Bill

Like or Dislike: 0  0

All who carry the name of Christ should be advocating compassion and tolerance of the weaknesses of our brothers and sisters in Christ – according to how we ourselves would like to be treated with regard to our own individual weaknesses. This does not mean, however, that the Church body should be tolerate of deliberate and open rebellion against the very Pillars of the SDA Faith from within the very ranks of paid representatives within our own schools.

Open attacks against the Church from within need not nor should they be tolerated without decided resistance and corrective action by the Church in order to protect the body of the Church from ultimate destruction…

Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com

Like or Dislike: 0  0

According to Scripture, it is also true that some who have been thought of as sheep will turn out to have been goats and some who have been thought of as goats will turn out to have been sheep.

This suggests to me the wisdom of not being too self-confident about one’s own spiritual and moral superiority on any of these issues. Some people are going to be very surprised.

I hope I am not one of them!

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

@Bob Pickle:

In 5T 516-520 appears a tactfully written letter to Canright after Canright had written an article for the Review advocating the reading by our youth of Uncle Tom’s Cabin and Aesop’s Fables. On p. 517, she wrote, “You must be getting away from Jesus and His teachings and do not realize it.”

So given that Ellen White calls theistic evolutionism the “worst form of infidelity” 3SG 90-91, my guess is that she would not want the Review publishing an article suggesting that the youth read Darwin’s “Origin of the Species”.

That is something to think about.

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 4  4

Schneider went on to say that he tried to pay a visit to university president Randal Wisbey (who was not in the office that day). Schneider wanted to encourage Wisbey to “stay close to Jesus” and to be his friend.

First of all, is this really what Schneider said? Has anyone confirmed that the statement as given is accurate?

If it is true, then it appears that the statement is theologically incorrect.

In 5T 516-520 appears a tactfully written letter to Canright after Canright had written an article for the Review advocating the reading by our youth of Uncle Tom’s Cabin and Aesop’s Fables. On p. 517, she wrote, “You must be getting away from Jesus and His teachings and do not realize it.”

Thus, to be theologically accurate, if Wisbey does not believe in a six-day creation and Noah’s Flood, and is not using his position and influence at LSU to correct the problem, one cannot truthfully tell him to “Stay close to Jesus.” At the very best, something along the lines of what Ellen White wrote would be more appropriate.

Another snippet from the letter gives a better picture of the overall tone of her letter: “I have felt so thankful for you that you could act a part in this great work. Jesus loves you, and He will work with your efforts if you have a living connection with God. But you must live a life of watchfulness and prayer. Do not become careless. Do not separate from Jesus, but bring Him into your everyday life.”

Canright couldn’t stand correction. I’ve wondered if his last departure from the church was in response to this letter, as well as to Ellen White’s rebuttal article that was printed in the Review.

Hot debate. What do you think? 5  8

I found this quote by Pastor Kevin Paulson in a previous scan and then spent the better part of an hour this evening trying to find it again.

This is really great!

@Kevin Paulson:

The servant of the Lord is clear about the kind of leaders God’s church needs, in such a moment as this:

“In the work of reform to be carried forward today, there is need of men who, like Ezra and Nehemiah, will not palliate or excuse sin, nor shrink from vindicating the honor of God. Those upon whom rests the burden of this work will not hold their peace when wrong is done, neither will they cover evil with a cloak of false charity. They will remember that God is no respecter of persons, and that severity to a few may prove mercy to many. They will remember also that in the one who rebukes evil the spirit of Christ should ever be revealed” (PK 675).

There the perfect balance is seen.

There also the appeal, so often echoed as it calls for “false charity”, is exposed.

Here we find a little less soft-toned version of that same warning listed above.

In the existing state of religious declension, there is crying need of earnest, faithful Nehemiahs and Ezras,–men who will not shun to call sin by its right name, and who will not shrink from vindicating the honor of God. Those upon whom God has laid the burden of his work are not to hold their peace, and cover prevailing evils with a cloak of false charity. Men of courage and energy are needed to expose fashionable sins. Iniquity must not be palliated and excused. Those who lead the church of God to follow the customs and practices of the world, are not to be lauded and exalted. No regard for family or position will hinder the faithful servants of Christ from guarding the interests of his people. God is no respecter of persons.

Great light and special privileges bring increased responsibility. When those who have been favored or honored of God, commit sin, their influence goes very far to encourage others in transgression. And if, by their example, the faith of another is weakened, and moral and religious principle is broken down, the wrath of God will surely come upon those betrayers of their sacred trust. {ST, January 24, 1884 par. 9}

“wrath of God on betrayers of their sacred trust”????

Glad I did not author that one!

And if the Bible has anything to say about the gift of prophecy – then Ellen White did not author that statement either!

As the song goes — “God and God alone”!

in Christ,

Bob

Hot debate. What do you think? 9  7

Leaders who claim they “did not know” of anything should be removed. This type of rationalizing of “ignorance” is pathetic. It’s their duty TO KNOW what is going on, and they should be in a position, either personally or by a representative who reports to them, TO KNOW!

Hot debate. What do you think? 6  9