Gossip Juice and the Meanings of Meetings: Annual Council & NAD — Adventist Voices

I am. Mmmmmmm. Juice of life.


George get caffeine joints and smoke them
Without sugar and milk combinations

We know what EGW says about milk and sugar tho KELLOGG’S made trillions on frostie flakes

We could do a deal with the NAD
I can talk to some people and organize coffee supplies and machines to all churches
Chhhhaaachinggggg $$$$$$ sanitarium cafe

Maybe they went out for a cup of coffee. They will work on a report when they come back… :innocent::laughing:

1 Like

Simon, you’re going too far on this.

By the way, I don’t drink real milk, only almond or soy milk. Don’t use sugar either, only Trivia or Splenda. Unless I am somewhere where these products are not available. But, again, my habits don’t have to be approved/disapproved here… :wink:

1 Like

FDA approved :slight_smile:

1 Like

Because Adventist healthcare and education systems couldn’t function without it.

Or as Frank Herbert would put it, “The caffeine must flow!”

1 Like

A lot of action in Twitter, conversations, memes, jokes, #churchmerch. And quite a bit of coverage there.

In what way is coffee no different from cocaine and heroine? There is not a day that goes by that I do not interact with substance use disorder. Patients are admitted to our psychiatric unit and are placed on treatment and/or withdrawal protocol. I still have to admit a person with coffee use disorder, a diagnosis which does not exist. So I’d like to know more how you came to the conclusion that coffee is no different from cocaine or heroine. Perhaps I missed an important ground-breaking NIMH study. Please elucidate.


Simon, why are you posting these things directed to me? I never touched a cigarette, I never saw ANY illegal drug in front of me, I don’t drink alcoholic beverages. Actually, I helped tens of people professionally to overcome allbkinds of addictions.

In case you are advertising some products here, well, I’m sorry, but I am not a potential customer… :upside_down_face:


Sorry you addressed my original post
Look the spectrum editors mocked Neil Nedley and EGW
Now the hypocrisy and dilemma of spectrum is we like to post save the planet articles (we the stewards of the planet) yet mock EGW writings on us temple created .
Now i drank odd coffee and have given up and hope people in forum do as well and try to .
But to mock EGW is a bit low and basically rejection off the word

You appear to equate EGW to the status of the Bible.

I am not in favor of this GC statement on EGW for the simple reason that it equates EGW to the Bible. Once this happens, one of the two is always diminished as there can never be two coequals. As always in any delusions, the danger is one of the two coequal will have to be eventually eliminated. It happened to Jesus. Matt 26:23 “The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” It happened to John Lennon as his assassin believed he was John Lennon himself. And I’m sure it will happen to the Bible as our current GC leaders are bent in elevating EGW to being equal or above the Bible as you seem to endorse.


The same effects of cannabis such as euphoria and paranoia can be induced by non-pharmacological interventions such as talking about politics and religion. And the best thing is, it’s free and venues can extend from churches to political gatherings without polluting the air.

I once read Doug Batchelor’s life as a youngster where he lived in the desert, walked about the area naked as Adam & Eve did in the garden of Eden. He also engaged in illicit drugs and am sure experienced what euphoria and paranoia felt. He is still living the dream except instead of using illicit drugs to experience euphoria and paranoia, he has exchanged it with his brand of religion. The resulting experience is still the same, euphoria and paranoia. The only difference is he now uses a suit when in public.


Well Elmer, this (the whole post #33) is quite an extraordinary literary piece. Inspiration???


LOL! I can’t wait.


Sorry folks. but our salvation has nothing to do with what you eat, drink, etc. BUT, what we eat, drink, etc. does affect our salvation.

Could you briefly give some examples of this?


Do you mean effect (not affect)? I could see both used in this context, with perhaps similar meaning.


This topic was automatically closed after 7 days. New replies are no longer allowed.