Seventh-day Adventist Church Responds to Equality Act

(JRStovall) #177

Nope! Not an impasse! Follow the Golden Rule and have no issues.

The problem is that people using the marriage gambit are inconsistent with their beliefs. The defense of ones belief system would demand consistency, especially when trying to use the Bible as proof.
(enough said):sunglasses:

(Patrick Travis) #178

Tell you what Jaray. On this subject…Don’t attempt to force your personal views in this area on many Americans, Christians, Jews, and others by law and we won’t do it to you. Or “in reverse” We won’t force by law our views on you and don’t you attempt to force yours on “Us.”

It is the hostile proactive stance that groups have adopted in recent years as much as a common felt “live and let live” in general society as relates to LGB particularly. I think and know there are some LGB that don’t care to be associated with T+ in legal causes.

Golden rule reciprocated.

(David) #179

The State has the gold and the State makes the rules.

Nuff said!

(Patrick Travis) #180

The law represents force. Nothing voluntary and golden rule about it.

(Harry Elliott) #181

[quote=“Hadassah, post:46, topic:18379”]
“law was not abrogated”


“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?” (Gal 4:21)

In the vocabulary of the Bible, the Law is Genesis-Deuteronomy which contains 613 commandments by careful Jewish count. Paul tells us that it’s obey all of them or obey the Spirit.


What is this supposed to mean?

Are you saying @bigtomwoodcutter should be killed? Banished to the desert? Siberia?

What about the gossipers, cheaters, liars, prideful, Sabbath breakers?

You don’t seem to be talking about separation of church and state; you are talking about Christians killing, abandoning, and wounding their own.


[quote=“harrpa, post:182, topic:18379”]

How do you “break” Sabbath? And are the rules the same as in the OT?

(George Tichy) #184
  1. Love is not what I have seen people showing toward homosexuals.
  2. “The curse of his choice.” What could this possibly mean? Care to explain?
  3. How can the genetic code be changed so “the next generation” won’t be born the same? Is such a technology already available? Please explain.

(Tim Teichman) #185

Well, if you’re trying to keep it in the first place, then you’re putting yourself under the law. Which Paul says is broken - cannot give salvation - and is replaced with Jesus. (Galatians 4)

Every time the Sabbath is given in the bible (all three versions of the commandments) keeping it holy is defined as not-working, as resting. That is all. So, presumably, working is breaking the Sabbath - is the only way to break the Sabbath.

If you note, every single time Jesus was challenged regarding the Sabbath, he was accused of working. He was never accused of worshiping incorrectly, incompletely, or too infrequently. This reinforces the idea that breaking the Sabbath is about work, not worship.


Right and the reason to keep it? Says something about remembering when you were released from slavery in Egypt which I can’t find happening in my ancestry.
And those preachers that tell me the mark of the beast is about worshipping on Sunday doesn’t seem possible either if keeping Sabbath is about work.

(Steve Mga) #187

George –
In my reading about “genetics”, one author presented a study that showed
that families who had 3 boys, there was a predominance of gayness with
the 3rd boy pregnancy.
Studies showed that Boy 1 and Boy 2 set up resistance to Testosterone in
the Mother’s blood. The writer said this impairs the development of that
male brain by Testosterone. Testosterone is present, but in lesser amounts
than would be available to Boy 1 and Boy 2.

Have you ever heard of these phenomenon?
Fraternal Girl and Boy twins are noted that the Girl in life seems to manifest
TOMBOY behaviors. She was influenced by her brothers Testosterone and
enjoys more “boy type” activities than “girl activities”.

(Tim Teichman) #188

Yes. The commandments are explicitly given to those that experienced the Exodus:

“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.
You shall have no other gods before me… - Ex 20

"Then the Lord said [to Moses]: “I am making a covenant with you. Before all your people I will do wonders never before done in any nation in all the world. The people you live among will see how awesome is the work that I, the Lord, will do for you. Obey what I command you today. - Ex 34

“The Lord our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. It was not with our ancestors that the Lord made this covenant, but with us, with all of us who are alive here today. The Lord spoke to you face to face out of the fire on the mountain. …And he said: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.”" - Deut 5

So, the Law was not given to us, and so does not apply to us. Seems rather clear.

Specifically, the Sabbath:

“Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the Lord your God has commanded you. [Keeping it holy is define as:] Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns, so that your male and female servants may rest, as you do. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God has commanded you to observe the Sabbath day.” - Deut 5

Not the Egyptians. Not the Babylonians. Not the Romans. Just the Israelites.


Right so when preachers tell me the Sabbath is a creation remembrance?

(Tim Teichman) #190

They’re wrong. They should know it, though they may be ignorant or in denial.

This passage was added to Exodus 20 at a later date after Genesis was completed by the redactor in order to tie the two together:

“For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” - Ex 20

It was not part of the original commandment, which read simply:

“Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns."

Taken with the preamble, though, the reason is still clear:
“I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery."

The original actually reads:
I am Yahweh, your god, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

(Steve Mga) #191

We NEED to understand “Slavery”.
Since the War For and Against Slavery [state’s rights] 1861-1865, we have no
idea what it means to be in Slavery.
It means you are NOT your own person, there is ALWAYS someone there
who manages your life every moment of every day, every day of the week.
They determine when to get up, when you are allowed to go to bed. Provide
your only food you can eat. Work does NOT allow for rest periods. Not working
fast enough, not producing one’s quota can ensure lashes at the end of the day
or maybe during the day. Working EVERY DAY, with no days off.
So when God says I brought you out of Slavery, it means a whole lot not verbalized
and it means REST.
In the First Creation story by that writer, EVERYDAY began with Rest before work.
Every 7th day was a day of REST for everyone and everything. Rest for all people
and all animals in the household. This concept was very important to this person!
So for God to say, I brought you out of Slavery was VERY important to say.
Slavery from all the Physical aspects of slavery, and also Freedom to develop
a New Lifestyle. They DID NOT know How to live. So God had to spoon-feed
them with all the Rules for Living in Community. They had no idea HOW to live
in Community without someone there directing their every day, every activity.
They HAD to be taught HOW to be Self-Directed in their lives.
“Children” of Israel was more True – they were like little children in knowing HOW
to live. And like Children had to be taught.

Giving the Sabbath to the World is a legacy to the world through Israel. To change
the living habits of their neighbors – who were probably more like the Egyptians.
Give REST to humanity. To prevent Workaholic mentality which is what one has
when there is no concept of Sabbath in one’s mind.


As you mentioned our ultimate rest is Jesus. Seems the emphasis on Sabbath “keeping” is in vain.

(David) #193

Christ: “The Sabbath was made for man"

(Tim Teichman) #194

Is your point that Jesus altered the law with this statement, thus including all peoples?

The original, to me, has a different connotation.

Jesus was defending himself against criticism - being accused of working by feeding himself on the Sabbath by picking grain. He used the story of David, who committed a likely worse offense of stealing the consecrated bread from the temple on the sabbath.

Then he followed that story up with the somewhat convoluted statement, translated as:
“The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

For me, the a more literal translation makes more sense, without detracting:

“The sabbath, because of the humans was made, and not humans because of of the sabbath. So then, master/lord is the son of the human also/even of the sabbath.”

I take this to mean that the sabbath should not cause human suffering - hunger in this case - because the sabbath was offered to alleviate human suffering - to offer solace from labor. Humans were not created to be slaves to the sabbath, but to be free to keep it. Just like humans are not created for bread, but bread for hungry humans.

So Jesus is saying that, in this case, to accuse those of work - of breaking the sabbath - because they are picking seeds to eat when they are hungry is without merit.

(Alix CaDavid) #195

As a 3rd generation SDA and a member of a family of church workers, pastors, educators, and missionaries, I am saddened by this announcement of my beloved church. Freedom of religion and the separation of church and state are key tenants in the SDA church, which means that people with different interpretations of the Bible, different religious believes or none at all also have rights and are equal under the law. We are talking about human and civil rights! I am yet to know a church creed that dictates that we should discriminate people because they don’t keep the Sabbath holy, for instance. “In truth, I perceive that God is no respecter of persons" There is no partiality with God. Furthermore, if we are all sinners and if our church does not believe in a hierarchy of sins, then why some of us deserve to have equal rights and others don’t? We need to be congruent and show unconditional love to everyone not only those that share our particular interpretation of the bible. Or else what is next? Are we going to withhold the rights of people that eat pork just because we believe eating pork is wrong? Sounds ridiculous, right? Let the judging to God and let’s concentrate on being love to one another and in being instruments of His peace. This also means making sure everybody is equal under the law and restraining from trying to impose our religious believes in others or trying to legislate according to our own particular religious believes, that is a risky proposition; we SDAs should know better.

(reliquum) #196

I have read literature suggesting this phenomenon. There is some effect, and suspected cumulative, to each successsive male child.

Numerous studies have shown that there is a unique relationship between older brothers and homosexuality in males (for review, see [1][3]). Homosexual males tend to have significant preponderances of older brothers. Other categories of siblings (i.e., older sisters, younger brothers, younger sisters), however, do not appear to be uniquely associated with male sexual orientation. The unique relationship between older brothers and male sexual orientation has been termed the fraternal birth order effect .

The most prominent hypothesis regarding the fraternal birth order effect posits that maternal-fetal interactions are responsible for this association [4], [5]. Specifically, this effect is hypothesized to reflect a mother’s immune response to the gestation of successive male fetuses. According to the hypothesis, some mothers experience an immune response to male-specific antigens linked to the Y chromosome, an immune response involving the production of anti-male antibodies. This immune response is thought to become more likely with each successive male fetus gestated and increases the probability that the typical action of male-specific antigens in the developing fetal brain will be diminished. This affects neural areas underlying sexual orientation such that matured males exhibit a female-typical sexual partner preference (i.e., sexual partner preference for adult males). Hence, in later-born sons, there is an increased probability of homosexuality. This line of reasoning has been termed the maternal immune hypothesis . Although no laboratory evidence directly supporting the maternal immune hypothesis is available, there are three main lines of evidence that indirectly demonstrate that this hypothesis is tenable.