Pastor leaves Adventism

[StormyOne]

Night, it appears these people choose their battles wisely.

There is no way to fight the inevitable. The .org will NOT change; therefore ipso facto it must, and will, die a painful death. You cannot redeem what is ultimately based on self-deception.

It is a money-making machine and will not alter the formula on that. But people are gradually losing interest in what it has to offer because outside of some interesting eschatological insights and a terrific body of legend and lore from which to springboard onto the Reconciliation Awareness, it really has very little. More to the point: what little it does offer is drowned beneath the horrible toll it exacts on people's spiritual and emotional well-being.

well said.... of course I believe that some people have given the "church" too much power over their lives...

The money making aspect is quite evident... one of my friends suggested that the only reason corporate worship is encouraged is to collect the tithes and offering.... lol

 

[NightEternal]

I believe (though only he can speak for himself) that Night's post is designed to try to persuade the denomination to take a good hard look at itself in light of these departures and cease from the party line that these departures are either the work of some mechanism ordained by God

Yes, Moriah has touched on some good points I wanted to make.

Unfortunately, the only thing many will take away from this (that is, assuming they will even read this testimony through the hands covering thier eyes) is that another 'apostate' pastor has thrown in the towel and left 'the truth'. We who do not learn from history will be doomed to repeat it again and again and again and again. This pastor is desperately providing red signs and warning flags left and right. This for example:

At some point you are supposed to grow up into your full stature of men and women in Christ. Can you do that leaning on the crutch of EGW? Letting her be the filter for all that you are willing to think, learn, and believe? It also plays to human paranoia and pride. It offers a compelling illusion of the future. It is pipe dream theology with self subtly at the center. It is very simply, paranoia. Adventists are afflicted with a twisted Bible EGW paranoia.

Again and again we have heard this as the final words of those who file out the back door. But many segments of Adventism just go right on doing it anyhow, making EGW the final say and arbiter in all matters.

Many will simply just ignore all of the warnings out of blind denominational patriotism.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Night, the problems addressed here -- while more obvious in SDAism due to the 'papal' presence of EGW and an eschatology focusing upon themselves in a starring role -- are endemic to Christendom itself.

I would be extremely surprised if they could be solved in SDAism at all, because they are mere symptoms of a sickness that infects the Whole.

The whole head is sick. The whole heart, faint. From the top of the crown to the sole of the foot there is no soundness in it; only wounds, bruises, and putrefying sores.

 

[Sophia7]

NE 'we' have not lost anything.

We have though Moicherie. 'We', meaning those who desperately want to see reform in the church, have lost another good, keen minister who could clearly discern some of the problems we are facing as a denomination. But instead of staying in and trying to help those of us who also see the problems affect change, he plans on bailing and abandoning ship, leaving this monumental task for us to deal with.

This is the problem. It seems like the ones who best can diagnose and isolate our problems end up leaving. How can we ever turn this Titanic around if this keeps happening?

I ask myself this question if the church was closed down tomorrow does that mean my relationship with the Creator will suddenly disappear? I should hope not.

Of course not. I have never believed that.

Because we subconsciously teach that leaving the Adventist church equates to leaving God

No, no. That is not at all what I believe nor was that what I was saying. There is no 'Ark Of Safety' mentality here, believe me.

we get upset when things like this happen,

I'm not upset because I feel he has 'betrayed' the church. I am upset because the cause for reform in the church has suffered another blow. This man had wonderful potential as a pastor to contribute in the uprooting and discarding of the cultic elements that plague Adventism. Now he is plotting his course out.

who knows where God is leading this man and to be honest as Jesus said to Peter 'what is it to thee, follow thou Me'...

I just wish God would lead more of those who are in leadership to stay and fight the insanity instead of dropping the flag of reform and running the other way. We need HELP here. Fear-mongering, legalism, cultishness, heterodoxy and Phariseeism is not going to simply fade out and die by itself. We need soldiers like this man to stay and engage the falsehood so that we can corporately bring this church back to a true, Protestant, Sola Scriptura denomination with EGW in her rightful place.

that is the problem with those who believe that in order to be a "member" one must agree with everything that the church believes.... so when it becomes apparent that they no longer believe "everything" then they feel they must leave.... I don't share that mindset.....

That works for some lay members. The problem is that pastors really have only two options when they find themselves in disagreement with any of the SDA Church's fundamental teachings: they can stay and ignore the issues and pretend to agree with the doctrines because if they spoke openly against them they would be fired, or, if they want to be honest about their beliefs, they can resign. When a pastor does Bible studies, he is required to teach all of the fundamental beliefs of the church before baptizing someone:

Ministers Thoroughly to Instruct Candidates Previous to Baptism—A minister should not present any candidate for baptism and church membership until he can satisfy the church by a public examination that the candidate has been well instructed and is ready to take such a step. (See pp. 31-35.) In churches where frequent baptisms might reduce the significance of a public examination, an alternative plan should be observed. The minister’s work is not completed until he has thoroughly instructed the candidates, and they are familiar with and committed to all fundamental beliefs and related practices of the church and are prepared to assume the responsibilities of church membership. Churches should insist on the application of this as a guiding principle in the reception of new members. Churches, through the church board, should insist that candidates be instructed individually and, in addition, wherever possible, that they be taught in a baptismal class. (SDA Church Manual, pp. 30-31)
​

How can a pastor conscientiously do this if he no longer believes the things that he is supposed to teach? While I know some pastors who ignore this dilemma and teach only what they are comfortable teaching, they are going against their employment requirements. Conferences have employee handbooks that specifically state that pastors must uphold all of the doctrines of the church.

Many pastors don't talk about the IJ and other controversial distinctive doctrines and actually preach the gospel. My husband was advised by one Adventist professor to teach the sanctuary doctrine in Bible studies merely by presenting the traditional view in terms of something that Seventh-day Adventists have historically believed, without expressing agreement or disagreement with it, but I disagree with this advice. However, whether a pastor teaches these things or not, they are still there in the background, and they interfere with a pastor's ability to search out all truth and to teach purely from the Bible without risking their ministries and the well-being of their families. How effective can a pastor be with this handicap, and how can God bless the efforts of a church that refuses to address these issues openly and honestly?

For this reason, if the church is to be reformed, I believe that such reform is going to have to be embraced and propelled by the laity. Pastors can contribute indirectly to "the uprooting and discarding of the cultic elements that plague Adventism," but they are severely limited by the expectations of their job descriptions in the Adventist Church.

 

[freeindeed2]

That works for some lay members. The problem is that pastors really have only two options when they find themselves in disagreement with any of the SDA Church's fundamental teachings: they can stay and ignore the issues and pretend to agree with the doctrines because if they spoke openly against them they would be fired, or, if they want to be honest about their beliefs, they can resign. When a pastor does Bible studies, he is required to teach all of the fundamental beliefs of the church before baptizing someone:

Ministers Thoroughly to Instruct Candidates Previous to Baptism—A minister should not present any candidate for baptism and church membership until he can satisfy the church by a public examination that the candidate has been well instructed and is ready to take such a step. (See pp. 31-35.) In churches where frequent baptisms might reduce the significance of a public examination, an alternative plan should be observed. The minister’s work is not completed until he has thoroughly instructed the candidates, and they are familiar with and committed to all fundamental beliefs and related practices of the church and are prepared to assume the responsibilities of church membership. Churches should insist on the application of this as a guiding principle in the reception of new members. Churches, through the church board, should insist that candidates be instructed individually and, in addition, wherever possible, that they be taught in a baptismal class. (SDA Church Manual, pp. 30-31)​

How can a pastor conscientiously do this if he no longer believes the things that he is supposed to teach? While I know some pastors who ignore this dilemma and teach only what they are comfortable teaching, they are going against their employment requirements. Conferences have employee handbooks that specifically state that pastors must uphold all of the doctrines of the church.

Many pastors don't talk about the IJ and other controversial distinctive doctrines and actually preach the gospel. My husband was advised by one Adventist professor to teach the sanctuary doctrine in Bible studies merely by presenting the traditional view in terms of something that Seventh-day Adventists have historically believed, without expressing agreement or disagreement with it, but I disagree with this advice. However, whether a pastor teaches these things or not, they are still there in the background, and they interfere with a pastor's ability to search out all truth and to teach purely from the Bible without risking their ministries and the well-being of their families. How effective can a pastor be with this handicap, and how can God bless the efforts of a church that refuses to address these issues openly and honestly?

For this reason, if the church is to be reformed, I believe that such reform is going to have to be embraced and propelled by the laity. Pastors can contribute indirectly to "the uprooting and discarding of the cultic elements that plague Adventism," but they are severely limited by the expectations of their job descriptions in the Adventist Church.

Exactly! I understand exactly what you're referring to.

And many of the pastors I know have this same dilemma. They are caught between what they believe personally and what is required of their employ to the SDA church.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

So that no man might buy or sell, save him who had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name ....

 

[Jimlarmore]

The only thing I have found to date that is even slightly questionable is some aspects of the IJ. Most of it is completely Biblical as far as my research has led me. The other fundamental beliefs are Biblically sound as well. Those who drift off find a welcome respite in the OSAS camp , that seems to be the trend anyway.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

of the two delusions, i would much prefer the "osas" delusion to the tortures of believing my probation closed at the age of 19. been there, done that, got the demons to prove it.

 

[NightEternal]

Exactly! I understand exactly what you're referring to.

And many of the pastors I know have this same dilemma. They are caught between what they believe personally and what is required of their employ to the SDA church.

I also know many pastors in this same dilemma Free.

 

[freeindeed2]

I also know many pastors in this same dilemma Free.

More than most would care to admit.

(Resurrecting old threads? No Easter pun intended! )

 

[Adventist Heretic]

I am studying with a pastor who is sifting throught the issues. tough postion

 

[freeindeed2]

I am studying with a pastor who is sifting throught the issues. tough postion

It is a tough position. And it's serious business that is not taken lightly. When SDA conference employees resign for theological/doctrinal issues it is not something taken lightly. We're talking about careers, making a living, health insurance, life insurance, retirement, starting all over again, etc. And you should know, it's not easy for SDA pastors to pastor anywhere else. There's a stigma attached to them and many don't even want to touch them.

So when you meet those who were brave enough to leave, including the few who post online...it was in NO WAY an easy or candid choice they made. If they weren't convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt they never would have given it all up to face ridicule and shame from family, co-workers, and friends, loss of income and benefits, fear, doubt, etc., unless they absolutely knew that God was calling them out.

I would challenge anybody to follow up with those who have left over theological/doctrinal issues and see if they have any regrets (and don't limit yourselves to one or two!). I have NONE and I wouldn't change a thing! The grass really is greener when Jesus is your EVERYTHING.

In CHRIST alone...

 

[NightEternal]

It sure is.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Originally Posted by freeindeed2
Exactly! I understand exactly what you're referring to.

And many of the pastors I know have this same dilemma. They are caught between what they believe personally and what is required of their employ to the SDA church.

Should this even be a dilemma? Seems to me a no-brainer. You either adhere to the denomination's tenents or get out. Whats so hard about this?

And BTW--when these pastors' 'hired-in' did they have the same questions? Doesn't the word say that you cannot serve God and mammon?

Lu 16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

 

[moicherie]

Should this even be a dilemma? Seems to me a no-brainer. You either adhere to the denomination's tenents or get out. Whats so hard about this?

And BTW--when these pastors' 'hired-in' did they have the same questions? Doesn't the word say that you cannot serve God and mammon?

Lu 16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

Perhaps that is why they left to serve God. Perhaps some stay to try and change things. It is only the arrogant who have an 'We're alright Jack' attitude and assume every single the church does and believes is absolutely correct.

 

[moicherie]

Should this even be a dilemma? Seems to me a no-brainer. You either adhere to the denomination's tenents or get out. Whats so hard about this?

And BTW--when these pastors' 'hired-in' did they have the same questions? Doesn't the word say that you cannot serve God and mammon?

Lu 16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

Perhaps that is why they left to serve God. Perhaps some stay to try and change things. It is only the arrogant who have an 'We're alright Jack' attitude and assume every single the church does and believes is absolutely correct.

 

[freeindeed2]

Should this even be a dilemma? Seems to me a no-brainer. You either adhere to the denomination's tenents or get out. Whats so hard about this?

You act like it's all black and white. It's not! The dilemma exists between presenting an unadulterated true Gospel and all of the extra SDA add-ons that stem from an extra-Biblical source.

And BTW--when these pastors' 'hired-in' did they have the same questions? Doesn't the word say that you cannot serve God and mammon?Lu 16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

Are pastors not allowed to question? What difference does it make when they had questions? Those who don't question don't use critical thinking. They are not open to the Holy Spirit (who is FULLY God) moving them and growing them.I understand your use of that verse.In CHRIST alone...

 

[NightEternal]

I am studying with a pastor who is sifting throught the issues. tough postion

Why in the world was this post reported?

 

[freeindeed2]

Why in the world was this post reported?

LOL! Why do you even ask in these forums!? It's simply a TRAD trying to stir up trouble.

In CHRIST alone...