AdventNetwork of Southern Africa Issues Statement After Annual Council Compliance Vote

(Tim Teichman) #283

That seems rather simplistic. How do you figure that?

I didn’t deny any bible based doctrines. I don’t accept many of the 28. Well if you can say that because I believe different things than you that is between me an Jesus, then I could say the same thing right back at you on the same exact grounds. That would be petty, though, so I won’t.

(Denny) #284

…Because it wont apply perhaps…even if you said it… ? i believe whatever the bible teaches and i have found in our 28 beliefs no discrepancy with the Word… For interest sake, which beliefs do you not accept?

(Robert Lindbeck) #285

@BroDenny, evrybody has a different and incomplete understanding of God. To each has been revealed a different aspect of God, though there is a small piece of the infinite God that overlaps - the understanding we have of God that was revealed to us through the incarnation of His Son. Even the understanding from that differs based on our cultural background and our personal experience. My understanding of God is not exactly the same as yours, though I am sure we could find parts that we have in common. I would hope that I can extend my understanding of God through discourse with you, as I would hope that you can extend your understanding of God through discourse with me. Our feeble, finite human minds will never fully understand God, not even through eternity. The good news is that He has revealed to us everything we need for salvation.

If we understand the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation - good, but our salvation does not depend on them. If it did, I am sure Christ would have spent more time talking about them. The same applies to the 28 fundamentals of the SDA church. They are statements of what the church believes - not a roadmap to salvation. When I was baptised there were no fundamental beliefs - does that mean my baptism was incomplete, or my membership is void? Salvation is not tied to any denomination or their creed, or fundamental beliefs. It is a personal choice - accept the gift that Christ offers.

(Denny) #286

Yes… Iron sharpens iron. We can learn from each other.

Christ actually made a lot of references to prophecy. He often quoted Isaiahs and when He mentioned the “time is fulfilled” He was referring to Daniel 9 i.e. AD 27, AD31 etc. Luke_24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Its only that Jesus didnt dwell on the 1844, 1798, Revelation 17 woman prophecies etc because they were for the future.

The 28 fundamentals indeed are not a roadmap to salvation. Never have never will. However they are an identification that Christ has and continues to reveal light to His last day movement. Thats why the admonition was to study to know more… Because Gods will is revealed as we study more rather than be content with only precious truths i.e Jesus died for us is all we know and hold to. This is why ALL Scripture is inspired and ALL Scripture is profitable for instruction in righteousness.

(George Tichy) #287

The 28 FBs constitute a real CREED. Despite the denial, it has surely been used as a creed. Just look at how much discussion spins around it now!

(George Tichy) #288

This is true. Would you share what you learned so far from the interaction with people here on Spectrum?

(Denny) #289

But then I ask the question… If say for example a member on the records comes forward and says after plenty studying and debate they personally have concluded that Jesus is not God, He was created sometime in eternity and that He didnt really dies but was in a deep coma after the crucifixion… What does the local church do in that scenario? This person has said they will not change their views and are not interested in any form of Bible studying with the church nor any counselling whatsoever… Whats the Bible’s remedy for that person?

I look forward to hearing your replies.

(George Tichy) #290

My reply?
After being a SDA member for all my life (and still being!) I learned what is/not safe to say/do. The first thing I would tell that person is, “shut up.” “Shut the door!”… AKA: Keep it to yourself, don’t discuss it with anybody. Thus avoiding trouble for yourself. Stay away from the “religious (cultic) police!” Cause some of them are really weird!

What happens between a person and God is confidential, nobody’s business.

This is my reply. How would YOU reply to your own question, Bro???

(Tim Teichman) #291

Well, lots of people who believe many different and conflicting things think that. Figuring out what the bible teaches is the trick. People read the same bible and come up with all sorts of different things.

Perhaps look a little deeper. In any case, they represent particular positions that in many cases can be supported, but other positions can be as well, sometimes from the same verses that are used to support their positions, and sometimes from other passages Adventists dismiss or ignore.

Well, that could take a long time to answer fully and accurately. They’re pretty easy to pick apart in some ways as just being unsupportable and so vague in other ways that I don’t accept them because I simply don’t know what they mean - and even my pastor can’t tell me.

Here are some examples:

FB1: “The Holy Scriptures are the supreme, authoritative, and the infallible revelation of His will.”

Here, the church is probably using infallible to mean inerrant, but even using the strict definition of infallible, “incapable of making mistakes or being wrong” we know this to be wrong.

In the first place, the bible we use is the product of translators and each time they come up with a version of the bible it says something different, and their own notes indicate the source texts are unclear on many things. But, even if going back to the oldest/best source texts, none of them are original. They are all copies. And all the source copies we have of every book of the bible are different. Sometimes this is hundreds or thousands of ancient manuscripts. Not one is the same as another. There are tens of thousands of differences between them. So, even if the original manuscripts were infallible, we don’t have them anymore and the best thing we have is copies of copies of copies.

Second, the bible includes internal conflicts. These conflicts occur when teachings from different traditions are included, where they are mutually exclusive or when stories are told that are repeated with different details where both cannot be factual at the same time. This causes issues for those that insist the bible stories are literal history (which they are not) because taken literally they invalidate the stories. For example, there are four stories in the gospels about what happened after the crucifixion. They are all different in ways the can’t be reconciled. They each disprove the others when taken literally.

FB 6: “God has revealed in Scripture the authentic and historical account of His creative activity.”

Well, there are two stories present in Gen 1 and 2, and they are different and mutually exclusive. The source documents make this clear, as the language and even the name for God are different.

Was Adam created first and then did he name the animals as God created them, and then Eve was created at the end? Or were humans, both male and female created together the end of the creation story by the Gods (“we”/“us”) as the pinnacle of creation?

FB 6: “in a recent six-day creation the Lord made “the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them” and rested on the seventh day. Thus He established the Sabbath as a perpetual memorial of the work He performed and completed during six literal days that together with the Sabbath constituted the same unit of time that we call a week today.”

There are so many things wrong with this it’s hard to know where to start:

  • The bible never tries to place creation in time. Only recent men have done that.
  • God rested on the seventh day, but no where in the creation story is a claim that seven days later there was to be another rest.
  • There is no mention of the sabbath in Genesis. Nowhere. None of the stories include anyone taking a break and resting or worshiping on a special day.
  • The first time the sabbath is mentioned is in the Exodus story around the time the 10 commandments were given, “in memory of the time you spent as slaves”. The reference to creation in Ex 20 in the 4th commandment was added to the text later, after Genesis was compiled, to make it seem to hearken back to creation.
  • The real reason for the sabbath, the day of rest (not worship), was the memory of being slaves and working every day. That is why no one is to work, not even your slaves.
  • There were no weeks, no units of time on the ancient calendar used through Jesus’ time and for another 400 years that correspond to weeks. The Israelites and later the Jews had no such concept. They had quarter moons and lunar months, in a calendar that repeated on a complex 19 year cycle. The sabbaths were fixed to particular days of the month, not to particular days of a week.

OK, gotta quit for now…

(Kim Green) #292

How would this belief change anything, Denny?

(Kim Green) #293

That would appear to be obvious…but he can answer on his own. :slight_smile:

(Denny) #294

hmmmm… Quite interesting; your personal views on the FBs… Unfortunately not all ministers trained in the theology necessarily can disect the Word proper. I dont look to ministers to break down the Word alone. We must also study for ourselves and with the bretheren as well. We learn lessons from the errors of the Dark Ages in how only the priests were permitted to read the Bible and in Latin for that matter. This partial or lack of knowledge does not however remove their being called to the ministry. Please Note…

FB1: The Word of God is indeed authoritative. P.S. The Bible texts were never by dictation but by inspiration, therefore even if there may be small grammatical and spelling errors in the translations of today, God has not permitted these to be such that we now cant “hear” Him through His Word… Why then would people die for a fictional book in the dark ages? Why would the Roman church martyr people for believing in a fictional book? Why would some like Wescott and Hort hate the bible and create their own version to mislead people? How can one then explain the internal consistency of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation when these authors were separated by 1500 years, time and geography? If you dont trust the Bible, how then can you be certain the Bible backs up your version with regards to WO???

FB 6: The 4 gospels are written in the purview of the authors…Right now if 4 of us were to witness an accident scene, some would dramatically describe how the car flew, flipped and landed on its head…Another witness would describe how careless and probably drunk the driver was…Another who is in the car would describe how the driver got distracted by his phone and lost control… The last would simply say there are so many accidents lately and life is lost due to negligence… A simple but real life example… Does this mean any of the witnesses is not credible? No! They are all giving pieces of info from their perspective thus giving richness to the story…

Genesis 1 and 2 are consistent. Gen 1 gives the detail of the creation WEEK and it mentions evenings and mornings were the 1st day etc. You cannot then say that these could be long periods of 100s or 10000s of years?? Unless you believe evolutionary accounts?.. The same evenings and mornings language is used in the NT in many references. Even the Catholic church knows that the Sabbath is the 7th day Saturday and this is why they then say they changed it to Sunday.Throughout history there are many “heathens” who acknowledged the Sabbath as well a 7 day creation weekly cycle… The Sabbath reiterated to the Israelites in Ex 20 says REMEMBER, meaning it had been there in time past… During their slavery there is no mention that they kept, or kept it proper because the Pharoah didnt want them the Shabbat (rest) and thus their burdens were increased.

God rested in Gen 2 and hallowed the day…The same is seen later in the 4th commandment and the wording is similar.

(Denny) #295

Sr Cincerity knows my response. You know how i would do it… But certainly not Georges perspective of persecution etc… Paul says if someone does not hold to the faith then they have to leave and join with those who believe the same. Telling them to keep quite lest they lose membership is very irresponsible on a members part as this is why Achan and babylonish garment story is there… What Achan did privaely affected the camp PUBLICLY and some even died. More so a totally unbiblical view (1 John 4) of the divinity of Christ… Nevertheless, I am sure we remember Sr Whites quotation that not all who are on the church records are in the heavenly records… I leave it there.

(Denny) #296

1Jn 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Jn 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

And a full understanding of these is that it speaks of the Incarnation (John 1v1-3, 14; Col 1v15-19 etc) and the divinity of Christ… It needed a member of the Godhead to fulfil the requirements of the broken Law… So its a BIG DEAL my sister. It changes EVERYTHING… Now to have that person as a member i.e. what they say out there is presumed to be what Adventists believe is really unfortunate wouldnt you think?

(Kim Green) #297

"Now to have that person as a member i.e. what they say out there is presumed to be what Adventists believe is really unfortunate wouldnt you think?"

No…and I don’t believe that it would be quite the catastrophe that you seem to think that it would be. I don’t see how it would “change everything”. They would still have a belief in God and spirituality, this would be more important. Now, in your definition of Adventism, this may disqualify them from being a member- but salvation doesn’t come from membership. Therefore, the greater pity would be that they lose faith in God and have no spirituality.

(Denny) #298

…If they had come to the light and knowledge of the Word and understood the divinity of Jesus but then deny it and say i am still “spiritual and religious”, of what use it that? Thye would have denied a fundamental aspect of salvation: that Jesus being God and man came to die for them…Once you deny the divinity of Jesus (having received light), then theres no level sincerity that can excuse an individual.

(George Tichy) #299

Hurry up! You and Denny @BroDenny got only 17 days noiw to resolve this problem, before this topic closes automatically… :innocent:

(Kim Green) #300

I know, right? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: :+1: :laughing:

(Kim Green) #301

Glad that you have it all figured out, Denny…:smiley:

(Tim Teichman) #302

I’m glad you have it all figured out.