Basic Adventist Answers

[ComradeAndrei]

Have I ever said anything offensive to you or anyone?

Nope, and I’m not accusing you of such. Actually, you have been quite respectable and I thank you for that.

I’m trying to show you that Adventists are not necessarily as you have them pegged. Thats all. No NEGATIVITY here.

Most of the Adventists I know are nice folks. I’ve got Adventist friends. I’m already way past you here.

But if we want to dispell myths and rumors, then I just did with the whole Constantine thing. We’ve been fans of the whole separation of Church and State thing, but in different meaning I would suppose than your own. We don’t like emperors and kings messing in business that is not their own.

 

[Mike_D30]

SDAgirl:

And my statement was that there is no bigotry. There are interpretations. If someone says they don’t like American politics, so you then take that statement personally? Or do you understand it to mean the people who are INVOLVED with the politics? This is the seperation I am making.

Your anology doesn’t work though.

Example A:

Someone can say I don’t agree with the war in Iraq, the money could’ve been spent on health car reform, or education to strengthen the country. I would probably say O.K. that person is more than likely a Democrat. But sounds like they love America

Example B:

Someone else says, the United States is a horrible country, there policies cause the massacre of millions, and some day soon God is going to destroy that country. This is the same thing even Bin Laden has said of the U.S that he has no quarrel with the people only the policies of the US. But I still consider him to hate Americans, because he attacks my country, it’s tough to seperate.

I would call the person in Example B an “anti-American”. I’m sorry you don’t like the label I gave to your Church. but it’s a fair one, they are anti-Catholic, and IMO biggoted.

And I gotta tell ya, I’m not so fond of the label you guys give my Church, the whole whore of babylon thing doesn’t sit well.

 

[SDAgirl]

ComradeAndrei:

I realize that. However, where is the authority that what she writes is worth using as a study guide for the Bible?
THERE ARE TESTS OF A PROPHET IN THE BIBLE THAT SHE HAPPENED TO FIT. SPEAKING WITHOUT BREATH, ETC. SO WE CLEAVE TO WHAT IS ACCURATE AND BANISH WHAT IS NOT.

Yes, as long as they are in line with the Church on there understanding. That’s happened to me, and I’m sure most folks around here would probably say that its happened to them. They could also read that verse 100 times and fall into heresy if they do not have proper guidance.
I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT BE HAPPY IF I CAME INTO SOMETHING THAT I FELT IN MY HEART WAS RIGHT ONLY TO HAVE SOMEONE TELL ME THAT IT WAS AGAINST CANON TRADITION AND LAWS. THAT SOUNDS OPRESSIVE TO ME.
Not the same thing. All private revelation is subject to official doctrine and dogma. People come up with all sorts of silly things otherwise.
I DO AGREE WITH THAT. BUT MY CHURCH IS NOT SOME SECT. WHEN IT COMES TO MISSIONARY WORK IN EVERY COUNTRY, WE ARE IN EVERY NATION IN THE WORLD. WHEN THAT MANY PEOPLE ALL COME UP WITH THE SAME INTERPRETATION, ITS NO LONGER A LITTLE SILLY IDEA.
There’s another beef we have, so does every other protestant. They are just as convinced that they have the ultimate Bible truth from the Bible Alone (Sola Scriptura). That causes unending debate and contention about this verse or that, the meaning of that word in Greek and this one in Hebrew, etc. etc. ad nauseam.
I AGREE ON THE INTERPRETATIONS PART. BUT WE DO BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE ALONE, AND IF FREEDOM TO INTERPRET THINGS FOR ONES SELF LEADS TO MORE SEARCHING ON BOTH PARTIES PARTS, THEN PRAISE THE LORD! THE CONTENTION IS THE DEVILS SHARE IN THE EQUATION I BELIEVE.

 

[SDAgirl]

Mike_D30:

Your anology doesn’t work though.

Example A:

Someone can say I don’t agree with the war in Iraq, the money could’ve been spent on health car reform, or education to strengthen the country. I would probably say O.K. that person is more than likely a Democrat. But sounds like they love America

Example B:

Someone else says, the United States is a horrible country, there policies cause the massacre of millions, and some day soon God is going to destroy that country. This is the same thing even Bin Laden has said of the U.S that he has no quarrel with the people only the policies of the US. But I still consider him to hate Americans, because he attacks my country, it’s tough to seperate.

I would call the person in Example B an “anti-American”. I’m sorry you don’t like the label I gave to your Church. but it’s a fair one, they are anti-Catholic, and IMO biggoted.

And I gotta tell ya, I’m not so fond of the label you guys give my Church, the whole whore of babylon thing doesn’t sit well.

But you need to understand that it wasnt the Catholic hating Adventists that came up with the whole Whore thing. It was a Catholic bishop. Do you think it was easy for him to accuse his very own base of religion? I believe thats why he has been forgiven by your faith. We can bicker doctrine all day but that was heart wrenching for him, and was not enjoyed.

 

[Mike_D30]

SDAgirl:

But you need to understand that it wasnt the Catholic hating Adventists that came up with the whole Whore thing. It was a Catholic bishop. Do you think it was easy for him to accuse his very own base of religion? I believe thats why he has been forgiven by your faith. We can bicker doctrine all day but that was heart wrenching for him, and was not enjoyed.

Well it’s probably a protestant (probably an Adventist or Millerite) who coined the term “Anti-Catholic”, so I guess it’s par for the course…

 

[amills]

We believe that the Bible is an open book. That is does not need ANY specific church to interpret it. Everyone has their view. I’m just explaining ours a little bit. Not in an attempt to cause bickering, but to let you know that we are alike in some ways. Anyways, we believe that with the help of the holy spirit, ANYONE can understand Gods precepts. They are not grievous.

Am I understanding you correctly?? What you are saying is that anyone can understand and interpret the bible however they want and it is correct - even if their interpretations contradicts another? Are you also saying that the SDA church admittedly may be totally wrong in their interpretation but they follow it because that is what they want to believe - not because it is true?

Annette

 

[SDAgirl]

ComradeAndrei:

Nope, and I’m not accusing you of such. Actually, you have been quite respectable and I thank you for that.

Most of the Adventists I know are nice folks. I’ve got Adventist friends. I’m already way past you here.

But if we want to dispell myths and rumors, then I just did with the whole Constantine thing. We’ve been fans of the whole separation of Church and State thing, but in different meaning I would suppose than your own. We don’t like emperors and kings messing in business that is not their own.

I agree. My original reason for starting this thread as I said earlier was to dispell myths about Adventism. Which you have just done by saying that the ones you know are nice folks. I am not a theology major. I started it because someone stated that we think Catholics are not Christian. I HAD to answer that. It’s just not true. You can understand the need for me to do that.

 

[ComradeAndrei]

THERE ARE TESTS OF A PROPHET IN THE BIBLE THAT SHE HAPPENED TO FIT. SPEAKING WITHOUT BREATH, ETC. SO WE CLEAVE TO WHAT IS ACCURATE AND BANISH WHAT IS NOT.

Which are? and how does she fit them (in your views)?

BTW-all caps means yelling as per internet forum customs.

I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT BE HAPPY IF I CAME INTO SOMETHING THAT I FELT IN MY HEART WAS RIGHT ONLY TO HAVE SOMEONE TELL ME THAT IT WAS AGAINST CANON TRADITION AND LAWS. THAT SOUNDS OPRESSIVE TO ME.

Saying that the Bible is open to private interpretation is the hight of opressiveness because it introduces the vile dictatorship of anarchy. How do you know you’re right then? It sounds a whole lot more opressive to go through life not really knowing if you have the right interpretation of the Bible or if you screwed it all up and are following the wrong interpretation.

Without having to bicker about it (I do the apologetics thing as a ‘hobby’ so to say) we in the Catholic Church can concentrate on actually living out Christ’s teaching instead of trying to figure out what it is.

Also, what does the Good Book say about the heart being a liar?

I DO AGREE WITH THAT. BUT MY CHURCH IS NOT SOME SECT. WHEN IT COMES TO MISSIONARY WORK IN EVERY COUNTRY, WE ARE IN EVERY NATION IN THE WORLD. WHEN THAT MANY PEOPLE ALL COME UP WITH THE SAME INTERPRETATION, ITS NO LONGER A LITTLE SILLY IDEA.

We are in every nation of the world, so thus I guess that gives us authority too?

They didn’t come up with the same interpretation, they bought into your church.

I AGREE ON THE INTERPRETATIONS PART. BUT WE DO BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE ALONE, AND IF FREEDOM TO INTERPRET THINGS FOR ONES SELF LEADS TO MORE SEARCHING ON BOTH PARTIES PARTS, THEN PRAISE THE LORD! THE CONTENTION IS THE DEVILS SHARE IN THE EQUATION I BELIEVE.

Freedom is the ability to do what is right. What protestantism has is license to believe what you want. Granted, most protestant folks have solidified into one confession or church or the other and thus don’t just “believe whatever they want” but that is where it leads. More “searching” can also just lead to more heresy.

Remember, the Church is supposed to be the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15), not just some Bible study club. The Christian Faith is not just the Bible, it is much richer and deeper than that.

 

[SDAgirl]

amills:

We believe that the Bible is an open book. That is does not need ANY specific church to interpret it. Everyone has their view. I’m just explaining ours a little bit. Not in an attempt to cause bickering, but to let you know that we are alike in some ways. Anyways, we believe that with the help of the holy spirit, ANYONE can understand Gods precepts. They are not grievous.

Am I understanding you correctly?? What you are saying is that anyone can understand and interpret the bible however they want and it is correct - even if their interpretations contradicts another? Are you also saying that the SDA church admittedly may be totally wrong in their interpretation but they follow it because that is what they want to believe - not because it is true?

Annette

Of course not. My meaning was that one can determine Gods commands for them without a specific church telling them what they MUST believe in order to be a member. Thats all.

 

[amills]

So then you don’t have to believe in the Seventh Day Sabbath to be an Adventist?

 

[SDAgirl]

ComradeAndrei:

Which are? and how does she fit them (in your views)?

BTW-all caps means yelling as per internet forum customs.

Saying that the Bible is open to private interpretation is the hight of opressiveness because it introduces the vile dictatorship of anarchy. How do you know you’re right then?

Also, what does the Good Book say about the heart being a liar?

We are in every nation of the world, so thus I guess that gives us authority too?

They didn’t come up with the same interpretation, they bought into your church.

Freedom is the ability to do what is right. What protestantism has is license to believe what you want. Granted, most protestant folks have solidified into one confession or church or the other and thus don’t just “believe whatever they want” but that is where it leads. More “searching” can also just lead to more heresy.

Remember, the Church is supposed to be the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15), not just some Bible study club. The Christian Faith is not just the Bible, it is much richer and deeper than that.

Sorry about the yelling thing. I didnt know. I was just making a difference between the question and answer. The only way I can answer that is to say that the entire reason for being is to give everyone their choice rather to follow the devil or God. Spending time here discussing these things shows that all of us are seeking understanding about religious issues. The tests of a prophet I can post at a later date as I’m not sure how to access that site w/out losing this one. But I will get it asap ok? I just want to thank everyone for not being rude or instigators of arguments. I appreciate it. I hope that if nothing else, I have been able to at least share that we have differences, but not bigotry for each other.

 

[Mike_D30]

My question that I have for Adventists, Mormons, JW’s, some Protestants like Baptists and what not. Is that if the Catholic Church was such a truly corrupted Church, pagan Church, the whore of babylon. How can anything that coems out it be accepted? I think in this case you would seriously need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

The Catholic Church protected and came up with the Canon. Why do these Churches still use the same canon? The idea of the Trinity was FORMALIZED during the Council of Nicea to fight off the heresy of the day, SDA’s rail against tht very same council as Constantine forming and pushing forth his belief system, yet they accept what came out of that council and early Catholicism (in all fairness JW’s and Mromons’ don’t believe in the Trinity). All the doctrines that we consider “mainstream Christianity” are a direct result of Catholic teaching. While the Bible doesn’t contradict the Trinity, it doesn’t specifically say it either. The Trinity is 100% a Catholic teaching, why would SDA’s accept this teaching?

On what authority do Churches pick and choose what was corrupted and what wasn’t? After 1500 years as the sole possesors of Christianity (not counting the Schism of the Eastern Church), if the Church is as corrupted as we are lead to believe, I find it impossible that really anything of value would remain that wouldn’t be completely corrupted. You can’t just say the Bible, because I’ve heard Mormon apologists mop the floor with Protestants using only the Bible to supprt thier ideas on the Godhead. The Bible is open to too much interpretation, it can fit a lot of differing ideas about Christianity and God. Hence the numerous denominations of Protestantism.

 

[SDAgirl]

amills:

So then you don’t have to believe in the Seventh Day Sabbath to be an Adventist?

To be a member of the church, no. To hold office, yes. Once a member joins there are all kinds of studies one takes to understand our position and they can choose to disassociate or hold office. Thats my best answer I can give. My neighbor is just starting classes. She is not fully convinced of the Sabbath, but by the end of it will know our stance and can then choose to finish her membership or not.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

“Cumbered with humanity, Christ could not be in every place personally; therefore it was altogether for their advantage that He should leave them, go to His father, and send the Holy Spirit to be His successor on earth. The Holy Spirit is Himself divested of the personality of humanity and independent thereof. He would represent Himself as present in all places by His Holy Spirit, as the Omnipresent.” (Manuscript Releases Volume Fourteen, page 23, paragraph 3)

SDAgirl if you answered this I missed it. It has to do with Ellen White’s belief that Jesus was not omni-present.

Now, SDAgirl do you keep all 613 commands, laws of the torah or just those your church likes?

jewfaq.org/613.htm

 

[SDAgirl]

Mike_D30:

My question that I have for Adventists, Mormons, JW’s, some Protestants like Baptists and what not. Is that if the Catholic Church was such a truly corrupted Church, pagan Church, the whore of babylon. How can anything that coems out it be accepted? I think in this case you would seriously need to throw the baby out with the bath water.

The Catholic Church protected and came up with the Canon. Why do these Churches still use the same canon? The idea of the Trinity was FORMALIZED during the Council of Nicea to fight off the heresy of the day, SDA’s rail against tht very same council as Constantine forming and pushing forth his belief system, yet they accept what came out of that council and early Catholicism (in all fairness JW’s and Mromons’ don’t believe in the Trinity). All the doctrines that we consider “mainstream Christianity” are a direct result of Catholic teaching. While the Bible doesn’t contradict the Trinity, it doesn’t specifically say it either. The Trinity is 100% a Catholic teaching, why would SDA’s accept this teaching?

On what authority do Churches pick and choose what was corrupted and what wasn’t? After 1500 years as the sole possesors of Christianity (not counting the Schism of the Eastern Church), if the Church is as corrupted as we are lead to believe, I find it impossible that really anything of value would remain that wouldn’t be completely corrupted. You can’t just say the Bible, because I’ve heard Mormon apologists mop the floor with Protestants using only the Bible to supprt thier ideas on the Godhead. The Bible is open to too much interpretation, it can fit a lot of differing ideas about Christianity and God. Hence the numerous denominations of Protestantism.

The trinity is not a Catholic idea. It is a Bible teaching. If other denominations choose to overlook that, that is their choice and are welcome to it. God can bring light to an athiest, he can bring light to them as well. As I stated earlier the Adventist church came out of the protestant movement by piecing together what they believed to be the fundamental teachings of the Bible. They did not care if they were looked at as seperatists. Thats why we have a free country to believe as you wish. If we didnt, this discussion would not be able to take place as it would be heresy.
I dont necessarily think that the Bible being open to interpretation is a bad thing. I think that the devil has his place in causing in-fighting between the beliefs. God has many sheep, not all of one fold.

 

[SDAgirl]

Daniel Marsh:

SDAgirl if you answered this I missed it. It has to do with Ellen White’s belief that Jesus was not omni-present.

Now, SDAgirl do you keep all 613 commands, laws of the torah or just those your church likes?

Whew! The sarcasm! We believe that the entire Mosaic law was nailed to the cross and therefore no longer applies. The 10 commandments written in stone with Gods finger were seperate from those feast days and new moon days.
If you can find the writing where it says she believed so, I wont be reading her anymore. Deal? But it cant be a snipit, it must be in context ok?

 

[Mike_D30]

SDAgirl:

The trinity is not a Catholic idea. It is a Bible teaching. .

Can you cite the verses where the Trinity is explicitely taught in the Bible? The Trinity is clearly a Catholic teaching. Like I said I’ve heard Mormons mop the floor with Protestants with their idea of the Godhead. They can find plenty of support for thier idea of the Godhead using the Bible alone.

Again if this corrupted whore of babylon held Christianity together for 1500 years. Why would anything that came from them, including the Bible, since there are many many books that were left out of the Bible Canon, Catholics canonized your current canon. Yet you use this to back up the idea of the Trinity that is a Catholic teaching, and doesn’t exist in the Bible?

Again if the Catholic Church was as lost as they claim for as long as they claim, it would’ve been a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water, you would have to.

 

[amills]

SDAgirl:

To be a member of the church, no. To hold office, yes. Once a member joins there are all kinds of studies one takes to understand our position and they can choose to disassociate or hold office. Thats my best answer I can give. My neighbor is just starting classes. She is not fully convinced of the Sabbath, but by the end of it will know our stance and can then choose to finish her membership or not.

This seems to contradict what you said before - about anyone being able to interpret. If anyone is able to interpret then why would they need SDA classes? Also if they interpret differently and their different interpetation is correct then you are saying that the Catholic Church’s interpretation is correct but then the SDA interpretation is also correct. How can the Catholic Church be the Whore of Babylon and not the Whore of Babylon at the same time?

Sorry - this just doesn’t make sense to me. Can you expand on your explaination.

Thanks

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

One of the tests of a prophet is not leading God’s people to follow other gods. The qoutes below are from E. J. Waggoner’s Christ Our Righteousness. Since, his online book does not give page numbers ( these qoutes are between pages 9 to 23 ), I am
supplying the section headings. The online version of this book is at: smyrna.org/Books/COR/christ_our_righteousness.htm

theology.edu/areopagus/christology/messages/27.html

 

[ComradeAndrei]

The trinity is not a Catholic idea. It is a Bible teaching.

It is insinuated as far back as the Old Testament (Holy, Holy, Holy…) and implicit in the New (baptize in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), however, it in not explicit that these three figures are the three Persons of the Holy Trinity as understood by “orthodox” Christians.

From adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/

1. The Trinity:
   There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal Persons. God is immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing, above all, and ever present. He is infinite and beyond human comprehension, yet known through His self-revelation. He is forever worthy of worship, adoration, and service by the whole creation. (Deut. 6:4; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; Eph. 4:4-6; 1 Peter 1:2; 1 Tim. 1:17; Rev. 14:7.)

The whole “unity of three co-eternal Persons, immortal, all-powerful, all-knowing…” thing cannot be taken out of the Bible alone. The Trinity, as understood by most Christians, is a Catholic teaching from both the Holy Bible and Sacred Tradition.

God has many sheep, not all of one fold.

The Bible would disagree with you.

John 10:16-
I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd.

“there will be ONE flock, ONE shepherd”

The whole human race is the flock of Christ-but He wants them all to be of this one Flock-His One Church (Matt. 16:18)