What Do Progressives Have In Common Theologically With Traditionals?

[OntheDL]

I could name a few I know. *lol*

I would say the majority of the protestants and catholics I talked to did not know saturday is the 7th-day sabbath.

 

[tall73]

As for approaching the GC, I'm fairly certain that you are well aware of the effectivness of doing that or all progressives would be applying for recognition of themselves and their beliefs.

Seems the GC so far has been more worried about the legal standing of:

A. Traditional groups who put up billboards about the papacy
B. Homosexuals


I haven't seen them going after progressives. Maybe the GC doesn't hold the same convictions you do in the matter.

 

[Mankin]

The Sabbath was made to benefit man and not man to benefit the Sabbath.

 

[OntheDL]

The Sabbath was made to benefit man and not man to benefit the Sabbath.

So that means man is entitled to do everything on sabbath as long as it benefits him?

 

[OntheDL]

Seems the GC so far has been more worried about the legal standing of:

A. Traditional groups who put up billboards about the papacy
B. Homosexuals

I haven't seen them going after progressives. Maybe the GC doesn't hold the same convictions you do in the matter.

Yeah GC is treading the footsteps of the papacy.

 

[tall73]

Yeah GC is treading the footsteps of the papacy.

So that being the case an appeal to something other than legal standing is in order to establish the argument that Doc is making.

Generally the appeal is to historic continuity....hence the historic label.

But then that puts the historics back to where they really are--a minority--a remnant within the remnant. They are the ones who really believe the old message, even if the GC sues them. So Doc would be better off making appeals to perceived truth than to power, since as Adventists are fond of saying the majority is not always right. And in this case the powers that be do not seem intent on stamping out progressives.

 

[OntheDL]

So that being the case an appeal to something other than legal standing is in order to establish the argument that Doc is making.

Generally the appeal is to historic continuity....hence the historic label.

But then that puts the historics back to where they really are--a minority--a remnant within the remnant. They are the ones who really believe the old message, even if the GC sues them. So Doc would be better off making appeals to perceived truth than to power, since as Adventists are fond of saying the majority is not always right. And in this case the powers that be do not seem intent on stamping out progressives.

I agree with the underlined statements.

 

[JonMiller]

I think people here are too dramatic.

JM

 

[tall73]

I agree with the underlined statements.

So if that is the case then historics would be far better off letting the progressives hang themselves with their own rope on these forums rather than trying to silence them.

A lot of the literature of the historics that I have seen has been pointing out the perceived theological errors of the progressives anyway. This way you have ammunition.

In any case it goes without saying that I disagree with the historics arguments as well. But they are consistent with the pioneers in most respects, though I don't find them to be consistent with the Scriptures or modern day notions of Adventism.

 

[JonMiller]

Clearly exercize and playing games fall into the catagory of doing thine own ways and finding thine own pleasure.

For everything that

1. has nothing to do with the Lord
2. can be done on another day of the week,

should not be done on the sabbath.

You don't eat or sleep on the Sabbath?

JM

 

[JonMiller]

The Sabbath isn't about what you shouldn't be doing. It is about what you should be doing. If you have extra hours in the day after you have done what you should be doing... then spend them as you wish.

JM

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Going back to Daryl's revised question, why do you ask a question upon only one verse in the Bible. Not even extending it to the version of the 10 commandments that was actually the one written in stone?

12 "Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the LORD your God has commanded you. 13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor the alien within your gates, so that your manservant and maidservant may rest, as you do. 15 Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the LORD your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.

Now you can say spiritually or metaphorically that you were brought out of Egypt. But then metaphorically or spiritually one could observe any day in 7 as a Sabbath also. The point here is that if you go over ideas you can't just restrict the idea being considered in one very limited way. That is what your questions have been first assuming that accepting the sabbath has some meaning that you hold but not stated and second trying to deal with one verse while not even considering the other verses which relate the same incident in the Bible.

It is these kinds of assumptions which makes people like Doc think they can practically condemn others and say they are not even part of the church they are members of. Or at best ignorant of information, or as DL posts simply unholy people.

What is probably the biggest difference between Progressives and Traditional SDA's is that the Progressive philosophy sees the world as other then black and white. That there are differences of opinions based upon the differences in people and their experiences as well as their understanding of God and humanity. We don't condemn those who worship on the 7th day sabbath nor those who worship on Sunday or any day. The reason you worship is more important then what day you do it on. The traditions have the philosophy that they have the truth, but progressives see too many holes for them to believe they have the truth and they therefore have to continue to search for the truth. Maybe we will never find the truth in this life but then maybe the search is more important then establishing what we think is the truth. Because frankly the most unloving people are the ones who think they have arrived at the truth and that leaves a bad taste in everyones mouth.

 

[OntheDL]

You don't eat or sleep on the Sabbath?

JM

Notice second part of the qualifier.

Originally Posted by OntheDL

Clearly exercize and playing games fall into the catagory of doing thine own ways and finding thine own pleasure.

For everything that

1. has nothing to do with the Lord
2. can be done on another day of the week,

should not be done on the sabbath.

Clearly exercizing and playing games are NOT life sustaining like eating and sleeping.

 

[OntheDL]

The Sabbath isn't about what you shouldn't be doing. It is about what you should be doing. If you have extra hours in the day after you have done what you should be doing... then spend them as you wish.

JM

Can you quote the bible to support your statements?

What does the commandment say?

 

[JonMiller]

See, I disagree that that is true of all progressives. I think what is true is that progressives are 'big tent' while traditionals aren't.

JM

 

[OntheDL]

On the other note, I think Doc is correct.

A member can be disciplined for willingly breaking the sabbath and other commandments (common case is adultery).

Apostasy is one of the two grounds for removing the membership. This is done at the local church level, not at GC level and is rarely enforced.

 

[JonMiller]

Notice second part of the qualifier.


Clearly exercizing and playing games are NOT life sustaining like eating and sleeping.

I can (and do) go a day without sleep, or without eating, or without exercising.

But I will die if I don't sleep. I will die if I don't eat. And I will die if I don't exercise.

Additionally, you still haven't pointed out where it is said that you shouldn't exercise on the Sabbath? You don't even have good support for me not entertaining myself on the Sabbath.

JM

 

[tall73]

On the other note, I think Doc is correct.

A member can be disciplined for willingly breaking the sabbath and other commandments (common case is adultery).

Apostasy is one of the two grounds for removing the membership. This is done at the local church level, not at GC level and is rarely enforced.

Doc provided no evidence of Night breaking the Sabbath.

 

[Jimlarmore]

When I first came into the SDA Church, I don't remember the existence of all these labels, particularly the two predominate ones here, namely Progressives and Traditionals.

Even though I am aware of the various mindsets within the SDA Church, I personally do not like labels myself.

Since, however, they are so predominate here, even to the extent of having their own separate sub-forums, what do Progressives and Traditionals have in common theologically?

For starters, do both Progressives and Traditionals accept the seventh-day Sabbath?

I think everyone knows I'm not a progressive but I thought I would add this to this thread. The way I see it is most progresives don't see truths and doctrines as absolute or clear truth as traditionals do. IOW, there is no such thing as black or white when it comes to doctrines and Biblical truths. One may ask why this is and to be real honest it's hard to place a finder on specifically why.

The one thing I see as a constant through out most progressive's philosophies is they do not want to be supposedly tied down to keeping any law per se' whether they keep it with the power of Christ or not. The majority will find ways to rationalize away the requirements of keeping God's Holy Law's which includes the Sabbath. Some even go to the extent of invalidating the Bible itself.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[JonMiller]

On the other note, I think Doc is correct.

A member can be disciplined for willingly breaking the sabbath and other commandments (common case is adultery).

Apostasy is one of the two grounds for removing the membership. This is done at the local church level, not at GC level and is rarely enforced.

I jog on the sabbath fairly often.

JM