Who do SDAs worship to?

[Icyspark]

SDA's reject Divine Simplicity, their God consists of parts. The facts are that SDA's do boast about being Bible Only while idolizing a supposed prophet who stated that SDA Doctrines were established as truth by supernatural events OUTSIDE of the Bible. Your denial of this fact is nonsensical.

All SDA doctrine is substantiated strictly from the Bible. It is only the critic's predisposition to find in others the same willingness to reject the Bible as they do that they seek to impose beliefs upon the SDA church. I have never appealed to anything other than the Scriptures to affirm my beliefs (unlike those in the cult that is the Roman Catholic church).

Here's a link to the SDA church beliefs. See if you can find one belief not found upon a "Thus saith the Lord," (as opposed to the never-ending RCC traditions elevated above the Word of God).

What do Seventh Day Adventists Really Believe? - Adventist.org

The official description of Seventh-day Adventists’ interpretation and practice of the major themes in Scripture, organized into 28 Fundamental Beliefs.

www.adventist.org

 

[e v e 21]

divine simplicity as no parts is a greek concept referring to the pagan view of divinity, a concept adopted by greek affected roman christian theology.

i agree with the desire to be true to God… which is why we all discuss here… and why i say most kindly — we cannot rely on greek philosophy.

a problem is that modern christianity, affected by greek theology, forgot God is affected and relies on His souls and needs us and He hurts. Love by definition allows vulnerability.

the unaffected, impervious god is described by plato in the phaedo dialogue, which i taught to my college students. and yes i pointed out plato is not christian and has views not belonging to God’s reality.

that’s where the divine simplicity concept and, other ones too, originate…. plato.

from what i see on the forums all the denominations could be free of plato…

 

[pythons]

All SDA doctrine is substantiated strictly from the Bible. It is only the critic's predisposition to find in others the same willingness to reject the Bible as they do that they seek to impose beliefs upon the SDA church. I have never appealed to anything other than the Scriptures to affirm my beliefs (unlike those in the cult that is the Roman Catholic church).

Here's a link to the SDA church beliefs. See if you can find one belief not found upon a "Thus saith the Lord," (as opposed to the never-ending RCC traditions elevated above the Word of God).

What do Seventh Day Adventists Really Believe? - Adventist.org

The official description of Seventh-day Adventists’ interpretation and practice of the major themes in Scripture, organized into 28 Fundamental Beliefs.

www.adventist.org

Correction, it supposedly is NOW - the point I made was that according to Ellen, IT WASN'T until she visioned it....
...This is what you are dealing with - the explicit admission that SDA Doctrines could NOT be established by Bible only.
...Here it is again:

Ellen White
At that time one error after another pressed in upon us; ministers and doctors brought in new doctrines. We would search the Scriptures with much prayer, and the Holy Spirit would bring the truth to our minds. Sometimes whole nights would be devoted to searching the Scriptures and earnestly asking God for guidance. Companies of devoted men and women assembled for this purpose. The power of God would come upon ME, and I was enabled clearly to define what is truth and what is error. As the points of our faith were thus established, our feet were placed upon a solid foundation. We accepted the truth point by point, under the demonstration of the Holy Spirit. I would be taken off in vision, and explanations would be given me. I was given illustrations of heavenly things, and of the sanctuary, so that we were placed where light was shining on us in clear, distinct rays.--Gospel Works, p. 302. {3SM 32.1}"

This is dispositive Icyspark - the points of SDA Faith had their shot to establish their Doctrines from just the Bible - they couldn't pull it off - Ellen claims that God working through her prophetic confirmation was what established the doctrines...

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Jn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Can anyone tell the Truth like Jesus did ??? <<< It is a choice in free will from GOD.

AV Ro 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

I expect the "Divine Simplicity" truth from all of GOD's people, in the unity of "Divine Simplicity".

SDA's reject Divine Simplicity, their God consists of parts.

AV Isa 58:13 If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, [from] doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking [thine own] words:

"nor speaking [thine own] words:", Do you promise to witness in GOD's Own "the Word was made flesh" ???

Does the "Divine Simplicity" lie ???

Does the "Divine Simplicity" possess "the sabbath" ???

Does the "Divine Simplicity" keep sabbath day as holy ???

AV Hb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Jesus Christ in the flesh, is "the same yesterday" in walking on earth, "to day" walking in heaven "and forever" walking in Heaven in life eternal with all the saints.

Does the "their God consists of parts" separately keep sabbath day as holy ???

---

The future holds a day where some will kill for Sunday, and GOD will remove the blessing of Life Eternal from those who believe a lie from the liar.

Some know the Truth of GOD, NOW !!!

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

Every prophet before EGW and after, has the same issue of inspiration.

Would there be free will if all had Divine Omniscience ???

This is dispositive Icyspark - the points of SDA Faith had their shot to establish their Doctrines from just the Bible - they couldn't pull it off - Ellen claims that God working through her prophetic confirmation was what established the doctrines...

AV Jn 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

So you can claim from your perspective call every doctrine not literally found in the Bible canon, is not the whole Truth of GOD then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[pythons]

SDAchristian said:
AV Jn 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

So you can claim from your perspective call every doctrine not literally found in the Bible canon, is not the whole Truth of GOD then ???

The issue I see is that ALL SDA "distinctive doctrines" depart from both the Bible and the Sacred Tradition of the Church. This is most likely why Ellen White describes that despite companies of devoted men and women meeting for the purpose of vetting NEW doctrines tying to use the Bible Alone combined with prayer couldn't get the job done. Instead, what Ellen describes as happening is that supernatural power would come into HER and that SHE was enabled to clearly define truth from error and it was THUS that SDA doctrines were established.

Like what I told Icyspark - Ellen's statements are dispositive to my point.

SDAchristian said; Would there be free will if all had Divine Omniscience ???

God has Omniscience - and as for the blasphemous hypothetical of God sinning and eternally ceasing to exist God indeed extended Omniscience about the gross error of that doctrine to us via the Scriptures in both the Old and New Testaments that repeatedly and explicitly say God would not fail in providing Salvation.

SDA's however affirm that everything Ellen White said is true and if that means God be a liar so bit it.

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
A point I make repeatedly is, Is GOD so powerless to not execute Vengeance in Judgment on sinners against GOD(in the First four of the Decalogue) ???

God has Omniscience - and as for the blasphemous hypothetical of God sinning and eternally ceasing to exist God indeed extended Omniscience about the gross error of that doctrine to us via the Scriptures in both the Old and New Testaments that repeatedly and explicitly say God would not fail in providing Salvation.

You are stuck in "the blasphemous hypothetical of God sinning", and can get past it as historically false. This does not prove it could not have happened. This one part of doctrine worth killing Adventist over ???

AV 1Jn 2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

A check of your position historically: Did Jesus sin in sabbath keeping, in the flesh while on earth ???

SDA's however affirm that everything Ellen White said is true and if that means God be a liar so bit it.

Who gets to provide GOD's perspective then ???

Is it worth killing over then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[SDAchristian]

Prologue:
AV Mt 24:37-39 But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
AV Mt 25:45-46 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did [it] not to one of the least of these, ye did [it] not to me. 46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

This universal judgment parables as it applies to all of us living in the end days before Jesus' second advent.

Like what I told Icyspark - Ellen's statements are dispositive to my point.

Okay, what if, EGW prophecies come true in the very last days, are you going to change your viewpoint ???

AV Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

What if Jesus is right about "ye that work iniquity", and many are wrong, will they deserve Jesus' judgment ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

 

[Icyspark]

Correction, it supposedly is NOW - the point I made was that according to Ellen, IT WASN'T until she visioned it....
...This is what you are dealing with - the explicit admission that SDA Doctrines could NOT be established by Bible only.
...Here it is again:

Ellen White
At that time one error after another pressed in upon us; ministers and doctors brought in new doctrines. We would search the Scriptures with much prayer, and the Holy Spirit would bring the truth to our minds. Sometimes whole nights would be devoted to searching the Scriptures and earnestly asking God for guidance. Companies of devoted men and women assembled for this purpose. The power of God would come upon ME, and I was enabled clearly to define what is truth and what is error. As the points of our faith were thus established, our feet were placed upon a solid foundation. We accepted the truth point by point, under the demonstration of the Holy Spirit. I would be taken off in vision, and explanations would be given me. I was given illustrations of heavenly things, and of the sanctuary, so that we were placed where light was shining on us in clear, distinct rays.--Gospel Works, p. 302. {3SM 32.1}"

This is dispositive Icyspark - the points of SDA Faith had their shot to establish their Doctrines from just the Bible - they couldn't pull it off - Ellen claims that God working through her prophetic confirmation was what established the doctrines...

Your inability to objectively scrutinize and analyze the words of Ellen White is already noted. However, the fact is--and this too I've already pointed out--the quote you supplied says the SCRIPTURES are what Ellen White and her contemporaries were searching and "asking God for guidance."

Ellen White​

At that time one error after another pressed in upon us; ministers and doctors brought in new doctrines. We would search the SCRIPTURES with much prayer, and the Holy Spirit would bring the truth to OUR minds. Sometimes whole nights would be devoted to searching the SCRIPTURES and earnestly asking God for guidance. Companies of devoted men and women assembled for this purpose. The power of God would come upon ME, and I was enabled clearly to define what is truth and what is error. As the points of our faith were thus established, our feet were placed upon a solid foundation. We accepted the truth point by point, under the demonstration of the Holy Spirit. I would be taken off in vision, and explanations would be given me. I was given illustrations of heavenly things, and of the sanctuary, so that we were placed where light was shining on us in clear, distinct rays.--Gospel Works, [Theres no such book as "Gospel Works." It's "Gospel Workers."] p. 302. {3SM 32.1}"​

That you and other critics of Adventism have no conception of what the gift of prophecy is, how it works, or that it is even a gift left for "the church" is also noted. If you are predisposed to reject the very idea that prophets are even a possibility for "the church" then your conclusions can really only lead to confusions. Catholics elevate a man (i.e. the pope) to the position of "the vicar of Christ," which is total blasphemy. There is ZERO biblical support for that nonsense, yet as a Catholic one must tenaciously cling to that heresy. I'm sure none of those who came up with the premise of a pope spent "whole nights searching the Scriptures and earnestly asking God for guidance." If they did then there would never have been such a heresy developed. But here we are and here you are embracing one extra biblical heresy while attempting to condemn a biblical gift left for "the church."

In the scenario above, God used His chosen servant to help settle certain issues regarding "ministers and doctors [who] brought in new doctrines." The issue was not something extra biblical, but the Holy Spirit guiding His people "to define what is truth and error." So you continue to be wrong in your imposed belief that the Adventist church does not "establish their Doctrines just from the Bible." Whether God used only Ellen White to assist Him in "defin[ing] what is truth and error," or whether He used the Holy Spirit to "bring the truth" to a multitude of minds, the fact is indisputable: our beliefs are founded solely and solidly on Scripture. Conversely what is also incontrovertible is that the Roman Catholic church has innumerable doctrines which are not only extra biblical but ANTI biblical. So for a Catholic to attempt to castigate a Christian for their adherence to the Bible is irony at its worst.

Have you ever read your Bible? If you haven't I suggest that you do so. Then run the beliefs of your church through the filter of that lens. God promises wisdom to those who ask.

 

[Buzzard]

Have you ever read your Bible? If you haven't I suggest that you do so. Then run the beliefs of your church through the filter of that lens. God promises wisdom to those who ask.

And God also promised "Strong Delusion" to those that set at naught the Scriptures
especially the words of Paul

Icy;
these words were written to:
For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those [believers] at [a]Laodicea, and for all who [like yourselves] have never seen me face to face.

Col.2:18
Let no one defraud you of your prize [your freedom in Christ and your salvation] by insisting on mock humility and the worship of angels, going into detail about visions [he claims] he has seen [to justify his authority],
puffed up [in conceit] by his unspiritual mind,

and Ellen goes on and on and on about all her "Visions" and her "Angel"
on and on and on and on; millions of words in print
about visions [he she claims] she has seen [to justify her authority], puffed up [in conceit] by her unspiritual mind,

 

[pythons]

divine simplicity as no parts is a greek concept referring to the pagan view of divinity, a concept adopted by greek affected roman christian theology.

i agree with the desire to be true to God… which is why we all discuss here… and why i say most kindly — we cannot rely on greek philosophy.

a problem is that modern christianity, affected by greek theology, forgot God is affected and relies on His souls and needs us and He hurts. Love by definition allows vulnerability.

the unaffected, impervious god is described by plato in the phaedo dialogue, which i taught to my college students. and yes i pointed out plato is not christian and has views not belonging to God’s reality.

that’s where the divine simplicity concept and, other ones too, originate…. plato.

from what i see on the forums all the denominations could be free of plato…

Its simply logic eve21.

Ancient Judaism didn't believe in a flesh hominid God.

It so happened that the ancient Greeks had more precise language than did the ancient Jews - the Church leveraged that as it should have.

 

[pythons]

Icyspark said: Your inability to objectively scrutinize and analyze the words of Ellen White is already noted. However, the fact is--and this too I've already pointed out--the quote you supplied says the SCRIPTURES are what Ellen White and her contemporaries were searching and "asking God for guidance."

Yes, they were all earnestly searching the Scriptures to see if those proposed "new doctrines" were truth or error and as you can clearly read desire coupled with a copy of the Bible did nothing to confirm truth from error. Ellen White said she had the power given to her to do that.

Icyspark said: That you and other critics of Adventism have no conception of what the gift of prophecy is, how it works, or that it is even a gift left for "the church" is also noted. If you are predisposed to reject the very idea that prophets are even a possibility for "the church" then your conclusions can really only lead to confusions. Catholics elevate a man (i.e. the pope) to the position of "the vicar of Christ," which is total blasphemy. There is ZERO biblical support for that nonsense, yet as a Catholic one must tenaciously cling to that heresy. I'm sure none of those who came up with the premise of a pope spent "whole nights searching the Scriptures and earnestly asking God for guidance." If they did then there would never have been such a heresy developed. But here we are and here you are embracing one extra biblical heresy while attempting to condemn a biblical gift left for "the church."

I don't discount Prophets in the Church, its a valid position to be sure - what I'm saying is that PUBLIC REVELATION ended with the death of the last Apostle. SDA's, to my understanding, hold what Ellen White said to be "public revelation" (as opposed to private revelation). Is this not true Icyspark or am I wrong in claiming this????

Icyspark said:
In the scenario above, God used His chosen servant to help settle certain issues regarding "ministers and doctors [who] brought in new doctrines." The issue was not something extra biblical, but the Holy Spirit guiding His people "to define what is truth and error." So you continue to be wrong in your imposed belief that the Adventist church does not "establish their Doctrines just from the Bible." Whether God used only Ellen White to assist Him in "defin[ing] what is truth and error," or whether He used the Holy Spirit to "bring the truth" to a multitude of minds, the fact is indisputable: our beliefs are founded solely and solidly on Scripture. Conversely what is also incontrovertible is that the Roman Catholic church has innumerable doctrines which are not only extra biblical but ANTI biblical. So for a Catholic to attempt to castigate a Christian for their adherence to the Bible is irony at its worst.

Have you ever read your Bible? If you haven't I suggest that you do so. Then run the beliefs of your church through the filter of that lens. God promises wisdom to those who ask.

These new doctrines didn't come from Martin Luther, the Greek Orthodox or the Methodists - that's why Ellen White said "NEW"...
...These would be doctrines DISTINCTIVE or apart from other Christian denominations.
...Point here is Ellen would confirm the new doctrine with a VISION - not Scripture.

I've spent quite a bit of time reading the Bible.

 

[e v e 21]

Its simply logic eve21.

Ancient Judaism didn't believe in a flesh hominid God.

It so happened that the ancient Greeks had more precise language than did the ancient Jews - the Church leveraged that as it should have.

i feel very uncomfortable taking anything at all from greek philosophy, augustine, aquinas.

i simply cannot.

what i’ve said against divine simplicity doesn’t mean i agree with a hominid god in the current state we are in (fleshbodies)…as you mentioned.


i feel that scripture is perfect and we don’t need greek language overlaying it . (I mean perfect what He speaks, I am not referring to translations which are men’s effort to interpret what He speaks.) often scripture refers to the other world. such that it is literal but not in relation to literal upon this earth and neither being abstract greek forms with their simplicity.

the greek version is very satanic and after years teaching at university and having read and taught the texts… i must reject them all and included in that rejection being aquinas’ summa… an entirely pagan work. and all of augustine.

that’s my take… i realize im outnumbered and many disagree.

 

[pythons]

i feel very uncomfortable taking anything at all from greek philosophy, augustine, aquinas.

i simply cannot.

what i’ve said against divine simplicity doesn’t mean i agree with a hominid god in the current state we are in (fleshbodies)…as you mentioned.


i feel that scripture is perfect and we don’t need greek language overlaying it . (I mean perfect what He speaks, I am not referring to translations which are men’s effort to interpret what He speaks.) often scripture refers to the other world. such that it is literal but not in relation to literal upon this earth and neither being abstract greek forms with their simplicity.

the greek version is very satanic and after years teaching at university and having read and taught the texts… i must reject them all and included in that rejection being aquinas’ summa… an entirely pagan work. and all of augustine.

that’s my take… i realize im outnumbered and many disagree.

I appreciate your candid openness / honesty.

 

[Buzzard]

[
Michael says

Prologue:
AV Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

Michael;
Ellen wasn't "from ancient times" in fact she came right on time as Paul says of such
that will arise in the Church of the Laodiceans,

For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those [believers] at [a]Laodicea, and for all who [like yourselves] have never seen me face to face.​

​

Col.2:18​

Let no one defraud you of your prize [your freedom in Christ and your salvation] by insisting on mock humility and the worship of angels, going into detail about visions [he claims] he has seen [to justify his authority],​

puffed up [in conceit] by his unspiritual mind,​

​

Every prophet before EGW and after, has the same issue of inspiration.

and just who would be these prophets; as you posted
" and after" EGW

Matt.24:8​

11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.​

​

care to inform us who these "MacNuttlies" of Adventism are

AV Jn 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

So you can claim from your perspective call every doctrine not literally found in the Bible canon, is not the whole Truth of GOD then ???

Yours in Christ, Michael

Michael;

"To the law and to the testimony:"

Isaiah 8:20​

And when they shall say unto you,​

Seek unto them that have familiar spirits,​

and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter:​

should not a people seek unto their God?​

​

20 To the law and to the testimony:​

if they speak not according to this word,​

it is because there is no light in them.​

​

any """"""NEW""""" Doctrine" is still subject to Isaiah 8
"To the law and to the testimony:"
and the Testimony of Christ is

Matt.24:9
Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted,
and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations
for my name's sake.
-----------------------
Michael.
Christ said His Name Sake;
not some Sunday Law
why are you so blind to the words of Christ

 

[Common Tater]

divine simplicity as no parts is a greek concept referring to the pagan view of divinity, a concept adopted by greek affected roman christian theology.

i agree with the desire to be true to God… which is why we all discuss here… and why i say most kindly — we cannot rely on greek philosophy.

a problem is that modern christianity, affected by greek theology, forgot God is affected and relies on His souls and needs us and He hurts. Love by definition allows vulnerability.

the unaffected, impervious god is described by plato in the phaedo dialogue, which i taught to my college students. and yes i pointed out plato is not christian and has views not belonging to God’s reality.

that’s where the divine simplicity concept and, other ones too, originate…. plato.

from what i see on the forums all the denominations could be free of plato…

Is Christianity's belief that the Holy Spirit exists without a body based upon Greek philosophy? Is Christianity's belief that angels exist without a body based upon Greek philosophy? Is Christianity's belief that God created time and space, and that a body occupies 3-dimensional space, and that God is spirit as theBible says, and that it makes no sense that He would have had a physical body that existed before He created space based upon Greek philosophy?

I'd suggest that Adventists believe that the Father has a body is based upon Ellen White saying it was so.

 

[pythons]

Is Christianity's belief that the Holy Spirit exists without a body based upon Greek philosophy? Is Christianity's belief that angels exist without a body based upon Greek philosophy? Is Christianity's belief that God created time and space, and that a body occupies 3-dimensional space, and that God is spirit as theBible says, and that it makes no sense that He would have had a physical body that existed before He created space based upon Greek philosophy?

I'd suggest that Adventists believe that the Father has a body is based upon Ellen White saying it was so.

Good point!

Ellen also claimed her visions taught that angels were flesh hominids with Lucifer and Michael the archangels having bodies of flesh.

 

[e v e 21]

Is Christianity's belief that the Holy Spirit exists without a body based upon Greek philosophy? Is Christianity's belief that angels exist without a body based upon Greek philosophy? Is Christianity's belief that God created time and space, and that a body occupies 3-dimensional space, and that God is spirit as theBible says, and that it makes no sense that He would have had a physical body that existed before He created space based upon Greek philosophy?

I'd suggest that Adventists believe that the Father has a body is based upon Ellen White saying it was so.

I don’t see anything at all in Christianity is based on Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy is basically a theology of Greek so called ‘gods’.

Christians only worship God.

Flesh cannot enter heaven so neither we or God have these fleshbodies in paradise, what paul found so abhorrent.
Our resurrection bodies are not fleshbodies.

 

[pythons]

I don’t see anything at all in Christianity is based on Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy is basically a theology of Greek so called ‘gods’.

Christians only worship God.

Flesh cannot enter heaven so neither we or God have these fleshbodies in paradise, what paul found so abhorrent.
Our resurrection bodies are not fleshbodies.

I disagree with that - you've departed from historic Christianity radically there.

 

[e v e 21]

I disagree with that - you've departed from historic Christianity radically there.

what was the departure?

thank you.