Witnessing to Adventists Idea #1

[adventistnomore]

You make the claims sound so lofty, but you supply no evidence for people to verify your claims.

As one poster already noted, I already asked you to prove that the Catholic Church was not at least institutionally contiguous with the apostolic Church.

Many sees in the Catholic and Orthodox churches trace their institutional origins to the first century. The “church of Rome” to which Paul addressed his epistle was successively governed by leaders (the bishops of Rome) whose names remain preserved in such ancient sources as Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:3:3; c. 180), Tertullian (Demurrer Against the Heretics 32:2c. 200), Cyprian (Letters 55:[52]):8c. 250), and Eusuebius (* Church History 3:4:9–10; 5:28:3*, c. 300). That succession continues to the present day (where we arrive at the 263rd bishop of Rome). The historical data is universally acknowledged as authentic; there is no debate on this point.

Please show us where the Bible uses the word “Catholic”

It doesn’t. However, Ignatius of Antioch consistently calls the one Church “the Catholic Church” as early as 105 CE (Smyrnaeans, 8), indicating that the expression was already in use during apostolic times. The Church uses that appellation to the present day.

Please show us where the Bible… and says explicitly that the Catholic Church was the “first” church."

Such a statement would exist if the Bible knew of “a second” Church, which it does not.

You even make many claims about what Adventist really believe, again, without providing proper Adventist references to back up your claims. It looks like you are in the habit of pulling some of your claims out of a hat

What claims of mine are you challenging? My presentation of Adventist theology is accurate. I remind you I was an Adventist, studied under Adventist theologians, and own dozens of Adventist theological works/journals. And please, I do not ask you to cite Andreason, Shea, G. Hasel, Holbrook, Rodriguez, Gulley, or Neall everytime you represent an Adventist position (let alone GC documents). Neither should footnotes be required of me. (If you haven’t read an essay by even one of those names, then I assure you, it is you who do not know Adventist theology.)

 

[Protestant101]

Hmmm…that’s interesting. Can you show me this obsession or where the SDA church is mentioned anywhere official Catholic teachings?
Here is what the Adventist church has to say about the Catholic Church.

“Official teachings” were not actually referenced by this poster so much as forum members here that profess to be Catholic, and how they are reacting to Adventists here.

To blame past violations of Christian principles on one specific denomination is not an accurate representation of either history or the concerns of Bible prophecy. We recognize that at times Protestants, including Seventh-day Adventists, have manifested prejudice and even bigotry. If, in expounding on what the Bible teaches, Seventh-day Adventists fail to express love to those addressed, we do not exhibit authentic Christianity.

Our Church, the Adventist Church, does not just point the finger at one denomination; even our own is not exempt from God’s Word.

 

[Protestant101]

What claims of mine are you challenging? My presentation of Adventist theology is accurate. I remind you I was an Adventist, studied under Adventist theologians, and own dozens of Adventist theological works/journals. And please, I do not ask you to cite Andreason, Shea, G. Hasel, Holbrook, Rodriguez, Gulley, or Neall everytime you represent an Adventist position (let alone GC documents). Neither should footnotes be required of me. (If you haven’t read an essay by even one of those names, then I assure you, it is you who do not know Adventist theology.)

I would challenge many things you say here; but for now I am challenging your claims of “understanding” Adventist beliefs. Here, you are doing what certain sales and marketing training teaches people to do; to “name drop.” Name dropping is where one throws out a bunch of “official” names to impress people of their knowledge and connections regarding a given matter at hand.

You have also cut and pasted from a few websites about what we really believe, but you have not demonstrated the “understanding” that you purport.

Furhter, you are even telling me to not use quite a number of Adventist sources to explain my understanding of official Adventist positions, even including in your hit list the General Conference. Now you have put me, and other Adventists here on your forum in a real “pickle” because I have been confronted by many Catholics on this forum to please give official Adventist teachings from official Adventist sources. You aren’t even starting to make sense.

To add “icing” to your frozen “cake;” while naming all the sources I am not allowed to quote, you failed to mention even one that would pass your hypocycloid inspection.

Your “witnessing to adventists, idea number one” is worse than an utter failure; and it is with great trepidation that I wonder: “What on earth is idea number two???”

 

[6YRSHOME]

If you read the post it says “Catholic Church” not Catholics.

And you are proving my point in my post to you. I guess if you can’t answer a question its just best to avoid it altogether.

 

[SDA2RC]

Protestant,
As a former Adventist, Sabbath School Teacher, SDA Church Board Member, Church Constituency Delegate, etc. I am convinced that AdventistNoMore has a very good grasp of Adventist doctrine. I went to visit him while he was a student at an SDA University and have spent much time with him talking about Adventism.

Now, you may also say that I dont have a good understanding of Adventism… so be it… if not, then I would ask that you take this opportunity, on this thread, to educate both of us. If you would like to pick one particular topic, I would be happy to give my understanding of the Adventist position on that topic, and we can discuss it from there, maybe we will both learn something.

 

[Protestant101]

Protestant,
As a former Adventist, Sabbath School Teacher, SDA Church Board Member, Church Constituency Delegate, etc. I am convinced that AdventistNoMore has a very good grasp of Adventist doctrine. I went to visit him while he was a student at an SDA University and have spent much time with him talking about Adventism.

Now, you may also say that I dont have a good understanding of Adventism… so be it… if not, then I would ask that you take this opportunity, on this thread, to educate both of us. If you would like to pick one particular topic, I would be happy to give my understanding of the Adventist position on that topic, and we can discuss it from there, maybe we will both learn something.

You are simply name-dropping with titles that you have held in the Church. What makes you so sure you would have a good understanding of Adventist beliefs, because of these offices that you held?

Name one thing that you feel you have a good understanding of, from our beliefs, that you also feel is not truth.

 

[SDA2RC]

You are simply name-dropping with titles that you have held in the Church. What makes you so sure you would have a good understanding of Adventist beliefs, because of these offices that you held?

Name one thing that you feel you have a good understanding of, from our beliefs, that you also feel is not truth.

Protestant,
I am not name dropping, I am simply giving you some of my background in the SDA Church. While it is not proof that I have a good understanding of Adventism, it is certainly evidence that those in the Church did trust my knowledge enough to represent the Church and its teachings in some situations.

As far as something that I understand but don’t agree with… lets start easy… the claim from SDA’s that there is a Biblical injunction still in effect against eating pork. This is mentioned in the 22nd fundamental belief of the Adventist Church.

What I don’t understand is why you automatically seem to assume that Hugo or myself don’t understand Adventism simply because we don’t agree with it?

 

[pedja]

Pedja,

I can’t believe you picked on my name! Haha.

I joined this forum a few years ago because I needed encouragement in my own journey towards the Catholic Church. At the time (and up until a few months ago), I was a student in an Adventist University, and felt overwhelmed by the pressures all around me to remain Adventist. People started debates with me pretty regularly; in rare cases, I lost friends because of my new-found faith. It was a rough experience.

I think you can understand my need to connect with other Adventists who had made the same journey of faith for the sake of receiving encouragement. I also had a few doctrinal questions that I neded help with (like the sabbath, etc.). SDA2RC, among others, helped answer those last remain questions. Now, I am happy to do the same for other people. Helping answer other people’s questions and challenges help me reaffirm what I believe. That’s why we start these threads all the time: reaffirm our new faith.

Of course, I wanted a screen name that summed up who I was. Just by the name “adventistnomore,” you understand my basic story: I was once an Adventist. I didn’t want to use a real name, though early on, I often signed with my name (“Hugo”). That turned out to be a disaster, since people at my college recognized me, and reported my online activities to my Adventist religion professors. Oh well, haha, no biggie.

Now Pedja,

If you realy believed that talking about other Christians is a waste of time, why are you on a Catholic forum at all? Haha, why not chat with Adventists? Or maybe, why reach lost souls who have never heard the gospel with all the time you spend talking to us Catholics? (Don’t leave… I’m just saying, lol.)

P.S. I’m not bitter, though any conversion is rough on your emotions.

To answer your question, I love being on this forum especially when its about discussing non-Christian topics, such as Mormonism, JW and Islam, that is where I think ALL Christians can contribute and its fun and very valuable to read all the posts.

 

[adventistnomore]

Protestant 101 and pedja,

Rather than futily defend my credentials further, I will demand (and hope the moderator of this forum will enforce) that we only discuss the doctrinal points of that original post I wrote two years ago. Those are:

1. The Adventist Sanctuary Doctrine

as it compares to

1. The Catholic Eucharistic Sacrifice/Intercession

If you have challenges to particular theological claims I made in that original post, or either of these two doctrines, I welcome you to issue them at this time. Please direct your comments at the ideas themselves–not my name and intelligence. Otherwise, I will not respond.

 

[Protestant101]

Protestant 101 and pedja,

Rather than futily defend my credentials further, I will demand (and hope the moderator of this forum will enforce) that we only discuss the doctrinal points of that original post I wrote two years ago. Those are:

1. The Adventist Sanctuary Doctrine

as it compares to

1. The Catholic Eucharistic Sacrifice/Intercession

If you have challenges to particular theological claims I made in that original post, or either of these two doctrines, I welcome you to issue them at this time. Please direct your comments at the ideas themselves–not my name and intelligence. Otherwise, I will not respond.

If you will check my posts, you will see that I did not question your name or your intelligence. I questioned your understanding of Adventist doctrines. You yourself have left the opening here to discuss more than “the original topic” by calling it “idea number one;” leaving us all with the expectation of more “ideas” to come.

As I mentioned; it is with trepidation that I ask; what is idea number two? It is only fair that your understanding of Adventist beliefs be questioned here, given the nature of idea #1. If you lack a proper understanding thereof; then “idea #1” falls flat on it’s face.

I can still respect your request to only discuss “the original topic here;” but I would hope that you stop trying to pass yourself off as some kind of expert in Adventism.

 

[pedja]

Protestant 101 and pedja,

Rather than futily defend my credentials further, I will demand (and hope the moderator of this forum will enforce) that we only discuss the doctrinal points of that original post I wrote two years ago. Those are:

1. The Adventist Sanctuary Doctrine

as it compares to

1. The Catholic Eucharistic Sacrifice/Intercession

If you have challenges to particular theological claims I made in that original post, or either of these two doctrines, I welcome you to issue them at this time. Please direct your comments at the ideas themselves–not my name and intelligence. Otherwise, I will not respond.

I wasnt questioning your intelligence, I only said I find it ridiculous how you can call yourself adventistnomore which in my view automatically means you have an agenda which is to attack and discredit SDA. But since you have explained it so nicely I have no problem with that, no worries. I`m still amazed that you as a former SDA would embrace the Catholic philosophy of an eternal burning in hell and the Sunday worship. That I simply cant understand.

 

[Protestant101]

Protestant,
I am not name dropping, I am simply giving you some of my background in the SDA Church. While it is not proof that I have a good understanding of Adventism, it is certainly evidence that those in the Church did trust my knowledge enough to represent the Church and its teachings in some situations.

As far as something that I understand but don’t agree with… lets start easy… the claim from SDA’s that there is a Biblical injunction still in effect against eating pork. This is mentioned in the 22nd fundamental belief of the Adventist Church.

What I don’t understand is why you automatically seem to assume that Hugo or myself don’t understand Adventism simply because we don’t agree with it?

I like the way you pose a question and then supply your own answer. No one has said that you don’t understand Adventism, “because you disagree with it.” However, in the case of your post here to which I am replying, you have already proven my point that you don’t understand us at all by the subject you picked, and by the nature of your post. :tiphat:

 

[St_Violet]

I Haven’t seen any adventist bashing from the start, Adventistnomore has been interested in reaching out to the Adventists and reveal truth to them, it’s kinda like Adventists with their Revelation seminars (about the evils of the Catholic Church), but with truth

 

[pedja]

I Haven’t seen any adventist bashing from the start, Adventistnomore has been interested in reaching out to the Adventists and reveal truth to them, it’s kinda like Adventists with their Revelation seminars (about the evils of the Catholic Church), but with truth

adventistnomore ironically *left *the truth by joining your church

 

[St_Violet]

adventistnomore ironically *left *the truth by joining your church

yeah…well I supose some people get sick of listening to a woman who got hit in the face by a rock in 3rd grade through the SDA pastors that are around today and decide to join the A church that has been inspired and guided by the Holy spirit himself ( the RCC).

 

[pedja]

yeah…well I supose some people get sick of listening to a woman who got hit in the face by a rock in 3rd grade through the SDA pastors that are around today and decide to join the A church that has been inspired and guided by the Holy spirit himself ( the RCC).

Yeah, same reason here, the reason why some people will NEVER join your church is because they get sick of listening to your arrogant claims of possesing the universal truth and being the motherchurch as well as being a member of a church who’s boss is a blasphemous old man with a funny hat who crowns himself to be Christ on this earth

 

[St_Violet]

Yeah, same reason here, the reason why some people will NEVER join your church is because they get sick of listening to your arrogant claims of possesing the universal truth and being the motherchurch as well as being a member of a church who’s boss is a blasphemous old man with a funny hat who crowns himself to be Christ on this earth

don’t the SDA’s claim of being a remnant church in revelations?. a church that had to accept The trinity just so it can be considered a christian church by our pope? is it not your church that believes they are the true church because they have the guidance of a woman who is known to delete some of her GOD inspired visions? , and Also that GOD showed her that masterbation can cause brain decay? I find it quite odd how you could compare our Pope to your church Leader (Jan Paulsen) who believes it’s never okay to break the sabbath but it’s fine to have an abortion. and Also how you could compare our Pope to your other church leader ( ellen white) who believes africans and other races that are among this earth to be part human and part animal

 

[pedja]

don’t the SDA’s claim of being a remnant church in revelations?. a church that had to accept The trinity just so it can be considered a christian church by our pope? is it not your church that believes they are the true church because they have the guidance of a woman who is known to delete some of her GOD inspired visions? , and Also that GOD showed her that masterbation can cause brain decay? I find it quite odd how you could compare our Pope to your church Leader (Jan Paulsen) who believes it’s never okay to break the sabbath but it’s fine to have an abortion. and Also how you could compare our Pope to your other church leader ( ellen white) who believes africans and other races that are among this earth to be part human and part animal

Dont even get me started on the Pope, where was the Pope when Catholic Croats massacred Orthodox Serbs and Jews in ww2? What were the Catholic priests thinking when they were blessing the weapons, guns, knives and tanks before Catholics went to kill and exterminate Orthodox Serbs and Jews in 1991? Your church has got so much blood on her hands that it stinks to heaven!!

 

[Rachel_Malloy]

Stay on topic.

Petty bickering is not welcome.

God bless-

Rachel

 

[adventistnomore]

You yourself have left the opening here to discuss more than “the original topic” by calling it “idea number one;” leaving us all with the expectation of more “ideas” to come.

Two years ago, when I initiated this thread, it received no responses, so I abandoned the entire series. Since you recently resurrected the thread, we may continue discussing the ideas in my original post, though I have no plans to start any more threads with more “ideas” (two years is a long time). According to the title, this thread is only about “Idea #1”; that alone is the subject of discussion.

And now, Protestant101,

I beg of you, which aspects of my original presentation of Adventist doctrine do you take issue with as false? I want exact quotes from my post, and the reasons why you find those statements inadequate. Those would be most helpful in advancing a meaningful discussion.