The Fraud of Church Tithing

hfsturges · 05-21-12 10:40 pm

Tom,

Tom Norris wrote:

The OC is not something that we in the 21st century get to revise or even define. The history of Judaism speaks for itself and so too does the NT record of the church.

If we don't define what the OC is, then how can a person throw it around in a discussion and get any meaning out of it?
Briefly, the Old Covenant is the attempt of men to do the work that only God can do. For instance, Cain offered fruit, denying the need for the blood of Christ.
Abraham took Hagar as a second wife to "help" God fulfill His covenant for a son, and a multitude of descendants.
The elders of Israel at Sinai, made promises to keep the law in their own strength, which they could not do.
In time Israel looked on the sacrifices, circumcision, and temple rituals as a method of salvation. They forgot all about the Redeemer to which they pointed.
These were all Old Covenant activities. The Old Covenant takes many different forms.

The New Covenant is the promise of God to write the law in the heart, and make of the people "an holy nation." In Jeremiah, it was the law of God, the Ten Commandments. They had no other at that time. When God presented the covenant to Adam and Eve, Genesis 3:15, He said, "I will put enmity between thee and the woman." That "enmity" is the law of God. It was put in the woman and her seed by the initiative of God. It was the New Covenant. The New Covenant was given to Abraham, but it was a long slow process with frequent interaction between God and Abraham. The New Covenant was offered to Israel at Sinai. God gave them wonderful promises, which He would make possible by the power He used to deliver them from Egypt. The Ten Commandments were given in the same way. the preamble of grace for the covenant was Exodus 19:4, and the preamble of grace for the ten commandments was Exodus 20:2.

This is enough for now.

bshields · 05-22-12 2:25 pm

Might I remind you Hubert that the New Covenant would not be like the old.

Jer 31:31 “The day is coming,” says the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah. 32 This covenant will not be like the one I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand and brought them out of the land of Egypt. They broke that covenant, though I loved them as a husband loves his wife,” says the Lord.

Hebrews 8:13
When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear.

If the covenant was to be new then certainly it wouldn't be the same as the old one. You have the old one being replaced with the same wording. There is no differences in the old and the new according to you. One they read form a scroll and the same thing written on the heart? That is not the way I read it.

Once again I bring up the fact that only when people are somehow convinced by others to observe Sabbath does that person make a decision. The heart is not pleading with individuals to lay aside a day to observe the release of Jews out of bondage.

hfsturges · 05-22-12 7:41 pm

Bob Shields,

Bob Shields wrote:

If the covenant was to be new then certainly it wouldn't be the same as the old one. You have the old one being replaced with the same wording. There is no differences in the old and the new according to you. One they read form a scroll and the same thing written on the heart? That is not the way I read it.

This statement is confusing. Where have I said that the wording of the old and new covenant had the same wording?

bshields · 05-22-12 8:25 pm

Hubert wrote:

This statement is confusing. Where have I said that the wording of the old and new covenant had the same wording?

You said the new covenant is the 10 commandments didn't you? The 10 were what the old covenant was. Am I missing something?

Did you not write the following?

Hubert wrote:

The New Covenant is the promise of God to write the law in the heart, and make of the people "an holy nation." In Jeremiah, it was the law of God, the Ten Commandments.

Last edited by bshields (05-22-12 8:28 pm)

tom_norris · 05-22-12 8:39 pm

Hub said: If we don't define what the OC is, then how can a person throw it around in a discussion and get any meaning out of it?  

Tom replied: We want the correct definition of the OC, not some made up nonsense that is calculated to defend Traditional Adventism.

No one should be “throwing around” his or her own opinions, definitions, or ideas about the history of Judaism or Christianity. This is the point. It is only the facts that matter, not or views.

The Bible defines the OC and the NC. Not us. This is the problem with so many today, they are not disciplined or honest with the Bible Story. Thus many make up whatever points they want, and the go off running in all directions.

Hub, this topic is not hard to understand. The OC = Judaism, which is codified in the OT. It is a law-based paradigm, which featured a separate priesthood, supported from tithe, with an earthly Temple that had “divine regulations for worship.”

Heb. 8:13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

Heb. 9:1 Now even the first covenant had regulations of divine worship and the earthly sanctuary.

Heb. 9:2 For there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread; this is called the holy place.

There is no excuse for anyone today to misunderstand the OC, which is something that can be understood by reading the OT and the NT, and also by becoming familiar with Judaism.

2Cor. 3:14 But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.

The problem is that few Gentiles today understand the OC. In fact, legions have been taught many incorrect points about the Jews, and thus there is an epidemic of incompetence about Judaism in the church and in the world.

The SDA’s know very little about Judaism, but even so, they have followed in their anti-Gospel footsteps. Which is why they pay tithe and think it a sin to work on the Sabbath.

The SDA’s are very confused all this, which is why they entered into such a great debate in 1888, - a debate about the definition of the Two Covenants, and the meaning of the book of Galatians. A debate, which was never resolved, even to this very day.

Hub, if you ever want to get your head on straight, I suggest that you read Luther’s commentary on Galatians. Read it over and over until you understand the difference between the OC and the NC.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/luther/galatians.toc.html

http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/L … atians.pdf

Hub said: Briefly, the Old Covenant is the attempt of men to do the work that only God can do.

Tom said: Wrong. Where did you come up with this spin? The OC is Judaism. It was a law based religious system given to the Jews by God, and there was plenty that they were supposed to do. Including developing a nation that would give the world the Gospel.

So you are just making things up so you can defend your many false doctrines. This is not the way to find truth.

Hub said: For instance, Cain offered fruit, denying the need for the blood of Christ.   Abraham took Hagar as a second wife to "help" God fulfill His covenant for a son, and a multitude of descendants.  The elders of Israel at Sinai, made promises to keep the law in their own strength, which they could not do. 

Tom said: The OC was a law-based system that also contained various symbols about the Gospel. It was a temporary system that would give way to a better, NC paradigm.

Hub said: In time Israel looked on the sacrifices, circumcision, and temple rituals as a method of salvation.

Tom said: The Jews were supposed to depend on these symbols for the forgiveness of sins. They WERE a correct method for them to understand salvation.

The Temple rituals came from God, not man, and thus they represented a divine plan about salvation, which worked for those who participated with an honest heart.

So your negative spin on things is not going to help understand the facts that define the OC. You seem to be following a story in your head rather than the facts. There is a big difference.

Hub said: They forgot all about the Redeemer to which they pointed.  

Tom said: So too did the church after time. In fact, even the apostles fell back into their OC ways and embraced a false Gospel. (See Galatians). And the church in Corinth had at least four versions of Christ, while today there are legions. Your spin on things is not helping to define the OC or the NC. You seem unable to stick to the point and get the correct answer.

Let me repeat: The OC = Judaism. Period. This is not up for debate, and neither is the NC.

Hub said: These were all Old Covenant activities. The Old Covenant takes many different forms.

Tom said: No it does not. Judaism does not “take many forms.” It is based on the direct revelation of God, and on his specific laws, rules, and regulations, including the death penalty for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. The OC is based on many laws, - not “many different forms.”

Hub said: The New Covenant is the promise of God to write the law in the heart, and make of the people "an holy nation."

Tom said: The Jews were also supposed to be a Holy Nation. Why did you omit this fact?

Ex. 19:5 ‘Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine;

Ex. 19:6 and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the sons of Israel.”

In addition, the NC is about far more than sanctification. But of course you are a TSDA, so for this crowd, the NC is much like the OC, it’s all about following the law. Law, law, law.

In fact, the definition of the Gospel does not contain our sanctification. So not only are you having a hard time understanding the OC, you also don’t understand the NC, which is the Gospel.

This is the problem with all SDA’s. They don’t understand either the OC or the NC correctly. Which is why they practice so many false doctrines, like tithe and the OC Sabbath.

Hub said: The New Covenant was given to Abraham, but it was a long slow process with frequent interaction between God and Abraham.

Tom said: While Abraham was shown the Gospel, he was also instructed to become the first Jew, and start OC Judaism. So let’s not pretend that Abraham was a NC apostle. No, he was the first Jew. He started the OC. He started the Nation of Israel.

Hub said: The New Covenant was offered to Israel at Sinai.

Tom said: Mt Sinai stands for the OC, not the NC. Why do you think the opposite? Because you are not being honest about the definition of the OC. You have allowed the confusion of the SDA’s keep you from following the facts.

Gal. 4:22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman.

Gal. 4:23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.

Gal. 4:24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.

Gal. 4:25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.

So forget this idea that the NC was offered to the Jews at Mt Sinai. Neither the OT nor the NT teaches such a point.

Hub said: God gave them wonderful promises, which He would make possible by the power He used to deliver them from Egypt.

Tom said: You have misunderstood the story. These ex slaves could hardly understand the OC, much less the NC, which was not featured at Sinai. You do not understand the OC or the Gospel.

Hub said: The Ten Commandments were given in the same way. The preamble of grace for the covenant was Exodus 19:4, and the preamble of grace for the Ten Commandments was Exodus 20:2.

Tom said: The OC features law, not Gospel. Nor does the Gospel feature law. You have things so confused and convoluted that you will never understand the Gospel correctly unless you stop with all the double-talk and revisionism.

Hub said: This is enough for now.

Tom said: Please don’t go any further. You have obviously invented your own special view of the Two Covenants that is based on a number of myths and much legalism. I don’t want to hear any more, thank you.

I can’t help anyone understand the Gospel who is committed to so much fiction and error. You have to first give up all these false assumptions and strange views.

Of course, if you could do this, you would no longer be a tithe paying, Sabbath keeping Jew, ..err, I mean TSDA. But that is not something that I think you can live with. You are committed to the false traditions of your life. Just like most Jews. Pity.

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 05-27-12 10:46 am

Bsheilds said: Hold the phone on the innocence and naiveness of the developed modified false tithing system.

Tom said: We are dealing with a time period before the Civil War. This was another world and culture, very uneducated and legalistic, far removed from our modern, secular way of life. It was a time of great religious zeal and political division, where false doctrine was legion, and so too slavery and war.

One needs to understand this proper historical context before rushing to judgment. The SDA’s were sincere but very naïve and uneducated, - and they paid the price for their errors, because all that they worked so hard to develop, would come crashing down, shortly after 1888, destroying their Empire like a house of cards.

The SDA’s, regardless of the few points where they were correct,- built a house of cards for themselves. They were certain they had every doctrine fully correct, but in fact, they had very little Gospel truth.

Consequently, their Battle Creek Empire would collapse in the last decade of the 19th century, due to their internal, doctrinal divisions. So they did not escape the results of their false doctrine, and neither are they doing so today.

Gal. 6:7 Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.

Doctrinal error is still error, regardless of sincere motives. But there is no reason to think the Pioneers were purposefully embracing error at that time.

While this is something that is obviously taking place today, it was not happening with the Pioneers. They were honest and well meaning. The leaders today are paid to pretend and to promote propaganda, and many do it just for the money and benefits.

Bsheilds said: If you truly believe ellen was a real prophet then what she said in the quotes below make it clear that it was God's plan. They had His blessing in developing the tithing system.

Tom said: First off, Ellen White is not a “real prophet” as the SDA’s teach. In fact, she was not an OC prophet at all, as the SDA’s pretend. They have confused everybody with their false definition of a prophet, and with their manipulation of Ellen White.

Having spiritual gifts in the NC does not make anyone infallible much less fully correct about doctrine. Nor does it give anyone in the 19th century apostolic authority to write scripture or invent new doctrine.

Of course the 19th century SDA’s understood this point. It was the Takoma Park apologists that pushed forward this false hermeneutic. An error that was officially approved at Glacier View in 1980.

To better understand Ellen White, see:

Test of A Prophet
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm

Ellen White & Doctrinal Authority
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ipture.htm

Ellen White NOT A Source For Doctrine
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ite-13.htm

Ellen White NOT A Prophet
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ipture.htm

Understanding Ellen White
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ite-10.htm

This idea that Ellen White must never be wrong about doctrine, or anything else, is utter nonsense from the White Estate. And so too the modern SDA hermeneutic that pretends she has doctrinal authority. The real Ellen White refutes this nonsense.

Just take a look at the apostle Peter; he had many spiritual gifts, including performing miracles, having visions, and writing scripture. He was also the protégé of Christ and the head of the apostolic church.

But yet, with all these spiritual gifts, including having doctrinal authority, he fell into false doctrine, along with many in the early church, including Peter, James, and Barnabus. How could this happen if those who have spiritual gifts are supposed to be faultless?

Was Peter a fraud, a false apostle? No. He was a sinner, one that even denied Christ and ran away from the cross, and did it again after the cross (see Galatians). Even with all his spiritual gifts, far, far, in excess of Ellen White’s, he still made great errors of doctrine. Is this how apostles are to act?

Do you think Peter is a fraud, and that his letters should be removed from the NT?

Why does Peter get a pass, but not Ellen White? Why the double standard?

Perhaps you need to go to the Ellen White thread and get a better understanding about how Adventist Reform views Ellen White.

Ellen White
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

Second, Ellen White, like the other SDA’s at this time, thought they had developed correct doctrine about many points, including the Sabbath. But even this doctrine was a work in progress, as they all found out in the mid 1850’s when Ellen White had to admit she was wrong about when the Sabbath began and ended.

Thus, Ellen White endorsed all manner of doctrines as truth from God, just as they all did. But even so, corrections and revisions were often needed, which is why their doctrinal books became so thick over the years. And why they had to change their positions over time.

Doctrine is not static, as the history of the early church shows. And Ellen White, like many others in church history, changed her views over time. This should not be held against her. This is what everyone does from Peter to Luther and everyone else. People grow, learn, and change their views over a lifetime.

The fact of the matter is that Ellen White moved towards the Protestant Gospel, not away from it, like so many other SDA’s, like Uriah Smith.

Bsheilds said: Why are you covering up for SDA false doctrine and their false prophet?

Tom said: I am not excusing any false doctrine, as I have no authority to do so. Nor am I covering up anything about Ellen White or church history. You must have me confused with the White Estate?

I readily admit that the SDA’s were, and still are, full of false doctrine. But the point I was making is that they did not embrace error on purpose, at least not before 1888. They were uneducated, living in a very uneducated time. They misunderstood many things and it is remarkable that they did find some serious truth.

However, the modern SDA’s are not naïve today. Nor is there any lack of knowledge about the points under discussion. Thus there is no excuse for anyone to be teaching so much false doctrine and incorrect history. The SDA’s today are not honest, much less fully correct about doctrine, nor are they even trying to be.

But neither are the critics. They are also full of error, division, and confusion as well. In fact, not one of them can articulate the correct view of the NC Sabbath, proving that they are also in the dark.

Bsheilds said: Time and time again you have told innocent people that ellen was not involved in the tithe scheme and that she didn't endorse it. Why do you cover up for ellen? What is your purpose?

Tom said: Ellen White did not develop the doctrine of tithe, nor was that doctrine a priority in the early SDA church. Rather, they focused first on eschatology, including the Sabbath. But even so, they were still revising things, including the Sabbath doctrine, which they admitted was still wrong in the mid 1850’s. So there was always error that needed to be corrected.

In spite of Ellen White having spiritual gifts, she embraced the Sunday Sabbath for years. After she switched to the 7th day, she still had it wrong, because she embraced Bates view, which was from 6 pm to 6 pm.

Thanks to Andrews, this error was corrected in the mid 1850’s, even as Ellen White was shown to be wrong on this point, - and all Battle Creek knew it. Proving that having spiritual gifts does not trump Bible Study or give Ellen White doctrinal authority. Also disproving that this idea that a true “prophet” cannot be wrong. This evil myth was promoted by the White Estate, not by James or Ellen White.

The SDA doctrine of tithe, was a work in progress. It was a minor point that was first worked out just before the Civil War. Ellen White was not taking the lead on this, but she endorsed these views of others, as they all did. In doing so, they all thought they were following Bible truth. There was no attempt to deceive or embrace false doctrine. Nor was Ellen White in charge of any committee on tithe.

The fact is this: they had all embraced error about the Two Covenants, as well as tithe, including Ellen White. And it was only a matter of time before the former error would become discovered, (by EJ Waggoner in 1886), which would soon destroy the Battle Creek Empire and set the SDA’s on a course that would leave them headed for cult status, which is where they are now.

The failure of the Battle Creek SDA’s to correctly understand the Two Covenants is what led to their demise. Ellen White was on the right side of this debate, which she lost. And had the church not hidden this part of her life, we would all have a much better understanding of SDA history and doctrinal development.

Ellen White did the best she could. The tithe doctrine was a minor point as compared to the 1888 debate about the law and the Gospel.

Bsheilds said: The SDAs and you still don't understand the New Covenant.

Tom said: I agree that the SDA’s are wrong about the Gospel and the Two Covenants, but so too the NCT crowd.

Both the SDA’s and NCT crowd have an incorrect, but different view about the Sabbath. Only when the Gospel is correctly understood, will the NC Sabbath correctly emerge from the teachings of Jesus.

Moreover, this thread is about tithe, not Ellen White. While the SDA’s developed a doctrine of tithe, which has grown into an obsession and a fundamental error, Ellen White came to understand it was not fully correct, and that the Spirit was leading her away from it. While this view stunned the leaders, she did not care, and never backed down.

THIS is how we know she did have spiritual gifts. There was no motivation for her to take such a position, and buck the establishment, of which she was a part. It would have been much easier for her to go along with majority about the 1888 debate and later tithe. But she took the more difficult road and followed the Spirit, not even fully understanding the details or the repercussions that were involved.

Such a courageous, anti-hierarchical position proves to me that Ellen White was following her own spiritual path, not that of the leaders. She did have the Spirit, and they not so much.

Too bad that the White Estate covered up this changed view about tithe, and many other revisions that Ellen White made, as she matured and better understood the Gospel.

Let’s take a look at your quotes from Ellen White:

"Systematic Benevolence," Ellen G. White early linked the tithe with "Systematic Benevolence." First she assured the church in June 1859: "The plan of systematic benevolence is pleasing to God" (1T 190). And then in January, 1861, in an article entitled "Systematic Benevolence," she wrote: "Rob not God by withholding from Him your tithes and offerings." The article closed with Malachi 3:8-11 quoted in full (1T 221, 222).

Tom said: First off, note the date. Second, this is not the same doctrine as we know today, - that would be developed in another 20 years. Third, the SDA’s were not the only ones who quoted Malachi and applied it to their lives. Many, churches, did so this at this time, and many still do today.

So if anything, the SDA’s were following the crowd on this point, as well as on abstinence. They did not live in a vacuum. They were not smarter than everyone else as the SDA’s brag.

The fact that the SDA’s took this famous tithe passage, and this topic, and tried to find a way to make it work for them should come as no surprise. This is what they did with doctrine. The fact that they were fundamentally wrong about the Gospel was unknown to them as this point. They thought they were correct.

Bsheilds posted: There were many references to systematic benevolence and the tithe through the late 1860s and the 1870s. Ellen White, in Testimony No. 24, written in 1874 and published in January 1875, devotes 28 pages to "Tithes and Offerings," followed by five pages under the title of "Systematic Benevolence." (3T 381-413.)

Tom said: First off, if you compare Ellen White’s writing about tithe to the Sabbath,-- the Sabbath would win by a mile. Tithe was a very minor doctrine for the Battle Creek SDA’s. But not the Sabbath.

While tithe in the church, in any form, is wrong, the SDA’s did not know this. Ellen White, in spite of her spiritual gifts, would not begin to understand such errors until after 1888, then she made many corrections, tithe being just one.

Good for Ellen White to change her views on the law and the Gospel as well as tithe. This shows she is trying to follow the theological debate and the Spirit of Christ, not go her own way.

Too bad the White Estate covered up these doctrinal changes, and declared she made no such changes. Why did they take such a view? Because they also were teaching that prophets cannot be wrong, - or they were false.

So they trapped themselves with their own myths, and rather than confess they were wrong, they decided to hide Ellen White’s post 1888 writings that showed that she did change her view on the law and the Gospel, as well as tithe.

I guess they figured they were in too deep to tell the truth. So they just tried to hide what Arthur White had done, and pretend all was well. Thus they have yet to confess what has taken place, much less correct the record. Disgusting.

Bsheilds posted: In 1876 the conviction came to leading brethren that there were defects in the plan, especially in the basis on which the tithe was reckoned.

Tom said: Here we see the SDA’s realizing that they have made some mistakes about their attempts to codify a tithe doctrine. Remember, they had just discovered error with their Sabbath doctrine in the 1850’s, so they knew they had others errors that also need revision.

Besides, their tithe doctrine was not coming anywhere close to generating 10%, so it was not working properly.

Because of their literal view of the Sabbath, the uneducated SDA’s just assumed that tithe was also part of the apostolic church. Listen to Ellen White embrace this false assumption, as they all did in Battle Creek:

“The New Testament does not re-enact the law of the tithe, as, it does not that of the Sabbath; for the validity of both is assumed.”
Ellen White, The Faith I Live By, page 244.

Of course this is wrong. Tithing is clearly part of the OC ceremonial laws, while the Sabbath is located in the center of the Moral law, and is a moral law that also contains some ceremonial aspects.

Moreover, if the OC Sabbath has the same lack of support from the NT as it does for tithe, then there is no Sabbath for the church. Because there is absolutely no such doctrine as tithe in the NT, nor could there have ever been such an Old Covenant doctrine in the Apostolic church for a number of reasons.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uption.htm

Bsheilds posted: The following comes from a special session of the General Conference held early that year:  "Remarks were then made by Brother Canright on the subject of systematic benevolence. Taking certain well-ascertained facts as a basis, he showed that if all would come up to the Bible plan of S.B., the amount within our ranks would reach the sum of $150,000 yearly, instead of about $40,000 as it now is. The Lord says, 'Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse,' and until this is done, the Lord will not be 'proved,' to see whether He will not pour out a blessing so that there shall not be room enough to receive it. Brother White followed with lengthy and stirring remarks on the same subject.

Tom said: Just as Andrews had taken the lead about correcting the error of the time of the Sabbath, --even challenging Bates and Ellen White’s view, so too Canright about tithe. He is the man that realized how much money could be brought into the church if changes were made. Thus it is Canright’s view that we have today.

But guess what? Not only was Canright a great legalist that did not understand the NC, he would repudiate the SDA’s in less than a decade, including their view of tithe that he developed in the late 1870’s.

Too bad they kept his warped view of tithe and many other things. But Ellen White, who was wary of Canright, moved away from this doctrine after 1888, even making it clear to the leaders, (later) that the Spirit was leading her AWAY from it.

No wonder she doubted tithe. Any work product of Canright should be doubted, because he turned out to be the greatest of all SDA critics. No wonder Ellen White would come to doubt what was the greatest of all Canright achievements --the doctrine of tithe.

No wonder he thought so highly of himself. He made the SDA church wealthy.

Bsheilds said: "Brother Canright offered the following resolutions on the subject of systematic benevolence, which were unanimously adopted by the conference and congregation:

"Resolved, That we believe it to be the duty of all our brethren and sisters, whether connected with churches or living alone, under ordinary circumstances, to devote one-tenth of all their income from whatever source, to the cause of God. And further
"Resolved, That we call the attention of all our ministers to their duty in this important matter to set it plainly and faithfully before all their brethren and urge them to come up to the requirements of the Lord in this thing.

Tom said: Note who is pushing tithe forward? Not Ellen White.

Regardless, the SDA’s thought they were following the Bible at this point. None of them had any idea how wrong they were about the Gospel or the Two Covenants. But this period of innocence would not last long.

Waggoner would discover great error in 1886, and Canright would respond by leaving the SDA’s in 1887. This was followed by the great 1888 debate, which destroyed the Battle Creek Empire and forced the SDA’s to retreat to Takoma Park, where they refused to be honest with doctrine or church history.

Bsheilds posted: "Moved and carried that the chairman appoint a committee of three, himself to be one of that committee, to prepare a tract upon the subject of systematic benevolence.

The Chair appointed D. M. Canright and U. Smith to act with him as that committee."--Minutes of the Special Session of the General Conference, published in RH April 6, 1876, p. 108.  By the year 1878 a change had been made in the plan of figuring the percentage of giving or tithe, shifting from approximately one percent per year to the total valuation of property to ten percent of the actual income.

The former plan was found to be defective. In one case on the old plan the tithe amounted to $10 per month, while under the new plan of an actual ten percent of income, the tithe amounted to $36 per month.

Tom said: Note that Ellen White was not part of the team. This was a man’s world, and men ran the SDA church. Not Ellen White. This is one of the White Estate greatest myths.

If anyone ran the church and worked on doctrine, it was James White, (the Chair), Uriah Smith, and Canright. Ellen White had little power. It was a man’s world. Women could not even vote or use birth control. They were very unequal, and Ellen White was no different. Her husband managed the Denomination, not Ellen White.

Just as there was a committee set up to investigate the alleged error in the Sabbath doctrine, so too about tithe. Thus changes were made as a result of Bible study by the men. Not because of Ellen White, and in the case of the Sabbath, in spite of her.

So there is no effort to deceive or promote false doctrine. These naïve people thought they were following the Bible. They did not think they were following Ellen White, because they were not.

While one may say: “If Ellen White had spiritual gifts, why did she not know better?” This is a false point, because this is not how spiritual gifts work. To prove this, just look at the early church. For a number of years, all the apostles taught that only Jews could join the church and be saved. No Gentiles were allowed. But this error was changed when Peter received a vision, etc.

But how many years did those apostles, with all their spiritual gifts, embrace error on this point? While they were sincere, they were still wrong. All of which disproves how the White Estate was promoting Ellen White. One can have spiritual gifts and still be WRONG about doctrine, even about the Gospel. The NT makes this clear.

Bsheilds posted: Late in 1879 Ellen White penned the article on "Sacredness of Vows" now in Testimonies, vol. 4, pp. 462-476.

In this she makes several references to "tithes and liberal offerings" as a means of supporting various facets of the work of the church.

"The plan of systematic benevolence was of God's own arrangement, but the faithful payment of God's claims is often refused or postponed as though solemn promises were of no significance. It is because church members neglect to pay their tithes and meet their pledges that our institutions are not free from embarrassment.

If all, both rich and poor, would bring their tithes into the storehouse, there would be a sufficient supply of means to release the cause from financial embarrassment and to nobly carry forward the missionary work in its various departments. God calls upon those who believe the truth to render to Him the things that are His."--4T 475, 476.

Tom said: So what? This is what they thought the Bible taught. They were not trying to invent a scam. The fact it has ended up that way is beside the point. Just as Peter preached false doctrine about the Gospel, and thought only Jews could be saved, so too the SDA’s embraced many doctrinal errors. This is normative for all. Even for Ellen White.

Too bad the White Estate made Ellen White out to be greater than the apostles, and smarter than Luther. She was neither. She was often wrong, as most people are, but this does not make her a fraud.

The SDA’s, including Ellen White, were sincere, but wrong about many things. Which is why you will see Ellen White changing her view on many points.

Listen to the mature, post-1888, Ellen White talk about these things. Does she take the view that the SDA’s have found all truth, and that they are without error? Does she teach that doctrine should not be examined, or that we should not remain open to correction and new truth? Hardly.

Investigation of Doctrine, by Ellen White:

There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.

We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ.

The Lord designs that our opinions shall be put to the test, that we may see the necessity of closely examining the living oracles to see whether or not we are in the faith. Many who claim to believe the truth have settled down at their ease, saying, "I am rich, and increase with goods, and have need of nothing."

Bsheilds said: ellen may not have invented it (tithe), but she supported it all her life.

Tom said: First off, there was no tithe, in any form, until just before the Civil War. And then it was not really tithe or 10%. Which is why they called it “Systematic Benevolence.”

When it was further revised, Ellen White was not part of the 1878 committee. But she obviously agreed, at first, with its findings and with the new revision. They all did. But ten years later, after 1888, she had second thoughts, which she later acted on, and then went further to say that the Spirit was leading her away from tithe.

One day, someone should do an honest study about Ellen White and tithe. What the White Estate and their supporters, have done, cannot be trusted whatsoever.

The fact of the matter is this: Ellen White became a tithe rebel. During the 1890’s and beyond, she did not support tithe as taught by the SDA’s, and when confronted, refused to correct her view when asked to do so.

So stop embracing the fiction of the White Estate. This is a discussion based on facts, not propaganda.

Bsheilds said: The only thing she rebelled at was where her tithes should go.

Tom replied: Wrong: Ellen White not only refused to follow the rules and give her tithe to the hierarchy, she also accepted the tithe of others to spend as she saw fit. Listen to Ellen White:

Some cases have been kept before me for years, and I have supplied their needs from the tithe, as God has instructed me to do. And if any person shall say to me, Sister White, will you appropriate my tithe where you know it is most needed, I shall say, Yes, I will; and I have done so.

I commend those sisters who have placed their tithe where it is most needed to help to do a work that is being left undone. If this matter is given publicity, it will create a knowledge, which would better be left as it is. I do not care to give publicity to this work, which the Lord has appointed me to do, and others to do.

I send this matter to you so that you shall not make a mistake. Circumstances alter cases.

I would not advise that anyone should make a practice of gathering up tithe money.

But for years there have now and then been persons who have lost confidence in the appropriation of the tithe, who have placed their tithe in my hands, and said that if I did not take it they would themselves appropriate it to the families of the most needy ministers they could find.

I have taken the money, given a receipt for it, and told them how it was appropriated.

I write this to you so that you shall keep cool and not become stirred up and give publicity to this matter, lest many more shall follow their example.

Letter 267, 1905, pp. 1, 2. (To Elder Watson, Jan. 22, 1905.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------

If all SDA’s followed her example, the leaders would lose control. They were not going to let that happen.

http://egwtext.whiteestate.org/publicat … enumber=13

http://www.gilead.net/egw/books/manuscr … uences.htm

Ellen White did not follow the SDA doctrine of tithe in her last two decades of life. She was a tithe Rebel! The fact that the church covered this up and promoted Ellen White as if nothing had happened is par for the course.

Bsheilds said: She wanted it to be a secret that she was not sending her tithes to the GC, but was using them for her self interest.

Tom said: First, she was not spending the money on herself, but on church work that was not being supported by the leaders.

Second, it was hardly a secret because others were also following her practice, even as some were giving their tithe to Ellen White for her to direct where it should go.

However, Ellen White was not trying to harm the denomination, nor was she trying to start a debate or schism. She was careful not to harm the church, even as she had to remain faithful to the practical needs around her, as well as the Spirit, who was urging her to move away from tithe.

Bsheilds said: She wanted everyone else to send their tithes to the GC and she even wrote extensively about doing so.

Tom said: The fact of the matter is that others were sending their tithe to Ellen White, and she refused to say that this was wrong. Even when the leaders pressured her to do so. She would not admit that tithe was a fundamental doctrine that could never be changed. But like I said, she was not trying to harm the work of the church, even though she knows something was very wrong with this doctrine.

Today we know. Look at the corrupt anti-Gospel hierarchy that this false doctrine has spawned. Look at the billions of dollars that have been used to promote legalism and build up a false, corrupt empire that is self-destructing for all to see.

1Tim. 6:10 For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.

2Tim. 3:2 For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy,

Heb. 13:5 Make sure that your character is free from the love of money, being content with what you have; for He Himself has said, “I WILL NEVER DESERT YOU, NOR WILL I EVER FORSAKE YOU,”

Bsheilds said: Go to www.whiteestate.org and type in tithe. She said enough about tithing to keep you busy for hours and none of what she wrote was rebelling against it. You, Tom are, promoting a falsehood when you tell us ellen was a tithing rebel.

Tom said: Ha! This is too funny. Go to the White Estate web site and type in “cover-up,” or “publishing fraud.” Do you think you will find out that Arthur White was hiding thousands of documents and dishonestly manipulating her writings? NO. That will not come up. And neither will the truth about Ellen White and tithe.

So let’s not pretend that the White Estate is the source of anything true or credible. Much less about how Ellen White really viewed tithe.

The mature Ellen White was a tithe rebel and we have posted the sources for all to see on this site. Why ignore such facts?

Bsheilds said: Thanks for revealing where you stand.

Tom said: I stand for Adventist Reform, which is a comprehensive plan that will change OC Adventism into a NC brand, where the Gospel is featured over law, and the teachings of Jesus reign supreme.

Bsheilds said: It is such a joy to be free from the clutches of Adventism.

Tom said: I agree. The SDA’s are Gospel rebels and Judaizers. They are so full of the OC, that they have no idea what the NC teaches. This is why they are obsessed about the false doctrines of the OC Sabbath, tithe, and a Celestial Judgment in heaven where our Sanctification is examined to see who is obeying the law good enough. This is awful stuff against the Gospel.

Millions have had to flee Adventism, and this is very sad. And more leave every day. Which is why the church in NA cannot grow or prosper. The SDA’s are self-destructing right in front of our eyes, for all to see. Only if they repent and reform can they stop this inevitable descent into cultic irrelevance and doom.

Bsheilds said: To know that we have salvation is beyond anything else. Adventism failed us.

Tom said: I agree 100%! There is no doubt that Adventism has failed everyone, including Ellen White. They have much to repent about.

However, it is a good thing that we can each go to the NT and find salvation through the Word of Christ. We do not need an organized church to be saved. Thank God!

Regardless, no one should think that only the SDA’s have gone bad. As if they are the only church that has a false and confused Gospel. No. No. Every church in the land is full of false doctrine and error. NONE of them even have the Sabbath correct, much less eschatology.

Bsheilds said: Tom has some very good points concerning Adventism.

Tom said: I have spent about 40 years working on Adventist Reform. The 12-point Agenda is the correct path forward for the Advent Movement, including the stunning point about the Reformed, 7th day, NC Sabbath of Christ.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … form-2.htm

http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1222173098

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtop … id=234&p=1

Bsheilds said: I don't buy into anything he says about Sabbath observance.

Tom said: The NC Sabbath is based on what Christ teaches, not on Tom Norris. So if you don’t buy into this doctrine, then that is a matter between you and Christ. At the Judgment you will be given the opportunity, along with many others, starting with the 1st century Jews, to explain to the Lord of the Sabbath why you rejected his Gospel Sabbath. Good luck with that!

Those that have left the SDA’s, only to embrace the NCT myth about the Sabbath, have confused themselves further. While they were correct to reject the OC Sabbath of the SDA’s, they failed to discovery the true, 7th day Sabbath of Christ. Now they are stuck with this utter nonsense and double-talk that has no support from the NT.

NCT is garbage. Sorry. No one should buy into this scam.

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=953

Bsheilds said: There is absolutely no scripture telling Christians about or to observe a "reformed" Sabbath.

Tom said: Wrong. The Gospels are full of Jesus NC Sabbath instruction, including his teaching that the Gospel Sabbath was made for all mankind.

Mark 2:27 Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

Bsheilds said: I have asked over and over for some proof of his findings. Never does he respond with scripture even suggesting Christians are under obligation to "keep" Sabbath.

Tom replied: Ha! This is too funny. I suggest you go to the Reformed Sabbath thread or the one that destroyed NCT and see if you can’t find some passages.

The Reformed Sabbath
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=228

NCT Exposed As Error
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=953

Bsheilds said: As far as I am concerned all that is garbage, pure false teaching.

Tom said: Anyone that embraces the delusion of NCT, is in no position to throw stones at any other doctrine. Much less what is so obvious in the Gospels.

That’s like a Mormon attacking the beliefs of a Scientologist. Or two blind people trying to fight.

Those that have grown up in the SDA cult, have no special pedigree of truth. They have been wrong for so long, how do they even know what truth is? If they could be fooled for so long, what makes them think they are not being fooled again?

Besides, it is one thing to finally spot error, but another to find truth. While the OC Sabbath of the SDA’s is error, so too what the NCT crowd teaches about the Sabbath. It is pure garbage. But not the NC Sabbath of Christ. Anyone that calls what Christ teaches “garbage” is not a Christian, nor do they have clue about the Gospel, or the Judgment, which they have no chance of passing.

Bsheilds said: Tom regards ellen white as some kind of guru and defends her to the hilt.

Tom said: I defend Ellen White from the myths and fabrications of the White Estate. I stand up and speak about the thousands of documents that Arthur White was hiding, trying to explain the facts about the real Ellen White of history.

Traditional Adventism is based on a false and manipulated view of Ellen White. Neither is true.

As for the real Ellen White. She is a great historical source. She left detailed writings about her life as a co- founder of the SDA’s. More importantly she was the wife of James White, the real powerhouse and driving force behind the church.

While the critics are correct to condemn traditional Adventism, and how the White Estate explained and promoted Ellen White, they too were fooled by the White Estate. They were never allowed in the White Estate, nor did they solve the mystery of what was going inside the vaults. So they have been off target all these years, not understanding the real issues.

This is why the White Estate has to come clean and tell the truth about all this. They have committed fraud on the public and they must be held accountable, forced to correct the record.

Bsheilds said: Do a search on ellen at www.whiteestate.org and see for yourself what she thought of the Sabbath and how it was to be kept. tom's theory clashes with ellen at every point.

Tom said: Do a search of how the post apostolic church “thought how the Sabbath was to be kept.” They have been wrong the whole time, including some of the greatest scholars, like Luther. So the fact that Ellen was partially wrong about the Sabbath, is not news. Everyone has been wrong about this doctrine, including the Sunday keepers, which the SDA’s battled.

However, even when the Sabbath is the topic, Ellen White still says such doctrine should be examined, because it may still need correction. Listen to Ellen White:

“There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible.”

Such statements are also in the White Estate, but of course, they would never apply them to tithe or the Sabbath.

Moreover, the real Ellen White would embrace Adventist Reform with both hands. The manipulated creature from the White Estate, would not. But who cares, she is a fraud.

Here is more from the real Ellen White:

“We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible.”

“Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed.”

Ellen White, Counsels to Writers and Editors, pages 33-42.

Tom said: In conclusion;

After the SDA’s had developed a final doctrine of tithe, Ellen White felt free to disregard it. Consequently, she embraced a variant view of tithe that made the leaders angry. She refused to endorse their rigid, controlling view, and even willingly accepted tithe money from others to reallocate.

Her actions regarding tithe, as well as her advice to investigate doctrine and follow the Word, do not support the present view, practice, or attitude of the Adventist church.

If Ellen White joined our conversation today, she would repudiate the censorship that is placed on this topic by the leaders, and demand that a full and complete investigation be taken to understand what is truth and what is not. She would send everyone to the Word to settle the issue. Just like she did in 1888.

Let all understand that there is no such doctrine as tithe in the church for many irrefutable reasons, nor is the present tithe based hierarchy structure compatible with either Protestant or democratic fundamentals. This is why the leaders refuse to have an open examination and discussion about tithe. They know they would be defeated. So they forbid any such debate.

Listen to Ellen White about this:

The rebuke of the Lord will be upon those who would be guardians of the doctrine, who would bar the way that greater light shall not come to the people…

Whenever the people of God are growing in grace, they will be constantly obtaining a clearer understanding of His word. They will discern new light and beauty in its sacred truths. This has been true in the history of the church in all ages, and thus it will continue to the end.

But as real spiritual life declines, it has ever been the tendency to cease to advance in the knowledge of the truth. Men rest satisfied with the light already received from God's word, and discourage any further investigation of the Scriptures. They become conservative, and seek to avoid discussion.

The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God's people, should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error.

When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves, to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition, and worship they know not what...

God would have all the bearings and positions of truth thoroughly and perseveringly searched, with prayer and fasting. Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill-defined ideas of what constitutes truth. Their faith must be firmly founded upon the word of God, so that when the testing time shall come, and they are brought before councils to answer for their faith, they may be able to give a reason for the hope that is in them, with meekness and fear.

Agitate, agitate, agitate! The subjects which we present to the world must be to us a living reality.

It is important that in defending the doctrines which we consider fundamental articles of faith, we should never allow ourselves to employ arguments that are not wholly sound. These may avail to silence an opposer, but they do not honor the truth. We should present sound arguments, that will not only silence our opponents, but will bear the closest and most searching scrutiny. . . .

Ellen White, Counsels to Writers and Editors, pages 33-42]

White Estate Not Honest

The Watson Letter is another one of these cases where the White Estate has not been honest. It’s just one more example of how the church hides half the story, so that they can promote their point of view.

Who ever heard that Ellen White drank wine? But she did and it was in the Review, on the record, for all to see. But who knew such a simple fact? The White Estate knew, but they covered it up and promoted Ellen White as if she would never in a million years drink a drop of evil spirits.

While the church today uses Ellen White ‘s writings to promote faithful tithe paying, they fail to explain that Ellen White was a “Tithe Rebel,” so disgusted with church mismanagement, that she made up her own version of tithe, one that made the administrators hot with anger. And she refused to ever repent or think she was wrong.

Ellen White was not being stubborn or contrary for no reason. Her Spiritual Gifts, the very ones that the SDA’s extol and praise, were leading her AWAY from tithe. The Spirit was convincing her there was something wrong with this doctrine.

But of course the SDA leaders don’t want to hear what the Spirit was saying to Ellen White about tithe, or anything else. In fact, their first reaction was that of disbelief, even as they pleaded with Ellen Whites son to declare the Watson letter a fraud. But it was no such thing. It was genuine proof that Ellen White does have spiritual gifts that the leaders lack.

Those that follow the same Spirit today will understand that there is something very wrong with the SDA doctrine of tithe. Ellen White was giving a warning, through the Spirit, to the SDA’s. But who is listening? Not the White Estate. They would rather have the money.

Today we know that tithe is not a valid doctrine in the church. Those today that teach the apostolic church practiced tithe are very misinformed, incompetent, and wrong. They are even great liars and fools, unable to understand the Word or the Spirit.

There was never any such doctrine as tithe in the apostolic church, much less a hierarchical organization like the SDA’s have developed. Which is why there is not one verse in the NT showing any Christian paying tithe or receiving tithe, or storing tithe. There was no such doctrine. Period.

Tithe is a false doctrine that can no longer be tolerated. Tithe is a great lie that has brought BILLIONS OF $$$ into the SDA church. But instead of making them rich in the Gospel, it has made them wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked.

Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,

Now we can see why the Spirit was leading Ellen White away from tithe. The same Spirit today is now calling for the complete repudiation of this Old Covenant doctrine, as well as the hierarchical model that it spawned. (Which of course explains why the leaders don’t want to hear what the Word or the Spirit is saying.)

If only the White Estate had told the truth about Ellen White, we could have seen the mature progression of her views about tithe and many other doctrines. But the SDA leaders betrayed Ellen White and the Advent Movement. They have been caught deceiving the people about church history and doctrine, and it has to stop.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 05-27-12 10:35 pm

Tom, note the following points:

1. From reading the NT, Paul wanted the preachers of the Gospel to make a living form that service. Would you agree that some may pay 10% and make their payment a tithe of his income. The NT leaves the giving up to the Christian but the promises of that giving are taken very seriously. You can't just leave the discussion the way you have that the NT does not command a tithe, because in Ananias and Sapphira's case it was a promise of 100%, an enhancement from tithe to what is expected from the believer. Not every case will be the same but you have to admit, some will be over 10%, eh??

2. Is it the believer's duty to save a church and her prophet or to do what the scripture asks, and point to the scripture when that church or prophet are referred to???

tom_norris · 05-29-12 10:39 am

Bob said: 1. From reading the NT, Paul wanted the preachers of the Gospel to make a living form that service.

Tom said: Slow down. This is not about “what Paul wanted.” No. No. No. Stop pretending that Paul is the head theologian of the church. He is not. Christ has that role and you need to understand this point and respect it.

The Christian faith is based on the teachings of Jesus. Thus it is Jesus who teaches that those who preach the Gospel are to be supported by those who hear the Gospel.

Paul is teaching only what Jesus had previously taught. Paul is not being original, nor is he going beyond what Christ teaches in the Gospels.

Bob said: Would you agree that some may pay 10% and make their payment a tithe of his income.

Tom said: No. Did Jesus teach that his Gospel teachers should be paid 10%? No. Such a number represents OC tithing, which was abolished from the NC. So a NC number must be different.

More than that, tithing is an ongoing situation. It is required by OC law; it is not short-term commitment. And it is paid to a religious superior, not to an equal. Anyone that preaches the Gospel correctly, is an equal, even a servant, not a superior or a master.

Furthermore, God reads the heart and mind. Thus anyone who is trying to follow OC Tithing in the church, --but are just trying to disguise their real intent, --are only condemning themselves. The church is not based on OC law, and anyone who thinks otherwise, is not following the Gospel.

Moreover, who says that anyone has to have a specific number, a specific percent of giving? The NC church shared with each other, they did not try and figure out what percentage of their income they were going to pledge. You are thinking like a modern SDA, not a 1st century Gentile Christian.

A & S offered to sell a piece of property and give the proceeds to the church. They got in trouble for lying. And then lying again, - when they had a chance to tell the truth. Tithing was not taking place whatsoever.

Bob said: The NT leaves the giving up to the Christian but the promises of that giving are taken very seriously.

Tom said: First off, this is wrong. The NT does not “leave the giving up to the Christian” without any rules or guidelines. The apostles followed what Jesus had taught, and made sure that the church was based on honest, freewill sharing as well as a congregational model that was not owned or controlled by the leaders.

So the amount and frequency is left up to the members, but not the fundamental doctrine of how the church was to be financed. The apostles taught how this should be done, and they did not use tithe whatsoever, or anything close to it. Neither can we.

A & S discovered that their promises about giving were to be taken seriously. But this had nothing to do with tithe. There was no tithe or anything close to it. This is the point that must be understood and accepted.

Bob said: You can't just leave the discussion the way you have that the NT does not command a tithe, because in Ananias and Sapphira's case it was a promise of 100%, an enhancement from tithe to what is expected from the believer.

Tom said: A & S promised to give X, because there was no tithe. They did not promise to pay tithe on their sale, nor was one required, as Peter made clear. There was no tithe being practiced at any time in the apostolic church.

The NT forbids tithe, as well as a separate priesthood to accept the tithe. It also forbids lying about giving and everything else.

The SDA’s are wrong to have ever thought that the early church tithed. They were very uneducated about Judaism and church history. None of them had any theological training, and it shows. They were not trying to mislead or deceive. They were just honestly wrong.

We should not be shocked that they could be wrong about so many things, including tithe. Tithe was never practiced in the church as they teach, and it is time for all SDA’s to stand up and admit the facts, and repent for their great error, and many others.

While they naively assumed the early church practiced tithe, we know today this never happened. Tithe is an OC doctrine, not a NC one.

Bob said: Not every case will be the same but you have to admit, some will be over 10%, eh??

Tom said: A one-time gift to the church, were all are equal, is not to be equated with a year of tithing to a superior religious cast. There is no correlation, nor is this tithe.

Let me say again, there was no tithing in the church. Period. What don’t you understand about this fact, fact, fact?

Bob said: 2. Is it the believer's duty to save a church and her prophet or to do what the scripture asks, and point to the scripture when that church or prophet are referred to???

Tom said: A believer’s duty is to follow the teaching of Christ and pay attention to his Gospel Words. Christ can only save those who repent and embrace the Genuine Gospel.

There can be no tithing in the church, much less a separate class to receive the tithe and control the church through a hierarchy. This should not be hard to understand.

Ellen White was on the right track. She realized that something was wrong with this doctrine, and now we know why? Tithe is not a Gospel doctrine. Those who promote tithe in the church are enemies of the Gospels, wolves in sheep’s clothing.

There can be no tithing in the church. While we can debate it forever, there is really no debate about it.

Let all embrace the genuine Gospel, not this false, OC nonsense that has overwhelmed the corrupt and legalistic SDA church.

Tom Norris for Gospel Reform in the church

bob_2 · 05-29-12 5:49 pm

Tom, your talk is double talk. A church member can find 10% to be their feelwill giving. Nothing wrong with that that I can see in the scriptures. Tom you don't give much to support your position. Tithe may not be based on Paul and on Jesus instruction, but whether you like it or not, Paul was appointed by Jesus as His messenger. He had a lot to do about the organization of the Early Church.

Last edited by bob_2 (05-29-12 5:51 pm)

tom_norris · 05-30-12 11:21 am

Bob said: Tom, your talk is double talk. A church member can find 10% to be their feel will giving. Nothing wrong with that that I can see in the scriptures.

Tom said: First off, the main point is this: There can be no tithing to a hierarchy of religious elites in the Protestant church. Period. It is outrageous and completely against the Gospel.

Such a position is not double-talk but Protestant talk, for which I am unapologetic. You either accept this Gospel fact, or you reject it and the Gospel.

If you really think it is fine to believe in NC tithing, then here is a group that wants to recruit you. I think you, and all the TSDA’s should join. They have some nice t-shirts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublons … ociety.htm

http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/

Second, if a church member is trying to mimic the outdated, OC doctrine of tithe, by giving a 10% offering, they are wrong. God is not mocked. There is to be no tithe, or a priestly hierarchy to receive it and control the church. Nor is there to be anything like tithing or such division and inequality in the church.

Those who participate in this blasphemy, and think they are pleasing God are delusional. They are no more pleasing God than the Judaizers who promoted ritual circumcision in the early church, or later, pretended that Sunday was the NC Lord’s day.

God is not pleased with false doctrine, much less with something that has allowed the few to take control of the many. Tithe creates a hierarchy, which then goes corrupt and fights the Gospel and abuses the people. Look around at the SDA wasteland and see how they have squandered billions of dollars, all to create a $30 Billion Empire of false doctrine and arrogant pride. An Empire ready to collapse, like a rotten tree in a storm.

The SDA leaders support tithe because they are paid by the tithe. Proving their so-called Gospel is one of Law, Law, Law, and not of faith, even though they pretend otherwise.

So it makes sense that they are not being paid according to the Gospel, but according to law. Do you see it? Do you understand?

Thus by their own words and OC doctrines the SDA’s are self-condemned, proving that they are law based. Proving that they do not understand the Gospel.

Bob said: Tom you don't give much to support your position.

Tom said: There are numerous posts from Tom Norris, on this site and others that explain why tithe is wrong in the church.

Moreover, if you understood the change from the OC to the NC properly, you would also understand why tithe in the early church was an impossibility, and why it never took place.

If you really want to learn about this topic, just go online and see the many web sites that discuss this issue from both the pro and con side. Read all the material and figure it out. It is not hard to understand, --especially once you understand the Gospel. The same goes for the Sabbath.

Bob said: Tithe may not be based on Paul and on Jesus instruction, but whether you like it or not, Paul was appointed by Jesus as His messenger. He had a lot to do about the organization of the Early Church.

Tom replied: Tithe is based on the OC Leviticial Priesthood. It is a doctrine of Moses, not Christ.

Tithe was never a NC doctrine, which Peter, made clear in the book of Acts as he organized the church. (Before Paul was even a Christian). Jesus teaches sharing, and so too the apostles, including Paul.

The fact that all in the church are equal, all being priests of God, renders the doctrine of tithe moot and non-functional in the NC. Which is why the early church never tried to embrace such an OC practice. Not even the Judaizers tried such a stunt.

Tithe made no sense then, or now. Unless of course someone is trying to re-create the OC, ruling over the people and treating them as inferiors, trying to control their lives, money, thoughts, and property.

Tithe is a great windfall (and false doctrine) for those who receive it, but it is a curse to those who pay and suffer under the anti-Gospel control of false teachers and law-based blowhards and Pharisees.

The present structure of the SDA church is OC. This is wrong. It must be NC. Which means no tithe and no separate hierarchy owning and controlling the local churches.

This should not be hard to understand, but it obviously is. Especially for those who have grown up in the SDA cult. Sad.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 05-30-12 12:30 pm

So Tom, you will support a reformed SDA church if no one gives a tithe to an organized Christian Church and you can work on Sabbath. INTERESTING!!!! And you want to own the local church not Silver Springs, Maryland? Offerings were gathered to help those preaching the Gospel make a living doing so. That is stated in the New Testament. Where does it condemn this practice, Tom? How are offerings handled in you REFORMED SDA???

I agree that the OC way was a tithe first then free will offerings. The new way is freewill offerings only. Be aware of your promises and give according to your promises.

Last edited by bob_2 (05-30-12 1:02 pm)

tom_norris · 05-31-12 9:45 am

Bob said: So Tom, you will support a reformed SDA church if no one gives a tithe to an organized Christian Church and you can work on Sabbath. INTERESTING!!!!

Tom said: I support a Gospel based organizational system, as well as the Reformed, NC, 7th day Sabbath of Christ.

I do not support an OC based hierarchy, were the few are above the many, controlling all, owning all, and requiring an ongoing OC tax, called tithe. This is the wrong system for the church, and so too is the OC view of the Sabbath that goes along with such legalistic confusion.

Few have any idea what the NT really teaches, thus truth seems surprising and strange to many. This is a normative reaction to Gospel truth by those in the dark.

Just as the Gospel surprised and amazed the Jews, so too the SDA’s, and all others in due time.

Right now the SDA’s are too stunned, and wrong, to even process Adventist Reform. They have not recovered from the shock of hearing that the IJ is wrong, much less tithe. And now there is a new doctrine of the 7th day Sabbath emerging for them to deal with.

Wow! Their heads are exploding, even as the church continues to self-destruct in arrogant rebellion and denial.

The SDA’s don’t know how to deal with truth, besides run away from it, pretending it cannot possibly be correct. The 1st century Jews did the same thing. The real Gospel of Christ is shocking and very different from what many expect or think. This is especially true now, at the end of time, when the real Gospel is almost extinct. Which is why Christ condemns the entire Laodicean Church, calling them blind and naked, wrong about the Gospel, and very unsaved.

This is why Dr. Ford’s Gospel seemed so shocking to the TSDA’s. They were not looking for truth, but only for ways to defend their traditions and promote more law keeping.

Dr. Ford was promoting the genuine Gospel, which was very different from what many imagined. Thus they thought he was a heretic, teaching false and awful doctrines, when in fact; he was promoting the true Gospel, which they did not understand. And like the Pharisees, they did not want to repent or change their views.

So Dr. Ford and the Gospel were thrown out of the church so that the OC hierarchy could go back to deceiving the sheep like the wolves they are. False doctrine is all the SDA’s know, even when it comes their most prized doctrine, - the Sabbath. Who knew?

The Gospel Sabbath is shocking to the SDA’s because they don’t know the Gospel. All they know is law, and they pretend that is the Gospel. But the Gospel is not what we would normally think, nor is it what is typically taught, except at a very few times in history.

Like the Gospel, the NC Sabbath requires a double-take. It seems wrong and impossible. How can this teaching be from God? But Jesus said it was, and his teaching is the basis for the Gospel.

Why is the Gospel Sabbath unlike any Sabbath doctrine in the church today? Why? Because every church today has misunderstood the Gospel and the NT, even as the Jews misunderstood the Gospel and the OT. The Jews were not prepared for the Gospel or the NC Sabbath and neither is the Laodicean Church today, including the SDA’s.

When the Gospel is correctly understood, so too church finance and organization, as well as the Sabbath, food laws and everything else. And yes, the whole package is stunning and shocking. This is what the Gospel does. It overthrows tradition and only saves those who are humble and repentant, honestly looking for new truth.

Bob said: And you want to own the local church not Silver Springs, Maryland?

Tom said: I don’t want to own any church. Rather, it is the members that are to own, support, and manage their own local churches. The local church is NOT to be managed by a separate class of elites associated with Rome, Salt lake City, or Silver Spring, much less pay tithe to those that pretend they speak for God, as if they were Levites.

Bob said: Offerings were gathered to help those preaching the Gospel make a living doing so. That is stated in the New Testament. Where does it condemn this practice, Tom?

Tom said: Offerings were to support Gospel preaching, as well as to provide food and shelter for the members. Only a few in the church preached the Gospel. Most did not. Members gave to the church, according to the needs of the church. They did not tithe. They shared with each other, as equals in Christ.

Acts 2:41 So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.

Acts 2:42 They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

Acts 2:43 Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles.

Acts 2:44 And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common;

Acts 2:45 and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.

DOES ANYONE SEE TITHE TAKING PLACE HERE? Hardly.

Acts 4:32 And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own, but all things were common property to them.

Acts 4:33 And with great power the apostles were giving testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all.

Acts 4:34 For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales

Acts 4:35 and lay them at the apostles’ feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need.

Acts 4:36 Now Joseph, a Levite of Cyprian birth, who was also called Barnabas by the apostles (which translated means Son of Encouragement),

Acts 4:37 and who owned a tract of land, sold it and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet.

This system of sharing in the local church worked so well, that “there was not a needy person among them.” No tithe, - but the sharing of resources, among EQUALS within the congregation.

If the local church were to follow this system today, can you imagine how things would look? It would be such a paradigm shift that it is hard to think about what should have been all these years. The local church would be an exciting place, where people are valued over the hierarchy and their never-ending quest for funds to build their Empire on the backs of abused members.

Today, the SDA church has no system to help the members with their financial needs. No. They want all the members to give their resources to the leaders, including deeding every church over to the hierarchy, even though they paid zero for it.

And when SDA’s die, the church tries to trick the retired into willing them all their property, thus depriving the family of their just resources. This is not tithe, but an even worse scam directed to take 100% of the dead members assets to feed the endless needs of a corrupt hierarchy. This is not the Gospel or anything close to it.

http://www.willplan.org/

The Jews did the same evil thing.

Mark 7:9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.

Mark 7:10 “For Moses said, ‘HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER’; and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER, IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH’;

Mark 7:11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’

Mark 7:12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother;

Mark 7:13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

The SDA’s teach that the members are to take care of their leaders needs, not caring a hoot about the needs of the local church members or their families. They even claim that this is how God wants the church to be financed and managed. But it is the greatest of all lies.

Tithe in the church is a monumental scam, and so too the last grab for resources from the old and dying. Such behavior spits in the face of Christ and denies his Gospel and his Spirit, as well as denying the Priesthood of All Believers.

The local church cannot tithe, nor can a hierarchy own it. This is forbidden by the Gospel. The local church, which should be managed by the members and for the members, has a duty to take care of the needs of the believers, who are equal at all times—even the women with the men.

Those who follow Christ have no duty to obey any demands of an evil hierarchy, much less provide resources for them.

Bob asked: How are offerings handled in you REFORMED SDA???

Tom said: The local church can easily set up a fund where the members can donate what is needed. A committee can make sure the needs of the members are being addressed, including paying the pastor. The local church is to manage their own affairs and help the members, not indulge the leaders with their never-ending need for Empire building.

The resources are for the local members, not the hierarchical leaders.

Bob said; I agree that the OC way was a tithe first then free will offerings. The new way is freewill offerings only. Be aware of your promises and give according to your promises.

Tom said: Good for you Bob! I knew you could understand this point. There can be no tithe, or a priestly hierarchy to control the church. Congratulations!

Which is exactly what the RCC developed. This is one reason why they are such a false church. Look at how they are set up? They have a separate Priesthood, which is forbidden in the NC. And they are proud of it.

The SDA’s have no excuse for following Rome’s model. Shame on them.

While their Pastors don’t wear priestly robes or call themselves priests, this is the roles they are playing, even as they are doing it in a deceitful manner, pretending they are following the Gospel. They are not even close, which is why they have the SAME organizational structure as Rome, and the same view of the law in Galatians.

Which proves again that the SDA’s are not Protestant. They do not believe in the Priesthood of all Believers. If they did, they would not practice tithe. Nor would they exile those who bring them the Gospel.

Let all that choose to embrace the NC, repudiate tithe in every form or fashion. It is a very false and dangerous doctrine.

Those who continue to embrace this OC practice are denying the Gospel and repudiating the NC with its amazing doctrine of “the Priesthood of All Believers.” They will regret this great mistake at the Judgment day, along with many others that refused to be honest with the Gospel.

Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Tom Norris, for NC Adventism

hfsturges · 05-31-12 11:44 am

Tom,
I responded 5-28-12 to your last post, on the "New Covenant" thread.
If you want to run away from this, that is OK, I will not bother you.

tom_norris · 05-31-12 12:34 pm

Hub, after all these years, why would you think that I would “run away” from any serious question or post? Especially from a die hard TSDA, such as yourself. You should know better. It is no "bother" for me to try and teach the Gospel to those who sit in darkness. This is the duty of all that correctly understand the Gospel.

Furthermore, it is the leaders, like Goldstein and the White Estate, that have run away from this discussion years ago. And they are still running, fearful to discuss the issues, which prove them wrong. Good to see that there are still a few TSDA's trying to defend their confusion. But their numbers are fading fast. TA is not sustainable any longer.

Why don’t you fix up your tithe post and repost it here on the Tithe thread, correcting the typos that say, Tom said: which is then followed by what YOU said?

While you are at, why not address all the points, not just the few that you like?

I will be happy to respond.

Tom Norris, for open and free discussion about Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 05-31-12 6:14 pm

Tom, your argument that tithe is not in the NT is a little like you trying to say Jesus was reforming the Sabbath. How does a desert economy compare to a suburban type city dwelling. Different rules had to apply, but the Pharisees had gone too far, and Jesus pointed that out. That does not create a NEW Reformed Sabbath as you like to brag as the sole proponent. The way people give to support a church should be a planned pledge at the beginning of the fiscal year, and if they sign a card then the leaders should be able to depend on that. Tom, your no hierarchy is unbiblical and depends on the number that are served by a group of leaders preaching the gospel. Your continual rant on tithe is ridiculous and your Sabbath Reform in light of no other preachers or leaders of any church interpreting it your way. Christ fulfilled the Sabbath, He can and he does. As far as money for the livings of the gospel "preachers", plan with the needs for the next year or eliminate expenses the brethren aren't willing to pledge for. You don't have to call it tithe, though some may pledge 10 % of their income. Maybe next year they can only give 5%. So be it.

You know your way to the Flat Earther site, hold whatever you want, but to bring it into the discussion of preacher pay and the Sabbath is about as absurd a referencing of someone that wishes to be taken seriously as I've seen.

If you do not believe there is a disconnect between Old and New Covenant, then you leave yourself open to the Old Sabbath and the Old Tithing scheme. You speak with forked tongue.

Last edited by bob_2 (06-02-12 1:42 am)

bshields · 06-01-12 2:42 pm

Bob, many churches use the term tithe and tell their members that collecting money in this fashion is de3manded by scripture. SDAs are among the churches that are deceiving the membership. The tithing system God imposed on the Israelites didn't pertain to all of them. The tithe was not imposed on all Israelites. The New testament churches that impose tithing impose it on ALL members. Never is this suggested in the New Testament.

If you believe tithing is alright to impose on believers then you need to evaluate your thinking and study scripture. Tom is very correct on this issue.

http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/

http://www.nonsda.org/study3.shtml

bob_2 · 06-01-12 6:31 pm

If Tom sees no disconnect at the cross, from Old Covenant to New Covenant, from tithe to cheerful giving, from Sabbath day to Forgiving Savior, then it is obvious what his beliefs are. There is no mandated tithe or rest day in the NC. If you don't believe that then you inherit both, tithe and Saturday Sabbath.

Last edited by bob_2 (06-02-12 1:38 am)

bshields · 06-02-12 10:04 am

bob_2 wrote:

If Tom sees no disconnect at the cross, from Old Covenant to New Covenant, from tithe to cheerful giving, from Sabbath day to Forgiving Savior, then it is obvious what his beliefs are. There is no mandated tithe or rest day in the NC. If you don't believe that then you inherit both, tithe and Saturday Sabbath.

OK, your other post seemed to indicate that churches could impose 10% by pledge, on the membership, and that was kosher. I misunderstood.

I believe Tom does understand the difference between the old and new. He is not like most SDAs who have no idea about the covenants. He is still hung up on "keeping" the old day no matter how silly it is "kept" in his mind.

tom_norris · 06-02-12 11:46 am

Bob, I thought you were making some progress in your understanding of the Gospel, but I was wrong. As for Hub, I have no expectations that he will ever renounce Traditional Adventism. But I could also be wrong about that? I hope so for his sake.

Bob said: Tom, your argument that tithe is not in the NT is a little like you trying to say Jesus was reforming the Sabbath.

Tom said: The NT is clear that there can be no tithing or a priestly type hierarchy in the church. Anyone who says otherwise does not understand the NC or the fundamental Protestant doctrine called the Priesthood of All Believers.

Tithe and the POB are mutually exclusive positions, belonging to very different paradigms. The first is OC, while the latter is NC.

The Sabbath

The NT is also clear that Jesus teaches a very active and controversial 7th day Sabbath, for which the Jews sent him to the cross. The Gospels are full of such passages, even recording the debates between Jesus NC view of the Sabbath and that of his OC enemies.

Those that wish to refute the clear facts, (meaning the TSDA’s like Hub or the NCT crowd like yourself), choosing instead to embrace various errors, are wasting their time in this discussion. Adventist Reform is based on facts. Not myths, of which there are plenty to choose from.

Bob said: How does a desert economy compare to a suburban type city dwelling. Different rules had to apply, but the Pharisees had gone too far, and Jesus pointed that out. That does not create a NEW Reformed Sabbath as you like to brag as the sole proponent.

Tom replied: Geography is not to be confused with theology, nor does economics have anything to do with Gospel doctrine. Moreover, Jesus was the first “sole proponent” of the NC Sabbath, not Tom Norris. If you took the time to actually study the Gospels you would know this fact.

The Pharisees had not only gone too far with their defense of the OC, they totally refused the many NC changes that Christ demanded. They did not want to consider that everyone was equal, much less that the entire OC tithe based system needed a makeover, - abolishing the Levites and making the people more important than the earthly Temple.

This was their greatest sin, -to reject the Gospel. They had gone too far into the dark side of the OC, which is law, law, law. They forgot that God was also about love and mercy, even more than law.

Thus they only knew a stern God of law, which they manipulated for own their self-interest and control over the people. The God of the Gospel was unknown to them. Thus the teachings of Jesus seemed absurd and impossible.

Luke 6:36 “Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

So it is today. Many cannot hear the Gospel Words of Christ, even though they claim they are following God as born again Christians. But they have been deceived into following a false God and a worthless Gospel. Just like the Jews.

John 8:42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.

John 8:43 “Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.

John 8:44 “You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

John 8:45 “But because I speak the truth, you do not believe Me.

John 8:46 “Which one of you convicts Me of sin? If I speak truth, why do you not believe Me?

John 8:47 “He who is of God hears the words of God; for this reason you do not hear them, because you are not of God.”

Let all understand the fate of those who reject the NC teachings of Christ, including his reformed NC Sabbath or his view of the Judgment, or anything else. It is the same as the fate of the Jews. Very bad.

Bob said: The way people give to support a church should be a planned pledge at the beginning of the fiscal year, and if they sign a card then the leaders should be able to depend on that.

Tom said: Slow down. The NT does not teach such a point, so neither can you.

Why do you want to run the church as if the members are profit centers, - whose object is to support the leaders as they develop a real estate empire for the hierarchy to own and control?

The church does not have to be run like a big corporation or a business. Capitalism is not part of the Gospel, and is against it. In fact, the first churches were Home Churches. Thus there was no need to start a building plan and focus on collecting funds to build a church and take care of a building, much less to support a religious hierarchy to control the believers.

The 1st century church focused on the Gospel and people. Not on the things that the modern church deems important today.

No wonder the Laodicean church has been condemned to hell by Christ in the true Pre Advent Judgment of the last church. They don’t know how to do anything right, nor do they care. They are in love with their confused views that reflect a blending of the OC, and the NC with Capitalism. Such a recipe is poison, so much so that it makes Christ vomit in disgust.

Rev. 3:16 ‘So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.

Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,

This is a big topic; the church is not about a building and the endless costs to maintain it. The church should be all about the people—not the steeple.

The Gospel focus is about people, both their spiritual and physical needs. The church is not a real estate enterprise for the members to support on behalf of the leaders who own it, nor is a venue for entertainment.

The modern concept of church needs Gospel Reform. It is very wrong and the SDA’s are one of the worst offenders. They view the church as profit center for their OC style Empire.

The members, who own no church building, are just being used by the hierarchy to fund their real estate empire and support legions of false, anti-Gospel doctrines. It is a great scam, just like the doctrine of tithe that plays such a large role in this false system.

Let all understand that to pay tithe is to repudiate the Gospel. So while it may make some brainwashed SDA’s feel good, they will regret it at the Judgment day when they are locked out of the Kingdom of God. Sad.

Bob said: Tom, your no hierarchy is unbiblical and depends on the number that are served by a group of leaders preaching the gospel.

Tom said: Gospel doctrine does not depend on any numbers as you claim. There is to be no division in the church where one group is elevated over the other, much less through the OC practice of tithe. This is an impossible doctrine in the church, which is why the apostolic church never embraced tithe or anything close to it.

All are equal in the NC. None can control and rule over another, much less own the church and control everything and everyone in it. This is how the RCC is set up and so too the SDA’s. It is very wrong. Rome is beyond repentance, and it appears that the same can be said for the SDA’s. Sad.

Matt. 20:20 Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to Jesus with her sons, bowing down and making a request of Him.

Matt. 20:21 And He said to her, “What do you wish?” She said to Him, “Command that in Your kingdom these two sons of mine may sit one on Your right and one on Your left.”

Matt. 20:22 But Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” They *said to Him, “We are able.”

Matt. 20:23 He *said to them, “My cup you shall drink; but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.”

Matt. 20:24 And hearing this, the ten became indignant with the two brothers.

Matt. 20:25 But Jesus called them to Himself and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them.

Matt. 20:26 “It is not this way among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant,

Matt. 20:27 and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave;

Matt. 20:28 just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

Those at the top are to serve, not be served. Which is why they have no “authority” over others, much less pretend that are like the Levites and should receive tithe. All are equal. All are priests of God. No one is above another. Thus there can be no form of tithe in the church.

While there are leaders in the church, as the Spirit gives such gifts, there cannot be a separate, tithe supported class as the SDA’s have developed. This is an OC paradigm, not a NC one.

All who participate in this Gospel Fraud, either by paying tithe or receiving it, will go to hell. Why? Because they have embraced a false Gospel. And the pastors, who should know better, will be held even more accountable.

Matt. 7:21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

James 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.

Bob said: Your continual rant on tithe is ridiculous and your Sabbath Reform in light of no other preachers or leaders of any church interpreting it your way.

Tom said: My “continual rant” is about the Gospel. This is the over arching doctrine that must be understood clearly and correctly. Only the Gospel can save, thus it is what really matters for those who seek Eternal Life.

Anyone who thinks tithe is part of the Gospel, as the SDA’s teach, are not following the NC. They do not understand the Gospel correctly. So it is very important to get this correct, just as it is about the NC Sabbath.

When the Gospel is correctly understood, so too church finance and organization, as well as the Sabbath and all else.

Bob declared: Christ fulfilled the Sabbath, He can and he does.

Tom said: Ha! Don’t you ever get tired of your worthless rant about Jesus supposedly fulfilled the Sabbath? And now you say he is still ‘fulfilling” it?

How does one fulfill something in the past, and yet, keep fulfilling it on a present basis? That makes no sense. It’s just double-talk that has no basis in scripture.

Bob said: As far as money for the livings of the gospel "preachers", plan with the needs for the next year or eliminate expenses the brethren aren't willing to pledge for.

Tom said: Each local church will set their own priorities and figure out their own needs and act accordingly. They will also reach out to other churches to help them, or to receive help. This what happened in the apostolic church.

Bob said: You don't have to call it tithe, though some may pledge 10 % of their income. Maybe next year they can only give 5%. So be it.

Tom said: No one should try and see how close they can come to false doctrine. There can be nothing like tithe in the church. Not accidentally or on purpose. No divisions. No payments to an elite class of spiritual people who control the church and own the real estate.

Bob said: You know your way to the Flat Earther site, hold whatever you want, but to bring it into the discussion of preacher pay and the Sabbath is about as absurd a referencing of someone that wishes to be taken seriously as I've seen.

Tom said: I found this Flat Earth site useful in my past discussions with the TSDA’s. When they would try and defend the most absurd and mythical points, like tithe or the IJ, I would roll out this site to show them that sincerity does not equal truth.

Many play this game with God, thinking that if they just “believe” some portion of the scripture, it is true. As if their “belief” makes it so. But that is not how doctrine works.

Some people are not able to discern the difference between facts and myths, truth and error. Even in this day and age, there are many that deny the most clear and irrefutable facts. This is what Hub is still doing today, and so too are you.

So I think you both should purchase some of those Flat Earth T-shirts and wear them as you post on their Forum for awhile. Maybe a conversation with those so confused will help you both re-consider how to view the facts of the Gospel Story.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/inde … &Itemid=69

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/

Here is another recent example about someone who was so certain their Bible views were correct, when they are obviously absurd, impossible, and very dangerous. Why not learn from the mistakes of others? Why not determine to be honest with the Word?

Serpent-handling pastor profiled earlier in Washington Post dies from rattlesnake bite

Mark Randall “Mack” Wolford was known all over Appalachia as a daring man of conviction. He believed that the Bible mandates that Christians handle serpents to test their faith in God — and that, if they are bitten, they trust in God alone to heal them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle … story.html

Why I watched a snake-handling pastor die for his faith?

Camera in hand, I watched as the man I’d photographed and gotten to know over the past year writhed, turned pale and slipped away, a victim of his unwavering faith, but also a testament to it. A family member called paramedics when Mack finally allowed it, but it was too late. Mack Wolford drew his final, labored breaths late Sunday night. He was 44.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle … tid=pm_pop

The SDA’s have been bitten by the IJ, and are even now close to death. But even so, they refuse to admit that they have been wrong in any way. In their delusion and death spiral, they hope that God will vindicate their beliefs and heal them. But there is no possibility this will take place. They have misunderstood God and his Word. Like so many others, who are also dying...

The SDA’s are dying for a reason, --because they have embraced legions of false doctrines, which are killing them. But yet, they refuse to repent and stop playing with the poison of error. Like those who embrace a doctrine about snakes, or the view that the Earth as flat, they have lost their ability to reason, much less understand the Word.

Bob said: If you do not believe there is a disconnect between Old and New Covenant, then you leave yourself open to the Old Sabbath and the Old Tithing scheme. You speak with forked tongue.

Tom said: There is NOT a total disconnect between the Two Covenants as you claim. This view comes from Marcion, the heretic; which position was correctly refuted by the church.

The OC and the NC have a clear relationship that must be properly understood. There is not a total disconnect as you and Marcion claim. Sorry.

The Continuity versus Discontinuity Debate
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtop … 8886#p8886

(See post 208, Reformed Sabbath Thread; 4-26-2010)

Bsheilds said: Bob…If you believe tithing is alright to impose on believers then you need to evaluate your thinking and study scripture.

Tom said: Correct. Anyone that embraces tithe, in any form or fashion, does NOT understand the Gospel correctly. The SDA’s badly misunderstand the Gospel, and so too most of those that leave them.

Bsheilds said: Tom is very correct on this (tithe) issue.

Tom said: Correct. However, Tom is also correct about the reformed, 7th Day Sabbath of Christ. This NC doctrine is very easy to understand in the NT, at least for those that are honest and that want to understand the Gospel.

Bob said: There is no mandated tithe or rest day in the NC. If you don't believe that then you inherit both, tithe and Saturday Sabbath.

Tom replied: There can be no OC tithe in the NC, much less a division in the church between those who are priests and those who are not. There can be no class of elites receiving tithe, as the SDA’s have developed. Such a system is against the Gospel and prohibited in the church. Which is why the apostolic church never practiced tithing or anything close to it.

As for the Sabbath, it is not the same as tithe for many reasons. While tithe was designed to support the Levites and the temporary OC Temple services, God bases the Sabbath on the creation of the world. Thus it is not based on a temporary, fading doctrine, but an eternal one that identifies a defining and unchangeable point about God and man.

Second, while the OC Sabbath mandated rest, the NC Sabbath promotes the opposite. Thus Jesus does not teach a “resting” Sabbath, but an active and reformed NC doctrine that is full of Gospel freedom and innocence, even as the OC Sabbath rules are made moot by faith in Christ.

So there is a NC Sabbath for the church, as taught by Christ in all four Gospels. But there is no OC Sabbath or tithing, much less to a separate class of elites that control the church.

It is time for the SDA’s to grow up and understand the difference between the OC and the NC. If they can’t do this, then they will never comprehend the Gospel, much less the Gospel Sabbath or how the church should be organized and financed.

Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 06-03-12 3:44 am

Tom, if you want to make your points, stick to scripture not the tripe you are producing. You can't see Jesus fulfilling the Sabbath with clear text supplied over and over. As far as tithe, if they don't see the disconnect between Old and New Covenant, like you, then what difference if tithing continues, you believe the Decalogue continued. So why should I believe you and your angles on a Reformed Sabbath that no one else touts and Tithing system to support it. You want your 10 Commandment Reformed Sabbath and a Fraudulent Tithe that you can shake in front of the leaders of the SDA Church. You are on the edge of truth, but maybe run it through your noggin a few more times. Very interesting that every believer is a priest in the NC, they can support themselves without robbing God, eh???? Pretty clever!!!!The Early Church started out small, what happens when megachurches happen, a heirarchy is sinful. Come on Tom. If you want to drag through a Sabbath from OC to NC, why not drag through a tithe to fund it or a promissory system. No wonder you aren't in the Hierarchy of the SDA church.

tom_norris · 06-04-12 7:02 pm

Bob said: Tom, if you want to make your points, stick to scripture not the tripe you are producing.

Tom said: Bob, you are not a Gospel believer, much less a Protestant or a scholar or historian. You are an angry ex- SDA who is bent on revenge against your former cult.

This is not the proper attitude to find truth, which is why you have not found it with NCT as you claim. You are wasting your time throwing stones at Adventist Reform.

Bob said: You can't see Jesus fulfilling the Sabbath with clear text supplied over and over.

Tom replied: No. I can’t see or hear Jesus teaching that he fulfilled the Sabbath, much less so that he would abolish it and then revise it into an Every Day state of rest so that the NCT crowd can meet every Sunday. No. I don’t see that anywhere in the Gospel because it is not there.

Jesus NEVER claims to fulfill the Sabbath. Never. So why do you insist on such a false point? Jesus never even teaches a resting, non-working, 7th day Sabbath; only an active one, where it is no sin to work.

There is no reason to embrace phantom doctrines that do not exist. I suggest that you focus on the genuine Sabbath teachings of Christ, trying to understand what is clearly written over and over in the Gospels for our instruction.

Bob said: As far as tithe, if they don't see the disconnect between Old and New Covenant, like you, then what difference if tithing continues, you believe the Decalogue continued.

Tom said: If you understood why tithe is wrong in the NT, then you should also understand the reformed NC Sabbath of Christ. They are both based on a dramatic change in the Priesthood, which abolishes tithe and reforms the Sabbath.

As for the Decalogue, every church, both RC and P, believe that the Moral law is still active in the NC. Such a fact of church history should give you great pause.

Bob said: So why should I believe you and your angles on a Reformed Sabbath that no one else touts and Tithing system to support it.

Tom said: The object here is to follow the genuine Christ, believing only what he teaches about all things, including the Sabbath. Many do not want to do this. So they make up their own views of Christ. Big mistake.

So there is a NC Sabbath for the church, but no tithing whatsoever, much less a special set of religious elites that are set above all others.

Bob charged: You want your 10 Commandment Reformed Sabbath and a Fraudulent Tithe that you can shake in front of the leaders of the SDA Church.

Tom said: Only the Gospel is to be uplifted and presented. The reformed Sabbath of Christ is part of the Gospel, and so too is a non-tithing, congregational style, organizational structure.

Bob said: You are on the edge of truth, but maybe run it through your noggin a few more times.

Tom said: Speak for yourself. There is great truth in the Gospel Sabbath as well as about church organization, and the fact that there can be no tithing in the NC.

Moreover, Adventist Reform is the correct path for the self-destructing SDA’s. It is present truth for today. You however, along with the SDA leaders, have not entered into this new paradigm, and thus you are standing on the outside, at the edge of truth, throwing stones and refusing to enter. Sad.

Matt. 23:13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.

Bob mused: Very interesting that every believer is a priest in the NC, they can support themselves without robbing God, eh???? Pretty clever!!!!

Tom said: Those who do not understand the Priesthood of all Believers are not Protestant. They don’t even know the major difference between RCC and Protestant theology. Such naïveté speaks volumes, even as it disqualifies you for further discussion.

The High Priest of God in the NC is Christ, and all who follow him-- and his active priestly Sabbath, are also priests of God.

Bob said: The Early Church started out small, what happens when mega churches happen, a hierarchy is sinful? Come on Tom.

Tom said: Gospel doctrine is not based on culture or population. The size of the church does not change doctrine. That is absurd. Where do you come up with these wild ideas?

Bob said: If you want to drag through a Sabbath from OC to NC, why not drag through a tithe to fund it or a promissory system. No wonder you aren't in the Hierarchy of the SDA church.

Tom said: We don’t get to pick or choose any NC doctrine. All this has been done for us by Christ and the apostles. Thus the Word holds the key to understanding what OC doctrines survive in the NC, and how they function.

If you want to know what Jesus teaches about the Sabbath, study the many passages in the Gospels where he addresses this point.

Don’t ignore what he teaches and then pretend he teaches something else. Unless you can be honest about the Gospels, you will never find truth. The teachings of Jesus are for us to study and understand, not manipulate, ignore, and revise.

Jesus has made it clear in the Gospels that he expected the church to meet on a weekly basis. And so they have. The first church was exclusively Jewish, and thus the 7th day was the Lord’s Day. After 70 AD; and the destruction of the Jewish State, Temple, and priesthood, the Gentile church began to embrace Sunday as the NC Lord’s day.

So regardless of the day, the church has always had a weekly Lord’s Day, aka, the Sabbath. The fact that it was not fully correct most of the time is beside the point.

The SDA’s came along and vowed to make this correction, claiming that Sunday was wrong, and only the 7th day correct. Misunderstanding the Gospel, they missed the genuine Gospel Sabbath. But they did get the day correct. Which is a step in the right direction.

Gospel Sabbath Has Arrived:

Today, the 7th day Gospel Sabbath of Christ has emerged for all to see. It is unlike any of the many Sabbath doctrines being practiced by the Laodicean Church. It is both the correct “day,” as well as the correct “way” to understand the active and reformed, NC Sabbath of Christ.

It is not at all like the SDA Sabbath, which is based on the OC law. Nor can there be any tithe paying involved, as the SDA’s feature every Sabbath. Every Sabbath, - without fail.

The SDA’s have linked their non-working OC Sabbath keeping with their Tithe paying to their leaders who are pretending to be Levites. This is all wrong. The NC Sabbath allows work on the 7th day, but not any tithing, much less a hierarchy to rule over and own the church.

The Gospel church cannot be based on tithe or anything close to it. Nor can it worship on Sunday, as if that were the Sabbath, or teach that it is a sin to work on the 7th day.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 06-05-12 10:23 am

And again, Tom, it appears that you have removed a third one of my posts responding to you. I think the second one was one of my better responses. I was just trying to take your points one at a time. I must of hit a nerve. Didn't want the rest of the forum to see the opposition to your no scriptural position, I guess.. Looks like I'll have to draft my response on Microsoft Word and save it separately, since this is the third time you have done this too me. It takes time to put a response like the last one together. Yours didn't have much scripture and you can dictate off the top of your head. Sorry this is the only way you can keep your Reformed Sabbath pure is to delete those that respond against you.

The gist of my remarks were Jesus was born of a woman under the law. He had to keep the OC Law including the 4th Commandment to be perfect enough to be our Savior. His life, death and resurrection ushered in the New Covenant. The 4 Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, though called the Gospels, does not mean that the gospel was instituted before Christ death and resurrection.

He gave soul peace and rest, the objective of the OC Sabbath was for physical rest, when Christ died and was resurrected, He became worthy to be our Savior. He declared Himself "Lord of the Sabbath". You seem to suggest that Jesus could change the Sabbath rules to His whim. No, he had to keep it perfectly. You seem to think what he did while alive was Reform it. Notice he goes back and talks about David and the shewbread, and the priest breaking the Sabbath with their labor. He declares that someone more important than the temple is here. But He kept the 4th Commandment perfectly, then fulfilled it in the NC to be our rest and peace. (Texts can be supplied when I have assurances you will cease and desist deleting posts that come too close to home for you. Why not leave this one alone. It is responsive. At least send a message why you delete my posts. )

Last edited by bob_2 (06-05-12 11:02 pm)

tom_norris · 06-06-12 11:16 am

Bob said: Tom, it appears that you have removed another one of my posts responding to you. I think it was one of my better responses.

Tom said: Bob, you are not being responsive to the issues. Nor can you do much of anything except deny the facts and cling to your myths as if they were true.

We have mutually exclusive views about the Gospel, which cannot be reconciled, so there is no point in trying. Besides, the repetition of myths will never change any point into Gospel truth. Regardless if it is about the IJ, tithe, or the Sabbath.

Your stubborn insistence that Jesus “fulfilled” the Sabbath is baseless. Jesus never uttered such words, much less such teaching or behavior. The facts are irrefutable and damning, and thus the matter is concluded. You cannot teach what Christ did not teach. Nor do we have to listen to such nonsense over and over.

Moreover, it is not polite to scream and make insults with all caps or underlining, as if such drama changes the facts. The IJ screamers would do this all the time. But large fonts do not change doctrinal facts. I don’t think they ever understood this point.

If you want to continue to attack what you don’t understand, - do so in your own section where there are plenty such threads. Here is one that you started to attack Adventist Reform. Make such posts there, not here.

Tom Norris' Reformed Sabbath - Unbiblical
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=787

Don’t misunderstand; I will be happy to come over and expose your nonsense for all to see. As I have before. It is an easy thing.

Bob said: I was just trying to take your points one at a time.

Tom said: No. You were making the same false points while ignoring many others that you need to address. You are basing your views on false assumptions, even on words that Jesus NEVER SPOKE.

Doctrine cannot be based on what Jesus never said. But yet, this is how you operate. This is the basis for your strange view of the Sabbath that has never been embraced by any denomination at any time.

NCT is garbage. It is just more error for those who have lived in error all their lives. How can those who have been in the cultic shadows for so long, become experts? On what basis? Many former SDA’s have only exchanged one set of Sabbath errors for another set. They are still wrong today, and you are a prime example.

Let’s face it. People like false doctrine; otherwise there would not be so much of it around. When most SDA’s discover their church is full of false doctrine, they leave and go find more false doctrine somewhere else. Proving that people like false doctrine and myths. Which is why NCT was invented. It serves a purpose, as there is great demand for false doctrine.

Bob said: I must of hit nerve. Didn't want the rest of the forum to see the opposition to your no scriptural position.

Tom said: This is comical. You are the one that claims Jesus fulfilled the Sabbath, but yet Jesus NEVER teaches such a point, even as he teaches other points about the Sabbath that you ignore. The entire basis for your view of the Sabbath rests on myth and false assumptions. Jesus does not teach that he fulfilled the Sabbath; much less that he supports a soul “resting” Sabbath.

Thus you are the one that is holding on to Gospel myth.

Moreover, I am used to far worse treatment from the TSDA crowd. But your hermeneutics, arguments, and anger, all sound similar to the cult you left behind. They too refused to be honest with the Word, embracing many false assumptions and myths, even as they attacked Adventist Reform for telling the truth about tithe, the IJ, and the Sabbath.

They too could not be budged from their false assumptions about the IJ any more than you of your “Jesus fulfilled the Sabbath” mantra.

Even when the IJ screamers were shown that the original word in Dan 8: 14 was not “cleansed,” meaning that there is no connection to the Day of Atonement as they had assumed, they still did not care. They wanted the passage to say, “cleansed” and they were not going to let the facts stand in the way!

Consequently, the TSDA’s just refused to use any other Bible than the King James. This way they could still pretend they were correct. They would rather embrace error than admit error. This is the same game you are playing. It gets old.

So please take your Sabbath myths, and your defense of tithe and a hierarchy, to your own section and try to convince the world that NCT is true, when it is nothing more than a failed attempt to resolve the age old debate about the Sabbath.

The debate is over. As the Gospel becomes clearer, the NC Sabbath has emerged for all Adventists to see.

Sabbath Reform has matured and come of age, even as the way has been prepared for the church to move forward into the full Gospel of God.

Matt. 11:15 “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

I hope this helps

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

bshields · 06-07-12 8:25 am

Tom wrote:

Sabbath Reform has matured and come of age, even as the way has been prepared for the church to move forward into the full Gospel of God.

Matt. 11:15 “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Tom's is a mere pipe dream of an egocentric. Tom has no interest in reading the real truth found all through scripture. Tom was brought up in a false religion and he remains connected to that falsehood by creating another one. Tom writes vain excuses when cornered and he cannot prove his teachings.

It is all about Jesus Tom. He is the truth and the light. He is the New Covenant and the New Covenant has nothing to say about Christians observing a Sabbath in any way, shape or form. New Covenant Sabbath is a myth formulated by you and a few of your disciples to distract from Jesus and the real purpose of His life and death for our salvation.

I know you will build your defense and write a long disconnected post on how wrong I am for discrediting you. However I had to tell you, after reading all the long drawn out posts that I was so amazed at how no scriptural proof was in their contents, that I am not any closer to believing your ramblings now than after the first time I found one of your posts. I don't think I am the lone wolf either. Most just shake their heads and go on without comment. I thought maybe you could be salvaged because you really have exposed tithing falsehoods in Adventism.

Last edited by bshields (06-07-12 8:26 am)

tom_norris · 06-08-12 5:24 pm

Bsheilds, a NCT supporter and former TSDA said: Tom’s (NC Sabbath doctrine) is a mere pipe dream of an egocentric. Tom has no interest in reading the real truth found all through scripture.

Tom said: Ha! This is what the Jews said about Christ and his pipe dream about a reformed priesthood and Sabbath. They claimed he did not understand the scriptures or God, and that he was insane, even possessed by the devil. They said his teachings were impossible, even as he was a lawbreaker and fraud.

So the “real truth” for you is this: there is no Sabbath doctrine for the church. This is a strange truth, not supported by the NT. If your point is true, why does Jesus teach that the NC Sabbath was made for all mankind, not just for the OC Jews?

Jesus teaches that the Gospel Sabbath was not “fulfilled” for man, but “made” for man. These are mutually different perspectives.

But yet, you claim there is no NC Sabbath, only an OC doctrine that was fulfilled by Christ, then abolished, and then changed to an Every Day doctrine for those who meet on Sunday.

Mark 2:27 Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.

Those who claim the Sabbath is only for the OC Jews are refuting the clear teachings of Christ on this point. Jesus did not misspeak here. He teaches that his Gospel Sabbath was made for all humanity, just like the Gospel.

The fact that the SDA’s have the wrong view of the Gospel and the NC Sabbath is beside the point. There is a NC Sabbath for the church. This is the point that cannot be refuted by the anti-Sabbath, anti- SDA crowd.

No matter how much people may hate the SDA’s, and they do have cause to do so, - it changes nothing. There is a NC Sabbath for the church, as taught by Christ in the NT. Those today who fail to find it, have also failed to find the genuine Gospel.

Bsheilds said: Tom was brought up in a false religion and he remains connected to that falsehood by creating another one.

Tom replied: Everyone in Laodicea was raised to believe in false religion and a worthless Gospel. Not just the SDA’s. So we are all born into this same blind situation, which requires all to search hard for truth and repent.

Some are further ahead in this process, even as most will never find the true Gospel.

Bsheilds said: Tom writes vain excuses when cornered and he cannot prove his teachings.

Tom said: I have been online for more than 10 years, answering hundreds of questions about doctrine and church history. The charge that I have failed to use enough texts is ludicrous, and so too this idea that I have been “cornered” by the NCT crowd. This is nothing more than wishful thinking by the deluded.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … _70484.htm

I suggest that you read the various threads on this site, including the one that refutes NCT and try to find truth as opposed to defending NCT.

NCT Exposed As Error
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=953

The Reformed Sabbath
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=228

One must be willing to give up error in order to understand truth. Otherwise, the errors you embrace will become your truth. On the Judgment day you will be sorry.

Luke 11:34 “The eye is the lamp of your body; when your eye is clear, your whole body also is full of light; but when it is bad, your body also is full of darkness.

Luke 11:35 “Then watch out that the light in you is not darkness.

Luke 11:36 “If therefore your whole body is full of light, with no dark part in it, it will be wholly illumined, as when the lamp illumines you with its rays.”

NCT is darkness, not light. Beware!

Bsheilds said: It is all about Jesus Tom. He is the truth and the light. He is the New Covenant and the New Covenant has nothing to say about Christians observing a Sabbath in any way, shape or form.

Tom said: Yes, all true Gospel doctrine comes from Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath. However, he clearly and repeatedly teaches a NC view of the Sabbath in all four Gospels. Those that deny this fact, have shut their eyes to truth, pretending to be blind. The Jews did the same thing, and thus they became unable to see.

While the NCT crowd screams that there is no Sabbath for the Christian, and that Christ taught none, the facts do not agree. The Word proves them wrong for all to see.

Those that claim Jesus had “nothing to say” about the NC Sabbath are living in gross denial. They are refuting the NT and the many Sabbath teachings of Christ. NCT is nothing more than an anti-Sabbatarian hate group, embraced by many who are angry with the SDA’s. Sad.

Bsheilds said: New Covenant Sabbath is a myth formulated by you and a few of your disciples to distract from Jesus and the real purpose of His life and death for our salvation.

Tom said: Wow! So the many passages about the Sabbath in the Gospels should be denied and removed from the NT? They are only “distractions” from Gospel truth? This is madness.

Of course this anti Sabbath position is in line with the enemies of Christ. They too rejected his view of the NC and the Gospel Sabbath. Do you see the kind of company you keep?

Furthermore, you fail to understand that the church, both RC and P, have always embraced a NC Sabbath called the Lords Day. Even to this very day, most all churches and denominations meet on Sunday, on what they call the Lord’s Day, and the few that don’t, meet on the 7th day.

While none have the Sabbath doctrine fully correct, they do understand that Jesus teaches a NC Sabbath for the church.

So the NC Sabbath is not myth, but a Gospel doctrine, with a long historical pedigree.

But yet you say there is no NC Sabbath, and thus all are wrong to believe such myth. Ha! You are the one making a fool of yourself. No church or denomination has ever embraced what you teach about the Sabbath. Nor will they. It is baseless and without merit.

Although the NC Sabbath is no myth, it has been very difficult for the church to fully understand. The Sabbath of Christ cannot be on Sunday, nor is it a day where work is prohibited.

When the Gospel is fully understood, so too the 7th day, NC Sabbath. At this point, you are not close to comprehending either.

Bsheilds said: I know you will build your defense and write a long disconnected post on how wrong I am for discrediting you.

Tom replied: Ha! Get over yourself. You have not come close to “discrediting” the Gospels, which are full of Jesus NC Sabbath teachings. Nor have you made a case for the No Sabbath view, which is held by many angry ex- SDA’s.

But you can believe whatever you want, many people do. This is how the IJ screamers behaved. They just pretended they won the debate, and went on living a life of delusion. You are free to follow this TSDA pattern.

However, this is the tithe thread. We seem to agree on this point. So let’s be glad and move on.

There are other threads where the Sabbath is discussed in detail, even threads where Tom Norris has refuted NCT. So if you have anything worthwhile to add to those long running discussions, please do so. Otherwise, don’t waste anymore time trying to defend NCT. It cannot be defended.

In conclusion, people are free to read the material and reach their own Gospel conclusions. This is what this discussion is all about; giving the Adventist Community a choice to better understand the Gospel.

Many are thankful. Some, - not so much.

So I say again; Sabbath Reform has matured and come of age, even as the way has been prepared for the church to move forward into the full Gospel of God.

The doctrine of the 7th day Gospel Sabbath has emerged for all to see. Let the critic’s stutter and stammer, throwing as many stones as possible. But it matters little. Truth moves forward regardless of those who fail to see it.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#151 05-21-12 10:40 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#152 05-22-12 2:25 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#153 05-22-12 7:41 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#154 05-22-12 8:25 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#155 05-22-12 8:39 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#156 05-27-12 10:46 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#157 05-27-12 10:35 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#158 05-29-12 10:39 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#159 05-29-12 5:49 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#160 05-30-12 11:21 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#161 05-30-12 12:30 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#162 05-31-12 9:45 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#163 05-31-12 11:44 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#164 05-31-12 12:34 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#165 05-31-12 6:14 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#166 06-01-12 2:42 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#167 06-01-12 6:31 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#168 06-02-12 10:04 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#169 06-02-12 11:46 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#170 06-03-12 3:44 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#171 06-04-12 7:02 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#172 06-05-12 10:23 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#173 06-06-12 11:16 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#174 06-07-12 8:25 am

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

#175 06-08-12 5:24 pm

Re: The Fraud of Church Tithing

Board footer