We should see this apostacy as paralleled by the …

Comment on LSU student petition criticizes curriculum by Bill Sorensen.

We should see this apostacy as paralleled by the rebellion in heaven. No doubt some of the loyal angels asked God why He did not deal with Lucifer in a more dynamic way. Is there a reason?

Yes, God knows it is imperative for sin to develop to a certain level that no one will say they did not know what the issues were. Just so, in the SDA church, this apostacy must continue until it is so obvious an attack on God and His kingdom, no one can say they did not understand the implication of the rebellion.

And there is a sense in which God can do nothing about it and still maintain the free will responsibility of His created beings. Didn’t God know Satan would deceive a third of the angels? Yes. But all He could do was suffer the pain of knowing the outcome that all could eventually see what Satan was up to.

Some things, God can’t do. And this is one of them. People who are eventually lost simply refuse to accept their accountability either for themselves or others under their influence. God won’t alter His kingdom and the rules of it for their sake or anyone else. To do so, would challenge His right to create free moral agents and this is the very heart of the rebellion and controversy between Christ and Satan.

Satan claims God is solely responsible to preserve His created order and no created being should feel any pressure to maintain their existence. God created us, God should preserve us. There should be no law that could or would threathen our existence.

People buy into Satan’s theory again and again and the final deception is universalism based on the idea that God will eventually save everyone, no matter what. This lie is so appealing and reflects the lie Satan told in heaven. Small wonder so many were deceived then, and no mystery why so many in this world of sin are more than willing to believe it as well.

It is heart and soul of the present false gospel being presented even in much of modern Adventism. Few seem to have the spiritual preception to identify it and oppose it.

The final judgment according to works is to remind us that we are ultimately responsible for our own destiny and salvation. No one wants to believe it, and you are called a “legalist” if you advocate and support it.

So, we must endure the LSU fiasco and many more like it before it is all over. We don’t have to like it, or support it. And most of all, we need to understand the spirituality of it all. The loyal angels warned those being deceived of the outcome of apostacy. But there is a certain carnal logic to Satan’s theory and they wanted to believe it, and did.

His logic is carrying many today. And it comes in many forms. Such as, “I have an issue with the things being said here. Have anyone on this website ever seen the children that attend the La Sierra Campus? These teenagers/adults have done amazing things as Christians for the people in their community, faith, and as a campus family. The faculty is amazing and have only encouraged the students to develop and grow in their walk with God. Has anyone on this website realize the damage that is being done and will be done to the teenagers when they read this? I have talked to many people from La Sierra University and it is all hurtful to each and every one of them. But as a school family they have only grown closer to the Lord.”

And we can only ask, “In what way are they closer to the Lord?”

Catholics do a “lot of good”. And many civic minded people “do a lot of good.” And Mormons “do a lot of good”. So what? This argument is meaningless. Our goal is to demand accountability to the word of God. We don’t ask “Do they do a lot of good?” As though this is reason enough to abandon the bible.

Not everyone is deceived, nor will everyone be deceived. But “straight is the gate and narrow is the way…….” We know the rest of this scripture, don’t we?

Jesus wants His people to stand firm. Even if it is only a few. And we are not to judge who in the end will see “the light” and join the true and loyal. None the less, we can identify apostacy and opppose it.

Keep the faith

Bill Sorensen

Bill Sorensen Also Commented

LSU student petition criticizes curriculum
Now if God can and will save “the church” it certainly will not be by some hocus-pocus magic that people apparently seem to visualize. “Oh, don’t worry, Bill, God will save His church”, is the idea some express. And my question is “And how will He do that?”

If God could save by some hocus-pocus magic, then He certainly could have saved the Jews. Or the early church from Popery. The condition of success for the church is always by way of response to reproof and correction by the scriptures. And since “the church” today seems less than willing to respond to the bible, we could only wonder if “the church” is not in the process of commiting the unpardonable sin like previously chosen instrumentalities.

Do we believe EGW when she wrote….

“God is weighing our characters, our conduct, and our motives in the balances of the sanctuary. It will be a fearful thing to be pronounced wanting in love and obedience by our Redeemer, who died upon the cross to draw our hearts unto Him. God has bestowed upon us great and precious gifts. He has given us light and a knowledge of His will, so that we need not err or walk in darkness. To be weighed in the balance and found wanting in the day of final settlement and rewards will be a fearful thing, a terrible mistake which can never be corrected. Young friends, shall the book of God be searched in vain for your names?” {CCh 188.2}

We should have no misgivings as to what she means by this phrase “weighed in the balances of the sanctuary”. It means lost and rejected. So we ask, “Does she ever apply this to the SDA church?” Here is what she said…

” In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the
sentence: “Found wanting.” By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged. . . . ” {LDE 59.3}

Were you aware of this statement? Do you understand what it means? Did she believe in some kind of “unconditional election” for the SDA church? I think not. So what are the implications of the statement? I think we already know. But we need to be aware of its fulfillment right before our eyes and do all we can to see that this conclusion can and will be avoided.

She had great faith and hope for “the church”. But she was not blind to the possible reality of the SDA church eventually being disqualifed as the instrumentality to present the final message to the world.

It is my conviction that the message itself is infallible because it is biblical. But the church is not and can easily be led astray when those in position of influence and authority abandon their obligation and duty to deal with apostacy until the apostacy is so strong, there is no hope of recovery in the church as in the Jews rejection of Christ and the early church rejection of the bible.

I still have hope. But it is not blind faith and hope as many seem to think in their view of “the church” and its election to finish the work.

After all, this fiasco at LSU is just one of many scenarios that most are not willing to even talk about, let alone act to correct the errors.

Keep the faith

Bill Sorensen

LSU student petition criticizes curriculum

Professor Kent says:
August 29, 2010 Bill Sorensen wrote

People like Batchelor and Assercheck need to be more vocal in their opposition.

Ron Stone wrote

As far as Pastor Batchelor is concerned, I personally know that Doug Batchelor (I attend his church) is fully supportive of our efforts here. He has spoken on this and other controversial topics many times, always taking God’s Word as the highest “truth” in contrast to the LSU philosophy of teaching human “wisdom!” Pastor Doug, because he actually preaches God’s Truth, is hated by many out here in our SDA Church in California. Why? Well, he and his staff have not backed down from the supporters of humanistic philosophies that we see prominent out here, both in our members and “leaders.”

Sounds like you two need to be on the same page. Professor Kent

Professor Kent,
I live in the mid-west, (Kansas). In some ways,I suppose the church is more conservative here. But certainly not even close to the historic faith of our Fathers. All over the denomination, pastors are intimidated by various means if they are conservative. I suppose their job is one main issue that keeps them less than vocal even in what they know about these issues they disagree with.

And of course, there is also a legitiment issue of “wheat and tares” to be considered in decision making. I am not suggesting the problem is always a cut and dried issue simple to diagnois and remedy.

But to sit and do basically nothing to maintain the statis quo and hope the problem will solve itself is certainly no solution. Church politics is paralleled by civil government politics. How far are we from a power take over in America? Precisely because no one in authority has any moral character in America in the government. And many can not even understand what is basically wrong with America.

No doubt, many are willing for someone to “stop the bickering” in America and do something. And isn’t this the same scenario in the SDA church?

Individual accountability seems to be dead in both agendas, both civil and religious. After all, we are all basically still pretty comfortable both in the church and in the world. And none of us are going to like the situation in the near future. I’m not looking forward to it either in the SDA church or in American politics.

Shocking developments will soon unfold and SDA’s are not ready for it. But could and should at least be aware that the present statis quo will not survive and we need to consider now, what side we will take as the issues become more intense, not less intense.

True believers are going to be sacrificed by the church as the old argument “It is better to sacrifice some than see the whole denomination splintered”. It has already happened, but will intensify as the issues become more dynamic and demand action to preserve the church.

Lay members don’t see it, believe it, or understand it. It is beyond their present mentality. The leaders will keep it “hush, hush” as possible. But eventually, it will simply “blow up” just as the crucifixion of Jesus caused an explosion heard around the world.

LSU is neither the beginning, nor the end. It is simply somewhere in the middle. At some point, no doubt, every individual will necessarily stand alone and it may well be against “the church”.

Remember this, Adventism began with the continual cry of her opposers that Adventism was a system of legalism. We have tried earnestly to shed this label and in order to do this, we have abandon our doctrine, message and commission. In short, we have abandon the bible.

The label will simply be re-affirmed and applied to all true believers who are loyal to the faith and no one is more forceful and dynamic in applying this label today than liberal leaders who hold positions of influence and authority in the SDA church today.

Martin Weber, editor of Mid-America Outlook, never publishes an issue that he does not continually and consistently attack conservative church members as legalists. Who’s the real enemy of Adventism? Inside, or outside? If you don’t like the label of “legalist”, you just as well abandon ship today. Trust me, you will be stuck with it whether you are one or not, as long as you support EGW and our historic bible message.

Keep the faith,

Bill Sorensen

LSU student petition criticizes curriculum
“Is the GC willing to step in and do its job? I have my doubts. The problem, as we all see, is MORE than a few “rogue” Biology Profs. It is a chronic, planned, and well orchestrated deterioration of our SDA beliefs at LSU, not only in the area of teaching “evolution as fact” but in other areas, such as “gay marriage” etc. And, not only by the Biology Department. The Religion Department is also to blame, as is every administrator and teacher who has not spoken up about this matter.”

For some of us, Dr. Stone, we agree with your assessment. But we think it covers considerable more ground than Calif. The whole denomination is moving away from bible truth in more than one area as you have stated.

Every true restoration demands some specific basis for reform. With Noah, it was the flood. Elijah denounced Baal worship and called for a return to the worship of the true God. John the Baptist called for specific repentance and stated several issues that needed correcting. Jesus presented Himself as the Messiah. Luther confronted the church with the meritorious cause being Christ alone for salvation.

Adventism presented a final judgment according to works with the Sabbath an essential and primary issue.

The point is this, to simply rehearse general principles of law and gospel will bring no reformation to the SDA church. It must be by way of specific issues such as the origins controversy. Dress and worship style. Ordination of women pro or con. These are “present truth” issues for the SDA church.

The mark of the beast as being Sunday, state of the dead, second coming issues and the thousand year gap between the 2nd and 3rd coming are not “present truth” issues for SDA’s.

At least most SDA’s concur with a unified understanding of these truths. But we think it is our duty to “warn the world” about these issues, (and it is), while we simply ignore our own departure from biblical concepts in the church.

I would guess every man, woman and child will eventually be forced to decide between Christ and “the church”. Loyalty the Christ and loyalty to the church is not one and the same thing. As long as we think so, “the church” can get away with “murder” with no real accountability demanded.

But again, we see every reform in this world’s history has been Christ vs. the “true church.”

I still believe historic Adventism can be saved and perhaps “the church” remain intact. But only if enough people begin to demand accountability on some level in their local congregations. Some of us believe the message is infallible as God has given it to us. This does not mean “the church” is infallible, especially when we see it continually abandoning the message and moving farther and farther away from its implications and application in these last days.

“Educate Truth” has some influence, but rather limited in light of the big picture. More people need to speak out, especially those who know what is happening is wrong. To sit in church week after week with no protest is to agree and endorse the apostacy. People like Batchelor and Assercheck need to be more vocal in their opposition.

Well, that’s my opinion, anway. Too many people are going to be lost because we did not “cry aloud and spare not.” We are “our brother’s keeper” even if many are being educated to think otherwise.

Bill Sorensen

Recent Comments by Bill Sorensen

Revisiting God, Sky & Land by Fritz Guy and Brian Bull
@Sean Pitman:

Since the fall of Adam, Sean, all babies are born in sin and they are sinners. God created them. Even if it was by way of cooperation of natural law as human beings also participated in the creation process.

Paul says, “Sold in in.” and “Children of wrath just like everyone else.”

You may not like this biblical reality, but it is true none the less.

And yes, God has also provided a way of escape so that all who He has created “in sin” can be “born again” spiritually and escape their heritage of sin and shame.

I know a lot of people don’t like this idea, but it is true anyway. We are born lost with the potential to be saved if we accept Jesus and His atonement that is provisional for “whosoever will may come.”

Cain didn’t like it either and resisted the exhortation of his brother, Abel, to offer a sin offering because he was a sinner. Cain says, “No, I’ll bring a thank offering, but no sin offering. Sin is not my fault. God created me this way.”

Most people will be outside looking in because they agree with Cain but a few will be inside looking out because they agree with Abel.

Bill Sorensen

What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
@Sean Pitman:

Well, Sean, I was not as confrontational as Wesley who said, “Those who deny the doctrine of original sin are heathen still.” … [deleted]

[Oh please…

If you want to have a real conversation, great. However, unless you actually respond substantively to the questions and counter arguments posed to you, without your needless pejoratives, I’m not going to continue posting your repetitive comments on this topic in this forum…]

What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
And the topic at hand is “What does it take to be a real SDA?”

It takes someone who is willing to follow the bible and its teaching in every particular. If you don’t believe this, you are not a “Protestant” SDA.

You then bring up the Trinity. Which is fine. But that is certainly not the only thing that qualifies for the topic of your thread.

So, here is what you stated to me…..”To be morally “guilty” of something, however, requires that one is consciously aware of what is right, but deliberately chooses to do what is wrong instead (James 4:17). Without the interplay of free will, there is no moral “guilt”.”

So a person is “born” selfish, proud, coveteous, vain….etc, but not “guilty” of being, selfish, proud, coveteous, vain….etc. Your limited view of “guilt” is not biblical. Half a truth is equal to a lie. There is certainly conscience guilt. But guilt is more than awareness of right and wrong. “Sin is transgression of the law”, and the law doesn’t care what you know, or don’t know. If you break the law, you are guilty of breaking the law.

Just admit the truth, Sean. But don’t accuse me of going outside the intent of this thread when it was not specifically stated as a thread about the Trinity.

Just “man up” once in a while and admit you are wrong. We are all born guilty in the eyes of God. And our ignorance does not free us from this fact.

Bill Sorensen

Science and Methodological Naturalism
Well, Sean, this article is about Dr. Taylor and his argument to negate the bible. Maybe you and Goldstein can persuade him with your arguments.

The evidences of nature function as a “law that is a schoolmaster” to lead us to the bible. “The heavens declare the glory of God…….” but still does not tell us who God is nor the function of His government concerning the moral law.

In fact, natural law is so convoluted by sin that “survival of the fittest” is the only logical conclusion.

At any rate, I wish you well in your endeavors to support the creation account in scripture.
Take care.

What does it take to be a true Seventh-day Adventist?
@Sean Pitman:

I read Kevin Paulson’s article and he “double talks” around the obvious to deny and/or ignore the reality of what the bible teaches and EGW confirms.

Babies are born guilty of sin because they are born with the spirit of sin. They have no power to do anything but sin unless and until by the special grace of God, they are given the ability to “choose”.

If you add God’s grace to the bible definition of original sin, you can make man free to act all you want. Original sin has to do with the fall of Adam and the results. It is not about God’s grace that has been added by way of the cross. So EGW has stated clearly in support of the fall and its effects on Adam’s children.

” God declares, “I will put enmity.” This enmity is not naturally entertained. When man transgressed the divine law, his nature became evil, and he was in harmony, and not at variance, with Satan. There exists naturally no enmity between sinful man and the originator of sin. Both became evil through apostasy. The apostate is never at rest, except as he obtains sympathy and support by inducing others to follow his example. For this reason, fallen angels and wicked men unite in desperate companionship. Had not God specially interposed, Satan and man would have entered into an alliance against Heaven; and instead of cherishing enmity against Satan, the whole human family would have been united in opposition to God.” {GC88 505.2}

Those who deny original sin and its effects on the children of Adam always appeal to the atonement and the grace of God. But we see that God “put” enmity between Satan and the human family.

As Luther said to Erasmus in their discussion on this matter when Erasmus claimed the will was free by way of grace,
“Once you add grace you can make the will as free as you like.”

Original sin is not about grace nor what man can do once grace is implied and involved. Original sin is about what man is after the fall apart from grace and/or God’s special action super-imposed in the situation. So, if there is no original sin, neither is there any need for grace.

Kevin Paulson convolutes the issue just like other SDA scholars by making no distinction between how man is after the fall with or without grace.

So, in light of original sin, David says, “The wicked are estranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.” Ps. 58

David knows apart from God’s grace, no one can do anything but sin. Original sin highlights the necessity and value of the atonement and what it truly means to be “born again.”

Hear the words of Jesus, “That which is flesh is flesh and that which is spirit is spirit, ye must be born again.”

Original sin is exactly why Jesus made this comment. No one can read and understand the bible who denies the reality of original sin and its effects on all the children of Adam. We are all born guilty of sin, even before we act. So Isaiah says, “Write the vision and make it plain, that wayfareing men, though fools, need not err therein.”

In closing, original sin is not about the atonement nor its meaning and application to humanity. It is about man as he comes from Adam lost and without hope, power, choice or any ability to do anything about his situation.