sold it out for convoluted, confused SDA dogma.

How sad.

I follow the truth that is in the Bible. I would hope you would as well. The SDA church has nothing to do with my decision to embrace the truth. If I could find a church that follows closer to the truth than they do I would be going there.

Christ indeed paid all for our salvation but He also says " I stand at the door and knock" . We must choose to let Him change our lives.

And what does this at all have to do with our salvation? Why do TSDAs insist on making our spiritual growth and maturity salvational?

I would say you may not understand or you have chosen to reject Biblical truth on what the Bible says concerning free will and God not forcing salvation.

I will tell you how. A fundamantal Catholic understanding of sanctification, whereby sanctification is not an accomplished fact but a process whereby we strive towards a saved condition.

Jesus Himself told His disciples to take up their crosses and follow Him, this was symbolic of dying to the old man of sin we all have. Paul said he did this daily as he walked in the new covenant christian life.

This must happen daily. You can call that works if you want, but the Bible gives it too us as a guide line to eternal life.

Certainly these are works and we are commanded by the Scriptures to manifest the fruits of the spirit in our lives. We were created for good works.

These works, however, are a love respose to the fact that we are saved, not a means to an end for salvation.

The 'guideline' to eternal life is accepting Christ as your Savior. Period.

You just said it we must accept Christ. That takes a mental action, works? If you want to call it that.

What you have accepted is a deception that will lead you into a license to sin with impunity.

Oh, not this again! Why does this ridiculous charge keeps making an appearance? I have been an advocate of the Reformation gospel for over 20 years and I do not 'sin with impunity', so let's quit with the judging and speculating on the lifestyle of others, shall we?

Yes, I trust in Christ alone as my surety and righteousness, so I must be out picking up prostitutes, watching porn, smoking crack and slamming back tequila shooters, right?

COME ON already! Enough!

Enough will be when some of your folks stop preaching that our behavior is irrelevant in a Christian walk. What we do does indeed matter to our Savior.

With no confession or repentence? That is a sure fire recipe for eternal death.

More fear-mongering and attempted psychological spiritual manipulation. Typical TSDA tactic used to bend others to thier doctrinal will. A prime example of the way cults operate in thier brainwashing techniques.

Nope, not going to work with me. Try someone else.

I don't want to argue with you my friend. I just want you to examine your heart and read your Bible for what it really says. Righteousness by faith is very true and irrefuteable in the Holy word, however, this new teaching concerning grace can lead some right back into sin all over again. That is what the enemy wants.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[NightEternal]

[/i][/b]

I think nearly the entire Bible makes it very clear that we must consciously choose to be saved. God does not wish that any will be lost but unfortunately many will be because they choose death and sin over salvation and life. Salvation is contingent on a mental decision we must all make. Even though Christ has done all of the hard work that really matters we must use our free wills to choose Him.

Okay, I can assent to the above. Of course one must make a concious choice to accept Christ as thier Savior. If this is the 'work' you had in mind, I agree.

We must do this daily as the work of sanctification progresses.

I disagree. Sanctification is an accomplished fact, not a process or a means to an end. This is pure EGW dogma. Dying to ourselves daily has nothing to do with our already secured salvation.

Again my brother we must differ because of what the Bible says. The Bible says that a person has a free will to go back to the dark side if they wish. Many examples are in the Bible where this happened. Some came back to God and some didn't.

I agree with this as well. One can choose to forfeit thier salvation by openly and willingly turning thier backs on what Christ offers. However, there is still the oppourtunity for that person to once again profess Christ, as Jesus has not gone anywhere nor changed how He regards the individual. I do not believe in 'once saved always saved' as I have been incorrectly charged with in the past. However, neither do I believe that our salvation is hanging by a thread and in danger 450 times a day like the traditional doctrine of the IJ teaches.

Do you have a Biblical reason why you reject free will and a conscious decision to be saved? Please give it to us.

I guess I misunderstood what you meant by us 'having a part to play in our salvation.' In the past this has been rendered a loaded statement by the ultra-conservatives, and it is usually code for 'the part we play in partnership with Christ to reach an exalted state of sinlessness'. If you only meant the free will we excercise in making a concious choice ONLY then do I agree.

I follow the truth that is in the Bible. I would hope you would as well. The SDA church has nothing to do with my decision to embrace the truth. If I could find a church that follows closer to the truth than they do I would be going there.

I would encourage you to read the Geoffrey Paxton article and find out what an Evangelical outsider has observed in regards to the influence of Rome in the SDA understanding of salvation.

http://www.presenttruthmag.com/7dayadventist/shaking/index.html

It is dead-on, and it diagnoses the problems with the fundamental misunderstanding of the Gospel the SDA church has.

Too bad it took an outsider to say what needed saying, but when Ford arrived at the same conclusion he was rewarded with denominational banishment.

I would say you may not understand or you have chosen to reject Biblical truth on what the Bible says concerning free will and God not forcing salvation.

I agree God does not force salvation. I disgree that salvation is contingent our growth process. We allow Him to change our lives because He has saved us, not 'to make us fit to save'. But even this maturing process is not glorification where we are rendered completely sinless in the twinkling of an eye.

Jesus Himself told His disciples to take up their crosses and follow Him, this was symbolic of dying to the old man of sin we all have. Paul said he did this daily as he walked in the new covenant christian life.

I agree this will happen in the Christian walk. I disagree that our salvation is in any way conditional upon our doing this.

You just said it we must accept Christ. That takes a mental action, works? If you want to call it that.

I agree. Again, the term 'works' has been so loaded by the fundamentalists that I assumed you meant something you did not.

Enough will be when some of your folks stop preaching that our behavior is irrelevant in a Christian walk. What we do does indeed matter to our Savior.

If some of my liberal brothers and sisters are engaging in sinful lifestyles, I leave that between them and God. Let it be known I do not agree and they are bringing disrepute and dishonor to the evangelical wing of the church. But I would submit that it has more to do with the individual person and an inability to cope with vices than a result of 'permissive' theology. I have known many conservatives who were wife beaters and child abusers.

I do not believe that our behaviour does not matter to God. What I dispute is the fundamentalist tendency to portray God as driven into a rage by our sin (as if God is somehow taken by suprise and outraged by the things that our fallen, carnal natures sometimes cause us to do) resulting in Him gleefully and savagely ripping our salvation away until we 'get it right', much like a parent snatching away a child's favourite toy as punishment. God knows we are sinful beings and He remembers we are dust. He is not swayed by our behavior, good or bad, and we cannot influence His favor by how 'good' we are. We cannot make Him love us any more or less than He already does.

I reject and repudiate the tyrannical and petty god of the ultra-conservatives.

I don't want to argue with you my friend. I just want you to examine your heart and read your Bible for what it really says.

Why the implication that I do not understand what the Bible 'really' says? As if 'through grace alone by faith alone in Christ alone' is somehow antithetical to the Gospel? And what has my heart to do with any of this, unless you are prepared to judge my motivations and innermost intentions?

Righteousness by faith is very true and irrefuteable in the Holy word,
however, this new teaching concerning grace can lead some right back into sin all over again.

We are all 'in sin', no matter what we do, good or otherwise. We are all sinful and in a hopeless condition.

There is never a danger of having 'too much' grace, regardless if Adventism wants to treat as some indulgence that must be provided in moderation.

Also, grace unmerited and given freely is not a 'new' thing.

That is what the enemy wants.

I know very well what the enemy wants. I see his tactics displayed by the ultra-conservatives every day.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

****

 

[annie1speed]

Icedragon thanks for that detailed list of descriptions. Nother question: What is pre-fall, post-fall?

Thanks

 

[Jon0388g]

Icedragon thanks for that detailed list of descriptions. Nother question: What is pre-fall, post-fall?

Thanks

If I may

Pre-fall refers to the condition of human nature before the fall of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. God made them perfect, in His image (Genesis 1:27) without any tendency to sin.

Post-fall is the direct opposite: the nature inherited after the Fall by humans due to the sin committed in Eden. It basically infers the tendecy to sin, ie, a sinful nature.

Hope that helps,

Jon

 

[annie1speed]

Thanks Jon.

 

[Sophia7]

Icedragon thanks for that detailed list of descriptions. Nother question: What is pre-fall, post-fall?

Thanks

The controversy concerns whether Christ had a fallen or unfallen human nature. The Adventist Church does not take an official position on it, but it can be a heated issue of debate within the church. Here are a couple of articles from the Adventist Biblical Research Institute, presenting the two opposing viewpoints:

http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/humanatureChristunfallen.pdf
http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents/humanatureChristfallen.pdf

Here is the introductory statement from the first article, summarizing some of the points of controversy:

Seventh-day Adventist theology presents two alternative views concerning the human nature of Jesus Christ. Christ had a sinful human nature because He had a sinful mother like the rest of us, or He had a sinless human nature because, unlike the rest of us, He had God for His Father.1 The first view stresses His identity with man; the second focuses on His uniqueness as man. Some try to bridge the two by saying Jesus had a sinful physical nature but His human birth was like our new birth—born of the Spirit. They say that Jesus began in Bethlehem, where we begin when born again. Others suggest that the parallel breaks down under investigation. They believe that Jesus was both sinful and sinless in human nature, sinful only in that He took sin-weakened physical nature but sinless in that He never became sin in birth.

Are we simply left to take our pick? Does it really matter which view we choose? Is this merely academic hair splitting, with no practical meaning?

 

[thecountrydoc]

Hi Annie1speed,


You have ask some much needed questions. However, while the answers that have been given may indeed state what appears to simply be a list of facts, those facts are of very little practical value unless we consider those facts in the light of logic.


There is one major point that you have ask about that has been raised by others, without anyone giving a logical, well reasoned answer and that point/question is the 'nature' of JesusChrist; was it pre or post fall?

The reason that I say it is a "major" point is that the correct answer is vital to the plan of salvation and what was accomplished through Jesus death on the cross.

Please understand that this is a question that can not be understood without the use of logic. Before I address the original question of Christ nature let me explain why the use of logic is so vital to the understanding of Scripture.

When God created all things during creation week, it should be noted that man was created in the very image of God. It should also be noted that God created man with the ability to communicate with his Creator. What allowed man to have that direct communication with His Creator was the mind. Without the mind there could be no power of choice (the ability to use free will), to love God. We might call the mind our 'communications center' with God. When we look at the wonders of creation it becomes quite clear that our Creator is a being of great logic. If our Creator uses logic, and we are created in His image, it is also logical that we are intended to use logic. Unfortunately with the degradation of man by sin the use of logic has also decreassed.


Now lets consider the role that Christ played here on this earth, and why he had to come in human form, and the "nature" that was required to fulfill that requirement.

If I may paraphase; Satan had claimed that God was unfair for requiring His created beings to live by standards that were only possible to live up to if they, the created beings, were also gods. The puropse for Christ to dwell anoung mankind in human form was to disprove Satan's accusations.


If Christ had had the unfair advantage of divine attributes in any way, Satan would have been able to once again accuse God of being unfair, and that he, Satan, was right and God was wrong, proving to the universe that created beings could not live up to God's standards. Therefore Christ had to live on this earth, using absolutly none of His divinity, yet live a perfect, sinless, life. How was that possible if he had all of the same human attributes that you and I have you ask? The answer is both simple and logical. Jesus Christ used something thats available to each and every one of us today according to His Word, the Bible. He used a complete and total faith in God the Father. We are told of the seemingly impossible things we could do, and the life we could lead, if we had "faith as a grain of mustard seed." Christ had to use faith to acheive His redemption from this world of sin just as you and I must use faith to lay hold of the same promises that Christ did. You see, even though He was divine, He used none of His divinity to acheive a perfect life. He came into this world with the same nature that we are born with. Ergo, logic tells us that He had to have to have a "post fall nature."

When the unfallen angels and the rest of the universe saw that God's standards could be met by a created being, and yet Satan hated God so much that he would take the life of the very Son of God on the cross, the entire universe could see that God had been right and Satan had been wrong from the start. God's charector was vindicated and our salvation assured through the grace that was offered through Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross.


I pray that this may be of help in understanding this topic. If you have additional questions please feel free to contact me at any time.


May God put His loving arms around you, the Holy Angels protect you, and the Holy Spirit guide you as you study God's Word.


Your brother in Christ,
Doc

 

[Jon0388g]

Hi Annie1speed,


You have ask some much needed questions. However, while the answers that have been given may indeed state what appears to simply be a list of facts, those facts are of very little practical value unless we consider those facts in the light of logic.


There is one major point that you have ask about that has been raised by others, without anyone giving a logical, well reasoned answer and that point/question is the 'nature' of JesusChrist; was it pre or post fall?

The reason that I say it is a "major" point is that the correct answer is vital to the plan of salvation and what was accomplished through Jesus death on the cross.

Please understand that this is a question that can not be understood without the use of logic. Before I address the original question of Christ nature let me explain why the use of logic is so vital to the understanding of Scripture.

When God created all things during creation week, it should be noted that man was created in the very image of God. It should also be noted that God created man with the ability to communicate with his Creator. What allowed man to have that direct communication with His Creator was the mind. Without the mind there could be no power of choice (the ability to use free will), to love God. We might call the mind our 'communications center' with God. When we look at the wonders of creation it becomes quite clear that our Creator is a being of great logic. If our Creator uses logic, and we are created in His image, it is also logical that we are intended to use logic. Unfortunately with the degradation of man by sin the use of logic has also decreassed.


Now lets consider the role that Christ played here on this earth, and why he had to come in human form, and the "nature" that was required to fulfill that requirement.

If I may paraphase; Satan had claimed that God was unfair for requiring His created beings to live by standards that were only possible to live up to if they, the created beings, were also gods. The puropse for Christ to dwell anoung mankind in human form was to disprove Satan's accusations.


If Christ had had the unfair advantage of divine attributes in any way, Satan would have been able to once again accuse God of being unfair, and that he, Satan, was right and God was wrong, proving to the universe that created beings could not live up to God's standards. Therefore Christ had to live on this earth, using absolutly none of His divinity, yet live a perfect, sinless, life. How was that possible if he had all of the same human attributes that you and I have you ask? The answer is both simple and logical. Jesus Christ used something thats available to each and every one of us today according to His Word, the Bible. He used a complete and total faith in God the Father. We are told of the seemingly impossible things we could do, and the life we could lead, if we had "faith as a grain of mustard seed." Christ had to use faith to acheive His redemption from this world of sin just as you and I must use faith to lay hold of the same promises that Christ did. You see, even though He was divine, He used none of His divinity to acheive a perfect life. He came into this world with the same nature that we are born with. Ergo, logic tells us that He had to have to have a "post fall nature."

When the unfallen angels and the rest of the universe saw that God's standards could be met by a created being, and yet Satan hated God so much that he would take the life of the very Son of God on the cross, the entire universe could see that God had been right and Satan had been wrong from the start. God's charector was vindicated and our salvation assured through the grace that was offered through Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross.


I pray that this may be of help in understanding this topic. If you have additional questions please feel free to contact me at any time.


May God put His loving arms around you, the Holy Angels protect you, and the Holy Spirit guide you as you study God's Word.


Your brother in Christ,
Doc

The question most people follow up this view with is: does this imply that if a baby is born which manages to achieve what Jesus did (perfect obedience), would this being not need grace for salvation?

Jon

 

[annie1speed]

Thank you Doc. Over the past year I have learned much about the Adventist faith from a precious Adventist friend. The church of Christ and SDA have many beliefs in common. I invite you to visit the restoration movement forum and learn about our beliefs as I continue to learn about yours. Thanks for letting me hang out in your backyard.

Annie

 

[thecountrydoc]

Hi once again Annie1speed,

Thanks for the invitation. I will stop by. I'm quite familar with the Church of Christ because many of my realitives were once Church of Christ. Please feel free to ask any question on any topic or subject that may come to mind. I look forward to talking with you more.

Your friend and brother in Christ,
Doc