Christ affirms vehemently and vigorously THREE TIMES in the last chapter of the Bible ( written circa AD 60?) BEHOLD I AM COMING SOON!
Had his Heavenly Father not yet nformed Him In AD 60, that this was an untruth and impossible for Him to come soon, since He had some remote task to fulfill nearly TWO MILLENIA later (1844 ) ?? This whole investigative judgement dogma is a farce!
With a lot of prophecy that has past it is possible to verify the prophecy. The image in Dan 2 can be verified - Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome all existed. The last part is still in play. The prophey of the 2,300 “days” (Dan 8) can’t be confirmed. The maths brings you to Oct 22, 1844. If the date is correct what happened? The final part of the text says “…then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” What sanctuary, where? Surely not the earthly sanctuary, in 1844. The original “mathematicians” said that Christ would come on that date (forgetting that no one knows the hour or date etc). When that didn’t happen, they had to find another event to match the date. This time they chose wisely…they chose an event that nobody could refute. The explanation for the date in 1844 was Christ went from the Holy to Most Holy place in the Heavenly sanctuary. By design, or coincidence, we cannot verify that this actually happened. How do you prove Christ changed chambers in Heaven?
What is the point of a prophecy that cannot be verified? Prophecy is to tell us about the future, to give us confidence in God. A prophecy that can’t be verified does not give confidence.
Do you recall this Belief prior to the 1840’s?
William Miller and MANY other believed that the EARTH was God’s Sanctuary.
So when they saw “Sanctuary” in Daniel, they ASSUMED it was meaning “EARTH”.
The ONLY CONCLUSION they could come up with was – Christ was coming to
take His family Home to heaven.
The EARTH was going to be purified with fire as we read in the NT. Then God’s
New Earth Kingdom would be set up on Earth as described in Revelation.
October 22, 1844 was the date — CHRIST IS COMING!
Then, after the Disappointment, there was the “cornfield vision.”
And THAT BEGAN a New Paradigm to the William Miller and others’ preaching
prior to Oct. 22, 1844.
That’s really getting into the weeds. I take a higher-level view where I recognize that she was human and fallible so not every detail of what she wrote is necessarily absolutely accurate. More than that, I try to obey her clear instruction to pastors that we use and follow the Bible first, foremost and always and that we never quote her writings in the pulpit or use them as the basis for any belief or teaching.
What instructions did Jesus give us for how we are to declare that the kingdom of God is near? By doing good works so people would be touched with the power of God and become followers who praise God. Our study of prophecy should be reserved for “doctoral level” students instead of the first and primary thing we present.
That was a horrible time for me, when “the church was ruthlessly destroying Des Ford and anyone who was suspected of believing anything he taught.” That was a time for re-studying everything I have learned in the SDAC, including my 4 years in college (theology major, class 1972).
After about three years digging into everything available I finally concluded that Des was right! Which taught me not ever again believe things just because they are some church’s doctrines. “Trust but verify!”
The feeling of being deceived was horrible. The Church (Denomination) was part of me and I was part of the Denomination. Well, not anymore after that! I learned that there is a big difference between “the church” and the Denomination. I am part of a “local church,” but have nothing to do with the Denomination. @gford1
Adventism is to mainstream Christianity is what David Goggins is to marathon running (look it up ). It’s never meant to be popular or oversimplified “Jesus loves you” type of denomination, and that’s why I joined it. It’s a denomination that does both “Jesus love you”, and explains what it means.
Yes, there’s additional baggage of Adventist Eschatology, but even with it there should be understanding that Adventist eschatology is structured to point out concepts that Adventists see of paramount importance, and that would be existential Christianity and not the one that you find in a lecture about Jesus who can be your imaginary friend that patches the holes in your psychological inadequacies.
So, even in context of “questionable eschatology” I can see it as allegory that pointing back to important matters of Christian faith that doesn’t exist in your head, but actually propagates to your hands and feet.
So, the problem with Adventism today isn’t that there isn’t enough “Jesus preaching”. Quite the opposite. Adventism got out of the business of Christian excellence, and got into business of “organizational rent-seeking” and mediocre approach to Christianity.
And, as inscription above my college locker went… “Once you lick the lollypop of mediocrity… you suck forever”.
And yes, the motivations for excellence begin with Christian basics, but getting stuck in the comfort of basics gets you nowhere. And comfort is a heck of a lot more popular than suffering, but comfort isn’t the true message of Christianity. Unfortunately, that’s where it is today, and that’s what people are looking for, hence pastors are essentially turn church into a place where the comfort of mediocrity is rationalized as somewhere we need to be collectively… falling asleep to yet another “Jesus loves you” sermon/lullaby
That’s not what we need, and that’s not what world needs, and that’s not what Adventism should be.
Pastors become nice bullies who present subtle "you suck, try harder " sermons and then present palliatives and quote 1 JN 1:9…to make churches “safe places” for the perverted depraved masses.
What irks me is to go to an SDA church where th scripture reading is 1-4 verses and then a day later go to a non - denom church where they read several verses and teach verse by verse expository bible books.
Interesting, The prime resource of Adventism has become the policy handbook rather that Scripture.the presumption is that the Church rather than Scripture defines the human nature of Jesus and the Investigative role of Christ is taken over by the committees on compliance. The theme is get with it or get out.,Glacier View has become standard operating policy., The astonishingly thing is that gonads trump brains, training,and commitment.
Policy handbook shouldn’t be problematic at the level of organization. Bible doesn’t have directions on how to organize modern 501c3 non-profit, and how to run it in our modern society. It contains principles that have to be expressed into some structure.
Hence, policy isn’t a problem. The problem is when policy becomes a focus of our discussion about church narrative, just like politics becomes the prime focus of discussion about our national narrative. It merely rationalizes us paying attention to these things as though these contain solutions to our problems, when these don’t.
If we collectively voted in the women to be pastors, it doesn’t really resolve much. We could pat ourselves on the back for being progressive denomination, but it doesn’t resolve the problems that church faces today. It doesn’t make the members magically re-focus on Christian excellence. So, it’s a attention deterrent that shifts focus on organizational hierarchy, as though that’s what we really should be focusing on, and the issues that are arguably inconsequential in the long run.
So, it doesn’t actually helps us understand that it’s up to us as local individuals to assume responsibilities for the health of their local congregations, instead of looking for “salvation from above”, and I don’t mean “heaven” :).
Sooner we will shift focus locally and encourage the local congregations to assume responsibility for maintaining certain “functional independence” and growth process that doesn’t rely on celebrity pastors conducting evangelism series… the better it will be for the church, since the theological quibbles at the CG level would become the proverbial “trees in the woods” as these should be. Not to say these are not important and have no place, but these are not the problems we should be focusing locally IMO.
Even worse, if the verses are read in context, I found that the meaning was actually not what the pastor was trying to say that it meant! No, not TW’s fault, this has been going on for decades and decades.
I love attending a church where there is verse by verse teaching through the whole book…nothing left out. And, no third party (EGW) to interfere. So edifying and refreshing.