Proofs, Or Lack Thereof, A concern of causing false assumptions Options

[PeacefulBe]

All of us come to Scripture and "the church" with "a priori" assumptions. Some of us have confidence in the infallability of Scripture. Some do not. Some have confidence in the traditional Adventist interpretation of Scripture, others have lost confidence in that interpretation (often those raised in the church). Some have placed all beliefs on the table for discussion, others would prefer to move on with obeying what they are sure of - not being tossed to and fro by every doctrine always needing to be challenged. Some view the Adventist church through primarily negative glasses, others through primarily positive glasses. Some through rose colored glasses, others through jaded glasses. Some have an "independent" stance, others a more "supportive" view.

One thing is for sure, an inordinate devotion to either the organized church, or its critics, can be dangerous. Of course the church is not our savior. But if we are being saved we will be in "the church" - not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together. One of the primary halmarks of the church is the unity in Christ's love that it exhibits. Will there be doctrinal diversity within this agape unity? Yes. Will it be as extreme as is often bounced around on this site? Probably not. The Bible indicates there will be doctrinal unity too. One of the safeguards that Paul tells us will help us not to shaken by doctrinal controversy and to be of "one mind," is the leadership gifts and offices given to the church. Prophets, evangelists, Pastor/Teachers (Eph.4:11-14) - gifts that are confirmed by an organized body.

- v.15 says we should be speaking the truth in love. If we are speaking a lie (error) in a loving way, then we are not speaking the truth in love. If we are speaking the truth in an unloving manner, then we are not speaking the truth in love. Truth and Love are two unifying factors in a church that strives to be organized (unified) - not disorganized. A church that strives to preserve the purity of truth and the prevelance of love.

In the words of Crush, the Sea Turtle, "Awesome dude!"

[princessdi]

Ok, so I LOVE!!! that movie!! Ok sorry!

In the words of Crush, the Sea Turtle, "Awesome dude!"

[PeacefulBe]

Well, I have seemed to found people in these mountains that want to know more about Jesus and the Sabbath. Maybe this is where God wants me to witness. My kid has been asked to play the organ in a Methodist church on a Sunday service. Is this a witness? Are we putting our light under a clay pot by saying yes? I have Adventist telling me to be careful that I don't bring demons home with us from visiting other churches. God has blessed my kid with a gift that we are willing to share with others. We daily put on the WHOLE amour of God.

There are two Adventist churches in these mountains and all they do is fight for power and control. I watch friends leave and go to other churches (not Adventist churches) for the lack of love and concerns for them. I don't condemn them, I try to show them the love of Jesus
Going back

Jnana,

I believe your whole post here demonstrates that you are right where the Lord impressed you and your husband to be! This is your area of influence, this is your calling. Please don't let anyone who does not fully understand your whole situation call into question the light you are able to share just where you are!

We all need to join you in praying for your dueling churches!

:hugs:

PB

Ya'll will probably tell me that EGW wrote this at a different time for a different place, but I remember reading she wrote that Enoch would talk with God and would go down and tell the people what God had said and NO it's not in the bible Finally God took him. I do read and believe in ELLEN G. WHITE and I will not apologize for this, so go ahead and rip me apart. Jesus was raised in the hills of Nazareth, Moses fled from Egypt and cared for Jethro's sheep for forty years (maybe not the entire time) before returning to Egypt.

Jnana,

I will stand right there with my arms around you for the ripping because I believe in Ellen G. White as well.

So folks,

if you want to rip into anyone for believing in EGW, make it a general group attack please, not on any one individual.

[princessdi]

There will be no ripping. Right about now, I have a vision of you both standing there huggin each other singing "Kumbayah", or better yet, Side By Side"

[PeacefulBe]

There will be no ripping. Right about now, I have a vision of you both standing there huggin each other singing "Kumbayah", or better yet, Side By Side"

Di, I love your vision!

[PeacefulBe]

ITA Clay, the martyr complex used to try and end theological debate, this is a discussion board and if one has problems with people disagreeing and equate that to being ripped apart perhaps one is not ready for debate........? The fact remains there is no mandate for believers en masse to up sticks and 'flee the cities' what individuals choose to do is a different matter. God blesses the country and city dweller and those who live in boats the same.
Once again cities arise cos people choose to congregate together if enough flee New York to the country you will end up with New York part 2 elsewhere.

Denny,
It was my understanding that this forum was a place to state opinions. I agree with your statement that this is a discussion board. But then you made the qualifier that I have bolded. It got me to thinking so I rushed to the Online Free Dictionary for some definitions:

discussion, n.
1. Consideration of a subject by a group; an earnest conversation.
2. A formal discourse on a topic; an exposition.

debate,
v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
v.intr.
1. To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.
4. Obsolete To fight or quarrel.
v.tr.
1. To deliberate on; consider.
2. To dispute or argue about.
3. To discuss or argue (a question, for example) formally.
4. Obsolete To fight or argue for or over.
n.
1. A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.
2. Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.
3. A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.
4. Obsolete Conflict; strife.

While the two terms have some shared attributes, the overwhelming differences between the two is also very evident. I prefer to think of this place as a venue for earnest consideration of a subject, a place of discussion. Debate just smacks of winners and losers and arguments and contention, something that we saw plenty of before a group of folks were recently banned.

So perhaps Clay, Di or Calvin could weigh in on what BlackSDA.com is actually considered to be. If the administrative position is that this is a place that accomodates both discussion and debate, perhaps Calvin could provide the more sensitive among us with a smiley or sign that says "Discussion only please. I'm still too tender for debate" or "I'm still a puppy - Not quite ready to eat with the big dogs".

[SoulEspresso]

I respectfully submit for discussion ...

... that you can believe in EGW as a prophet and still weigh her against Scripture--to go with Scripture, and with how Scriptural prophecy works. (It's a pity I didn't get it until I went to grad school, but there you go ... at least there were serious Bible students there.)

... prophecy is never given to tell us the future, so we can know the future. Whatever genre of prophecy you're looking at/reading/hearing, its point is to tell you how to live today.

... that "fleeing to the hills" is something we should all do daily, in the metaphorical sense (Psalm 121). (You see, the country might have 5-10% of the crime of the city, I have no idea--but what is there is a thousand times worse. That I'm pretty confident of.)

... that everybody here wants the best for everyone. Eh?

[princessdi]

Now, Calvin can speak more officially for the site. But as I see it. This is a discussion forum. Be that as it may, more often than not, the discussions lead to debates, primarily because the espessions of opinions do not always agree. Add the emotional aspect, and belief that one's opinion, especially in the "theology forum" is biblically supported, and it is a miracle that we don't have all out war more often. We have witnessed the stuff from which the crusade was born, and squirmshes which resemble the age long wars between the Jews and Arabs.

That being said, we ALL have to be mindful in the way in which we present our point, and more importantly, in the way we disagree with another. About subjects which you know are near and dear to your heart, take a moment and reread you post before hitting that "Send" button.

Now that also being said,, PB, I gots to go with, "if you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch". Also a knowledge that you have posted on the world wide web on a discussions group which you know can be more than volatile, and God is still working with most of us on attitude in several areas. Most often that not those who get a little flamed have come with their own flame guns ablazing, I guess expecting the members to......I don't know what, but they assumed wrong and have some burnt britches to prove it. General rule though if it is your first or second post, it is not wise to bust out with condemnations and questioning folks christianity and/or Adventism.

I think the sign thingy is cute, though.

So perhaps Clay, Di or Calvin could weigh in on what BlackSDA.com is actually considered to be. If the administrative position is that this is a place that accomodates both discussion and debate, perhaps Calvin could provide the more sensitive among us with a smiley or sign that says "Discussion only please. I'm still too tender for debate" or "I'm still a puppy - Not quite ready to eat with the big dogs".

[PeacefulBe]

Di,

ISTA. When my own beliefs are called into question, so to speak, my cheeks may pink up a bit and my knees may knock together at the prospect of tangibly supporting what I have declared but I don't melt under the pressure to any major degree. I also feel the benefit of realizing the need to examine why I believe something in the first place (thanks Clay for your ever present ability to do that) and I don't ever, EVER want to get smugly over-confident that my beliefs are beyond question or that I have it all figured out!

That being said, it still would be nice if, while we're tossing our big dog bones around, we would be big enough dogs not to maul the puppies as they begin to test life off of the porch. Of course, all bets are off if those puppies come in looking for a big dog fight.

[Observer]

Oh My goodness!! I would never want you to feel this way. I have a lot of respect for the people here and their opinions. I have thanked God for all of the good trials and bad.

Please forgive me if I have come across negative to you. This is not my intent. I want to see Jesus too much to offend here or anywhere. My husband is right and I need to listen to him. I talk too much.

By

Janna, I am recieving PMs from people whom I respect here in BSDA who tell me that they did not see your post in the same manner as I saw it. I will take thier council to heart. I meant you no harm. I acknowledge that my perception was not what you meant. I wish you welll, and will not respond in the same manner the next time.

No, to those wha may wonder, I have not gone psychotic. I do not think?

[YogusBearus]

No, to those wha may wonder, I have not gone psychotic. I do not think?

No, but you are standing a bit taller now...

-bear

[Denny]

Denny,
It was my understanding that this forum was a place to state opinions. I agree with your statement that this is a discussion board. But then you made the qualifier that I have bolded. It got me to thinking so I rushed to the Online Free Dictionary for some definitions:

discussion, n.
1. Consideration of a subject by a group; an earnest conversation.
2. A formal discourse on a topic; an exposition.

debate,
v. de·bat·ed, de·bat·ing, de·bates
v.intr.
1. To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.
4. Obsolete To fight or quarrel.
v.tr.
1. To deliberate on; consider.
2. To dispute or argue about.
3. To discuss or argue (a question, for example) formally.
4. Obsolete To fight or argue for or over.
n.
1. A discussion involving opposing points; an argument.
2. Deliberation; consideration: passed the motion with little debate.
3. A formal contest of argumentation in which two opposing teams defend and attack a given proposition.
4. Obsolete Conflict; strife.

While the two terms have some shared attributes, the overwhelming differences between the two is also very evident. I prefer to think of this place as a venue for earnest consideration of a subject, a place of discussion. Debate just smacks of winners and losers and arguments and contention, something that we saw plenty of before a group of folks were recently banned.

So perhaps Clay, Di or Calvin could weigh in on what BlackSDA.com is actually considered to be. If the administrative position is that this is a place that accomodates both discussion and debate, perhaps Calvin could provide the more sensitive among us with a smiley or sign that says "Discussion only please. I'm still too tender for debate" or "I'm still a puppy - Not quite ready to eat with the big dogs".

maybe its me but when i am discussing a subject with lots of different people i dont expect all and sundry to agree with every single thing i do and say,neither do i take offence and deem it a personal spiritual attack when an opposeing view is expressed.

[Brick Step]

I also see Matthew 24 as making the fall and destruction of Jerusalem analogous or typical of the destruction of the rebellious world at the end of time. According to Daniel 9:24-27 and Jesus words in Matthew 23:38, probation closed for the Jewish nation AD 31-34. The Matthew 24:16 sign saying it was time to “flee to the mountains” occurred more than thirty years later (in AD 66 as I recollect), but just before the actual destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Is there not a distinction to be made between Ellen White’s counsels to find a home in the country (these counsels I think are full of practical common sense when taken in their entirety), and her endtime application of the prophecy in Matthew 24 to “flee to the mountains?” As I read her writings, the former counsels she applied to the here and now, the latter not till after the close of probation, when the work of the gospel is over.

“As the decree issued by the various rulers of Christendom against commandment keepers shall withdraw the protection of government and abandon them to those who desire their destruction, the people of God will flee from the cities and villages and associate together in companies, dwelling in the most desolate and solitary places. Many will find refuge in the strongholds of the mountains. Like the Christians of the Piedmont valleys, they will make the high places of the earth their sanctuaries and will thank God for ‘the munitions of rocks.’ Isaiah 33:16. But many of all nations and of all classes, high and low, rich and poor, black and white, will be cast into the most unjust and cruel bondage…” Great Controversy, p. 626.

The positioning of the above statement is right in the middle of the chapter, “The Time of Trouble”, which comes after the chapter entitled, “The Final Warning.”

[princessdi]

Exactly!! Context, People, Context!!!

[Fran]

Janna, I am receiving PMs from people whom I respect here in BSDA who tell me that they did not see your post in the same manner as I saw it. I will take their council to heart. I meant you no harm.

I acknowledge that my perception was not what you meant.

Fran: But, do you still hold the same perception as you did before? That would be the next question I would ask.

I wish you well, and will not respond in the same manner the next time.

No, to those who may wonder, I have not gone psychotic. I do not think?

Fran: Hum.... No problem, I don't wonder.

I just wonder why you made the post at all.