Seventh Day Adventists

[Protestant101]

Hi, P101,

Sounds like we are all enjoying the “funny” insights this post is providing… But, since you responded to part of Patrick’s post, I am wonder if you would respond to the heart of its matter…

If “Faith Alone” and “Scripture Alone” is sufficient … why is it that Christ words in John 6, rephrased in at 8 different ways, that He is Food to be eaten … and the Last Supper account where Christ again says that He is Food to be eaten and hands the Broken Bread to His friends and tells them to eat - why this can not be believed for what it says?

I really would appreciate hearing an explanaiton - especially from a group that I think says the earth was created in six (24-hour) days. And, why? Because, the Bible says so.

Thanks.

God bless

If you were to boil what you say down to the lowest common denominator; it would, in essence, mean that anyone who did not share the Catholic view on “The Eucharist,” is not a Christian.

From my personal viewpoint, and understanding of Scripture, if your were to boil that down to it’s lowest common denominator; even if I were Catholic, the Eucharist would mean nothing without “faith” or “scripture.”

I think that if Christians would only accept and live the essence of the Scriptures; that it could also be boiled down to just three words. Those three words are the last sermon I preached. Yes. Just three words. That’s a pretty short sermon. I called it “Present Truth.”

Before I tell you what those three words were; I would like to see what your best guess would be? I will wait for a bit to see what people say to that, and then, I feel, I would be better able to respond more specifically to John 6

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

Protestant101:

I was an SDA for 31 years. When we would go out to do door to door evangelization in preparation for an evangelistic series we were told not to reveal our religious affiliation, and were instructed in how to avoid it if we were pressed on the issue without “actually” lying about it.

Hi Marsha,

Yes I can testify as well that keeping our Adventist affiliation secret was taught to us in many situations. Back in the day I participated in a fund raising endeavor called “Ingathering”…I don’t know if the Adventist church even does this any more since people began to not like going door-to-door and would just write checks to cover what they were supposed to raise. But we were taught to avoid naming the Adventist church.

Evangelistic series or prophecy seminars or Revelation seminars were usually held in a public school or rented hall, and the advertisements did not list Seventh-day Adventist on them.

When I was in Adventist college earning a degree in theology, I worked summers as a Literature Evangelist and went door-to-door selling those blue children’s Bible Story books you see in the doctor’s offices. In that training we were taught to conceal our church affiliation as much as possible in order to not let prejudice against SDAs affect our selling. We announced ourselves at the door as being from the “Home Health Education Service” doing a family oriented Christian work in the area.

This was the practice of Adventists up through the end of the 20th century, and if I’m not mistaken Ellen White even provided “counsel” regarding taking measures that would avoid negative responses due to prejudice against “sabbath keepers”.

But also, in all fairness, I saw changes beginning to take place during my time in the Adventist church. I don’t know if Ingathering door-to-door still exists so I cannot address how they do that any more. But lately I have noticed prophechy seminars being conducted in Adventist churches and the advertising being a little more forth coming.

And there was a group of us young idealistic converts to Adventism, mostly theology majors, who when selling books, proudly proclaimed that we were Seventh-day Adventists. I did very well selling books, so I don’t think revealing my identity as an Adventist adversely affected my sales.

However, on these forums you usually find the Adventists listing their religious affiliation as “protestant”, “Christian”, etc. which tells me that a certain amount of concealment is still felt necessary.

But for those of us who were Adventists for decades, especially prior to 1990, concealment was the standard mode of operation in just about all “outreach” programs.

And yes, I was discriminated against in various situations because I was an Adventist. Perahps that is why the animosity of some directed to me now as a Catholic doesn’t bother me too much…lol.

I had an old college roommate of mine from Adventist college, who recognized my name on the SDA2RC blog, send me emails pleading with me to abandon Catholicism and come back to “the truth”. He came right out and told me that I was worshipping Satan and that as long as I remained a Catholic I would be worshipping Satan.

There are so many changes and factions now in the SDA church it appears, but I think the views against Catholicism are held by the majority. Even the nicest and very intelligent SDAs posting on the SDA2RC blog, when I pushed them for their views on Catholicism, admitted that they did not believe the Papacy was of God. In the world of religion, that leaves only one other option…doesn’t it?

God bless all!!!

 

[Patrick_Murebil]

1. Some former Adventists truly believe that they are “experts” on Seventh-day Adventists. This is not usually the case; but it’s what they believe. All they can do is relate their own personal experience, but this does not prove what the denomination “really teaches.”

Hi P101,

Most of the former Adventists who have converted to Catholicism (myself included) whom I 've met on this forum and in other blogs, were 3rd or 4th generation Adventists, hold degrees in theology from Adventist colleges, and were very active workers in the SDA church.

I think we all have a pretty good idea what Adventists believe and what the denomination teaches! That’s why we’ve dedicated so much time to dialogue with SDAs on public formums.

God bless all!!!

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Some former Adventists truly believe that they are “experts” on Seventh-day Adventists. This is not usually the case; but it’s what they believe. All they can do is relate their own personal experience, but this does not prove what the denomination “really teaches.”

I attended Andrews University, an SDA institution. There I minored in the SDA religion. A minor required 32 credits of religion classes, I took 54 credits because in addition to the required courses I took religion courses for all my electives. After college, I was Sabbath School Superintendent and taught adult SS lessons. Also I was the Dorcas leader. Those credentials may not make me an “expert”, but it does prove that I know what the denomination “really teaches”.

Oh, thank you for referring to it as a denomination and not as church.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, P101,

I am disappointed … I really had expected a much better respose from you. After all, this is simply a straight forward question. But, let’s see what we can do to coax out a response to this … it really is important.

If you were to boil what you say down to the lowest common denominator; it would, in essence, mean that anyone who did not share the Catholic view on “The Eucharist,” is not a Christian. WRONG! Now, it must be understood that those who follow Christ are called Christians. Looking at your Bible, you will find in Matthew 16 that Christ founded His Church (and, that would be the Catholic Church) on Peter. What the CC teaches is that there are separated brothers.

From my personal viewpoint, and understanding of Scripture, if your were to boil that down to it’s lowest common denominator; even if I were Catholic, the Eucharist would mean nothing without “faith” or “scripture.” **ALMOST WRIGHT! Our Faith in Christ and the Church He founded on Peter is the foundation - after all, it is not the first theological virtue for nothing. Ah, but the Scripture part is where we differ - you see, there would be no New Testament or approved canon for the OT, if it were not for the CC. We look at Pentecost as the Birthday of the Church - and while the Holy Spirit did a lot of miraculous things - the one thing He did not do was deliver a book! The Bible that you are clinging to - has its origin in the CC. So, when it comes to the Eucharist we have a major consideration to make here.

Here we have John 6 (check it out…) where Christ no less then eight times compares Himself to Food that He says we must eat if we are to have eternal life. There is no where else in Scripture where Christ continues to repeat and repeat the point He tries to make - and surely this is to tell us how important the Message is He is giving to us. Notice, when the Jews heard this they refused to believe - AND - walked away. Christ does not call them back. (If it were a misunderstanding, He would have corrected the problem (look at how He spoke to Martha at Lazarus’ tomb - she did not understand what Christ said and Christ corrected her misunderstanding.) Ah, and then we have Matthew, Mark and Luke all relating the story of the Last Supper with Christ stating that the Bread He is giving them is His Flesh to be eaten. The major consideration is why are these very plain words of Christ not believed for that they clearly say? **

I think that if Christians would only accept and live the essence of the Scriptures; that it could also be boiled down to just three words. Those three words are the last sermon I preached. Yes. Just three words. That’s a pretty short sermon. I called it “Present Truth.” STAY FOCUSED - you are wandering off the topic and away from the quesiton I have asked. I can understand if you do not know the answer. I really don’t understand why you want to evade this issue on the Eucharist. And, just in case you were not sure, not answering the question and changing the topic is evasion.

Before I tell you what those three words were; I would like to see what your best guess would be? I will wait for a bit to see what people say to that, and then, I feel, I would be better able to respond more specifically to John 6 Honest - the question was put to you - not to see how others would respond, but to see your response. Take the time, please, to read John 6 in light of this post and formulate your own answer. This is really important. Let’s just answer the question and, if you are so inclined, you can start a thread on "…what you call “Present Truth”. The question is: SDAs do not believe Christ is physically present (Body, Blood, Human Soul and Divinity) in the Eurcharist because: _________________ (the line is really just a prompt - take as much space as you need). Now remember, we are working from Scripture. So, give it your best shot.

God bless

 

[Bill_Pick]

If you were to boil what you say down to the lowest common denominator; it would, in essence, mean that anyone who did not share the Catholic view on “The Eucharist,” is not a Christian.

From my personal viewpoint, and understanding of Scripture, if your were to boil that down to it’s lowest common denominator; even if I were Catholic, the Eucharist would mean nothing without “faith” or “scripture.”

I think that if Christians would only accept and live the essence of the Scriptures; that it could also be boiled down to just three words. Those three words are the last sermon I preached. Yes. Just three words. That’s a pretty short sermon. I called it “Present Truth.”

Before I tell you what those three words were; I would like to see what your best guess would be? I will wait for a bit to see what people say to that, and then, I feel, I would be better able to respond more specifically to John 6

Iam not in this thread but I be very careful at what I say"“The Eucharist,” is not Christian.
It is the words of Our Lord This is My body,This is my blood, so are you saying Our Lord is lie or He did not start Christian Church You may need to read bible verse 1 Cor 11:26-30

 

[Protestant101]

Hey Tom, and others who have joined his chorus:

Over the past few years, I have been over the John 6 thing with various forum members here quite a bit. You won’t be able to tell me anything I havent heard before. And you won’t be able to convince me any further than I already am - not.

If I am reading you correctly, what you are saying is that by literally eating the literal flesh of Jesus, we become like Him?

Or, are you trying to say that we are saved by literally eating His literal flesh?

I know some people of a certain nationality, and they enjoy eating barbecued dogs. Do they become like dogs, just because they eat dog flesh? Then how would we become like Jesus by eating His flesh? Character is not passed on by literally eating our Lord.

And neither is salvation. If we are somehow saved by eating His flesh; then that does away with, or lessens the need for the cross.

I have looked at John chapter 6 again last night - and I don’t see what you see. I see the symbolism of the eating of the bread or the drinking of the wine; but not all that other stuff.

I am sure the condemnations, ridicules, and other negative characterizations will now follow, but I will be patient and see if I can learn something new, and convincing.

I am sure you will try to defend this doctrine by saying how it reflects on His shed blood and whatnot; but it just doesn’t make sense, and there are only 2 or 3 texts you can use to make such a doctrine, but many others which suggest the more commonly held belief amongst Christianity that the “bread” and the “wine” are symbolic.

Adventists hold a communion service where we do partake of the “bread” and the “wine” but it is by faith that we trust in His shed blood, and we do not believe that we need to literally eat Him to be saved, or to be like Him.

 

[Marsha_Adams]

Or, are you trying to say that we are saved by literally eating His literal flesh?

I don’t need to “try” to say that, since Jesus came right out and said it.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed. John 6: 53, 55

No wiggle room, just plain fact.

Unless you really want to stand there and call Jesus a liar to His face?

 

[happilycatholic]

Hey Tom, and others who have joined his chorus:

Over the past few years, I have been over the John 6 thing with various forum members here quite a bit. You won’t be able to tell me anything I havent heard before. And you won’t be able to convince me any further than I already am - not.

If I am reading you correctly, what you are saying is that by literally eating the literal flesh of Jesus, we become like Him?

Or, are you trying to say that we are saved by literally eating His literal flesh?

I know some people of a certain nationality, and they enjoy eating barbecued dogs. Do they become like dogs, just because they eat dog flesh? Then how would we become like Jesus by eating His flesh? Character is not passed on by literally eating our Lord.

And neither is salvation. If we are somehow saved by eating His flesh; then that does away with, or lessens the need for the cross.

I have looked at John chapter 6 again last night - and I don’t see what you see. I see the symbolism of the eating of the bread or the drinking of the wine; but not all that other stuff.

I am sure the condemnations, ridicules, and other negative characterizations will now follow, but I will be patient and see if I can learn something new, and convincing.

I am sure you will try to defend this doctrine by saying how it reflects on His shed blood and whatnot; but it just doesn’t make sense, and there are only 2 or 3 texts you can use to make such a doctrine, but many others which suggest the more commonly held belief amongst Christianity that the “bread” and the “wine” are symbolic.

Adventists hold a communion service where we do partake of the “bread” and the “wine” but it is by faith that we trust in His shed blood, and we do not believe that we need to literally eat Him to be saved, or to be like Him.

It’s okay, the Jews are convinced either

God Bless,

HC

 

[happilycatholic]

Adventists hold a communion service where we do partake of the “bread” and the “wine” but it is by faith that we trust in His shed blood, and we do not believe that we need to literally eat Him to be saved, or to be like Him

 

[greggy53]

Marsha doesn’t “have my number,” and the last thing I want is “sympathy” from anyone here. I appreciate the opportunity of expressing my ideas here, of testing my beliefs and opinions; and I would just add two things to this comment I am posting.

I’m glad you are here to express your ideas. We are all guilty at times of being “thin skinned” about things myself included. I try not to take it personally, and hope you don’t either. I often have to stop and remind myself of something ST Paul told the Corinthians:
“And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.”

1. Some former Adventists truly believe that they are “experts” on Seventh-day Adventists. This is not usually the case; but it’s what they believe. All they can do is relate their own personal experience, but this does not prove what the denomination “really teaches.”

So, former SDA cannot be experts but only current SDA?..If I may make a suggestion; find a former Catholic who is now SDA, and invite him/her to join our friendly discussion. That I think would be interesting for all.

1. Adventists do not “hate” the Catholic Church or any other Church. We do teach things that are in direct opposition to your Church; and we do say that some of these teachings are not from God, but that is an entirely different thing than “hatred” of an entire denomination.

I disagree. Your teachings imply that the Catholic Church is not only wrong, but not Christian to the point of being in league with the devil. You look upon the poor common Catholic flock as being duped by a devil worshiping papacy. You don’t hate Catholics per se, but you do hate the Church. Your entire religion is based on it. Problem is if you hate the Catholic Church (Papacy included) you hate the mystical body of Christ. That is why I don’t believe the SDA is a Christian denomination, and you are not the only sect that hates the Church. I can think of several others.

I could also presume from the many responses I have gotten just on this forum, let alone elsewhere, that Catholics hate Adventists; in fact, I do think that some former Adventists actually do hate us. They act and look very bitter to us in any interactions. But generally speaking, Christian groups who oppose one another’s teachings are not guilty of “hatred.” They are concerned about truth, just as you are. I also know that the Adventist Church certainly does not condone the behavior of some of our members towards Catholics, so you need to consider this, plus the fact that Ellen White has written just as strongly against Seventh-day Adventists whom she saw as not following the truth. If you were living beside me here where I live; I am sure we would be good friends.

And we too are just as concerned about speaking the truth. I cannot speak for anyone else but I do not hate Adventists. I hate some of the lies they spread about the Church, and that is why I am here talking to you. Ah, there’s the rub; “Quid est veritas?” What is truth?..Ellen Whites version? Or what the Catholic Church has taught consistently for 2000 years? That is the heart of the matter.

 

[Javl]

I received notice that the thread is still active, so here I am back again ( aren’t you thrilled? )

Protestant101:
I have been reading the latest posts and I’m glad to see a SDA who is pleasant and not
“arrogant”. I do not like to argue, but that’s all I had gotten, plus the ignoring of my many
questions.

If it is acceptable, I would also like to dialogue with you. God Bless.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[tqualey]

Hi, P101,

This took me a little longer then I thought. Ah, “…brevity is the soul of wit…” as the poet reminds us. But, bear with me a bit - this is Part 1 of a 2 Part explanation. Hopefully, I won’t lose you along the way…

I appreciate your response. I do see some problems with it … and notwithstanding your years of doing this, bear with me for a post and just let’s see what we can come up with together. After all, Scripture Alone is the cry so often heard … and while I am still not really hearing a definitive response, maybe this time…

Hey Tom, and others who have joined his chorus:

Over the past few years, I have been over the John 6 thing with various forum members here quite a bit. You won’t be able to tell me anything I havent heard before. And you won’t be able to convince me any further than I already am - not. **Now, this type of response strikes me as strange indeed from one who claims to want to know the Truth. It sounds distressingly similar to the statement about “Don’t confuse me with the facts when my mind is made up!” Surely you want to come onto this List with an open mind to engage others with throughtful responses. Saying, “You won’t be able to tell me anything…” really is not in the best interest of any intelligent human being. The convincing comes from the Holy Spirit - not my poor efforts. You responsibility is to be open to the Spirit. Can you do that, P101? Good. So, let’s try a little harder. **

If I am reading you correctly, what you are saying is that by literally eating the literal flesh of Jesus, we become like Him? **That is the idea that Christ was trying to give us (Marsh did a nice reference on this … big red font… check it out. These are not our words - they are the words of Christ. Do you have an argument with the words of Christ? **

Or, are you trying to say that we are saved by literally eating His literal flesh? **That is the idea, too! Christ was really very clear about this. Honest, even though you tell me that you have read John 6 many times … try it again. Pray to the Holy Spirit to open your mind to His Guidance. Read what is there and just think about the words. This is really the way things are done - the Power of the Holy Spirit to open up our minds to God’s revealed Truth. Christ said that we are saved by eating His Flesh - AND - drinking His Blood… I didn’t want that part left out. **

I know some people of a certain nationality, and they enjoy eating barbecued dogs. Do they become like dogs, just because they eat dog flesh? Then how would we become like Jesus by eating His flesh? Character is not passed on by literally eating our Lord. **Do you recall St. Paul talking about the carnal man can not grasp the spiritual? (1Cor 2:9) Look at the way you have phrased your question to a Catholic List. Does blasphemy come to mind? Do you eat eggs? Do you become an egg? Do you eat apples? Do you become an apple? The larger takes in the smaller and the smaller becomes joined to the larger. God is much larger then we are. We are joined to God physically just as long as the Consecrated Bread is in our body. **

And neither is salvation. If we are somehow saved by eating His flesh; then that does away with, or lessens the need for the cross. **How can that possibly be because Christ Himself set up the arrangement whereby His body would be available to us in the form of the Eucharist - AND - Christ Himself set up the arramgement whereby He would be crucified for the remission of sin. The Triumph of the Cross is as real as the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist because He gave us both. **

I have looked at John chapter 6 again last night - and I don’t see what you see. I see the symbolism of the eating of the bread or the drinking of the wine; but not all that other stuff. ** You know, people do not walk out from a speaker because of symbolism. These Jews that Christ spoke with knew exactly what Christ said and walked out BECAUSE of it. The totally rejected the Power of God to do whatever God wants to do - even though it does not make sense to us. They walked… and unfortunately, that same said trail of disbelief in our Lord’s own Words is being followed by Protestants today. And for the same reason given by the Jews … and given by you in even less elegent terms. **

Part 2 is en route…

God bless

 

[tqualey]

Hi, P101,

Thank you for your patience … here is Part 2

I am sure the condemnations, ridicules, and other negative characterizations will now follow, but I will be patient and see if I can learn something new, and convincing. ** Hardly, if you first paragraph is to be believed. I am not doncemning you or ridiculing you - just pointing out the Words of Christ. You know, there was another group that claimed to give a follower of Christ a ‘fair hearing’. You can read about their interest in Acts 7. **

I am sure you will try to defend this doctrine by saying how it reflects on His shed blood and whatnot; but it just doesn’t make sense, ** So, now things have to make sense to us? Do you recall that God’s ways are not our ways? (Isaiah 55) I am also reminded of God asking man where was he to consult when God was making the heavens and the earth? **
and there are only 2 or 3 texts you can use to make such a doctrine, ** Is this a numbers game with you? More citations mean more truth? There is NO other section in the NT where Christ keeps on going over the same material in at least 8 different ways: He is Food and we are to eat this Food if we are to live. (I do seem to recall pointing this out to you… but, you do seem to be evading it.) Find another reference where Christ repeats what He has said 3 or more times (the sower parable was repeated twice - the second time was to explain it to the Apostles). I can’t think of anything even close to what was done in John 6. If you really want to demonstrate Biblical knowledge - here is your chance. **
but many others which suggest the more commonly held belief amongst Christianity that the “bread” and the “wine” are symbolic. Now, here is another chance for you - provide the reference you are claiming that the Eucharist Christ gave us is just a symbol (and that same Eucharist, that if taken in an unworthy manner, will condemn you according to St. Paul You know… symbols just don’t have that power.

Adventists hold a communion service where we do partake of the “bread” and the “wine” but it is by faith that we trust in His shed blood, and we do not believe that we need to literally eat Him to be saved, or to be like Him. **Then, quite simply, you make a mockery of the Eucharist established at the Last Supper and the Words of Christ plainly given in John 6. Your choice of unbelief is what is in question. You have chosen a man-made traditon of eating bread and wine over the Command of Christ to eat His Flesh. You are really going to have to address this issue, P101. You can do it here or before the White Throne - but, it will be addressed. **

God bless

 

[Protestant101]

I don’t need to “try” to say that, since Jesus came right out and said it.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed. John 6: 53, 55

No wiggle room, just plain fact.

Unless you really want to stand there and call Jesus a liar to His face?

Nice internet yelling Marsha. I commend you, and it’s even in my favorite color.

But perhaps we are calling Jesus a liar when we say something is literal; and He really intends it as symbolic?

 

[Protestant101]

Hi P101,

Most of the former Adventists who have converted to Catholicism (myself included) whom I 've met on this forum and in other blogs, were 3rd or 4th generation Adventists, hold degrees in theology from Adventist colleges, and were very active workers in the SDA church.

I think we all have a pretty good idea what Adventists believe and what the denomination teaches! That’s why we’ve dedicated so much time to dialogue with SDAs on public formums.

God bless all!!!

yes, I know Patrick. Those who have organized ongoing attacks against Adventists are consistent with saying how they are “experts” on what we believe, and I am afraid that I must be just as consistent in saying that just because your name is on the Church books, and you go through all the ropes, it does not follow that you understand what you are doing, or that you are thereby some sort of expert or authority. Sometimes, the higher the education, the lower the understanding. Many cannot see that Christianity is simply wonderful, and wonderfully simple.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Marsha,

Nice job

I don’t need to “try” to say that, since Jesus came right out and said it.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drink indeed. John 6: 53, 55

No wiggle room, just plain fact.

Unless you really want to stand there and call Jesus a liar to His face?

I guess the idea about there are none so blind as those who refuse to see is matched by there being none so deaf as those who refuse to hear. I think you have tried to address both of these ailments that are so obvious with this SDA.

God bless

 

[benidict]

You have great joy, but is it true that the SDA teach that Jesus is not GOD contrary to what the Bible teach “and the Word was GOD”, “before Abraham was I AM (YHWH)”, “you being a man make yourself to be GOD”,“I am the First and I am the Last”, “thomas replies, My Lord and My GOD”. Jesus refers himself as the Lord of the Sabbath, YHWH of the Sabbath. he is refer to as the Lord of GLORY, Lord of Lords, King of Kings and many, many more which are all trates and names of GOD the Father.

Just your thoughts, GOD BLESS.

actually sda is trinitarian. they teach the same as catholicism on this point. but they also believe that the roman church is the beast mentioned in revelation.

 

[Javl]

actually sda is trinitarian. they teach the same as catholicism on this point. but they also believe that the roman church is the beast mentioned in revelation.

Practically all protestant denominations are trinitarian, and practically all hold the Catholic
Church as the beast, or whore of Babylon, of Revelation. I know that this is mostly because of a mis-understanding or mis-interpretation of scripture ( Sola Scriptura ). This
has been predicted by Jesus. Little do they all realize that they all are doing the work of the devil, as predicted by Jesus, in trying to tear down and destroy Jesus’ Church. But
He holds true to His promise that “the gates of hell shall not prevail” since His Church
has lasted for these past 1927 years teaching the same truths that He has taught us.
Let us pray to the Holy Spirit and peacefully dialogue with those that do not understand.
God Bless.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

Protestant101:

May I ask why do the SDAs interpret some scripture as literal when it is symbolic and other as symbolic when it should be literal? Thank you.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem