What's the difference?

[RND]

I know for sure Chuck Smith would be shocked to know he's endorsed 'traditional Adventism.' Utterly shocked!

CHAPTER 14: Christ's Kingdom on Earth with Israel Restored


v.1-8 At the end of the age Israel will be restored and exalted.

v.9-11 Satan will end up in Hell, and when you see him you will be amazed.

v.12-14 Lucifer's five "I will's"-the beginning of sin and rebellion in the universe, as he opposed God's will (Ez. 28:12-14).

By the Holy Spirit God will conform us back to our original state, by making us again into the image of Jesus Christ.

v.15-17 Satan's end is destruction.

v.24-27 The awesome sovereignty of God-His purpose and plans are always accomplished.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

So J. Vernon McGee was accpting of Adventist 'tradition?' That comical.



So unless we accept your position we're not thinking?




EGW's usage was based on sound and accepted majority viewpoints of hundreds of Biblical scholars.

I wonder if David Guzik knows he's Adventist?

http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-...@@@@@14&*David+Guzik&&Select.x=17&Select.y=14

Apparently you have too much difficulty to follow a discussion of the issues. No where have I ever said that the Lucifer myth is or was developed by Adventists.

When people try and argue like you have I can only leave them to their own devices.

 

[RND]

Apparently you have too much difficulty to follow a discussion of the issues. No where have I ever said that the Lucifer myth is or was developed by Adventists.

When people try and argue like you have I can only leave them to their own devices.

You have called this viewpoint 'tradition.' You must be clarifying your stance that this 'tradition' is widespread throughout Christianity. Funny, your original remarks and comment were clearly regarding Adventistism however.

Really come on is there one verse in the Bible that says a third of the angels were thrown out of heaven? All you do is hold to a tradition and assume that your tradition and your explanation must be correct despite the facts of the verses you are using.

Which 'tradition' were you refering to here in the above quote, traditional Adventism or traditional Christianity?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

If we go back to the purpose of this thread you can see that there really is a huge difference between the Traditional and Progressive SDA's. The Progressive is willing to change their understanding of what they have believed. They are willing to grow as they learn information. The Traditional SDA however fights hard to maintain their traditional beliefs. This is pretty clearly observed by RND responses.

What is interesting is that Adventism was founded by people who were non traditional. They did not accept the traditional views on all areas. They felt free to question and reinterpret their beliefs. So it is the Progressive Adventist that actually continues the best aspects of Adventism. Because there are so many areas to explore and so many areas where tradition holds sway that a reasoned view of Christianity is sorely needed today and it is not limited to the Adventist church.

 

[sentipente]

History bears this out, RC. It did not take long for Protestantism to become a mirror image of the Catholicism it had fought so had to throw off. In a sense they were forced into it by the Counter-Reformation they sure held on to it.

 

[RND]

If we go back to the purpose of this thread you can see that there really is a huge difference between the Traditional and Progressive SDA's. The Progressive is willing to change their understanding of what they have believed. They are willing to grow as they learn information. The Traditional SDA however fights hard to maintain their traditional beliefs. This is pretty clearly observed by RND responses.

These are simply generalities that in reality mean nothing. Adventistism didn't come about because it completely turned the protestant world upside down. Adventism expressed some very clear and very direct non-traditional Biblical teachings. This is not to say that Adventism completely reject much of mainstream protestant thought and teaching.

Only someone so gripped in completely reversing this 'traditional' stance of Adventism would argue contrary to it.

What is interesting is that Adventism was founded by people who were non traditional. They did not accept the traditional views on all areas. They felt free to question and reinterpret their beliefs.

There were only a 'few' areas where Adventism did not agree with the traditional view.

So it is the Progressive Adventist that actually continues the best aspects of Adventism. Because there are so many areas to explore and so many areas where tradition holds sway that a reasoned view of Christianity is sorely needed today and it is not limited to the Adventist church.

Too bad common sense seems to keep getting in the way of the progressive view point.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Common sense however is not found in the embrace of unexamined traditions. Every attempt at argument you make reinforces why the TSDA's position is so flawed. TSDA's and you have made a religion out of name calling and appealing to tradition that would have made any middle ages Roman Catholic proud. They at least have grown up a bit since then, our only hope is that TSDA will do so more rapidly.

I just must add, you said:
"These are simply generalities that in reality mean nothing. Adventistism didn't come about because it completely turned the protestant world upside down."

Such non sequiturs seem to be your favorite mode of operation. Most of your arguments are directed at things no one has said.

 

[StormyOne]

commonsense as defined by those who are of a traditional mindset... ironic indeed.....

 

[RND]

Common sense however is not found in the embrace of unexamined traditions. Every attempt at argument you make reinforces why the TSDA's position is so flawed.

Exempt you've yet to accept the fact that, in order to discount the traditional view of Adventists, you have to completely discount the much of the traditional view Christianity.

That's problematic for you because it exposes your theological arrogance and piety that only your view is the acceptable view.

TSDA's and you have made a religion out of name calling and appealing to tradition that would have made any middle ages Roman Catholic proud.

Crocodile tears RC. Comparaing Adventist to the RCC bloodshed? Nice, inaccurate, but nice.

They at least have grown up a bit since then, our only hope is that TSDA will do so more rapidly.

So we can all agree with you RC and live happily ever after?

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Exempt you've yet to accept the fact that, in order to discount the traditional view of Adventists, you have to completely discount the much of the traditional view Christianity.

That's problematic for you because it exposes your theological arrogance and piety that only your view is the acceptable view.

No that is why my article on Who is Satan or Lucifer misidentified begins with:

It may come as a surprise to many Christians that to the Jews and New Testament Christians there was no such person as Lucifer. To many Christians Lucifer is equivalent to Satan, the devil. How could it be that the Jews knew nothing of Lucifer, we find it clearly printed in our King James Bible in Isaiah 14. But then again it is not found in most contemporary language versions.

That is why I supplied so many references to back up my position, it is certainly not something that I came up with myself. And it is so strange that even after I posted the article you proceeded to think that this was all just something I thought was from Adventism. It is of course why I presented the material from Origen and Tertullian in my article. Again what you think of as fact appear to be horribly confused.