Is Desmond Ford Dead!!!

[Adventist Dissident]

There are roumors going around that Desmond Ford and died. is this true. and can you provide proof. a video is said to be in exsistance of his funeral.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Why is this so shocking? Don't we all die when we get old? Sometimes before we get old?

 

[Princessdi]

ECR, this man is of some significance to the SDA church. I have forgotten what it was about, but it would indeed be of some importance that he passed away.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

ECR, this man is of some significance to the SDA church. I have forgotten what it was about, but it would indeed be of some importance that he passed away.

I know who he is... his erroneous doctrines caused a great split within the church, especially the Australian division.

I still don't see the importance of knowing if someone, unless a personal aquaintance, has passed... to each their own I guess.

 

[Diane_Windsor]

There are roumors going around that Desmond Ford and died. is this true. and can you provide proof. a video is said to be in exsistance of his funeral.

For future reference you might want to explain who the subject is in your OP. I, for one, have no idea who you are talking about. For others in my boat here is a Wikipedia article on him.

 

[Princessdi]

Hello Diane! I am Diane, also!

 

[ricker]

I know who he is... his erroneous doctrines caused a great split within the church, especially the Australian division.

I still don't see the importance of knowing if someone, unless a personal aquaintance, has passed... to each their own I guess.

I sense obvious hostility. Dr. Ford has been an important Adventist figure long before, and continuing after Glacier View. Why wouldn't his life be noteworthy?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Ford has some pretty close ties with Adventist Today so I think if he died they would report it and they have not so it is likely a rumor. That is kind of funny to read the revisionist history of saying Ford's erroneous doctrines caused a split as if it was not caused by the Administrations own actions. I mean really to fire ministers because they did not believe in a particular point of the historicist belief in a particular prophecy. It seems absurd but the church damaged a lot of lives over that. And today it is a backshelf item which the church hardly discusses and when they do it is nothing at all like it was in the previous 50 years.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

I sense obvious hostility. Dr. Ford has been an important Adventist figure long before, and continuing after Glacier View. Why wouldn't his life be noteworthy?

No hostility as I never knew the man, I only know what his teachings did to disunify the church. That's the same reason I don't care to know of his passing.... never knew the man.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

That is kind of funny to read the revisionist history of saying Ford's erroneous doctrines caused a split as if it was not caused by the Administrations own actions. I mean really to fire ministers because they did not believe in a particular point of the historicist belief in a particular prophecy. It seems absurd but the church damaged a lot of lives over that. And today it is a backshelf item which the church hardly discusses and when they do it is nothing at all like it was in the previous 50 years.

I never defended the conferences actions with what they have done to disfellowship people in the last 30 years or so. The subject was Ford, so I commented on his contribution to the church... nothing more.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I never defended the conferences actions with what they have done to disfellowship people in the last 30 years or so. The subject was Ford, so I commented on his contribution to the church... nothing more.

NO you said:

I know who he is... his erroneous doctrines caused a great split within the church, especially the Australian division.

If you think that was his contribution, not the many books and the years of training and I bet you can't name one doctrine that is erroneous that he taught. I don't agree with his views, such as forensic justification but that is hardly called an erroneous doctrine Eschatology interpretation should never be classed as doctrine. So your language was abuse of the man, but maybe you don't have enough self realization to understand that.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

If you think that was his contribution, not the many books and the years of training and I bet you can't name one doctrine that is erroneous that he taught. I don't agree with his views, such as forensic justification but that is hardly called an erroneous doctrine Eschatology interpretation should never be classed as doctrine. So your language was abuse of the man, but maybe you don't have enough self realization to understand that.

The man is a preterist and denounces one of the foundational pillars of our faith, the cleansing of the sactuary in 1844. Spin it as you will, he was teaching false doctrine to his students, the effects of which we are seeing in the church today as many that were influenced by his beliefs are in positions of authority in the church.

As far as my statement that he split the church doctrinally, that is a fact that his writings attest to. From his doctoral dissertation in '72 to the Glacier View manuscript in 1980, he has espoused theories that are so far from traditional Adventsit teaching that it cannot be merely classified as an interpretation. He follows in the line of Prescott and Froome in attempting to tear down the pillars and foundations of Adventism, plain and simple. No doubt, his influences were directly or indirectly from these earlier apostates. Satan has been working through men of influence and standing to try and take down God's remnant church.... as sister White says, it may appear as about to fall but it does not.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

The man is a preterist and denounces one of the foundational pillars of our faith, the cleansing of the sactuary in 1844...

So you don't really know anything about Ford do you, he is not a preterist. And there is no sactuary in heaven or earth that was cleansed in 1844! Learn about what you decry, it might make you a little believable.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

So you don't really know anything about Ford do you, he is not a preterist. And there is no sactuary in heaven or earth that was cleansed in 1844! Learn about what you decry, it might make you a little believable.

So, he doesn't believe that most end time prophesy occurred in the first century? I think you need to better understand his beliefs. Here is a quote from Mr. Ford regarding the little horn of Dan 8

"only Antiochus Epiphanes fulfills the chief specifications of Daniel's little born, and the vile person of Daniel 11. All other fulfillments, such as pagan and papal Rome, are fulfillments in principle rather than in detail."

Ford slyly avoids the label of a true preterist by claiming the apotelesmatic principle... a melding of preterism and historicism. However, the historic view encompasses the multiple fulfillments of prophesy so the preterist needs to create a new label to say that the true fulfillment was 1st century and maybe there are other applications in history. But the preterist view is dominant... basically a preterist in historisists clothing.

As far as the cleansing of the sanctuary, don't forget which room you are posting in. To say that it never happened and that I need to learn what I'm talking about, I'm 100% in line with traditional Adventist teaching. Accept it or reject it, it is pioneer doctrine.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

You just keep digging yourself deeper showing you don't know what you are talking about:

"Preterism is a Christian eschatological view that interprets prophecies of the Bible, especially Daniel and Revelation, as events which have already happened in the first century A.D"

His view of the little horn is the same as the majority of Christians that that section is talking about Antiochus Epiphanes, so does that make them all preterists? Of course not. (by the way Antiochus was well before the 1st century)

As for what forum this is it is the moderate/Progressive forum and we don't have to bow the knee to traditional Adventism. But of course you are wrong again because Adventists don't believe in the sanctuary being cleansed in 1844 they believe that that is when it began, as you had written "the cleansing of the sactuary in 1844". Aside from that most North American Adventists know longer even believe that idea and have tried to re-imagine what it is supposed to be

By the way pioneer doctrine was also that the cleansing was the second coming...guess that one did not work out so well, then again it depends on what you mean by pioneer doctrine, As what became SDA took a lot of Millerite terms and changed their meanings. It none the less does not make them truth anymore then the previous Millerite interpretation.

 

[Adventtruth]

So you don't really know anything about Ford do you, he is not a preterist. And there is no sactuary in heaven or earth that was cleansed in 1844! Learn about what you decry, it might make you a little believable.

Amen RC!

 

[Adventtruth]

So, he doesn't believe that most end time prophesy occurred in the first century? I think you need to better understand his beliefs. Here is a quote from Mr. Ford regarding the little horn of Dan 8


Ford slyly avoids the label of a true preterist by claiming the apotelesmatic principle... a melding of preterism and historicism. However, the historic view encompasses the multiple fulfillments of prophesy so the preterist needs to create a new label to say that the true fulfillment was 1st century and maybe there are other applications in history. But the preterist view is dominant... basically a preterist in historisists clothing.

As far as the cleansing of the sanctuary, don't forget which room you are posting in. To say that it never happened and that I need to learn what I'm talking about, I'm 100% in line with traditional Adventist teaching. Accept it or reject it, it is pioneer doctrine.

Hahahaha...looks like you are the one who forgot what room you are in...LOL!

AT

 

[JohnMarsten]

I know who he is... his erroneous doctrines caused a great split within the church, especially the Australian division.

I still don't see the importance of knowing if someone, unless a personal aquaintance, has passed... to each their own I guess.

why judge?? you say erroneous doctrines... but you dont know that for sure!!

especially the sanctuary theory...

lets admit for a second that the investigative judgment is for real, what good does this theory do?? how does it help you?? does it change anything at all??
I mean compare the situation of before and during the investigative judgment, does it change anything at all?? I mean is one to be judged stricter or lighter during the investigation than before?? what does it change??

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

why judge?? you say erroneous doctrines... but you dont know that for sure!!

especially the sanctuary theory...

lets admit for a second that the investigative judgment is for real, what good does this theory do?? how does it help you?? does it change anything at all??
I mean compare the situation of before and during the investigative judgment, does it change anything at all?? I mean is one to be judged stricter or lighter during the investigation than before?? what does it change??

Ford was an Adventist, and one of the pillars of our faith is the investigative judgement or the cleansing of the sancturay, the beginning of the atonement ministry. If you don't want to believe it, that your perogative but teaching the youth of the denomination this is another thing entirely. Would a Baptist theologian be allowed to teach in their seminaries that baptism by immersion wasn't necessary and that sprinkling was wholly acceptable?? I don't think so....

As far as the IJ and what it means, it shows us the time in which we are living, this final dispensation just before Christ comes. Even though the disciples didn't understand it at the time, Jesus was very specific as to when the time of the end would be... after the falling away of the faithful and the man of sin was revealed, another doctrine the church is distancing itself from.

Tell me this, if there was no importance to the prophesy of the sanctuary being cleansed after 2300 years, then why was it given. I believe that every jot and tittle of the Word has significance, most we understand and a little that hasn't been revealed yet.

 

[Pythons]

It appears Ford is still alive however he must be fairly old given the date the following video was aired on National T.V.....
....He looks pretty spry in the following telecast however this was many years ago.
....Ford was the authority on the i.j. for the SDA church and when he rejected it the SDA church freaked.

Seventh-day Adventist - Desmond Ford, and Walter Rae interview Part 1 of 5 - YouTube