Holly said…… “The truthful answer is that we will not be …

Comment on Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising? by Bill Sorensen.

Holly said……

“The truthful answer is that we will not be able to “just get along” when such different world views are held.”

Holly, many if not most church members are not able to discern this situation. And for that reason, very little is done, or deemed necessary to get involved one way or the other. The mentality is this, “Our church leaders will handle the situation, and therefore, I don’t need to get involved.”

But no doubt, someday whether people want to or not, they will “be” involved due to a condition that will necessarily force everyone to make a decision.

I think we agree it is better to “get involved” and know as much as possible before you are forced to. Knowledge is both freedom and power. Ignorance is bondage and servitude.

Bill Sorensen

Bill Sorensen Also Commented

Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
Ervin TaylorReplyApril 19, 2012 at 12:40 pm

“It would be interesting to determine how much of the quoted paragraph in Prophets and Kings EGW “adapted” or “borrowed” from a previous author. I believe everyone is now aware of how much EGW used other writer’s ideas and word phrases in her publications.”

Who cares? or, What does it matter?
None. Truth stands on its own two feet and needs no human endorsment or affirmation.

Neither do we need to know who said what, when or where unless it is some biblical quotation. So, the only thing we need to ask is whether this quotation fits our present day scenario or not.

I know many don’t think so, but at least some of us do.


Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
I think David set forth a pretty good overview of the whole situation. Both from an American political game, to spiritual politics in the SDA church.

And most importantly, most individual members who sit in the pew don’t have a clue of the importance of the issues at hand.

Even if members sense that there are some problems, it is generally hoped that someone else will deal with them and church members are not culpable for the outcome.

With this mentality, themselves and their children are being raped spiritually on a continuing ongoing basis. Meaning, we are all being “forced” in some way to participate in rebellion against God just by attending church and financially supporting the church.

Now I think we should continue to support the church both financially and in other ways, but only if we protest and demand accountability of ourselves individually and our leaders corporately.

I think most of us understand that the church will surely split. And now the only question is when, how, and what will the final outcome be? Who will control? Ahab and Jezebel, or the sons of the prophets?

Bill Sorensen


Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
Any game we participate in must have some set of rules that all must adhere to. And this certainly applies to any religious group as well. As SDA Christians, we have stated the “rules” we go by are found in the word of God.

There must necessarily be a unified concensus of what these rules are and how they are to be applied. If not, like any game, we have total confusion and no definitive common goal.

How would you like to play a game where there are no stated rules? No specific goals? No way to tell if you are actually participating in the game? And no way to know if you are actually “winning” or “losing”?

In the end, if you have rules for yourself that are different than everybody else, or if everyone has their own rules, the result has no meaning.

What will happen is this. Those who determine a specific set of rules will necessarily join together to defend and participate in how they understand the bible, for as Amos asks, “Can two walk together unless they be agreed?”

At some point, Adventism must necessarily define itself, its purpose and mission and then discipline those who choose to ignore the definition. Either they will leave of their own volition, or, they must be told they are violating the “rules” and can no longer participate.

God has stated the rules. At some point, if the church no longer supports the bible and keeps the rules as I personally understand them, I must necessarily drop out. It is the only honest and honorable thing anyone can do. If a person stays, they are “cheating” and not playing fair.

So, a split is coming. It can not be avoided and all we can do is carefully examine our own personal spirituality and decide if we can still participate and if so, for how long? Not just, how long can I tolerate them and still function, but how long can they tolerate me and have all be at peace?

How long can I go to church where they teach error, rock and roll around the golden calf, wear anything they please including jewelry and bring in music that offends me and that I am convinced offends God as well? I don’t know for sure. EGW makes this comment about the corruption during the period of the Judges and Eli….

“Sins of Priests Caused Some to Offer Own Sacrifices.–As the men of Israel witnessed the corrupt course of the priests, they thought it safer for their families not to come up to the appointed place of worship. Many went from Shiloh with their peace disturbed, their indignation aroused, until they at last determined to offer their sacrifices themselves, concluding that this would be fully as acceptable to God, as to sanction in any manner the abominations practiced in the sanctuary” (ST Dec. 1. 1881). {2BC 1010.4}

Serious times require serious and difficult decisions.

Keep the faith

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…]
-sdp


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.