Amen MM.

I do pray for the church at times, I think I need to pray more.

I cannot go my entire life wondering if what I believe is true or false. Yes, the journey to the truth as it is in Jesus is progressive. But eventually we reach a point where the truth sets us free. I have reached that point. I am absolutely certain, beyond doubt, what I believe is true. I am free. As I continue to read and study the Word of God I discover new and fresh reasons to thank God for the truth that sets me free and keeps me free. The fundamental beliefs are biblical, and biblically sound.

It is obvious to everyone but you that you are in fact in bondage to your 28 fundamental beliefs, ideas conjured up by fallible men. Even your own prophet says so (Counsels to Writers and Editors, pg 33). As an example, consider how you misinterpret Rev. 12:17; yet blindly swear by your own misunderstanding.


///

James, you are free to reject the fundamental beliefs of the SDA Church. However, you are not free to call yourself a SDA. To do so is madness. No one in their right mind would call themselves an American or a Canadian if in fact they reject the constitution upon which it exists. Similarly, no one in their right mind would call themselves a SDA if in fact they reject the fundamental beliefs upon which it exists. You are seriously deluded if you believe Ellen White stands with you in rejecting the fundamental beliefs of the SDA Church. Please do the honest and upright thing and denounce your claim to be a SDA. And, also, please stop posting on this forum. Your opposition here to fundamental SDA beliefs, your abject rejection of them is - unpleasant and nauseating.

MM - you make the 28FB out to be a creed. The Adventist Pioneers could not accept the 28FB as currently published. Shall they be damned? Perhaps you should read what the church recommended to the Gentile converts what to do on joining the church in the book of Acts. Perhaps you should read what Elisha said to Naaman with respect to the worship of the true God. Did God find what they did unpleasant and nauseating?

The Five Steps of Apostasy - by JN Loughbourgh

In setting up of this "abomination that maketh desolate" (Daniel12:11), we see that five distinct steps were taken:- {1907 JNL, COOD 76.1}

1. Forming a creed, expressing their faith in man-made phrases instead of adhering to the word of the Lord. {1907 JNL, COOD 76.2}

2. Making that man-made creed a test of fellowship, and denouncing all as heretics who would not assent to the exact wording of their creeds. {1907 JNL, COOD 76.3}

3. Making the creed a rule by which all heretics must be tried. Many were thus declared sinners whose faith was more in harmony with the direct statements of the Bible than that of those who decreed against them. {1907 JNL, COOD 76.4}

4. Constituting themselves a tribunal for the trial of heretics, and excluding from their fellowship all who would not assent to their creeds. Not content to debar such from church privileges in this world, they declared them subjects for the lake of fire. {1907 JNL, COOD 76.5}

5. Having thus kindled a hatred in their own hearts against all who did not conform to their creeds, they next invoked and obtained the aid of the civil power to torture, and kill with sword, with hunger, with flame, and with beasts of the earth, those whom they had declared unfit to remain in the world. {1907 JNL, COOD 77.1}

Then appeared on the stage of action one class of professed Christians with a head over them, actually declaring that he was "God on earth," persecuting another class of Christians who were conscientiously following the Lord and his Word, - a class of whom it might be said, in the light in which God views them (as was said, of the ancient worthies), "of whom the world was not worthy." Hebrews11:38. {1907 JNL, COOD 77.2}

Step #1 is something we all do.
Everyone on this forum is doing this.
Expressing their faith and their believes in their own (human) words. We all know that people see the words of scripture differently. Like James insisting the Rev. 12:13 and 17 are talking about the same time, when others see it obviously talking about time before "the earth helps the woman" and after "the earth helps the woman".

So we express our beliefs in our own words so people know how we understand the words in the scriptures.

There is nothing wrong with a denomination to list Bible texts and explain how they conclude what those texts mean. As in the state of the dead -- there are texts that clearly say the dead know NOTHING, etc. but there are other texts that some see as supporting a separation with the soul being in the presence of God. So we write out what we believe on the state of the dead in clear words of that belief.

The only problem in step one is IF
the statement is not in harmony with the word of God.
But if it lists many texts (which our statement of beliefs does) then it is seeking to clarify that this is in harmony with the word of God.

Step #2 The fellowship of like believers is an exercise of freedom of religion. There is no freedom of religion if a denomination MUST abide and accept into fellowship the vocal presence of people who come to denounce the congregations understanding of scripture. To insist that no one can be denied fellowship no matter how antagonistic they are to the beliefs of the congregation, is to deny the freedom of worship.

The problem in step #2 is
calling everyone who believes differently "heretics".
No, we are not condemn them, they are free to believe and to live and worship with like believers in a group that believes as they do.

Steps 3-7 are way out of line as they go beyond the congregation of like believers and start imposing on society in general, seeking civil authority to impose their beliefs on others.

The biggest problem in these debates is a confusion over
Denominational statements of belief
And a sacralist creed.

A sacralist creed?

A sacralist church or religion is a concept of "church" that involves the whole of society; (everyone living in the region) this necessitated that all within
the society embraced the same basic religious beliefs for the society to function properly. Those who refused to accept and abide by these religious practices were cast out – exiled or even killed.

Israel in the OT operated as a sacralist church -- everyone in that nation was to embrace the same basic religious beliefs or "be cut off".

In the New Testament Christ introduced a whole new concept of church. It is a concept where church is composed of believers and believers only, who live in a society where most do not believe.
Thus "church" does not conform it's doctrines to society at large, nor does it enforce it's doctrines on society at large.


However, the church itself is composed of BELIEVERS and the "unbelievers" are not part of the church.

The disagreements in these threads comes about when people accuse a church that holds to its beliefs as being a sacralist church when in fact it is only operating as a true NT church within a non-believing society.

To say a church is not allowed to hold to its beliefs is the ecumenical teaching that seeks to have all churches put away their distinctive doctrines and form a sacralist church where church groups with distinctive doctrines are no longer tolerated.

This thread was started by Elle who posed the question, "Should the Body Discipline Members for disagreeing on 28FB?" Inevitably, people were going to be divided into two camps over the issue, and the posts reflect that. Mountain Man however shouts the loudest with ProdigalOne, going further in demanding the heads of all who say nay, trying desperately to co-op Admin into carrying out his wishes. Doesn't that sound like the lamb-like beast to you? Aren't we seeing a fulfillment of prophecy in miniature before our very eyes?

///

Fortunately the spirit of prophecy agrees with me. Because Rev. 13:5-7 says ...

• And [the Dragon-sponsored Beast] was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months (i.e. 1,260 days).
  -
• AND WHAT DID HE DO FOR 1,260 DAYS? It says plainly ...
  -
• Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.

It was to that self-same 1,260 days that, according to Rev. 12:17, "the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." And so therefore, it is not right for SDA to appropriate Rev. 12:17 to themselves when that war was waged many long years BEFORE the denomination came up out of the earth.

///

"...with ProdigalOne, going further in demanding the heads of all who say nay, trying desperately to co-op Admin into carrying out his wishes."


Strange... I don't recall saying any of the above? Would anyone care to find the post in which I, "demanding the heads of all who say nay"?

If such a post cannot be found, then it would appear to be a lie, deliberately perpetrated by a member of this forum with the express purpose of damaging the reputation of a fellow member.

The same member spreading this lie has also deliberately lied, either in his application and profile, by claiming not to be an SDA member, or in a thread wherein he claimed in fact to be an SDA member: both claims cannot be true.

The last time I checked, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." was still Commandment number nine.

Perhaps, obedience of The Ten Commandments is a Fundamental Belief that the "progressive truth" espoused by an increasing number of members, reject?

Interpretive disagreement is acceptable. Outright, commandment breaking on membership applications and on forum threads is another matter!


By the way, no one, including myself, is, "trying desperately to co-op Admin into carrying out our wishes." I have no doubt that Daryl is well aware of all activity on the threads; he has years of experience in these matters and I respect his judgement.


A number of members are simply hoping that the Commandment breaking member will either repent, or do the honorable thing and resign from the site.