The Three-Legged Stool of Apostasy

[Prophecy Countdown]

LURKERS: Those individuals, both registered and non-registered, who read the posts in here but do not contribute. They 'lurk' in the background without getting involved.

TRAD: Traditional Adventist.

PROG: Progressive Adventist.

NON-TRAD: Anyone who does not qualify as a Traditional Adventist.

Thanks NE, in making that clear.
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

By the current definitions progressives and non-traditionals are technically the same.

So Tall73, I can bring ‘non-traditionals’ and ‘progressives’ together as one without causing offence to either?
PC

 

[sentipente]

All progs may be non-trads but not all non-trads are necessarily prog.

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

So Tall73, I can bring ‘non-traditionals’ and ‘progressives’ together as one without causing offence to either?
PC

Thanks Tall73; that simplifies it some what.

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

All progs may be non-trads but not all non-trads are necessarily prog.

Thanks Sentipente, but what if and I mean a big 'IF' a TRAD becomes a NON-TRAD then moves on to a Progressive.
Then we would have a truly flexible thinking SDA that could do wonders.

If NON-TRADS are progressive then they can be in with the above group.

The Progs could, be closer to the above group.

Then we Have the TRADS, separate, that's a relief.

And the LURKERS are floating around in the background.

Thank you Sentipente, Tall73, and last but not least Night Eternal.
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Just keep in mind that whatever you post is for the benefit of the lurkers who read. Non-Trads who are actually foolish enough to believe they are going to convince the biased Trads of anything by what they post are to be pitied, because they have wasted every single minute they have spent typing in here.

Now That I have some idea of the terms thank you NE, I can agree with you wholeheartedly.

I have a friend Charles Wheeling, who is well known in the USA and many countries around the globe, who speaks on Eschatology to SDA's that don't brandish the fact that they support him.

They grasp what he says along with Baptists, Seventh Day baptists But he says the Traditional Adventists who came 'to spy' at his seminars when he first went out, sat there with blank looks on their faces.
So from the TRADS, I don't expect anything other than a slanging off, which is a real pity.

Have a nice Christmas Night Eternal, you and your family.
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

PC--I've heard all 'your' arguments for years honey--they are empty. This is why I made the comment I did about your LONG DRAWN OUT diatribe. Been there done that! You added nothing to the many before you that have tried to pull it off--it's a no go in my book.

And BTW--Sentepente is correct -did you think that I or any Adventist is going to embrace your comments? I'm an Adventist on PURPOSE!!

Quote. “PC--I've heard all 'your' arguments for years honey--they are empty.” Unquote.

What part of my argument don’t you agree with?
Also how about you use some Bible, to prove your statements for once.
No you haven’t heard all my biblical arguments because I have NOT posted them ALL.
How can you judge something to be ‘empty when you claimed that you did not read my threads? Your claimed actions belie your own words!
I rest my case on that issue.

Quote. ‘This is why I made the comment I did about your LONG DRAWN OUT diatribe.’ Unquote.

Oh, I see, so on your claimed basis that you ‘haven’t read them’ Mmmmm,,
you came to the conclusion of calling them ‘diatribe?’

No, I think you are angry and upset because the Bible, does not back you up.
As I said. My posts are for serious Bible students but not for surface readers that claim ‘not to have read them’ then say from that ignorant basis, claim they found them as diatribe and boring?”
I don’t see any deep Bible discussion here, well I don’t really expect it from the ‘indoctrinated,’ and that is proving to be a sad fact.

Quote. “Been there done that! Unquote.

No, I don’t believe people that say I have ‘been there and done that.’

Its more like done a little of this and a little of that and not much of anything else because if hey had, they would be using the Bible, to prove their argument.
More Bible please.

Quote. You added nothing to the many before you that have tried to pull it off--it's a no go in my book. Unquote.

I need more than simplistic repetitious retort and blether, I need you to come up with some biblical substance and I’m not getting any.
You say ‘not in my book’ what book would that be? Certainly not the Bible, because you seem very reluctant to use it.
The fact is, your opinion without biblical backup is groundless!

Quote. And BTW--Sentepente is correct -did you think that I or any Adventist is going to embrace your comments? I'm an Adventist on PURPOSE!! Unquote.

I now know that the TRADS haven’t got a clue biblically, that’s why they withdraw from using their Bibles or can’t verify the TRAD position adequately from what I have witnessed here so far.
‘Thus sayeth E G White’ just doesn’t cut it.

I do believe you have misquoted Sentepente.
That’s commandment Exodus 20: 16 broken again by you.
In your arguments you are supposed to receive biblical verification of them not biblical censure.
Sentipente, did NOT use the term “did I think that Adventists would embrace my comments” at all.


Sentipente was very considered and careful in what he said if you read his intent.

Quote“ IN CASE you DID NOT notice, this is the SDA sub-forum. You should EXPECT members of this forum to be BIASED towards the SDA church.” Unquote

My reply was a little tongue in cheek.
“O yes I noticed it was an SDA Sub-forum and yes, I noticed they are biased. And yes, I am an SDA member.
Where did I say, I expected them not to be biased Sentipente? I didn’t!
Thanks for telling me the obvious!”

Sentipente, was correct, I do expect bias and have found it sadly in one or two in this case.
I do expect that My Brothers and Sisters with differing views of all kinds to be powerful with scriptural arguments.
Sadly in you and reds I have been disappointed but I have found others with strong biblical ties and I love reading their progressive biblical enlightenment.
Unfortunately for you and Red they know their Bibles and that is what makes them biblically stronger than the both of you in HIS word.

As for me asking you to.
Quote “Name them please all “the HUNDREDS OF THREADS,” WHERE ARE THEY?”
”A 150 will do, you are obliged to back up your statements here.
Maybe 100? Or 75? Or 50?”
Your reply was Go into the prog area--it tells the story!
That answer is most unsatisfactory.
If you or the church TRADS haven’t the biblical backup then please don’t comment with sly babblings for the sake of agitating truth seekers it makes your arguments asinine.

You called me "honey."
You cheeky thing you.

PC.

 

[honorthesabbath]

honorthesabbath
Quote
“PC--how many people do you really think read all those pages?” Unquote.

Those serious Bible students, that love biblical debate but It's not for ‘surface readers,’ they find it boring.

honorthesabbath
Quote
“Who has time?” Unquote.

The servants of God, have the time of course.
2 Tim 2: 15. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

honorthesabbath
Quote
Not I--thats for sure.” Unquote.

Hab 2: 2. And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.

Rev 1: 3. Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

honorthesabbath
Quote
“If you have a point to make--make it short and sweet” Unquote.

I had many, many points to answer and did so. And each point was made as short as possible.

honorthesabbath
Quote
“long posts are boring and unproductive. At least in my opinion.” Unquote.

How would you know whether it was ‘unproductive’ you said you didn’t read the posts?
I think you didn’t read them because you maybe biased towards the SDA church?
Or you are not able to bear it. Isaiah 30: 10. Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits:

honorthesabbath
Quote.
“Red--I find the responses to your thread very amusing.” Unquote.

I’m surprised you said that you find them amusing because you also said the following.
“trash and tear-down the Adventist church”
“we don't like it”
“The double-standard is glaring!”
“look at all the intolerance and hatred spewing forth” Unquote.

I can’t find any of the above to be truthful here so what were you laughing at…. Your imagination?

honorthesabbath
Quote “Look at the HUNDREDS of threads opened by the non-trads that attempt to trash and tear-down the Adventist church. And they wonder why we don't like it. Unquote.
look at all the intolerance and hatred spewing forth” Unquote.

Name them please all “the HUNDREDS OF THREADS,” WHERE ARE THEY?
A 150 will do, you are obliged to back up your statements here.
Maybe 100? Or 75? Or 50?

honorthesabbath
Quote But boy--post something like you have here and look at all the intolerance and hatred spewing forth. Unquote.

Where is all ‘the intolerance and hatred spewing forth? Show me the threads for your backup please?

honorthesabbath
Quote The double-standard is glaring!” Unquote.

Yes ‘the double standard is glaring.’
Now, Please read this gentle reminder of our obligations to each other in love and please try and remember it.
Exodus 20: 16. “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”

I forgive you honorthesabbath,just as my kind peers will do, I am sure we understand clearly where your coming from.
Bless you.

PC.

No offense PC--and I appreciate forgiveness and all--but for what are you forgiving me? My opinion about LONG drawn out posts?

Well--ok then--if this is a SIN--then maybe God should forgive me too?

 

[honorthesabbath]

Quote. “PC--I've heard all 'your' arguments for years honey--they are empty.” Unquote.

What part of my argument THAT YOU SAID YOU HAVEN’T READ, don’t you agree with?
Also how about you use some Bible, to prove your statements at for once.
No you haven’t heard all my biblical arguments because I have NOT posted them ALL.
How can you judge something to be ‘empty when you claimed that you did not read my threads? Your claimed actions belie your own words!
I rest my case on that issue.

Quote. ‘This is why I made the comment I did about your LONG DRAWN OUT diatribe.’ Unquote.

Yes I see, on your claimed basis that you ‘haven’t read them’ Mmmmm!
And that is how you came to call then ‘diatribe?’ No, I think you are angry and upset because the Bible, does not back you up.
As I said. My posts are for serious Bible students but not for surface readers that claim ‘not to have read them’ then say from that ignorant basis, claim they found them as diatribe and boring?”
I don’t see any deep Bible discussion here, well I don’t really expect it from the ‘indoctrinated,’ and that is proving to be a sad fact.

Quote. “Been there done that! Unquote.

No, I don’t believe people that say ‘been there and done that’ its more like done a little of this and a little of that and not much of anything else because if hey had would be using the Bible, to prove their argument.
More Bible please.

Quote. You added nothing to the many before you that have tried to pull it off--it's a no go in my book. Unquote.

I need more than simplistic repetitious retort and blether, I need you to come up with some biblical substance and I’m not getting any.
You say ‘not in my book’ what would that be? Certainly not the Bible because you seem very reluctant to use it.
You see the fact is, your opinion without biblical backup is groundless!

Quote. And BTW--Sentepente is correct -did you think that I or any Adventist is going to embrace your comments? I'm an Adventist on PURPOSE!! Unquote.

I now know that the TRADS haven’t got a clue biblically that’s why they withdraw from using their Bibles or can’t verify the TRAD position adequately from what I have witnessed here.
‘Thus sayeth E G White’ just doesn’t cut it any longer.

I do believe you have misquoted Sentepente.
That’s commandment Exodus 20: 16 broken again by you.
In your arguments you are supposed to receive biblical verification of them not biblical censure.
Sentipente, did NOT use the term “did I think that Adventists would embrace my comments” at all.


Sentipente was very considered and careful in what he said if you read his intent.

Quote“ IN CASE you DID NOT notice, this is the SDA sub-forum. You should EXPECT members of this forum to be BIASED towards the SDA church.” Unquote

My reply was a little tongue in cheek.
“O yes I noticed it was an SDA Sub-forum and yes, I noticed they are biased. And yes, I am an SDA member.
Where did I say, I expected them not to be biased Sentipente? I didn’t!
Thanks for telling me the obvious!”

Sentipente, was correct, I do expect bias and have found it sadly in one or two in this case.
I do expect that My Brothers and Sisters with differing views of all kinds to be powerful with scriptural arguments.
Sadly in you and reds I have been disappointed but I have found others with strong biblical ties and I love reading their progressive biblical enlightenment.
Unfortunately for you and Red they know their Bibles and that is what makes them biblically stronger than the both of you in HIS word.

As for me asking you to.
Quote “Name them please all “the HUNDREDS OF THREADS,” WHERE ARE THEY?”
”A 150 will do, you are obliged to back up your statements here.
Maybe 100? Or 75? Or 50?”
Your reply was Go into the prog area--it tells the story!
That answer is most unsatisfactory.
If you or the church TRADS haven’t the biblical backup then please don’t comment with sly babblings for the sake of agitating truth seekers it makes your arguments asinine.

You called me "honey."
You cheeky thing you.

PC.

Just to ease your troubled mind--I read the first few paragraphs of your LONG DRAWN OUT post--and knew where you were going with it--as I said--been there --done that--and have NO desire to entertain you with an involved 'study'. From your post--I knew there is no way whatever I or anyone with a "TRAD" view-point would PROVE from scripture--that you would agree with. You have an agenda and thats that.

 

[tall73]

All progs may be non-trads but not all non-trads are necessarily prog.

I agree with that in real life, but with the definitions here one either DOES submit to the usual understanding of each of the 28 or they do not.

It is probably a flaw in the definition itself.

 

[tall73]

If you or the church TRADS haven’t the biblical backup then please don’t comment with sly babblings for the sake of agitating truth seekers it makes your arguments asinine.

I think that is the issue. Thanks for pointing it out.

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

No offense PC--and I appreciate forgiveness and all--but for what are you forgiving me? My opinion about LONG drawn out posts?

Well--ok then--if this is a SIN--then maybe God should forgive me too?

No that is not a forgiveness issue at all, why would you think such a thing.

Honorthsabbath post 61.
Quote. PC--how many people do you really think read all those pages? Who has time? Not I--thats for sure. If you have a point to make--make it short and sweet--long posts are boring and unproductive. At least in my opinion. Unquote.


This is the post that was offensive. I will highlight it with capitals for emphasis only.

Post 62. Red--I find the responses to your thread very amusing. Look at the HUNDREDS of threads opened by the non-trads that attempt to TRASH and TEAR-DOWN the Adventist church. And they wonder why we don't like it.
But boy--post something like you have here and look at all THE INTOLERANCE and HATRED spewing forth.
The DOUBLE-STANDARDS is glaring! Unquote.

Tall73 responded to the same remark above and used evidence for his position rightly held that scripture was needed and demonstrated that reddogs admitted there was no biblical backup for the I J.
Tall73 stuck to the issue only and did not attack the person.
Tall73
“How is it hatred to ask Red to back up his claims with evidence rather than just condemn? Or did you miss where Red said the IJ is not spelled out in Scripture?” Unquote.

“Originally Posted by reddogs
The Investigative Judgement is not detailed out in the scripture, so you cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt as you are trying to do.”

Mankin, noted the intent of your remarks and made it very plain that you needed to back up your statements biblically.

Mankin quote.
“Honor stop trying to demonize us, it only makes you look more riduculous. Please give a reason why PC's arguments are "empty". Unquote.
On my post 64 I argued the point about your referrals to my posts based on your own admission that you had not read them however it was not a forgiveness issue.
I isolating the offending remarks form post 62 which was a forgiveness issue not only from me but others offended by them, because they were uncalled for and grossly unfair.

Quote “trash and tear-down the Adventist church”
“we don't like it”
“The double-standard is glaring!”
“look at all the intolerance and hatred spewing forth” Unquote.

I said “I can’t find any of the above to be truthful here so what were you laughing at…. Your imagination?”
“Yes ‘the double standard is glaring.”
“Now, Please read this gentle reminder of our obligations to each other in love and please try and remember it.”
“Exodus 20: 16. “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”

“I forgive you honorthesabbath, just as my kind peers will do, I am sure we understand clearly where your coming from.
Bless you.” Unquote.

So please stick to the substance of the matter and not personalities.
Have a lovely Christmas.
PC

 

[honorthesabbath]

Just keep in mind that whatever you post is for the benefit of the lurkers who read. Non-Trads who are actually foolish enough to believe they are going to convince the biased Trads of anything by what they post are to be pitied, because they have wasted every single minute they have spent typing in here.

And Night--you are UNBIASED???

 

[honorthesabbath]

No that is not a forgiveness issue at all, why would you think such a thing.

Honorthsabbath post 61.
Quote. PC--how many people do you really think read all those pages? Who has time? Not I--thats for sure. If you have a point to make--make it short and sweet--long posts are boring and unproductive. At least in my opinion. Unquote.


This is the post that was offensive. I will highlight it with capitals for emphasis only.

Post 62. Red--I find the responses to your thread very amusing. Look at the HUNDREDS of threads opened by the non-trads that attempt to TRASH and TEAR-DOWN the Adventist church. And they wonder why we don't like it.
But boy--post something like you have here and look at all THE INTOLERANCE and HATRED spewing forth.
The DOUBLE-STANDARDS is glaring! Unquote.

Tall73 responded to the same remark above and used evidence for his position rightly held that scripture was needed and demonstrated that reddogs admitted there was no biblical backup for the I J.
Tall73 stuck to the issue only and did not attack the person.
Tall73
“How is it hatred to ask Red to back up his claims with evidence rather than just condemn? Or did you miss where Red said the IJ is not spelled out in Scripture?” Unquote.

“Originally Posted by reddogs
The Investigative Judgement is not detailed out in the scripture, so you cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt as you are trying to do.”

Mankin, noted the intent of your remarks and made it very plain that you needed to back up your statements biblically.

Mankin quote.
“Honor stop trying to demonize us, it only makes you look more riduculous. Please give a reason why PC's arguments are "empty". Unquote.
On my post 64 I argued the point about your referrals to my posts based on your own admission that you had not read them however it was not a forgiveness issue.
I isolating the offending remarks form post 62 which was a forgiveness issue not only from me but others offended by them, because they were uncalled for and grossly unfair.

Quote “trash and tear-down the Adventist church”
“we don't like it”
“The double-standard is glaring!”
“look at all the intolerance and hatred spewing forth” Unquote.

I said “I can’t find any of the above to be truthful here so what were you laughing at…. Your imagination?”
“Yes ‘the double standard is glaring.”
“Now, Please read this gentle reminder of our obligations to each other in love and please try and remember it.”
“Exodus 20: 16. “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.”

“I forgive you honorthesabbath, just as my kind peers will do, I am sure we understand clearly where your coming from.
Bless you.” Unquote.

So please stick to the substance of the matter and not personalities.
Have a lovely Christmas.
PC

PC wrote:
No that is not a forgiveness issue at all, why would you think such a thing.

My reply:

PC—ahh—the reason why I would ‘think such a thing came from YOUR post…

I forgive you honorthesabbath,just as my kind peers will do, I am sure we understand clearly where your coming from.
Bless you.

PC.

 

[honorthesabbath]

Thanks Sentipente, but what if and I mean a big 'IF' a TRAD becomes a NON-TRAD then moves on to a Progressive.
Then we would have a truly flexible thinking SDA that could do wonders.

If NON-TRADS are progressive then they can be in with the above group.

The Progs could, be closer to the above group.

Then we Have the TRADS, separate, that's a relief.

And the LURKERS are floating around in the background.
Thank you Sentipente, Tall73, and last but not least Night Eternal.
PC

PC--Wasn't it the Pharisee's that used 'flexable' thinking and almost destroyed the image of Christ in the sanctuary services? Yep--it was.

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

My reply:

PC—ahh—the reason why I would ‘think such a thing came from YOUR post…

This is what you said and I forgave you for saying it.

Post 62. Red--I find the responses to your thread very amusing.
Look at the HUNDREDS of threads opened by the non-trads that attempt to TRASH and TEAR-DOWN the Adventist church. And they wonder why we don't like it.
But boy--post something like you have here and look at all THE INTOLERANCE and HATRED spewing forth.
The DOUBLE-STANDARDS is glaring! Unquote.

I forgive you.

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

PC--Wasn't it the Pharisee's that used 'flexable' thinking and almost destroyed the image of Christ in the sanctuary services? Yep--it was.

No, they were like you!

 

[Mankin]

No, they were like you!

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

PC--Wasn't it the Pharisee's that used 'flexable' thinking and almost destroyed the image of Christ in the sanctuary services? Yep--it was.

Who said anything about the Sanctuary?

Again you are trying to score points by a missaplication of the intent of the word flexible.
I stay flexible when I read the Bible without any preconceived ill thought out 'set in concrete' theories and concentrate on what sayeth the Bible.

The Saddusees and Pharisees used sly cunning questions to trap Jesus, to try to belittle him personally and within those sneaky questions were implied slurs toward His perfect character

So my advice to you today is. 2 Tim 2: 16. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
Have a lovely day.
PC

 

[Prophecy Countdown]

Just to ease your troubled mind--I read the first few paragraphs of your LONG DRAWN OUT post--and knew where you were going with it--as I said--been there --done that--and have NO desire to entertain you with an involved 'study'. From your post--I knew there is no way whatever I or anyone with a "TRAD" view-point would PROVE from scripture--that you would agree with. You have an agenda and thats that.

Honorthesabbath
Quote. “Just to ease your troubled mind—: Unquote.

What troubled mind? You’re the one that keeps coming back without producing biblical evidence for your case.


Honorthesabbath
Quote.
“I read the first few paragraphs of your LONG DRAWN OUT post--and knew where you were going with it.” Unquote.

Where was your biblical criticism of those ‘first few paragraphs?’
What a stupid question for a TRAD PC, really!

Just as I thought you and have no biblical backup so what we get are remarks like these.
Quote “I read a few of your LONG DRAWN OUT post” Unquote
Then you say. Quote. “--and knew where you were going with it.” Unquote.

How do you know where I was going if you didn’t read it all and I didn’t print enough to get to the end of all that study?
As I said It was a short study, by my standards but if you’re a slow reader that’s a sad pity and I can understand where your coming from.
Would you like me to get serious with some biblical questions for you?

Honorthesabbath
Quote “--as I said--been there --done that--and have NO desire to entertain you with an involved 'study'. Unquote.

Involved BIBLE study? I don’t think it possible with a TRAD but it would be entertaining watching you paint yourself into a corner needing legs 10 feet long to get out. LOL
Why don’t you get some of your best TRAD brains here and we can watch the BIBLE show it power.
What’s with all these little things --- --- --- is it Morse code?
I used to know someone that when over excited did this, “!!!!!!!!” and ‘??????” then ‘b#^*!*y’ which I think stands for. ‘Broadly’ as in broadly speaking.

O yes now I see, it’s an expression of boredom! Can I play?

You-----can-----be assured---th---tha----thaaa---- that I da-----do--na---na--not---f---f---find you entertaining. I---f--find--- you--- stultifyingly boring----yawn--- I’m----going---ta---to--s---s---sleep.

Next morning. Boxing Day. Gewd Mawnin all.

You had your chance HTS, to prove your church taught theories using scripture and you went to water because progressive Bible students, have out grown you biblically.
It is the Bible, that stands here not sly devious crafty questioners with a bent to impose negative character inferences.

I am aware and I fully understand the implications of you constructing a false application of my forgiveness reply to something other than that to which it was clearly intended.
You mischievously implied that I forgave you for supposedly being critical of my thesis of Daniel 8 to bring about an inference of arrogance on my part within an implied question well it did not work!
As soon as you say ‘no offence’ I know you intend the opposite.

The Sadducees and Pharisees, tried the same old sly imputation implied within their entrapment questions, with the Lord and Disciples, to try and destroy their characters but they were dealt with using scripture to which they were powerless to answer.

Honorthesabbath,
quote. “From your post--I knew there is no way whatever I or anyone with a "TRAD" view-point would PROVE from scripture-” Unquote.

Yes you are correct a TRAD would not stand a chance against scripture’s truth, used within its intent and the fine detail gets right to the point of rejecting TRAD error.
Well that proves the point that TRAD folk are not standing firm with the scriptures.
You are dead scared to try using a Bile, discussion because you rely on the writings of E G White and --- that--- just---- doesn’t---- cut----- it.

Honorthesabbath,
quote.
“-that you would agree with.” Unquote.

Again the incorrect inference, suggesting that it is me that has to supposedly agree is incorrect, it is THE BIBLE that will confirm truth!
Every serious Bible student here knows IT IS SCRIPTURE THAT MUST BE IN HARMONY!

Act 17: 11. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they RECEIVED THE WORD WITH ALL READINESS OF MIND, and SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY, WHETHER THESE THING WERE SO.

Honorthesabbath,
Quote.
“You have an agenda and thats that.”

Now that is interesting, Reds used the same paranoiac term of AGENDA being unable to answer Tall73’s question of why Reds did not use the Bible
Reds’ term ………“Tall you have your AGENDA,”
Honorthesabbath term.. “You have an agenda and thats that.”

Originally Posted by tall73
*Reddogs, re-Quoting Tall73*
Your posts all boil down to the same thing. "Don't apply the Bible to our beliefs.." Unquote.

Reds reply. “Tall you have your AGENDA, I just follow Gods truth, and what Christ asked us to follow, and let the Holy Spirit guide into all truth...

Then Reds, said the following quoted sentence which to me demonstrates a clear consequence of indoctrination

Reds reply to Tall73.
Quote. “If the SDA church ever turns from that, then I must follow the path God lays out...” Unquote.

Later Tall73 said “So let me ask this. Is there ANY way to test the SDA church's doctrine if you feel that we cannot test it biblically? Because that seems to be the upshot.”

I don’t know how Tall73 got Reds, to even say this next quote but it was the clincher for all Bible Christians here.

*Reddogs reply “The Investigative Judgement is not detailed out in the scripture, so you cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt as you are trying to do. But neither can you prove God exists beyond a reasonable doubt, the Holy Spirit is what leads you to have believe and have faith, and without it all the Bible is just dry text and hollow words...Unquote.

Tall73 replied.
Quote. “So you admit that the Adventist IJ is not spelled out in the Scripture--yet you want me to believe it. Why?”
”And how is the illustration of God's existence the same? The Bible VERY CLEARLY says that God exists--and I believe it, and trust in God. Now if the Bible very clearly spelled out the Adventist IJ I would also believe that. But you have admitted it doesn't.” Unquote.

I don’t know how you got him to do that. Well done Tall, I am pleased to be here with you Brother.

Rom 15: 4. For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written FOR OUR LEARNING, that we THROUGH PATIENCE and comfort OF THE SCRIPTURES might have hope.

Matt 22: 29. Jesus answered and said unto them, YE DO ERR, NOT KNOWING THE SCRIPTURES, nor the power of God.

Well Honorthesabbath. I like many like minded true Adventists, believe in upholding the Scriptures and the testimony of Jesus Christ, being the spirit of prophecy you call an ‘agenda?’

We know when you haven’t the necessary biblical answers HTS,
Because you start doing this----slanting----the--discussion away from the subject matter-- into the personal.

Have----a happy----day----HTS..!

PC