What Is A "Progressive" Adventist?

[Bourbaki]

you have a point? or will you spend the day debating the merits of a name? Just asking....

Forgive me for asking a trivial question that has no answer. Is it really that impossible to be consistent?

 

[Bourbaki]

Stormy you have a point.

Bourbaki - I don't see this thread making much of a difference do you?

If you mean that I'm being neutral, that is correct.

 

[StormyOne]

Forgive me for asking a trivial question that has no answer. Is it really that impossible to be consistent?

the question is trivial, consistency is not.... however you will read into this what you will.... the name of this sub-forum is progressive sda, plain and simple, no bells, whistles, manifestos, mission statements, or profound explanations of our reason to be.... as I said, there is really no need to overthink this one... unless you have the time and that's what you wish to do......

have a good day...

 

[mva1985]

If you mean that I'm being neutral, that is correct.

Bourbaki,

Just so you know I would be considered a traditional by those that consider themselves progressives. Some of them have stated that they really don't like labels - if I remember correctly.

Because of the rules that they have come up with they allow me to post in this sub-forum.

And from your posts so far - no I would not consider you neutral.

 

[tall73]

Forgive me for asking a trivial question that has no answer. Is it really that impossible to be consistent?

To answer your question we had these sub-forums imposed upon us. At first we were called reformed Adventists, but that is the name of an actual movement that is not the same.

Therefore we at some point selected another name.

The definitions are not real-world ones, but practical ones that were imposed by outside mods. We have just embraced them for lack of a better "fence."

Some things develop historically, and might not make much sense to an outsider.

 

[Bourbaki]

the question is trivial, consistency is not.... however you will read into this what you will.... the name of this sub-forum is progressive sda, plain and simple, no bells, whistles, manifestos, mission statements, or profound explanations of our reason to be.... as I said, there is really no need to overthink this one... unless you have the time and that's what you wish to do......

have a good day...

Are there or are there not Adventists that strongly disagree with the Trinity doctrine in the 28 fundamental beliefs because they think the church should be following the doctrinal beliefs of the Adventist pioneers of the 1880s? By the accepted definition, they are Progressives. It that true or not?

 

[tall73]

Are there or are there not Adventists that strongly disagree with the Trinity doctrine in the 28 fundamental beliefs because they think the church should be following the doctrinal beliefs of the Adventist pioneers of the 1880s? By the accepted definition, they are Progressives. It that true or not?

In a strange twist, yes, they are, for the purpose of this forum.

Sorry if that bothers you. Again, this fence developed historically.

The major divide here has been among those who insist on adherence to the 28 and those who don't in every particular. Our definitions and rules have developed around that.

Truth be told the traditionals would probably be fine with such a person as you have described. In fact we are aware of at least one tri-theist in the traditional camp now.

 

[Bourbaki]

To answer your question we had these sub-forums imposed upon us. At first we were called reformed Adventists, but that is the name of an actual movement that is not the same.

Therefore we at some point selected another name.

The definitions are not real-world ones, but practical ones that were imposed by outside mods. We have just embraced them for lack of a better "fence."

Some things develop historically, and might not make much sense to an outsider.

Hi Tall. I can accept an arbitrary definition. And I even think it's a good idea to separate dissidents from the main Adventist forum. Technically, the Progressives are just Adventist dissidents, are they not?

 

[tall73]

Hi Tall. I can accept an arbitrary definition. And I even think it's a good idea to separate dissidents from the main Adventist forum. Technically, the Progressives are just Adventist dissidents, are they not?

If that works for you.

People can look at something and call it different things.

For instance, some look at us and call us Jesuits

For my part I didn't want this label. I am a pastor who is currently on a sabbatical because I am struggling with two of our beliefs. Until this time I considered myself quite traditional.

But since I am doubting, though I don't like the label progressive, I am what I am by the definition.

No sense arguing with it. It is just for practical purposes.

 

[Bourbaki]

In a strange twist, yes, they are, for the purpose of this forum.

I'm just testing this forum to see if anyone around here fits my definition of being reasonable. I sincerely appreciate your simple direct answer. By any chance, are the moderators of the Progressive Adventist forum as reasonable as you?

 

[tall73]

I'm just testing this forum to see if anyone around here fits my definition of being reasonable. I sincerely appreciate your simple direct answer. By any chance, are the moderators of the Progressive Adventist forum as reasonable as you?

We don't have any yet!

And don't worry, you don't know me enough yet to assess me as reasonable.

We all have our moments.

But in general the progressives have chosen to allow folks to discuss. Don't worry about being officially warned for theology. Only personal attacks, etc. are an issue in our forum.

The only exception is on voting on our policy. This is again for practical reasons.

 

[StormyOne]

I'm just testing this forum to see if anyone around here fits my definition of being reasonable. I sincerely appreciate your simple direct answer. By any chance, are the moderators of the Progressive Adventist forum as reasonable as you?

define reasonable.....

 

[tall73]

Eugene? Is that you?

Someone just informed me that might be you.

Now you could have just introduced yourself, since I am already on your forum

I have had some changes in my life lately, since I was actively posting on your board.

But I still enjoyed the time I spent there.

Welcome.

 

[StormyOne]

Eugene? Is that you?

Someone just informed me that might be you.

Now you could have just introduced yourself, since I am already on your forum

I have had some changes in my life lately, since I was actively posting on your board.

But I still enjoyed the time I spent there.

Welcome.

when i was a member there it took about 2 or 3 posts and I found myself in jail or something....

 

[tall73]

when i was a member there it took about 2 or 3 posts and I found myself in jail or something....

Hey, I got a three pip rating there!

Yeah, well Eugene likes categorizing


Besides, all progressives are by default intoxicated (and enjoy going to clubs) right? haha

 

[StormyOne]

no doubt.... check out this list....

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15073

 

[tall73]

Just to refresh your memory

Jail
If you are dangerous, appear intoxicated or are a public nuisance, you can only post here.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Actually Progressive Adventist is a real world definition and it has been in use for over 20 years. Like any new word or term of course it is adopted by a subgroup first as they are then ones who find the term useful. From there it moves into the wider vocabulary.

For those who would like a definition you can read the following:
http://newprotestants.com/traditio.htm

 

[StormyOne]

Just to refresh your memory

Jail
If you are dangerous, appear intoxicated or are a public nuisance, you can only post here.

yeah, that seems about right... was suppose to ask for help to get out or something....

 

[tall73]

Actually Progressive Adventist is a real world definition and it has been in use for over 20 years. Like any new word or term of course it is adopted by a subgroup first as they are then ones who find the term useful. From there it moves into the wider vocabulary.

For those who would like a definition you can read the following:
http://newprotestants.com/traditio.htm

Agreed. But ours may not be the same in all respects, so consistency is not required.

Our definition is our definition.