Should the SDA Forum Be Split?

[sentipente]

It may be best for the world to shut down the entire SDA experiment. It has not worked.

 

[JonMiller]

In other areas then these forums we have done a lot better.

JM

 

[sentipente]

In other areas then these forums we have done a lot better.

JM

I was referring to the CF experiment.

 

[woobadooba]

What are you talking about? I have done no such thing. I merely corrected a poster on what specifically you apologized for.

I would just like to also make a clarification. Someone made the claim (Conklin I think) that a certain forum member claimed he was the only true Progressive. That is probably true, if it is who I think it is. While I am definitely aligning myself with the Progressive side, I am not a Progressive in the sense of RC where it is major denominational doctrinal restructuring from the ground up under question. I disagree with him on certain things such as theistic evolution and moral influence theory. I am an Evangelical Adventist. However, I am also Progressive in the sense that I am willing to take a second look at SDA doctrine and beliefs and am prepared to make changes if necessary. While I believe she has the most doctrinal truth in Christiandom, I do not believe our church has completely 'arrived' by any stretch of the means.

RC, I am totally baffled that you are pushing for a blended forum. You honestly enjoy dialoging with people who think you are a 'slithering Jesuit'? I am at a loss.

Tall and Sophia, they think you are an apostate pastoral couple who are traitors to the Ark Of Safety.

And Ice, they think you are about as Adventist as Billy Graham as well as an EGW hater.

I said I will support it if the split is voted down and I will. I am just really confused about this whole thing.

Now, how much longer will it take for this to be decided? I have served on board meetings that were less painful than this process.

This post speaks volumes about your character. Indeed you are the most divisive SDA that I've ever encountered.

You really should be ashamed of yourself for this, but you don't really think too much about these things, because you are under the influence of the adversary.

Truth is, we were doing a lot better than we are right now before you came back. That should say something!

 

[NightEternal]

Woob, do you deny that certain TSDA's feel the way I have spelled out about certain non-Traditionals in here? Are you saying I am so totally off-base that this could not possibly be the case?

Be honest.

I find it strange that someone who just recently said the boards would be better off without the Progressives is now pushing the hardest for not splitting.

And no, I won't take the blame that you so presumptiously try to shove on my shoulders.

Keep it up with the demonization. You are only convincing me more and more that separation is the way to go.

Not that there was ever any doubt in my mind to begin with.

 

[TrustAndObey]

But how would Christ feel if the words that I sought to present to you were of Him, and then you would refuse to accept them simply because they do not agree with one of the 28 fundamental doctrines of our church?

Woob, I don't doubt the sincerity of others here when they feel that one (or more) of our funamental beliefs contradicts their "new" light either. Everyone thinks their revelations come directly from God, yet how can there be so many differing opinions?

You might think it's something you need to share with me, but that doesn't always mean it's something I'm willing to debate.

There's nothing new under the sun. I think at this point I've heard every argument against Adventism that there is. And every argument against a fundamental belief too.

It is good to be firm in what you believe, but even better to be flexible enough to allow room for further light.

But I see that I will have no place to call my own on CF once a split takes place.

You will get what you want, but not without consequence.

You were welcomed in the Traditonal section last night and you'd be welcome in there in the future if there's a split.

 

[Jon0388g]

I do not believe we should split.

The constant bickering amongst grown adults is embarassing enough: but after a little consideration I have come to decide a split would be a disgrace to both Traditional and Progressive Adventists.

There are ways of getting along. Our Lord is long-suffering, and we are commanded to be perfect as He is perfect. Almost instantly after speaking the Law to the congregation of Israel, bringing them out of slavery, they went and made a golden idol. Our Father did not cast them off for such blatant rebellion. Neither should we cast off our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Does nobody remember, "77 x 7"? ? ?

I am as sick of defending my beliefs against supposed "Adventists" as the rest of you, but what message does it send to the CF as a whole if we stand divided? I believe we would be sending a distorted one to other Christians/non-Christians if we broadcast our family difficulties to the world.

We as TSDA's know that Ellen White warned of the great shaking. I believe it is occurring before our very eyes. The split will happen eventually. God's remnant will emerge from the dust in His own time, from all corners of Adventism, Catholicism, Baptist, Pentecostal, etc. We do not need to use our own initiative to make this happen.


I think the traditional/progressive subfora should remain. The main forum should be used for socialising, and uplifting Christ only. We have done this before, rarely, but it has been done. Ellen White says we should constantly strive to portray a united front to the world, no matter what is going on behind the scenes.


The subfora can be used efficiently for what is classed as clearly "traditional" or "progressive" in nature. Perhaps a clear sign can be used in the thread title to indicate this to all users. We can even start up a seperate subforum for controlled debate between Traditional and Progressive sides on matters of doctrine. Strict guidelines and warning systems would be greatly beneficial for such an area, as Woob suggested.


But, either way this goes, I will continue to post where and when I feel necessary. We all have individual responsibility to reflect the image of Christ in every letter we type, so that the true serpents will be made ever more obvious.

"To sum up, all of you be harmonious, sympathetic, brotherly, kindhearted, and humble in spirit; not returning evil for evil or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead; for you were called for the very purpose that you might inherit a blessing...But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame." 1 Peter 3:8-16


How timely a message!!



Jon

 

[woobadooba]

Woob, do you deny that certain TSDA's feel the way I have spelled out about certain nontraditionals in here? Are you saying I am so totally off-base that this could not possibly be the case?

Be honest.

There is no denying the fact that people have tension towards each other on here. However, rather than trying to put people against each other, which is what you did in your post, it would be best to encourage them to look to Christ.

Perhaps you should be reminded of this verse: "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God."
(Mat 5:9)

Are you really acting like a child of God, Night?

I find it strange that someone who just recently said the boards would be better off without the Progressives is now pushing the hardest for not splitting.

You find it strange that the Holy Spirit spoke to my heart? Can you hear His voice?

 

[TrustAndObey]

We all have individual responsibility to reflect the image of Christ in every letter we type, so that the true serpents will be made ever more obvious.

Amen.

 

[woobadooba]

Woob, I don't doubt the sincerity of others here when they feel that one (or more) of our funamental beliefs contradicts their "new" light either. Everyone thinks their revelations come directly from God, yet how can there be so many differing opinions?

Keep in mind that there is a difference between 'New Light' and 'good Exegesis'

 

[NightEternal]

I am as sick of defending my beliefs against supposed "Adventists" as the rest of you,

And here we have a good example of why blended forums is a complete joke and waste of time.

What productive dialogue can come of this sort of intolerant, bigoted mindset?

 

[StormyOne]

unbelievable....... and sad....

 

[TrustAndObey]

I'd like a split just so I don't have to watch you two fight anymore! Hmphhh.

Woob, everyone here thinks they're right, and I'm sure no one comes here in under the guise of having new light when they're really trying to deceive. God help them if they do.

I chose this church, I agreed with the fundamental beliefs, and I didn't do it overnight.

I studied this church and several others and this was my decision. I'm happy with the Adventist church for SEVERAL reasons, and I should be allowed to enjoy it without defending it all the time.

 

[woobadooba]

I'd like a split just so I don't have to watch you two fight anymore! Hmphhh.

Woob, everyone here thinks they're right, and I'm sure no one comes here in under the guise of having new light when they're really trying to deceive. God help them if they do.

I chose this church, I agreed with the fundamental beliefs, and I didn't do it overnight.

I studied this church and several others and this was my decision. I'm happy with the Adventist church for SEVERAL reasons, and I should be allowed to enjoy it without defending it all the time.

I think that if all of us could just learn how to communicate our ideas without being offensive, or overly offended, we would learn a great deal from each other. Don't you think so?

 

[Jon0388g]

And here we have a good example of why blended forums is a complete joke and waste of time.

What productive dialogue can come of this sort of intolerant, bigoted mindset?

Pejorative adjectives do not help soothe the tension. However, I choose to work with you and perhaps elaborate on my comment in another way.


What I meant by "supposed Adventists" are the way Traditionals view Progressives, and vic verca. Neither group wish to see the other remain. Progressives wish to retain the Adventist name yet re-evaluate some of the beliefs (rightly so or wrongly so), whereas Traditionals believe that their beliefs are founded in truth already - and any new light from our Saviour will not contradict their foundations (rightly so or wrongly so).


I believe we are all on the same boat. Preach Christ and Him crucified. There is never not a time to proclaim Him and His Second Advent.

Doctrinal differences have a time and a place.


Jon

 

[Endium]

I think there should be two different forums, but I don't think "split" is the right word.

Honestly, it is progressives who are more so going against the foundation of what it means to be an SDA.

I have nothing personally against any progressive, and I have even learned some things from them. I commend people for searching for the truth and trying to understand God better.

However what it comes down to is the fact that progressives disagree with the basic foundations of what SDAism is built on. I think progressives should learn a note from the Shepherds Rod and just start their own group with a different name.

Ultimately, this is not necessarily one group splitting into two groups, but one group moving off of the main group.

You have to accept that fact that the SDA church has certain foundational principles. Those who disagree with so many of these principles, as I believe the progressives do, should choose to accept the fact they are not really SDA, nominally speaking.

So I would vote for the split, but only if the two forums resulted in something like "SDA Forum" and "Progressive SDA Forum." Like I said earlier, when the Shepherds Rod realized that their beliefs were different than many other Adventists, they did not try to call themselves "Reformed SDA" or anything to confuse others into thinking they were in full compliance with the SDA church (at least I don't think...)

But if the split results in something like "Traditional SDA" and "Progressive SDA" I will not support it, because that gives the implication that the SDA church is split down the middle. That would cause too much confusion because it does not reflect the reality of the official SDA church. There is only one SDA church, and any group of people who decide that SDA foundational beliefs may need to be changed need to recognize that unless that change is official, it is not SDA stance.

It's like if I were to go into a Catholic forum, claim to be catholic, and then claim that the Pope is the antichrist and the devil himself. There are some matters in the Catholic church that people can disagree on, but there are other matters that are so fundamental to the church that you cannot disagree on them. The people in that Catholic forum would probably tell me to believe what I want to believe, but do not present myself as a Catholic if I disagree with such a fundamental part of their religion. It is just the logical conclusion to come to. Just as well, the problem with progressiveism is not that they disagree, but the fact that they disagree on something that is too fundamental to be disagreed on. The principles are so fundamental to the SDA church that if you disagree with them, you disagree with SDAism itself.

I know that progressives all hold various levels of different beliefs, and I don't think it's necessary for them to all form another group. But for those who agree with such things as evolution, that ellen white was not inspired, etc... they should accept the fact that those beliefs are too fundamental to the SDA church to disagree with them and still be an SDA. It just doesn't make any sense.

Consider yourself non-denominational even, if you will, but not SDA. It's impossible for it to be.

 

[NightEternal]

No, I am not trying to pit anyone against anyone Woob. I am being a realist and seeing things for how they really are.

If my fellow non-traditionalists are okay with fellowshipping and dialoging with those who believe what I have claimed, then more power to them. I will not, however, pretend to understand it.

The bottom line for me is that I believe Adventism is a huge umbrella that can accomodate a wide spectrum of views.

Others do not think so.

It is because of those people the old, blended forum format will never work.

The church has division everywhere and always has since its inception. You won't find a denomination with more conservative and liberal offshoots, independent ministries and churches than Adventism. Some even have thier own camp meetings and schools.

What's the big deal if it happens here on this forum?

Bring on the split. It is time.

 

[JonMiller]

Honestly, there are many in the 'traditional' camp that are just as far from the 28 fundamental beleifs as Night. (For example, from what I have seen of their beleifs, Woob and Night are about just as far from the 28 fundamentals... but they are for some reason impassioned against eachother?)

And from what I have seen, the 'traditional' camp doesn't accurately reflect the church's views on things like the trinity. Or many other things.

And yet they claim to be the true SDAs.

And some of them who might follow the 28 fundamentals, seem to have problems showing Christ to the world.

I don't want my church represented only by the 'traditional' camp here.

JM

 

[sentipente]

Endium, no one is promoting anything. This is merely discussion of new ideas.

 

[Mankin]

Woob, what is with you? You want the forum to not spilt, yet you say that progressives are under the devil's influence and only traditionals are true Adventists. Progressives question some of the Adventist beliefs. So what?