You are not logged in.
Chris, I gave you a comprehensive, 12 point list of much needed Adventist Reforms. You only responded to a few points, so I don't know if that means you agree with the other points or that you did not review them.
I suggest that you take more time to understand these points that define Adventist Reform for the 21st century. These issues are a package deal, and they must be grasped by anyone that wants to the see the Advent Movement come back to life. There is nothing to be gained by living in denial, pretending that the SDA's have no errors or false doctrine. Such a dishonest, arrogant, and pharisaical attitude makes it very difficult for any Laodiceans to distinguish myth and propaganda from historical fact and true doctrine. I hope that you will not make this typical SDA mistake.
The White Estate
The White Estate is referenced in points 3, 4, 6. So they play a key role in Adventist Reform. This makes sense because they are responsible for much of the false doctrine and dishonest history that has come to represent Traditional, Takoma Park Adventism.
While you expressed doubt about the guilt of the White Estate, let me assure you that they have committed great sin and error, even a crime. They have orchestrated the largest fraud in the history of the modern Protestant church, even as they have misrepresented Ellen White's life work and her fundamental beliefs to the world. Let there be no doubt that the White Estate has not been honest or truthful with the public or the Adventist Community. They have violated their charter and broken the law, and they will be held accountable.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Estate.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm
As for Arthur White, I met with him in 1979 when I was researching in the Archives and White Estate. Because I had discovered a large collection of documents about 1888, I was ushered in to meet the legendary and stern Arthur White, the grandson of Ellen White, and the most influential Adventist in the 20th century. Although I was only a theology student in my late 20's, I nonetheless confronted him, in person and in writing, about the misrepresentation of the 1888 debates.
While he refused to admit any wrongdoing, others were forced to agree that there were some obvious problems. As a result of that meeting, the White Estate's premier book about the history of 1888 underwent a dramatic name change. Instead of the glowing and positive title called: "Crisis To Victory" the revised title would become "13 Crisis Years". A description that fit much better with the newly discovered documents about 1888 that were being suppressed by the church.
Although the rest of the book also needed to be reworked and corrected, the church was not about to admit any wrongdoing in public. At the time they were battling with Walter Rea and Dr. Ford, and Arthur Whites fraud was the last thing they wanted the critics or the public to know. So they covered up the discovery of these hidden documents, many of which were found in the White Estate, and pretended that all was well, when in fact a great fraud had been discovered and explained to the church leaders BEFORE Glacier View took place.
However, the hypocritical conservatives were too busy trying to find a way to remove Dr. Fords Gospel theology from the church, which they claimed did not have any support from Ellen White. So they dismissed the facts, which proved them wrong and went forward with Glacier View anyway. The entire trial was based on the fraudulent testimony from the White Estate about Ellen White's theology and beliefs. But few knew it.
While Glacier View represented a triumph for Arthur White and the Conservatives, it was a disaster for the Advent Movement. It made official the fraud of the White Estate, even as a new Creed was developed to buttress this historic scam. But few knew there was any fraud taking place. And many today still have no idea what really took place back in 1980, or that Ellen White did not support the positions of the leaders, much less the exile of Dr. Ford and his correct theology about the Gospel, Judgment, and the Three Angels Messages.
Few people understand that Arthur White controlled and manipulated all the information about Ellen White from the 1930's until 1980 when he retired. The White Estate was like a fortress that held state secrets. Few were allowed to see the materials in the vault, much of which was off limits to the public and scholars.
Thus, the White Estate's version of Ellen White was imprinted on the Adventist psyche through a nonstop campaign of magazines, books, and sermons, as well as the Sabbath School lessons, school textbooks, and even the church manual. Even though Ellen White was long dead, it was as if the White Estate had brought her back to life, and they made sure that everyone knew her "inspired" viewpoints.
The White Estate essentially defined and controlled 20th century Adventism, even as they became a propaganda machine that promoted Ellen White as if she wrote scripture. There was not a point of doctrine or behavior where the White Estate had not worked out a detailed position that was supposedly based on Ellen White's "inspiration." Whether it was about the law or the Gospel, eschatology or diet, Sabbath keeping or dress, The White Estate put out what they claimed was Ellen White's position on every possible point and situation.
But guess what? Arthur White's version was a fraud. His published view about Ellen White's theology is VERY DIFFERENT what Ellen White really believed and taught. Which means that Traditional Adventism, as defined by the Takoma Park apologists and made official at Glacier View, is a sham. Ellen White does not support it, and the White Estate had the documents in their possession that proved this fact all along. This is why they were hiding them. They didn't like what the real Ellen White believed, especially after 1888, so they hid her more mature writings, and promoted her earlier views.
It was Arthur White's story of church history and doctrine that became normative and orthodox for all modern SDA's; it was his version of 1888 that all have been taught, and his version of hermeneutics, salvation, and eschatology that were being promoted in the name of Ellen White. Consequently, the SDA church today is based on the fraud and manipulation of Ellen White by Arthur White. What all SDA's have been taught about Ellen White and her views has been so badly tainted and manipulated that no one should trust anything that the White Estate promotes. They are a den of iniquity and fraud.
While many think they are following Ellen White by embracing Traditional Adventism and supporting the 28 Fundamentals, they are doing no such thing, because she has very different views from Arthur White about most everything. Ellen White does not support the SDA Creed that was developed in conjunction with Glacier View in 1980. She would condemn Arthur White and all those that have helped him hide and manipulate her writings over the years, and so should we today.
Let me be blunt; Arthur White is the most incompetent and dishonest church leader that the SDAs have ever produced. He is so wrong about so much that it is amazing that the Denomination still supports his lifelong work, pretending that he was honest and true when the opposite was the case all along.
Arthur White has caused more damage to Ellen White and the Advent Cause then all the critics combined. He must be posthumously censored and denounced for what he has done, even as the White Estate must confess, repent, and correct the record. The Advent Movement cannot go forward until this criminal and embarrassing situation is corrected.
As for your concern that I was taking Ellen White out of context, this is not what happened. You asked about "a time" when Ellen White prophesied that the movement would need to get back to the basics or fundamentals again. I responded with one of her earliest and most important comments about this.
Your assumption that I was ignoring the context and trying to "project" my version of the LM is false. I gave you Ellen White's earliest views of the Shaking. In that passage, she clearly says that the future Adventist Community will be shaken, upset, and reformed by a powerful articulation of the LM. This eschatological message features wholesale repentance for false doctrine, as well as Gospel Reform.
Although she did not articulate the details of how this would unfold, it has become clear that the SDA church has much to repent about, even the doctrine of the Sabbath, which they have wrong.
Moreover, your assumption that I have somehow ignored the Moral law is incorrect. You need to pay closer attention to what is being said and what is not. Neither the Roman Catholics nor the Protestants have ever taken the position that the 10 Commandments have been removed from the NT, and neither am I. So you have misunderstood my position about the law and the Gospel.
As for the Sabbath, which is always a major point for SDA's, I am not saying that they have the wrong day, they don't; but they do have the wrong doctrine. They have embraced the Sabbath of the Pharisees and the Judaizers, not the Gospel Sabbath that Jesus taught in the NT.
So the Seventh Day Sabbath, as reformed by Jesus, IS BINDING on the church. In fact, the Seventh-day Sabbath is just as binding on the church as are the rest of the nine commandments. Not for salvation of course, because no sinner is saved by keeping the law. But the Moral law is still the standard of conduct for all of mankind, including the church, and thus the 4th Commandment, as REFORMED BY JESUS, and set forth in the Gospels, is binding on the church.
The problem with the SDA's is that they have made the Old Covenant Sabbath binding instead of the Gospel Sabbath, which is very different. They do not understand the law or the Gospel correctly, or the interrelationship between the Two Covenants. (See #s 3, 6 of the Reform Agenda)
As for new theology, here is some for you to digest; # 9 deals with the Pre - Advent Judgment of the church, here a new interpretation for all Adventists to consider. If embraced, it will revitalize the Advent Movement and lead to the development of the 4th Angels Message of Rev 18.
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1154462379
As for the issue of wine, which is #7 on the Adventist Reform agenda, you and the SDA's are wrong. Wine in the Bible is not grape juice, and anyone that has embraced this silly myth, needs to become educated on the topic and repent. The Gospel Story includes real wine, not pasteurized Grape Juice. Those that say otherwise are repudiating history, mocking the Gospel, and disenfranchising themselves from Eternal Life.
Here are some facts from the Bible Review for your edification. This article explains, among other things, how grape Juice came into the church, --and it was not only the SDA's that made this blunder. All SDA's, and some others, would do well to read and understand the truth about wine versus grape juice.
Jesus the Teetotaler
by: Michael M. Homan and Mark A. Gstohl
Jesus drank wine;Mark 14:23-25; Matthew 26:27-29; Luke 22:17-18. He even produced wine: When the alcohol supply dwindled at the wedding in Cana, a youthful Jesus turned six jars of water—holding 20 to 30 gallons each—into wine;John 2:1-11. Pretty impressive for a guy's first miracle.
For centuries, Christians have commemorated Jesus imbibition at the Last Supper by drinking wine during Holy Communion. The Catholic Church has always used wine during Eucharistic celebrations, as did all Protestant denominations until just over a century ago. Martin Luther along with John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli agreed that wine should be used in the celebration of the Eucharist.
Why then do several Protestant denominations in America—including many Methodist and Southern Baptist churches—claim that Jesus never drank alcohol?
Ironically , it was the European wine industry that put in motion the idea of a teetotaling Jesus, by financing Louis Pasteur's research to find a method to destroy the bacteria that were spoiling their vintages.
In 1865 Pasteur discovered that the bacteria in liquids such as wine, beer and milk could be killed by heating the liquid to a temperature of about 140°F for about 25 minutes. The process, which came to be known as "pasteurization" did not alter the liquid's taste or alcohol level.
Pasteur's experiments were noted across the Atlantic Ocean by a Vineland, Massachusetts, dentist named Dr. Thomas Bramwell Welch. Welch, a pious Methodist communion steward, was becoming increasingly disturbed that many of his fellow parishioners were having a hard time stopping with just one drink at communion on Sundays. Welch felt they were profaning the Sabbath by continuing to drink in their homes and in taverns after services. He set out to produce a preservable nonalcoholic grape juice.
Welch simply applied the pasteurization process to freshly squeezed grape juice, rather than the fermented juice Pasteur used. In 1869, he succeeded in producing the first preserved nonalcoholic fruit juice.
Welch's invention rapidly took off due to both his religious conviction and his astute business sense.
Gradually, religious communities began serving what they called unfermented sacramental wine at Sunday communions. The Evangelistic Department of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union in 1874 included a division devoted entirely to securing the use of unfermented wine at the Lord's Table. In 1891, Tennessee Baptists proposed a resolution requiring churches to serve only unfermented wine, but the motion created some controversy among those Baptists who interpreted the Bible literally.
The resolution was tabled. The Congregationalist Moses Stuart advanced a "two-wine theory" using scriptural and historical evidence to suggest that the Bible must be describing two types of wine—fermented and unfermented. Jesus, they proposed, drank only the latter. Some Baptists as well as Christians from many other traditions adopted Stuart's view. Yet this view was refuted by John A. Broadus, a prominent 19th-century Baptist scholar who claimed that Jesus drank wine simply because it was part of his culture. If Jesus had lived in the 19th century, Broadus suggested, he would have drunk coffee or tea. Gerrit Smith, a New York philanthropist active in the temperance movement, argued that if Jesus had known about the evil effects of alcohol, he would have used grape juice. He also claimed that those who followed Jesus practice and drank wine at communion were committing a sin.
Welch's son Charles, who introduced thousands to grape juice at the 1893 Chicago World's Fair, wrote in his will: "Unfermented grape juice was born in 1869 out of a passion to serve God by helping His church to give its communion" the fruit of the vine, instead of the "cup of devils."
Proponents of a teetotaling Jesus have gone to great lengths to argue that Jesus abstained from alcohol. Some have argued that pasteurization was known 2,000 years before its inventor was born, while others have made the equally absurd claim that all of the wine in the Bible was freshly squeezed grape juice.
But wine was esteemed in Jesus world, as is reflected in the use of the Greek word for wine, oinos, 26 times in the New Testament. This elite heritage is mirrored in the Hebrew Bible, where four terms for grape wine; yayin, tirosh, hemer and asis occur 185 times. These biblical citations include prohibitions against drunkenness—further evidence that the biblical beverage was most certainly not nonalcoholic;Proverbs 20:1; Isaiah 28:1; Titus 1:7.
Jesus imbibitions of alcohol are by no means a negative aspect, however, as consuming both wine and beer in moderation is frequently praised in both the Hebrew Bible; Isaiah 24:9; Proverbs 31:6; Ecclesiastes 10:19 and the New Testament;1 Timothy 5:23. Wine is consumed in the covenant meal between Moses and Yahweh on Mt. Sinai's summit;Exodus 24:11. If libations can be understood as alimentary in function, than ancient Israel clearly believed God had a deep thirst. The Israelites offer Yahweh libations of 3 1/3 hins;about 13 bottles of wine on the first of each month;Numbers 28:14 and four hins;about 8 cases or 192 12-ounce cans of beer;shekar; per week;Numbers 28:7-10.
Textual evidence, as well as preserved ancient wine and wine residue, all indicate that Jesus' wine—like that drunk throughout the Greco-Roman world—was likely sweeter, more concentrated, and held a higher level of alcohol than most modern vintages. (12.5%) For more on the kind of wine drunk at the Last Supper, see the forthcoming article by Elizabeth Lyding Will in BR #39's sister magazine, Archaeology Odyssey.
However, wine was rarely consumed undiluted in first-century C.E. Israel. So the Book of Macabees recommends: "Just as it is harmful to drink wine alone, or, again, to drink water alone [!] ... wine mixed with water is sweet and delicious and enhances one"s enjoyment;2 Macabees 15:39.
The faulty notion that Jesus drank nonalcoholic grape juice simply places the cultural baggage of the modern temperance movement on first-century C.E. Israel. • Bible Review
-------------------------------------------------- ------
So much for this absurd myth that wine in the Bible is grape juice! Away with such silly and childish myths! The Gospel Story is not subject to our manipulation or traditions, nor do we control what the apostle's say or teach, much less the culture in which they lived. Here is some more discussion about this topic.
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1228284303
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … l#POST9564
It is very dangerous to manipulate the Bible and try to make it say what we want. Those that do so are obscuring the Word, which is the primary revelation of God to man. All those in Laodicea are very guilty and forcing the scriptures to say what they want they want to hear. This is why there are so many different doctrines and traditions. Such distortions of the Gospel Story are fatal if not corrected.
Eternal Life is only for those that accept the Gospel as it was delivered by the apostles. Salvation is not for those that wish to change or distort the Gospel Story. Which is what the entire Laodicean Church, including the SDA's, has done. None of them have true or correct doctrine today.
I suggest that you study these issues more carefully. The religious world is full of false doctrines and worthless traditions. And the SDA's are the worst offenders. They have one false doctrine piled on top of another until they have built a Laodicean house of false doctrine on the sand of Sabbatarian double talk that cannot stand.
All should beware of SDA doctrine; it is full of much error, myth, and historical fraud. This is why the Adventist Church in America and Europe is dying. It is self-destructing because the Denomination refuses to confess their many errors and embrace Gospel Reform. And it will continue to falter until there is zealous repentance for what has happened in the White Estate, as well as what took place at Glacier View and 1888.
The 12-point Reform Agenda will save the Advent Movement. I suggest that you read it more carefully. It represents the correct path.
I hope this answers some of your many questions and gives you enough information for further study into both church history and doctrine. The Advent Movement is dying for lack of honesty and common sense. Make sure that you lack neither.
Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform
Last edited by tom_norris (03-21-10 8:45 pm)
Offline
Tom...a private book sale you might be interested in!!!!
Truth or Fables
April 9, 2009
I am reducing the size of my library and offering to sell very old Ellen G. White and SDA books.
This should be of interest to those that collect old SDA books and that live in the United States.
To see the books click on the URL link showing the books.
If electricity comes from electrons, does morality come from morons?
Offline
Chris, have you read how Tom would have the Adventists observe the Sabbath?
He tells us that Jesus came and changed the way Sabbath was always observed by the Israelites. If Jesus really did this then how should we view the statement by Jesus in Matt 5:18? I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
I guess the Sabbath isn't part of the law or Tom is blowing hot air.
Tom would have Adventists believe it is perfectly fine to work at their secular jobs on Saturday. It is okey to go to sports events or do almost anything the heart desires. Mrs. White never said that. she was very specific in the way Sabbath was to be kept. If her flock veered from her teachings she let them know they were not going to receive their eternal reward.
While I do believe Arthur White was not truthful in his role as head of the White Estate, this did come naturally because he was chip off the old block Ellen. Ellen was a fraud and I believe Arthur knew it and kept the truth from us. Tom testifies of that.
Offline
John said: Tom...a private book sale you might be interested in!!!!
Thanks for the info, but I either have these books in my library or have access to them. In fact, I have a number of very rare Adventist books from the 19th century, including a few by Uriah Smith that most people know nothing about. But thanks anyway.
Bob said: Chris, have you read how Tom would have the Adventists observe the Sabbath? He tells us that Jesus came and changed the way Sabbath was always observed by the Israelites.
All SDA's should READ the Sabbath debates between Jesus and the Pharisees in the Gospels. This is the proper source for all Christians to understand how the Sabbath functions in the New Covenant.
Bob said: If Jesus really did this then how should we view the statement by Jesus in Matt 5:18? I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
I can assure you that Jesus has a lot to say about the Sabbath in the Gospels. So if the NT is to be trusted, then the teaching of Jesus about the Sabbath must also be embraced. But understand, Jesus is not removing the Sabbath, nor changing it to Sunday.
Rather, he is interpreting the Sabbath in a manner that is consistent with how the Levitical Priests observed it. Which was very different from how all others were taught and commanded. The Priests had to work on the Sabbath. So there is no real conflict with the law as you, and the Pharisees imagined. Jesus is making a very subtle and deep observation, which has been overlooked by most all.
Bob said: I guess the Sabbath isn't part of the law or Tom is blowing hot air.
Of course the Sabbath is part of the Moral law. This is why it can never become Sunday, and why it can never be removed from the duty of the church.
Jesus did not promote the NO WORK Sabbath of the Jews. Rather, he promoted the WORKING, ACTIVE Sabbath from the perspective of how the Levites observed it. Jesus knew that after the cross all those that embraced the NC would become priests of God. All Christians, regardless of their gender or Nationality, automatically become NC priests and thus the OC Sabbath rules prohibiting work no longer apply.
So there is an OC Sabbath, which is very different from the NC version.
Do not confuse the schoolmaster Sabbath with the Gospel Sabbath. This is a great error that the SDAs have obviously embraced with both hands. Why? Because they are so OC minded that they couldn't understand much of anything as it relates to the Gospel. They failed to understand the Gospel or the Gospel Sabbath.
At the end of time, the Gospel, and the Gospel Sabbath, will stun the church and prove it to be so wrong about most everything that it will pave the way for a great Reformation. Thus opening the eyes of the blind Laodiceans, including the SDA's, that have most everything wrong.
Bob said: Tom would have Adventists believe it is perfectly fine to work at their secular jobs on Saturday.
Ha! Tom Norris is not an apostle, so he has no doctrinal authority whatsoever. He is not the source for any doctrine, as this role is exclusively reserved for the apostles that wrote scripture.
It is Jesus who stood up and shocked the Jews with his new interpretation of the Sabbath, not Tom Norris. It is Jesus who infuriated the Pharisees with his teaching that God works on the Sabbath and he will do so as well.
So your dispute is with the NT, and Jesus, not Tom Norris.
All SDA's need to better understand the Sabbath teaching of Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath. They have misunderstood much.
Bob said: It is okay to go to sports events or do almost anything the heart desires. Mrs. White never said that. She was very specific in the way Sabbath was to be kept. If her flock veered from her teachings she let them know they were not going to receive their eternal reward.
Ha! Ellen White has no doctrinal authority either. And her Sabbath record is not very impressive. She has made many mistakes about this doctrine, as JN Andrews would be happy to explain. So she is not to be considered an expert on either the Gospel or the Gospel Sabbath.
Moreover, she did not understand the Gospel until late in her life, and by that time, the SDA's were too busy self-destructing to even understand such a Gospel concept.
The Gospel Sabbath is very different from the OC, legalistic Sabbath of the Jews and the SDA's. At this point, you are having a difficult time understanding this important difference. But if you study this issue, it will become clear.
As to how secular the Gospel Sabbath, that is a matter for the church to deal with and understand. But before that, they have to repudiate their OC Sabbath and embrace the active, priestly, Gospel Sabbath.
Bob said: While I do believe Arthur White was not truthful in his role as head of the White Estate, this did come naturally because he was chip off the old block Ellen. Ellen was a fraud and I believe Arthur knew it and kept the truth from us. Tom testifies of that.
While Arthur White has turned out to be a cultic fool who has manipulated and falsified the life story of Ellen White, it is not fair to say that Ellen White is also a dangerous fraud. This is not what the record shows and it is absurd to try and make this connection.
Tom Norris can prove that Arthur White was running a massive fraud in the White Estate for 40 years. Like Bernie Maddof, and others who abuse their trust over a long period of time, Arthur White has turned out to be a dangerous and delusional criminal that has ruined the lives of many people by his fraud. He has conspired with others to promote this scam, which has extorted many, under false pretenses, to give their money to the SDA's. So this is a crime about money and power, like all others. It has been discovered, and it will not stand.
At some point, the authorities will be brought in, just like with the Maddof scam. This scam should have been stopped many years ago, but people refused to believe something like this was going on.
But some had caught on to his massive Wall Street fraud many years ago, but no one would believe them. I was amused when the regulators were called in front of congress to explain why they had refused to listen to those that had brought them evidence of a crime? They had no excuse for allowing this to go on for so long. They looked the other way and refused to take action, and many people were harmed.
The General Conference had done the very same thing. They too have had the evidence of Author White's crime placed before them. But they have chosen, over and over, to pretend that all is well when that is obviously not the case. They are in big trouble and it is only a matter of time before the law starts to work.
There is no escape for what the White Estate has done. They are guilty as sin and they are going to have to face up to what they have done, and explain why they have refused to come out and tell the truth about all this. This is a most serious matter that is not going to go away.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Last edited by tom_norris (03-27-10 12:09 pm)
Offline
Tom,
What is the future of the reform movement in the SDA movement? The future of this movement can best be foretold by looking at how this movement developed in its immaturity and infancy.
Adventism was born as an apocalyptic” oriented movement which saw itself as the fulfillment of all the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, not just the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14, but also
• the fulfillment of final churches of Philadelphia and Laodicea
•the “wise virgins” of Matthew 25,
•the falling of the stars, community of the sixth seal of Revelation 6:12,
•the seal of God community of Revelation 7,
•the “great disappointment, community of Revelation 10 who believed that they ate the little book of Daniel and therefore understood for the first time in the history of the Christian church the prophecies of Daniel 7, 8, and 9 and that the words of Revelation 10 that “time shall be no more” referred to the “time” prophecy of Daniel 8:14 and the cleansing of the sanctuary and the beginning of the Day of Atonement and the Hour of His Judgment
• the post French Revolution" community of Revelation 11 which measures the temple in heaven and thinks that its sees the beginning of the high priestly ministration of Christ in the Most Holy Place in heaven,
•the post 1260 days/years community of Revelation 12 which is called to keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus
• the seal of God community which warns the world against the mark of the beast of the apostate Roman/Apostate Protestant union,
• the three angels proclamation community of Revelation 14,
• the 144,000 community of Revelation 14,
• the community which is about to live through the terrible seven last plaguesof God's final wrath of Revelation 15,
• the perfected community which lives without a mediator in heaven when no one is able to enter the temple during the seven last plagues
• the loud cry community of Revelation 18 which denounces the sins and errors of the final world union of the apostate Roman church with apostate Protestantism and Spiritualism,
• the Spirit of Prophecy community of Revelation 19:10,
• the millennial" community which will live between the first and second resurrection,
• the final Bride of Christ/New Jerusalem community which will be married to our Lord just before He leaves the heavenly sanctuary, and finally
• the community which will live in the beautiful city which is 12,000 furlongs wide, 12,000 furlongs long, and whose walls are 12,000 furlongs high.
Something happened however in the year 1888 which suddenly shook the little Adventist community to its core. It began to discover that the Gospel of the bible teaches that God justifies poor lost sinners, which all of us are by nature by God’s unmerited grace alone through faith alone in the sinless life and atoning death of Christ alone as revealed in the Bible alone.
The far-reaching implications of this discovery/recovery of the everlasting Gospel were to give the Advent Movement an entirely new self identity which most of those involved in the movement saw as a threat to their tiny apocalyptic movement and their narrow sectarian interpretations of not only the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation but also their understanding of every area of systematic theology: Christology, Soteriology, Eschatology, Anthropology, Harmatiology, Hermeneutics, and Ecclesiology. For the first time in her history Adventism was forced to come to realize that the Protestant Reformation was much bigger than the mere confines of her sectarian borders. For the first time Adventism was told that it had “many things to learn and many, many things to unlearn”.
One of the first things that needed to be learned by the humble advent believers is that the prophecies of Daniel had met their primary fulfillment in the sinless person and atoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ upon the cross of Calvary. The “Kingdom of God” had broken into the stream of sin-ridden history in the sinless life, atoning death, resurrection from the dead, and enthronement of the Lord Jesus Christ. The “Kingdom of God” and the enthronement of Jesus Christ as Priest/King had begun under the New and Everlasting Covenant. The “judgment of the world” had commenced in the proclamation of the “Good News of the Kingdom”. All the world was being judged according to the startling proclamation that the kingdoms of this world Babylon had fallen and that “Jesus Christ is Lord”. He is now set down upon His throne and is judging the nations and calling them to repentance and faith in the Lamb of God who has taken away the sins of the world through His vicarious sufferings and death. All who bow the knee to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and are putting their faith in His blood have the verdict of “life” now and even unto the final judgment Day when His kingdom and lordship will be openly revealed in power and great glory. This is the primary meaning of all of the “time” prophecies of Daniel.
The book of Daniel was unsealed, not in 1844, but in the annunciation by the angel Gabriel to a young Jewish girl named Mary.
Luke 1:30-33 Then the angel said to her, Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name JESUS. 32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.
It was Gabriel who sealed up the book of Daniel until the “time of the end” and it was Gabriel who unsealed the prophecy of Daniel 2, 7, 8, 9-12. Jesus Christ, Messiah is the complete fulfillment of all of the symbols and “times” of Daniel’s “vision”.
It is in the book of Revelation that the apostle John now recasts the symbols of Daniel in the setting of Christian era and the Christian church throughout her earthly sojourn. The setting of Revelation is now the judgment throne of Jesus Christ reigning in heaven and also the trials and sufferings of the church upon the earth. The “seven” churches are representative of Christs world-wide church upon the earth through all of her hardships and tribulations. Just as our Lord ministered for 3 and ½ years so the church witnesses and prophesies for “3 and ½ years” or “1260 Days”.
The angelic hosts carry out the divine judgments upon the unbelieving kingdom of the Beast through the unsealing of the everlasting covenant with its blessings and curses: “Curses” to the wicked kingdom of darkness and “blessings” to the 144,000 faithful remnant of Christ. The 144,000 represent those who are of the “election of faith” the royal nation who gather at the heavenly sanctuary on the great Day of Atonement while their heavenly High Priest makes intercession for them through the incense of the merits of His atonement which was made “one and for all” at Calvary. The church in her wilderness wanderings suffers at the hands of the Dagon but finally she is delivered from the hand of her Enemy and she will see with her own eyes the ultimate fate of those who worship the Dragon, the Beast, the Image to the Beast, and believe the False Prophet. These symbols of evil did not begin in AD 538-1798 they represent Satan’s kingdom since the apostolic era. The image to the Beast did not arise merely with the rise of the USA but it arose in the great “falling away” of the first century AD with the inroads of the judaizing Gnostics.
Apocalyptic literature in the bible must be seen as having an ongoing application to every generation of the Christian church in every phase of her journey towards the Final Day.
Bill Diehl, editor
Present Truth Magazine Online
www.PresentTruthMag.org
Offline
Tom said: Bill, I am sorry to see that you have so little interest for Consummated Eschatology. Your obsession with Realized Eschatology places you outside the Adventist paradigm and leaves you in a very strange and confused place. I thought you were a Reformed Adventist, but I have obviously misunderstood.
It seems like you do not believe that the Advent Movement is credible, even as you are very dismissive of the Three Angels Messages, which you do not clearly or correctly understand.
Your confused attempt to defend the IJ as the PAJ is laughable, and so too is your view that the Jews are wrong in their interpretation of Dan 8: 14. I did not realize that you were in such a fog, and that you did not support the advances brought to the church by Dr. Ford.
Bill said: Tom, I have been hesitant to be as direct as I could be regarding the very narrow views that you express regarding how you interpret the four angels of Revelation 14.
Tom said: Bill, if you have something to say, say it! No need to hesitate or be indirect. This discussion about Adventist Reform, which has been taking place for a number of years, online, is not for the timid or shy. In fact, it is not for those that want to double-talk and play games with the issues, as Clifford Goldstein and many others have discovered. So you are free to speak your mind, and so too all others.
First, this thread was not about the Four Angels, but about the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. You have posted nothing to refute my position that the IJ is not a pillar as taught.
You have also taken the view that the IJ has some merit and that it is some type of PAJ that supposedly teaches a correct message. But you have proved no such position as credible.
You also reject the baseline interpretation of Dan 8: 14, and ignore the work that Dr. Ford has done in this area of history and eschatology. But again, you have not been persuasive in the least, and it seems that you do not really grasp this discussion, or the details of Adventist Reform.
Bill said: Your use of the "fourth angel" as only having a future fulfillment in the SDA movement and also your use of "Laodicea" as having a direct reference to the SDA church is very narrow and reflects a vestige of "cultic" mentality and thinking which you have not been able to shake off, even though you have been able to make great strides towards a more universal interpretation of biblical apocalyptic literature.
Tom said: Ha! So you think the Three Angels Messages has been replaced with a better and more “universal interpretation” of eschatology? I was not aware of this great discovery of yours. By all means please post up this new and improved Apocalyptic for us to all marvel at and follow.
Then, with this new “universal view” all SDA’s can stop wasting their time with the Three Angels Messages and move on to understand the real truth of the matter as you see it. No doubt you will be a hero for clearing all this up for us.
However, until you unveil this superior eschatology, I think I will continue to work with the original and genuine version of the Three Angels Messages, which I think will stand until the end of the world. But I am open to review your new views if and when you can articulate them in a cogent fashion.
I will be looking for you to post up your new and improved version of eschatology that you think is more credible than the Adventist Apocalyptic, but so far I see great error.
In the meantime, I will respond to your last post, even though it seems futile because you are so far advanced from all the rest of us. But here goes.
Bill, I never said that the 4th Angels Message is only relevant for SDA’s. But the SDA’s did articulate this eschatology. It is original to them, and thus they will be the first to understand what the last Pre-Advent Message will look like. Ignore this eschatology at your own peril.
In fact, if the Adventist don’t repent of their many errors and better understand the Gospel and the Three Angels Messages, they will never understand or develop the last Message that is anchored in Rev 18. Then, others will make this final Gospel call to the world and the SDA’s will be sidelined and forgotten.
Furthermore, while the term Laodiceans is a reference that includes all denominations at the end of time, it also includes the SDA’s and thus it can and does have a “direct” application to them as it does all others.
Are you sure that you are an Adventist? You don’t sound like one to me.
As for me being cultic? That is a strange charge that has no basis in fact. Why would you say that? Because I believe that the Advent Movement was the work of God and that the genuine Three Angels Messages is credible paradigm for the last days?
The term “cultic” applies better to those that rummage around in the OT looking for the PAJ of the church. Any that try to defend the IJ as a pillar deserve to be called cultic, not those that repudiate such error.
Bill said: A more open and truly biblical method of understanding the prophecies of Daniel is not to adopt the "Antiochus Epiphanes" interpretation which neither the Essenes, John the Baptist, our Lord Himself nor the writers of the New Testament ever embraced.
Tom said: Ha! Since when it is “truly biblical” to ignore a mountain of facts in favor of cultic, Gentile myth? The OT belongs to the Jews, not the Gentiles. So the Adventist spin on Jewish history is arrogant, wrong, and very foolish. It’s a little late to be re-writing the history of how the Jews interpreted Dan 8:14, or to pretend that wine in the Bible is grape juice.
The SDA’s have made fools of themselves with their silly delusions, and I see you are part of this problem. Dan 8:14 is about Hanukkah. This is the primary meaning of this passage and all the cultic doubletalk in the world will not change the history of the Jews or wine making.
It is time for all SDAs, including you Bill, to give up any pretense that the IJ is valid, or that it is the PAJ in Dan 8: 14. These are childish and cultic views that have no credibility.
Besides, the Gentiles do not need to become experts in the book of Daniel to understand the Gospel. If fact, it is not required reading to enter the New Covenant Kingdom of God or to obtain Eternal Life. Stop pretending otherwise.
Bill said: They understood that the book of Daniel was being unsealed and the kingdom of God was being established in the person and atoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Tom said: Since when have the Gospels been replaced with the writings of Daniel?
Since when is the book of Daniel a primer on the Gospel?
Your cultic flirtation with Daniel, combined with your obsession with Realized Eschatology has overshadowed the NT teaching about Consummated Eschatology. The Advent Movement is correctly focused on how the end of the world will take place. This is its correct contribution to the church.
One cannot be an Adventist, and at the same time be so hostile to Consummated Eschatology. So you have me confused. What are you?
Bill said: All of the "time" prophecies of Daniel point to 3 and 1/2 years of Christ’s ministry as the incarnate Son of God who would defeat all of the demonically ruled kingdoms of this world and establish the Son of Man as King of Kings and Lord of Lords who would be set down in His throne of judgment after having accomplished the eternal salvation of His people at Calvary.
Tom said: Today, who needs any time prophecies about the Gospel? Those that want to understand the Gospel Story, can go directly to the Gospels to understand the 1st century teachings of Jesus and the cross event. They don’t need the book of Daniel at all.
Searchers for truth can read the writings of Paul and others to better understand the Kingdom of God. The book of Daniel is not required reading to understand the Gospel Story and embrace Eternal life. Sorry.
Furthermore, your emphasis on Realized Eschatology is wrong. It is not to be confused with the Consummated version. I am surprised that you have embraced the former to the exclusion of the latter. I don’t really think one can be called an Adventist with such views. So I have no idea what you are all about.
Bill said: The Maacabee revolt against Greek rule was not God's will and all of the bloody scenes which resulted from the revolt would have been avoided if the Jews would have peacefully submitted to their rule.
Tom said: It is too late to change history, or the interpretation that the Jews, and Jesus, placed on Dan 8: 14. Besides, who are you to say what is God’s will and what is not? God was in charge of the Jews, and we must not speculate about such things, much less try to change world history to fit our whims.
Bill said: It was because of the Jews hatred of foreign rule that they made their occupiers hate them in return and as vengeance defile their temple by offering a pig upon their alter and force the Jews to be Hellenized.
Tom said: I am amazed that you blame the Jews for wanting to remain independent. As if it were their fault that their enemies defiled the Temple. But it changes nothing. The Jews view Dan 8: 14 they way they do and so too did Jesus. There is no use in trying to change history so that the SDA’s can invent false doctrines about Dan 8: 14.
Bill said: The Jews thought that the Maacabee revolt and rededication of the temple was a fulfillment of the Daniel's prophecy when in fact they were merely reaping the result of their own rejection of God's word. As a result of their fallacious understanding of Daniel, the Jewish priests and rulers were not looking for the true fulfillment of Daniel in the true messianic mission of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Tom said: Ha! So you think the Jews need the SDA’s to better understand their own history? This is comical, and absurd. While the Jews made many mistakes, they nonetheless correctly teach that Hanukkah is the historic fulfillment of Dan 8: 14. This is a fact, just like the fact that wine in the Bible was NOT grape juice.
Who are the SDA’s to come around at the end of time and try to spin this ancient passage into a cultic pretzel that only they understand? Who are they to overturn the facts about wine? It is madness. The SDA’s have lost their minds to be so arrogant, stupid, and foolish.
Perhaps you need to spend more time at the Hallmark store studying Daniel? Then maybe you can grasp this situation like Raymond Cottrell did.
Bill said: To understand Daniel we must approach it as the New Testament writers did:
Tom said: Wrong. To understand Daniel, we must first approach it as the JEWS understood it. It is their history, not ours. And guess what? The Jewish apostles believed in Hanukkah, and so too did Jesus. They did not teach what the SDA’s teach about Dan 8: 14 and it is madness to pretend otherwise. Have you learned nothing from Dr. Ford?
Bill said: In Christ, the Rock hewn without hands has struck fourth kingdom of the Daniel 2 great image of a man at the ten toes and the Messianic Son of David has established His kingdom:
Tom said: This is RC theology. Your obsession with Realized Eschatology is limiting your view of Consummated Eschatology. Your view is not Adventist at all.
In fact, Miller had a private meeting with Charles Finny and they discussed this very portion of Daniel that you quoted. And guess what? Finny, the great perfectionist and post millennialist took the same position that you have articulated.
Miller said the opposite and claimed that the rock was the Second Coming that would destroy the world and then set up God's Kingdom forever. You have embraced the view of the enemies of the Advent Movement.
Daniel 2:44 "And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."
For Miller, this passage was about the 2nd Coming. But for RC’s and those P’s that repudiated the doctrine of the pre-millennial Eschaton, it was about the church being set up on earth. This is really a RC view, which is why they have no eschatology. They love RE, and run from Protestant eschatology about the Second Coming.
To reject Miller’s correct view on this point is to repudiate the Advent Movement. To reject the Three Angels Messages, as you seem to do, also does the same thing.
Bill said: In Christ the "abomination of desolation" has happened at the cross of Calvary and also the "restoration of the temple" has already happened in the resurrection of our Jesus Christ our Lord.
Tom said: As far as RE is concerned everything took place at the cross and we are now, by faith, sitting in the Heavenly Places. But not really. Look around, we are not in Heaven.
Eph. 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
Eph. 2:5 even when we were dead 1in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ, by grace you have been saved.
Eph. 2:6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
However, when it comes to CE, we are pilgrims and strangers on this earth, making our painful way to the New Jerusalem. We have not yet arrived, nor will we ever receive Eternal Life, in an empirical sense, until the 2nd Coming, and there is no sense in trying to pretend otherwise.
Heb. 11:13 All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.
Heb. 11:14 For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own.
Heb. 11:15 And indeed if they had been thinking of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return.
Heb. 11:16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them.
Today, none of us lives in a heavenly city or country. We have not received the promise of Eternal life in a real sense, nor will that take place until the 2nd Coming. Sorry. I wish it were not so, but things are what they are. Which is why CE is important and necessary for the church.
Adventism is all about Consummated Eschatology. If you don’t like this view, then you are not an Adventist. So Bill, what are you, and why?
Furthermore, Christ did not teach that the Abomination of Desolation was only a 1st century event; rather he places it in the future, disproving your point.
Matt. 24:13 “But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.
Matt. 24:14 “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
Matt. 24:15 “Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place; let the reader understand,
Matt. 24:16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains.
Matt. 24:17 “Whoever is on the housetop must not go down to get the things out that are in his house.
Matt. 24:18 “Whoever is in the field must not turn back to get his cloak.
Matt. 24:19 “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days!
Matt. 24:20 “But pray that your flight will not be in the winter, or on a Sabbath.
Matt. 24:21 “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will.
Matt. 24:22 “Unless those days had been cut short, no 1life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
It is clear that the AOD is a future event that is associated with the time of trouble that precedes the 2nd Coming. Why would you try and pretend otherwise?
Under the 4th Angels Message, the Adventists are going to have to figure out what the AOD means in a Consummated sense. The Adventist must push on to understand how the final events will actually play out and then act accordingly.
Today, the SDAs are lost in the Old Covenant, obsessed with delusions about Dan 8: 14 as the PAJ. Such incompetence prevents them from understanding Adventist eschatology correctly, much less from going forward to develop the 4th Angels Message, (which you apparently do not accept). Pity.
Those that look for the Gospel in the OT, and think that they find direct instruction for the church from the book of Daniel, have made a serious error. All SDAs need to repudiate the PAJ in Dan 8: 14 and then start looking in the NT for such information.
Bill said: In summary, it is in Christ that all of the prophecies of Daniel have been fulfilled; in the 3 and 1/2 years of Christ's ministry; His sinless life, atoning death, resurrection from the dead; and His having been set down upon His throne judging the world.
Tom said: This is nonsense. There are many prophecies in Dan that are not fulfilled is Christ. Were any of the great kingdoms, which were part of the opening story about Daniel being a true prophet, fulfilled in Christ? Hardly.
Furthermore, the Gospel is not to be preached from the book of Daniel. Rather, it is the words of the apostles, and the teachings of Paul and others in the NT that instruct us.
The Gospel Story is not based or recorded in the OT book of Daniel, no matter what it may or may not be saying about the Gospel and future events.
Nor does Daniel have any authority over the church to correct it or Judge it in any way. Which is one reason why you will never find any PAJ of the church in the book of Daniel. It is a ludicrous concept that makes no sense.
If you want to find the PAJ of the church, you must go to the NT writings of the Apostles. They are in charge of the church, not the Jewish Prophet Daniel.
Try Rev 2 & 3. Here you will find 7, (seven) PAJ’s, one for each of the seven church eras. The LM is the 7th PAJ.
Thus the works and doctrines in every church era has been judged, even as each church "era" is being reproved and admonished by the Spirit, all in the context of Consummated eschatology.
Most are commanded to repent, even as all are offered eschatological hope and advice on obtaining Eternal life. The last church is the worst of all, by far, and thus all SDAs should all pay close attention to the real PAJ and repent for their many errors.
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/seve … lation.htm
http://www.askelm.com/news/n020728.htm
http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl … tml?cat=34
http://www.bcbsr.com/survey/rev7c.html"
http://amazingdiscoveries.org/the-seven … ation.html
http://www.biblestudy.org/maps/seven-ch … l-map.html
http://www.truthablaze.com/church.html
http://www.sacred-destinations.com/turk … lation.htm
http://www.luthersem.edu/ckoester/Revelation/Main.htm
So Bill, forget looking for any PAJ of the church in Daniel. However, there are seven of them to be found in Rev 2, 3. (Surprise!) And zero found in Daniel.
1Pet. 4:17 For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
The PAJ of the church has already taken place. Woe to those, like the SDA’s, that misunderstand and ignore this important point of eschatology. They will forfeit Eternal Life and have their names removed from the Book of Life.
Rev. 3:5 ‘He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.
Bill said: The prophecy of Revelation recasts the book of Daniel in the light of New Testament of Christ. The everlasting covenant has been unsealed by the One whose right it is to Judge.
Tom said: No amount of theological “recasting” is going to change the history of Hanukkah or validate the PAJ from the book of Daniel. Sorry.
Bill said: The judgment of the world has begun in the proclamation of the everlasting gospel to every nation, kindred and tongue.
Tom said: The world was already judged guilty before Christ arrived. That is why he came to save and not condemn. All are condemned by default; only the Gospel can change their status.
John 3:17 “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
John 3:18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Rom. 3:9 for we have already charged that both jews and Greeks are all under sin;
Rom. 3:10 as it is written, <BR> “THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE;
Rom. 3:11 THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;
Rom. 3:12 ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD,
THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.
Bill, there is nothing you can say to remove the necessity of Consummated theology. RE does not trump CE, rather it is the other way around. CE is superior to RE. Miller was correct; there is going to be a literal and earth-shattering event called the Second Coming. This is the judgment of the world. All your talk about RE and the PAJ in Daniel will never change this biblical fact, which is foundational to Judaism as well as Christianity and the Advent Movement.
Bill said: The verdict of the judgment shall be openly revealed on the final day when this verdict shall be carried out.
Tom said: While RE is true, it does not negate Consummated Eschatology.
Rom. 2:5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
The Second Coming is the Day of Judgment. It is a real event of unknown duration and detail that is not very well understood. You are wrong to try and minimize it.
Rom. 14:10 For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.
1Cor. 4:5 Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God.
2Cor. 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.
Matt. 11:24 “Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you.”
Matt. 12:36 “But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment.
Bill said: As Peter told us:
1 Peter 4:17 17 For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
Tom said: There is a PAJ for all seven church periods. Thus the church, in every age, has been judged and given a chance to repent and obtain Eternal Life. These PAJ’s of the church are not found in Daniel, but in Revelation.
Bill said: I would encourage our Adventist brothers and sisters to adopt a more open and less sectarian approach to its understanding of the apocalyptic portions of scripture which is more in harmony with the gospel of Jesus Christ which the writers of the New Testament fully proclaimed.
Tom said: Wow! I would encourage all to ignore your dismissive attitude about Consummated Eschatology, as well as your great error to think the PAJ is Dan 8: 14.
I would also encourage all to better understand the history and doctrines of the Advent Movement, as well as comprehend that the Three Angels Messages have not been faithfully or correctly promoted by SDA’s.
Bill, you and I are very different; You defend a form of the IJ as the PAJ in Dan, even as you give the White Estate a pass for hiding documents and teaching the myth that the IJ is the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message of Rev 14:7.
Not only that, you have backpedaled on Glacier View and have repudiated Dr. Ford’s correct position that there is no IJ pillar in the 1st Angels Message, and that Hanukkah is the primary fulfillment of Dan 8: 14. These truths should be self-evident to all that have the ability to understand the evidence, and I am surprised at your positions.
While both Dr. Ford and Tom Norris embrace the Advent Movement as an extension of the Protestant Faith, including the view that the Three Angels Messages is a valid, credible, prophetic paradigm, you seem not so sure.
In fact, you do not embrace the historic definition of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message, nor do you seem to think that the SDAs have a mission to develop the Loud Cry of the 4th Angel, which is anchored in Rev 18.
You don’t seem to think that the SDAs have a duty to prepare the church for the Time of Trouble and the Judgment Day, which is the Second Coming and the end of the world.
Today, the modern Advent Movement, as represented by the SDA church, is self-destructing in cynicism, ignorance, and confusion. They have lost their prophetic Mission and Gospel Message, even as the Consummation of all things is close at hand. This is a tragic and unnecessary situation that must be corrected.
Where is the prophetic voice of the Advent Movement for the 21st century? Where is the warning for what is about to take place? Where is the final articulation about the Day of Judgment and the end of the world?
The failure of the SDA leaders to tell the truth about 1888 and Ellen White, has led to a great misunderstanding about the definition, meaning, and purpose of the Three Angels Messages.
The fraud in the White Estate, and the subsequent corruption of the Denomination has allowed Traditional Adventism, with it many cultic errors, to reign supreme until the farce of Glacier View exposed the IJ as a false pillar that has no support from the Bible.
Rather then repent as the true PAJ demands, the SDA’s have gone on to embrace the confusion of Pluralism, even as they continue to deny the Gospel and the truth about the Three Angels Messages.
The present course of the Advent Movement is not correct or sustainable. Their only hope is to repent for their many false doctrines, including both 1888 and Glacier View, as the real PAJ demands, and embrace Adventist Reform. Only zealous repentance and correct Reform will save them.
Matt. 11:15 “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Last edited by tom_norris (03-27-10 4:44 pm)
Offline
The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God;1 Peter 4:17 applies to the New Testament era. The judgment-hour message of Revelation 14:6-7 also applies to the New Testament era, since this message was first sent to the seven churches in Asia Minor. The hour of His judgment is come is the announcement of the apostolic gospel and must therefore be coextensive with the gospel. The hour of his judgment has come is in the present perfect tense and not in the future tense as in is coming. The angel is symbolically depicted as proclaiming the everlasting gospel and saying that the "hour of His judgment has come". The present perfect participle tense is used here for a completed act in the present. The hour has come.
Revelation 14:6-7 6 Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth -- to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people -- 7 saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water.
The pioneers of Adventism made certain eschatological claims. O. R. L. Crosier and Uriah Smith said that the atonement was not made on the cross. James White said that the remnant of Joel 2:32 did not appear until 1844. No one seemed to recognize that the last days were inaugurated by the resurrection and outpouring of the Spirit.
The Old Testament must be interpreted in the light of the New Testament rather than the reverse. But an examination of pioneer literature shows that the early Adventists tended to interpret Old Testament prophecy without reference to the New Testaments interpretation of that prophecy.
The New Testament clearly teaches that the last days were inaugurated by the resurrection, that Christ was enthroned at Gods right hand in the holiest of all, and that the kingdom or judgment was inaugurated by the Christ event. Adventists are sometimes thrust into the awkward position of preaching a new gospel—a gospel with features not found in the apostles.
We cannot, dare not, go beyond what the apostles preached. We can only recover it. The apostolic gospel, restored to its true framework, is the essence of the pre-advent judgment. By this gospel, sent from heaven, men are tested and judged, sealed or marked. He who believes and keeps on believing has the verdict of the judgment and the life of the age to come.
Bill Diehl, editor
Present Truth Magazine Online
www.PresentTruthMag.org
Offline
Mark Duncan said: I appreciate your apparent concern that SDAs understand the gospel and recognize the errors and mistakes that the SDA church has made.
I appreciate your apparent concern that SDA's gain assurance of salvation, which is not usually produce by the official gospel proclaimed by the church.
I was raised an SDA and studied the churches teaching on prophecy extensively and read what I could find about the gospel but was utterly hopeless until I learned the 1888 message. Through studying it for the past 20 years I came to assurance and hope in Christ.
Tom Norris said: While Weiland and Short were responsible for making sure that the modern SDA Community understood the importance of the 1888 debates, they misunderstood the nature and theology of those debates.
However, they were correct to claim that the White Estate was hiding the real story about 1888, and they should be praised for pressuring the church to be more forthcoming about Battle Creek history.
Unfortunately, they were never granted access into the White Estate vaults, nor did they grasp how many documents were being suppressed and manipulated by the White Estate.
Lacking the necessary data to make their case, they went forward anyway, making far too many assumptions and errors. They failed to remain objective or professional about the history of 1888, and this led to false conclusions that, for a time, took on cult like tendencies.
Weiland & Short’s view about the nature and the substance of the 1888 is flat out wrong! And so too their definition of the Gospel.
Anyone that has embraced their so-called “1888 Message” is going to have to repent and get the real facts.
Mark said: I disagree with Desmond Ford on the Sanctuary. I do not think his positions are irrefutable as your web site claims. In fact I believe Dr. Fords position have been well refuted by Pastor Jack Sequiera.
Tom Norris said: Dr. Ford is correct to point out that there is no such doctrine as the IJ in the Bible. Jack Sequeira also knows this fact and AGREES.
Dr. Ford is also correct to teach that the IJ was NEVER a doctrinal pillar from the 1st Angels Message,- as all modern SDA’s have been taught.
The “hour of his Judgment has come,” in Rev 14: 7, was ONLY a reference to the Second Coming. This is what ALL the Pioneers taught, and so too Ellen White.
Thus, the simple facts of Adventist history prove that Ellen White never supported the IJ or Glacier View as the leaders claimed. Not one Pioneer would support this myth that the IJ is the Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message. There is no such pillar in the Three Angels Messages. The SDA's have been destroyed by a myth.
This one fact alone, overturns Traditional Adventism and proves it is built on myth, error and fraud. The White Estate and the Review led the Adventist Community in the wrong direction. These incompetent institutions have deceived us all.
Furthermore, your view that Pastor Sequeira has refuted Dr. Ford is untrue.
In fact, Pastor Jack and I have spoken in detail about Dr. Ford’s views and he AGREES with them. If you think otherwise, feel free to contact him and find out for yourself.
Perhaps you are thinking too far back. There was a time, before 1993, when Sequeira did refute Dr. Ford’s theology, like most SDA church workers too busy to study the issues. But he came around to understand the Gospel. Now that he is retired, he is free to agree with Dr. Ford and tell the truth about theology.
In fact, listen to what JS wrote about Righteousness by Faith in Chapter 10 of his book Beyond Belief. He takes the Protestant view of salvation, the same as Dr. Ford.
“The Bible teaches that we are saved by faith or through faith. Faith is only the instrument or channel by which we receive Christ as our righteousness. It is Christ — His life, His death, His resurrection — that saves us, nothing else.”
http://www.jacksequeira.org/beyond10.htm
Such theology is very different from Traditional Adventism, which teaches faith and works save us. When he says “nothing else” he refutes what the 1888 Study Committee teaches about the Gospel. This work in 1993 represents his break from Weiland’s false and legalistic Gospel.
Feel free to contact Pastor Jack and send him my best wishes. Also feel free to ask him his views about the Gospel or Dr. Ford. Let me know what you learn.
http://www.jacksequeira.org/beyond00.htm
Mark said: You have a link reference to Jack Sequeira but there is no in formation on it. I encourage you to get Jack's material and his sermons.
Study what he has written and listen to his sermons. You will discover that Dr. Ford is not the answer to the problems that the SDA church faces.
Tom said: The Adventist Reform web site needs to be updated, but I am sure we can Google Pastor Jack and find his web site.
Here are two web sites where the discussion of Adventist Reform is active:
http://www.allexperts.com/ep/2318-70484 … Norris.htm
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=11
Here is Jack Sequeira’s link:
http://www.jacksequeira.org/jacklist.htm
You will discover that Dr. Ford’s view of the law and the Gospel, as well as the Sabbath are correct. The only hope for the SDA church is for them to repent for both 1888 and Glacier View and return to the original version of the Three Angels Messages, which features the Protestant Gospel and the Judgment as the Second Coming, NOT the IJ.
Mark said: Ford may be close to the gospel but he is in error on many other points. It is true that Adventism does not have a clear understanding of the gospel. The problem is Adventism affinity for Armenianism, which inevitably leads to legalism. It should also be noted that much of Protestantism is based in Armeianism and therefore vulnerable to the same errors.
Tom said: Dr. Ford is 100% correct about the Gospel. If you think otherwise, then you are the one in error.
The SDA’s are 100% wrong about the Gospel, and most everything else. They have the wrong Sabbath and the wrong view of the Lord’s Supper, and hermeneutics, and the wrong organizational model and on and on...
They don’t have a correct view of church finance or of the theology and history of the Three Angels Messages. Their view of eschatology, and Sunday laws, including the doctrine of the Judgment, is very confused.
It is time for the Adventist Community to wake up from their delusions. They must come to grips with the fact that they are truly naked and blind and wrong about most everything.
The SDA’s need to repent, reform, and re-organize. The end of the world is much closer than ever before…
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Mark Said: Tom, Thanks. That helps. However, I still believe you are in error when you claim that the 1800+ page four vol. set proves Weiland wrong about the 1888 history.
Tom said: How would you know the details about this material that I discovered 30 years ago? Much less the rest of the materials that have never been published?
Besides, this is not about Weiland, but about finding out what really happened in SDA history. History is what it is; it needs no spin to make it come out a certain way. But this is what all the SDA’s have been doing for decades about 1888 and many other things. Hiding materials and making up stories from Battle Creek is very dishonest and wrong.
Weiland was right on a number of points, but wrong on many others. There is no sense in pretending about any of this. The facts, for those few that have them, are clear about what happened in 1888 and what did not. It is only the facts that matter. This is not about anyone’s “belief” or theory, but about the facts of history. Do you understand the difference?
Besides, who is Weiland? He is not a scholar or a serious theologian. He was an SDA missionary who focused on sanctification, like all SDA’s of this time period. He never understood the Protestant Gospel or the 1888 debate correctly, but yet he claimed he had found the secret meaning of 1888 when he never went into the vault.
Weiland’s view of Battle Creek history is wrong. He did not find any new theology as he claimed. The cult of Weiland is a dead end road. He was misled and diverted down a false path by the White Estate.
Mark said: I have the set and I have the research edition of the EG White CD ROM and Wieland's position holds up well.
Tom said: You only have what the White Estate has allowed you to have, nothing more. So you have no idea what those documents really say or mean, much less the background story of their discovery. So who are you kidding? Not me. When you make such absurd statements like this, you lose all your credibility. Proving that you are biased and not very objective.
Those who look at history, only to try and defend their views, will never understand. Nor do they want to. They are being very dishonest and cultic, just like the White Estate, who has been misleading everyone about Ellen White from day one.
Mark said: When you make bold statements like this: "This material REFUTES what the church teaches about 1888, including Weiland, who never knew these materials existed." You seriously damage your credibility.
Tom said: I can only damage my credibility if I fail to back up my “bold statements.” But this is what I have been doing for years online, for all to see. You must have been hiding under a rock?
In fact, Clifford Goldstein, and others, acted like you until we met online over the issues. He ran away defeated and embarrassed, because he does not have the facts, and neither do you. Why not ask him about his experience?
Mark said: If I understand you correctly there is still additional 1888 Materials that have not yet been published. I have no concern that those materials will contradict the 1800+ pages that have already been release so I am not persuaded that your position is solid.
Tom said: Your bias is showing again. You really don’t know what you are talking about. I do. Which is why I am so strong about all this. I am not guessing about anything. I have the facts and the real story. You rely on an incomplete, and fictionalized account that is contaminated with much myth and fraud. Which is not your fault, you are a victim of the White Estate.
Mark said: I strongly suspect that you disagree with Weiland on the nature of Christ and we don't need any EGW material to settle that question. Wieland is correct.
Tom said: Those that understand the Gospel correctly refute perfection and all such nonsense from Traditional Adventism. But that is another issue for another day, because the Nature of Christ played NO role in the 1888 debate. NONE.
Those that say otherwise are flat out wrong and don’t know what they are saying. It is a diversion from the real debate, which was about the law and the Gospel.
Today, the records of 1888 have been found and thus there is no point for SDA’s to pretend any more.
Listen to Bert Haloviak, an expert on SDA history and the director of the Denominations Archives:
"Among the significant items that have been discovered recently are the W. C. White handwritten notes from the Minneapolis meetings. These were uncovered at the White Estate in Washington, D.C. "
In the light of these notes and other discoveries, Bert Haloviak, wrote: "You can see from the handwritten W. C. White notes and also know from thousands of documents recently studied pertaining to the 1888 period that Christology was not the point of friction in 1888. "
"The theology of the law in Galatians and of the covenants and the question of the role of the Spirit of Prophecy were the basic points of contention." (Letter from Bert Haloviak to E. C. Webster, August 3, 1982)
http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/web … 03-IIb.htm
Mark said: There may be some nuances of difference between what you call the "real" 1888 story and what has been written by Wieland, Daniels, Froom and others.
Tom said: The real story of 1888 is very different from what all have been taught. In fact, did you know that Canright was the first casualty of Waggoner’s new Covenant theology? This too was hidden and covered up. Canright left the church because of the 1888 debates, but the church never admitted this. They made up something else.
Mark said: However, I still believe your case is over blown.
You have not yet convinced me that your perspective is a "game changer". Perhaps a good addendum to what we already know but so far nothing earth shaking, nothing that impugns my prior knowledge of the history.
Tom said: If you refuse to read the material, how can you be convinced of anything? Those who run from the facts, do so because they don’t want to have their views upset. You don’t know what you don’t know, and you don’t know a lot.
The reason I was ushered into the White Estate, 30 years ago, is because what I found in the Archives was “earth shaking.” It overturned what had written about 1888 by Froom and the White Estate, and others.
Consequently, I entered the White Estate with a special mission, from a special church committee, (against the protests of Arthur White), to see what was in the vault. I was allowed to research the unpublished 1888 material and to get to the bottom of this controversial matter.
Mission accomplished. Just because you have never heard about any of this makes no difference. The facts are the facts, and so too the real story about 1888. Had it been up to me, the entire church would have been informed of this great discovery.
But it was not up to me. The leaders decided that no one need find out about this new information about 1888. Which is why the public never knew that such documents were hidden, much less found. Why do you think the church took that dishonest position? Any guesses?
What was discovered in 1979 was so opposite of what had been taught, that the whole matter was covered up and not disclosed to the church. Although Olsen promised me that they would deal with this great historical discovery, and tell the church, it never happened. The White Estate knew all the time that that they had this material. They were hiding the facts on purpose.
The church hid the discovery of the 1888 documents because it showed the White Estate had been very dishonest, incompetent, and wrong.
This “game changing” discovery was kept away from the church. And the White Estate never announced what had been discovered in 1979, because if they had, it would have made Glacier View impossible and the exile of Dr. Ford pointless. The truth of the matter is that Ellen White did not support Traditional Adventism as the White Estate and others insisted. After 1888, she viewed the Gospel like Luther or Dr. Ford, not like Uriah Smith or Kenneth Wood.
Of course this is why these documents were hidden. The leaders did not want people to know that Ellen White had changed her views about the Gospel because of 1888. They did not want anyone to know that she actually supported Dr. Ford’s views.
This is why I went public, online, about 10 years ago. I refuse to stand by and be a party to this ongoing crime. The White Estate is guilty of publishing fraud. They have deceived everyone about Ellen White and 1888, and have made millions of $ from this fraud by the sale of her books, which do not accurately represent her views of the history of 1888. Even though they were caught in 1979, they covered it up and continued on as if nothing had happened.
The White Estate is a crime scene. SDA’s are very foolish to trust or defend this corrupt institution.
Mark said: We were already well aware that the law in Galatians and the Covenants was part of the 1888 controversy. This is not new information.
Tom said: While everyone knew about the law in Galatians, the point about the Two Covenants was not well known or understood.
Moreover, thanks to Froom, everyone incorrectly thinks that the nature of Christ was part of the debate, when it never was.
In fact, even the term “Righteousness by Faith” is also absent from the debate. This was NOT a phrase that was used during this time period, even though everyone thinks otherwise.
So everywhere one looks, there are glaring errors, myths, and diversions of fact. I have only listed a few.
In fact, the real 1888 “debate” took place in Battle Creek in the spring of 1890. No one knew this fact either! Nor the fact that there were transcripts discovered of that debate, as well as official accounts about the debate that was still raging in 1890.
In fact, during this time period, in 1890, Ellen White had a dream about the theological debate. Here she was told who was correct and who was wrong. But this fact was also hidden from the church and kept out of publication. Wow! Who knew that the White Estate was hiding such material?
I can assure you that the real story of 1888 is very different from you have been misled to believe. But don’t blame me. I did not deceive you. The White Estate did. Blame them.
Moreover, while Froom and everyone claimed there were no eyewitness notes from Minneapolis, this has also turned out to be a great lie. I found WC Whites hand written notes that were taken of Waggoner’s infamous 1888 sermons, IN THE WHITE ESTATE. They were in the vault all the time! The White Estate, Froom, and the Review Editor Bill Johnsson were just lying about it!
I could go on and on about what was found and how it is so very different from what has been officially taught. So wake up and understand what has taken place. We have all been horribly misled and deceived by the church leaders, but yet, they still refuse to confess and clean up this mess.
While Arthur White is the most dishonest man in SDA history, Froom was also very dishonest, even to the point of destroying his notes from Movement of Destiny to try and cover his tracks. But there is a long list of men who have been party to this scam. Kenneth Wood is another, and so too Herb Douglas.
The SDA church has NEVER been honest about 1888 or Ellen White. The White Estate is guilty of great sin in this matter, even as they are still trying to cover up what they have done. So the scam lives on, as the White Estate arrogantly pretends that they can do as they please without consequence.
It is a sad story my friend, and there is no use trying to clean it up and make it sound better. The church leaders have been, and still are, being very dishonest about church history and doctrine. It is criminal what is taking place and it must stop. It’s just this simple.
Mark said: I do not understand your apparent eagerness to claim you have the "real story" and everyone else is deceived. It really appears to be a poor attempt at self glorification.
Tm said: Ha! So you think I am making this story up for my own ego? If true, what a colossal waste of time. But such a charge is absurd and more like wishful thinking by those who think they have the facts.
If you had the same access to the data that I had over the years, you too would be saying what I am saying. Unless you are a dishonest person, that is.
I really do have the genuine story, and I am sorry if that makes you think I am a nut job. But the facts are what they are. I have them, you don’t. Deal with it.
However, I am committed to making all this information public and that is what I have been doing for years online. Many have come to understand things very differently about SDA history and doctrine because of this information, and the more that hear the more understand.
But guess what? It is the duty of the White Estate to correct the record and tell the true story of 1888. This is their legal obligation and I intend to make sure they do so. At this point, they refuse. So additional action will be necessary. Fine by me.
Besides, this is an embarrassing story. I take no pleasure in having to admit how dishonest and incompetent the White Estate has been all these years. It is hardly a source of personal pride that I have been a member of a church that is so very dishonest and full of deception. This is all very sad.
Mark said: Your salutation which reads "The man who discovered the truth about 1888" is in very poor taste. Have you ever heard the axiom, which says "self recommendation is no recommendation"?
Tom said: Have you never heard this teaching from Jesus?
Luke 8:17 “For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.
How about these passages. Do they mean anything?
Zech. 8:16 ‘These are the things which you should do: speak the truth to one another; judge with truth and judgment for peace in your gates.
John 8:45 “But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me.
Gal. 4:16 So have I become your enemy by 1telling you the truth?
Mark, I have been debating these issues online for years. One must be blunt and forward to survive in such an environment. But the facts are the facts. I am the man that caught the White Estate hiding the 1888 materials.
I am the one, in 1979, that discovered a very different story about 1888 in the basement of the old Takoma Park, GC building. I can’t deny the facts, nor should you. Rather, you should be grateful that this deep and massive fraud was discovered, and that this story is being exposed to the light of day.
The object of this discovery, for me, is to help the Advent Movement go forward. So this is not really about Weiland or me. But about the White Estate, and the facts of SDA history. Until the church understands what really happened in Battle Creek and Takoma Park, the problems cannot be resolved.
It is time to tell the truth, no matter how painful it will be to the White Estate and the other church leaders who have enabled and supported this massive fraud.
Let me assure you that if my story were not true, it would have been debunked long ago for all to see. But this has not happened because the White Estate is guilty as charged. They have been caught in a great number of lies, which changes everything for SDA’s.
http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com … orris.html
http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com … orris.html
Mark said: Jesus put it this way "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." Since you seem to have a high regard for the "real story" consider that real story.
Tom said: I have many witnesses to verify my work in the Archives and White Estate. My research there was carefully monitored and watched by many people, even as I made regular briefings to the Biblical Research Department headed by Dr. Gordon Hyde.
So if you want to verify my story, just ask Dr. Haloviak, he is still at the archives and he knows the story well. There are also many others, as well as the documents themselves.
So once again, let’s be clear: Tom Norris did discover the “real story” of 1888, in the GC Archives and then again in the White Estate. 30 years ago, and he has been researching the issues ever since.
Mark said: Your approach to sharing the real story is a real turn off.
Tom said: Perhaps you will like the book and the class action lawsuit against the White Estate better? Then you will understand how badly all SDA’s have been misled about their history.
But am willing to share the story now. It is not meant to be a secret. I have gone public with the facts, and neither the book nor the pending legal action will change the facts already online.
The fact that the real story refutes Weiland and Froom and others, is beside the point. History is what it is, not what we may want it to be. Sorry.
Mark said: I work for a living as an Electrical Engineer with ITT Communications Systems Division.
Tom said: I am a real estate developer in Md. It would seem that we both need to act professional, rational, and honestly in our professions. We also need to do the same when it comes to religion.
Mark said: I do take time to study the issues but as I said forums are an inefficient format. I do not have the luxury of being able to deal with such inefficient formats. I will await the books you have announced but I hope they are better written than what I have seen thus far.
Tom said: The real story of 1888 can be understood now. It is no longer a secret. I have made it public, online, so you don’t need to wait for the book. But you do need to stop pretending that Weiland has all the answers. He only has a few.
Moreover, it is a mistake to avoid these Forums. Everyone is online nowadays. If the “1888 Committee” has anything worthwhile to say, they need to say it online. This is the new medium for discussion in the 21st century.
After all, if one can’t openly and successfully confront their critics online, in front of everyone, and defend their views, then they lose credibility. It’s just this simple. This is why Adventism is dying out. It is too confused, wrong, and divided. Few things can be defended, including the official story of Ellen White or 1888.
It is time to correct the historic record and clean up the many myths and errors that have overwhelmed Adventism. It is time to understand what went wrong in Battle Creek and why? And to understand why the Takoma Park SDA’s also self-destructed. This is the only way to get out of this mess.
The Advent Movement needs to go forward to the 4th Angels Message, not hold on to a false view of the 3rd Angels Message.
Mark said: I hope you will reconsider the lawsuit. That is an unbiblical method for Christian brethren to settle differences.
Tom said: This is no “dispute.” The White Estate was caught red handed hiding thousands of historical documents about 1888 so they could sell a false story to the public. They were caught in a crime, and there is no “dispute” about it.
Since when is it wrong to expose sin and tell the truth? Since when is confronting evil in the church wrong?
Those committed to lie and deceive, and commit crimes in the church should be fully prosecuted by the law. Whether it is RC child abuse by the clergy or SDA Publishing fraud by the White Estate. Sin is sin.
1Tim. 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.
The White Estate is a non-stop sinning machine. I can bring many witnesses against them, but they don’t care. They think they can do as they please. But they are very wrong.
1Tim. 5:20 Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.
1Tim. 5:21 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.
So I am following the NT by publicly rebuking “Those who continue in sin in the presence of all.” Why? “So that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.”
Anyone today that defends the White Estate is joining in their great sin. Anyone that refuses to call for a full and complete investigation of what they have done, is defending sin and is just as guilty.
Why would you defend this massive fraud in the White Estate? Why would any Christian? The White Estate is a registered corporation and thus they must live by the rules of their charter, if nothing else. If they violate these rules they must be held accountable.
The leaders have been informed of this massive fraud, but they refuse to confess and correct the record. This is why they released all this suppressed material in 1987, when no one was looking. They were trying to cover up the fact that this material had been hidden from the church all these years. They knew that Tom Norris had caught the White Estate hiding these documents.
So they knew it was only a matter of time before this became public. But it changes nothing. These materials, when released, were incomprehensible and unreadable. They lacked the necessary editorial that explained why they were hidden from the church and what they mean. Thus no one understood what had taken place or why?
If the leaders continue on with this position, there will be no choice but to bring in the courts to enforce justice. The NT in no way prohibits such action, which should never have been needed in the first place.
In fact, the Jews set up court system to hear disputes and so too did the church. But the SDA’s never set up any system of justice. This is why they are out of control and fully corrupt. Who dares correct them?
When David Dennis tried to be honest with the books, he lost his position in the church. The SDA leaders are corrupt and out of control, and what has been going on in the White Estate all these years proves this point.
Jesus teaches that not only are lawsuits and a court system useful and necessary, but those with a weak case had better deal with the issues before they get to court.
This is excellent advice for the White Estate. I suggest that they listen to Jesus and settle this matter out of court before they find themselves behind bars. Once the lawsuit is filed, a criminal investigation will most likely also occur, and then some of these men will be in jeopardy for their crimes.
Matt. 5:21 “You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’
Matt. 5:22 “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court…
Matt. 5:25 “Make friends quickly with your opponent at law while you are with him on the way, so that your opponent may not hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Sin is sin. Publishing fraud is wrong. It is a crime. For the SDA church to hide documents and make up false stories about Ellen White and church history is detestable and inexcusable. And then to cover it up over and over is even worse. This fraud will not stand, if I have anything to do with it. And I do.
The White Estate, which is fully owned and controlled by the GC, is guilty of perpetrating a massive publishing fraud about Ellen White, and then trying to cover it up. They have knowingly and systematically hidden documents so that they could deceive the public about church history and Ellen White’s views. Such behavior is unlawful, immoral, and disgusting. It will not stand.
Mark said: You have not given me too much to digest, just too much to sift through to find something to digest.
Tom said: You are free to pretend all you want. But you have been informed, and it is only a matter of time before everyone is going to know the real story. Then what will you say?
If you want to hide under a rock, clinging to unproven theories from the 1950’s, then have at it, but you seem too educated to be so easily fooled. The real story is out there if you want it.
Mark said: In addition to working for a living I serve as an elder a SS Teacher, a pianist, and chair of a couple of committees in my local church.
Tom said: Aside from getting the 1888 story wrong, the church has also embraced one error after another, including tithe, and the WRONG, Old Covenant Sabbath. Who saw that coming?
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=228
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=239
There are many errors within Adventism that need to be corrected in addition to 1888. But of course, you sound too busy to search for such truth. It seems like you think you have everything all figured out?
Sorry to be the one to say otherwise. The SDA’s have almost nothing correct. Not even the Lord’s Supper! So beware. You have been warned.
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=11
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1222173098
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=238
Mark said: I am also currently serving as the president of the 1888 MSC and the chair of the 1888 Message Conference planning committee for this year. So time is at a premium.
Tom said: Weiland has played an important and necessary role in the search for 1888. He goaded the White Estate into publishing documents, and forced Froom to write Movement of Destiny, which was the official story of 1888.
Of course Froom’s book has turned out to be part of the original 1888 cover-up, which in turn, caused more confusion and error, paving the way for the debacle of Glacier View. And Weiland was never allowed into the White Estate to get to the real story. So he made the most out of what he had, but it does not work.
The 1888 Study Committee needs to carry on Weilands quest for the truth about 1888. They need to demand that the White Estate EXPLAIN why they were hiding thousands of documents about 1888 in their vaults until 7 years AFTER Glacier View.
Moreover, they need to come out and tell the truth about 1888 and stop playing these dishonest games. THIS is the true spirit and legacy that Weiland represents.
Your group that focuses on 1888 should officially demand that the White Estate explain the contents of this material and explain why all these years they claimed they had no eyewitness record of the infamous 1888 lectures, when they DID have such notes?
There are many questions that need to be asked of the dishonest and incompetent White Estate. They are the problem. Weiland was correct on this point. And they are still the problem today.
The White Estate must tell the truth about what they were doing all these years. Then they must correct the record and tell the real story of 1888. This massive fraud must stop. It is an insult to the Pioneers and especially Ellen White. It is also an insult to those today who expect their leaders to tell the truth and be honest.
THIS is what the 1888 Study Committee should be doing! Not running around pretending they have the correct version according to Weiland. They do not.
When Weiland wrote his books and took his positions, he had no idea that there were thousands of 1888 documents, that told the real story, hidden in the White Estate. So it is understandable that he got it wrong. He was the victim of the White Estate and so too are we all.
It is time for the SDA’s to wake up and stop allowing themselves to be abused and manipulated by their awful leaders. It is the legal responsibility of the White Estate to correct the record and tell the truth about 1888 and Ellen White. This is their duty and they must do so or else.
If your group has any loyalty to Ellen White, or any sense of fair play and honesty, they will work for real solutions and stop pretending they are the experts about 1888. They are not. It is time for truth and plain speaking.
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for genuine Adventist Reform
Offline
Tom said: Mark, Here is my reply to you. It is also being posted on the ATomorrow Forum for all to see: Feel free to come online and participate in the discussion if you want.
http://www.atomorrow.net/forum/viewtopi … 8931#p8931
Mark emailed: I would rather you did not post my comment online. I am not an exhibitionist, as you seem to be.
Tom said: Too late my friend. I am not afraid to speak to the issues, in public, - for all to see.
I find it interesting that you are fearful of such a public discussion. So too is the White Estate.
Why do you think that is?
Those that speak the truth have nothing to hide...So let’s open the windows and let as much light as possible into the room. There is no reason for anyone to be in the dark about these issues.
Mark Duncan wrote: Tom, I have nothing to hide. And unlike the White Estate, I am not afraid to be wrong because I have nothing to loose except a little pride, which is doing me no good anyway.
The issue is, one writes differently when he/she is speaking to a broader audience than when one is conversing with an individual. So it is unfair and perhaps even unethical to take someone words from a private conversation and post them online.
You are an intelligent man and you know I speak the truth on this matter so don't try to cop a santimonious attitude and pretend the issue is I have something to hide. Every intelligent person can see right through you.
Tom replied: Mark, pride goes before a fall my friend. Your views of 1888 cannot be defended. This is what is really taking place here, and THIS explains why you are throwing a temper tantrum.
No one likes to lose, especially when ones salvation is viewed as depending on the outcome. But don’t blame me, I am not the one who told you to embrace Weiland's confused and half-baked story.
Moreover, you are hardly the first to complain about being treated unfairly when the facts slam you in the face. But you are not being treated improperly. I posted our exchange of views about 1888 for all to see.
Why is that bad?
Are you ashamed of what you wrote? Do you wish you had not said some things? Not me. I stand by what I said. Your views however, will not stand. They are wrong. Sorry. Someone has to say it.
Besides, we never had any understanding that we were just having a private, secret, discussion. You wrote to me and started telling me that I was wrong on most every point. I refuted your views and placed our discussion on the ATomorrow site, in the Adventist Reform section.
So what is the problem?
In fact, Mark wrote:
"I speak of things that I have already researched and studied extensively. And I cannot accept what you have written.
Furthermore, I am currently serving as the president of the 1888 Message Study Committee and have a pretty good knowledge of what we teach and can say without conjecture that what you have spoken about us and Robert Wieland and Donald Short is also in error.
You should do your homework before you make the type of statements that you have made."
--------------------------------------------------------------
It looks like you are the one that needs to do some homework? You are the one that is shooting blanks, not me.
If you are such a good researcher, why are you angry that our discussion was posted for all to see? Why would any expert want to hide their research or their conclusions?
Guess what, I am not ashamed of what I wrote, which is why I am still posting some of these exchanges online for all to read. There all can see that you were proven wrong on a number of points.
So no wonder you don’t want the world to know that you, and the 1888 Study Committee, are full of myth and error. But this is your problem, not mine.
I want everyone to see that these so called experts about 1888, are no such thing. This is the takeaway message. Which is also why so few SDA leaders will not enter into any discussion about Adventist Reform. They know that they would lose every point. Just like you have done so far. There is no excuse for all this confusion and error when the facts were discovered 30 years ago.
Weiland’s Version of 1888 WRONG!
You think you can defend Weiland and the cult of 1888, when it is obvious that you cannot. This is what is really taking place here. I want this fact in the public domain, while you want to hide it. Sorry. I don't conduct private discussions about public issues.
The discussion about Adventist history and theology is not a private matter. Nor is Adventist Reform. The issues under discussion must be debated, out in the open, in the clear light of day, for all to see. Too bad for you!
My posting of our discussion about 1888 was proper and correct. So rather then complain, I would suggest that you figure out how you could be so wrong?
Although you claim the Internet is not useful for research or discussion, I do not agree. Nor am I bound by your narrow views of how to debate, or on what format.
I promote public discussion about Adventism, not private or personal debate. Those that cannot deal with the issues in an open, honest, manner are disqualified from the discussion.
I answer questions about SDA history and theology online, on a number of Web sites. When you found the Adventist Reform site, and wrote to me, as a represenitive of Weiland's public theology, and entered into a discussion about the public issues of 1888, I consider this part of the ongoing debate that has been in the public domain for years.
So our discussion about the issues was never considered by me, or mentioned by you, (until it was too late), to be secret or privileged.
This is all rather strange. There was no reason to pretend we were off the record. We were on the record and we are still on the record today, for all to see. Sorry.
Mark said: Tom, Now that you have gone public with my private comments and displayed a reckless disregard of my privacy, you will never have the credibility with me that you might have had.
Tom said: I had no idea that you would not stand by your words in public. I had no idea that your views were not meant for public discussion. Or that they were to be treated confidential or secret. Especially since you represent the 1888 Study Committee. Is that a secret society? If so, I did not know that.
Besides, the posted comments were only about public issues. So you have no right to complain or to pretend that something unfair has taken place. You just don’t want the world to know that you don’t know what you are talking about. OK, I get that. But too bad. People have to grow up and face the facts. Welcome to the real world my friend!
So I say again, our discussion was about public issues that we have been debating online for years. I had no idea that you thought we were having a secret debate. You obviously misunderstood.
As for my credibility? I will let the facts speak for my views. I am only as credible as the evidence will allow. And so too are you. The problem is that you don’t have the facts and I do. This is why you were so easily proven wrong on a number of points in our short little discussion. Go back and read it for yourself, it is now part of the public record for all to see.
Did you contact Jack Sequeira and Burt Haloviak as suggested? What about Goldstein? Have you taken any steps to check the facts and better understand the issues?
Or are you content to complain that you have been mistreated? All the while still pretending that your views are correct, when it is obvious they are not?
It won’t work. You have been caught embracing a false story about 1888. Period.
In fact, if you were paying attention, you would have known that the 1888 Study Committee condemned Jack Sequeira’s book “Beyond Belief.”
So why did you try and tell me that he repudiated Dr. Ford and supported your view of 1888? Don’t you read your own publications? That book represented Sequeira’s separation from Traditional Adventism, and his embrace of Dr. Ford’s correct, Protestant Gospel. He has never looked back.
http://www.teachservices.com/products/I … ittee.html
Like all Traditional SDA’s, the 1888 Study Committee is full of many false assumptions, half-truths, and much false doctrine. They also have a bad attitude to go along with their confused propaganda and poor history.
If you can’t get your facts straight about recent church history, how do you expect to understand what happened so long ago in Battle Creek? Because Weiland said so? Ha! This would be funny, except it is also very sad.
All SDA’s, no matter what their various views, must start dealing with the facts and stop pretending. It is time for all to understand the difference between religious spin and propaganda versus the real facts of history and theology.
So get mad all you want, it only underscores the point that your views do not hold up under cross-examination, and neither does the 1888 Study Committee. Which is why the GC has repudiated Weiland’s half-baked confusion about 1888 long ago.
http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.or … Gospel.htm
http://www.gospel-herald.com/primacy_st … _index.htm
This well-meaning group needs REFORM. At this point they are following silly myths and delusions. How is this going to help the Advent Movement?
Mark said: You also will probably never have my support in your efforts to change the views of the church as you might have had. You have shown yourself to be the kind of person who cannot be trusted to exercise good judgment. And therefore it would be unwise for anyone to partner with you.
Tom said: SDA’s seem to enjoy division and the pursuit of myths and false doctrines. There is a reason why Adventism is self-destructing in front of our eyes. The blind enjoy being led by their blind leaders, but at some point, enough is enough.
While you are free to support whatever false doctrine and myth you want, no one gets to develop their own set of facts. This is what must change within Adventism. The facts must replace the many myths that are the root cause for all this division and debate.
There is only one story about 1888, and it is not the one that the White Estate, Froom, or Weiland has published. The sooner this fact is understood, the better for Adventism.
As for your support? You are not close to being ready to repent of your false views. And you will never be ready, until you lose your bad attitude and agree to deal with the facts in an open, public, and honest fashion. Honesty is the best policy when it comes to history or theology. This is no time to follow myths or sloppy scholarship.
It is time for the most blunt talk. There is no other way to deal with the overwhelming corruption that is destroying the SDA church. The leaders are so full of dishonesty, double-talk, and false doctrine that there is no option but to tell the truth with the most plain and blunt remarks, supported by a mountain of evidence.
The 1888 Study Committee is part of the problem. But they can be part of the solution. They can wake up and understand that the real story of 1888 has been hidden by the White Estate on purpose. And the dishonest leaders have yet to tell the truth about this important history.
Thus, the Committee should pressure the White Estate to come clean and tell the full story. This is how they can help the church. The status quo about 1888 is not worth trying to protect or save, and this includes Weiland’s confused theology.
Weiland and Company are not the experts on 1888 as you assumed. No doubt this has came as a shock to you. But there are more shocks to come, because most everything that you think you have correct, is not.
I suggest that the “1888 Study Committee” start doing some serious “studying” about the issues. They need to keep hounding the White Estate to explain the full story, and stop thinking that they have all the answers, because they don’t.
If this 1888-focused group were really honest, and if they wanted to help Adventism, and defend Ellen White, they will stop pretending they are experts and get busy trying to better understand the facts. They should be eager to find out more information from those that have the answers.
In conclusion:
Weiland was CORRECT to say:
#1. The history of 1888 is critical for the SDA church to understand.
#2. The White Estate is not being honest with Ellen White’s documents or views.
#3. The church must repent for the 1888 debacle, including the
White Estate.
All three of these points are still very correct today, and both Weiland and Short should be commended for keeping the story of 1888 alive. This was a good thing.
But the rest of what they claim, is flat out wrong. The Nature of Christ was NOT, not, not part of the debate, nor did Weiland understand the true theological details or context of the debate.
However, the facts are now known. The details have been discovered and now there is no reason not to get this story 100% correct.
This is what the White Estate must do. They must confess what they have done and correct the record.
THIS IS WHAT THE 1888 STUDY COMITTE SHOULD DEMAND.
They need to stop pretending that Weiland got it fully correct and go find the facts from those that understand them. They need to stop pretending that the White Estate is innocent, and demand that they tell the full and complete truth about 1888. Is that too much to ask?
One way or another, the White Estate is going to answer the questions. This is why the courts will be brought into this debate if the leaders keep stonewalling. The rules of the legal system will force the White Estate to deal with the issues and answer the questions, under oath, for all to see.
So their days of stonewalling and deceiving the public are about over. And so too these outdated and incorrect views about 1888.
The true understanding of 1888 will allow the SDA’s, at least those that are honest, to go forward and complete the mission of the Three Angels Messages.
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Mark wrote: Tom, You have made many claims of having proven many things. However, anyone can make claims. As the saying goes "talk is cheap".
Tom said: I have the facts to back up my claims about 1888. I have the evidence that explains the history and theology of 1888. You can pretend otherwise if you want. But it will not change anything.
Mark said: The issue is: Can they back up those claims with demonstrable facts? This you have not done in any of our discussions to date. You have merely made claims, which prove nothing.
Tom said: I gave you numerous links to a number of discussions about 1888, which have citations and many references.
I also quoted the head of the GC Archives DENYING that the nature of Christ was part of the 1888 debate. Did you check it out this source?
So you have been presented specific points of evidence that refute your views. Why do you pretend otherwise?
Mark said: I will retrace this conversation to its start and demonstrate that the claim that I make in the above paragraph is not an idle claim as most of yours are.
Tom said: If I make a point about 1888, I can assure you that it is not an “idle claim.” When I say such and such took place, I say this because I know it for a fact. I am the one that found the 1888 documents and I have spent years dealing with this original material that most people don’t even know exists.
Rather than focus on the history of 1888, you would rather deal with the issue was about Jack Sequeira. As if he were an expert on the history of 1888. He is not, and neither is Weiland.
You think he supports Weiland’s view of theology, when I claim he supports Dr. Ford. OK, I will play along. What about JS? What is he saying?
Mark wrote: Below is a section from your initial response to me. You stated:
“The Bible teaches that we are saved by faith or through faith. Faith is only the instrument or channel by which we receive Christ as our righteousness. It is Christ — His life, His death, His resurrection — that saves us, nothing else.”
http://www.jacksequeira.org/beyond10.htm
Tom said: Such theology is very different from Traditional Adventism, which teaches faith AND works save us. When he says “nothing else” he refutes what the 1888 Study Committee, and all the Traditional SDA’s, teach about the definition of the Gospel.
He is agreeing with Luther and Dr. Ford, as well as the post 1888 Ellen White.
-----------------------------------------------
Tom said: Mark, I was quoting Sequeria’s book and making the point that he had switched sides. This quotation was used as proof by his critics that he had embraced Dr. Ford’s view of the Gospel.
Guess what? The critics, like the Standish brothers, and Hope International, were correct. Sequeira had changed his view of the Gospel to mirror that of Dr. Ford.
He correctly rejects the typical SDA legalism. He understands Luther’s Gospel and so too Dr. Ford’s. I am surprised that you don’t know this?
Mark said: The above section from your first email to me is a prime example of your idle false and misleading claims.
Tom said: I personally know both Dr. Ford and Pastor Sequeira. They have BOTH been in my home.
They both view the nature of Christ the same.
They both agree that Justification is by faith alone, without sanctification.
They both agree that Ellen White has no doctrinal authority.
Mark said: What entity published and currently sells Jacks Sequeira's book Beyond Belief? Why the 1888 Message Study Committee (1888MSC) published and currently sells it. Now that is odd. How is it that this book represents a break from the theology of the 1888MSC when the 1888MSC is the institution, which currently sells it?
Tom said: It appears that the 1888 Study Committee is either very confused about what happened in the 1990’s, or they just want to pretend all is well so they can sell books and have a reason to exist. You tell me, I am not part of that misguided group?
But regardless, the fact of the matter is that Jack Sequeira does not share the views of Traditional Adventism as you have assumed. He is correct, and so too Dr. Ford, but you, and your group, are very wrong about many things, including the 1888 message.
Perhaps its time for JS to speak more clearly? He does not like to go around and admit that his theology is so close to Dr. Ford because it turns off his SDA audience and his peers. It causes him problems. But so what? The preaching of the genuine Gospel is supposed to cause problems and debate.
I think it is time for everyone to stop playing games and deal with the issues, openly and honestly. The Advent Movement must admit its many errors and return to an attitude of searching for truth. They have almost nothing correct. Not church organization, the Sabbath or the Euchrist. Not even the Gospel or the history of 1888. Pitiful. And very dishonest.
Mark said: Your claim in this case is ridiculous and false as are most of them. Below is a link to the 1888MSC web site where you may purchase the book and prove to yourself that you are WRONG!
http://www.1888msc.org/transaction.php? … y_parent=4
Tom said: The fact that your group sells a book that you don’t fully understand, hardly disproves what I am telling you about recent church history, much less about the history of 1888. The White Estate sells all manner of books and publications, (like the 1888 Collection that was released in 1987), that they do not understand. It happens all the time in the confused and dishonest SDA church.
So all you have proven is how confused everyone is about Adventism. And that it little makes rational sense.
The fact of the matter is that Sequeira does NOT support Weiland's theology or his view of the Gospel. He does however; embrace Dr. Ford's Gospel, and his view of the nature of Christ.
If you don't think so, GO ASK HIM!
While I thought that Weiland wrote a refutation of JS book Beyond Belief, called: Is Beyond Belief Beyond Belief? I may be mistaken, because it looks like Weiland supported Sequeria’s book, which was under attack by most all the other Fundamentalist SDA’s. (I have not been able to find a copy of IBBBB).
So I need to read Weiland’s little work and try and figure out what he was doing was doing and why. And I apologize for this apparent mistake.
But guess what? If Weiland didn’t disown Sequeira, many others did. Thus, the Traditional SDA’s, like Hope International, and the Standish brothers, etc protested against Sequeira, and broke away from the 1888 group.
It is hard to keep up with the details of all this silly drama. But it changes nothing. Sequeira does not support the legalistic Gospel of the SDA’s. Nor did Weiland understand 1888 correctly.
And none of this changes anything about the history of 1888 or Glacier View, which was just a replay of 1888, with Dr. Ford playing the role of Waggoner.
Also see:
http://great-controversy-movie.com/blog/?p=212
If you don’t believe me, just read what other critics say about Sequeira:
Within the last few months, Jack Sequeira published a doctrinal book through Pacific Press. Entitled, Beyond Belief, this 192-page book details a sizable range of Sequeira’s teachings. In addition to that book, earlier sermon tapes of his are avail- able. Since Sequeira is becoming an important theological speaker logical speaker, on behalf of leadership, it is important that we know what he teaches. In the present study we will survey nine of them:
He ridicules Ellen White's writings, and says we should not use them.
He rejects essential parts of our historic Sanctuary Message.
He teaches errors which Ballenger taught.
He refuses to use the Spirit of Prophecy in his sermons, papers, books, or replies to critics.
He labels those areas, in which he disagrees with the Spirit of Prophecy writings, as ''non-essential'' and “non-fundamental.”
He declares that Christ's atonement was totally finished on the cross, and our salvation was assured and fully completed at that time.
He teaches that we now have unconditional salvation, which received by us just once, guarantees our being taken to heaven.
He says that cooperation with God in working out our salvation is “Galatian legalism.”
He insists that the Final Crisis will be fought over acceptance of the finished atonement, instead of over obedience to the law of God.
Jack Sequeira has had an influence in our church far beyond his pastoral duties to the students, faculty, and village folk in College Place and Walla Walla, Washington. (More recently, Sequeira was transferred to the Potomac Conference.)
In his sermons, he openly boasts that he is in so demand by conference presidents. He explains that he frequently receives calls from them to hold ministerial retreats in order to teach the ministers the importance of not using the Spirit of Prophecy in their work.
He has, in addition, the unusual distinction of being the only Adventist college pastor who regularly teaches groups of historic Adventists throughout the continent. This is due to the fact that he is frequently a speaker at 1888 Message Study Committee seminars.
http://www.sdadefend.com/MINDEX-S/J-Seq … 01-506.pdf
The paper goes on to say that Sequeira is out of step with Traditional Adventism and the 1888 crowd on numerous points. The author is essentially correct to make such observations.
Here is someone else making the same point:
"Do the writings and theology of Jack Sequeira truly represent correct Bible doctrine, or is it something else again?
Here is one quote from Jack Sequeria’s book, “Beyond Belief.”
“The gospel of faith plus works, or justification plus sanctification, is at the heart of Roman Catholicism theology. It is a subtle form of legalism.” (p. 25)
That’s funny; this is not what the Bible teaches.
James 2:20 But will you know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
He assigns two Bible doctrines to Roman Catholicism in one fell swoop. He also denies the necessary lifelong work of sanctification, which is separate from justification.
By faith in Christ, and obedience to the law of God, we may be sanctified, and thus obtain a fitness for the society of holy angels and the white-robed redeemed ones in the kingdom of glory. {RH, April 26, 1881 par.}
http://www.adventistonline.com/forum/to … and-beyond
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tom said: Apparently you do not know the firestorm this book created when it came out. Hope International, and the Traditional SDA's were very upset with Pastor Jack because they correctly saw his views shifting to Dr. Ford. The fact you don't know this is rather astounding.
JS refutes Weiland's view of the Nature of Christ and the Gospel. Period! This is a fact. Thus he has broken away from the 1888 Committee a number of years ago, but maybe they didn’t want to admit it. Or maybe Weiland is also shifting his theology towards Dr. Ford’s correct view of the Gospel and church history?
Sequeira does not support what you claim. I say good for him! How could you not know this?
Here is JS Story;
http://www.jacksequeira.org/personalbeliefs.htm
I admit this is not written as clear as it could be. So I can see how some would read this a different way. And perhaps this was intended? One cannot readily understand what side of the fence Sequeria is standing, unless more of the backstory is known.
Here is some more about Sequeira:
In the mid-1980s, Wieland and Short retired. At that time, Wieland began lecturing, and soon was holding the meetings in the name of an organization the two founded, the 1888 Study Committee. With the passing of time, this lecture circuit gained momentum as leading speakers in the church, well accepted by leadership, toured with him.
While other Independent Ministries were gradually shut out of the churches, the 1888 Study Committee continued to have church doors opened to them. One of the men on their lecture team was Jack Sequeira. Sequeira was the senior pastor of the Walla Walla, Washington, Adventist Church.
After becoming senior pastor of that congregation (the church attended by faculty and students of our northwest college: Walla Walla College), he came out clearly with two key sermons.
In the first, he flatly stated that it was wrong for our people to quote or refer to the Spirit of Prophecy in public meetings, or even in private conversations (!), in order to support, defend, or influence another regarding a doctrinal belief or church standard.
In the other sermon, he declared that there is no sanctuary in heaven-because all heaven is the sanctuary. He declared that there is no two-room building there, and never has been. Those who have listened to those two sermon tapes, recognize that Jack Sequeira is not really a Seventh-day Adventist. He is an ordained Evangelical preaching in our churches.
The crisis in the 1888 Study Committee came in the late fall of 1993, when it published whole-hearted approval of Sequeira's new book, Beyond Belief, in which he clearly rejects obedience to the law of God, through faith in Christ, as an aspect of salvation.
Because Robert Wieland had shown consistent support for Sequeira's book and beliefs, a group of historic believers met with him in southern California in January of this year (1994). Reconvening on February 2-3, approximately 40 were in attendance, including both Wieland and Sequeira. By the end of the two-day gathering, it was clear that Sequeira and Wieland stood squarely together in their positions.
(For much more on Sequeira's views, see The Teachings of Jack Sequeira [WM-501-506], a six-part tract set released in January 1994.)
How did Elder Wieland slip away? Very likely, he spent more time discussing deep theology with friends and associates, than in studying God's Word as a little child. Did you know that only little children will be saved? The little children are the ones willing to bow humbly before the Inspired Writings, and take those Writings just as they read.
Those who want to add their own inspiration to the Inspired Whole, -will unconsciously find themselves walking away from the sacred books, and seeking out those who have uninspired theories. Self-kindled sparks takes the place of the Words of God.
It is all a tragic mistake, but it can happen so gradually that one is not aware it is taking place. Keep soaking in God's Word! Approach it humbly as a little child reading his precious Father's writings. Respect God's Word more than the sayings of those around you.
Keep submitting to that Word! Keep obeying it, by the empowerment of Christ, your Lord and Saviour.
Sequeira's lectures and book is only part of a multi-pronged attack against historic Adventism. Sequeira teaches that we do not-and should not-try to obey God. It is not our place to resist sin, but to let Him automatically work out our obedience for us. We should only believe and wait for God do it.
Sequeira's typical new theology includes the concept that there is no atonement after the cross, because everyone was saved at the cross. All that is thereafter necessary is to accept that salvation.
Sequeira's teaching is basically the same as that of Helmut Ott and Norman Gulley. On July 23, 1993, a special ministerial gathering was convened at Cohutta Springs, Georgia. A 32-page document was given to all those who attended the meeting. That document discussed the 1888 problem and presented as a solution a combination of Norval Pease's concept of "salvation-by-faith-alone," with O.A. Olson's "1888-as-victory" theory.
This July 1993 gathering combined "sinning till the Second Coming" with the "1888-victory" theme. Yet this is understandable: If we were all saved at the cross, then the opposition at Minneapolis mattered not-for all in attendance had professed faith in Christ and so all were saved already, no matter what position they took on righteousness by faith!
With these new theologians, profession is everything; what is done in the life, by the "saved individual" is of little consequence. So, in a sense, we have come full circle. At Minneapolis, a mature understanding of righteousness by faith was presented, and the opponents wanted works alone. Today when that mature view is presented, the opponents want faith alone. All the while, the correct view of forgiveness and enabling obedience by faith in Christ (the message of the Third Angel: Revelation 14:12) is set aside, ridiculed, ignored, or repudiated.
http://omega77.tripod.com/rbfaithrealtruth.htm
It is clear that a number of people think JS has embraced the theology of Dr. Ford. They think this because it is true.
Here is a BOOK written by a Weiland supporter against Beyond Belief: While I am not saying that I agree with all of these criticisms, it shows the fallout from JS switching sides. How can you be part of the 1888 Study Committee and not know this history?
________________________________
Adventism's New View,
'It's Beyond Belief'-
by
Jeff Pippenger
The publishing of the book Beyond Belief by Jack Sequeira has brought about a chain of circumstances necessitating the formulation of the following book.
This book will first briefly describe the gospel plan as set forth in the Scriptures and echoed in the Spirit of Prophecy. We will address a few aspects of the gospel, then set forth the gospel message as brought by AT. Jones and EJ. Waggoner.
We will then identify some of the concerns we find in the book Beyond Belief It matters not what any man or group of men believes to be truth. It does matter what we individually believe. It is our prayer that individually God's people will come to the true understanding of the plan of salvation, and then experience and proclaim it.
This work also highlights the meeting that resulted to debate Sequeria's new theology: Two meetings were held in 1994 between Jack Sequeira and some prominent members of the 1888 Message Study Committee, and a few other ministries not in agreement with the theology contained in the book Beyond Belief The first meeting was for a day in January; then the second meeting was two days in February. Both meetings were at Loma Linda, California.
At the close of the first day of the second meeting, a motion was made that on the following day Colin Standish do an exegesis on Romans 7 to be followed by exegesis on Romans 7 by Jack Sequeira. The motion was passed and the next day there came a change of the agenda.
The New View advocates wanted Romans 5 to be addressed instead of Romans 7, with one interesting addition. They made a motion that in the exegesis no Spirit of Prophecy could be used.
Of course, there followed a lively discussion on light and truth, but the numbers were there for the New View. No Spirit of Prophecy was allowed to be introduced in the exegesis on Romans 5. One must ask himself why? The obvious answer to this writer is that Romans 5: 18 is too important a verse for the advocates of the New View to be challenged by the clear testimony of the Spirit of Prophecy. If the New View is to be accepted, Romans 5: 18 must teach that all men are justified.
http://salmun.cwahi.net/nrm/chrst/sda/d … nv.htm#00c
Here is more from Ron Spears about Sequeria embracing the theology of Dr. Ford:
“In the late 70s and early 80s Desmond Ford jarred some Seventh-day Adventists awake with teachings new to Adventism, teachings, which he claimed were the true gospel. We now refer to his teachings as the New Theology, but they were actually old theology in a new dress...At Glacier View, in the early 80s, the church was forced to deal with Ford's counterfeit gospel and he was defrocked. But now we have reached the 90s and an even greater theological crisis has appeared. Every wind of doctrine seems to be blowing within Adventism.
Today we have the futurists who are attempting to reapply the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, discounting the Spirit-of Prophecy statement that new light will not contradict old light. We also find in many places the same teachings for which Ford was defrocked being preached in the pulpits, and very few objections are made. When the straight testimony is given in response, it is considered critical, and some have been censored and even dis-fellowshipped for promoting it.
Jack Sequeira, who promotes these Nicolaitan concepts, is now sponsored by some leaders to teach what is purportedly the 1888 message of righteousness by faith. In reality his is a new version of the 'New Theology'. Desmond Ford was easy to identify.
At Pacific Union College he openly renounced his belief in the investigative judgment. There was an immediate response from some laymen, pastors and leaders. The outcome of that episode is now history.
Jack Sequeira is much more subtle. Proclaiming what he calls, "the essence of the 1888 message," he insidiously contradicts it with carefully chosen words and phrases. His book Beyond Belief is just one of a series of dangerous books that have recently come from our denominational presses. The following chapters will clearly identify and deal with some of the erroneous and dangerous teachings contained in this book.
http://salmun.cwahi.net/nrm/chrst/sda/d … nv.htm#00b
Tom said: Now do you think I am just making things up?
There are many that understand the obvious fact that JS has shifted his theology. He was originally against Dr. Ford and Glacier View, but now he has become more educated about the NT, and the Gospel.
Here is another critic who claims that JS has embraced the theology of Dr. Ford. Which he has! These people are saying these things because he has shifted his theology to that of Dr. Ford.
http://www.stepstolife.org/php/view_art … le_id=1063
In conclusion, it should be clear that JS's theology is much closer to Dr. Ford than Weiland’s. This is the point that I have been making. I am surprised you don’t know this.
Like I said, I have known JS for many years. He has come to my house for Sabbath lunch, and we spoke about Dr. Ford's theology. He supports Dr. Ford's Gospel, while he does not support Weiland’s view of the Gospel.
Good for him!
Too bad he didn't come out sooner, and speak out more boldly for the correct Gospel.
Perhaps he has been too cute about all this? But this is the way the SDA's operate. There are too many factions and too much division, politics, and double-talk about 1888 and all else. It needs to stop.
The real story of 1888 has been discovered. The nature of Christ played no role in the debate. This fact, alone, overturns much of what the 1888 Study Committee teaches about this history.
Dr. Ford's theology has turned out to be correct, while Weiland's assertions about 1888 and the IJ, are mostly all wrong.
Sorry to be the one to tell you this, but it is a fact that cannot be refuted.
You can pretend all you want. But the facts are what they are! And you do not have them!
History cannot be so easily hidden or manipulated, as all SDA’s are going to find out. The time has come for all sides of the debate to understand there is only one set of facts.
There is only one correct version of the Three Angels Messages, even as there is only one Gospel.
There is no excuse for all this myth, error and confusion about Adventist history and doctrine. The record of what happened in 1888 has been hiding in the White Estate all these years. What a tragedy that the leaders choose to hide, suppress, and manipulate the record? They have fooled most everyone with this massive fraud that can no longer be hidden.
Like I said, the 1888 Study Committee should wake up and demand that the White Estate explain why they were hiding thousands of rare historical documents about 1888,- until 7 years after Glacier View?
The 1888 Study Committee should demand that the White Estate explain in detail what these new documents contain, and why this information is so different from what the church has taught all these years.
If this group really wanted to get to the bottom of the issues about 1888, they would demand that the White Estate tell the truth and confess what they have done. But no. They think they have all the answers, when they don’t even know the right questions.
Wake up, silly SDA’s. Wake up!
Tom Norris, who knows the real story about 1888
Offline
So, Tom, let me get this clear, the documents written by EGW hidden in some vault hold the truth to salvation.
Who is being silly. The Word of God has that, not the documents you claim to have seen but can't share in a succinct manner.
Offline
Bob 2 said: So, Tom, let me get this clear, the documents written by EGW hidden in some vault hold the truth to salvation?
Who is being silly? The Word of God has that; not the documents you claim to have seen but can't share in a succinct manner.
Tom said: Sorry Bob, but you are not comprehending this discussion as yet.
The documents in the White Estate vaults hold the “truth” about SDA history and theology. They contain the genuine record about Ellen White’s views, as well as what happened during the infamous and very controversial 1888 debates.
To be blunt, these documents prove that the leaders have been fabricating church history and theology for generations. Which is why they have a false Gospel and are so confused and divided about theology.
These suppressed documents prove that there was a systematic, deliberate, and criminal plan, from the highest leaders, to hide the 1888 story from the church.
In other words, the White Estate is a crime scene. And these documents, and others that were discovered in the Archives, prove that the highest leaders in the SDA church have been knowingly participating in the crime of publishing fraud. They have acted so wickedly and arrogantly in this matter, that it boggles the mind.
To make matters worse, they have also been working hard to cover-up this fraud when Tom Norris discovered it in 1979. So the modern leaders are as guilty as the dead ones that started this crime. Some should go to prison for what they have done.
The leaders could not be guiltier if they tried and it is only a matter of time before legal action commences against the White Estate for what they have done. One way or another, they will be forced to admit what they have done, and the record will be corrected for all to see.
The Fraud of Glacier View
In hindsight, an honest reading and disclosure of these suppressed documents would have prevented Glacier View and stopped the great schism that is now destroying Adventism. These documents were found in time to correct the record, and stop the rush to defend Traditional Adventism at Glacier View, (which had been based on a massive cover-up about 1888 in the White Estate all along).
However, what has been done is done. History cannot be rolled back. But the damage can be stopped by telling the truth and correcting the record. This is what must take place if the SDA’s are ever going to become united and focused on Gospel eschatology.
Telling the truth about the history of 1888 will save the Advent Movement from its present course of self-destruction and double-talk. It will also save the reputation of Ellen White, whose real views have been so distorted that few know what she really believes about the IJ or the Gospel.
When this massive fraud ends, it will ruin the reputations of men like Arthur White, Kenneth Wood, and Dr. Froom. It will also as expose Weiland’s active imagination about 1888, as absurd and incompetent, a silly diversion from the facts that has confused many.
Others, like Sequeira, who have tried to take a middle view, will also be correctly seen as dishonest double-talkers, who tried to capitalize on the confusion and sell books to make themselves great. The truth about 1888 will show that most all SDA pastors are very gullible and incompetent, if not downright dishonest. They will all have to repent of their false views before they will enter the Kingdom of God.
The genuine story about 1888 will prove that Glacier View was a sham, and that Dr. Ford is due an apology from those that thought he had the wrong Gospel and was attacking the Three Angels Messages as well as Ellen White.
The White Estate and the GC have horribly misled the SDA church about their history, mission, and theology. They have deliberately suppressed and misrepresented thousands of documents so that they could fabricate a false story about 1888 and manipulate church doctrine for their own evil purposes.
This awful and illegal fraud has divided and confused the church, leading it down a legalistic, Old Covenant path that has taken the Advent Movement to the brink of self-destruction. It must stop. The truth will be told, and the fallout will be what it will be…
In order to resolve the present crisis, and save the disoriented Advent Movement, the record must be corrected. Period. Everyone must understand what really happened in Battle Creek and Takoma Park as one myth after another is exposed and removed. THEN the SDA’s will be able to understand the Gospel, which at this point they DO NOT.
The Gospel does not operate or function in such a dishonest environment. Only when the SDA’s repent for what they have done, and start telling the truth about church history and theology, can the Gospel emerge.
At this point, no one is being saved by any version of the SDA Gospel, because it is false, wretched, and worthless. The present condition of the Adventists, which has been correctly described by the Laodicean Message, (the true Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church) is that they are blind and naked. Which means that they are wrong about most every point possible, and that they are not saved.
This is why these documents in the White Estate and the Archives are important to understand. And why the truth about 1888 must be told.
This is also why there must be honest and genuine REFORM.
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Do you have proof of this fraud so law officers could prosecute, or just your memory? Do you have photocopies to prove your accusation, or sort of a warm idea, a warm memory of what you saw, or cold recollections?
JUST ASKIN'
Offline
Bob, I was in the GC Archives and the White Estate for over a year, full time, going over this hidden material. I have copies and notes of my research. There is no doubt that these documents are genuine and that they contain a very different story about Ellen White and 1888 from what the church, and the 1888 zealots teach.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Estate.htm
There is also no doubt what the White Estate was doing all these years. Arthur White was hiding documents and misrepresenting Ellen White’s views in a deliberate attempt to manipulate the record. He succeeded, at least for a while, and thus Glacier View was the crowning act of this great deception.
Not long after Glacier View, many started to understand that the White Estate and the church were not being honest about church history. Then Walter Rea, an EGW zealot, told his story about how he caught the White Estate not telling the truth. These events opened the floodgates of schism, even as it was a final blow to Ellen White’s credibility.
But even then, the White Estate continued to stick to their fabricated and absurd story about Ellen White and her views. They would not confess, even though such a confession would clear up all the debated issues, and rehabilitate Ellen White’s damaged reputation.
So don’t misunderstand. I do not wish to bring legal action against the White Estate. Such action is only a means to an end. It is a last resort if they continue to refuse to come forward and tell the truth to the Adventist Community.
If they continue with this arrogant cover-up, and refuse to confess, then legal action will be taken to force them to do the right thing. But they can avoid such a costly and embarrassing situation if they take the proper action now. So the choice is really up to them.
The White Estate succeeded in deceiving millions of people about Ellen White, including the 1888 crowd that claims to know all the details about this controversial history. But they have been caught for all to see. They are not going to get away with this crime of publishing fraud. Nor should anyone want such a criminal enterprise to run free and misrepresent Ellen White.
The White Estate was behind Glacier View, and they used their fabricated story of church history to make their false case against Dr. Ford. Such contaminated testimony renders any trial moot, and only proves how corrupt the leaders have become to stage such a phony trial. Glacier View was a great lie that has yet to be fully explained or understood by the Adventist Community.
There is no nice way to describe this crime of fraud and spoliation in the White Estate. This long running scam has contaminated every church doctrine, rendering nothing but confusion, delusion, and division in the process.
The White Estate’s behavior is outrageous, and so to the GC, that has full control over the White Estate. The church has no defense for what they have done. NONE. Any that support this fraud are going to go down in flames with them, including the foolish 1888 crowd that has allowed itself to be taken in by this great scam.
The White Estate has never denied that Tom Norris was ushered into their vaults- via a special committee called for this purpose. Nor can anyone deny the fact that in 1987, out of nowhere, came this huge collection of rare and missing documents about 1888, which told a very different story of church history.
Why was this massive amount of material hidden in the first place? And why did it show up 7 years AFTER Glacier View, when the debate over RBF and the Gospel were over, decided by the church leadership in 1980?
The publication of this material, even though it was unreadable and unedited, is proof of guilt. This is the smoking gun that proves there was a massive and long running fraud taking place. One that is still ongoing today.
Too bad that the 1888 crowd looked the other way and pretended that nothing was discovered in these documents that changed their views. Such a position only proves that Weiland and company cannot read, or that they are as dishonest and incompetent as Froom and Arthur White. Perhaps both.
These blind men look at the newly discovered 1888 documents, not to find out what really happened and correct their assumptions, but to find some word or phrase to support their pre-determined views, which they have no plans to change. Thus Weiland and others pretend that this discovery changes nothing, when it changes everything.
http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/righteou … f1888.html
One would have assumed that the 1888 crowd would rejoice because of this great discovery, especially since the handwritten notes of Waggoner’s 1888 presentation were finally found, hidden in the White Estate all along.
Up until this time, there were no eyewitness reports of Waggoner’s 1888 presentation, and it was this point that allowed Froom and others to fill in the blanks as they pleased. After all, who could say otherwise? Without an eyewitness record, who could be sure of anything?
But this too turned out to be another myth, because this eyewitness record was in the vault the whole time! And so they are today. Arthur White knew it, and so too did Froom and others. But they pretended it was not there so they could fabricate a different story for the Adventist Community.
THIS is why the White Estate was set up like a fortress. Where only a few words from a letter or document were allowed to be published, and the rest censored. THIS is why there was a complex system of manuscript releases, and why no independent scholars were ever allowed to freely examine the documents in the vault. The White Estate was a crime scene all these years. It was a very dishonest archive that was breaking all the rules, and betraying Ellen White the Adventist Community.
The Review was also part of this fraud and they worked hard to minimize the 1979 discovery of these documents, even to the point of denying what was discovered. Thus, in 1995, the Editor of the Review, Bill Johnsson wrote that the church really doesn’t know what happened in 1888. Things are so “murky,” he declared, that no one today can figure it all out.
Listen to this great lie from the Review Editor:
"These are the bare facts: dispute over the role of the law in salvation, polarization, large scale rejection of Waggoner's and Jones' emphasis but endorsement of it by Ellen White. Beyond these facts, the picture is murky.”
“Why? Partly because Waggoner's messages at the conference were not recorded. We simply don’t know what he said beyond the fact that he included the moral law is the law that is to bring us to Christ (but not beyond). In this vacuum theories proliferate."
The Fragmenting of Adventism, 1995, William G. Johnsson, p.99.
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … l#POST2953
Ha! So 12 years after the discovery of thousands of documents about 1888, including the eye witness notes of Waggoner’s famous 1888 presentation, the Review Editor claims that there was no record made and that we “don’t know what he said.”
(He must have thought that Tom Norris had died.)
Thus, the church leaders pretended there was no discovery about 1888 and that there was no way to ever understand this period of church history.
But it was all great lie. Bill Johnsson knew about these materials, but he too went along with the long-standing cover-up, denying the facts.
Wow!
The SDA leaders are the world’s greatest liars!
No wonder Bill Johnsson refused to be interviewed by Tom Norris over at AToday. He knew he had been caught, so he ran away from the AToday Interview, even as he tried to shut down the discussion by closing the site.
Weiland also overlooks this stunning new 1888 evidence. Why? Because it does not support his delusions. So you never see him quoting this rare document from the 1888 meeting because it does not support his view. This is the way the SDA’s operate. They are not honest about the facts of history or scripture.
Talk about being blind and dishonest? This whole episode is beyond belief. It is mind-boggling. If liars cannot go to heaven, then the SDA’s are in for a shock. None of their leaders know how to tell the truth.
It was exactly this outrageously dishonest behavior about 1888 that prodded me to go public and tell the real story. Between the White Estate and the Review covering up the evidence, and Weiland running around declaring he knew the secret theology of 1888, it was too much for me to take. I had to speak out, and that is what I did, starting with the interview of Dr. Ford, and the topic of Glacier View.
The SDA’s today are just as dishonest and cultic as the Mormons, JW’s, or Scientologists. They are great liars and mythmakers, just like those dishonest and disgusting cults, which would also include the RCC with their dark secrets of rampant child abuse. Organized religion today is a farce, and the SDA’s are no exception to this Laodicean rule.
So it is no wonder that so many have left the church. Honest people cannot be SDA’s today. Too many things make no sense. Too much double-talk, division, and lies.
I am stunned at the level of blatant dishonesty from those that claim to follow the teaching of Jesus. I am astounded that those that claim to revere the Adventist Pioneers have repudiated them so totally.
There is hardly an honest man in the SDA ministry, and none in leadership positions. This is why no apologists will even speak to the issues in public. Not one of them will debate Dr. Ford or Tom Norris; Not Goldstein, Johnsson, Sequeira, or the 1888 crowd. They are all double-talking cowards that have been caught with a mountain of myths and false doctrines for all to see. Their Gospel is worthless and so too most everything they teach.
The Denomination has gone fully corrupt and blind. No one should trust anything that is taught or published by this “wretched” church or its many spins offs, like the 1888 Study Committee.
Today, SDA theology, doctrine, and history are nothing more than dishonest propaganda and spin. Their confused Gospel is a bad joke, and so too their Old Covenant doctrines, like tithe and Jewish food laws that they pretend is the will of God.
Woe to the SDA’s if they do not wake up and repent!
Woe to the Adventists is they do not stop supporting their dishonest leaders!
Woe to the Advent Movement is they refuse to tell the truth and embrace Gospel Reform.
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Tom wrote:
Today, SDA theology, doctrine, and history are nothing more than dishonest propaganda and spin. Their confused Gospel is a bad joke, and so too their Old Covenant doctrines, like tithe and Jewish food laws that they pretend is the will of God.
Ellen endorsed the tithing system Tom. She also endorsed the food laws for the flock. I don't
know if her angel directed her about the food laws, but I do know she used the angel in telling her flock that their salvation depended on paying an honest tithe. This should make her a false prophet in your eyes. It has in mine.
What was the real truth about 1888?
While in the vault did you see Ellen's early visions on the Shut door? Did you see how she used her angel in those visions? Now we know the whole shut door theory was false and we can see how the "prophet" was completely off track. We can see that she was just a disillusioned young woman trying to make a name for herself. It worked, but the price is a big one.
Offline
Yeah, Tom, why the secrecy of what the true message of 1888. If EGW died shortly after the turn of the century, she must have been complicit in hiding the truth about salvation, eh? What is the truth as you see 1888 in two paragraph, not two pages.
Offline
Mark said: Tom, JS has a different view of the IJ, which I agree with.
Tom said: There is way too much confusion, myth, and error associated with the IJ. Few people really understand these issues, which have been incompetently and dishonestly explained to the Adventist Community by the White Estate as well as many others.
Today, there must be a careful, calm, and honest assessment of the IJ, as well as with the history associated with it. Until this is done, the SDA church will continue to embrace many myths and false assumptions about the Pre-Advent Judgment, (which is another term for the IJ). They will continue to self-destruct.
Dr. Ford is correct about the IJ, church history, and the Gospel. To the extent that Sequeira embraces Dr. Ford’s theology, then he is also correct. But JS is being very dishonest and slick. He talks out of both sides of his mouth and tries to hide the fact that he is closer to Dr. Ford than to Traditional Adventism and Weiland’s point of view.
But guess what? Few comprehend what Dr. Ford has really been teaching, and the same seems to go for Waggoner or Sequeira, (who still refuses to come out of the closet and clearly admit that Dr. Ford is correct). There is so much slander, propaganda, and misinformation within the Adventist Community about church history and doctrine, that few have any idea what is really going on, much less how to get out of this mess.
It is time to stop all this utter nonsense, double-talk, and stupidity. It is time to deal with the issues and point out the facts regardless if it makes this faction look good or bad. The 1888 Study Committee is promoting myth and delusion, their view of history and theology is very wrong.
If the IJ is truth, then it should have no problem. But if it not, then it must be repudiated, like any false doctrine.
EJ Waggoner & the IJ
Although Weiland and the 1888 crowd claim that EJ Waggoner is a great theologian who discovered some deep insight into the Gospel, they disagree with him about most everything, including the IJ and the Gospel. So how can they claim to follow his teachings, when they take the opposite view?
Waggoner was raised to believe in the IJ, and it took him many years before he had sufficient knowledge to understand it. In fact, he was so determined to grasp the details of Daniel that he actually went to the trouble to learn Hebrew. At the end of his life, Waggoner was 100% certain that there was no such doctrine as the IJ in the entire Bible. It was a myth and an error.
Like Dr. Ford, and Raymond Cottrell, EJ Waggoner also came to understand that the SDA’s have made a huge mistake about the IJ.
Listen to his confession about the IJ:
The Investigative Judgment
Extracted from his final manuscript, Confession of Faith, 1916, by EJ Waggoner
“It is impossible that there could be any such thing as the transferring of sins to the sanctuary in heaven, thus defiling that place; and there could, consequently, be no such thing, either in 1844, A.D., or at any other time, as the "cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary."
"Then what took place in 1844?"
“That question puzzled me for many years; for I have been so thoroughly indoctrinated with the idea of a 2300-year period ending in 1844, that it never occurred to me to doubt it. Indeed, I never did doubt it for a moment; but one day the light dawned on me, and I saw that period had no foundation whatever, and then of course I simply dropped it.”
“How did I learn this? You asked. Well, I suppose I should never have seen it if I had not been for so many years fully convinced that the thing which I, from my boyhood, had been taught took place in 1844 did occur, then not at any other time.”
“But what about the 2300 days? Are we to throw the prophetic rule of "a day for a year"? By no means; that rule holds, but it has no application in this case, for the simple reason that the eight chapter of Daniel makes no mention whatever of 2300 days. Not the "King James" version, nor any other version, but the Hebrew text, must settle the question, and that says, "two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings." (Literally "evening-mornings"), as correctly rendered in the revised version.”
"But, it [is] asked, "doesn't an evening and a morning make a day?" Yes; but what reason have we for gratuitously assuming that the term is here used as a periphrasis for "day"? In that case we should have a figure of a figure!”
“We are placed under the necessity of interpreting a figure of speech, and then taking that interpretation as a prophetic figure. When a prophetic symbol is used, the symbol itself ought to be absolutely clear, needing no explanation. But here we are told to believe that we have for the figurative day a term that is never elsewhere used in the Bible for the word "day." Why should we assume an exception here?”
“There is a Hebrew word that is everywhere rendered "day," and it is the only word for "day" in the Hebrew language. It occurs more than 2000 times in the Hebrew Scriptures.”
“Has it never occurred to you to wonder why an exception should be made here? It certainly rests with those who claim an exception here to show the most clear and convincing proof of the alleged fact, and to give a plain and conclusive reason therefore.”
“If the translators of the 1611 version had translated the Hebrew words ereb boker (evenings mornings), instead of substituting "day" for the proper rendering, I doubt if even the maintaining of a theory would have led anyone to light upon so far-fetched an interpretation.”
“I ask again, what reason can be given for the introduction by inspiration of a new, absolutely unknown, and clumsy expression, instead of the simple and well-known word for "day," if the reader were intended to understand "day?" I say "clumsy expression," meaning only, of course, as a circumlocution for "day." “
“In reality there is nothing clumsy about it when taken in its obvious sense. It seems so obvious as to need no argument, that the term "evening-mornings," when used in connection with the sanctuary, must refer only to evening and morning sacrifices….”
"But what about the Investigative Judgment?" Yes, indeed, what about it?”
“In truth, there is no responsibility resting on me to say anything about it, because in the entire Bible, from Gen. 1:1 to Rev. 22:21, inclusive, there is never once any mention of such a thing.”
“A long time ago I found that the only way to avoid misunderstandings in Bible discussions was to keep clear of theological terms not found in Scripture, and hence not susceptible of Bible explanation. A brief consideration of the Judgment in general will show that there is no place for an "investigative" Judgment before the coming of Christ.”
“You will pardon me for quoting several passages of Scripture in full, instead of merely giving the references. I want the truth that they contain to stand out so boldly that it will be apparent what a libel upon God it is to assume that He is under the necessity of investigating the record of men's lives and characters, in order to ascertain whether or not He can take them to Heaven…”
http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/waggoner.htm
Waggoner does not support TA or what the 1888 Study Committee teaches. He would refute and denounce most everything they teach. So why do they pretend that he is their champion?
Waggoner calls the IJ “Far Fetched.”
So why does anyone today think he supports the IJ or those that do? Waggoner does not, not, not, believe in Weiland’s view of what happened in 1888, much less the meaning of Glacier View or the Gospel. So why pretend? Why deceive the Adventist Community about the facts of history?
How odd that the 1888 zealots claim: “The focus of the 1888 message was the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.” If this was the meaning of Waggoner’s message in 1888, what happens to that “message” when he totally and forever repudiates the IJ? What happens when the record proves that the IJ was not part of the debate?
http://www.gospelherald.com/walper_ann/ … tion_8.htm
1888 Not About the IJ
This idea that the 1888 Message was about the IJ, or about a new view of the Gospel is absurd and blasphemous. Why world anyone believed such garbage? Listen to what the 1888 crowd promotes:
“In 1888 at the Minneapolis General Conference session, two young men presented a revolutionary position on justification. Because it embraced the Scriptural doctrine of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, it was light-years beyond anything that the Reformer’s had ever dreamed of. The foundation of this position on justification is the covenant promise conceived in the mind of the Godhead before sin entered into this world.”
“Ardent Bible students, A.T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner had independently arrived at the same truth from Scripture on the consummate work of Christ and His righteousness. This is the truth they presented at that General Conference at Minneapolis in 1888. From his studies on the covenants, Waggoner had discovered that the everlasting (also known as “new”) covenant is all encompassing in its power to save lost humanity.”
http://www.gospelherald.com/walper_ann/ … tion_2.htm
Too bad such speculation is garbage. It is utter nonsense. How can Waggoner be the hero that supports the IJ, when he fully and clearly repudiates the IJ? This makes no sense. The 1888 record has been found, and it does not contain any debate about the nature of Christ or the IJ.
So here we have the typical SDA double-talk in full view for all to see. They believe what they want to believe, not what really happened. They are blind by choice.
Waggoner never repudiated the Bible or the Gospel, or the Sabbath or even Ellen White for that matter, but he did repudiate the IJ. So why do so many think he supports the IJ, when he does not? This is madness. It is utter self-delusion.
If the hero of the 1888 crowd is certain there is no IJ, why do they hail Waggoner as their hero? He is their theological enemy and opposite. Why do they pretend to follow him? Why don’t they deny and repudiate him as a heretic like they did with Dr. Ford, who agrees with Dr. Waggoner?
Better yet; why don’t they pay close attention to what both Waggoner and Ford are saying and stop fabricating false stories?
http://en.allexperts.com/q/SeventhDayAd … ggoner.htm
The fact of the matter is that the 1888 zealots do NOT understand or embrace what Waggoner was saying about the law and the Gospel in 1888, nor do they understand his later conclusions about the Pre Advent Judgment. So why do they pretend?
The 1888 Study Committee should be called the 1888 Propaganda Committee. They do not understand SDA church history or the Gospel correctly. They do not correctly understand the Judgment or the Three Angels Messages. Which is why they need to repent and stop confusing people and stop making fools of themselves. Weiland’s views are absurd, delusional, and against the facts. His views can no longer be defended by any honest, educated person.
The IJ
The first error of the modern SDA’s is to think that there is a great doctrinal pillar called the IJ. There is no such “Pillar”. Although this is what the White Estate and the Review have indoctrinated generations to believe, it is pure myth and fabrication. Which means that Glacier View was based on this myth, which is why it cannot stand.
The only Judgment “pillar” in the Three Angels Messages is the Second Coming, which is located in the 1st Angels Message. The “hour of his Judgment has come,” in Rev 14:7 is ONLY a reference to the Second Coming. This is how ALL the Adventist pioneers, including Ellen White, viewed this landmark doctrine from the 1st Angels Message, and this is how it must be viewed today. Thus, there was no IJ pillar, and there never was!
At least not until the Takoma Park leaders invented this disastrous doctrine that has destroyed the SDA’s. They even pretended that Ellen White supported this impossible new view about the Judgment, exiling Dr. Ford in 1980 to prove the point. But it was never true. It was all a sham. The IJ is not a “pillar” at all, much less the Judgment pillar from the 1st Angels Message. Dr. Ford knew this fact. That is why he refused to back down. Unlike so many others that played politics with theology, he was too honest for such games.
There is no IJ pillar in 19th century SDA history.
There is an IJ doctrine that was sketched out in 1857 by James White, and detailed 20 years later by Uriah Smith in the Review and in book form. But neither James White nor Smith, nor Ellen White, or any of them, thought that the IJ was the Judgment Pillar as the Takoma Park apologists taught generations to believe. Every SDA Pioneer taught that the 2nd Coming was the Judgment Pillar in Rev 14. None of them thought it was the IJ. But yet this is what ALL SDA’S have been programmed to think. But Dr. Ford was too honest, and so he told the truth. There is no IJ pillar in Adventism.
It is a fact of history that Ellen White NEVER supported the Takoma Park version of the IJ that triumphed at Glacier View. She never viewed this doctrine as unmovable or sacred, much less a “pillar.”
This one fact, (and there are many more), changes the entire discussion about the IJ. It changes everything, disproving this fundamental ASSUMPTION that the IJ is a true pillar from Rev 14.
There is no such pillar in the Adventist Apocalyptic. The “Hour of his Judgment has come” is only, only, only fulfilled by the preaching of the Second Coming. This is what all SDA’s correctly taught, including Ellen White. This history and theology about the 1st Angels Message can never be changed.
"I saw a company who stood well guarded and firm, giving no countenance to those who would unsettle the established faith of the body. God looked upon them with approbation. I was shown three steps-- the first, second, and third angels' messages. Said my accompanying angel, "Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages. The true understanding of these messages is of vital importance."
(Early Writings of Ellen G. White, 1858, also known as: Spiritual Gifts; and The Great Controversy, page 158, Chapter Title: A Firm Platform.)
The Phantom Pillar, The IJ
To deny that the IJ is a great pillar seems impossible to any SDA to comprehend, especially for those that cheered the exile of Dr. Ford. This is because the modern SDA church was indoctrinated by the White Estate into believing their false version of church history. Few understood how dishonest and misguided the Takoma Park leaders had become about Ellen White, the Gospel, and the IJ. But Dr. Ford knew the facts, and he refused to endorse what he knew was fiction and false doctrine.
No one can defend the IJ today. Not on any level, not on any point. Nor can Jack Sequeira defend it. But he is not really trying, he knows it is a Phantom Doctrine, one that is false and against the Gospel.
Pay attention: The IJ is not “what” the Takoma Park leaders claimed, (a pillar), nor is it “where” they claimed it to be, (1st Angels Message, Rev 14: 7).
The IJ is not a pillar in Historic Adventism, and thus a great mistake has led the modern SDA’s into legalism, prophetic confusion, and schism. The IJ does not exist in the entire Bible; it is unknown to Jesus and the apostles.
There is no excuse for this universal misunderstanding about the Judgment (and the Gospel) by SDA’s. This is the doctrine that made Adventists famous, (Second Coming). How could they forget such facts of history? How could they be so foolish as to replace the literal Second Coming as the Day of Judgment with a secret, Celestial Judgment of our Sanctification, in deep outer space?
The Adventist Community needs to re-examine the issues, this time in an honest and rational manner, instead of like a mob of screaming Judaizers, bent on stoning Paul, err, I mean Dr. Ford.
Jack Sequeira knows the Gospel. Which means he supports Dr. Ford’s theology. But he refuses to come out and be clear, because then he would be banished from preaching in the SDA church and selling his books. So he is playing politics with the Gospel, something that is forbidden by the Gospel.
Many SDA pastors are expert double-talkers. JS dishonestly lets people assume and believe he is saying X, when he is really saying Y. Such behavior is against the Gospel, and underscores that the SDA’s are very dishonest, misled, and divided.
Leave it to the SDA’s to preach a confused and dishonest Gospel. This is what they have been doing for generations. They deserve to be cursed for what they have done, and so they are. Adventism is fragmented because they have so many false views of the Gospel. No wonder that they also have the wrong view of the Sabbath, and most everything else, including the history and theology about 1888.
It is time for JS to come out of the closet and stand up for Dr. Ford and the genuine Gospel. Raymond Cottrell waited until he was on his deathbed to admit the truth and repudiate the IJ.
Why not embrace the genuine Gospel while something can be done about it? Why not be honest with church history sooner rather than later? Why all the games?
JS has made a living from the SDA Community and he doesn’t want to lose his reputation or his life’s work. So he decided to be very dishonest and slick about all this, even though the critics quickly caught on to his double-talk and correctly viewed him as embracing Dr. Ford’s correct, but condemned views.
This is disgusting and very wrong. But this is how many SDA’s operate today. They are not honest. Period.
Mark said: I also agree with you that most SDA’s have an old covenant view of both the IJ and the Sabbath.
Tom said: All practicing SDA’s have a false view of religion and the Gospel. They misunderstand the difference between the Old and New Covenants, and thus the law and the Gospel is convoluted in their minds to such an extent that they have no idea what is truth and what is not.
This is why they tithe, thinking it a NC doctrine when it is NOT. And why they think their sanctification is part of the Gospel and that it plays a role in their salvation. The SDA’s are the modern day Judaizers. The SDA’s have followed the error of the Galatians. They have followed the errors of Peter and James, all the while persecuting those, like Dr Waggoner and Ford, that correctly stand for the Pauline Gospel, denouncing the IJ in the process.
The SDA’s are so OC minded that they think it very wrong to work on the Sabbath, or go to a restaurant, etc. They are following the Pharisees, view of the Sabbath, not the Gospel Sabbath of Jesus, which allows all work.
While some try to clean up the terminology of the IJ, and spin things in a softer, less judgmental tone, it matters not. If the SDA’s really understood the Gospel they would repent for Glacier View and apologize to Dr. Ford.
If the church leaders were really honest, they would stop hiding what really happened in 1888 and confess that Arthur White was guilty of misleading the church about Ellen White’s real views, and what really took place in 1888.
The facts are clear that the IJ is a mistake, and so too the practice of OC tithing. And so too their Roman Catholic like church structure, and a long list of errors.
Without Adventist Reform, the SDA church cannot survive. The longer they refuse to repent, the more damage they are inflicting on the Advent Movement. Which is why so many, long-standing SDA’s are leaving the church. Here is but one example:
http://www.truthsearch.info/hawley10.htm
Sorry, but SDA theology today is not based on the Gospel. It is not even based on the historic understanding of the Three Angels Messages. The 28 so called “fundamentals” are an abomination of myth, falsehood, and double-talk. The NT supports very little of what the SDA’s teach today, and so too Ellen White. She repudiates most everything that the SDA’s teach and do.
THIS is why there must be Adventist Reform. THIS is why the real story about 1888 must be told BY THE WHITE ESTATE. The record must be officially corrected, and so too the historic understanding about the Three Angels Message.
THEN the 1888 Study Committee will have something worthwhile to promote. Then Adventism will make sense and the reason for the Glacier View/Walter Rea schism will become moot. There will no longer be any reason for division because there is only one Gospel, and one version of 1888, and one version of the Three Angels Messages.
When the facts are understood about 1888, the debate over RBF will be over, even as the genuine theology of historic Adventism will emerge for all to see. It is very different from what the White Estate has claimed all these years.
Mark said: Here is how I understand the IJ, thanks to Jack and Elder Wieland by the way.
Tom said: Who cares how you or I view anything? You are not an apostle, and neither am I. So our views don’t matter. When it comes to doctrine for the church, only the views of Jesus and the apostles matter.
So the real question is this: “How does the NT understand the IJ?” “What do the apostles teach about the IJ?”
The real question is not about our views, but about the views of the NT. And guess what? The IJ is not found in the Bible. Sorry. Any serious and informed scholar will admit this fact. You may believe the IJ is real all you want, but it will not change the facts.
The NT knows nothing of the IJ doctrine. Zero. Because there is no such doctrine. Anyone that thinks otherwise, like Weiland or Sequeira, has embraced error and must repent or lose out on Heaven.
So if you ever want to get serious about understanding the Gospel, this is one of the first points to grasp, at least for SDA’s. This is why it is the first reform in the list of 12. There is no such apostolic doctrine as the IJ, much less starting in 1844. Not one apostle taught any such thing. Which is the end of the matter. If the apostles don’t teach the IJ, then no one can ever teach this view of the Judgment. Not even the SDA’s who invented this error.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Reform.htm
I suggested that you ask JS point blank if the Bible teaches the IJ and 1844? Perhaps he will confess the truth to you and admit that Dr. Ford has been correct all along?
To your credit, you tried to get some answers from him. But he is playing the SDA stonewalling game? He will not answer you in public. None of the SDA leaders will speak honestly about Glacier View, tithe, or much of anything else. Most all of them know there is no such doctrine as the IJ in the Bible, but they have to lie in order to keep their jobs. The others that think it true are just incompetent, dense, and uneducated.
Dr. Ford is an honest Christian scholar. Which is why he will answer any questions put to him, openly and honestly. Just read his interview that I conducted. All the others ran away from the issues, but not Dr. Ford. Why? Because the SDA’s have all been caught with legions of false doctrine and dishonest teachings, and they don’t want the world to know it. Nor do they want to confess and reform. These wolves like things just as they are.
The SDA church operates by censorship, double-talk, and deception. These are hardly gifts of the Spirit. Unless this group stops being so obstinate and rebellious, they are doomed. It may already be too late for them to understand and repent? At this point, the 1888 Study Committee is part of the problem when they should be part of the solution.
Sequeira knows that Dr. Ford is correct and that there is no such doctrine as the IJ in the Bible, but he fears the ramifications to his private ministry if he comes out and openly supports Dr. Ford. So he plays games like so many other dishonest SDA pastors.
How sad and dishonest! This is hardly how the Gospel is to be proclaimed is it? With double talk, evasion, and stonewalling? The church is not to operate as if it were a political machine, where spin and propaganda is all the leaders know. But this is how the SDA’s play church. They have it all wrong.
In fact, the NT teaches that those who teach the Gospel, like Pastor Sequeira, must do so in an open and forthright manner. There can be no stonewalling or refusal to discuss the issues, much less to run from the important questions that many are asking.
1Pet. 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;
Sequeria’s refusal to address the Gospel issues under discussion is a clear violation of apostolic doctrine. Goldstein played the same game online and made a fool of himself. He took very strong positions, but then ran from any discussion about his views. He too, acted just like Sequeira and refused to answer the questions.
Those that refuse to “given an account” of their Gospel, are not only disobeying Peter, but they also have a false and confused Gospel. Those that cowardly run from the issues are not fit to be called preachers of the Gospel. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing; double-talking cowards for all to see.
After I interviewed Dr. Ford about the details of his theology, all the SDA leaders ran away and refused to respond. Why is that? Bill Johnsson, Goldstein, and Sequeira all refused to go on the record and address the issues. And to this day, NONE of them will answer the real questions.
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … /intro.cfm
This is not only a violation of the NT, but it proves that the SDA’s do not care about the facts or the truth. Such behavior also proves that Adventism has become a cultic farce, preying on the uneducated and gullible. They may as well be Mormons or JW’s.
The IJ was a big mistake that cannot be defended. But that does not mean the Three Angels Messages, or the mission of the SDA’s is wrong. Not at all. But it does mean the SDA’s need to repent, because they have been following a distorted view of the Gospel all these years, as well as a massive fraud about 1888 and Ellen White.
Mark said: The issue in the IJ is not whether we are good enough to be saved. God already knows that we are not good enough to be saved and we never will be.
Tom said: First off, who are you to declare the nature of “the issue?”
The first issue in such a discussion is “not whether we have genuine faith in Christ.” No. The first issue is to determine if the IJ is taught in the Bible. The first issue is to see if this doctrine has apostolic support and is genuine. If not, that is the end of the matter.
Thus, hermeneutics is the first issue. What does the Bible and the NT teach about 1844 and the IJ? THIS is the first question!
Answer: NOTHING.
There is no such judgment in the Bible. There is no such Judgment taking place in heaven, much less one that started in 1844. This is the truth of the matter. This is what the evidence proves.
Mark said: The only issue that the judgment must address is whether we have genuine faith in Christ.
Tom said: There is no such judgment as the IJ, so it does not have to address anything whatsoever. It is not a real doctrine or prophecy. It is error, myth, and great delusion.
Anything you say that assumes otherwise is wrong. You are assuming doctrines not in evidence, pretending that what is false is true. There is no IJ in the Bible. Period. So it has no point or purpose because it is a fraud. Sorry.
Mark said: Thus the Bible says we are judged by our works (see Rev. 20:12), because our works reveal our faith.
Tom said: When the NT speaks about the Day of Judgment, it is the Second Coming. It is not speaking about the IJ in any text.
The NT teaches that those in Christ are not condemned at the final Judgment (Second Coming). Those who have correctly embraced the Gospel are accounted righteous because of the Protestant doctrine of JBF, without any works of the law or acceptable level of sanctification.
This is not what the SDA’s believe and not what the 1888 crowd teaches. The SDA view is this: JBF + Sanctification = Salvation. But this is wrong. The correct view is this: JBF + 0 = salvation.
Mark said: But our works are not perfect and therefore they also reveal that we are not good enough to be saved. Thus we are saved by grace through faith. And I believe it is the faith of Jesus that saves us and not our own. (See Gal. 2:16.)
Tom said: This is a very poor, incorrect, and confusing attempt at defining the Gospel. Those that embrace the IJ also think that God will give them the power, by faith, to obey the law. And that if they do not exhibit an acceptable level of sanctification, including OC Sabbath keeping, they will not be saved. This is all wrong. This is not the Gospel.
This is what the Battle Creek SDA’s taught, but it is still wrong. Very wrong. Waggoner and Jones repudiated this formula and promoted Luther’s view of the Gospel. This is what the 1888 debate was all about. A Roman Catholic view of the Gospel versus Luther’s Protestant view. (Luther’s view lost out).
Mark said: Dr. Ford teaches that the cleansing of the sanctuary beginning in 1844 is totally invalid.
Tom said: He is correct. It is invalid and very misunderstood by SDA’s. It is not a real doctrine at all, but an error that was invented in Battle Creek.
Mark said: In my opinion based upon study of the Word, he is wrong.
Tom said: You are mis-informed my friend! You are only saying what others have convinced you to believe. You have not really done any objective or serious study to test the credibility of what you believe. You just bought into a certain point of view, that you are now finding out is worthless and full of hot air. Sorry.
You would not last 2 minutes in a debate with Dr. Ford or Tom Norris about the IJ. The very fact that you think you can is comical. Better yet, neither JS nor Weiland would last any longer.
Why do you think all the talking heads have run away from any real interviews? You just saw that JS refused to answer the simplest question. Why all these games from the leaders?
NONE of them can defend Glacier View or Traditional Adventism; not anyone from the Hierarchy, like Goldstein or Bill Johnsson. Nor anyone from the 1888 crowd, like the tongue tied Sequeira or the other ministries that are represented by Standish, etc. They all run from the hard questions and hide from the real issues. All the while pretending that they are correct.
The SDA’s are the most dishonest of all churches today. They are so divided and full of double-talk that it is impossible to get a straight or united answer out of them. Dr. Ford was the only one that really just told the truth. The rest are so dishonest and so wrong that they must hide their incompetence from the people. This is why they run from this public discussion. But it won’t work. The facts will not go away.
Dr. Ford has “studied the Word” far more than you. He is an expert and a world-class scholar. Don’t flatter yourself into thinking you are his equal or his peer. Few people can make such a claim, and few, if any SDA’s can even come close. If you are serious about understanding the Gospel and obtaining Eternal life, I suggest you pay attention to Dr. Ford and stop risking your salvation with the likes of Weiland and Sequeira. These men are minor leaguers compared to Dr. Ford. They don’t know the Bible or the Gospel or Adventist history like he does. So why waste your time with the confused and cowardly?
Mark said: It is true that most SDA’s have taught a legalistic and unbiblical view of the cleansing of the sanctuary/IJ. But the fact that someone teaches it incorrectly does not mean it does not exist.
Tom said: The original view of the IJ, also known as the Pre Advent Judgment, was very legalistic. This is a fact. And so too is the new view, that sounds a little better. But error is still error.
Don’t miss the point: There is no such doctrine as the IJ in the NT. There is no such pillar in the Three Angels Messages. Uriah Smith was very wrong about the Gospel and the IJ, and had the church told the truth about 1888, everyone would have known not to follow the confused theology of Smith.
There is no way to make a totally false doctrine turn into something true. There is no IJ taking place in heaven, of any kind. There is a judgment coming, and it is very serious and somber matter, but it is not the IJ. It is the Second Coming. And before this, there is a Pre-Advent Judgment of the last church, but it is the Laodicean Message, with its last call for repentance and reform.
Mark said: There are those who taught for years that the earth is flat. That does not mean the earth does not exist. It just means they don't understand it correctly.
Tom said: Today, SDA theology is equal to the error of the flat earth. They have so many things wrong that they have almost nothing correct. They are very much like the RCC that declared Copernicus view of the earth heretical. When the experts, like Galileo, tried to correct the church’s false view, the leaders resisted and used censorship and force for to promote their absurd and false views.
The SDA’s leaders made the same errors. They started off the Takoma Park era determined to hide the 1888 debate until some time in the future, when the denomination was mature enough to handle it. But guess what? That time never came. They have never told the truth about 1888 or the IJ for that matter.
The IJ is a phantom doctrine. It no doubt seems real to many SDA’s, but such delusion proves nothing. The IJ is no more real than the doctrine of the Sunday Sabbath or the Easter Bunny. There is no such doctrine in the apostolic church, much less in heaven.
The IJ is like the flat earth. It is an error based on the uneducated musing of man. It is a mistake that is embraced against the evidence and against what the real experts, like Dr. Ford teach.
Mark said: Ford threw the "baby out with the bath water".
Tom said: This is what you have been misled to believe. But it is not true.
What is the “baby” that was thrown out? The IJ? This is what many assume. But this is very wrong. The IJ is neither the meaning nor the purpose of the Advent Movement. It is not part of the fundamental pillars that define Adventism. It is a diversion of error.
The real “baby” is the Three Angels Messages. THIS is the theology and history that defines Seventh-day Adventism. Dr. Ford stood up and protected this great prophetic paradigm, and the 7 pillars that it contains. He threw out the IJ, because he knew it was a false and pretend “pillar.” He knew it was wrong and against the Gospel and against Historic Adventism, even though many others thought otherwise.
Mark said: I am not certain of what you mean by "Traditional SDA's". If you mean the legalists then I agree with you. They do not understand the gospel.
Tom said: NO ONE that believes in the IJ, understands the Gospel or Adventist Prophecy correctly. The IJ has zero support from the apostles. Thus all “Traditional” SDA’s have a false Gospel. And not just because of the IJ. Tithe and the OC Sabbath, also prove that a false Gospel is in operation.
Mark said: I do not have a detailed enough knowledge of Glacier View to respond to your comment on that. However, if Dr. Ford lost his credentials primarily for denying the beginning of the judgment in 1844, (I think that is the official story, which may not be accurate) then no repentance is in order. Is that why you say we need to repent for Glacier View?
Tom said: Glacier View was the modern version of 1888. Ford played the role of Waggoner, and the church played themselves, as they repudiated the Gospel one more time.
Like I said, the IJ is not a fundamental pillar. It was NEVER a pillar in the Three Angels Messages.
Mark said: Maybe Jack neither understands or believes what you have ascribed to him and in that case your accusations against him regarding a lack of courage are completely unfounded.
Tom said: Ha! Maybe the moon is made of ice cream? Maybe the earth is really flat? Forget trying to cover up for the wretched and double-talking SDA’s. This is not what the LM teaches. Heaven wants the church to repent and confess their false doctrines, not pretend that “maybe” they are not so wrong.
There is no “maybe” about Adventist history or theology. The facts are what they are, and so too are the errors. It is time for the Adventist Community to wake up and understand that their leaders have confused, betrayed, and misled them.
Today, the 1888 Study Committee is part of the problem. But they could be part of the solution if they actually started “studying” instead of swallowing the worthless delusions and double-talk from their leaders.
While Weiland was correct to claim that the White Estate was hiding the 1888 story, he has never come close to understanding the issues or the thousands of documents that record this important history. But it is not too late to start.
If this 1888 minded group is honest, they should demand that the White Estate explain what they were hiding and why. Thus the 1888 Committee should call for a real investigation into the allegations of fraud that Weiland first leveled against the church leaders way back in the 1950’s. Why? Because Tom Norris actually went into the White Estate and caught Arthur White hiding thousands of documents about 1888 that tell a very different story from what has been taught all these years. So Weiland was correct. There was, and still is, a massive fraud taking place about Ellen White and 1888. I am an eyewitness to this stunning crime that has yet to be acknowledged and repented of.
All SDA’s should demand that leaders come clean and tell the truth about 1888 and Glacier View.
All SDA’s should demand that the White Estate officials answer the many questions, in public, under oath, so that this massive fraud can be put to rest and the record officially corrected.
The Advent Movement cannot go forward until both 1888 and Glacier View are correctly resolved. The SDA’s are doomed if they cannot understand their past mistakes and embrace Gospel Reform.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
How long does God/Jesus need to judge the living and the dead?? If the final day of judgment is at Jesus second coming, are Adventists preaching another Final Judgement, a Sealing Day, before Tribulation or Time of Trouble???
Offline
Mark, of the 1888 Study Comittee said: Tom, I have not finished your note and I feel compelled to respond.
I have difficulty taking you seriously because you have already demonstrated to me that you are not knowledgeable enough about Jack Sequeria or Wieland to even discuss the issues, which you are raising.
I have read Jack's books you have not. I have read many of Wieland's books and I do not believe that you have read them.
Therefore you should refrain from attempting to persuade me that Dr. Ford is more accurate than Sequeira and Wieland when you do not know what those two men teach.
Mark
Tom Norris replied:
Mark, I have read all of Weilands material over the years, as well as all other views, including JS's and Standish, Ford, and Venden, etc. I have been tracking all this info for decades and have a large library full of SDA books.
So you are only fooling yourself to pretend that I don't know the issues. I know all the SDA positions from Battle Creek, Takoma Park, and Silver Spring. You do not.
The problem is that you are ignorant of many things, including Dr. Ford's views, as well as many others I could mention, like Ellen White, U Smith, and Waggoner. But many SDA's like to stay in the dark, that way they can dismiss all their critics, as you have just done.
Those that like the dark can stay there. Fine by me.
If you ever come to the place where you want to get serious about Adventism and the Gospel, let me know. Otherwise, there is no need for further communication.
Best wishes to you,
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Who's Mark???
Offline
Mark Duncan is serving as the President of Wieland's delusional "1888 Study Committee." He stumbled on Adventist Reform and took the time to e-mail me to say I am wrong and Weiland is correct.
Mark said: “I must reiterate, what you are saying about the 1888 Message Study Committee and Robert Wieland is in error. I have been associated with the 1888 MSC for about 20 years and currently serve as the president of the committee.”
As I posted our discussion for all to see, (see post #8, 9, 10, 11, 18, & 20) he got angry because he apparently didn't want our little debate to go public. But Adventism is not a secret society, nor should it continue to operate in the dark; controlled, censored, and manipulated by its incompetent and dishonest leaders.
Let all understand that the 1888 Study Committee is part of the problem. They have no plans to either “study” the issues or tell the truth about church history or doctrine. It is a pitiful situation that underscores the fact that many SDA’s are hopelessly cultic, confused, and dishonest. Sad.
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Truthseeker said: Tom Thanks for your answer. I can see by the structure of your answer that you know what you are talking about, and i completely agree with you, but i am always afraid that critics take a stance that is too extreme.
Tom said: The critics are going to have to understand that they too have been misled by the White Estate about church history and doctrine. They are all going to have to take a second look at Adventism and stop allowing themselves to be manipulated by the fraud of Arthur White and company.
There is no sense either attacking or defending myths and half-truths. It is time for the White Estate to correct the record of 1888 so that everyone can understand the real issues and get to know the genuine Ellen White of history.
TS said: For example, we both disagree with the doctrine of perfectionism/legalism/ etc., however in the book of Daniel we read that there will be a judgement of the dead. It seems very reasonable to me to assume that the universe wants to know why some people will be accepted in the kingdom of God and why others will be destroyed.
So, rather than suggesting that there is no investigative judgment, we can argue about the interpretation of this IJ.
Tom said: There is a Judgment Day for all. It is at the Second Coming, NOT THE IJ. There is no such doctrine as the IJ in the Bible. The apostles do NOT know of any such “Pre-Advent Judgment” of the church, which the SDA’s claim started in 1844, in heaven.
The Judgment Day is the 2nd Coming:
Rom. 14:10 For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.
Matt. 11:22 “Nevertheless I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you.
Matt. 12:36 “But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment.
2Pet. 3:7 But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
1John 4:17 By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment;
Matt. 25:31 “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.
Matt. 25:32 “All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats;
Matt. 25:33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.
Matt. 25:34 “Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
None of these texts are speaking about the IJ, because there is no such doctrine in the Bible. The SDA’s have made a great error for all to see. They must repent or be condemned at the Judgment.
The Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church
Although the SDA’s were wrong to develop the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment, they were not wrong to understand that there is a “pre-advent Judgment” of the church.
There is in fact seven (7) of these “judgments”, one for each of the seven eras of the church. The PAJ of the Laodicean Church is the Laodicean Message. This is where the last church is judged as “wretched, blind, and naked.” Doomed unless they repent and reform.
See also:
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1154462379
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/8/9213.html
TS said: For example, i believe that the IJ will be about the question whether we have lived in Christ. The standard won’t be perfectionism, law-keeping etc., but rather the extent till which we have accepted Christ as our saviour. There is not one simple way to tell people how to go to heaven, so what i am saying is that i believe God will read our hearts.
Tom said: There is no such doctrine as the IJ in the entire Bible. It is not a Gospel doctrine. Jesus did not teach it and neither did Paul or any apostle. Thus, there is no use even thinking, talking, or fearing about such a false judgment. It is false doctrine.
Unfortunately, the modern SDA’s have tried to cover up their great error about the IJ by teaching it is only an “investigation” to see if God is fair and just. Not only is this not what the original SDA doctrine taught, this revision is also not taught in the scriptures.
Any SDA’s that wants to follow the teachings of Christ, and by faith, claim Eternal Life, MUST repudiate the IJ, in every form, and repent of this false, SDA Gospel that features sanctification as part of the Gospel.
The Protestant Gospel correctly teaches that we are saved by faith alone, only because of the doctrine of Justification by Faith. The word “alone” underscores the point that sanctification was EXCLUDED from the Gospel formula. The SDA’s have made the Roman Catholic error of requiring BOTH JBF and an acceptable level of Sanctification before one can be saved. This is the greatest of all SDA errors, which they refuse to confess and repent.
TS said: The gospel of Uriah Smith is totally opposite to the gospel. The bible tells us to accurse anybody who teaches a different gospel. I have got the feeling that Uriah was boasting and deceived by his own deceitful and sick heart. What he taught was so terribly satanic.
Tom said: The apostolic church fell into legalism quite easily. Even the leaders, meaning both Peter and James, as well as many others like Barnabus and John Mark embraced the false Gospel of Judaizers.
So it is normative for those leaders in the church to embrace a false Gospel. Thus Uriah Smith and the SDA have made the same exact mistake about the Gospel, as did some of the apostles and much of the church over the ages. This does not excuse false doctrine, as Paul makes clear in Galatians, but it explains how easy it is to misunderstand the Gospel.
At the end of time, the Laodicean church is totally and completely wrong about the Gospel. Every church and denomination in the world is judged as being “wretched, blind, and naked.” Heading for hell unless they zealously repent and reform.
While Uriah Smith had some education, as well as some good writing and preaching skills, he never had any theological training. None of the SDA’s had much education and none of them had any theological degrees. Had they had more knowledge of church history and theology, they would, no doubt, have made fewer errors.
While Smith was essentially promoting and defending RC theology, Waggoner educated himself by reading Luther. While he was doing this, Ellen White was in Europe, touring the sites of the Reformation for her upcoming book called the Great Controversy, which was published in the spring of 1888. (The 1888 GC would take place in the fall of 1888).
Ellen White was stunned to discover that young Waggoner was correct and that Smith, the leading SDA theologican, was on the side of the Papists. She came down very hard on Smith, even claiming that he was under the control of Satan.
It was no doubt true because Smith refused to change any point, much less admit that he had embraced a false, anti-Protestant view of the Gospel.
Ellen White, the widow, was not as powerful as Smith, and thus she was exiled from Battle Creek for her views. When she returned ten years later, she advised that Smith be terminated from the Review for his false Gospel that he was still promoting.
Consequently, the great Uriah Smith was fired from the Review for legalism in 1902. He never repented of his false Gospel, nor did he ever reconcile with Ellen White. He died a very confused and humiliated man.
U Smith is the reason why the Battle Creek SDA’s became so legalistic. When Waggoner discovered the Gospel in 1886, it was Smith that fought the hardest against it. Smith is also the man that refused to resolve the 1888 crisis. He worked overtime against Ellen White and Waggoner, and tried in every way possible to stop these new views about the Gospel.
TS said: In my life i have experienced his fruits. Since i believe that the SDA church has the truth, i thought everything they teach is true.
Tom said: The Jews also had the truth and the Sabbath, but that did not do them much good. They spurned the Gospel and murdered their Christ. The SDA’s have done the same thing. Having so much truth, they misunderstood it and botched the 3rd Angles Message. Which is why Ellen White said that the SDA’s were so much like the Jews. (They really are!)
TS said: So i thought that by good works and law keeping, God would accept me. This led me to focus on the law and good deeds constantly. Rather than being filled with peace and happiness i was hateful and angry, and i constantly failed while i could hear Satan whisper in the back of my mind "look at you, you call yourself a Christian". I was focused on the law rather than being focused on Christ.
Tom said: This is EXACTLY what took place in Battle Creek before 1888. This is how all the 19th century SDA’s were feeling during the 1870’s and on. The SDA religion when practiced faithfully is very hard, cold, and legalistic.
Listen to AT Jones discussing the 1888 Gospel debate at the 1993 GC session:
"He who thinks of receiving that message of Christ's righteousness according to his own idea of it, will miss it entirely. We are to receive it according to God's own idea of it, and nothing else than God's idea of righteousness, nothing else then that is righteousness."
"There is the thought again that we had the other night, that when it was presented four years ago (1888) and all along since, some accepted it just as it was given and were glad of the news that God has righteousness that would pass the judgment and would stand accepted in his sight. A righteousness that is a good deal better than anything that people could manufacture by years and years of hard work."
"People had worn out their souls almost trying to manufacture a sufficient degree of righteousness to stand in the time of trouble, and meet the Savior in peace when he comes. But they had not accomplished it."
"These were so glad to find out that God had already manufactured a robe of righteousness and offered it as a free gift to everyone that would take it, (a righteousness) that would answer now, and in the time of the plagues, and in the time of the judgment, and to all eternity...They received it gladly just as God gave it and heartily thanked the Lord for it. "
Jones continues; "Others would not have anything to do with it at all; but rejected the whole thing. Others seemed to take a middle position. They did not fully accept it, neither did they openly reject it. They thought to take a middle position and go along with the crowd...others deliberately discounted the message about 50% and counted THAT the righteousness of God. And so, all the way between open and free deliberate surrender and acceptance of it, to open, deliberate and positive rejection of it--all the way in between--the compromisers have been scattered ever since; and those who have taken that compromising position are no better prepared tonight to discern what is the message of the righteousness of Christ than they were four years ago (in 1888). "
Jones is rolling now, and some are no doubt slipping out the back, muttering under their breath about how these new upstarts (Jones and Waggoner) are trying to destroy Adventism with this "new light".
Jones continues his public GC address; "Some of these brethren since the Minneapolis meeting I have heard myself, say 'amen' to preaching, (and) to statements that were utterly heathen...Some of those who stood so openly against that (righteousness of Christ) at that time (1888) and voted with uplifted hand against it (have since that time said) 'amen' to statements that were openly and decidedly papal as the papal church itself can state them."
"That I shall bring in here in one of these lessons, and call your attention to the Catholic church's statement and her doctrine of justification by faith. 'Why' says one, 'I didn't know that the Catholic church believes in justification by faith'. Oh yes she does! Yes indeed she does: you can read it out of her books. Says one 'I thought they believed in justification by works'. They do and they do not believe in anything else: but they pass it off under the head of justification by faith. And they are not the only people in the world that are doing it."
(General Conference Daily Bulletin 1893, The Third Angel's Message-No. 11 pp242-246; Elder A. T. Jones).
TS said: In fact i came to see Christ as an obstacle towards achieving my own salvation because Christ seemed so demanding. When i sinned terribly i told myself "well it is all about the rules anyway, one !
day i will become perfect and then my old sins don t matter anymore". I had a hate relationship with God, it really was like hell. Instead of presenting a clear consistent happy loving message of Christ, i was indoctrinated by a satanic self-centered legalistic ego-boasting impossible cursed gospel.
Tom said: A false Gospel cannot bring peace or forgiveness, much less Eternal Life. Instead of fostering good works and love, it does the opposite every time.
TS said: While the SDA church is supposed to be the mountaintop of the reformation, one satanic segment of it, teaches a gospel opposite to that which the reformers taught. This makes me so angry, and i believe you must also know what it feels like, otherwise you wouldn t be bringing the truth out like you are doing now.
Tom said: The SDA’s have NEVER embraced the full Protestant Gospel. In fact, they officially rejected it in 1888 and again in 1980.
So while there is right wing faction that features perfection and such, there is no scholar, pastor, or church leader in the entire church right now that teaches a correct Gospel. Those that did, like Dr. Ford, were rudely thrown out of the church.
The SDA’s do not teach correct theology or church history. Nor do their leaders have any desire to clean up their awful doctrines and tell the truth about church history. This is what is so sad, and it should make all honest minded SDA’s very angry at such corruption and evil.
TS said: I am finally freed from the satanic gospel, and i totally rely on Christ, and by beholding him i become changed. I have tried the legalistic gospel for years and it didn't work out; on the contrary, i became hateful, angry and kept on sinning terribly. The legalistic perfectionist gospel is just as deceitful as the satanic lies of the new age movement, which nearly killed me!
Tom said: Eternal Life is given to all that believe the genuine Gospel. This prize is not based on how well anyone has changed, much less about how well they obey the law. Salvation is based on the promises of God and his Christ, and embraced only by faith. Our works are not the basis for any sinner to be saved.
While our prayer life and study of the Word is important, such good works are not salvific. We are not saved by any of our works, or our love, and this includes whatever works are necessary to facilitate a “relationship” with Jesus.
TS said: It s a terrible thing, if you survive many demonic attacks after being involved in the new age, then enter the Adventist church assuming that you are safe now, whereas the core of the whole gospel is totally misunderstood! I trust only in Christ now. The key to becoming saved is trying to build a genuine relationship with Christ, rather than building a relationship with laws and your goals of perfectionism.
Tom said: There was a time in Adventism when many thought they were saved by a relationship. Morris Venden made such views popular. But this is a dangerous and wrong doctrine that is actually focused on behavior modification as its goal. Beware.
The Gospel is not primarily focused on behavior modification. Even though this is how the SDA’s and most all others, view the Gospel. The object of the Gospel, as it relates to us, is the guarantee of Eternal Life. This is the great feature of this gift. And it is only through faith in the doctrine of JBF. Not Sanctification.
Salvation for a Protestant is not a “process,” dependant upon our “relationship” or sanctification. Rather, it is an instant transaction with heaven, based on the teachings of Christ. Eternal life is granted, fully and completely, without works of the law, to all that continue to believe the Gospel Story and the teachings of Jesus.
TS said: Maybe that’s why Jesus said to Laodicea that they have the illusion that they are rich, whereas they are miserable poor blind and naked. They think they have the truth, but they misunderstand the gospel, there is no brotherly love like in the Lutheran churches and only a few of them spread the gospel and feel the need to reach out to others.
Tom said: Out of all 7 church eras, the last one is the worst. In fact, there is nothing good said about Laodicea. It was all very bad news.
Heaven views the last church as the worst church. It has more riches, buildings, and members than at any other time. The last church preaches more sermons, and does more good works than at any other time in history. But their theology is all-wrong. They ALL have a false Gospel and an incorrect Sabbath. Which is why they are told to repent or be doomed.
Do not misunderstand, all churches are condemned, not just the SDA’s. All denominations have been declared “wretched” and wrong by heaven. All need Gospel Reform, starting with the SDA’s.
TS said: In the Great Controversy Ellen White put some emphasis on us having to become perfect in the IJ, i assume then that the Great Controversy was written at a time when she still misunderstood the gospel?
Tom said: Good for you to understand this point!
Yes, the GC was a pre-1888 work of Ellen White’s. She did not fully or correctly understand the Gospel. Her post 1888 works, like the Desire of Ages and Steps to Christ, are very different from her earlier writings.
TS said: I also have another question, where do we go from here? Should we start a new movement, or become a part of the Adventist movement and sanctify the church from within by reason to eradicate the satanic traces of legalism/perfectionism etc?
Tom said; Many are asking this same question. Many others have already asked it and have left Adventism.
But what is the correct answer?
Running away will not solve any issues, nor can the status quo be contained. So what is to be done?
The first step is to layout a reform plan. A 12-point Reform Plan has been developed. It calls for a dramatic updating of Adventist theology and eschatology, as well as organizational reform.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Reform.htm
http://www.atomorrow.net/forum/viewtopic.php?id=234
If the leaders continue to ignore the issues and refuse to tell the truth about Ellen White and 1888, and refuse to correct the record and repent for Glacier View, then a new Adventist organization will be needed.
Today, with so much knowledge of the Gospel and church history being so readily available, there is no excuse for anyone to embrace false doctrine. Thus, no Christian should ever embrace Old Covenant Sabbath keeping or pay tithe to the SDA’s, (or to anyone else), nor should anyone support the IJ and a long list of SDA errors and false doctrines.
All SDA’s need to wake up and understand that they must confess and repent for their many false doctrines that their incompetent leaders have taught them all these years. Thus it is time for a reformation to take place within the Adventist Community, and for the Advent Movement to move forward to the 4th Angels Message.
TS said: Fortunately there are also Adventist pastors speaking out against perfectionism/legalism etc. and telling us to rely solely on Christ.
Tom said: There are no SDA pastors or leaders that teach the Gospel correctly. They all have a false Gospel that includes OC Sabbath keeping and tithe paying, as well as this great error about the IJ. And this is just the beginning of their errors.
So don’t be fooled by the double-talking SDA’s. There is not one of them teaching a correct Gospel or a true view of the Three Angels Messages. This is the problem. Let all beware the dishonest and double-talking SDA’s.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris for All Experts.com and Adventist Reform
Offline
Irvin Rookstool asked: Tom, I'm wondering what it is that you are attempting to reform within Adventism?
Tom said: Adventism is a Protestant Movement that is based on the prophecy of the Three Angels Messages in Rev 14.
The SDA’s teach that this unfolding prophetic paradigm has three distinctive stages. The 1st and 2nd Angels Messages represents the Millerite Movement in the 1840’s, followed by the SDA’s, which represent the 3rd Angels Message.
Today, all three of these theological paradigms have terminated. There is no “present truth” in the SDA church, much less a united or active prophetic message that can be tied to Revelation.
In other words, Adventism has nothing worthwhile, or prophetic to say right now, unless it is about how wrong they have been about the Gospel and the Judgment and the Sabbath, and most everything else.
However, in hindsight, the SDA’s long ago concluded that the Second Coming was never going to take place during any of these three stages of the Adventist Apocalyptic.
Rather, just before the 2nd Coming, a 4th stage of eschatological development would occur. This final Adventist Message, located in Rev 18, would more fully and correctly reflect the Gospel and thus give mankind the final warning of mercy prior to the close of probation and the great Tribulation that will destroy the earth.
So the object of Adventist Reform is to push the Advent Movement to its fourth and final message. The goal is to remove the many myths and errors that have overwhelmed the 3rd Angels Message and help develop a Gospel based eschatology that is contemporary, rational, and biblical. A Gospel message that the SDA Pioneers, as well as the Reformers and the Apostles would all happily support.
Adventism can only move forward to the 4th Angels Message when they become honest with their history about the Three Angels Messages, and repent for repudiating the Gospel in 1888 and again in 1980. I suggest that they pay attention to the real PAJ, which is the LM, and “zealously repent.”
Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”
I hope this helps.
Tom Norris for All Experts.Com and Adventist Reform
Offline
Matthew said: Greetings Tom,
I have had several discussions already in regards to Sabbath keeping for the NC Church, and if all the Church in the day and time that we live has missed the truth about Sabbath keeping, what is a Child of God supposed to do if he chooses to keep the Sabbath?
Where does one worship?
There's not a church that embraces the Sabbath doctrine in it's reformed state, according to your understanding.
I don't see it as being the will of God to attend an SDA gathering and their OC pharisaical Sabbath doctrine, since they have drifted so far from the truth. Let's face it, there's not a church on every corner to this nature. Heb. 10:25 Tells us; Forsake not the gathering of yourselves as is the manner of some...
Therefore we should attend worship services somewhere, and it shouldn't be in a church that we aren't in unity with on doctrine.
What's your solution to this major road block?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom answered: The primary doctrine of the church is the Gospel. When this chief doctrine is fully understood, so too will the correct doctrine of the Judgment and the Sabbath.
Rev 18 shows a time when the repentant Laodicean Church, meaning individuals from all denominations, will move forward to “enlighten the earth” with the genuine Gospel and correct eschatology. Prophecy also shows that many will embrace this dramatic and correct view of the Gospel.
Let all understand: Those that embrace a false Sabbath, are doing so because they do not understand the historic Gospel, or the teachings of the NT correctly. At the end of time, the Sabbath doctrine becomes a very visible and obvious error that condemns every organized church in the world.
Which is why all Laodiceans, both organized and individual, are condemned in the Pre Advent Judgment of the Church, which is the Laodicean Message. Even the SDA’s are judged as wretched and wrong about the Gospel and the Sabbath.
A correct Gospel will be accompanied by a correct Sabbath. They both fit together. And so too many other things for the church. So the time has come for the last great reformation of the church.
Now that the genuine Gospel and the Reformed 7th day Sabbath are being proclaimed more fully within the Adventist Community, the Spirit will bring together those that seek truth. So too will the Internet.
This is also why God gives Gifts to the church, so that they can repent, understand the Gospel, become organized, and function properly as God intended.
There are many former SDA pastors, who became spiritually homeless after the Denomination exiled Dr. Desmond Ford. These were good Gospel men who knew that the IJ was false and dangerous. Some tried other denominations, while others set up their own Sunday keeping congregations and pretended to have all the answers.
But this Movement failed, even as Traditional Adventism also self-destructed. Thus the Advent Movement today has no clear or credible message, much less a correct one. All is in confusion and free fall, as the status quo cannot be defended, much less sustained.
Few that followed Dr. Ford, (and correctly rejected the IJ,) went on to solve the Gospel debate. Few tried to better understand the New Covenant Sabbath or 21st century eschatology. Many just rejected everything SDA, including the Sabbath, being content to become great critics, even though they themselves were still confused about much, and had really solved nothing.
Today, the Advent Community is very disappointed and unhappy. The vast majority does not go to church at all, even as those that do go are not happy with the present divided and dysfunction situation, nor should they be.
The so-called “evangelical SDA movement” failed to move things forward. In fact, they went backwards, which is why many now worship on Sunday, proving that they don’t understand the Gospel, church history, nor eschatology correctly.
The Advent Movement today needs to return to the fundamental pillars that define and empower it. They need to get re-organized, correct their many errors, and develop the final Gospel Message that will prepare the church for the Tribulation and the Judgment Day.
So this is not just about what day to meet, but how to understand the Gospel in a world that is about to face the great Tribulation and the Second Coming. There needs to be a sense of eschatological urgency and reformation, as well as a clear focus on Eternal Life and the Word.
In short, there will be a great Gospel Movement at the end of time. It will feature the Protestant Gospel and the Reformed Sabbath of Christ, as well as contemporary, credible, and actionable, eschatology. This (new) Protestant Movement that will shake the status quo and make a big impact, larger than Miller’s and Luther’s Reformation combined.
But how can such a new movement start today? Or better asked: How did the Christian Movement start in the apostolic era?
Because the Jews repudiated the Gospel, the synagogues were closed to those that followed Jesus, even as the Christian Faith was outlawed and criminalized by the Jews first, and then the Romans.
So the church was not allowed to meet in any public building, much less build their own churches or preach in public. So the church was forced to go underground and meet in the privacy of their homes. THIS is how the church met for the first 150 years or so. There were no Church buildings like today. By 400 AD, the organized, State church replaced the outlawed House Church and public meeting places were errected.
The Past is Prologue
History will repeat itself. The Church will recapture the point and purpose of the House Church concept. As people become disillusioned with a false and corrupt church structure, they will take matters into their own hands. This is what took place in the 1st century. This is how the Gospel was preserved and marketed.
The House Church was the only church structure for many years. In fact, church buildings were not legal until AD 222-225, meaning that everyone was meeting in a private house churches prior to this time.
However, by AD 380, the house church was outlawed by the church leaders and all had to follow the new State Church. This was the dawn of a new age for the church, one where the individual was subordinated to the power of the religious elites.
No longer was the laity to have any control of the Gospel, the Word, or the Eucharist. Professional, trained clergy would now handle all things religious. Which of course meant that the Bible was only legal for church officials, who quickly corrupted the Gospel and subjugated the people for over 1000 years until the Reformation set them free.
History of the House Church:
“Bishops Theodosius and Gratian (380) ordered that there should be only one state-recognized Orthodox church and one set of faith - the orthodox dogma. Each Roman citizen was forced to be a member and should be made to believe in the ”lex fidei,” the law of faith. Other groups and movements - including those meeting in homes - were forbidden.
That meant the legal end of the house church.
The law turned the rules upside down. Once, church buildings were not even allowed by the government until the rule of Severus around AD 222-235, and house churches were the only way for Christians to meet.
But from now on, to start a house church meant breaking the law and becoming a criminal. This started a new era: the persecution of the church in the name of the ”church.”
http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/HO … R-333.html
This is not to say that a Gospel group cannot become so large that they want to rent or build a church. This is fine, as the building is not really the issue. It is the doctrines of the church that matter most, not the size of the meeting place.
But the fact of the matter is this: The Church was started, preserved, and spread through the use of house churches. As it was in the beginning, so it will be at the end. The House Church Movement is a good solution for those today that are tired of so much false doctrine and worthless programs.
Here are some links about the House Church Movement:
http://procinwarn.com/housech.htm
http://www.site.house2house.com/
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/07/30/21 … -more.html
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_15547588
http://www.wayoflife.org/files/c886138a … 3-327.html
http://www.gordonconwell.edu/supporters … h_movement
http://www.simplechurchrevolution.com/#
http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/HO … R-333.html
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … abbath.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … n-Home.htm
I hope this information helps.
Tom Norris for All Experts.Com and Adventist Reform
Offline