Comment on Defining Adventism: A poll by PATRICK.
Well put Kevin.
PATRICK Also Commented
David R.: Hello,I really admire the persistence on this matter by Bro. Shane. We ought to uphold the truth as it is in Jesus. But I would like to point out something here and before I do I want to let everyone know that I am a 20 year Seventh-day Adventist and love this church and the truth that it has. But about the Bible being our ONLY creed â€“ I agree the Bible is the book to define our doctrine and should be our only creed. But if the Bible is our only creed, as mentioned in the beginning statement at the beginning of this page â€“ then why is it that the 28 Fundamental Beliefs book is suddenly moved into place as a representation of what the Bible is to say??? Please donâ€™t misunderstand me here â€“ I have to bring up this very critical issue.On one hand we are saying we donâ€™t have any creed but the Bible, but on the other hand we are making the 28 Fundamentals a â€œstandardâ€ to look to. Many of us may deny this is what we are doing â€“ but in actuality we are. Before I comment any further let me prove this point by quoting a section from the latest Church Manual â€“ this is found on pg. 33 under the Baptismal candidate section entitled â€˜Vow (Alternate)â€™ (Note: it should alarm us that we now have an alternate vow of only 3 professions for members to be baptized) hereâ€™s the quote from the Manual â€œ2. Do you accept the teachings of the Bible as expressed in the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and do you pledge by Godâ€™s grace to live your life in harmony with these teachings?â€ Please notice that the vow is making the Fundamental Beliefs book the â€˜acid testâ€™ and NOT the Bible. Please read it for what it is. The point Iâ€™m trying to make is we have to uphold the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy and not ANY other book. Iâ€™m not against reading other books and learning from them but to make it such a â€˜testâ€™ is not in line with Protestant thinking.Here is what I call the definitive statement of Seventh-day Adventists. From the book Evangelism, pg. 119-120 â€œIn a special sense Seventh-day Adventists have been set in the world as watchmen and light-bearers. To them has been entrusted the last warning for a perishing world. On them is shining wonderful light from the Word of God. They have been given a work of the most solemn import,â€“the proclamation of the first, second, and third angelsâ€™ messages. There is no other work of so great importance. They are to allow nothing else to absorb their attention The most solemn truths ever entrusted to mortals have been given us to proclaim to the world. The proclamation of these truths is to be our work. The world is to be warned, and Godâ€™s people are to be true to the trust committed to themâ€¦â€ What a beautiful statement!!!Once again please donâ€™t misunderstand me â€“ some might think Iâ€™m just being â€˜criticalâ€™, etcâ€¦ (There are many of our own members who are surprisingly sympathizing with La Sierra over this matter) I guess one could call it what they will but it is my only desire to help awaken Seventh-day Adventist to what could be a possible danger. I believe this is what we should do to help each other. What if the 28 Fundamentals had rank error in it?? â€“ and we were holding it high up as a standard and as a representation of what the Bible says and what we believe as a people?? Could this be the case??? Well Iâ€™m sad to say this is the case. In chapter 23 on the Sanctuary (Iâ€™m quoting from my 27 Fundamentals book â€“ the 28 Fundamentals is chapter 24 â€“ but itâ€™s still there) on pg. 315 it says â€œThe Atonement, or reconciliation, was completed on the cross as foreshadowed by the sacrifices, and the penitent believer can trust in this finished work of our Lord.â€ How can such a statement be found in something that is supposed to represent what Seventh-day Adventism believes? We as a church do not believe this â€“ our pioneers did not believe this. Anyone who has studied the Old Testament sanctuary service knows that the sacrifice was not the end of the process of the atonement for sin. But yet we are saying it is here in this book â€“ in essence our central pillar is destroyed by this one sentence. Look at this statement in the Great Controversy pg. 489 â€œThe intercession of Christ in manâ€™s behalf in the sanctuary above is as essential to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the cross. By His death He began that work which after His resurrection He ascended to complete in heaven.â€ The work going on in the heavenly sanctuary on our behalf is AS ESSENTIAL as Jesusâ€™ death on the cross in the plan of salvation.The Sanctuary doctrine IS the central pillar of our faith. Without this doctrine Adventism has no reason to exist. There are other churches that keep the Sabbath, teach the correct understanding of the state of the dead, etcâ€¦ But none of these have the sanctuary message â€“ total victory over sin through the indwelling power of Jesus working in our lives. This is what really sets us apart from ALL other denominations. This is what defines us as a people and makes us a privileged people to present such a message in these very last days. May God be with us all in our journey. (Quote)
David you plead eloquently for the Bible as our only guide, and caution rightly against making a written creed equal with or even superior to the Bible. Then you turn around and plead for adherance to a doctrine based on what the pioneers believed, and also appeal to the writings of EGW. Do you sense the dissonance in your position? Why not keep it nice and clean and simple: the Bible alone, Christ alone, by faith alone?
Recent Comments by PATRICK
New NAD president: ‘I love you’ doesn’t mean we won’t deal with issues
Sounds like there’s a man with spine and a smile here. We watch and pray.
WASC considers outside efforts ‘threatening’ to LSU’s autonomy
@Frank Haynes: I’ve not seen or heard from Frank for thirty years, but I recognize that gentle spirit. However, I think hard speach is warranted my old friend, as it was back in the days of Paul and Jesus who were patient with those who did not know better, but not so much with those who should have known and practiced the truth but instead perverted it. (Matthew 18:17; I Cor. 5:9-13; and especially Gal. 1:9) Grace and peace to all the saints of God!
The concept of academic freedom and autonomy is not in line with the purpose of the institution in the first place, they are not an autonomous institution, they are subordinates of the Churches mission to reach the lost by equipping members to be effective Christians and to also make a living while doing it; the original mission is obviously not the focus of our institutions and has not been for many decades, the real focus is what then? (Quote)
Precisely Vincent. We only begin to worry about accreditation when we begin to be confused or vague about the fundamental mission of all Christian Seventh-day Adventist schools K-21.
WASC considers outside efforts ‘threatening’ to LSU’s autonomy
Perhaps we should just get used to the idea that LSA will become ‘dis-affiliated’ with the SDA church, since there is no doubt that the board will consider WASC accreditation more valuable than the financial or philisophical support of the SDA church. Autonomy from the church has less appeal than autonomy from the big market place out there in the world of commerce and academia.
Silence of the Geoscience Research Institute
The fundamental question of this thread, if I get it correctly, is in regards to the size of the bang we get for our GRI buck. Let’s be charitable: a million $ divided between the afforementioned staff, possibly some ancilliary help, plus facility costs and there isn’t a whole lot of cash to do anything spectacular. Let’s campaign for 2 million $, and leadership that knows something about marketing and promotion. Scientists can be quite stuffy and oh so conservative! Get in someone with imagination, marketing skill and hair on fire zeal. How about training some terrific Creation Evangelists? Lets get on with it!