Should both Traditional and Progressive SDAs answer SDA questions in the main forum?

[tall73]

Hi Tall73,

You said:
No offense taken. My observations have been made as a result of having been here just a short time. It is from the current threads and topics that a nonSDA who stops by for the first time would draw a similar conclusion. I'm reasonably certain that before this division reared its ugly head that there were/are many that had their focus on other things.

This current situation remindes me of an old country saying; "When you're standing in aligators up to your tail, it is difficult to remember that your original objective was to drain the swamp."

Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc

True enough

 

[woobadooba]

A. I cannot speak to what Dave did with you. I can say they didn't kick out folks like pay attention just because of his theological beliefs.

B. Your solution, to limit theological statements, is the very type of thing that goes against our views of religious liberty, and the very sort of thing some (only some but I have talked to them) folks would LOVE to do to all Adventists.

We need less rules limiting theological statements here, not more.

tall73, all I'm saying is that if someone asks a question about what SDAs believe about something, the answer given ought to reflect what we officially hold to be true as a church. That's all I'm saying.

If people who differ in what they believe want to discuss such views in here, then so be it. May they all come in for discussion.

I do not oppose liberty. Rather, I oppose babel. And when you have two different answers which are supposed to represent what SDAs believe, you have babel.

 

[tall73]

Dave, all I'm saying is that if someone asks a question about what SDAs believe about something, the answer given ought to reflect what we officially hold to be true as a church. That's all I'm saying.

If people who differ in what they believe want to discuss such views in here, then so be it. May they all come in for discussion.

I do not oppose liberty. Rather, I oppose babel. And when you have two different answers which are supposed to represent what SDAs believe, you have babel.

I agreed with you on that part.

But your underlying discussion has been to say that some are pushing an ecumenical movement to water down the church, and that it is a plot (conducted apparently by my wife) to do so.

That is simply untrue. My wife is currently taking a very non-traditional stance on some things. Trust me, I have to hear about it even more than you! But she still advocates for Adventist positions and tries to treat Adventists fairly.

You may soon find out that having no Adventist moderator will be worse. Half the time moderators simply have no idea what Adventist theology even is. With no one to explain it they will be just going with what they can under the rules, sometimes with the wrong idea.

Ah well. Sometimes you get what you ask for.

 

[woobadooba]

I agreed with you on that part.

But your underlying discussion has been to say that some are pushing an ecumenical movement to water down the church, and that it is a plot (conducted apparently by my wife) to do so.

That is simply untrue. My wife is currently taking a very non-traditional stance on some things. Trust me, I have to hear about it even more than you! But she still advocates for Adventist positions whether she holds them or not.

You may soon find out that having no Adventist moderator will be worse. Half the time moderators simply have no idea what Adventist theology even is. With no one to explain it they will be just going with what they can under the rules, sometimes with the wrong idea.

Ah well. Sometimes you get what you ask for.

tall73, our message is becoming very obscure in this place as a result of the division; and now that both progressive and traditional SDAs can answer questions and thus claim to represent what our church believes, our message will become even more obscure in here.

 

[tall73]

Perhaps.

Maybe we should all get out to GT a bit more.

Sorry to say but Adventists seem to have an arguing gene, and at least that way it would be doing some good (making us study).


Anyway, gotta head to bed.

Have a good night

And thanks for the pm's .

 

[woobadooba]

Have a good night

And thanks for the pm's .

Same to you

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I think woob is under the wrong impression that the views expressed here are supposed to represent the SDA church rather then the personal views of the members of the forum. How could it be otherwise this is not an official SDA forum there is not an official SDA church representative here with some kind of document on file that says to all who listen this is our person submitting official SDA doctrinal views.

I certainly have never stated that my posts represent the SDA churches official views unless I present a quote from them as in the recent thread about Ellen White and her food for worms statement.

I think it is important that strangers learn that Adventists don't simply follow some set and closed doctrinal stance. That we have magazines like Spectrum and Adventist Today that question and dig deeper then anything found in the Review or Signs of the Times.

I think this is simply a power play by a Traditional Adventist to limit all opinions to those that please the Traditional Adventists.

 

[woobadooba]

I think woob is under the wrong impression that the views expressed here are supposed to represent the SDA church rather then the personal views of the members of the forum. How could it be otherwise this is not an official SDA forum there is not an official SDA church representative here with some kind of document on file that says to all who listen this is our person submitting official SDA doctrinal views.

I certainly have never stated that my posts represent the SDA churches official views unless I present a quote from them as in the recent thread about Ellen White and her food for worms statement.

I think it is important that strangers learn that Adventists don't simply follow some set and closed doctrinal stance. That we have magazines like Spectrum and Adventist Today that question and dig deeper then anything found in the Review or Signs of the Times.

I think this is simply a power play by a Traditional Adventist to limit all opinions to those that please the Traditional Adventists.

If you took the time to read my posts in this thread you would have discovered a few things about me:

1. I don't oppose liberty of thought
2. I am not a Traditional SDA
3. I know the history of this forum better than most members in here (I've been around since 2005)
4. I don't oppose open discussion in the main forum

Again, the idea here is that we have a defined list of doctrinal beliefs posted in this forum that the SDA church deems to be our official beliefs.
http://www.christianforums.com/t2180221-official-seventh-day-adventist-fundamental-beliefs.html

When someone comes in here and asks a question that can be answered by, or according to such beliefs, then that question ought to be answered thusly, since the one asking the question is obviously looking for an answer the SDA church generally accepts as truth on the matter, not a mere opinion.

Furthermore, the argument that this isn't an official SDA forum, therefore it is a free for all as such when it comes to answering questions, is self-defeating on the grounds that our official beliefs are posted in this forum. Now if a rule were to be established to take away the list of Our Official Beliefs, then you would have a point here, but that hasn't happened. Therefore, your point is moot.

Again, I am not arguing against open discussion. My contention is with how one ought to answer a question in here when the questioner is looking for an answer which represents what SDAs generally believe on that topic.

It must be understood that the one asking the question may not really understand the nature of the division--Traditional and Progressive, and is therefore looking for an answer that represents what SDAs generally believe. I've been around here long enough to see the type of questions that people ask, and can say that non-SDAs are generally looking for an official belief when they ask a question in here. Therefore, it is unacceptable to provide answers to such questions that are contrary to what the SDA church officially believes to be true.

 

[Sophia7]

The list of fundamental beliefs is posted as a sticky in the main SDA forum simply in order to give easy reference to them. This does not turn the SDA forum into a place where only official denominationally approved answers can be given, and there is no requirement that people have to agree with all of them in order to answer questions in the main SDA forum. As I said earlier, I think it's a good idea to state the official position on an issue if someone asks a question about it. It is not required by the rules, however, nor is expressing disagreement and noting that not all Adventists agree with the fundamental beliefs prohibited by the rules. Woob, whether I am on staff or not, the mods are just not going to dictate that strictly how people who identify themselves as Adventists can post in the main Adventist forum. That's not how the rules work here at CF.

 

[woobadooba]

The list of fundamental beliefs is posted as a sticky in the main SDA forum simply in order to give easy reference to them. This does not turn the SDA forum into a place where only official denominationally approved answers can be given, and there is no requirement that people have to agree with all of them in order to answer questions in the main SDA forum. As I said earlier, I think it's a good idea to state the official position on an issue if someone asks a question about it. It is not required by the rules, however, nor is expressing disagreement and noting that not all Adventists agree with the fundamental beliefs prohibited by the rules. Woob, whether I am on staff or not, the mods are just not going to dictate that strictly how people who identify themselves as Adventists can post in the main Adventist forum. That's not how the rules work here at CF.

For some reason I'm not being understood here.

Again, when someone comes here to ask a question they are expecting to get an answer which represents what SDAs generally accept as truth, not an opinion. If they want an opinion they will go to the GT forum where they will find many.

I do not oppose open discussion or debate. What I oppose is confusion. And this forum has been reduced to confusion. There's no order in here anymore.

People are slandering well known figures in our church. Questions are being answered according to views that are contrary to what the Bible really teaches. The cross is being trampled underfoot by certain views such as the moral influence theory. The creation account is being denied. Outright heresy has crept into this forum! And it is sickening.

To make matters worse, it is permissible for such people to use such heretical views as a means to answer questions of non-SDAs, and thus give the impression that such people who hold these beliefs represent our church. This is very disturbing!

If things don't change, I hope the Lord will shut this place down, because it is no longer SDA in my opinion. If this is going to be a forum that represents the SDA church there must be better guidelines, otherwise it shouldn't be called SDA.

This forum has really gotten out of control, and is actually doing more harm to our church than it is doing good. Changes need to be made in here.

I suppose that's the way it works though when you have a free forum. If we were paying for it we would have more control over what is happening in here.

 

[Jon0388g]

I have to agree with Woob here.

The main issue is that the defined Seventh-day Adventist message has become so watered down with all this traditional vs progressive nonsense that people come to this forum and only satan is being uplifted. Woob is right on the money when he likened the situation to Babel.

Is this forum represented by "Seventh-day Adventists" or people who consider themselves "Seventh-day Adventists" - whilst promoting blatantly non-Adventist positions, and sometimes even blasphemous ones?

I've raised this issue before. And it is a problem I am sure Tall and Sophia remember me questioning. How and when are we to draw the line with who can post and represent this forum, while acting under the guise of "considered SDA?"


There is nothing wrong with opinion. But where is the line to be drawn?

Jon

 

[Sophia7]

If things don't change, I hope the Lord will shut this place down, because it is no longer SDA in my opinion. If this is going to be a forum that represents the SDA church there must be better guidelines, otherwise it shouldn't be called SDA.

This forum has really gotten out of control, and is actually doing more harm to our church than it is doing good. Changes need to be made in here.

I suppose that's the way it works though when you have a free forum. If we were paying for it we would have more control over what is happening in here.

This forum was never created to represent the SDA Church. In fact, many other Christians here at CF are very anti-Adventist and would like to see us kicked out of the Christians Only sections entirely and relegated to cult status. As the only current Adventist staff member here, I have taken every opportunity that I could to promote understanding and tolerance of our beliefs among staff.

This is an online discussion forum for individual Seventh-day Adventists, under the larger umbrella of a Christian discussion forum not operated by Seventh-day Adventists. It is only one congregational forum out of many here, governed by the rules of CF, which we all agreed to follow when we became members here. If you want control, you are welcome to start your own forum. Otherwise, most forums have rules that they require members to submit to, whether they pay for the privilege of posting there or not.

 

[tall73]

I have to agree with Woob here.

The main issue is that the defined Seventh-day Adventist message has become so watered down with all this traditional vs progressive nonsense that people come to this forum and only satan is being uplifted. Woob is right on the money when he likened the situation to Babel.

Is this forum represented by "Seventh-day Adventists" or people who consider themselves "Seventh-day Adventists" - whilst promoting blatantly non-Adventist positions, and sometimes even blasphemous ones?

I've raised this issue before. And it is a problem I am sure Tall and Sophia remember me questioning. How and when are we to draw the line with who can post and represent this forum, while acting under the guise of "considered SDA?"


There is nothing wrong with opinion. But where is the line to be drawn?

Jon

I am not on staff anymore. And soon my wife won't be either. Then it will be up to the mods and the supervisors, and the Admins and the Execs. And if it follows the usual trend they will tell you that this same problem happens in the Messianic forum and the Baptist forum, etc. and they won't change anything. But maybe they will. You never know. The CC and such now have some definitions to apply. Maybe you will get some too. But I doubt it. One exec (the Protestant Representative, who used to mod here) said "not on my watch" to the proposal of setting up definitions and structures for each group. You are carrying on a discussion in one corner that is going on in a bigger way in the whole site.

I therefore suggest that if you take issue that you pm the staff here and make your appeal. Or post in the "discuss rules" forum, etc.

But I will tell you that things here at CF run on their own rules. Sometimes you get what you hope for and sometimes not. It is Erwin's board, run by the execs. Overall I find them pretty reasonable people (though I certainly don't always agree with them). I push for some things, but in the end it is what it is.

Consider before you do so that imposing rules here about who can talk will just encourage more rule setting all over the forum. As it is we cannot discuss two of our doctrines freely. I wish if you were going to get into a campaign it would be this one. You are worried that there is no unified answer. I agree. That is a problem. But as it is we can't even discuss our beliefs in our own forum! To me that comes first. And limiting speech will not help that at all. Even if it seems like it is for a good reason.

So again...make your appeal formally if you must. I would suggest you just leave it at a good sense appeal to the members involved here and put your efforts behind the cause of freedom to look at all the Scriptures.

 

[Sophia7]

I have to agree with Woob here.

The main issue is that the defined Seventh-day Adventist message has become so watered down with all this traditional vs progressive nonsense that people come to this forum and only satan is being uplifted. Woob is right on the money when he likened the situation to Babel.

Is this forum represented by "Seventh-day Adventists" or people who consider themselves "Seventh-day Adventists" - whilst promoting blatantly non-Adventist positions, and sometimes even blasphemous ones?

I've raised this issue before. And it is a problem I am sure Tall and Sophia remember me questioning. How and when are we to draw the line with who can post and represent this forum, while acting under the guise of "considered SDA?"


There is nothing wrong with opinion. But where is the line to be drawn?

Jon

From the early days of this forum, the line has been drawn at how people identify themselves. Staff can't go strictly by icons because not all Adventists use the SDA icon. They can't go by profiles because not all Adventists state that in their profiles. They can't go on witch hunts to find out if someone is really a member of the Adventist Church. They can ask people by PM to clarify their denominational status. Those who identify themselves as Adventists and who wish to remain affiliated with the denomination are allowed to debate, teach, answer questions, state opinions, and even disagree with Adventist fundamental beliefs in the main SDA forum.

 

[woobadooba]

This forum was never created to represent the SDA Church. In fact, many other Christians here at CF are very anti-Adventist and would like to see us kicked out of the Christians Only sections entirely and relegated to cult status. As the only current Adventist staff member here, I have taken every opportunity that I could to promote understanding and tolerance of our beliefs among staff.

This is an online discussion forum for individual Seventh-day Adventists, under the larger umbrella of a Christian discussion forum not operated by Seventh-day Adventists. It is only one congregational forum out of many here, governed by the rules of CF, which we all agreed to follow when we became members here. If you want control, you are welcome to start your own forum. Otherwise, most forums have rules that they require members to submit to, whether they pay for the privilege of posting there or not.

Well then, this should no longer be called an SDA forum, because to call it SDA is to give the impression that it represents the SDA church, and the truth of the matter is that much of what is being said in here is contrary to what we believe. Therefore, it isn't SDA. In fact, even those who are liberal would disagree with much of what some of the so-called progressive SDAs are teaching in here

Furthermore, our posted beliefs ought to be taken down, since they don't mean anything anymore in here

This forum has become a theological farce.

You know, I have no community that I can go to and feel that I can find something uplifting and encouraging. I was hoping this place would help me in this area, but that obviously isn't going to happen here, because people are too much concerned about stabbing each other in the back, and promoting heretical views, while pretending to represent true Christianity.

 

[tall73]

Let's back up a second here.

Woobadooba, I just want to be clear, are you asking for

a. People to be reasonable and put the traditional view when outsiders ask?

b. An official change to the rules of this forum?

 

[woobadooba]

From the early days of this forum, the line has been drawn at how people identify themselves. Staff can't go strictly by icons because not all Adventists use the SDA icon. They can't go by profiles because not all Adventists state that in their profiles. They can't go on witch hunts to find out if someone is really a member of the Adventist Church. They can ask people by PM to clarify their denominational status. Those who identify themselves as Adventists and who wish to remain affiliated with the denomination are allowed to debate, teach, answer questions, state opinions, and even disagree with Adventist fundamental beliefs in the main SDA forum.

The rules have changed. I've been here long enough to know this. It used to be that one had to have either an SDA icon, or state in his profile that he is a member of the SDA church to debate/discuss/answer questions in the SDA forum.

Now anyone who merely considers himself to be SDA is allowed to do these things.

 

[tall73]

Please consider just writing a nice letter to Christian73, one of our mods, and ask him to consider such a policy.

Sophia is quitting staff so she won't have a role in this anyway. No sense in more fighting.

 

[woobadooba]

Let's back up a second here.

Woobadooba, I just want to be clear, are you asking for

a. People to be reasonable and put the traditional view when outsiders ask?

b. An official change to the rules of this forum?

I'm asking that questions be answered according to what our church officially teaches as truth.

 

[Sophia7]

The rules have changed. I've been here long enough to know this. It used to be that one had to have either an SDA icon, or state in his profile that he is a member of the SDA church to debate/discuss/answer questions in the SDA forum.

Now anyone who merely considers himself to be SDA is allowed to do these things.

Those are general guidelines for the SDA forum, as are those that I listed above, not CF rules. We do look at those things first, but they don't apply to every situation. As I said, some people who identify themselves as Adventists don't have either of those things, and CF rules do not force them to. When daveleau was our mod, he stated that no inquisitions into people's self-proclaimed denominational affiliations would be allowed. This has always been the practice of mods in the SDA forum. I'm going to refrain from discussing this any further. As my husband said, you may PM christian73 with any further suggestions.