Oops, so is it that we are not to debate or not post?

HoneyDew · Oct 26, 2005

StormyOne said:
You have been here for not quite a week, and in this short time you have determined that some here are obsessed with one issue in particular, irrational, prone to fight all the time, snide, insulting, false accusers, not capable of rational bible discussions and unresponsive to your pertinent questions... You have also concluded that the split here is needed because of this experience you had in the Reformed/Progressive forums..... alrighty then...

Thank you for sharing your assessment of the place.... I pray your future experiences here are more pleasing than your recent ones.....

You know, there wasn't even a "good evening or a "good morning." Just this list of queries from a person who just joined and never even introduced themselves to the general forum. Add that to the general jittery mood, and voila! So there you have it.

dezzie1180 · Oct 26, 2005

I've never stated whether I'm a progressive or traditional, well because no one ever really asked me, where I stand on the issues. So I will clarify, I'm a traditionalist.
I enjoy reading the various posts, I don't get involved in argumenative debates,and I try to stay away from negative situations, or at least situations in which I deem negative. I've enjoyed CF so far, and I enjoy talking with other Adventists. So hopefully this forum will remain a positive place.

BondGirl · Nov 1, 2005

Is this all over now? Has this been rectified?

I hope so....

TrustAndObey · Nov 1, 2005

Personal animosity is absolutely resolved. The fact that we still differ on beliefs and haven't figured out how to discuss our differences in a peaceful way....maybe not so much.

I love my brother Stormy (and everyone else here) but it doesn't change the fact that our beliefs are still so different that it almost seems like we're of different denominations sometimes....hence the continued split sub-forums.

StormyOne · Nov 1, 2005

BondGirl said:
Is this all over now? Has this been rectified?

I hope so....

yep... its a done deal... big bubbles no troubles....

moicherie · Nov 2, 2005

What is the traditionalist Adventist view on things (the Progressive one has been posted) that may help to clarify whether the split was needed? JMO

Seraph1m · Nov 2, 2005

moicherie said:
What is the traditionalist Adventist view on things (the Progressive one has been posted) that may help to clarify whether the split was needed? JMO

It is not about different "beliefs" but how individuals view the beliefs personally and choose to apply them. Your idea is a good one moicherie.

BondGirl · Nov 2, 2005

OOoooohhhh!

TrustAndObey · Nov 2, 2005

moicherie said:
What is the traditionalist Adventist view on things (the Progressive one has been posted) that may help to clarify whether the split was needed? JMO

The Fundamental Beliefs have been posted already, but I don't think that would help at all. The Progressive Adventists, at least the ones I've talked with personally, started out Traditional Adventist and decided the church doctrine was flawed...so they already know how Traditionals view things I would imagine.

Also, I don't think the beliefs of the Progressives included their view on creation. Can a Progressive Adventist please post that?

Seraph1m · Nov 2, 2005

Would somebody help the newbies out pleeeeease...

moicherie · Nov 3, 2005

Seraph1m said:
Would somebody help the newbies out pleeeeease...

Yes please do cos I'm confused, StormyOne listed the definition of Progressives in another thread, can't remember which one, so it would be good to have the Traditionalist version of said thread listed, its too easy to say Traditional = those who accept all 28 fundamentals belielfs well considering the beliefs have grown over time that would not make them Traditionalist would it? :o

TrustAndObey · Nov 3, 2005

I honestly think that sometimes people would argue with themselves in a mirror.

The Traditional beliefs have been listed. If someone went from Traditional to Progressive then I'm pretty certain they knew the Traditional beliefs before they started leaning toward the Progressive ones.

I guess I like the name "newbie" if it means I won't ever get cynical about my church beliefs.

awesumtenor · Nov 3, 2005

TrustAndObey said:
I honestly think that sometimes people would argue with themselves in a mirror.

The Traditional beliefs have been listed. If someone went from Traditional to Progressive then I'm pretty certain they knew the Traditional beliefs before they started leaning toward the Progressive ones.

I guess I like the name "newbie" if it means I won't ever get cynical about my church beliefs.

Continually examining what one believes to ensure it is complete and correct is not being cynical. If the Adventist pioneers had not done so, there are a number of things accepted as truth today that would not be part of the doctrines of this church, starting with the Sabbath. The reasoning for the Seventh-day Adventist church's not having a creed is to prevent complacency or the developing of an unwillingness to examine the church's beliefs. It was to keep the Berean spirit alive in this church, not to place the church's beliefs beyond examination.

In His service,
Mr. J

SassySDA · Nov 3, 2005

HoneyDew said:
Hold thy tongue, Missy!

Yeah, don't give them any "ideers".

BondGirl · Nov 3, 2005

Ise so losted...but maybe dats the ways Ise suppose to bees....

tall73 · Nov 3, 2005

The problem is they don't tend to divide along one line or the other. But here are some defining issues. Progressives MAY in fact agree with most of these characteristics of traditionalists. But may diverge in significant ways on individual issues, or even underlying assumptions.

Key traditional tenants:

a. Inspiration. The Bible is the result of God's revelation of Himself, and is correct in its teachings in theological arenas. Some would also say it is correct in all respects, such as historical facts, scientific facts, etc. So called contradictions can usually be explained by further study. God's word is the rule of faith, and is use ful for correction, teaching, training in righteousness, and most of all are able to make one "wise unto salvation."

While traditionalists may see inspiration as either verbal or though inspiration they reject the idea that parts of the Bible are not inspired, or that the human element was such as to overshadow the divine. They tend to avoid rejecting literal applications of Bible texts based on new cultural or scientific understandings.

This one may be the most important as it determines one's approach to the whole biblical record, and therefore other beliefs.

For instance, Traditionalists generally accept a literal reading of Genesis, including seven 24 hour periods. Many of them also believe this was generally 6,000 years ago, based both on biblical chronology and EGW comments.

Progressives (though not all) tend to make more allowances for slightly longer (in the 10's of thousands of years) to much longer (millions) based on scientific and historical data, and what appears to be (for the slightly longer) telescoping of geneologies in the biblical account.

b. SDA's distinctive role. Generally traditionalists hold to the view that the SDA church is the remnant church of God with a distinctive message to be delivered to the world in light of Jesus' soon coming. Some additional beliefs under this heading:

i. sanctuary message and the time of the end
ii. Traditional SDA eschatology including the mark of the beast being compulsory Sunday worship, etc.

c. Various lifestyle, church issues
Traditionals often oppose:

i. Homosexuality as a legitimate christian lifestyle choice
ii. Consumption of alcohol
iii. Eating of unclean foods (and sometimes flesh foods)
iv. Wearing jewelry (sometimes the wedding ring)
v. dancing
etc.

d. 28 fundamentals. Traditionalists tend to subscribe to the accepted statements of doctrine encompassed in the 28 fundamental beliefs, and to be supportive of the General Conference. They are less likely to openly question these beliefs or even actions of the church, desiring unity on the fundamental theological understandings of the church.

They resist efforts to overturn long held pillars, especially the often attacked traditional Adventist eschatology and Sanctuary doctrines.

e. View of Ellen White. Traditionalists tend to view the ministry of Ellen White as inspired, and useful for today. They resist efforts to say that her visions were a result of delusions, or head trauma, etc. and that she was uninspired. They also tend to resist definitions of inspiration that would make it possible to discern what elements of her writings are inspired, and what ones are not. In this respect they see the issue similarly to the question of biblical inspiration.

TrustAndObey · Nov 4, 2005

awesumtenor said:
Continually examining what one believes to ensure it is complete and correct is not being cynical. If the Adventist pioneers had not done so, there are a number of things accepted as truth today that would not be part of the doctrines of this church, starting with the Sabbath. The reasoning for the Seventh-day Adventist church's not having a creed is to prevent complacency or the developing of an unwillingness to examine the church's beliefs. It was to keep the Berean spirit alive in this church, not to place the church's beliefs beyond examination.

In His service,
Mr. J

I guess it's okay to assume that I don't continually examine what I believe just because I'm "new"?

I'm curious, how long does one have to be in the Adventist church before they are considered intelligent or the fact is acknowledged that they did study out the doctrine and agreed with it? I'm serious, how long do I have to be in the church before the newbie slams stop? I need an exact amount of time....3 years? 5 years?

I find it very interesting that just because I'm happy and hold on firmly to my beliefs (which just happen to match with the Adventist church doctrines) that it's being implied that I haven't studied the doctrine enough.

SassySDA · Nov 4, 2005

TrustAndObey said:
I guess it's okay to assume that I don't continually examine what I believe just because I'm "new"?

I'm curious, how long does one have to be in the Adventist church before they are considered intelligent or the fact is acknowledged that they did study out the doctrine and agreed with it? I'm serious, how long do I have to be in the church before the newbie slams stop? I need an exact amount of time....3 years? 5 years?

I find it very interesting that just because I'm happy and hold on firmly to my beliefs (which just happen to match with the Adventist church doctrines) that it's being implied that I haven't studied the doctrine enough.

I'm wondering that same question myself...is it an amount of time, or will we know when we've hit it because we will have become cynical? Oh, and I'm being dead serious here...

awesumtenor · Nov 4, 2005

TrustAndObey said:
I guess it's okay to assume that I don't continually examine what I believe just because I'm "new"?

If you re-read the thread, the one making the assumption here is you, in saying that one is cynical if he questions. I was pointing out that the assumption of cynicism is non sequitur. I made neither statements nor allusions regarding the length of time you had been in the church.

I'm curious, how long does one have to be in the Adventist church before they are considered intelligent or the fact is acknowledged that they did study out the doctrine and agreed with it? I'm serious, how long do I have to be in the church before the newbie slams stop? I need an exact amount of time....3 years? 5 years?

I'm curious, seeing that neither the level of your intelligence nor the length of time you've been in the church has been addressed by me in this thread, why you feel the need to introduce those things where they are not being discussed...

I find it very interesting that just because I'm happy and hold on firmly to my beliefs (which just happen to match with the Adventist church doctrines) that it's being implied that I haven't studied the doctrine enough.

I find it interesting that you make this allegation in a response to a post where none of the things you allege have occurred. But since you brought it up, your contentment with your place in your Christian walk today and with the beliefs you have today probably has some correlation with the length of time you've been studying them. When my youngest daughter was a baby she was content to feed on warm baby formula; if I were to take her some today, however, seeing that she is college freshman, she would look at me like I was crazy... because while she is the same child, she has grown and moved on to more substantive fare in her diet. If you continue to grow in grace you will move on to the meat of the word from the sincere milk of the word you currently desire that you may grow thereby, as Peter puts it in his first epistle and when you have experienced this growth, you will look back on some of the positions you currently hold and recognize that your understanding was, in fact rudimentary, at best.

That's not a bad thing; it's just how things are. Noone begrudges you the fact that you are where you are in your walk...but it's a fact that there are those who are far beyond where you are...just as there are those who are far beyond where I am...and if someone who is beyond where you are says something that you may not agree with, it is not a correct assumption that they are attacking you or what you believe and if that is all you can see, then you are not yet in the place where you can discuss that topic on that level where things are not quite as black and white as you see them on the level you are on.

In His service,
Mr. J

TrustAndObey · Nov 4, 2005

I'm sorry for the defensive comments, they really weren't aimed at you and I apologize that it seemed that way. I was basically snapping back from all the "newbie" comments I've been hearing lately. Again, I'm sorry. I'm in "defense" mode and I'll admit it right now. That's what happens when you are getting attacked a lot I guess.

awesumtenor said:
That's not a bad thing; it's just how things are. Noone begrudges you the fact that you are where you are in your walk...but it's a fact that there are those who are far beyond where you are...just as there are those who are far beyond where I am...and if someone who is beyond where you are says something that you may not agree with, it is not a correct assumption that they are attacking you or what you believe and if that is all you can see, then you are not yet in the place where you can discuss that topic on that level where things are not quite as black and white as you see them on the level you are on.

I don't doubt for a second that people are beyond where I'm at in their walk....but Awesumtenor, what you said in the quote there...what does it say about the people that have been Adventist for..say...30 years, and are still happy with the doctrine?

It's hard to see past "well you don't really know anything yet because you're new." It's hard to see past that because 1) it's rude 2) it assumes a lot about me 3) it is a "I can't change your mind to my point of view so I'll just attack you personally" tactic.

I've seen/learned a lot in General Theology this week. Some good things, some bad things. It's been cemented for me that if someone cannot refute the scripture you give, they will attack your denomination. If they don't know your denomination they'll spend countless posts trying to GUESS it. If they can't guess your denomination, they'll attack your character.

Silly me, I broadcast my denomination icon so it's a quicker road for them just to go straight to my character!

So then I come here and I'm told I really don't know what I'm talking about because I'm new? Great. I don't even know why I bother sometimes.

Actually, that's not true, I do know why I bother. I bother because this week while being slammed against the wall repeatedly there were some bright spots. I met a really great person named Roger (Orthodox) and a Messianic that stole my heart with an awesome post, a Catholic that really is starting to question what he's grown up in and is reaching out for answers, and I got to know Woobadooba a lot better......in other words, in the pit of it all there are great people here that encourage others and really do let Christ shine through them. Thank God for the people that admit they're the least of the brethren and reach out to others!!!!

I hope that I touched at least one person this week. I don't know if I did and I probably won't find out until the resurrection, but hey....I'll keep trying.

Also, it wasn't a total loss because I did get complimented on my spelling.

I'm just going to have to spit out the bones from now on. I really can't allow stumblingblocks to keep up what they're doing. I can't, and I won't.

Oops, so is it that we are not to debate or not post?

HoneyDew

Guest

Active Member

Active Member

TrustAndObey

Guest

Senior Veteran

True Brit

Well-Known Member

Active Member

TrustAndObey

Guest

Well-Known Member

True Brit

TrustAndObey

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Sophia7's husband

TrustAndObey

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

TrustAndObey

Guest

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency