The CSDA!!

PaleHorse · Oct 17, 2005

Seraph1m said:
Peachy, just curious.

Is there some reason we are going on about what CSDA's believe if there are none here to defend why or what it is they believe?

ANYBODY here a "Creation SDA"?

Does it matter if there are any CSDA here or not? I don't think so. They want to use the Adventist name, as such, that makes it our business since we are Adventist as well.
If no CSDA's are here that is by their own volition for no one is preventing them from becoming members and posting here. I would fully welcome any of them to come here for I would like to discuss with them what they do/don't believe.

However, their website makes it very clear why they believe the detail we are discussing. If you want more information of this detail just click here.

Seraph1m · Oct 17, 2005

Frankly, my simple desire is to lift up Jesus, have sound doctrinal discussion and fellowship. I am a sinner saved by the grace of God and have no need to seek and point out the error of others.

Peace

Jhn 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.

PaleHorse said:
Does it matter if there are any CSDA here or not? I don't think so. They want to use the Adventist name, as such, that makes it our business since we are Adventist as well.
If no CSDA's are here that is by their own volition for no one is preventing them from becoming members and posting here. I would fully welcome any of them to come here for I would like to discuss with them what they do/don't believe.

However, their website makes it very clear why they believe the detail we are discussing. If you want more information of this detail just click here.

SassySDA · Oct 17, 2005

TrustAndObey said:
That's right, and don't let anyone distract you from the original topic of this thread.

As Adventists we have every right to discuss splinter groups, and what appears to be small groups that try to bear false witness by claiming they hold Adventist doctrine when they do not. These small groups are confusing people about what the true Adventist message is. Therefore we have the right, if not the duty, to let others know that.

SOP tells us that the church will start appearing to fail and that the conflict will come from within, correct? I'm sure none of us here are surprised by these splinter groups at all, but we do have the right and need to discuss them and their actions to see just how bad the problem is.

We talk about the beast power all the time without that power being here to "defend" itself. No group is or should be immune from discussion.

All denominations have branch offs and so be it, but when these groups come up with some "out there" doctrines, they should expect and get some kickback for it. Otherwise, it really would appear that they are more than willing to trash our beliefs, but become very defensive when their own are out on the table.

Correct me if I'm wrong everybody, but in this non-debate area a question can be asked, but once it's answered the asker needs to accept it and not debate the answer, correct? (Not that anyone is debating, I just want to make sure I'm clear on the rules here).

No, you are right...that's the rules. If someone wants to debate this they would have to take it out of this particular thread to the main thread.

happywiththelord · Oct 17, 2005

Totally agree!!!

awesumtenor · Oct 17, 2005

PaleHorse said:
Does it matter if there are any CSDA here or not? I don't think so. They want to use the Adventist name, as such, that makes it our business since we are Adventist as well.
If no CSDA's are here that is by their own volition for no one is preventing them from becoming members and posting here. I would fully welcome any of them to come here for I would like to discuss with them what they do/don't believe.

However, their website makes it very clear why they believe the detail we are discussing. If you want more information of this detail just click here.

Clicked the link; read the site. They believe that the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists is in apostasy and that they are, in fact the "true Seventh-day Adventist church" They are not interested in joining with or co-existing with the church as currently constituted.

As such, should they be allowed to use the name trademarked by the General Conference or otherwise represent themselves as part of a church whose authority they reject?

In His service,
Mr. J

happywiththelord · Oct 17, 2005

No they shouldnt.

daveleau · Oct 17, 2005

Mod hat on^

Members that identify with the soon-to-be "Progressive" SDA forum are not to post anything other than Fellowship or Questions in the Traditional area.

Purpose of Traditional SDA Sticky Post said:

** DEFINITION OF FELLOWSHIP POST:

It is not debate.
Someone without a SDA faith icon may not discuss reasons for or against a subject being discussed on this forum. This includes questions that essentially are rebuttal or argumentative in nature.

It is not apologetics.
Someone without an SDA flame over the Bible faith icon or SDA church in their profile may not engage in theological discussions that defend their particular point of view on scriptural, theological, doctrinal, SDA belief or political issues.

It is not answering questions.
Let's say a thread is started that asks the question about what do you think about keeping the Sabbath? Only SDAs (those with flame over the Bible faith icon or SDA as the church in their profile) can offer an opinion about that. A member with any other faith icon or with no SDA church in their profile may not answer that question in this forum. This is not to say they don't have an opinion on that topic, but they may not answer that question here. Neither may non-SDAs offer rebuttal to opinions posted in response to a question or discussion.

It is not teaching
If a thread is started that asks a general question such as what do you think XYZ means? Only a member bearing a SDA faith icon (thus identifying him/herself as an SDA) may give instruction on the topic. While there may be many very good ideas on the subject from other members (those bearing any other faith icon) they may not give instruction in the Seventh Day Adventist Forum.

Earnest questions are always welcome, from anyone.

It is
Essentially Fellowship is defined as discussion of topics of association, of companionship - i.e. discussions of things like friends, family, work..... these are fellowship posts. And posts that offer friendship would certainly be described as fellowship

Click to expand...

Further posting in the SDA forum will result in staff actions. These incursions between the two SDA groups is causing the SDA forum harm. This is because not only does it cause a lot of arguing, but it causes staff to post staff records. These staff records will all-but cancel out any chance that members have for being on staff. That means that you are going to be stuck with rnmomof7 and me for a lot longer.

Please, stick to your areas in the same way that you stay out of the Baptist, Charismatic or Catholic congregational forums. That is how this division is going to be enforced and there is a SDA forum for debate between SDA groups as well.

Any posts not following this after today by previously established SDA members will result in staff reports. (That doesn't mean that you have free reign for the rest of the day, either. It just means that I want to give people time to read this mod hat.)

Thank you,
daveleau
CF Staff

Mod hat off^

happywiththelord · Oct 19, 2005

Thanks Dave!! I appreciate your hard work!

PaleHorse · Oct 19, 2005

Thanks Dave,
I echo HappywiththeLord's sentiments.

happywiththelord · Oct 21, 2005

so, what else do CSDA's believe?

honorthesabbath · Oct 21, 2005

happywiththelord said:
so, what else do CSDA's believe?

HI Happy--I'm not sure what all the CSDA's believe--but since they chose not to part of the main body of Traditional SDA's--then they should forfiet using the name.

happywiththelord · Oct 21, 2005

i agree with that! i would like to knoe what else they believe also. just out of curiousity.

Seraph1m · Oct 21, 2005

Didn't somebody say just today, something to the effect that, "I don't want to be exposed to the beliefs of people who don't believe what I believe?" As Scoobie Doo would say errr?

happywiththelord · Oct 22, 2005

if you are referring to what i said out in the open forum, you got a little mixed up. that is not what i said. i said, i dont go into those areas and harras people on there beliefs. I want to be educated on what other people believe, so i know how to speak to them when i do come across them. i think not knowing other "beliefs" is wrong, we should know what is out there. But as to them coming into my "traditional area". i dont think they should come in here and debate me. we can do that in the open forum. but for knowledge, i wanna know what is out there.

so i hope that helped your confusion on what i said.

honorthesabbath · Oct 22, 2005

happywiththelord said:
if you are referring to what i said out in the open forum, you got a little mixed up. that is not what i said. i said, i dont go into those areas and harras people on there beliefs. I want to be educated on what other people believe, so i know how to speak to them when i do come across them. i think not knowing other "beliefs" is wrong, we should know what is out there. But as to them coming into my "traditional area". i dont think they should come in here and debate me. we can do that in the open forum. but for knowledge, i wanna know what is out there.

so i hope that helped your confusion on what i said.

How long can you hold your breath Happy?ROFL!!!!!

dezzie1180 · Oct 22, 2005

TrustAndObey said:
I think the GC absolutely should deny off-shoot groups that stray so far away from the church's original doctrine! I mean, come on, if these new groups want to turn our church into other churches, then why don't they just go to other churches?

Your statement just solidified something I've noticed a lot of lately...when some Adventists find what they consider "new light", they seem to decide Traditional Adventists their "enemy". They take their eye off the ball.

I agree fully. Why should they be allowed to call themselves sda's if they don't even support or follow the gc sda doctrines. They should just go and join other churches.

honorthesabbath · Oct 23, 2005

dezzie1180 said:
I agree fully. Why should they be allowed to call themselves sda's if they don't even support or follow the gc sda doctrines. They should just go and join other churches.

I feel the same way about "Progressives"!

moicherie · Oct 25, 2005

IOW join a church and no matter what keep your mouth shut - mmm sounds like a religious version of George Orwell's 1984

Dizahab · Oct 25, 2005

moicherie said:
IOW join a church and no matter what keep your mouth shut - mmm sounds like a religious version of George Orwell's 1984

Then I must ask; why would you join a church if you felt that it's doctrines and practices were not biblical?

PS-I am new, what does "IOW" mean please?

Seraph1m · Oct 25, 2005

Dizahab said:
Then I must ask; why would you join a church if you felt that it's doctrines and practices were not biblical?

PS-I am new, what does "IOW" mean please?

IOW = In other words

The CSDA!!

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Veteran

In all you do, do it for Christ and w/ Him in mind

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Senior Veteran

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Senior Veteran

True Brit

Dizahab

Guest

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency