Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Windmill said:. . . 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
Windmill said:No, heres what I said.
The standards for the two, and the way to reach the two is completely different. To become an adventist, you must first become a christian, but by becoming a christian you do not by defult become an adventist. Becoming a baptised member of the adventist church is totally different to becoming a christian.
Think of it this way...
To get say, a normal degree in maths, the understanding that is needed, is far different from a person with a doctorite in maths. To gain the doctorite, the person must've first got the first degree, but a greater understanding was needed before they could become Dr
What you say here... this is bordering a very very thin line. I'll have to be espically careful from now on. I'll take this post bit by bit.woobadooba said:But the logic still follows that you are saying(although you won't admit it)that the SDA church isn't Christian.
By the way, you don't become a baptised member of the SDA church. You are baptised into the body of Christ!
Do you think that the only true Christians are SDAs?
It's as if you separate SDA Christians from other Christians, as if to say SDAs make better Christians than all the rest.
Now that is condescending if anything is!
This is... a grey area.By the way, you don't become a baptised member of the SDA church. You are baptised into the body of Christ!
This was already explained above...Do you think that the only true Christians are SDAs?
You make it sound like a crime, for there to be one true church.It's as if you separate SDA Christians from other Christians, as if to say SDAs make better Christians than all the rest.
Explain, once again, how I am stating this...But the logic still follows that you are saying(although you won't admit it)that the SDA church isn't Christian.
In this quote it seems as though we are no better than catholics who say that if you are another denom you will not be saved.Where does it say that we are the choosen church? We have beliefs based on the bible but that may not mean that we are doing everything perfectly as to God's specifications. Ppl I have spoken to always group us with Johova witness, or say that we are a cult who think this is the only way but if we do carry this attitude then how can we get rid of this bias?You make it sound like a crime, for there to be one true church.
as if to say. Well, maybe its taken that way, but by being the chosen church of God, that doesn't make us feel above other christians, it just means we're right.
One thing we must realise here, is I'm speaking about the standards of the church. Not that of christianity as a whole.
Let me ask you a question. Do you think that an adventist should believe in the fundemental beliefs before being baptised?
Lets just say, you didn't know anything about the SDA church, you lived on a secluded area, and lets say, a baptist group came down, convicted you of Jesus Christ, and you were baptised into their church. The bible was not in your native tounge, and you relied on their help to interpret it.
Are you part of the body of christ? YES! You're doing the best you can do and know.
Being baptised, is saying to God...
"God, I can't make it on my own. Please God, I give my heart to you, show me the way."
In other words, you're giving your life to God, and willing to do what is right for him. If someone really did want to do what God was saying was right, then one day, if someone showed them how the bible shows the sabbath, they would not harden their hearts to it because it sounded hard to keep. They would gladly keep it, as God is leading their lives.
So, it is possible to be baptised into the body of the christ, and not be part of the adventist church!
You make it sound like a crime, for there to be one true church.
as if to say. Well, maybe its taken that way, but by being the chosen church of God, that doesn't make us feel above other christians, it just means we're right.
Revelation 12:1And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
We are that woman..
We are the bride of christ!
How in the world did you become an SDA without believing this? *Shakes head in wonder* what church do you go to?
. . . me? Not biblical?I think YOU are not biblical.So then, what are you saying, that the standards of Christianity aren't good enough for the church, that they have to be separated from it?
Are you saying that the standards of the church are not the same standards of Christianity?
Let's look at it this way...
Follow this closely please!
What is Christianity, but that world-view that upholds Christ's standards! According to the Bible Christ is the head of the church. With that said, how can Christianity(that movement which upholds the standards of Christ)be separate from the church, which, according to the Bible, is the body of Christ?
What you are saying, but not realizing that you are saying it, is that the head(Christ)is not connected to the church(the body of Christ). Because you say the church is separate from Christianty!
Hence, it necessarily follows that you are saying Christ's standards are different from our standards, since Christ(the head of the church)is separate from the body(the church)!
This is not Biblical
n.
- Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
- Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
- Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
- Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
- Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
- One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
- One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.
Philip, however, was open to everything the word of God told him. Therefore, he would've been open to the fundemental beliefs.It doesn't matter what I think. What does the Bible say? According to the book of Acts the Ethiopian didn't have to go through 27 fundamental doctrines to be baptised into the church(body of Christ), but that he only had to understand and believe that Christ died for him, and that was good enough.
Are you trying to tell me that the manner that the Bible prescribes for baptism isn't good enough for you?
Are you trying to tell me that Philip was wrong for baptising that man because he didn't go through and accept all 27 fundamental doctrines?
Okay. I take back my example. I think it was wrong. I'll explain my thoughts on this here:Being baptised into the body of Christ isn't about doing your best to know! It's about accepting by faith Christ's best for you! It's not about your attempts; it's about His accomplishments!
That included. Really, did that actually need to be stated... being baptised is about both.It's more like, "Thank you Jesus! Thank you for redeeming me!"
So he was enformed? What was his reasoning behind not following it? That makes a huge difference.I am assuming you believe in the writings of Ellen White. Did you know that she commended Martin Luther for the work that he did in commencing the reformation? She suggested that he would have a place in heaven.
But did you know that some of our most adept theologians at the time, informed him about the Sabbath? And did you know that he did not accept it? Yet, Ellen White was sure that he would have a place in heaven!
Now, would you dare say Martin Luther didn't love God? Would you dare say Martin Luther wasn't a true believer because he rejected the Sabbath message?
That is what you are implying! And you have no right to take the seat of God's throne to make such judgments!
You are standing on holy ground! Be careful!
. . . .When Jesus returns there will be a remnant; and they will not be called Seventh Day Adventists! They will be called exactly what they were called when the church was established! They will be called Christians--children of God!
I was not baptised into the SDA church, nor were you! We were baptised into the body of Christ. Period!
What you are teaching is not Biblical.
But perhaps you think SDAs are better Christians than those of Paul's day. Maybe that is what it is!
Be careful!
The bride is the SDA church. WOW, shocking, IT HAS A NAME, AND IT EXISTS. Oh too bad, it was a nice idea before, you know, that anyone was part of it, but that is not true. Not every christian is part of this church. Otherwise.. it'd be massive, and, narrow is the way, and few will find it.There is one true church. Unfortunately you put a name on it and excluded the rest of the people that belong to this one true church that the Bible speaks of
But I am right. Because I follow Gods teachings.In this statement I do not see the humility of Christ! What a shame! What I do see however, is the Pharisee that prayed to God saying, "Thank you Lord that I am not like them"!
Who ever said I decided?I'm sorry but I don't see the words Seventh Day Adventist in that text! Perhaps there is something wrong with my vision.
Let me tell you something! You don't decide what that church is or what it is called! God does!
I didn't say we don't belong to christianity! I said we're a mature form of christianity!I did believe it. But then I grew up, and became wise, thanks be to God who showed me that I shouldn't be so pompous!
And since you asked me to explain once again how your logic is saying the SDA church isn't Christian...
You said the church is separate from Christianity. So, here's the syllogism again...
The church is separate from Christianity. We belong to the SDA church.
Therefore, the SDA church isn't Christian.
It's simple logic. It's not hard to follow.
- Something left over; a remainder.
- A piece of fabric remaining after the rest has been used or sold.
- A surviving trace or vestige: a remnant of his past glory.
- A small surviving group of people. Often used in the plural
me? Not biblical?I think YOU are not biblical.
Take a look at te different meanings of being a christian.
Now, look at them. You don't even need to believe in Jesus to be considered a christian!
And you mean to say, that the standards for being an adventist vs a christian are the same? I think not.
I never said its seperate. WHEN? Quote me on this.
I said MILLIONS OF TIMES TO BE AN ADVENTIST YOU HAVE TO BE A MATURE CHRISTIAN. How many times must I say that?
You must be one of the certain dictionarys definitions of being a christian. Plus, you must have the maturity to believe in other parts of the bible as well, such as revelation, and genesis.
Philip, however, was open to everything the word of God told him. Therefore, he would've been open to the fundemental beliefs.
Back then, the SDA church didn't exist. Things were completely different, they didn't have revelation for one thing.
So, comparing us to back then is next to impossible. So don't even try. If, it had been now, however, and Philip was at the church, and he didn't believe the fundemental beliefs, I'm sure he wouldn't be baptised into the church, no. But, Philip did believe the churches fundemental beliefs back then. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been baptised. So he'd have to believe it now.
The adventist church exists. Please, can you understand that? It exists! Why can't you comprehend that? It exists, and it exists for a purpose! We ARE special! God made us to be seperate! We are the true church.
Not only this, but since we exist, you might as well come to grips with that. You should come to grips with the fact our church is different from the one body of christ.
Uh, how is that a flaw? Why can't he be both?payattention said:Windmill, you have caused somewhat of a confusion here. You cited two passages:
Ephesians 5:23For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
which says that Jesus is the head of the church, then
Revelation 12:1And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
which you interpreted with Jesus being the sun with whom the woman is clothed. How can be both be the head of the woman and clothe her at the same time?
I am not trying to argue against your thesis. I am only pointing out a fundamental (there's that word you love) flaw in your analysis.
woobadooba said:Hey, I'm not the one saying the church is separate from the Christ! That is what your LOGIC concludes!
I don't need to look at definitions! I know what I am!
This really is nonsense!
Either a person is a Christian or he isn't! And a Christian is one who upholds the standards of Christ! Period!
So you don't think Paul's standards were the same as the SDA standards? The more you speak the more you show us that you really don't know the Bible!
In post number 58 you said, CHRISTIANITY AND THE CHURCH ARE SEPERATE THINGS
Oh, so no other Christian but an adventist is a mature Christian?
You are digging a deeper hole for yourself.
To be a mature Christian one must take what God gives and give what God takes!
Wow! This has got to be one of the most pompous statements I've ever heard from an SDA!
So are you trying to tell me that you have more insight into what it means to be a Christian than Paul the Apostle?
But it wasn't Philip who was baptised, it was the Ethiopian, and he only had to know one thing--Jesus Christ!
You do not understand the purpose for or the meaning of the doctrine of baptism. This is very clear!
Can't I comprehend that? Who do you think you're talking to little lady?
You really are very crude! You should show more respect to your elders!
My opinion about your character is quickly changing!
I don't see the character of Christ in this type of language! What I do see is pride!
Your tone does not reflect the humility of Christ!
Well then, if this is true, I choose to be with Christ, and you can go off to your version of the SDA church which is supposedly separated from Christ!
You know, you are really giving our church a bad name by talking like this.
Attention Viewers: I've studied under the most adept theologians in the SDA church, and I assure that this theology of this young lady is not what we believe! She is grossly misrepresenting what we believe.
We do not teach that the church and Christianty are separate!
And we are not as proud as she makes us out to be!
Pauls standards were the bible through and through -.-Hey, I'm not the one saying the church is separate from the Christ! That is what your LOGIC concludes!
I don't need to look at definitions! I know what I am!
This really is nonsense!
Either a person is a Christian or he isn't! And a Christian is one who upholds the standards of Christ! Period!
So you don't think Paul's standards were the same as the SDA standards? The more you speak the more you show us that you really don't know the Bible!
Yes, they are in terms of how we speak about them.In post number 58 you said, CHRISTIANITY AND THE CHURCH ARE SEPERATE THINGS
I DO understand it. I understand what it is. How do I not understand baptisim?But it wasn't Philip who was baptised, it was the Ethiopian, and he only had to know one thing--Jesus Christ!
You do not understand the purpose for or the meaning of the doctrine of baptism. This is very clear!
My opinion, I'm afraid, of you, has already changed.Can't I comprehend that? Who do you think you're talking to little lady?
You really are very crude! You should show more respect to your elders!
My opinion about your character is quickly changing!
HOW?Well then, if this is true, I choose to be with Christ, and you can go off to your version of the SDA church which is supposedly separated from Christ!
You know, you are really giving our church a bad name by talking like this.
Oh, so no other Christian but an adventist is a mature Christian?
You are digging a deeper hole for yourself
They did not, infact, could not under any circumstances understand revelation.Wow! This has got to be one of the most pompous statements I've ever heard from an SDA!
So are you trying to tell me that you have more insight into what it means to be a Christian than Paul the Apostle?
Pfft, I am not proud!Attention Viewers: I've studied under the most adept theologians in the SDA church, and I assure that this theology of this young lady is not what we believe! She is grossly misrepresenting what we believe.
We do not teach that the church and Christianty are separate!
And we are not as proud as she makes us out to be!
tall73 said:I am new here so I hope you will put up with an outsider's view.
I might at a later point comment on the specifics of the symbols in Revelation 12, mostly because it is an interesting topic. But come on folks. This whole conversation is really destructive.
Our church has never said that you must subscribe to a creed. Please note that the official statement of the 27 state this. The earlier poster was right in saying that the 27 fundamentals (now 28 I guess) are a relatively new thought. At first Mrs. White referred to the 7 pillars. But even before that the truth is that the movement was studying all kinds of issues, learning all the time.
If we take the view that everyone must toe the line on tons of different issues then we cause ourselves to stop searching the scriptures.
We see this same issue in the much discussed GC session of 1888. Two of the key issues dealt with biblical interpretation/orthodoxy. They were the identification of the Germanic tribes in Daniel 7, and the identification of the law in Galatians. These were no small matters. Especially given that at that time sunday laws were being passed, there was a sense of tension, and the thought that the church would change a previous understanding was greatly debated--even though in one case, the tribes, it was fairly clear that we were probably wrong.
Some pressed Mrs. White to clarify things with her understanding. But she refused to do this entirely. Even though she disagreed with parts of Wagoner's views for instance, she encouraged them
a. to regard him as a sincere brother
b. to better emulate his manner of presentation--loving and respectful
c. to accept his overall view of the centrality of Christ in a way that was sorely lacking in the debate ridden denomination.
She noted that if the methods used to defend the truth were so harsh, she was tempted to reconsider if it really was the truth.
Did not your hearts break when that non-adventist said that they were wanting to examine our beliefs but couldn't get past our attitudes? I know mine did. I work hard to try to share Christ with people, and to turn one away from more of His will is a terrible shame!
She also encouraged them to STUDY out the issue.
We do not settle disputes by "thus saith the GC." Or "thus saith EGW" or even "thus saith our view of the Bible in the past." We instead cite the texts that show truth to be just that--truth. And if we can't answer those who question us, why are we calling it truth?
You all need to stop the witch hunt. If you don't want to see your fundamentals questioned then use your own self restraint and AVOID those posts where it happens. The truth will lose nothing by being stated--even numerous times if necessary.
StormyOne said:Thank you Tall for that post.... no where has it ever been said that to be a sda you MUST read, believe and sign off on all 27 (now 28) fundamentals... To use them as a litmus test of who is or is not an adventist is a travesty.... I am sure if some of the pioneers were alive they would be appalled.....
Cliff2 said:I will tell you what they would be appaled by.
The basic SDA beliefs being challenged by those who claim to be SDA's.
That's for sure.
No one here says we all must believe exactly the same but there must be a core of beliefs that those who are SDA can say we believe the same.
Such as the Sabbath, State of the Dead, Second Coming, IJ & the Sanctuary, Creation, End Time Events, Prophecy, Trinity, God's Word as Truth, and there are probably a few I have left out.
We get all these from the Bible but as a package we can turn to the "27/28" to find a summary of them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?