Powerful.

I heartily agree with Barry Black. The Golden Rule IS the Law and the Prophets.

This tape should be required for every member before baptism and for every Seminary student before graduation.

Thank you to both Barry Black and Wintley Phipps for their visibility and dedication, and for their openness, authenticity and honesty in this interview.

Amen!

Alex, I want to express some appreciation for the moderator (I don't know who he is?), and to the Evangelism Council at large, for making space for that conversation.

Perhaps we should also send appreciation to those who organized the campaign against TD Jakes last year, as damaging an effort as it was. Appreciation, why? Because were it not for their organizing to close ranks, this open conversation about the value of engagement with God's other sheep would not have happened -- and we need more conversations like this. We absolutely need them.

Another confirmation is above: It's pure arrogance!!!

Great message. As I write from Birmingham, Alabama, I am struck by the irony that God is using African Americans in such a mighty way to speak this present truth for our denomination. Reminds me how He used a frail female in the nineteenth century. I totally support for equality and respect for all----let's remove the labels.

The Seventh-day Adventist church attracts members by proposing that a person's path to salvation requires them to pick the right religious expression, and in that context declares itself as God's one true and final church on earth prior to the second coming.

As members become increasingly psychologically dependent on the truth of these two propositions, we see a groundswell of demand among members that church leaders defend its position against the wider Christian community.

The Seventh-day Adventist universe is the direct outcome of the Big Bang of 1844.

Arrogance is not nearly deep enough to account for what is happening in this regard.

The truly amazing aspect of God's saving grace is that it is expressed and is effective without so much as a scintella of condemnation no matter one's fear and loathing of such grace.

So Wintley Phipps point of view is that the reason the SDA church poured so much money and effort into evangelism in the former Soviet Union is because it was a new WHITE mission field. Wow. Had nothing to do with the fact that it had been shut to open evangelism and organized work for most of the 20th century? This is a sad commentary on the state of race relations in the Adventist church. However, that aside, I agree with much of what these two pastors said. We ARE too aloof and arrogant. And there are those in the church who are leading us further down that path, and I'm glad these pastors are speaking out against that.

Sorry about my spelling above. It is 'lighten' not 'ligthen.'

glennspring - Thu, 01/19/2012 - 14:24
Chaplain Black shared how he was cautioned away from civil right activism while at the seminary .

If it's Twilight books/movies, then the church is all about Standing For Truth, however "unpopular". But if it's Civil Rights, it doesn't want to offend anyone.

It apparently doesn't occur to anyone in Berrien or Silver Spring that if it can't find the will to stand on behalf of an oppressed minority, and to risk whatever blowback may result, it isn't likely to have the will to stand during the "time of trouble".<.em>
------------------------------------------------

This has worried me a little, I must say.

Some say we are not called to do what everybody else is doing (social activism etc.).
I think nothing is wrong with having a unique mission; but sometimes I wonder why the unique mission of the church doesn't resemble Jesus' ministry more closely. I do wish our church was a stronger voice against things like this rather than behind the cultural curve like it was during the Civil Rights era.
How is it that the remnant church had segregated cafeterias and hospitals? How come out unique truths do not make us more moral/ethical?

On the other hand, EGW would have flipped out about either. She called for work among minorities in a time when it was very unpopular.

I don't know. So far, the Character of God message popularized by Maxwell seems to be both "uniquely SDA" and relevant (the message for this time); but I am still trying to sort through this.

I have not viewed the video yet but I wanted to comment on this.

I don't recall having ever heard of T.D. Jakes or this situations, so I can't comment on the specifics, but I will say I agree with the general message of Phipps and Black here. If we expect others to listen to our ideas then generally speaking we should be willing to listen to their's. Also it's not like we're talking about protecting the minds of young children, these are college students, and it is insulting to act as though they can not judge the truth for themselves.

All you have to do is to watch Barry Black speak to see what arrogance looks like. He exudes arrogance in his style of speaking.

Ted Wilson speaks very humbly in comparison.

Imagine if God ran his own university. Do you think He would invite the serpent from the tree of knowledge to speak to His students?

That is exactly what these men are advocating. The Bible has the last word: "To the law and the testimony, if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them."

"Imagine if God ran his own university. Do you think He would invite the serpent from the tree of knowledge to speak to His students?"

We don't need to imagine that. God ran his own university. It was called "the Garden of Eden". Guess whom he invited for a lecture on epistemology?

Let's clarify some facts before we have misinformation spawn once again. From Pagophilus, John Mark and others' comments it's clear that people are a bit confused: T.D. Jakes was invited to do a professional development session for Evangelism Council--though this Conference is held at OU, the full name is the Pastoral Evangelism and Leadership Conference. He wasn't being asked to mount the pulpit to deliver a sermon to the general college student body. He was speaking to trained denominational pastors and evangelists. It's an important distinction to make and it highlights the irrationality of the "attack campaign".

As one of the most successful church administrators in the country, Jakes was asked to share information on his expertise with professional colleagues in a forum that only registered attendees would be listening to. It's quite akin to a non-Adventist lawyer, accountant, architect or nutritionist being invited to speak to colleagues about their field. Unless people believe (1) Adventists should only listen to other Adventists in ANY given field or (2) all other professionals are spiritually discerning enough to differentiate information, but pastors are the least spiritually fortified--so much so that merely hearing someone of another denomination would hopelessly mar their theological worldview. Either one of those perspectives moves beyond mere arrogance into the realm of bizarrely illogical.

PS: The moderator is Pastor Jesse Wilson. He will be the organizer of PELC starting this year.

"...they will end up managing their organisations not according to the principles of the Bible and SOP."

The SOP - the best manual of business administration! Of course, it had already dealt brilliantly with masturbation.

Are you under the impression that there are no "overpaid CEOs" in the Adventist Health System? And how exactly do you think Catholics and Adventists cooperate in Centura Health? Based on the SOP?

But there's a flaw in that analogy. Talking about worldly Mr. Overpaid CEO who is utilizing principles that are absolutely antithetical to our worldview is different than talking about someone who simply doesn't agree in ALL points. Someone who isn't 100% in agreement with our doctrine is not automatically at polar odds with us. It's not an all or none situation.

I don't know much about Franklin Graham so I can't speak on him. However, an example I can point to is the financial adviser Dave Ramsey. He operates his model on principles of stewardship, tithes and offerings found in the Bible. His teachings on finance are in harmony with Adventist teachings on finance. That's where we have common ground. But he's not Adventist. Therefore there are most assuredly some points of doctrine that we may not agree on. However, we wouldn't ask his opinions on prophecy or the state of the dead. Rather, as a professional financier who has helped literally thousands of people understand portfolios, organize finances, establish good monetary habits, and get out of debt I wouldn't hesitate in listening to him give advice on his area of expertise.

That is why you'll notice Barry Black repeatedly noted that this doesn't mean you extend an invitation to ANY and EVERYONE. It's important to vet individuals and see what foundational basis they're starting from. Someone with shady, greedy, manipulative and exploitative business practices shouldn't be asked to explain their model of management. But a successful leader of integrity, with upstanding and compassionate models of management that are in harmony with how we believe Christ would have us coordinate our affairs should be welcomed to share their knowledge--even if they aren't Adventist.

"Bogdan, what is wrong with what she wrote on masturbation?"

Before any scientific consideration, EGW's approach to the topic, as highlighted in the fragment quoted above, is entirely unchristian. When Jesus was asked "is he sick because of his or his parents' sin?", he healed (or so they say), he didn't start pointing fingers and writing books to expose "secret vices".

"You cannot show that what she wrote cannot be true."

I don't have to. OTOH, you should be able to prove that what she wrote is true.

"Just as you can't show that what she said were the effects of reading novels are not true."

Please. I can always point you to the bad effects of reading only the Bible and the SOP.

I'm wondering who it is that is arrogant. if outstanding leaders like E. E. Cleveland and others of his caliber could see value in cultivating meaningful relationships with non-SDA ministers and be supportive of other worthy causes in society, why do we keep describing the entire church with such highly negative language. It seems to me these two men who are specially privileged with unusual opportunities that few ever have, but does that mean that arrogance in the hallmark of the rest of us not so privileged? I think "indifferent" might be a better way to describe how some relate to this issue.

I know a pastor whose attitude and behavior suggests that involvement in a church-sponsored community forum, joining the ministerial association in the city, or even getting to know the Pentecostal minister who lives one block from his church, is non of his business - at least very low on his professional or personal priorities. There undoubtedly are others like him.

However, speaking for myself as a retired minister, most of the Adventist folks I deal with, ministers and non-ministers alike, are as deeply involved in the social marketplace as their competence and circumstances allow. We are still a bit leery of political involvement, and perhaps for good reasons. But I would like to think that, by and large, we have long since passed the adolescent stage of hiding out in an Adventist ghetto thinking that we are the only ones who can speak of God in a wide world that he so loves. If we are too indifferent, inspire and rouse us, don't dismiss us as an arrogant people.

Of course Adventism is arrogant and exclusivity. It's in the denominations 'DNA' and is not going to. Leave in a hurry.

Tom,

say "hi" to Pneumonia and kick her out :)

You're so right. In over two decades of listening to Adventist sermons and reading Adventist literature I have been bombarded with the myth that Adventists somehow own Revelation 14 (coupled of course with the idiotic exegesis that sees Adventists in Revelation 10). No one seems to even realize that others have expounded on Revelation 14, that others have been identified with the three angels (like Luther and other reformers, back in XVIth century exegesis).

Steve Blue: The last hour that I ever participated in SDA church, was sitting in SS and listening to a staff member of a local SDA school teach that it was a sin to pray with others who are not of our denomination. Everyone nodded their heads in assent, except for me and I protested.

For me, that was the 'last straw', of many straws. That was a huge neon light for me. I walked out after the SS lesson, never to return; that was my fork in the road.

Arrogance is a position held by the self-righteous. It is not restricted to religion, or within religion, to Adventism. However the eschatalogical emphasis, the health message, and the our brain injured prophet is better than yours roots of the church DO put it in a position where its exclusivity, on the grounds of superiority, is institutionalised.

Yes. That is 4 lines without a fullstop.
No. I do not think the Adventist church as a right to be arrogant about anything. And the self-righteous "We are not all like that" crap in the thread above is tantamount to a digital Bystander Effect - google Kitty Genovose and you will have the dominant cultural meme in the Adventist Church.

God said love your enemies, and the SDA church can't even be honest with its friends. God help us all if the church continues to exist in 50 years.

Very few Adventist are aware of TD Jakes beliefs concerning the rapture, prosperity religion, homosexuality, and his connection with the Illuminati. I agree 100% with non-Adventist speakers being vetted before they are extended an invitation to speak or lecture at the Evangelism Council. FYI
http://joeland7.blogspot.com/2011/06/sam-pipim-resign-bishop-tdjakes-to....

I couldn't agree more. It is embarrassing. I've met some Adventists who don't even know people outside the faith. It is tragic and needs to stop. Love Barry black and Whitley - keep preaching!

"There are some Adventist Pastors who are preaching a liberal theology and they should be removed from our congregations. We need revival and reformation."
Absolutely, and it cannot come too soon. We have enough learned SDAS who are true to the faith and don't need to learn theology from those who do not speak according to Scriptures as taught by the official SDA church.
Ted Wilson had courage when, in effect, he deplored inviting those who do not preach the Truth. And it is not arrogance to maintain the integrity of the doctrines, the libs notwithstanding. it makes good common sense.

"We have enough learned SDAS who are true to the faith and don't need to learn theology from those who do not speak according to Scriptures as taught by the official SDA church."

Do you believe that God is temporal or atemporal?

Phipps and Black spoke truth concerning isolation, insularity but its not arrogance to say no TD Jakes, no way you going to teach Adventist ministers your ways. The Bible tells us to try the spirit. Is.8:20 to the law and the testimony if they speak not according to this there is not light . What is truth? Ps. 119:142 - The law is truth; Jn.17:17 the word is truth; Jn.14:6 - Jesus is truth.

The Adventist Church is God's elected/chosen church for the last days. It has a very special and unique message that was delivered via the SOP. We sure have more of God's truth revealed than any one else. There is a purpose for that, i.e., to be God's instrument to preach His truth to the rest of the world in the last days. This in itself makes us special. God's chosen people are special and have a special mission - as nobody else does.
I don't understand why some people want to degrade our status to the same level of other churches that were not recipients of God's special message and don't have any duty regarding the last days as we do. This is not arrogance. It's just reality.

I am appalled! Some comments above are hard to believe!

This is exactly what makes our church unattractive to others, due to this futile attitude of superiority, elitism, triumphalism, exclusivity, separatism, arrogance, false humility, and on and on...

My conclusion is that there is no hope: Some people just don't get it, and will never do. It's actually a waste of time to discuss these issues with them.

How can someone praise an act of prejudice, as Your Friend (not mine) did when he (or she?) wrote: Ted Wilson had courage when, in effect, he deplored inviting those who do not preach the Truth."
Ted Wilson just demonstrated a very narrow understanding of what TRUTH is when he recommended not to invite outsiders to preach or deliver lectures in our institutions. What is this? A type of Soviet society?
But many can't see the absurdity. No hope!

Jirka, do you really believe that nobody else can find the "truth" in our days unless "via de SOP." You must be kidding us!

Just appalling!!!

How you gonna get condemn folks for being arrogant and not deal with teh theology that made them that way?

**********************

This is the $10,000,000 question that nobody really ever deals with. The separatism and arrogance that is so present in our denomination didn't just pop up from thin air. Nor is it only about people's attitudes over having "the truth."It actually seems to also arise from our theological and ecclesiastical self-identity. It comes from our origins as a denomination within Christianity. We sell people the product coming in the front door, that they are joining the one, true, remnant church, often with little mention made of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and then expect different results than what we're getting. The very message itself is prone to creating an insular environment and institution.

Paul wrote, "We do not preach ourselves. But, we preach Christ Jesus, and ourselves your servants, for his sake." This has it in balance, and seems to get different results. Paul was essentially saying, "It ain't about us." We're beggars who found bread, and we're here to share it with you. That's all it's about.

Thanks...

Frank

I loved this one, it made me laugh quite a bit. Very humorous!

" And any Adventist seminary library is replete with non-Adventist theological works (just as EGW's personal library was)." - Bogdan Gheorghita

We will never get anywhere until we come to terms with our teaching. We teach that Advnetism is the remnant church and all other churches are babylon. People are to come out of them to join Adventism. With that mindset, yes you talk to others...I should say "talk at" others. You convert others out of babylon into "the truth."

Can you learn from others? How can you if they are Babylon. We acting like folks ain't been taught that all other churches are spiritual babylon that needs us to come in and save them so we can have a star in our crown. No, that's what we been taught....

So if that ain't true...maybe teach that...But last I saw...remnant is in our fundamentals...Last I saw we call everyone to come out of the other churches into "the truth."

Again...how you gonna attack Adventist arrogance without dealing with the doctrine that causes it...the remnant and babylon....I would be interested in asking Black and Phipps do they belive in the traditional Advneitst idea that everyone else is babylon and the Advnetist church is the remnant...If they say yes...then one wonders why bring a priest of babylon in to teach your people...if they say no, then why not spend some time at least talking about that...that is why Advnetists are arrogant...

I hear Adventist preachers talking about Adventist arrogance all the time...they talk about vegetarianism causing some to be arrogant...or not wearing jewelry causes some not to be arrogant...while there is a little truth there...in general, It ain't cause of vegelinks...it ain't cause of not wearing jewelry...it ain't becuase of all of those things...no...it is inscribed in the 28 fundaemtnals...it's the remnant church idea...that's why adventists are arrogant...and if you ain't gonna deal with that, then we just wasting time talking about trivialities...

We need to live in the world but not be of the world, including mingling our teachings with other demoninational groups. We MUST not allow babylon to come in to our ranks (Though unfortunately we have already with the many different doctrines bring taught which our pioneers did not teach) but we also cannot be like the jews and keep our teachings to ourselves. Jesus is coming soon and we must warn the world and the churches that the crisis is coming; the National Sunday Law is about to hit America and then the rest of the world. Lets us go forward and upward and not stagnet.

May our Heavenly Father bless each of you as you do your part.

Jason
http://www.ittookamiracle.ca/'11daniel.htm

Ted Wilson just demonstrated a very narrow understanding of what TRUTH is when he recommended not to invite outsiders to preach or deliver lectures in our institutions. What is this? A type of Soviet society?
But many can't see the absurdity. No hope!

George,
I think something has to be said about the various levels of intelligence and education that makes up the SDA church. In North America we have WHAT? percent college degreed members, compared to third world countries. Even here at home we have those who are glued to 3ABM and Amazing Facts - not the most erudite sources of Christianity. Put all that together in a pot and mix in the SOP and you have quite a conglomeration of perceptions and beliefs. And I can hear it now, "worldly education ain't gonna mean nothin in the judgement", which may or may not be true; but the disconnect comes when the SDA churuch is so keen on educating everybody, but when that education is put into practice it's downgraded and even dismissed. It's happening in LLU and it happens in the way the leaders of the church talk down to its members. The church probably bit off more than it can chew when it dotted the country with all of its colleges, extolling the value of "higher eduction". On the issues being discussed here, we have to agree to disagree, and hope for the best.

Only by the mystery and the miracle of God's grace can any of us, including a social entity like the church, avoid breathing the atmosphere that is circulating around us. How else can it be? This is how normal human beings learn and normally function: we make our environment and are made by it.

This may be too much for most of us to swallow, but I would submit that if Seventh-day Adventists are truly arrogant, as these brothers are declaring, they are so LARGELY, (though not exclusively), because the church is shaped by a society that is the very epitome of arrogance in the modern world. In its relationship with the rest of the world - its wars, its sanctions, it dominance in the United nation, its exclusion of all but the most powerful nations from its economic and political club, its domination of the UN security Council, the superpower status that it alone claims, the automatic sanctions and punishment it inflicts, in one way or another, on weaker nations that disagree with or resist its policies and practices, in the very rhetoric it uses, and in a host of other areas, the USA exudes arrogance.

This is an exceptional nation, and at every opportunity that presents itself it openly declares its superiority and triumphalism without hesitation or humility. Great nations are not humble and self-effacing; when they lift up other nations that lifting up is usually a means to advance their own self-interest and dominance. When it prizes peace, patriotism and prosperity above all else, the church, as a social organization, follows society rather than leads it.

Here in America is where Adventism was born and bred. It is this social and political milieu that has put its stamp on most of those who have influenced the development of our church and therefore on the social attitudes it absorbs and projects. And it is from the USA, too, that the church has spread its seeds to the rest of the world.

Just as Roman Catholicism still reflects much of the Spirit of the Roman empire with which it was intertwined in its heyday, so American Protestantism, including SDAs, has too often reflected the dominant spirit of the American empire.

This is not to deny that the calling of the SDA church should be indistinguishable from other religious groups, that its special emphasis on certain beliefs is not valid, or to suggest that its uniqueness is without biblical foundation.

Rather, it is simply to say that we have a double force against which we are to contend, both of which make us most vulnerable to what I believe to be the satanic spirit PRIDE, here called arrogance - the force of pride whose pervasiveness in our society strongly impacts us, and the force of spiritual privilege in believing that God has specially called us to a particular mission. That has always been the tragic flaw that undermined and led to the downfall of nations and empires.

And that might very well be our most tragic flaw, both on the right and on the left. (To our credit, we who are Adventists blue-bloods have had the honesty to describe ourselves as being "rich and increase with goods, and having need of nothing', while not knowing that we are "wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked"). Unfortunately our condemnation is not the fact that we describe ourselves in such terms, but in not knowing what we are actually saying and how it applies to us. That's how deceptive pride is, especially with individuals and organization that are successful.

Let's begin dealing with arrogance by confronting the arrogance in our individual selves - an arrogance that society constantly nurtures and reinforces and in which it holds us captive. This might very well include confronting the arrogance in me as I write, and the arrogance in the critique offered by the arrogant to the arrogant in the interview.

That is, we need to be perceptive enough to grasp the fact that we are all in it together, whether we can admit it or not. By the grace of God, and only by an abundant supply of it, we can find deliverance from this horrible bondage.

Barry Black is a Catholic-educated preacher. He studied at the feet of Rome via his training at Salve Regina (Hail Holy Queen) University. We shouldn't be surprised that he would feel this way.

I have had some reservations about Brother Black ever since I saw him speaking in a strange tongue on a dvd recorded at one of our campmeetings. It was weird to see. People were clapping after something he said, and during that he lowered his head and his face started looking different and he started saying things in a low tone in some kind of tongue. I took the dvd to a pastor and he thought it strange too. I don't think it was a known langauge and there would have been no point speaking it anyway, since people were clapping and couldn't hear what he was saying anyway, and since he lowered his voice. It was a very strange thing to see and I couldn't explain it other than he seemed to be speaking in a gibberish tongue. So, understandably, I have questions.
I appreciate his work in Congress. I appreciate much of what was said on this video. I agree that God does not work with SDA's exclusively. He called the widow of Zarepheth, the wise men and many others to have contact with God's people. Someone who has not been blessed with the amount of truth given to His chosen people, but who lives up to the light they have better than some of us do, is in a better position before God. I agree we are not to stop people that teach in Jesus' name as the disciples tried to do. But it is not stopping others from speaking about Jesus to not invite them to speak in our universities! If that were true, we should be inviting non-SDA's all the time. God uses other denominations of course. SDA's didn't print the Bible that we use! We should have friends of other denominations. I have attended church now and then with some non-SDA friends. But i do not make it a habit. And very few of them ever were willing to come visit my church-so that shows that others are "arrogant" too. And I wasn't hurt over that. They believed they had the truth just as much as I did and they had the right to. I never felt they were arrogant and exclusive and we remained good friends on the levels we could be.
It is a fine line, I agree. It is not easy to be in the public eye and yet keep our distinction. Mistakes will be made. We have to avoid extremes. All this is true, but we still have to be careful. I think it would have been better to invite him to speak to some of our experienced leaders than to a group of impressionable students in such a public forum.
Let's look at it this way-If we did have him speak, would we then tell him what he can and can't say? There is no doubt he preaches some truth and could have a fine sermon that would inspire people. But what if he started preaching errors in order to try to get our people to be more ecumenical? Isn't it easier not to invite speakers like this at all, than to embarrass ourselves in telling them beforehand what thay can and cannot say? There is nothing wrong in exchanging dialogue if he or others showed real interest in what we teach. But we need to be very cautious because there are elements out there trying to water Adventism down and to make us into an ecumenical church and to lower our flag of distinction. Satan hates the Bible, he hates our message, he hates the Spirit of Prophecy and our Advent movement, and he will do everything he can because "the dragon was angry with the woman and went to make war against the remnant of her seed that keep the commandments and have the tesitmony of Jesus". Since this is true, then we can expect that he will use every means at his disposal to try to get us to lower our standard and become just like everybody else.

Yes it is true. Why would satan leave those who have been entrusted with the truths of God alone? Did he leave the Israelites alone after God gave them His commandments at Sinai and spoke through His representatives Moses and the priests? Today, he hates the SDA faith more than anything else on earth, and it is no surprise that he does and will do all in his power to make of no effect the truth God wants to reveal through us. He is attacking the Spirit of Prophecy more than ever nowadays as she warned us he would, because he hates the truth for this time.

If we do not believe that text refers to our church as being the remnant, then I would be the first one to leave the church. There is no point in having the name SDA if we do not believe what our church was called to teach and do.

Curtis, while there is reality in your analysis of the United States, Adventists appropriated the exclusive, special status long before the United States was a world power. In the mid-1800s, we were still developing our frontier.

I appreciate your well-balanced comment Pastor Mack.

joel72227:
"You can not achieve the rank of admiral or general without having connections and being trained and educated in Illuminati schools."

Please offer proof to substantiate your statement. Is this a 100% rule? Your accusation is very significant and serious. You MUST come up with the proof for what you just said. Otherwise it is actually just an incendiary comment posted on Spectrum that reflects prejudice and hatred - nothing else.
Please produce your proof immediately!

Joel72227: you've made your point about the Illuminati and other conspiracy concerns. Please move on and others, please don't let this thread go down that rat hole. It is wearying and unproductive - except for those whose lives seem to revolve around such speculation.

"who controls our..."

Indeed, the eternal obsession of totalitarians - control.

@Rich Hannon: " Please move on and others, please don't let this thread go down that rat hole."

NO! NO! NO!
He made a very serious accusation, and cannot offer ANY proof of it? This is defamation! A malicious, incendiary comment.
And you want to save the guy saying, "move on?"
NO! He has a moral responsibility to come up with proof or to apologize for a false accusation - whichever applies. It's tiring to see the "saints" talking with arrogance so often, throwing untrue statements, and just getting away with it.

No moving on! Either PROOF or APOLOGY!
I think this is not too much to ask from a true Christian committed to Christ's cause, a "witness" to the World..., is it?

George: Of course people will be saved who do not have the truths SDA's have. I was not saying that at all. In Matthew 25 Jesus doesn't say anything about the Sabbath or state of the dead at the judgment, but asks if we have helped the poor, visited prisoners and sick, etc. This does not mean the Sabbath and state of the dead are not important. On the converse side, Paul says we can be works oriented when we feed the poor or do good things. We need both faith, truth and good actions. God looks at a person's heart, their circumstances, whether or not they have been turned off by Christians not acting Christlike, etc.
But the Adventist truth was given to help people to stand and not fall for satan's deceptions during the time of the mark of the beast. Of course, all of our truths, except the 2,300 days, whose time had not arrived yet, were known and practiced in the past. We have been called to restore the waste places and build up the foundations of old that were destroyed by the beast power in the Middle Ages. The judgment message restores the truth that had been distorted in the years since Jesus was on earth. That is why the sanctuary needs cleansing and restoration. Jesus wants to restore what was lost by the corruption of the church in times past.
As far as EGW goes-I am not sure if you are an SDA or not, but if so, if we do not believe she was sent of God and that the pioneers of the church were led in studying and laying the pillars of our faith, then why claim to be an SDA? It all comes as a package and if we leave the Spirit of Prophecy out, we will be denying the very gift that led to the establishment of our church to begin with. We will then start doubting our more unique foundation pillars like the sanctuary, the 2,300 days, the Sabbath, the state of the dead, etc. Sooner or later, those who doubt that she was sent of God will leave it all.

There is no way we can remain SDA and doubt God sent her. Either her work is of God or of the devil. If it is of the devil, then the SDA church needs to close down for Christians do not want anything from the devil.
This is made very clear in Evangelism page 260 and the volumes of the Testimonies that it quotes:
"Let the Testimonies be judged by their fruits. What is the spirit of their teaching? What has been the result of their influence? All who desire to do so can acquaint themselves with the fruits of these visions....
God is either teaching His church, reproving their wrongs, and strengthening their faith, or He is not. This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work ... bears the stamp of God, or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the matter. The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil."—Testimonies For The Church 5:671 (1889).

God Speaks Through Testimonies—"We must follow the directions given through the Spirit of prophecy. We must love and obey the truth for this time. This will save us from accepting strong delusions. God has spoken to us through His Word. He has spoken to us through the Testimonies to the church, and through the books that have helped to make plain our present duty and the position that we should now occupy."—Testimonies For The Church 8:298 (1904).

1SM 48 says:
"Some who are not willing to receive the light, but who prefer to walk in ways of their own choosing, will search the testimonies to find something in them to encourage the spirit of unbelief and disobedience. Thus a spirit of disunion will be brought in; for the spirit which leads them to criticize the testimonies will also lead them to watch their brethren to find in them something to condemn."—Manuscript 73, 1908.

The Last Deception of Satan
"Satan is ... constantly pressing in the spurious—to lead away from the truth. The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. “Where there is no vision, the people perish” (Proverbs 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God’s remnant people in the true testimony."—Letter 12, 1890.

"There will be a hatred kindled against the testimonies which is satanic. The workings of Satan will be to unsettle the faith of the churches in them, for this reason: Satan cannot have so clear a track to bring in his deceptions and bind up souls in his delusions if the warnings and reproofs and counsels of the Spirit of God are heeded."—Letter 40, 1890.

These are familiar statements, but they are very clear. We see SDA's today that hate the Testimonies. But how can they keep calling themselves SDA's and do this? What is the point of staying in the church? I am not telling anyone to get out, but we need to each examine our hearts to ask ourselves if we really should have our names on books if we don't believe God started this work through our pioneers and that He spoke in vision to Mrs. White to establish the faith? When push comes to shove, all that harbor doubts about God's work through the Spirit of Prophecy will eventually leave the faith for an easier path and join ecumenically with the other church systems that have fallen into Babylon. There is no middle ground and no one will be wavering anymore when the time of testing comes

"the national sunday law is about to hit America" (trying to keep a straight face, here!!)....My response is, 'sooooo'? Are you suggesting that once America gets the nasty bug, they are going to spread their cooties to all the rest of the globe? This is so boggling...but one can never estimate the power of Satan; if only God had a weaker foe; poor God.

Amen! and thank you. As I speak, my worship team is planning our music program to share with one of the Baptist Churches here in town. We were asked to participate in their Revival meetings. Adventist worship team doing music for Baptists, who'd have thunk it. All to the Glory of God.

With our attitude of Denominationalism we have become introspective and seclusive. We have lost the Advent Movement attitude of inclusion and putting our arms around our neighbors and inviting them in. We are afraid to "adopt a church" in the neighborhood to be friends, enjoy Christian fellowship with combined service to community needs. I have a number of friends in other churches I couldn't invite to be members as they wouldn't be accepted, so they have to attend to worshiping God in community on Sundays.

Pr. Phipps cares about one thing: Money.

Our conference wanted to invite him to speak at campmeeting but didn't feel up to paying his $6000 appearance fee.

Other speakers just ask you to cover their travel costs and don't mind it if you give them something extra, if the heart is so moved.

He showed up here in our state a couple years later with his Dream Academy road show.
He was selling tickets throughout town, on the Sabbath.
But, when you live in a million dollar plus home in a swank exclusive Florida community,
well, there ARE bills to pay....

I have asked: "Does anyone know who did the inviting and who did the disinviting in this story?"

Now, I trust most of you understood why I asked this question. Let me spell it out, just in case. If my employer trusts me to make a decision (like organizing an event and drawing up the guest list), I'm either in charge, or I let him do the work. If I'm a simple minion, I have no reason to complain he thunders from above. Inviting two senior pastors, whose careers don't really hang in the ballance, to speak on my frustrated behalf is a little bit cowardly.

None of the above is meant to say that Adventists should be encouraged to close up denominationally.

I was going to leave the 2300 days alone, but George is tempting me and I am weak. Has anyone ever wondered how Adventists arrive at the year 457 BC as the beginning of the famed 2300 "days"?

A balance must be struck and conditions must be made or if it's a free for all , say what you wanna say on their pulpits while they say what they want on ours. Next year, invite the pope.

"The decree in the 7th year of Artaxerxes (457 BC) is specifically about the city not just the temple."

You assume that we know beyond reasonable doubt which Artaxerxes is mentioned in Ezra 7. We don't. The chronology of Ezra-Nehemiah is far from clear and the decrees mentioned lack historical corroboration. What's worse with your statement though is that it's false. The decree in Ezra 7 is not "specifically about [rebuilding] the city". It takes a whole lot of conjectural argumentation and explaining away to suggest that it might have had anything to do with rebuilding Jerusalem.

Oh, BTW, we don't even know for sure when Jesus died.

I forgot to stress that my question was about 457 BC as the beginning of the 2300 "days". Even if we had any certainty about the post-exilic reconstruction of Jerusalem, we would still be missing the most important piece of the puzzle: the connection between the time periods of Daniel 9 and Daniel 8. It's simply not there.

Pagophilus

Artaxerxes’ Decree to Ezra - 458 BC (No authorization to rebuild, no rebuilding resulted.)

“I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel,... to go up to Jerusalem.... And to carry the silver and gold, ,,,, for the house of the God of heaven...set magistrates and judges, And whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him....” (Ez 7:13-26)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Artaxerxes’ Decree to Nehemiah – 445 BC (Authorization to rebuild, rebuilding resulted, in troublous times)

“... the city, ..., lieth waste , and the gates thereof are consumed with fire ....If it please the king... send me unto Judah unto the city of my fathers' sepulchres, that I may build it.....

And the king granted me...

Then Eliashib builded the sheep gate And next unto him builded the men of Jericho. [Etc., etc.]

And it came to pass from that time forth, that .... the half of my servants wrought in the work, and the other half of them held both the spears, the shields, and the bows. (Neh 2:3-5, 3:1,2,16)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come on, which decree fits the prophecy? Please tell me.

Harry

And regardless of which decree and date, was the setting possibly one of anticipation, joy, desire to get back to Jerusalem and leave Babylon behind. If so, it conflicts with the 2300 days, which were ones of destruction and desolation.

Seems like there is a mismatch here. Wrong prophecy, wrong event.

"...fleecing the gullible masses... who are enthralled by his prosperity Gospel"

At what amount of income does a pastor become a fleecer? There are plenty of useless gospels to go around.

I have written concerning this issue here: http://clearerperspective.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/should-t-d-jakes-have...

Winston, I agree with you 100% we Are a peculiar people and our teaching is all God's word. So let's not dilute his word to please man, because when God come he's coming for those that are ready, NOT those that are getting ready.

Peculiar is a term from the KJV. At that time it meant "private" or "designated". The meaning has changed in the hundreds of years since the KJV production.

"There is no way we can remain SDA and doubt God sent her. Either her work is of God or of the devil. If it is of the devil, then the SDA church needs to close down for Christians do not want anything from the devil." - @ Kennan

This is a very judgmental statement based on "either, or". It denies EGW the right to be herself, thus very conveniently blaming someone else for her copying from other sources without giving credit (aka, plagiarism). She tried to attribute those copied portions to God, by means of direct visions to her. Nice try Ellen, but we gotcha!!!

Why are you trying to blame the devil for something EGW did by her own decision and free will? The devil is not always the culprit. People have the freedom to decide doing wrong! The rationale, "Good comes from God, bad comes from the Devil" is just a free pass for when people make wrong decisions and behave bad. It's just passing their bucket to someone else.

Regarding to being impossible to "remain SDA and doubt God sent her" - this is a BS (Bold Statement) but completely meritless, worthless, and untrue. It would be valid only if one goes to a church where EGW is worshiped and kept above the Bible. But fortunately, not all SDA churches are this way, and there is plenty of room to worship in SDA churches without being a devout of EGW.

Worshiping God in a church has nothing to do with EGW and her writings. Nothing!!!

Peculiar in the sense of oddly self centered. Unique in no way. All have sinned and come short of the Glory of God. All stand in the need of a Redeemer. We each stubble and fall.

It is the triumphalism that sets Adventism apart not its alleged proprietary hold on redemptive theology

The greatest curse of Adventism is to build a theology on eisegesis and to validate it upon a self proclaimed prophetess. SOP should stand for Strange Obscurant Projections.

Rome has her Mary and Adventism has her Ellen. There is no salvation in either.

"There is no other name given among men whereby we must be saved." That name is Jesus Christ the Alpha and Omega of our life, our salvation, our eternity.

Let us share that Good News among all men. Tom Z.

George

Yes but which spirit?

Tom Z

I may be mistaken but I haven't seen anyone saying that T. D. Jakes is "preaching the truth of the last days"!!
I don't really know T. D. Jakes or know much about his "message" to be honest but that really isn't the thrust of the thread or interview IMHO.
The "thrust" of this discussion revolves around a sense of "isolationism" and "arrogance" exhibited by the idea that we as "SDA's" have the exclusive corner on "truth" and have nothing to gain from "interacting" with those outside of the "SDA fortress". We avoid these "encounters" so we won't be contaminated so to speak.
If we are so confident in our position we have nothing to lose by examining others beliefs and comparing them with our own. In fact EGW speaks very eloquently about this in the book Counsels to Writers and Editors under the chapter entitled "Attitudes to New Light".
We have nothing to be afraid of by examining our understandings of the Bible and comparing them to others. We have many things to both "learn and unlearn". What do you think she might have been refering to??
Wintley and Barry did not endorse throwing the doors open to every speaker but rather a "careful vetting" should be undertaken. Sounds very reasonable to me!!
All the best
Fred

Fred Eastman, read what Ellen White has to say on new light carefully, in context, and together with all she said on the matter. She also wrote:

"I was shown the necessity of those who believe that we are having the last message of mercy, being separate from those who are daily imbibing new errors. I saw that neither young nor old should attend their meetings; for it is wrong to thus encourage them while they teach error that is a deadly poison to the soul and teach for doctrines the commandments of men. The influence of such gatherings is not good. If God has delivered us from such darkness and error, we should stand fast in the liberty wherewith He has set us free and rejoice in the truth. God is displeased with us when we go to listen to error, without being obliged to go; for unless He sends us to those meetings where error is forced home to the people by the power of the will, He will not keep us. The angels cease their watchful care over us, and we are left to the buffetings of the enemy, to be darkened and weakened by him and the power of his evil angels; and the light around us becomes contaminated with the darkness.

I saw that we have no time to throw away in listening to fables. Our minds should not be thus diverted, but should be occupied with the present truth, and seeking wisdom that we may obtain a more thorough knowledge of our position, that with meekness we may be able to give a reason of our hope from the Scriptures. While false doctrines and dangerous errors are pressed upon the mind, it cannot be dwelling upon the truth which is to fit and prepare the house of Israel to stand in the day of the Lord."

1. Can "peculiar" be a good thing?

2. In what sense were the Israelites "peculiar"?

3. Can we be "peculiar" in that sense?

4. Does "peculiar" have to mean "arrogant"?

Somebody said that Wintley Phipps costs 6K to bring in...I wonder how much T.D. Jakes costs. Does anybody know? Why has cost not come up in this conversation at all?

And, Fred Eastman we would never be Sabbath-keepers if we did not "listen" to the Seventh-Day Baptists.

I think what we need to be able to do is two things:

1. Be confident in ourselves enough to make unique contributions to the Christian world. Right now there is a debate on hell going on in the Evangelical world (Rob Bell etc.) and Seventh-day Adventists are nowhere to be found.

We wouldn't be so worried about being influenced by error if we were robust contributors ourselves.

The Character of God/Great Controversy theme is also one that is ripe for sharing.

2. We should also give members the tools to search the scriptures and think for themselves so we won't always be on edge. Our beliefs can stand up to scrutiny.
There is a paradox here that has been pointed out before: Why should I study if the conclusions have already been determined? We have to deal with that.

Also Trinidad...
I agree with you!! The "character of God" issue and how it relates to the "destruction of sin ultimately and the concepts of "Hell" is a very important idea to discuss and understand. The understanding of this issue "directly" reflects on the "character of God"!!
Does God motivate by "fear"?? I believe the "prodigal son" would speak to that with an emphatic NO !!
"Love wins is God's game plan for salvation"!!
Fred

Yes, I did mean Willow Creek. Just confused it with a locality not that far from where I live.

As to arrogance and humility - humility is not the same as beine permanently uncertain and never having an answer to your questions. Likewise, arrogance is not having the answer or being certain of having the answer.

Humility and arrogance both have to do with attitude. I know I come across as arrogant to you. But you liberals and "progressives" are just as arrogant in your uncertainty and questioning. And when you start talking about Ted Wilson or Ellen White......

Have you ever heard an Adventist evangelist say something like "now, we don't really know what Daniel 8 means and what historical events it references, but if you have faith, it will become clear that 457 BC etc etc etc"?

"However, because Daniel nine 's 70 week prophecy does start at the decree for rebuilding the temple, we know that a day for a year is correct."

I don't get you here. Would you elaborate?

The "day-year principle" has a big problem. Everywhere it appears in the Bible, it doesn't indicate an identification (albeit symbolical), but a correlation between two different periods of time. It is a mathematical function, not a symbolic key. If there is any symbolic equivalence for a day in the Bible, it's that a day is a 1,000 years. But even that is not a symbol, only a comparison.

Respect.

Fay Crombie

"Is it better to bury the awful stuff that is so embarrassing, and continue to paint Ellen as someone that God has sent for the world to give the 3 angels message?...our specialness"

No Fay, it's better to correct what's wrong and make public the change. The pioneers of Adventism knew that they were fallible and even desired not to have a creed. Here are some statements that showed their caution:

"We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have o give up a cherished view, never change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed". {RH, July 26,1892}

"There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth yo be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation". {Counsels to Writers and Editors p.35}

James White's view on the gifts of E.G. White

"Every Christian is therefore duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say the very moment he does, he places the gifts in a wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position"
-----
We need to be careful and not think we have all the truth, or that there are not things that we may have to adjust or change. Only Jesus was given the Spirit without measure. Only He is infallible.

Be not righteous over much; neither make thyself over wise. Why shouldest thou destroy thyself? Ecl 7:16

Better is a poor and a wise child than an old and foolish king, who will no longer be admonished. Ecl 4:13

The NAD and GC pay fortunes to legal people to bully people and get there way. Wintley has blessed far more people than the spiritual benefits of church legal bullying.

CV,

it depends on whom you ask. EGW would say that the "investigative judgment" is one of the SDA "pillars". Other Christians preach from Revelation 14 too.

In the Old Testament, (The Old Covenant) the question that granted acceptance, fellowship and participation in the Israelite community was:"Are you CIRCUMCISED/?" Even non-Jews who wished to join that community had to be circumcised.But In the New Testament, (New Covenant) Jesus himself, at the Last Supper,showed that his death ended the Old Covenant, and ushered in the New Covenant Yet the disciples missed the whole point! So God had to give Peter a vision ("don't call the gentiles unclean) in order to get him to go to the house of Cornelius to preach the Gospel of Jesus! God sent the Holy Spirit upon them and Peter baptized them, Yet Peter was attacked for going into the house of a GENTILE and fellowshipping--mixing with non-Jews.
,
So we see how hard it was for those first disciples to grasp the GOOD NEWS that JESUS' DEATH RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION had BROKEN DOWN THE BARRIER, THE WALL OF SEPARATION! SO CIRCUMCISION WAS NO LONGER TO BE THE ISSUE! THE QUESTION UNDER THE NEW COVENANT WAS, AND STILL IS, ACCEPTING JESUS! ALL THEIR "SPECIALNESS", "EXCLUSIVITY" "PECULIARITY"
ETC. WERE TO BE THINGS OF THE PAST.

We claim that we do believe in the Gospel of Jesus. But what exactly is this GOOD NEWS? Listen to Peter at Pentecost:-
1. Jesus of Nazareth APPROVED BY GOD
2. Jesus CRUCIFIED for our sin.
3. Jesus BURIED
4. Jeuss RESURRECTED
5. Jesus ASCENDED AND SITTING AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND!
And the POWER OF SUCH PREACHING BROUGHT 3,000 souls to repentance forgiveness and acceptance. According to Peter, the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost was Joel's prophecy being fulfilled in the "last days"!

Move forward to Phillip baptizing the Ethopian eunoch, Paul baptizing the jailor who brutalized him and to the other conversion stories in the New Testament. It's the same thing. Jesus' Gospel is preached and people accept salvation.Some still wanted to bring in their "God's SPECIAL PEOPLE" badge from the Old Covenant? Yes, but what did Paul emphasize as the DECIDING ISSUE in the Jew/gentile polemic? He thundered that neither he nor even an angel from heaven could bring another gospel--such was the absolute centrality of the life, death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Jesus who accepts and saves ALL WHO ACCEPT HIM! This was to be, and STILL IS, the One SPECIAL MESSAGE under the New Covenant. All other "distinctives" all other "specialneness" pale in comparision to the SPECIALNESS OF JESUS CHRIST AND HIM CRUCIFIED!

This SPECIAL, END-TIME MESSAGE IN Peter's day is still the ONLY SPECIAL END-TIME MESSAGE TODAY! It's the Message that saved the dying thief on the cross. It's the message that saved 3,000 people at Pentecost. It's the message that saved the eunoch, the centurion and the jailor. It's the saving message that rings through the New Testament. Many of those back there sougnt to cling to their "SPECIALNESS" AND "SPECIAL MESSAGES". But lost their way and missed the Good News of Jesus our Substitute, Sacrifice and Savior.
The question that confronts SDA's today is the same one that decided the fate of those back there who put their "specialness" and other "special messages" IN THE PLACE OF THE ONE AND ONLY SPECIAL MESSAGE-JESUS CHRIST.So, should Adventists accept others who have ACCEPTED JESUS AS THEIR SACRIFICE, SUBSTITUTE AND SURETY AND FELLOWSHIP WITH OTHER CHRISTIANS?

THIS DECISION WILL BE DECIDED BY WHETHER OR NOT ADVENTISTS ARE UNDER THE OLD OR THE NEW COVENANT. IN HEBREWS, PAUL SPELLS IT OUT QUITE CLEARLY THOSE WHO LIVE UNDER THE OLD COVENANT TRAMPLE UNDERFOOT THE BLOOD OF JESUS!

Charles,

you're on to something. There is a stronger discontinuity between the OT and the NT than most Adventists are willing to admit. For instance, Hebrews uses the cultic material of the Pentateuch as a contrast, not as a model to Jesus' priesthood. The New Covenant has a different sign than the Old one, too. And the whole paradigm of difficult access to the holy is replaced by a tearing down of walls and the ready availability of God.

The NT is highly apocalyptic, and the narrative of Jesus as Christ (in itself a violent appropriation of OT themes and images) is the only gospel there is.

But Adventists are far from being the only Christian church that returns to the OT paradigm. I would argue that historical Christianity (the Orthodox and the Catholic) is even more profusely pre-Christian. They might have done away with the Sabbath of the Jews and the food taboos. But the hierarchical approach to priesthood and the use of a fixed religious calendar, for instance, are equally OT. There is really no NT Christianity alive in the world. Jesus never returned (if he ever left) and the survival of the church needed the solid structures of the national religion of the Jews in order to survive.

ittook,

Papalism? That is a new one. I have heard Romanism and Papist, but not that one. It is nice when bigots do something different for a change. Kudos, you found a new way to be hateful and ignorant.

Some interesting quotes & material on the doctrinal authority of EGW changing over time. I would point out, though, that she herself began to make strong claims for her gift in later life.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2010/1/Ellen-Whit...

I've read quite abit that has been written by Tom Norris. He's quite thorough, and thoroughly biased. In his chivalry to protect Ellen, he makes everything look like it's the leaderships fault

GAClarke...that really took be aback, but i saw it in the context of lamenting

"...should Adventists accept others who have ACCEPTED JESUS AS THEIR SACRIFICE, SUBSTITUTE AND SURETY AND FELLOWSHIP WITH OTHER CHRISTIANS?" -- Charles

The answer obviously yes. Thanks Charles for making that clear. Of course Ted and his followers would disagree with you. Be careful.

As long as we, the SDA church, has the "The Remnant" attitude, we will be isolated from our Christian brothers and sisters in other denominations; and if Ted and his followers have their way, it will only get worse. As the situation with Loma Linda and McDonald's demonstrates, there are even those who want to expedite the process by isolating "the world" from us. So, we're working it from both ends. We don't want to be "near" the world and we don't want the world to be "near" us -- classic isolationism.

Let's be realistic: Offering a Big Mac to those who want to buy one is not the same as offering porn, as some have argued by comparison on that blog. The comparison is ludicrous. This is not a good witness to those we are trying to reach. Jesus says, we are to be in the world, but not of the world. We are not instructed to "ban" the world. Jesus certainly didn't do this.

Promoting isolationism via a Remnant mentality inevitably leads to us becoming less and less relevant in the world we live in, as Whitley and Barry make clear. They've experienced it first hand. Let's face it, there's about 1,000,000 Adventists in North America, 800K in the US and 200K in Canada. That's about it. Compared to other denominations, we don't even register on the scale. Sure we're growing in membership, but it's primarily in third-world countries. Don't kid yourself; and knowing how the GC counts "membership," I don't believe it no matter what Mission Spotlight says.

Let me ask you this question: If your local SDA church closed its doors tomorrow, what impact would that have on your community? Any? I don't know about your particular situation, but it would have "0" impact on the community where I live -- a big, fat ZERO. Nobody would know. Why? Well, it's because we are not involved in our community. "They" do their thing, and "we" do ours, never shall the two meet. I live in a county of about 200,000 with many churches to choose from. The ones that are "thriving" (a relative term) are the ones that are involved in our community. In fact, the pastor who is the most influential (again, a relative term) is also the mayor. How about that? Other pastors in the area belong to Rotary, Toast Masters and speak frequently at Full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship, just to name a few. Our pastor, on the other hand, likes Revelation Seminars. He thinks the "beasts" are the way to go. The growth of our church demonstrates otherwise.

Anyway, I appreciate your post. Keep up the good work. I agree with you: It's Jesus, not "ism."

tg

"I see this prophecy as referring to 70 lots of 7 years."

And you are correct. When the author of Daniel 10 uses the word "septad" in vv.2-3, he needs to specify it's a septad "of days" he's talking about to make it refer to a week.

Thanks for your insight, Charles. It reminds me of the disciples telling Jesus how they rebuked one who was casting out demons in his name, because they "they don't follow with us." We all know what Jesus' response was. I don't imagine him saying anything that would be much different to our church.

Paul wrote, "We do not preach ourselves. But, we preach Christ Jesus, and ourselves your servants, for his sake." Paul was essentially saying, "It ain't about us." We're beggars who found bread, and we're here to share it with you. That's all it's about.

Thanks...

Frank

How can we invite the very men who are teaching the heresy we are trying to stamp out. The bible says there should be a difference between the clean and unclean. We as Adventist cannot be found as bedfellows with those we believe to be in error. It is well none that both Barry and Wintley have been compromising their faith for years. Barry as a Chaplain in the USN has both served and supported other denominational practices that he knew to be in conflict of that the bible and yet he proceed for self advancement over 20 yrs. All Navy personnel know that a Navy chaplain cannot only support his belief as a chaplain, yet Barry has thrived choosing rather to serve in the Navy than in the church.

Wintley has been attending & performing in first day churches for years and has shown no real commitment to the three angel’s message throughout his career. He even recorded an album dedicated to one of the greatest enemies of the ten commands the man that not only called the Seventhday Adventist believers and occult, but stated that the ten commandments could not be kept & that those teaching it could are in error. Yet Wintley has furthered this man’s ministry by dedicating an album to him entitled Bill Grams Favorite hymns, not CD Brooks or Dr. Dough Bachelor but the enemy of truth.

As for arrogance, all you have to do is watch Wintley in concert or Barry so call preach and my case will be made.

Hey, Barry & Wintley the book of Revelation clearly states, "come out of her my people that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye receive not of her plagues"

Great text, Frank: "We do not preach ourselves. But we preach Christ....."
Great point, too: "We're beggars who found bread, and we're here to share it with you."

It would be a different day, wouldn't it, when this finally blasts open the door of exclusivity in the SDA.community! The problem, though, is that the overwhelming majority of SDA's DON't seem to want to venture beyond the confines of :'Thus says the SDA church'.

Sirje's comment is right on target, too: " When the institution becomes the OBJECT OF WORSHIP (caps mine) and membership in it the GOAL OF EVANGELISM. (caps mine).........the GOSPEL IS BEING SUBVERTED." (caps mine)

Another point that struck me is Bogdan's comment: "Adventist history is in many ways a recapitulation of Christian history." This should cause us to THINK. Her point here, reminds of her comment in a previous posting: "But Adventists are far from being the only Christian church that returned to the OT paradigm. I would argue that historical Christianity ( the Orthodox and the Catholic) is even more profusely pre-Christian. They might have done away with the Sabbath of the Jews and the food taboos. But the HIERARCHICAL APPROACH TO THE PRIESTHOOD (caps mine)........are equally OT. There is really no NT CHRISTIANITY ALIVE IN THE WORLD." (caps mine)

These comments drove me back to read again about Jesus' ministry. There is certainly a break with the Mosiac structure. There is a freshness about the direct access to heaven that cuts across all the fossilized, stultifying Judiac forms, ceremonies and hierarchical structures that made access to the Father a difficult, institutional. thing. And the simplicity of it all--direct, person to person interface! No different levels of hierarchical control and obstruction! You could congregate in the market place,on a mountainside, on the beach or just anywhere people gathered.as they went about their daily activities.

The book of Acts, too, shows simple, house-to-house ministries of sharing, caring and worship all intertwined in a down-to-earth way. Of course, as the numbers increased, simple organizational structures came into being. Such were necessary to avoid bedlam--everybody falling over one another.
Some decentralization was also necessary to permit each one to exercise the different gifts imparted for the building up of the body of Christ. So what we see back there were NOT DIFFERENT HIERARCHICAL LEVELS that ascended vertically with the so called "laity" being at the bottom and the so called "clergy" at the top weilding control (As we see today in ALL religious structures!) Rather, what we see was ALL BELIEVERS exercising their gifts ON ONE COMMON GROUND, ONE COMMON lEVEL, ALL EQUAL IN THE FATHER'S SIGHT. ALL ACCEPTING ONE ANOTHER AS SISTERS AND BROTHERS-ALL EQUALLY CHILDREN OF THE ONE FATHER!

Of course, there are those who will point to statements that talk about respecting elders and not entertaining accusations against elders in the absence of witnesses, etc.and interpret these as "proof" that there was an exalted "clergy" level . But in the spirit of Jesus himself we realize that SUCH RESPECT APPLIES EQUALLY TO ALL! Even to the "LEAST OF THESE MY BRETHREN." Greater responsibility means GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY! And is NOT to be equated with high-handed control and manipulation. Rather, he who is given the gift to lead must take the humble position as a servant. Leadership gifts, organizational gifts must lead us to GIRD OURSELVES WITH THE TOWEL AND KNEEL IN HUMILITY TO WAS ONE ANOTHER'S FEET! We must all kneel on the ground on ONE LEVEL in the common circle of service and equality. The only one at the top is THE FATHER/CREATOR. And to him and only him we all bow in reverence and adoration. This is what I came to realize as I was driven back to look again at the ministry of Jesus and his first disciples.

But the whole idea of church today is just the opposite and resembles more the structure under Moses than the structure under Jesus. So how and when this happen? The observable fact that we ALL are saddled with
an egotistical nature should not surprise us to see it rearing its ugly head even among those first disciples. Didn't the mother of James and John go to Jesus to see if, in his kingdom, she could get them to sit in the most exalted positions? Were those disciples arguing over who shold be the greatest in the earthly kingdom they believed Jesus had come to set up? Did not Paul himself refuse to give another chance to a younger brother and broke away to form another missonary duo? And did not the same Paul later come to admit that that same young man he rejected was USEFUL to him? Unless we think that Paul was sinless, this should not surprise us.

So how many years passed before the Old Covenant paradigm usurped the New Covenantal model of church? Ongoing research, especially into the literature discovered at the Nag Hammadi digs back in 1945, is coming to Light. And is showing that when the church sold out to Constantine's offer to make it the official religion of the Roman empire, it was already a long way from what Jesus had established. There was already infighting and power struggles among the bishops of the "clergy" that jesus did NOT establish!

So how can we help to return "church" to what Jesus envisioned under the New Covenant model? Should this be our quest even before we seek to evangelize? It would be interesting and helpful to hear suggestions! .

.

I am happy to say that the bible does says "unclean and clean" so see below:
Lev_10:10 And that ye may put difference between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean;

In addition, Babylon in that verse does not refer to one church but all spiritual confusion. Which the mixing of good and evil or teacher of error with teachers of truth is true spiritual confusion. Remember the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Fr. Jim,

The initial comment about Orthodoxy and Catholicism was mine. I stand by it without any trace of Adventist anti-Catholic sentiment. I simply recognize the fact that no church of today is a precise replica of the NT church (not even the SDA church), and much of the difference comes from Christianity's old problematic appropriation of the OT.

I trust that you should have your own criticisms of Catholicism. Mine are not strictly theological.

The Jews got arrogant too, and see what became of them? Nevertheless, the Adventist Church is still the best 'hospital' for sinners, though a major side-effect of its medication is indeed arrogance, IF said medication isn't balanced with the humility of Christ in the individual receiving it.

Dear Bro. Jim,

Thanks for your kind comments re. my previous posting. It is obvious that in your zeal to comment on what I said, you missed the point I was making. If you go back and read it carefully, you will see that I was giving my impression of how I understood the STRUCTURE and FUNCTION of the New Covental church based on the New Covenant that Jesus brought in to succeed the Old one.

You stated: "your comments about Orthodxy and Catholicism show that you are hewing to the old paradigm of anti-Catholicism. That is one part of fundalmental Adventism you seem to still agree with."

So I am asking you to please cite from my posting to validate your statement here. I was NOT, as you say, " hewing to the old paradigm of anti-Catholicism. I was comparing the early New Testament church described in the book of Acts with ALL SUBSEQUENT church structure and function. Whether Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Adventist and all others be they Baptists, Pentecostals or whichever. This is the issue I was addressing You, and all others do have the right and freedom to agree or disagree with how I see this. I expected you would do this. Instead you made statements that I did not say and attributed them to me and could NOT validate them.

You say, "We are Christians not pre-Christians." I did NOT say that you or the Orthodox church or the Roman Catholic or the Adventist church, etc.are not Christians. According to the New Covenant Gospel of Jesus Christ, all who receive HIM as Savior, trusting in HIS HOLY, SINLESS LIFE, HIS DEATH FOR SIN, HIS RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION TO THE FATHER'S RIGHT IN HEAVEN--ALL WHO TRUST IN HIM FOR SALVATION ARE CHRIST-IANS (CHRISTIANS.)The point I was making is the difference between the church in Acts and the Christian churches or church today. I say that they have departed from the New Testament model in STRUCTURE AND FUNCTION. If I am wrong on this, then please go back to the book of Acts and show how my comment is incorrect.

Finally, you ended by saying: "As for egotistical, you imagine everyone else has been wrong for 2,000 years and suddenly you got it right.... we.ve heard this before."

Bro. Jim, I did NOT say that everyone else was wrong but I ALONE GOT IT RIGHT. If I believed that everyone else were wrong, I wouldn't end by asking: "SO HOW CAN WE HELP TO RETURN THE CHURCH TO WHAT JESUS ENVISIONED UNDER THE NEW COVENANT..... IT WOULD BE INTERESTING AND HELPFUL TO HEAR SUGGESTIONS."
Christian charity would ask you to please NOT misquote me.. What you should have done--but did NOT do is to go to the record in Scripture to show IF YOUR INTERPRETATION SQUARES UP WITH SCRIPTURE but mine does NOT. THE VERY EXISTENCE OF SO MANY BRANCHES OR DIVISIONS OR VERSIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH AMPLY DEMONSTRATES HOW DIFFERENT MINDS COMPREHEND THINGS DIFFERENTLY. SO IF WE IF WE CALL INTO QUESTION ALL THAT DOES NOT SQUARE UP WITH WHAT WE SEE IN SCRIPTURE, THIS IS NOT A BAD THING. BUT LET'S ALL DO THIS FAIRLY AND LET'S NOT MISQUOTE OR MISREPRESENT THE COMMENTS OF OUR SISTERS AND BROTHERS IN CHRIST.

Your Bro. in Christ,
Charles

D.W.,

Your comment is balanced. I appreciated it.

"We should not be the punching bag."

I fully agree with that. Let me point out that I was the first to use the term "pre-Christian" here, applying it both to historical Christianity and newcomers like the SDAs, and referring strictly to the reaching back into the OT in order to acquire models of theology and religion that find no ground in the effervescent apocalypticism of the NT.

I don't know how/why information continues to get "lost in translation", but to reiterate, TD Jakes wasn't invited to preach in any of our pulpits. Not at OU, not to the student body, not at the University church. He was asked to give a workshop session to pastors that was relevant to professional development. The perpetuation of misinformation is EXACTLY how this became an entangled scenario. If people on this forum can't even keep the facts straight amongst a page of comments, no wonder the innuendos and rumors spread like wildfire as they did!

People confusing and purposefully distributing incorrect information created a firestorm by starting a website (the Beehive--kind of like "hold them accountable" or "educate_____"). This group incited reactionary people to "take action against Jakes preaching to the students of Oakwood". (None of which was even happening). Someone aligned with their zealous agenda got hold of the contact information for the students and began spreading this misinformation to parents, encouraging them to do something. The University was deluged with calls from people armed with misinformation that had been deliberately spread...it was becoming a PR nightmare for the school. Even after the organizers of evangelism council had conference call meetings with the propagandists, the group did not take adequate measures to clarify misunderstandings (furthermore, once something is out there, it's difficult to reign back in...as evidenced by the fact that even right now, misinformation STILL abounds)!

In light of all that, the regional presidents and the planning committee caucused together and out of concern for the reputation of the school (which was unjustly being conflated with PELC), the committee (not Ted Wilson, not anyone else) rescinded their invitation to Jakes.

Please start spreading facts. I've posted this several times, yet it keeps coming back to some weird Jakes/Illuminati/Jesuit foolishness. Jakes wasn't preaching to students/doing a week of prayer/preaching on doctrine/holding an evangelistic meeting/preaching for Divine Worship/ (I've heard all sorts of incarnations of this confusion!!) This discussion can continue only if the actual facts are known. People may have their own opinions, but not their own facts.

Thanks, C. Ray, for providing the information above, including answers to my question about who did rescind the invitation. I still find it troubling that anyone bows down to falsehood and manipulation.

weird Jakes/Illuminati/Jesuit foolishness...haha. What is the Illuminati? Is Jakes part of the Illuminati? Is Chaplain Barry and Wintley Phipps part of the Illuminati organazation? If yes, is it foolishness? Is this a Catholic or SDA forum? Is Fr. Jim a Jesuit? How many more members of this forum are Catholic? Have Catholics taken over this forum?

Sorry for being naive - Just want to know

Brothers and Sister,

Every night i earnestly pray for God's remnant church, for the the sheep have truly gone astray. The only condolence is that Sister White predicted this would come to pass before Christ Second Coming. This issue of having non-adventist teach us is clearly warned against in the SOP. These two men are good sincere men but according to the Bible and SOP they are sincerely wrong(TM 55.1). The same way satan used Balaam who was thought to be a prophet among the Hebrews he uses men of renown as a stumbling block today. Please pray and read the the words of God's end time prophet then pray again to help bring your thoughts in line with inspiration of God and not twist them to fit your own lives:

Seventh-day Adventists, who profess to be looking for and loving the appearing of Christ, should not follow the course of worldlings. These are no criterion for commandment keepers. Neither should they pattern after first-day Adventists, who refuse to acknowledge the claims of the law of God and trample it under their feet. This class should be no criterion for them. Commandment-keeping Adventists occupy a peculiar, exalted position. John viewed them in holy vision and thus described them: "Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." {2T 450.1}

Jenny,

I earnestly pray the Word of God does not saddens you for He has called us to be a pecuilar people, a royal priesthood and to be separate. This does not mean we stick our noses up at people, instead we love everybody and share the Truth in the Bible. But are never to accept their ideology or promote it within our churches.

"Seventh-day Adventists have been chosen by God as a peculiar people, separate from the world. By the great cleaver of truth He has cut them out from the quarry of the world and brought them into connection with Himself. He has made them His representatives and has called them to be ambassadors for Him in the last work of salvation. The greatest wealth of truth ever entrusted to mortals, the most solemn and fearful warnings ever sent by God to man, have been committed to them to be given to the world;" 7T 138

The idea that our professionals are somehow above and beyond intoxication by other "professionals" of other persuasions is just so much uppity nonsense. Adventist workers are not "professionals" because working for God is not a "profession". It is a calling. I never cease to marvel when I listen to you brothers from the North West. What fountain do you drink from? You act as though intellectual achievement and dexterity gives one immunity from the devil. May I remind you that as "mature" and "there" as you may be, read you "wretched, and naked and poor and blind."

You North American brothers, especially you black brothers just wind me. You are so desirous of self and social affirmation that you flounder all over the place in this pseudo academic sophistication that amounts to just a good feeling whilst all around you are millions of your own people who risk losing their only hope of ever getting anything out of this life. You have such a formidable task that no human can equip you for it: NONE. T.D. Jakes is completely so off field he is not in your game at all. Eloquent? yes, Enganging? to some, but God is not using Him for what He has called you to do.

The black people of America (amongst others) have received such a raw deal and our CLEAR message is their only hope and you guys....All this platform and posture in no way translates into what needs to be done and Oakwood is not the place to fraternise. It was established to represent Obedience to God. T.D. Jakes represents exactly the opposite. God uses OBEDIENCE to do great things and this familiarity with the DISOBEDIENT is not helping our thinking. We are getting drunk and the label on the wine Bottle reads - EXPERTISE. Our message is simple: The Hour of His Judgment IS Come. Fear God and Keep His commandments. Quit the rebellion and pray for the Spirit of Christ: the Spirit of obedience to the Father. That IS what love is: KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD. It takes self-SACRIFICE to please God. It takes a willingness to separate for Truth's sake. This was the spirit of the founders of this movement: OBEDIENCE AND SELF-SACRIFICE and it built a WORLD WORK. Being an Adventist is not ARROGANCE. IT IS A CALLING. Vigilence to maintain that calling clear in one's mind is not ARROGANCE. Please do not abuse words and confuse us. Being SEPERATE IS THE CALLING. Who needs TD JAKES? Not us. Much as I respect Wintley's drive and thinking outside the box; his drive for relevance, all that, he must not make us all risk takers because he will need someone who stayed sober on the ship to pull him back in when he runs out of steam out there. The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus: now that's a steady ship. This magnanimity that would compel us to change our emphasis and stance to be "nice" and make us feel guilty for striving to enter by the narrow gate of obedience is intoxicating - it gives a nice feeling of dare I say it - ecumenism but it is fatal both to us and those of other faiths whose favour we court. God has a controversy with the world and it is over OBEDIENCE, and affirming disobedience is treasonous and fatal and the most “uncool” thing we can do. Rather leave these people alone than confuse them. No brothers, we can't all party and drive. Someone must stay sober. Not everything black is good for God, least of all the charismatic religion with its fanatical supercharged liberalism that has “taken charge” of God instead of listening to Him. Relevance is not teaching how to survive and succeed: managing life in this world. Relevance is PLEASING GOD, because if something means nothing to God, it is not relevant to the question of life which question is ETERNAL LIFE. And let me say this as straight as I can. The best thing that can ever happen to any black person is to be a true Seventh Day Adventist. We must prepare people for the coming of the Lord and we must teach them Obedience. Obedience is the Mark of God's children and of all the peoples of the earth, we must invest in BLACK AMERICA’S THINKING because they have received the worst treatment over the longest period of time to this day. In obedience to God's simple word, Black America will regain its sanity, dignity and excellence and Adventism is God's vehicle for that to happen because we are defined or should be defined by a sober contemplation of Divinity and the Divine will; not endless peroration on our life situations and our persons. It is beholding the Bronze serpent that takes care of the personal machinations of Satan against persons of all races. There is one saving focus: Truth as it is in Jesus and that is ADVENTISM. We are CALLED TO IT.

The state of Black America is really sad. I am not taken in by the degrees, fine clothes and neat rows of teeth and sophisticated and spurious super-analysis that parades itself on the screens and winds up dragging us to the fringes of insanity. We still wind up largely black and broke. How high one climbs a ladder does not equate to escape. There is but one escape from hell: God's Truth. We need Wings bad and not just a ladder. It is so sad to see black people acting as mouth pieces for retrogressive decadence which guarantees our place in hell. If that is all we are going to be paid to do, we’d rather stay poor. Yesterday it was white decadence that oppressed us, but that decadence was in themselves. Today we sell our souls to promote the same nonsense and drivel and we call it success (the opportunity granted to buy nice this and that) and progressive thinking (no fear of God anymore) because we get to share in the flesh pots of Egypt and get a seat at Belshazzar's feast.. The same devil who oppressed and EXCLUDED us now INCLUDES us, declares us liberated and uses us to promote the same sin that oppressed us. The pay-off is we lose our souls. The selective inclusion or creation of a managed space for inclusion of the Black peoples of America at the dinner table in no way does justice to the case nor does it equate to God's offer of total emancipation, restoration and inheritance. I'd rather be EXCLUDED and sweep streets and go back to the plantation and be whipped and lynched than be robbed out of eternity by inclusion in this sick rebellion. After all we have already missed the bulk of this party.

What has happened to the BLACK MIND is a catastrophe and to fill that mind with the Mind of God as presented in the Word; Ellen White called it the truth as it is in Jesus IS our first ADVENTIST DUTY and real love. I know Dr Maxwell and yes I agree we should be kind and courteous, but that does not mean changing our role of spiritual leadership in this world. We are still this sect that Satan hates and good for us. We have a unique and timely message. Anything else is psycho therapy used to effect robbery. Of all the things TD Jakes teaches and I have taken the trouble to listen, none of it helps us with our calling - preparing a people to stand in the Day of God. Between the Bible and Ellen White God started and is finishing a world work. He will have a people who keep His commandments and Have Faith in Him as Jesus Did. You guys in America need to quit this partying and join AA. You are drinking too much light Babel.

It is true that in matters not related to our theology and ministry non adventists may know more than Adventists, but God can never place Himself in such a situation as to DEPEND on His enemies for the training of His workers. People forget that this is the ultimate of all wars, what we are engaged in and what Pastor Ray is accomodating or advocating is the most subtle form of ministerial disarmament. Thank God someone was awake and efficient. Whatever organization pastors may form, they intend to affect us by it and we refuse for ministers to get their influence from enemies of our message and mission. We have already lost much by this sophisticated mischief which has been sapping our strength, misdirecting our energies and squandering our resources in new thinking whose sole result is our weakness. This is why the firepower of our ministers is generally so weak. It's what they drink into their souls. Is T.D. Jakes an enemy of Adventism? Yes. Why are we so desirous to be nice we end up ambiguous. He may not hate individual adventists but he certainly believes we are off field and he is not ashamed to say it. So? And as for the 2300 days. At least we are the only denomination addressing that prophecy and have the best shot at it. If our understanding is inaccurate, give us yours. That God would raise Adventism as a global messenger at a time when Satan is fettering the world in Colonialism - the grandfather of the Global order we have now, makes sense. This race is heading for the line since then. The 1800s are definitely significant because the foundation was laid for a global contenst and we came into being on time 2300days or no.

I noted the crticisms of Phipps and Balck about lack of outreach and Matt 25 ministry failings and yet I am challenged when I post on Spectrum that SDA pastors are inept?

Jim the problem is your constant repetition, not just that specific instance. Also, we editors will certainly not see everything we want improved. It is very hit and miss. It is not an acceptable defense to point out that others are commenting in ways that should be improved so why were you singled out. - website editor