Your assumption is certain while mine has the possibility of being in error.
We all know from our own experiences through the years that the LGT Brethren/Disciples are NEVER wrong.
Herein lies the devil of the LGT: The pathological need to be perfect even to the extent of assuming they know as much as God does.
It is a huge and consuming fire for them…a waste of life.
We both have the possibility of error, Elmer. But that hardly precludes either of us from strongly believing in this or that. Tepidness is not a spiritual virtue. But humility definitely is–which is precisely why I say again, yes, I could be wrong. And that said, I do believe that my personal version of LGT (which, BTW, hardcore LGTers would heartily reject) is logical, based on the array of scripture, and is even adhered to by a number of commenters on this thread. Could I be wrong? Of course. Could you be wrong? Of course.
So true! This has been the downfall of too many.
" my personal version of LGT (which, BTW, hardcore LGTers would heartily reject) is logical, based on the array of scripture, and is even adhered to by a number of commenters on this thread."
Please share what your more PC version is that some of us would agree with, Shane.
Are you the same Shane Anderson who is the Pastor at New Market Church? Just curious…
You do realize of course…that you are describing your own POV?
One word is all that was required,
Shane already got forced into admitting that he is…albeit a “softer” form of LGTism (if this is even possible).
We should be asking if he is taking his “missionary” term on Spectrum now.
Some free advertising perhaps?
Hadn’t gotten there yet, Kim, but that’s all we need to know. A missionary is among us. Wonder if millennialism is yet to come
You are quite the wit, Shane…a bit evasive- but a wit.
Perhaps it is the evasiveness that is destroying your credibility…hmmm
Of course! That’s why I’ve said things like:
As far as I know, Andreasen didn’t copyright the term. So I’m re-appropriating it. (He would not be pleased, but surely, this is one of the advantages of the Adventist view of the state of the dead: He cannot lodge a complaint.)
Would you be disappointed if I said I wasn’t?
I’m hoping so, because… I am said pastor of said church.
But please don’t hold any of my congregation accountable for any of my tomfoolery. The fault is mine and mine alone.
Like I have said/warned you…when you post here, you post for eternity. Literally.
I have no problem with your POVs as long as you stop being so evasive. It destroys credibility.
Oh, Kim, you had to, didn’t you? My makeup that day was questionable, and it was my first time on Hope Channel, so I was nervous. The staff there were excellent, but the seat they had me on was made for someone 4’ 10" (I’m 6’ 4"). So not my best work, but good material I hope, nonetheless.
I usually do my research, Shane…lol
I won’t hold the poor make-up job against you.
No, not at all. It sometimes gives a bit of perspective to know where a person is coming from, especially if they are a pastor for the church, or work for the church in some capacity…pastor, teacher, etc.
Very interesting thread. I find your @Shane_Anderson response thought provoking. The fact that you are listing some of the texts that have “interplay” and need comparison thought wise (and are from scripture) is a breath of fresh air – in the EGW plethora of “quotage” that permeates from almost all LGT adherents.
Given the current “compliance” process going forth in SDA circles currently… this statement of yours…
> But if by “LGT” you mean that I believe that there will be a final generation of people who are sinless and do NOT know it; and who furthermore are joyfully Christ-centered, loving, just, kind, courageous, merciful, etc., etc.–the kind of people that see precisely zero of their good works as contributing to their salvation; then emphatically, my answer is YES. … this is a rare admittance and I very much applaud it.
I would be very interesting in your biblical (not EGW) understanding of the “definition of sin”. Since the SDA church is primarily interested in sin and the judgment (not the gospel) – by definition the “staunch” LGT adherent would side on the “transgression of the law” vs… “whatsoever is not of faith is sin”. (This is my comprehensive biblical view of sin)
Based on your “revoca” post. Your position is unique per my reading of it (if my understanding is correct).
with kind regards,