Irony in the Adventist Compliance Controversy


(George Tichy) #81

Isn’t it indeed insane? How Can someone say things like that when it is public knowledge that it is not true? The so called “representation” in our church is a joke. How can it be representative if the majority of the members does not have full rights and is not fully represented?


#82

No where is this statement of yours in the Bible, where do you get that from?


#83

Indeed their is plenty of historical evidence of days of weeks in various cultures around the word. The day of rest has been kept for thousands of years and known those who kept an understanding of God. After all Abraham and Shem were alive at the same time and this knowledge would not have been lost if for no other reason than that.

The establishment of the dateline was the result of the need to establish consistency in a world that grown to a point where it was needed to keep track of time in a global manner. It made sense to those in Samoa simply due to the fact that they would otherwise have had to change. It is not apostasy as some have claimed.


#84

The call to ministry is the by the Holy Spirit not people. By creating this gender qualification in order to support a human ‘male only’ tradition mock God and are guilty of rejecting the Holy Spirit.

This human tradition is thus an abomination before God.


(George Tichy) #85

The real issue in question is not WO, but rather power, control and discrimination. To recognize and identify discrimination does not require much judgment since it’s an obvious moral issue. Those who recognize and denounce discrimination are not following their conscience, they are just applying common sense and a very simple principle of morality.

Just curious,
Do you support discrimination of women? ____ YES … … ____ NO


(Tim Teichman) #86

It’s an Adventist tradition to follow just parts of the law in a half-baked way.

Other examples:

  • We insist on following the “biblical example” of marriage and then completely ignore the biblical examples of marriage, which are nothing at all like our modern ideas of marriage.

  • We won’t eat “unclean” animals, like pork and shrimp, but then we also don’t follow the biblical Kosher rules given right along with the list of animals: A non-kosher steak is just as unclean as a pork chop, but we pretend that’s not the case.

  • We claim that the Leviticus purity laws apply - well at least some of them - but then we claim the punishments for breaking them don’t apply.

  • We claim to keep the Sabbath - because it is in the 10 commandments - but then don’t keep it as described in the 10 commandments.

  • We routinely ignore various details of the 10 commandments while cheerfully claiming to follow them all - making us superior to all others.

  • We claim that the 10 commandments are important, but then ignore much of the rest of the 600+ laws in the Torah, but choosing a few, pretending that we are capable of splitting the law up and following only the parts that apply today - but then don’t describe how that is determined. Apparently it is open to anyone to just cherry pick whatever they want to follow and then deride everyone else for doing it wrong.

I could go on and on.


(Tim Teichman) #87

Except, that is not at all how the Israelite calendar worked up and through the 3rd century CE.

They interpreted the command to mean that they should have a Sabbath rest day (not a worship day) at least every 7th day. More often was fine, too.


(Tim Teichman) #88

Before Eve ate the fruit she didn’t have a conscience.

She didn’t have the ability to tell the difference between good an evil. The fruit of the tree provided the knowledge of good and evil - provided her with a conscience.

The dragon did not lie to her. He said she would be able to know good from evil - like the gods - and she did. He said she would not die today - as God had claimed - and she didn’t.

When God found out what had happened, He exclaimed that humanity had become like the gods - affirming the dragon’s claim - and as an aside that there is more than one god, which I find rather interesting.

If you actually look at the details of the story as if for the first time, it isn’t a story of a “fall” but of growing up. It’s a story of the children at the beginning of humanity growing a conscience, being clothed by their father-figure, and leaving the nursery to explore the world.


#89

And your support for this?

Do you believe the conscience is the presence of the Holy Spirit?

Do you have support for this?


(George Tichy) #90

I am glad you didn’t. It’s already embarrassing enough… :wink:


(George Tichy) #91

Oh, come on Harrpa, make it easier, just trust the guy!!!.. :roll_eyes:


#92

In Genesis 3:6 we read:

“And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.”

In this verse, we see Eve’s state of mind. She sees only the good things she wants to see. At no moment do we see her thinking about the warning that God gave or doubting.

I believe that the Holy Spirit speaks to our conscience.

Did not God forbid Adam and Eve to eat of the forbidden fruit?


#93

This says nothing about her conscience.

How are the Holy Spirit and one’s conscience connected?

Are you equating the Ten Commandments to forbidding Adam and Eve to eat from the Tree of Good and Evil? What law are you talking about? Are you also talking about the New Commandments from Jesus when you talk about “law”?


(Tim Teichman) #94

Of course. She had no ability to tell good from evil - she had no conscience.

It was only after she ate the fruit that she - like us - became like the gods, able to tell good from evil.


#95

No, here when I speak about the law I am talking about the commandment against eating the fruit of the Tree of Good and Evil.


#96

I don’t think that this is correct. She knew that touching the fruit would result in death and she knew that it was not a good thing. And also, she knew that going against God’s will was not a good thing either since He was the Creator.


(George Tichy) #97

I can just imagine how clear and comprehensive was her understanding of “death” - something that had not yet happened, that she had not seen happening around her.


(Tim Teichman) #98

She did not understand good and evil or the difference between them. Unless you’re prepared to state that the tree did not change her (as God said it did) and did not make her like the gods in that she knew the difference between good an evil, then before she ate she did not.

In any case it is recorded that she was deceived. When you become deceived you cannot make an informed choice, and in such a case you’re not sinning.


(Steve Mga) #99

Tim –
The Bible makes a HUGE distinction between what Eve did and what Adam did.
The Bible says “in ADAM we all die”. Does NOT say “in Eve we all die.”
The Bible also says “that in Christ we are all made alive.” And calls Christ the
SECOND Adam.
The “EVE THING” was promoted by the Church of the Dark and Middle Ages.
And also through the ART of those periods when the common people were
PREVENTED from learning to read, and from reading Scriptures for themselves.
NO ONE has promoted the correcting of that FALSE ADVERTISING.


(Tim Teichman) #100

Right. Eve was deceived. Under the cloud of deceit she took the fruit from the dragon (best translation) and ate it.

What did Adam do?

  • He stood there, with her, and watched this take place.
  • As recorded, there’s no hint that he was deceived.
  • He took the fruit from her and ate it.
  • Then, after he could tell good from evil, after he grew a conscience to be like the gods, then he lied to God about what he had done and like a toddler he blamed someone else for it.

As far as I can tell Eve committed no sin. Adam did.

---------Edit----------------
Adam might have committed a sin. I say this because it depends on if he actually disappointed God, if he actually behaved in a way that fell short of God’s actual expectations for Adam at that point in his development.

It’s just like if you tell a toddler not to take the cookie off the plate and then he does anyway about minute later. Did the toddler commit an offense, or a sin by not obeying his parent? No. He’s not yet capable of remembering the request long term or of resisting the cookie. Or really even of knowing taking the cookie might be ‘bad’ or that he’s supposed to ‘obey’ ‘rules’.