This MUST STOP!

woobadooba · Nov 30, 2007

By now I'm sure that many of you have noticed the assault that is taking place on our doctrines in this forum. It started with Ellen White, then went to the IJ, and then to Clean and Unlcean foods., and now the law and the Sabbath day.

Most congregational areas would not allow this as it constitutes proselytizing. In fact there used to be a site-wide rule against this kind of thing. Unfortunately, there is no rule against proselytizing anymore.

However, according to site-wide rules we have a right to enforce a rule against this.

Congregational Forums wishing to remain safe havens may choose to limit debate to members of their own denomination, insist that all posts conform to their creed etc.

By the way, notice the 'etc.' ???

What else does that mean but that we could enforce FSR?

It's one thing to discuss and debate with each other on matters that are outside of our official teachings (gray areas), but something else entirely to try to convince us to renounce our doctrines for something else.

We need to take a stand against this and put an end to it before it causes more division in here and more harm to our church.

And please note that only those people that are SDA have a voice on this matter. This is the SDA forum.

OntheDL · Nov 30, 2007

woobadooba said:
By now I'm sure that many of you have noticed the assault that is taking place on our doctrines in this forum. It started with Ellen White, then went to the IJ, and then to Clean and Unlcean foods., and now the law and the Sabbath day.

Most congregational areas would not allow this as it constitutes proselytizing. In fact there used to be a site-wide rule against this kind of thing. Unfortunately, there is no rule against proselytizing anymore.

However, according to site-wide rules we have a right to enforce a rule against this.

Congregational Forums wishing to remain safe havens may choose to limit debate to members of their own denomination, insist that all posts conform to their creed etc.

By the way, notice the 'etc.' ???

What else does that mean but that we could enforce FSR?

It's one thing to discuss and debate with each other on matters that are outside of our official teachings (gray areas), but something else entirely to try to convince us to renounce our doctrines for something else.

We need to take a stand against this and put an end to it before it causes more division in here and more harm to our church.

And please note that only those people that are SDA have a voice on this matter. This is the SDA forum.

I hear what you are saying.

If you lose confidence in the Testimonies you will drift away from Bible truth. I have been fearful that many would take a questioning, doubting position, and in my distress for your souls I would warn you. How many will heed the warning? As you now hold the Testimonies, should one be given crossing your track, correcting your errors, would you feel at perfect liberty to accept or reject any part or the whole? That which you will be least inclined to receive is the very part most needed.5 Testimonies, 98.

We have seen this since the alpha apostasy.

There was a person who posted teaching in the New adventist/bible study forum. But it was allowed to stay, there was nothing done to it.

So I'm not sure what rules are being followed and what could be done to enforce the rules.

Are you suggesting that we try to change the forum specific guidlines? Even with that now the rulings are up to the mods interpretation. So there is no gurrentee that any changes can happen?

Maybe the mods can chime in since we don't see the inquisition style of secrete precedings.

honorthesabbath · Nov 30, 2007

Well--if I read it correctly--it looks like Tall and Sophia are having their brand of secret meetings with the progs to let them know whats going on behind the scenes.

Jon0388g · Nov 30, 2007

woobadooba said:
By now I'm sure that many of you have noticed the assault that is taking place on our doctrines in this forum. It started with Ellen White, then went to the IJ, and then to Clean and Unlcean foods., and now the law and the Sabbath day.

Most congregational areas would not allow this as it constitutes proselytizing. In fact there used to be a site-wide rule against this kind of thing. Unfortunately, there is no rule against proselytizing anymore.

However, according to site-wide rules we have a right to enforce a rule against this.

Congregational Forums wishing to remain safe havens may choose to limit debate to members of their own denomination, insist that all posts conform to their creed etc.

By the way, notice the 'etc.' ???

What else does that mean but that we could enforce FSR?

It's one thing to discuss and debate with each other on matters that are outside of our official teachings (gray areas), but something else entirely to try to convince us to renounce our doctrines for something else.

We need to take a stand against this and put an end to it before it causes more division in here and more harm to our church.

And please note that only those people that are SDA have a voice on this matter. This is the SDA forum.

Hey Woob, hope you're well,

What's changed under the sun?? This has been happening since day one. But honestly I have been shocked that some people can raise the bar so many times at how they will attack the church. It's amazing.

Some of the comments flying around here nowadays I'm just like speechless.

Even the very elect, I guess...

Jon

OntheDL · Nov 30, 2007

honorthesabbath said:
Well--if I read it correctly--it looks like Tall and Sophia are having their brand of secret meetings with the progs to let them know whats going on behind the scenes.

Hmm...honor, do you have any specific examples?

I have not followed closely what's happening in the prog area.

I know Tall and Sophia align with the 'progs', but I can not and don believe (until proven wrong) that Sophia would do this.

moicherie · Nov 30, 2007

I live in the UK no one has secretly met me about anything. I doubt any secret meetings are taking place so the commandment Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour comes to mind.

woobadooba · Nov 30, 2007

I too have to say that I don't think Sophia would do something like that. However, there is no doubt in my mind that there are people in here who are spending a great deal of time trying to convert us to their way of thinking, which means they are trying to get us to renounce some of our official beliefs. This is wrong, and we should not let this happen.

It's one thing to enter into discussion on issues that are open to debate because they are not reflective of what our official beliefs disclose, but something else entirely to try to press views on us that are contrary to our official beliefs. The latter is nothing less than proselytizing, and we should not allow this to take place in here.

This is still the SDA forum, and we have a right to see to it that it properly represents our church. Otherwise, it should not be called the SDA forum.

No other congregational area that I am aware of allows this kind of thing to take place, and neither should we. We have shown ourselves to be too open in here, and as a result of that this place is replete with posts that clearly disclose an outright assault on our church and its doctrines. This should not be.

It's one thing to question what we believe for the purpose of clarity, but something else entirely for people to come in here and challenge our most crucial doctrines, especially when these people are ex-SDAs who have made it very clear that they no longer believe our message and want no part of being a member of our church.

According to site-wide rules we can formulate a Creed, and make it unlawful to inculcate ideas in here that are contrary to our official beliefs. And we should do this for the sake of preserving the integrity of our church, its members, and those who would like to join our church and are in the process of getting to know what we believe.

What do you say?

digdeep · Nov 30, 2007

woobadooba said:
I too have to say that I don't think Sophia would do something like that. However, there is no doubt in my mind that there are people in here who are spending a great deal of time trying to convert us to their way of thinking, which means they are trying to get us to renounce some of our official beliefs. This is wrong, and we should not let this happen.

It's one thing to enter into discussion on issues that are open to debate because they are not reflective of what our official beliefs disclose, but something else entirely to try to press views on us that are contrary to our official beliefs. The latter is nothing less than proselytizing, and we should not allow this to take place in here.

This is still the SDA forum, and we have a right to see to it that it properly represents our church. Otherwise, it should not be called the SDA forum.

No other congregational area that I am aware of allows this kind of thing to take place, and neither should we. We have shown ourselves to be too open in here, and as a result of that this place is replete with posts that clearly disclose an outright assault on our church and its doctrines. This should not be.

It's one thing to question what we believe for the purpose of clarity, but something else entirely for people to come in here and challenge our most crucial doctrines, especially when these people are ex-SDAs who have made it very clear that they no longer believe our message and want no part of being a member of our church.

According to site-wide rules we can formulate a Creed, and make it unlawful to inculcate ideas in here that are contrary to our official beliefs. And we should do this for the sake of preserving the integrity of our church, its members, and those who would like to join our church and are in the process of getting to know what we believe.

What do you say?

I say study your bible, know what you believe, and defend the truth. No Creed is needed in a discussion forum.

DD

woobadooba · Nov 30, 2007

digdeep said:
I say study your bible, know what you believe, and defend the truth. No Creed is needed in a discussion forum.

DD

It is needed when that forum is supposed to represent the SDA church and people that are claiming to be SDA are teaching views that are contrary to what we believe.

It is also needed to keep the peace, and not allow disgruntled formers to come in here and spoil the faith of those that are babes in Christ, or are in the process of making a decision to join the SDA church.

Yes, we are to study, but babes in Christ are very fragile when it comes to knowing how to deal with these things. For their sake alone we should not let this kind of thing happen in here. Not everyone is equipped to handle such controversy, and it could have an adverse effect on the faith of many which could not only result in causing them to not want to be SDA, but to leave the faith of Christ entirely.

honorthesabbath · Nov 30, 2007

OntheDL said:
Hmm...honor, do you have any specific examples?

I have not followed closely what's happening in the prog area.

I know Tall and Sophia align with the 'progs', but I can not and don believe (until proven wrong) that Sophia would do this.

Here is what I am referring to DL. They both have friends in 'high places' and know whats going on behind the scenes.

http://christianforums.com/t6478828&page=4

Tall—
Anyone interested in some off -site discussion about these issues?

pm for details.

Night—
I don't know how I accessed it! It was through one of the links in the 'staff appeal' section.

But, yes, I can access both the archived and present reports.

I would be very interested that discussion Tall.

honorthesabbath · Nov 30, 2007

moicherie said:
I live in the UK no one has secretly met me about anything. I doubt any secret meetings are taking place so the commandment Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour comes to mind.

MOI-and before you accuse of false accusing--WAIT until you see WHY a person says what they say BEFORE you interfere.

RND · Nov 30, 2007

woobadooba said:
By now I'm sure that many of you have noticed the assault that is taking place on our doctrines in this forum. It started with Ellen White, then went to the IJ, and then to Clean and Unlcean foods., and now the law and the Sabbath day.

Most congregational areas would not allow this as it constitutes proselytizing. In fact there used to be a site-wide rule against this kind of thing. Unfortunately, there is no rule against proselytizing anymore.

However, according to site-wide rules we have a right to enforce a rule against this.

Congregational Forums wishing to remain safe havens may choose to limit debate to members of their own denomination, insist that all posts conform to their creed etc.

By the way, notice the 'etc.' ???

What else does that mean but that we could enforce FSR?

It's one thing to discuss and debate with each other on matters that are outside of our official teachings (gray areas), but something else entirely to try to convince us to renounce our doctrines for something else.

We need to take a stand against this and put an end to it before it causes more division in here and more harm to our church.

And please note that only those people that are SDA have a voice on this matter. This is the SDA forum.

I would strongly disagree with you brother.

As Adventists and purveyors of the full truth of the Gospel as it relates to the truth nature and true character of God and people with a special end-times message to the world I think we should be prepared to in the most caring and loving manner possible to be able to defend what we believe and why we believe it.

Stiffling challenges to our doctrine just because the we don't like the questions involved is something I have seen on a regular basis at some so-called "Christian" forums.

Man, I've been outright banned by some web sites just because they found out I was a Seventh-day Adventist.

Look, as we like to say in my prison ministry group, "If the truth doesn't get them then nothing will!" We need to be prepared always to flex our Adventist spiritual mussles so that we can be strong and endure what is surely to come. We must have strength to stand on our beliefs. Discussion with other's that are skeptical or even downright hostile to Adventist doctrine and Biblical truth is just the type of exercise we as Adventist's need to become even stronger in our faith.

Silencing the opposition makes us just the same as them.

I've read a number of your post there woobadooba and for the most part I agree with a number of your takes. But at the same time we must be able to stand these fiery darts of distrust, misunderstanding and misinformation to be strengthened in the end.

tall73 · Nov 30, 2007

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41168619&postcount=32

happywiththelord · Nov 30, 2007

i guess my blondeness is showing again, but what exactly is a creed and what exactly would it do here?

woobadooba · Nov 30, 2007

RND said:
I would strongly disagree with you brother.

As Adventists and purveyors of the full truth of the Gospel as it relates to the truth nature and true character of God and people with a special end-times message to the world I think we should be prepared to in the most caring and loving manner possible to be able to defend what we believe and why we believe it.

Stiffling challenges to our doctrine just because the we don't like the questions involved is something I have seen on a regular basis at some so-called "Christian" forums.

Man, I've been outright banned by some web sites just because they found out I was a Seventh-day Adventist.

Look, as we like to say in my prison ministry group, "If the truth doesn't get them then nothing will!" We need to be prepared always to flex our Adventist spiritual mussles so that we can be strong and endure what is surely to come. We must have strength to stand on our beliefs. Discussion with other's that are skeptical or even downright hostile to Adventist doctrine and Biblical truth is just the type of exercise we as Adventist's need to become even stronger in our faith.

Silencing the opposition makes us just the same as them.

I've read a number of your post there woobadooba and for the most part I agree with a number of your takes. But at the same time we must be able to stand these fiery darts of distrust, misunderstanding and misinformation to be strengthened in the end.

I don't mind people asking questions. But you have to take a look at where these questions are coming from and assess if they are genuine or not.

There are those that ask questions merely for the purpose of setting people up for indoctrination into their views. That is what I don't like to see in here. It is proselytizing through manipulation.

Such people make it appear as though they are searching for answers, but when you give them to them they already have a plethora of objections from which to choose to quickly shut you down. This evidences very clearly that they aren't interested in hearing your side, but are only interested in getting you to throw your side away, so to speak. And that is what is happening in here right now.

RND · Nov 30, 2007

woobadooba said:
I don't mind people asking questions. But you have to take a look at where these questions are coming from and assess if they are genuine or not.

Wouldn't you agree that whether or not a question or questioner is genuine or not that the truth will win out everytime?

There are those that ask questions merely for the purpose of setting people up for indoctrination into their views. That is what I don't like to see in here. It is proselytizing through manipulation.

Ansd that is an excellent reason as to why we must always preach and be ready to lovingly mentor Adventist doctrinal and true Biblical beliefs.

Such people make it appear as though they are searching for answers, but when you give them to them they already have a plethora of objections from which to choose to quickly shut you down.

True enough, but as long as we are holding to the truth it will always come rising to the top. The truth can never be suppressed.

This evidences very clearly that they aren't interested in hearing your side, but are only interested in getting you to throw your side away, so to speak. And that is what is happening in here right now.

While that indeed may be true, we can only offer up our truth as we know it and allow the Holy Spirit to take over from there. Our job is simply to scatter the seeds, we are not (thankfully!) responsible for harvesting.

honorthesabbath · Nov 30, 2007

Wouldn't you agree that whether or not a question or questioner is genuine or not that the truth will win out everytime?

Actually RND, truth doesn't always win, as thousands of innocent people who have been falsely accused, falsely convicted and falsely executed could tell you.

OntheDL · Nov 30, 2007

RND said:
I would strongly disagree with you brother.

As Adventists and purveyors of the full truth of the Gospel as it relates to the truth nature and true character of God and people with a special end-times message to the world I think we should be prepared to in the most caring and loving manner possible to be able to defend what we believe and why we believe it.

Stiffling challenges to our doctrine just because the we don't like the questions involved is something I have seen on a regular basis at some so-called "Christian" forums.

Man, I've been outright banned by some web sites just because they found out I was a Seventh-day Adventist.

Look, as we like to say in my prison ministry group, "If the truth doesn't get them then nothing will!" We need to be prepared always to flex our Adventist spiritual mussles so that we can be strong and endure what is surely to come. We must have strength to stand on our beliefs. Discussion with other's that are skeptical or even downright hostile to Adventist doctrine and Biblical truth is just the type of exercise we as Adventist's need to become even stronger in our faith.

Silencing the opposition makes us just the same as them.

I've read a number of your post there woobadooba and for the most part I agree with a number of your takes. But at the same time we must be able to stand these fiery darts of distrust, misunderstanding and misinformation to be strengthened in the end.

Hi,

I agree with you that this is reaching into the final climax of the great controversy. We shouldn't stiffle/shy away from the challenge.

However this forum does not necessarily provide the platform for fruitful discussions. I can see and have seen the damage outweigh the gains.

Our best defense is the transforming holy spirit. If our characters are transformed into the solid gold, our testimony will be the most powerful weapon against the enemies attacks.

happywiththelord · Nov 30, 2007

Amen!!!!

RND · Nov 30, 2007

honorthesabbath said:
Actually RND, truth doesn't always win, as thousands of innocent people who have been falsely accused, falsely convicted and falsely executed could tell you.

Since we don't know the end of things as God does it is best to leave making sure the truth always wins out to Him. He knows His sheep, they hear His voice.

What we may see physically we have no idea of what the end is with them.

This MUST STOP!

Legend

OntheDL

Guest

Senior Veteran

Veteran

OntheDL

Guest

True Brit

Legend

Regular Member

Legend

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Sophia7's husband

Veteran

Legend

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

OntheDL

Guest

Veteran

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency