SDA Forum

same here... I was 9....

I have to say, and I am not angry, really I'm not, and I don't intend to "trash" anyone...but

I'm simply saying that I DO NOT understand what has been transpiring on this thread. I really don't. I may or may not get this post deleted, it may or may not be considered "flaming". I don't know. But all I'm really trying to say is that I DO NOT understand.

As Honor said in her one post about the baptismal vows, etc., this is ALL GONE OVER with anyone BEFORE they join this church. My pastor went over it and WENT OVER IT, for weeks, months, before he would baptize me into the church. I know I drove him crazy, but I was ready the day I walked in the door, and his making me wait for even 2 months was agony to me.

However, in looking back, I see how right he was to hold off for a bit. He joined me in bible study often, as did other members of my church. Not only studying scripture with me, but covering the history of the church, and, at the time, the 27 fundamental beliefs as well as the vows I would be taking at my baptism. I went into this with my eyes wide open and my heart bursting with love for Jesus AND my church and church family.

Those of you who come here and continuously question, and/or appear to look for fault within this organization obviously have changed your minds about it...because the beliefs you joined under or were baptized under have not changed.

This is where my confusion comes from I guess. There can also be confusion due to the many "separations" "off-shoots" of the main church that may be represented in here. There is no way for us to know, because a Davidian, a Shepherd's Rod, a ROG, etc., can all come in here under the SDA name. The distinction is that all of these "off-shoots" broke off into their own little churches due to differences of opinions or beliefs. I am a member of the General Conference Seventh-day Adventist Church. But there could be many others in here that are members of the "off-shoots". They are going to disagree with us...there's no doubt about that. If they agreed, they wouldn't have left the main church.

In all honesty, and I mean point blank honesty, I'm simply not interested in hearing about how you think this is wrong in my church or that is wrong, or that you think we need to look at this or look at that.

I love God, and my heart BURSTS with love for His precious son. I couldn't be more happy in a church home, and I just want to enjoy that. I guess that is what I am saying...I just want to enjoy that. I want to be left in peace to enjoy that. If I want to debate and/or argue with people about churches, or biblical truth, I know just where to go to get all of that I can handle. But when I come to a site that has a thread just for my church, I wish to have peace reign within it.

I, like Honor, enjoy questions from those who are not familiar with us. Every opportunity we have to share biblical truth with others is precious.

I am simply weary of "beating dead horses". Our beliefs are valid, they are what they are for a good reason, and they aren't going to change.

Honor is right, He's separating the wheat from the tare. We were told this was to happen, and it is happening with amazing clarity and speed.

Time is short my brothers and sisters...I think we would be best to put our energies into witnessing for Christ, than tearing at our church. Just my humble opinion.

God Bless, everyone.

Cliff2 said:

Over a period of time the "brethren" have developed a set of beliefs that a person must accept to become a member of the SDA Church.

It is the same for each person world wide. If a person accepts them and decides to join the SDA Church and is baptized then that person becomes a member of the SDA Church.

If at a latter date that same person no longer can agree to what those set of beliefs are then that person has a moral obligation to withdraw his or her membership from the SDA Church.

Again that person is most welcome to remain and attend but should not consider it to be their right to be a member since they can no longer abide by what the SDA Church believes according to what has been set out.

The "27" is only a starting point, they are not and never have been fixed in concrete as shown by the last GC when another was added to make "28".

These are only a guide and of course there is some flexibility in there but the main tennant of belief should be adhered to.

During the late 1970's and early 1980's the issues that have been brought up here were also examined and found to be wrong. As a result many minister resigned because they could not with good conscience preach error and still recieve a salary at the end of the week.

At least they had the integrity to stand up for what they believed that set them apart from the SDA Church.

If I were to join a local cub in my home town I cannot in good faith thyen go about tearing it down or I would be very quickly put out.

It seems that many feel they have the right to tear down the SDA Church and not be accountable for their actions.

Click to expand...

Cliff you missed my point,

My point is that our views of God are not complete! God still can give us new light. God still can reveal to us that there may be something that we could very well be wrong about. You seem to deny that possibility.

Moreover, what the church has developed over the years should not be equated with God's absolute standard for morality.

I was studying to be a pastor. And one very rude professor of mine, who is ironically well respected in the church, told me that I have to have a Master's degree to be qualified to teach. Moreover, he said that if I didn't have a master's degree that I wouldn't be qualified to teach. He basically views a pastoral role as being that of a teacher, and rightly so nonetheless.

Anyway, I asked him where in scripture does it state that I have to have a master's degree to be qualified to do God's work in teaching? And I further asked him, "who qualifies a person to do God's work, God or the church", he told me that the church qualifies that person." I was shocked to hear what he said, and so I asked another question to make sure that I heard him right. I asked, "Who makes the ultimate decision in deciding who will or won't be a pastor, God or the church?" He said "God does not make the ultimate decision, the church does."

And Cliff, the truth is, the GC dos require that a person have a master's degree to be a pastor in our church! There are exceptions of course, but it is a standard requirement.

Now, that just isn't Biblical!

Moreover, it isn't Biblical to say that a person has to know and agree to every doctrine that we espouse before they can be baptised into the church.

We are not baptised into the church! We are baptised in Christ!

You see, the point I am making is that on many points we've strayed from doing things according to God's will so as it is prescribed in His word, so that we can uphold our man-developed traditions!

I don't believe in a God that developes, but in a God who is absolute; and what He has revealed to us in scripture is good enough for me. I need not add anything to it, or take anything away from it.

I will say it again, we must not see the law for law, but the principle behind it! Only then will we be able to see Jesus' true character.

Amen Woobadooba!!

honorthesabbath said:

I think Jesus would rather have ONE true follower than 10,000,000 nominal's. If those who disagree with the tenents of an organization that was formed before thier births don't like those tenents--then as I said--leave it. But for heavens sake--don't come to those that do agree with them and continually harrass and bash them to death. Is THAT what you think a Christian should do?? Any Christian of any denomination?? I sure don't.

To answer your question about those who reject the traditional SDA beliefs leaving and how many would be left?? Well--I think we have it on good authority that that is exactly what God is doing now. He is purging His floor. He is shaking the branches for the weak fruit. That weak fruit will surely fall from the tree as we have seem already. The testing truths are doing their sure work. The weak and vascilating vessels ARE falling away--but they refuse to go quietly. Misery loves company. We have the story of satan's rebellion against God--he couldn't leave heaven alone or quietly, oh no--he HAD to spreaad his hatred of God and His doctrine and caused ONE THIRD of the angels to seperate with him. My, how history repeats itself. So yes Jonno--God is seperating the dissenters out. All their ranting will not change one ioda of the truths of this church. We knew this would happen--we were forewarned.

Blessings to you sis

Click to expand...

First of all, does my name appear feminine? At least my wife thinks its funny.
Just curious to know what you percieve to be the church or body of Christ and how the adventist organisation (as you describe it ) fits in your perception. From your reply it appears as if the Lord solely concentrates on the adventist church. I do not wish to put words in your mouth so please clarify. I have some more questions on your reply but this will suffice for now.
Thank you for graciously entertaining my questions
blessings to you bro

woobadooba said:

So are you suggesting that because we may not agree with your interpretation of a doctrine that we aren't genuine SDAs?

How do you know that your interpretation is accurate, or complete?

Are SDAs not allowed to think? Must we all be subject to your standard of thought?

They also called Jesus a devil, and an unbeliever because he had something more to show them about what they thought was true.

Could it be that we have the same situation here?

Click to expand...

I continue to take the stance tat SDA's who do not believe the fudementals arn't offical SDA's because to join the church and be baptised into it, you had to agree to them all before you're given the oppertunity to become a member.

Maybe we can question, but once we step off our boat and actually believe the fundementals are wrong, it becomes wishy washy and we do not have a standard, anyone is an SDA, and we go the similar path to the catholics, that anyone who comes to mass once a year is a official catholic member.

I know I'm stepping on dangerous ground by stating these thoughts, by they're my thoughts.

Though, sassy, you were kinda harsh and I do not believe that was the correct way to really handle it.... I do see where you're coming from.

Stormy, you're kinda a pain. You have your non official anti fundemental beliefs but you never, ever fully state them. You attack the church but when I asked why, you did not even answer me! Thats verging on patheticness. WHY were you bringing it up?

The no response signals it was infact just a plain attack on the church for absolutely no reason which, if you ever start to moan we question if you're an SDA or not, remember that, because it is stupid attacks like that which makes us think that.

"By their fruits you shall know them"

The the fruits you express, we see you're making attacks at the church for absolutely no reason, and undermining beliefs for no reason as you hardly ever back it up with evidence, or answer our evidence for our beliefs. Your fruits don't show a very trustworthy person.

If you arn't like I describe, then you need to change.

IF you're offending others with your beliefs you also need to change. If your attitude is offending others, it is not okay to continue it. It says so in the bible.

I continue to take the stance tat SDA's who do not believe the fudementals arn't offical SDA's because to join the church and be baptised into it, you had to agree to them all before you're given the oppertunity to become a member.

Click to expand...

But are you baptised into Christ or into the church? Be careful with this question for it is loaded!

And is it BiblicaL to have someone agree to the 27 fundamental doctrines of the SDA church and sign a certifcate to verify that, before he can be baptised into Christ?

Maybe we can question, but once we step off our boat and actually believe the fundementals are wrong, it becomes wishy washy and we do not have a standard, anyone is an SDA, and we go the similar path to the catholics, that anyone who comes to mass once a year is a official catholic member.

Click to expand...

But I don't see anyone stepping off the boat here, except those who are critical of the ones who are asking the questions!

IF you're offending others with your beliefs you also need to change. If your attitude is offending others, it is not okay to continue it. It says so in the bible.

Click to expand...

But sometimes we need to change! Even Jesus offended many by what He said. Just because we offend that doesn't mean we are in the wrong.

If that were the case we wouldn't be SDAs since most people of other denominations are offended by what we believe.

woobadooba said:

But are you baptised into Christ or into the church? Be careful with this question for it is loaded!

And is it BiblicaL to have someone agree to the 27 fundamental doctrines of the SDA church and sign a certifcate to verify that, before he can be baptised into Christ?




But I don't see anyone stepping off the boat here, except those who are critical of the ones who are asking the questions!




But sometimes we need to change! Even Jesus offended many by what He said. Just because we offend that doesn't mean we are in the wrong.

If that were the case we wouldn't be SDAs since most people of other denominations are offended by what we believe.

Click to expand...

1) cheese to whatever you mean by being baptised into christ or whatever.

I DO NOT CARE. SERIOUSLY. This is NOT a discussion of that! It is a discussion of the church not christianity as a whole, can't you, nor stormy, not mix the two together for just once in your life?

2) Not to be baptised into Christ. SEPERATE THINGS DANG IT.

Stormy DOES. He doesn't believe we're those three angels or whatever, he doesn't believe thats speaking about us, spreading the news. If you do not believe that, IT IS A FUNDEMENTAL BELIEF. He also believes you can not believe in soul sleep and be an adventist. FUNDEMENTAL BELIEF.

3) If they get offended by us, then we leave them alone, that is what Jesus did!

1) cheese to whatever you mean by being baptised into christ or whatever.

I DO NOT CARE. SERIOUSLY. This is NOT a discussion of that! It is a discussion of the church not christianity as a whole, can't you, nor stormy, not mix the two together for just once in your life?

Click to expand...

1. Don't forget, you are too reflect the character of Christ, even in this discussion.

2. You should care!

3. Who is the head of the church(this is where I was going with the question)? Jesus of course! Therefore, any decision that the church makes insofar as establishing rules is concerned, must be influenced by Him, since He is the head of the church. And the manner in which we identify that it is in fact His will that is influencing us to act thus, examining His word, to see if the rule concurs with it. If the rule can't be found in His word there is a good chance that it isn't according to His will, but something that is merely man-made, and not of God!

In such a case as this, we have no right to tell another that if they don't follow that rule that they are disobeying God, since God never established such a rule! That was my point. And I can see that there is by far too much of this happening not only in this forum, but in our church.

Not just our church, but every church of every denomination is guilty of this!

4. The two must be put together since Jesus is the head of the church and the church is the body of Christ. You can't separate them.

2) Not to be baptised into Christ. SEPERATE THINGS DANG IT.

Click to expand...

What your temper! The Lord is watching it!

Stormy DOES. He doesn't believe we're those three angels or whatever, he doesn't believe thats speaking about us, spreading the news. If you do not believe that, IT IS A FUNDEMENTAL BELIEF. He also believes you can not believe in soul sleep and be an adventist. FUNDEMENTAL BELIEF.

Click to expand...

I am not aware of these things, since I didn't discuss such things with him.

But what I've noticed here is that people have a very interesting way of taking something that someone says completely out of its context, and thus they make that person appear as though he said something or believes something that he never said or believes.

Could it be that you've done that here with stormy regarding this issue? Perhaps you should ask him in a new thread because I would be interested to see if what you are saying is true. For, if it is, then yes, it needs to be addressed because it isn't Biblical. Anyone who is of Christ plays a part in the three angles message. And soul-sleep is Biblical.

3) If they get offended by us, then we leave them alone, that is what Jesus did!

Click to expand...

Yes, but only at a certain point do we part our ways from them. But you missed the point I was making. The point is that sometimes we get offended because we have a certain way of doing things, and are unwilling to change. And when someone comes along and offers something new, we tell that person to get lost, or that he is lost!

It is important that we learn to think outside of the box.

Windmill, might I remind you that you are speaking to persons older than yourself? Regardless of how you feel, you are 15 and you would not be speaking to elders in your congregation like that, would you?

Windmill said:

Stormy DOES. He doesn't believe we're those three angels or whatever, he doesn't believe thats speaking about us, spreading the news. If you do not believe that, IT IS A FUNDEMENTAL BELIEF. He also believes you can not believe in soul sleep and be an adventist. FUNDEMENTAL BELIEF.

3) If they get offended by us, then we leave them alone, that is what Jesus did!

Click to expand...

Windmill, some things come with time. Age and maturity allows a person to grasp subtle shades of meaning, to see shades of grey where once there was stark black and white. Curtail your indignation, dear, because you might be misrepresenting what Stormy has actually said and what he believes. That would be bearing false witness. You are still a child, both in the church and chronologically. You have a very bright mind. There is much to learn.

*groans*

I'm sorry.

Okay. Now, people, PLEASE START LISTENING TO ME.

Discussion of the church vs christianity is completely seperate.

Stop mixing them.

I may be young but I am not stupid. That is a stupid thing to do.

Windmill said:

*groans*

I'm sorry.

Okay. Now, people, PLEASE START LISTENING TO ME.

Discussion of the church vs christianity is completely seperate.

Stop mixing them.

I may be young but I am not stupid. That is a stupid thing to do.

Click to expand...

HAPPY BIRTHDAY WINDMILL!!!

You are wiser than your young years.

Windmill said:

*groans*

I'm sorry.

Okay. Now, people, PLEASE START LISTENING TO ME.

Discussion of the church vs christianity is completely seperate.

Stop mixing them.

I may be young but I am not stupid. That is a stupid thing to do.

Click to expand...

Friend, there wouldn't be a church if there were no Christianity!

The evening is far spent but I just wanted to say that while it may appear a God given right to suggest (or insist) that someone who thinks that the church has made mistakes in its interpretation of the Bible should leave the church, but it is way more complex than that. If that is the case, Protestants should not continue to call themselves Christians because they felt that the Christian church (read RC) had apostasized and no longer followed the Bible. They continued to consider themselves to be Christians even though they had fundamental disagreements with other Christians. Even the early Adventists did not leave the Methodist church. They formed a new organization after they had been thrown out of their churches.
Nobody in this forum has the authority to throw anybody out of the church, so it is probably a good idea to learn to get along and trust in the power of your argument instead of the argument of your power.

uhm..

Definition of christian

1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

n.

1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

So, the definition of christian is very vauge, to be a christian, one must fit that description, so, Honeydrew... correct me if I'm wrong, but I do feel we can say that there are boundries to being an SDA.. while still calling ourselves christians.

Christianity is a vauge thing, seventh day adventisim is more complicated.

Uhm, we are not throwing anyone out of the church, but we are saying that one is not a SDA.

Thats like a lion claiming to be a tiger. The lion claims to be a tiger, but he defiantly aint a tiger. How do we know that? Because, there are certain characterisitcs, genes etc that define a tiger. If the lion were to say he was a tiger, we would say no you are a lion.

Same thing here. To be an SDA member, you had to say yes to these fundemental beliefs, and agree to them. If you stop agreeing to them, you stop having the adventist frame of mind, therefore are not one anymore.

Also....

CHRISTIANITY AND THE CHURCH ARE SEPERATE THINGS

HAVING THE BAPTISIM OF CHRIST AND BEING A BAPTISED MEMBER OF THE CHURCH IS SEPERATE

How in the world can you lump them together?

When you repent, and ask God to enter your heart, come to love God, that is completely seperate to becoming a member of the church! When you become a member of the church, thats like... a maturing step in your christianity.

As one grows older, more and more is expected of them. When you're 2 years old, if you stare at a person, you may make them feel uncomfortable, but its acceptable. If you're 22, it is expected that you follow sometimes unspoken social laws, and not stare at a person.
You gain responsibility as you learn.
At school, as you learn more and more, tests and standards get higher. Why? Because, you are learning, and therefore are at a different stage in your learning.

Same with the church. As you explore God, and his word more, you come to see the truths. The church is like a step up in your maturity. Not everyone is willing to take the plunge. When you join, it is a completely new thing basically. The beliefs, the standards, one must take on are completely different to a non member.

Not everyone is ready... people grow at different stages. But the church is there to help us. Help us to keep up our standards.

If we dumb down those standards, then we'll dumb down ourselves. People, you see, follow. The church is a place where we can help lead ourselves in the right direction together. If we allow somebody to lead us in the wrong direction, sadly, people WILL FOLLOW. Hence likely the fundemental beliefs. As they are true, if one doesn't believe them, and say believes in life after death, then they may lead a whole flock astray. We can't have that..

The point being? To be a true member, you need the baptisim of christ. But you also need a christian maturity level and understanding level to be higher. That is why they are seperate things. It is easier to become a saved person, and believe things that are not true. If we put that as the point of entry into the church, you just need to ask God for forgiveness, and discard the rest, say, the sabbath day, then people will enter, and lead others astray, as the ones who entered may not know about the sabbath day, and the others who are in the church think its okay, because others are doing it.

*phew* okay, long ramble, but yeah, THEY ARE DIFFERENT.

I'm sorry if I lost my temper, I'm trying to not and respecting others/elders.

Thanks sassy, my birthday is in two days

Windmill said:

uhm..

Definition of christian

1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

n.

1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

So, the definition of christian is very vauge, to be a christian, one must fit that description, so, Honeydrew... correct me if I'm wrong, but I do feel we can say that there are boundries to being an SDA.. while still calling ourselves christians.

Christianity is a vauge thing, seventh day adventisim is more complicated.

Uhm, we are not throwing anyone out of the church, but we are saying that one is not a SDA.

Thats like a lion claiming to be a tiger. The lion claims to be a tiger, but he defiantly aint a tiger. How do we know that? Because, there are certain characterisitcs, genes etc that define a tiger. If the lion were to say he was a tiger, we would say no you are a lion.

Same thing here. To be an SDA member, you had to say yes to these fundemental beliefs, and agree to them. If you stop agreeing to them, you stop having the adventist frame of mind, therefore are not one anymore.

Also....

CHRISTIANITY AND THE CHURCH ARE SEPERATE THINGS

HAVING THE BAPTISIM OF CHRIST AND BEING A BAPTISED MEMBER OF THE CHURCH IS SEPERATE

How in the world can you lump them together?

When you repent, and ask God to enter your heart, come to love God, that is completely seperate to becoming a member of the church! When you become a member of the church, thats like... a maturing step in your christianity.

As one grows older, more and more is expected of them. When you're 2 years old, if you stare at a person, you may make them feel uncomfortable, but its acceptable. If you're 22, it is expected that you follow sometimes unspoken social laws, and not stare at a person.
You gain responsibility as you learn.
At school, as you learn more and more, tests and standards get higher. Why? Because, you are learning, and therefore are at a different stage in your learning.

Same with the church. As you explore God, and his word more, you come to see the truths. The church is like a step up in your maturity. Not everyone is willing to take the plunge. When you join, it is a completely new thing basically. The beliefs, the standards, one must take on are completely different to a non member.

Not everyone is ready... people grow at different stages. But the church is there to help us. Help us to keep up our standards.

If we dumb down those standards, then we'll dumb down ourselves. People, you see, follow. The church is a place where we can help lead ourselves in the right direction together. If we allow somebody to lead us in the wrong direction, sadly, people WILL FOLLOW. Hence likely the fundemental beliefs. As they are true, if one doesn't believe them, and say believes in life after death, then they may lead a whole flock astray. We can't have that..

The point being? To be a true member, you need the baptisim of christ. But you also need a christian maturity level and understanding level to be higher. That is why they are seperate things. It is easier to become a saved person, and believe things that are not true. If we put that as the point of entry into the church, you just need to ask God for forgiveness, and discard the rest, say, the sabbath day, then people will enter, and lead others astray, as the ones who entered may not know about the sabbath day, and the others who are in the church think its okay, because others are doing it.

*phew* okay, long ramble, but yeah, THEY ARE DIFFERENT.

I'm sorry if I lost my temper, I'm trying to not and respecting others/elders.

Thanks sassy, my birthday is in two days

Click to expand...

Sometimes we say things and we don't realize what the final conclusion is for such sayings.


In essence, what you are saying young lady is that the SDA church isn't Christian.


You can't see that, but take your argument to its final conclusion and that is the message it conveys!


I told you before, without Christianity you don't have a church. Thus it necessarily follows that you can't separate the Church from Christianty, since Christianity makes the church what it is!


And if what is being taught in the church, and being declared to be of God, if it has no foundation in the teachings of Christ so as they are disclosed in God's word, then such a teaching is not binding for the Christian, and should never be the standard by which one's devotion to God is determined!

SDA is just a name! It has no place in the Bible. The body of believers were called Christians, not Seventh Day Adventists!


And whatever it was that those Christians upheld, we too must uphold, adding nothing to it, or taking anything away from it!

. . . I... am... a... girl....

no... I'm saying the seventh day adventist church is a maturity of christianity O_O I have NO idea whatsoever where you got that from. Quote me where I said seventh day adventist church = not christian