Bill Knott Not to Be Reappointed at Adventist Review

I am curious as to what scripture are we thinking that Timothy was referring?

2 Likes

My recollections. Thus, I was happy to see the comment sections go. There were not helpful for the most part.

Well stated. I agree. It was very disappointing to see people object, but never having the full discussion. Hence, going back to comments, the comments section was a place for vitriol not thoughtful or respectful discussion.

1 Like

there definitely were a healthy dose of these kinds of comments, no question, depending largely on the type of article printed…but there were also much more thoughtful, carefully considered comment streams that went on for months at a time - i know, because i was part of many of these comment streams, discussing everything from the validity of the 2300 day prophecy to the inspiration of egw to the evidence of a young earth to the biblical basis of WO to the value of the vaccines, among many other subjects…

but i think even the snappy comments had value, because they were a gauge of reader reaction…in the case of the Review, which is our official publication, i really think nothing but the best methods are in order…whatever it takes, best practices and best optics have to prevail…and i do get that writers can sometimes feel that their articles are being eclipsed, but writers’ feelings are only part of the equation that has to be considered…do we want a church where only certain voices are heard, or do we want to benefit from all potential gifts…are we looking to build an audience of zombie adherents, or are we trying to build a thriving, interactive community that everyone feels a stake in…these, and others, are fundamental questions to consider…there’s no point in touting Total Member Involvement on a GC level when our official publication is loudly preaching an entirely opposite message…

i have no idea who the next leader of the Review will be…but i do expect that person to be aware of the potential that the Review can have in our church, and that there are practices that support that potential, and practices that hinder it…i will be greatly disappointed if the Review thinks it can turn back the clock, and hunker down on a comment-free format…in fact i’ll continue ignoring it altogether if this is the case…

Just now I looked the whole thread and the replies.

My Dera Lord, it is / was a blessing thaht I made my career in a “Gemeinde” institution !!
"Gemeinde" : 1. The whole admnistartion of a community, a settlement, a , a city, a town - -
"Gemeinde" 2. a local church, a communtiy of believers, "Die
“Adventgemeinde” worldwide - -

  • believe it, all the uggly policies are much easier to cope wih in “Gemeinde” as characterized at point one !

but Gerhard, don’t you think it’s possible to be part of more than one community…why does anything with respect to community be either/or…i can think of myself as a member of the community of my local church, conference, union or division, my world church, my local city, my province, my country, my continent, my age group, my race(s), my gender, my sexual orientation, my height, my weight, my eating preferences, my drinking habits, my drug habits, my smoking habits, my health, my car preferences, my music preferences, my income, my net worth, my IQ, and many other communities, all at the same time…

equally, i can dissociate from one or all of these communities without batting an eyelash…are you suggesting we are victims of the community we’re stuck in, or choose unwittingly, as if we can’t step outside of that community at any time…

and what of it if your chosen gemeinde really is the world church…are you really going to lose sleep over what you’ll never run, or in any way control…and are possible issues going on in the GC at all a reflection of any one of us…first of all, we really don’t know why Bill isn’t continuing…why allow yourself to get worked up over something only possibly nefarious…everything could just as easily be innocent, and above board…

I apologize for hooking up the issue on “Gemeinde” - a special term in use in German speaking countries for the SDA Church, the local one, the national one, the worldwide one - -

(I still own the valid identity card as a (retired) official of “Gemeinde Wien”)

  • and for eight years I was in “Bundesgymnasium Wien XIII, Fichtnergasse” - my class still meets and “Fichtnergassler” are in their solodarity more connected than freemansons - -

  • and I was holding a mandate in two commissions of the**“Labor Union”**

  • sorry to say I am not really integrated in my hometown where I still live since my birth (my fault !)

The vocabulary, the speech, the dialect, the styleof communicationsthe performance, the behaviour, the style of communication in all those communities differ, sometimes in a very suble way.

The pseudo humlity / modesty in our local (?) “Adventese” is not easy to acquire and in deep contrast to all the other communities - and easy to be misunderstood !!!

1 Like

well, if you’re going to live in one place all your life, you could do a lot worse than Austria…i was in both Vienna and Salzburg some time ago, and loved every minute of it…someone i grew up with in Massachusetts actually moved to Austria about 30 yrs ago and decided to live there on the spot…he married there, and played in many orchestras for a living…every xmas he’d send me a huge email of all the places he played at, with pictures of his wife, his house, and his huge backyard of rolling hills, etc…he passed away unexpectedly from a heart attack recently, but he really knew what he wanted, and was able to make it happen (i believe his parents had German ancestry)…i’m thinking of going to Vienna again soon…

Well, he obviously did not have to deal with the City Authorities about building a litte house of his own, to fight about the conditionsn in working while being on the payroll of “Gemeide”, to deal with the electric energy supplying his house, to “discuss” what “working time” ,legally defined, is in a hospspital, to strongly oppose to a disciplinary based on simpy untrue “facts” - -, (to know how to bribe an official - - and get easyl and imediately what legally is yours – - )

Sounds like the differences between Austrian and American daily life may not so great as we have been led to believe, Doc!!!

:rofl:

he may have dealt with all these things, actually…but he never mentioned them…according to him, Austria was always the best place on earth, especially for violinists…his view was that all the orchestras there were better than American orchestras because the Austrians had inherited an understanding of how to interpret Bach, Beethoven and Brahms…every year he suggested that i move to the country areas of Austria, where everybody was musical, and eager to learn to play violin…

the whole reason i went a few yrs back is to see it for myself, although i also wanted to see Bogenhofen and the grave of Beethoven…plus his descriptions of Salzburg and the whole Mozart thing were irresistible…and wouldn’t you know it, he was out of the country - in NY to visit his parents - when i was there…oh well… :smirk:

Funny. But no because Knott is a surname.

1 Like

The Jewish bible, as that’s the only scripture that existed at the time.

Still, 2 Timothy was written by someone who was willing to lie about its true authorship - not written by Paul - and for me that throws the whole letter into question.

3 Likes

Exactly, we were brought up thinking that this was a reference to both the Old and New Testament. Isn’t it strange that we were taught this. I can’t help but that it is the height of dumbness but people still persist in thinking and teaching this.

3 Likes

this thinking and teaching may not be so dumb, actually…Peter seems to imply that Paul’s epistles were “scripture”, and Paul is generally believed to be a NT writer:

“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” 2Pet 3:15-16.

Thank you for pointing this out, however I think we should ask some basic questions about this. I do not mean to put you on the spot in my reply, I bring this up to merely question our assumptions :slight_smile:

Questions I think we should ask about this include and explore:
a) Are we making a gross assumption to this question of what is ‘scripture’ is? the same as these people? On this side of history how much of what we think we know is based on tradition or myth. How can we be sure that our views and understanding is the same as Peter and others? In other words we often assume that ancient peoples view of things are the same as ours as we read the Bible and how do we correct our understanding?

b) Did Peter/Paul (amongst other writers of the period) think these writings were really on par with the Torah and the Old Testament prophets? I see no actual evidence of this other than this vague reference. Just to clarity, no I am not suggesting we discount the value of the New Testament writers.

c) Is the verse (2Pet 3:16) by Peter really declaring that Paul’s writings are scripture?

d) Some view that everything Paul wrote is a ‘thus saith’ the Lord and nothing he wrote included his thoughts. How does one distinguish the difference?

e) How do we deal with those who cherry pick and ignore context?

Okay.

So now everything Paul wrote in letters he may or may not have written is “scripture” because Peter seems to imply this in a letter he may or not have written.

But neither of them could have known about the dozens of other so-called “gospels” to come, nor John’s Revelations, as these were written years later by unknown authors. And yet, some of these are nonetheless now considered “scripture” by most “Christians”.

The fact that there is no concerted effort by the purported instigator of these messages to eliminate the contradictions and outright deceptions in all them leads me to believe that if “scripture”-whatever that might mean-is god’s best and final effort at getting through to humans, he is not only the most confounding creator imaginable but he is so feeble and inept at communication as to be effectively nonexistent.

1 Like

questioning assumptions is always good, but i think we have to concede the possibility that some assumptions, at least, can be valid…certainly the assumption that the NT considers at least parts of the NT as “scripture” does seem to be one of these…

in fact i would say that the NT definition of “scripture”, given in 2Tim 3:15-17, opens the door for settling inspiration, and what “scripture” is, much more definitively than anything given in the OT…certainly by this definition, which identifies the purpose of “scripture” as making us wise with respect to salvation through faith that rests in Jesus Christ, v.15, the NT, where this salvation is explicitly spelled out, must be considered preeminent, even though the concluding purpose of being equipped for the entire spectrum of effective good works can also be thought of as an OT emphasis…and the quality of inspiration of god being a common feature of all “scripture”, v.16, by which Paul is obviously referencing what he calls “revelation”, eg. Gal 1:12, in addition to the explicit agency of the HS highlighted in
2Pet 1:21, means we can say without a doubt that egw meets the NT definition of “scripture”…that is, and by definition, anything given through a supernatural agency that reproves, convicts, instructs, and equips for effective good works must be considered “scripture”…

well, some clearly don’t know what they’re talking about…we all know that the celibacy counsel of Paul, for instance, given in 1Cor 7, is not “thus saith the Lord” counsel…we know this because of several markers like “but I speak this by permission, and not of commandment”, v.6; “but to the rest speak I, not the Lord”, v.12; “now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment”, v.25; “after my judgment”, v.40…i don’t know how much clearer this can get…

interestingly, in 1Tim 2, in which Paul ties Adam’s headship over Eve to their creation order, thereby providing a direct contradiction with Moses, in Gen 3:16, and egw, in PP:58, he clearly prefaces this counsel with markers like “I exhort therefore”, v.1; “I will therefore”, v.8; “but I suffer not”, v.12…these clearly show that the main headship argument, that men have headship over women because they were created first, is Paul’s culturally conditioned view, given for his time and place, and not “thus saith the Lord” counsel…

ultimately i don’t think we can’t really deal with those who cherry pick and ignore context…on many occasions, people just have to be left to their errors, however egregious…but at least none of us have to be part of it…the good thing is that the world, and in fact our church, is a big tent…all can form their own conclusions without having to accommodate someone else’s…

1 Like

i think the weakness in your view is that the student of scripture isn’t left to his own weaknesses and inabilities, when it comes to understanding it…the HS and holy angels assist in understanding inspiration when appropriate conditions are met, with the result that inconsistencies and even mistakes in scripture are neither here nor there…that the HS and holy angels bring supernatural power to assist in understanding scripture is a clear teaching in egw…and it’s strongly implied in the bible…

As always, you make truth claims and assertions without evidence, so only a fool would argue them with you.

Admittedly, I’ve been down that road before but I’ve learned my lesson and have no desire to retrace my steps.

:rofl::yawning_face:

2 Likes

the evidence is in personal experience…just because something can’t be distilled into a defined weight in a test tube doesn’t mean it isn’t evidence…

2 Likes