We need some SDA moderators

[tall73]

Also, I believe that it is important that we have an SDA Mod in here because there are views that are being inculcated in here that both conservative and liberal SDAs generally do not support.

Which are those?

 

[woobadooba]

Which are those?

The issues of the moral influence theory and the rejection of the Creation account as stated in the Bible.

These are clearly not generally accepted teachings within our church.

 

[tall73]

Moral influence theory is not that uncommon.

Maxwell has taught it for years.

 

[woobadooba]

Moral influence theory is not that uncommon.

Maxwell has taught it for years.

Indeed he has, but that doesn't mean it is commonly accepted by SDAs in general.

Even his own brother disagrees with him on this issue.

 

[tall73]

Indeed he has, but that doesn't mean it is commonly accepted by SDAs in general.

Even his own brother disagrees with him on this issue.

Yes, but I am aware of a large number of Adventists who accept that view and the view that God does not destroy.

 

[woobadooba]

Yes, but I am aware of a large number of Adventists who accept that view and the view that God does not destroy.

I don't deny that you are aware of a large number of people that hold to such teachings. However, my point is that these views are not generally accepted by both liberal and conservative SDAs as true.

Actually, it is usually offshoot groups of the SDA church that espouse such teachings. And such groups are not permitted by the GC to identify their congregation as SDA as a result of this. Hence, they are not considered to be SDAs.

 

[tall73]

Woob, the ones I know are not off-shoots. I disagree with them, but they are members.

I am not interested in a mod that would automatically stop discussion of ideas present in the church.

As much as I disagree the non-literal creation view is also floating around. Ministry magazine had a discussion on the topic recently.

You can't counter-act these things by repressing conversation.

 

[woobadooba]

I am not interested in a mod that would automatically stop discussion of ideas present in the church.

We went from having a definitive statement about what we believe to 'anything goes'.

I think we have become too passive. As a result of this many people feel they have a right to be hostile about defending their false doctrine, and assume those who disagree with them to be irrational.

It was not like this in the early Church. Although, the Apostles said that it would get like this before Jesus returns.

It only goes to show you the sad condition that we are in at present.

Now, keep in mind, those who hold to such teachings can still be members. They just should not be allowed to teach such things in the SDA forum, since such views are generally considered to be heretical.

 

[TrustAndObey]

double post

 

[TrustAndObey]

We went from having a definitive statement about what we believe to 'anything goes'.

I think we have become too passive. As a result of this many people feel they have a right to be hostile about defending their false doctrine, and assume those who disagree with them to be irrational.

It was not like this in the early Church. Although, the Apostles said that it would get like this before Jesus returns.

It only goes to show you the sad condition that we are in at present.

Now, keep in mind, those who hold to such teachings can still be members. They just should not be allowed to teach such things in the SDA forum, since such views are generally considered to be heretical.

This has been my point for a long time, although I didn't word it as eloquently as I could've at times (time constraints keep me from being eloquent ).

I know there have been times that I've been considered irrational because I won't "bend" on a subject, but the truth is that I specifically CHOSE the Adventist church after reading the bible. I personally wanted a church that stood up for everything that I believed in as well, and I made up my mind on those issues before I asked to become a member.

To decide later that I personally don't believe in...let's say a literal 7 day creation...and then find a group of other Adventists that don't either....doesn't change the fact that the group as a WHOLE does not believe in evolution or a gap theory. If I answered for the bulk, I would be painting a false picture to those questioning our denominational doctrine as a whole.

Even when you combine the bulk of beliefs in the Adventist church, you're still talking about a small minority of CHRISTIANS.

But this small minority has a set of fundamental beliefs that make us who we are, and people do go into it willingly (like myself) and wish to fellowship with other Christians that feel the same way without being called ignorant or well-indoctrinated.

That was my long way of saying "I don't disagree just to disagree. I chose what I believe in for a reason and I'm not irrational when I refuse to bend on it." HA!

I agree with you Woob, we really do need an SDA moderator. That person should be fully informed that they may very well get accused of bias, but be willing to overlook it for the good of the forum. It certainly won't be about becoming popular, that's for sure.

My question is...are there any Progressive Adventists that would take my nomination (or anyone else's) and apply as moderator? If so, I'd like to hear from you.

I'm not sure I like the idea of narrowing down our choices just to have that person say "no thanks". So I'd like to know who wants a moderator position so I can consider from there.

How's that?

Same with Traditional Adventists. If someone is willing to take on the job, why not put your name in the hat for Progressives to consider?

That just seems a little more productive to me.

 

[woobadooba]

My question is...are there any Progressive Adventists that would take my nomination (or anyone else's) and apply as moderator? If so, I'd like to hear from you.

I'm not sure I like the idea of narrowing down our choices just to have that person say "no thanks". So I'd like to know who wants a moderator position so I can consider from there.

How's that?

Same with Traditional Adventists. If someone is willing to take on the job, why not put your name in the hat for Progressives to consider?

That just seems a little more productive to me.

I think this is a very logical approach to the issue.

But what do you do about those people that are neither traditional or progressive? I just so happen to be one of this kind.

Nevertheless, as a last resort I am willing to consider being a Mod in here if need be. If this happens, I won't be a representative of either group. I will just simply represent the right way, which is the way that promotes truth, order and peace.

 

[TrustAndObey]

I think this is a very logical approach to the issue.

But what do you do about those people that are neither traditional or progressive? I just so happen to be one of this kind.

Nevertheless, as a last resort I am willing to consider being a Mod in here if need be.

Good question. We do have Evangelical Adventists as well.

I think if a person has proven themselves to always be level-headed that it shouldn't matter which side of the "fence" they sit on. A rule is a rule and even if it's your best friend breaking the rule, a mod has to take action right?

However, Erin did set the criteria, and I don't know if she's willing to bend on that or not.

Do we get to vote or ask questions on/of people that are willing to take on the position?

 

[tall73]

This has been my point for a long time, although I didn't word it as eloquently as I could've at times (time constraints keep me from being eloquent ).

I know there have been times that I've been considered irrational because I won't "bend" on a subject, but the truth is that I specifically CHOSE the Adventist church after reading the bible. I personally wanted a church that stood up for everything that I believed in as well, and I made up my mind on those issues before I asked to become a member.

To decide later that I personally don't believe in...let's say a literal 7 day creation...and then find a group of other Adventists that don't either....doesn't change the fact that the group as a WHOLE does not believe in evolution or a gap theory. If I answered for the bulk, I would be painting a false picture to those questioning our denominational doctrine as a whole.

Even when you combine the bulk of beliefs in the Adventist church, you're still talking about a small minority of CHRISTIANS.

But this small minority has a set of fundamental beliefs that make us who we are, and people do go into it willingly (like myself) and wish to fellowship with other Christians that feel the same way without being called ignorant or well-indoctrinated.

That was my long way of saying "I don't disagree just to disagree. I chose what I believe in for a reason and I'm not irrational when I refuse to bend on it." HA!

I agree with you Woob, we really do need an SDA moderator. That person should be fully informed that they may very well get accused of bias, but be willing to overlook it for the good of the forum. It certainly won't be about becoming popular, that's for sure.

Let me know when you all get Graham kicked out of the church.

I find that unlikely.

The mods here are not to do witchhunts but to apply the rules.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Let me know when you all get Graham kicked out of the church.

I find that unlikely.

The mods here are not to do witchhunts but to apply the rules.

I have no idea who Graham is, so you're safe to assume it's unlikely I'd get him kicked out of our church.

Sheesh.

And I just said the same thing you did. You see a fight where there isn't one Tall.

 

[TrustAndObey]

If I had an emoticon waving a white flag, I'd wave it.

 

[woobadooba]

Let me know when you all get Graham kicked out of the church.

I find that unlikely.

The mods here are not to do witchhunts but to apply the rules.

I don't see that people are trying to get others kicked out of the church; rather, I just simply see that there are some that agree that this place should be more orderly, peaceful, and properly represent what SDAs generally believe.

 

[tall73]

I have no idea who Graham is, so you're safe to assume it's unlikely I'd get him kicked out of our church.

Sheesh.

And I just said the same thing you did. You see a fight where there isn't one Tall.

You just said the same thing I did and the same thing woob did and they are complete opposites.

I think we don't need Adventist moderators. Woob thinks we do. You agreed with both.

You agreed with Woob who wants to eliminate people like Graham Maxwell's views.

 

[tall73]

I don't see that people are trying to get others kicked out of the church; rather, I just simply see that there are some that agree that this place should be more orderly, peaceful, and properly represent what SDAs generally believe.

This is a discussion forum, not a statement of beliefs. We have that posted in the sticky which anyone can read.

 

[tall73]

But what do you do about those people that are neither traditional or progressive? I just so happen to be one of this kind.

Woob, you are progressive by the definition of this site. You reject the traditional formulation of the sanctuary teaching by believing the the IJ started at Jesus' ascension.

Therefore you do not accept all 28. You are progressive. If you are not progressive then neither am I. We disagree on the same issue. But according to the sites definitions you are progressive.

From the sub-forum description:

Progressive and liberal SDA members who may question, have newer interpretations of, or do not hold to the official 28 beliefs.

 

[woobadooba]

This is a discussion forum, not a statement of beliefs. We have that posted in the sticky which anyone can read.

Yes, but this is called the SDA forum, not the general discussions forum.

There has to be a line somewhere that clearly defines who we are. Right now it is an anything goes except those things that CF says aren't allowed, forum.

Who/what defines what SDAs are, CF, or our 28 fundamental doctrines?