Adventist for Tomorrow

Our mission is to provide a free and open medium that will assist individuals in forming accurate, balanced, and thoughtful opinions regarding issues within and without the church.

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Due to a large increase in spam and an equal amount of decrease in my time, I have frozen forum registration. If you are new to the site and want to register, e-mail me personally at vandolson@gmail.com. Thank you.

#1 10-18-09 2:29 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Dr. Desmond Ford

Dr. Ford is ONLINE:

http://desford.org.au/live/

http://vimeo.com/user4848138

http://www.goodnewsunlimited.com

My fleetwd1 "Living Water 2 U" YouTube Channel no longer exists. You may write me here.

For the latest videos I had shared, or would have shared, please view and follow them now on Vimeo. see links to your favorite video sources below. for more resources see the websites also.

A friend of Des Ford from the fall of 1979. Prior to that I had listen to tapes, read book and articles by him.

A former student and personal friend of Des from Australia helped me understand the gospel in late 1972 a year after my conversion.
I produced Living Water CD in 2007 with approval and consent from Michael Mertens and Pam McHenry.

A friend of Edward Fudge and Mark Lanier who give me access to their videos as well.

my bio info from YouTube read as follows:

sharing music, sermons, biblical studies, lectures and seminars
"Come let us reason together."

A word about some of my benefactors:

This man, Des Ford, from Australia has influenced me indirect or directly for well over 40 years now. All that I have become in any virtuous way is a direct result of his teaching. I use what I have learned from him to measure all others. He has kept me away from teachings that are rubbish. He sees Jesus in all of scripture and makes an understanding of Him more clear as a result.

Edward Fudge is a true elder brother. Like an elder brother he is much superior in many ways. Yet in his generosity, he treats me as an equal. A truly spiritual brother is he. I desire to be like him.
Mark Lanier a true example of Christian excellence letting Christ define his ethics in work, study and play. Only he could make a term like "bible nerd" desirable. His library, a world class Theological Library is his gift to any and all who will use it responsibly.

Thanks to them my YouTube channel was the success it had become!

External Links
        Living Water 2 U, fleetwd1 - (no longer working) YouTube channel

        Dr Des Ford / Vimeo - sound biblical teaching, excellent gospel

        Mark Lanier - Biblical Literacy - Vimeo / a bible teaching class like no other

        Lanier Theological Library/Vimeo - World Class Theological Lectures and Seminars

        Lanier Theological Library - The Website with more resources

        Biblical Literacy Class - The Website with more resources

        Good News Unlimited - The Website with more resources

        Edward Fudge - The Website with more resources

        Oak Hills Church / Vimeo - more excellent videos to chose from

        Oak Hills Church - The Website with more resources

        Dr Peter Williams - Lecture - This was the most watched video on my YT

        Edward Fudge - Lecture - This was the 2nd most watched video on my YT

    Mark Lanier - Romans - a excellent presentation


Mike McHenry

http://vimeo.com/user4848138

Last edited by tom_norris (03-27-10 12:04 pm)

Offline

#2 10-24-09 8:08 pm

fleetwd1
Member
Registered: 10-08-09
Posts: 9

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

Thanks Tom.  I had been trying many different ways of telling others how to find the channel but this is more consistent.  I do not remember sending it to you.  It must have been one of my earlier tries.  Fords live feed last night was exceptional.  It is found here every 2nd and 4th Saturday of the month 12:30am US Eastern Time http://www.desford.org.au/live

Offline

#3 01-01-10 11:13 pm

fleetwd1
Member
Registered: 10-08-09
Posts: 9

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

I finally made a simple video to go along with Pam and Michael's song Living Water the title track to their CD.

Check it out and send it to friends.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcGqXbg0SDo

Offline

#4 04-20-11 5:57 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

Hi Tom,

Hope all is well in the Lord.

My question is can you please direct me to the Biblical support for the apotelesmatic principle that Desmond Ford used/uses.

Thanks,

David R.
---------------------------------------------------------

Tom Norris said:

While there is no biblical support for the doctrine of the IJ, much less any judgment starting in 1844, the Advent Movement emerged at this time to champion the pre-millennial Second Coming as part of the Gospel.  Thus, Miller’s discovery of the 1st Angels Message, and the subsequent formation of the Advent Movement, represents the fulfillment of prophecy; the start of the Three Angels Messages. 

Thus Adventism can be said to be a movement of prophecy and history, even the fulfillment of the Three Angels Messages of Rev 14.

Too bad that the modern SDA’s no longer understand Adventist history correctly or honestly.  Too bad that they no longer understand the Gospel or the Three Angels Messages.

What a great mistake it was to slander and exile Dr. Ford.  This experienced and honest scholar correctly understood how to explain and defend the Adventist Apocalyptic.  But the man that knew the most, was treated as if he were a heretic, and the SDA’s have been going downhill ever since Glacier View in 1980.

The Takoma Park leaders were so intent to defend their false and legalistic views, that they failed to understand that Dr. Ford was not attacking Historic Adventism, or Ellen White.  He was honestly trying to defend and support SDA eschatology in a credible, professional, and Gospel manner.  But the leaders misunderstood and mis-characterized his view of the Gospel, eschatology, and hermeneutics, including the little known apotelesmatic principle. 

Time and further research has proven Dr. Ford’s positions correct.  The SDA hierarchy, as well as the Review and the White Estate were/are wrong about Dan 8: 14 as well as the Three Angels Messages of Rev 14.   Thus the Denomination owes Dr. Ford an apology, even as they need to repent for their many false doctrines and errors.

While the Conservatives attacked Dr. Ford’s (correct) position that Chanukah, and Antiochus were the primary fulfillment of Dan 8: 14, the rules of hermeneutics prevented him from saying otherwise.  He had no choice and neither do we today.  The primary meaning of the author can never be ignored or changed, and that is the end of the matter for all that are honest with the Word.

However, Dr. Ford also said that such a passage could have additional meanings and fulfillments in the future.  Such a position supports SDA eschatology, even though it is not sufficient to save the IJ.  This concept is known as the apotelesmatic principle.

Here is Dr. Ford’s explanation about the AP.

AToday: QUESTION #7. Your critics have charged that you are a "preterist who wears the hat of a historicist and the cloak of a futurist." What does that mean in layman’s terms? Also, would you please define the "apotelesmatic" principle and explain the debate surrounding this issue?

Dr. Ford: In terms of prophetic interpretation, the preterist sees the fulfillment of prophecy as past, in the first century of this era. The futurist sees prophecy as yet future, for the last days, while the historicist views prophecy as a continually unfolding application with special reference to secular events affecting the church at specific dates. I do not belong to any of these categories because while each has a measure of truth, they also have a corresponding measure of error.

Bible prophecy DID have meaning for those who first received it (preterist). It does have a continual unfolding application, but no dates beyond Passion Week (see Acts 1:7), and it will have a flowering significance for those living in the last days. This is known as the apotelesmatic principal whereby prophecy in some cases is intended for more than the original recipients. George Macready Price used this term in his commentary on Daniel and it is well known to scholars.

E.G. White used this principle over and over again as I have documented in my Glacier View manuscript and so, too, does the SDA Commentary (see particularly the notes of the latter on the prophecy of 2 Thess. 2).

The principle was only denied when I used it at Glacier View to show that Daniel 8:14 had already been fulfilled in a primary and historical sense, which by no means would prevent future fulfillments. The Glacier View denial of the "apotelesmatic principle" was not taken seriously by the scholars present.

http://www.adventistreform.com/DrFordIn … P1.html#Q1

Listen to Raymond Cottrell discuss Dr. Ford’s view of the AP:


The Apotelesmatic Principle

Ford concludes that the traditional Adventist doctrine of the sanctuary cannot be reconciled with the Bible on the basis of generally applied hermeneutical principles, and because he is fully committed to the Bible on doctrinal matters he has no alternative but to reject the traditional interpretation, at least as the primary intent of Scripture.

But he does find a principle that enables him to be faithful to both the Bible and the historical integrity of the church, a principle Seventh-day Adventists have long recognized and used but never applied consistently to the prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation. Curiously, he points out, the traditional interpretation does apply the apotelesmatic principle to one point in Daniel 8: it makes the little horn out to be both pagan and papal Rome!82

"The resolution of our Adventist sanctuary problem," Ford says, "is found in the apotelesmatic principle.83 That principle "is the very key we need to authenticate our denominational appropriation of Dan. 8:14 to our own time and work."84

"By apotelesmatic we mean dual fulfillment or more"; "Scripture clearly shows that prophecies may have more than a single fulfillment."85 Note that Ford uses the apotelesmatic principle, not to prove the church wrong, but to authenticate the application of Daniel 8:14 to our own time and work.

He explains, further: The apotelesmatic principle . . . affirms that a prophecy fulfilled, or fulfilled in part, or unfulfilled at the appointed time, may have a later or recurring, or consummated fulfillment. The ultimate fulfillment is the most comprehensive in scope, though details of the original forecast may be limited to the first fulfillment.

The main idea rather than precise details . . is what has a recurring fulfillment.86

Of the primary application of Daniel 8:14 Ford says that "only Antiochus Epiphanes fulfills the chief specifications of Daniel's little born, and the vile person of Daniel 11. All other fulfillments, such as pagan and papal Rome, are fulfillments in principle rather than in detail."87

"Antiochus did fulfill the little horn prophecy, but he did not fill it full":88 "Every era of revival of the truths symbolized in the sanctuary may claim to be a fulfillment of Dan. 8:14."89 "Dan. 8:14 had its primary application to the times of Antiochus Epiphanes."90

"The Adventist application of Dan. 8:14 to 1844 was an application in principle, an apotelesmatic fulfillment-- a legitimate but not an exhaustive application."91

"1844 thus becomes a providential re-interpretation and an apotelesmatic fulfillment, rather than the primary intention of the apocalyptic passage."92

"1844 and the Advent movement are indeed a fulfillment of Dan. 8:14, an apotelesmatic fulfillment in the same sense that A.D. 70 was a fulfillment of Matt. 24, and John the Baptist of Mal. 4:5, 6; and Pentecost of Joel 2:28."93

Ford adopts the apotelesmatic principle because, in a number of instances, the Bible itself makes use of the principle.94 The SDA Bible Commentary acknowledges this principle and makes repeated use of it.95

In numerous instances Ellen White gives Bible prophecies, including those of Daniel, more than one fulfillment.96

For instance: The prophecy in the eleventh (chapter) of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.97

She similarly applies all of the signs of Christ's second coming delineated in Matthew 24 to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and to the coming of Christ:

This entire discourse was given, not for the disciples only, but for those who would live in the last scenes of earth's history.98

The Saviour's prophecy concerning the visitation of judgments upon Jerusalem is to have another fulfillment, of which that terrible desolation was but a faint shadow.99

This prophecy [Matthew 24] will again be fulfilled. The abounding iniquity of that day finds its counterpart in this generation. So with the prediction in regard to the preaching of the gospel. . . . So now, before the coming of the Son of man, the everlasting gospel is to be preached "to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people."100

This warning [false messiahs] was given also to those who live in this age of the world. The same deceptions practiced prior to the destruction of Jerusalem have been practiced through the ages, and will be practiced again.

This prophecy [false prophets] was spoken also or the last days. This sign is given as a sign of the second advent.102

This prophecy [Joel 2:28] received a partial fulfillment in the outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost; but it will reach its full accomplishment in the manifestation of divine grace, which will attend the closing work of the gospel.103

Ellen White similarly applied the parable of the Ten Bridesmaids to both 1844 and its "perfect fulfillment" in the future.104 She applies Daniel 8:14 not only to 1844, but also to "the final purification of the universe from sin and sinners."105 In fact, she applies it to events prior to apostasy of the early Christian centuries106 as well as to the closing events of earth's history.107

The apostelesmatic principle is thus well attested in the Bible, in the writings of Ellen White, and in the SDA Bible Commentary.108 The word apotelesmatic may be new to many who have long been using the principle without realizing the fact.

http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … 2part6.cfm

See also:

http://www.goodnewsforadventists.com/da … tchie-way/

http://dictionary.sensagent.com/Desmond_Ford/en-en/

http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … 2part9.cfm

http://www.atsjats.org/publication_file … 1&type=pdf



http://biblicalresearch.gc.adventist.or … eology.htm

http://spectrummagazine.org/files/archi … -2shea.htm

http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/c … _bruce.pdf

I hope this information answers your question. 

The apotelesmatic principle is not some dark plot from the devil, as the SDA leaders claimed.  Rather, it is a valid hermeneutical principle that helps us better understand Gospel eschatology.  It has biblical and hermeneutical support, but the IJ has none.

Let all SDA’s pay close attention to Dr. Ford’s Gospel teaching and repent of the IJ and for what took place at Glacier View in 1980.

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#5 06-03-11 4:41 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

David, a Traditional SDA asked:  So Tom, I asked where is the Biblical support for the apostelesmatic principle that Dr. Ford "uses"? In the first answer you start out by attacking/stating there is no support for the Investigative Judgment, etc... I did not ask you this. You haven't supplied a BIBLICAL answer - which is my question. Is it there? What you supplied me with is just pure speculation.

Then you supply an answer that Ford says Ellen White used it. Aren't you the one who says on this board over and over that her writings have been changed, altered, hidden, etc... But you are willing to accept her writings to try and back-up an imaginary principle. I believe in Ellen White as a true prophet but the teaching/principle must come from the BIBLE. I can back Historicism as a Biblical principle from the Bible with no problems.

Here's a quote from YOUR reply:

"E.G. White used this principle over and over again as I have documented in my Glacier View manuscript and so, too, does the SDA Commentary (see particularly the notes of the latter on the prophecy of 2 Thess. 2)."
-
AGAIN - I ask where is the BIBLICAL documentation???????
-
Another quote from your reply:
"The apostelesmatic principle is thus well attested in the Bible, in the writings of Ellen White, and in the SDA Bible Commentary.108 The word apotelesmatic may be new to many who have long been using the principle without realizing the fact."
-
AGAIN - Where is it at in the Bible????
-
Tom - I do not believe it's there. I'm giving you an opportuntiy to show me (everyone).

One more quote from your reply (words all in capital letters are mine for emphasis):

"However, Dr. Ford also said that such a passage COULD HAVE additional meanings and fulfillments in the future.  Such a position supports SDA eschatology, even though it is not sufficient to save the IJ.  This concept is known as the apotelesmatic principle."
-
The phrase "could have" = guessing.

My conclusion is the apotelesmatic principle is just like Futurism - it's guessing and speculating.

I talked to Dr. Colin Standish several weeks ago and he said to me (and also publically in one of his sermons) that Desmond Ford was the most brilliant man he ever met. I can agree that Des Ford is a brilliant man and thinker - but remember so was Lucifer.
-
Tom I ask for YOU to provide me with Biblical PROOF that this apotelesmatic principle is valid. I don't need interviews with other people, etc...
-
David R.
-------------------------------------------------

Tom replied: 

David, I see you are having a difficult time understanding this simple hermeneutical point about the apotelesmatic principle.  Why is this?  You need to stop being so defensive, determined at all costs to prove Dr. Ford wrong.  This is not the proper way to view the issues or find truth.

The apotelesmatic principle simply means that a prophecy can have a double meaning.  First there is the primary, original, meaning, and then, later on, a secondary meaning can emerge to become a valid fulfillment of the same passage.

My last answer showed you how Ellen White freely uses this principle when she deals with Matt 24 and the destruction of Jerusalem in the first chapter of the expanded addition of the Great Controversy. 

Here she correctly states that Christ’s prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem has a “twofold” application.   

“The prophecy which He uttered was twofold in its meaning; while foreshadowing the destruction of Jerusalem, it prefigured also the terrors of the last great day.”  GC, p25,

Thus Ellen White is correctly saying that Jesus used the AP.  Dr. Ford agrees with her and with the use of such a hermeneutical principle.  Why are you trying to fight such a clear and simple point? 

Listen again as Ellen White makes the point that the prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem“ is to have another fulfillment.”  This meets the definition of the AP.

“The destruction of Jerusalem is a fearful and solemn warning to all who are trifling with the offers of divine grace and resisting the pleadings of divine mercy. Never was there given a more decisive testimony to God's hatred of sin and to the certain punishment that will fall upon the guilty.”

“The Saviour's prophecy concerning the visitation of judgments upon Jerusalem is to have another fulfillment, of which that terrible desolation was but a faint shadow. In the fate of the chosen city we may behold the doom of a world that has rejected God's mercy and trampled upon His law.”   GC p 36.

http://www.greatcontroversy.net/

Ellen White correctly says that this entire discourse was given, not for the disciples only, but for those who would live in the last scenes of earth's history.98

The Saviour's prophecy concerning the visitation of judgments upon Jerusalem is to have another fulfillment, of which that terrible desolation was but a faint shadow.99

This prophecy [Matthew 24] will again be fulfilled. The abounding iniquity of that day finds its counterpart in this generation. So with the prediction in regard to the preaching of the gospel. . . . So now, before the coming of the Son of man, the everlasting gospel is to be preached "to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people."100

This warning [false messiahs] was given also to those who live in this age of the world. The same deceptions practiced prior to the destruction of Jerusalem have been practiced through the ages, and will be practiced again.

This prophecy [false prophets] was spoken also or the last days. This sign is given as a sign of the second advent.102

This prophecy [Joel 2:28] received a partial fulfillment in the outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost; but it will reach its full accomplishment in the manifestation of divine grace, which will attend the closing work of the gospel.103

Ellen White similarly applied the parable of the Ten Bridesmaids to both 1844 and its "perfect fulfillment" in the future.104

She applies Daniel 8:14 not only to 1844, but also to "the final purification of the universe from sin and sinners."105 In fact, she applies it to events prior to apostasy of the early Christian centuries106 as well as to the closing events of earth's history.107

The apostelesmatic principle is thus well attested in the Bible, in the writings of Ellen White, and in the SDA Bible Commentary.108

The word apotelesmatic may be new to many who have long been using the principle without realizing the fact.

http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … 2part6.cfm


There are additional examples where Jesus uses the AP. 

While the Jews predicted that Elijah would re-appear in the last days to restore the glory of Israel, Jesus re-interprets this OT prophecy.   He gives it a different fulfillment, even as we can easily see that there are still future interpretations yet to be fulfilled.


Mal. 4:1  “For behold, the day is coming, burning like a furnace; and all the arrogant and every evildoer will be chaff; and the day that is coming will set them ablaze,” says the LORD of hosts, “so that it will leave them neither root nor branch.”

Mal. 4:2 “But for you who fear My name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings; and you will go forth and skip about like calves from the stall.

Mal. 4:3 “You will tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day which I am preparing,” says the LORD of hosts.

Mal. 4:4  “Remember the law of Moses My servant, even the statutes and ordinances which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel.

Mal. 4:5  “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the LORD.

Mal. 4:6 “He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”

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


Matt. 17:10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”

Matt. 17:11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;

Matt. 17:12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”

Matt. 17:13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

Here Jesus gives an unexpected and different interpretation about the Elijah prophecy.  While the primary and traditional view was literal, Jesus revised it to mean his reforming cousin, John the Baptist.  Here Jesus is using the AP.  He is not denying the original prediction, but re-interpreting it.

I suggest that you stop trying to defend the confusion and error of Traditional Adventism, and start studying to find Gospel Truth. 

Dr. Ford is not only a “brilliant man,” but one who has a deep knowledge of the Word and the Gospel.  He is a Protestant, not associated with Lucifer as his legalistic critics claim.  Rather, he is a world class expert in Adventist history as well as the science of hermeneutics.  I suggest that all pay more attention to those who understand the Gospel.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#6 06-03-11 4:53 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

David said:  In your reply the first time I asked this, you (and Dr. Ford) said this can be found in the writings of Ellen White - that she used this principle.

I have taken a quote from one of your most recent answers of someone asking you about the Ellen White - notice your quote From 5/23/11:

"With this long running fraud about Ellen White in mind, how can anyone know what is the true “message” of Ellen White?"
*
That's strange - you have everything bad to say about her - even that her writings are a fraud - but yet you'll try and use her writings to support some made-up prophetic principle that Dr. Ford has imagined (and you for that matter).
*
Point blank - prove this from the Bible - or will you not even allow this letter to go to the website for anyone to see.

God Bless,
David R.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David, a Traditional SDA, said:  I sent you a question about Ford's apotelesmatic principle - asking where is it in the Bible. You gave me every reason - except from the Bible. I resent the question asking for proof from the Bible - you have failed to answer it or even respond - but yet you have answered other questions since on this forum.

Tom said:  You are not paying attention, nor do you appear to be honestly searching for truth.  Unless you stop pretending that Dr. Ford is from the devil, and that there are no errors in SDA theology, you will never find truth. 

I have since given you a second post and now a third on this simple hermeneutical point.  Hopefully you will be able to comprehend this material and move on, apologizing to Dr. Ford for thinking he was wrong, and from the devil.

David said:  Is the reason you are ignoring this is because it cannot be supported from the Bible? I would appreciate a response on how this is Biblical.

Tom said:  Every day I receive more questions then I have time to answer.  So I try to answer the most important and serious ones first. 

Moreover, your questions are not meant to find truth, but to destroy much needed Adventist Reform.  They are meant to defend Traditional Adventism no matter the facts, refute the Gospel and slander those, like Dr. Ford, who understand church history and doctrine correctly. 

Considering your bad attitude and awful theology, you should be thankful for any response from Tom Norris.  You need to repent of Traditional Adventism, not try to defend it.

David said:  In your reply, the first time I asked this, you (and Dr. Ford) said this can be found in the writings of Ellen White - that she used this principle. 

Tom said:  Correct.  Ellen White clearly uses the AP, even as she shows Christ also doing the same thing.  Of course she was not a theologian, nor had this hermeneutical term even been invented in her day.  But nonetheless, it should be obvious how she is viewing eschatology on this point.

David said:  I have taken a quote from one of your most recent answers of someone asking you about the Ellen White - notice your quote from 5/23/11:  "With this long running fraud about Ellen White in mind, how can anyone know what is the true “message” of Ellen White?

Tom said: You are not reading this answer in context.  Without careful, honest, study about SDA history, no one will be able to understand the real Ellen White.  Why?  Because the White Estate has not been honest about her life, authority, or her doctrines.  In fact, they have fabricated a fraudulent person and indoctrinated millions into this cultic hoax.  You are but one of many who has trusted the White Estate and embraced Traditional Adventism, as if it were true and supported by Ellen White, when it is not. 

The All Experts site is not designed for debate.  But there are other Forums where such things can be better discussed.  If you want to debate the issues, I suggest that you go to the proper forum and have at it. 

I feel sorry for Sal; he is relentlessly asked the same questions, mostly about the Sabbath, over and over and over.  No matter how many times he states his views, there are those who still want to argue the same points again and again, always with the same result.  This is a waste of everyone’s time.  The All Experts site is not set up for debating.  The TSDA's are never going to change anyone's mind about their many false doctrines, especially the Old Covenant Sabbath.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … _52014.htm

If you are looking for a public debate about the issues, there are sites for that.  But beware, you had better have some real facts to present or it will be a very short and embarrassing discussion for you.  See:

Adventist Reform Issues:
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=11

The Fraud of Traditional Adventism
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=235

The Judgment in the 1st Angels Message
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=227

David said:  That's strange - you have everything bad to say about her - even that her writings are a fraud - but yet you'll try and use her writings to support some made-up prophetic principle that Dr. Ford has imagined (and you for that matter).

Tom said:  You misunderstand much.  I support the real Ellen White, who is very different from the creation from the White Estate’s manipulated version. And so too does Dr. Ford.  I defend Ellen White and the Pioneers, taking care to place their teachings in the proper historical context.

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

David said:  Point blank - prove this from the Bible - or will you not even allow this letter to go to the website for anyone to see.

Tom said:  Those who understand the Gospel correctly have no need to hide from those that don’t.  I suggest that you reconsider Traditional Adventism, and start paying more attention to Adventist Reform.  This is the major point that you need to understand.

I hope you will soon come to the place where you can honestly study the issues without getting caught up with diversions and apologetics. 

No Christian is called to defend the doctrinal errors of the past, even as all Laodiceans are called to repent for their many false doctrines. 

The SDA’s are not excluded from the Pre-Advent Judgment of the church, which is the Laodicean Message.  It is time for them to repent, not fight against Gospel Reform.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#7 06-04-11 6:23 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

David said:  So you want me to stop being so defensive!!?? So I should stop defending the truth? Dr. Ford is wrong. He's is error on his view of the sanctuary and the IJ.

Tom said:  Which apostle said Dr. Ford is wrong about the Gospel, hermeneutics, or eschatology?  Dr. Standish is not an apostle.  Rather, he is an SDA Judaizer, a great enemy of Dr. Ford, who does not understand nor embrace the Protestant Gospel.

The fact of the matter is this; the NT does not contain the doctrine of the IJ, -which is why neither Jesus nor his apostles teach such a judgment of the saints, whereby their sanctification is examined in the records of heaven to see if they are good enough to be saved.  This false, legalistic, and mythical doctrine, which the SDA’s invented in the late 1850’s, termed the Pre-Advent Judgment, has turned out to be a phantom doctrine that is wrong, and against the Gospel.  There is no such doctrine in the Bible.

If there is no such doctrine as the IJ in the Bible, (and there is not), how can Dr. Ford be wrong to say so?  Dr. Ford never said the Moral law has been removed, or that the 7th day Sabbath was abolished.  But he is correct to say that there is no such doctrine as the IJ in the Bible.  This is a theological fact that cannot be successfully refuted.

Dr. Ford has been treated very unfairly and unchristian, much like EJ Waggoner and Ellen White back in 1888.  When it comes to the search for truth, the SDA’s have a very poor track record.

Listen to what Ellen White had to say about those, like you, that refuse to admit an obvious point. 

"No matter by whom light is sent, we should open our hearts to receive it with the meekness of Christ. But many do not do this.  When a controverted point is presented, they pour in question after question, without admitting a point when it is well sustained. O, may we act as men who want light!

"May God give us His Holy Spirit day by day, and let the light of His countenance shine upon us, that we may be learners in the school of Christ."  GW 301.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Today, it is clear that the SDA’s have misunderstood the Bible and church history.  They are acting “Just like the Jews,” who also took “it for granted they have all the truth, and feel a sort of contempt for anyone who should suppose they had more correct ideas than themselves of what is truth.”

Like the Jews, the SDA’s also refuse to repent and correct their many errors.  So they pretend that error is truth, even as they demagogue Dr. Ford and accuse him of being a heretic from the devil. 

Glacier View was a horrible mistake that is destroying the Advent Movement.  The IJ is not the #2 Judgment Pillar from Rev 14: 7, as Traditional Adventism claims, rather it was an incorrect extrapolation of the necessary correction to Miller’s Sanctuary error, which is the #5 pillar known as the Cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary. 

The IJ was never a pillar, much less in the 1st Angels Message.  This fact will stand forever, even as it means the death of Traditional Adventism and the repudiation of Glacier View.

The IJ, which is also known as the Pre-Advent Judgment, is false doctrine, just like tithe, abstinence, and OC Sabbath keeping.  All false doctrine must be removed.  Especially this legalistic teaching that bases Eternal Life upon our sanctification, character, and law keeping. 

Time and the facts have proven Dr. Ford correct, -but for some reason, all the evidence in the world will not convince the Jews, err, I mean the SDA’s, to repent of Glacier View.  They would rather see the Advent Movement self-destruct than admit they were wrong and repent.  Such is the nature of man,- and the record of the SDA’s.

Listen to Ellen White:

When the Jews took the first step in the rejection of Christ, they took a dangerous step. When afterward evidence accumulated that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah, they were too proud to acknowledge that they had erred.

So with the people of our day who reject truth.  They do not take time to investigate candidly, with earnest prayer, the evidences of the truth, and they oppose that which they do not understand. Just like the Jews, they take it for granted they have all the truth, and feel a sort of contempt for anyone who should suppose they had more correct ideas than themselves of what is truth.

All the evidence produced they decide shall not weigh a straw with them, and they tell others that the doctrine is not true, and afterward, when they see as light, evidence they were so forward to condemn, they have too much pride to say ‘I was wrong’; they still cherish doubt and unbelief, and are too proud to acknowledge their convictions. Because of this, they take steps that lead to results of which they have never dreamed.   Ellen White, 1888 Documents, p.169.
---------------------------------------

Glacier View has turned out to be a disaster for the Denomination.  While the leaders presumed they were saving the Advent Movement, they were confused and wrong about what doctrines defined the pillars.  But Dr. Ford was not.  He was correct on all points, while the leaders were very foolish and dishonest.

The leaders have made a fatal mistake to think that they could exile Dr. Ford, reject the Gospel, and misunderstand the Three Angels Messages without consequence.  They never dreamed that the outcome of Glacier View would so badly hurt the credibility of the church, that growth in the West would become virtually impossible.   

As a result of Glacier View, the leaders never thought that the Three Angels Messages would become so marginalized as to become generic, pluralistic, and irrelevant.  Or that the 21st century church would become in danger of self-destruction and collapse at the very time when cutting edge eschatology is needed.

Unless the Adventist Community repents for Glacier View, and returns to the historic and correct theology of the Three Angels Messages, all will be lost.  Then there would have been no point for the Advent Movement to exist.  But there is a point and Gospel purpose to Advent Movement with its’ noble mission to prepare the last church for the great Tribulation and the 2nd Coming.  This mission will go on with or without the SDA’s.

If Ellen White were alive today, she would scold all those who think Dr. Ford is in error.  She would have supported his Gospel views in 1980, even as she supported Dr. Waggoner’s controversial positions in 1888.  She would also condemn the modern SDA’s for being so stubborn, wrong, and in the dark.

Listen to Ellen White:

"The light of truth is shining upon us as clearly as it shone upon the Jewish people, but the hearts of men are as hard and unimpressible as in the days of Christ, because they know not what they oppose.

Many who claim to be standing in the light are in darkness, and know it not. They have so enshrouded themselves in unbelief that they call darkness light, and light darkness. They are ignorant of that which they condemn and oppose.

But their ignorance is not such as God will excuse, for He has given them light, and they reject it.

They have before them the example of the past, but they will not be warned, and unbelief is enclosing them in impenetrable darkness. They refuse to accept the testimonies they ought to believe, and are ready to accept tidbits of gossip and testimonies of men, showing their credulousness and readiness to believe that which they want to believe."    Ellen White; 11MR 286-287.

SDA’s NOT HONEST

In order to find Gospel truth, one must first be honest with the evidence and then be ready, willing, and able to repent of their false views.   But the IJ crowd is very much like the 1st century Jews.  They are not honest seekers for truth.  They too, like you and the SDA’s, thought they were “defending truth,” when in fact they were doing the opposite.  It is tragic to see those who claim to follow God, actually becoming so blind as to think error is truth, and truth error.  Thus the Jews were blind to truth even as the SDA Laodiceans are also guilty of the same fatal sin.

The SDA’s have repeated the errors of the faithless and legalistic Jews, and they need to confess and repent before it is too late.

"Satan is working that the history of the Jewish nation may be repeated in the experience of those who claim to believe present truth." 2SM 111.

The modern SDA’s are lazy and sloppy Bible scholars.  While they think they are the smartest and most advanced, and that all their strange doctrines are 100% true, needing no reform; they are blind, delusional, and unsaved.  Few think good of them, even as most consider them a cult. 

There is not one church or denomination in the world that has ever embraced the IJ.  Why?  Because it is an impossible and absurd doctrine that has no biblical support or textual defense.   There is no chance that any scholar is ever going to change his or her minds.  The facts do not allow it.  The IJ is a great error.  Period.  It is not a pillar or fundamental point of Adventist eschatology.  There is no need or reason for such a doctrine.  It can be removed without any harm being done to the genuine fundamentals.

Listen to Ellen White underscore the arrogant attitude of the SDA’s during their 19th century, Gospel debates.  Those that cling to the IJ today are also condemned by her words; they are as guilty as were the Pharisees that rejected the Gospel.   While her words were originally focused on the theological disputes made famous in 1888, they also apply to Glacier View in 1980.

“Many of the professed teachers of the people are perfectly content to set their stakes and make no advancement themselves, and they are much disturbed when others are induced to seek for truth.”

“When new light is presented, they feel as the Pharisees felt when Christ came with new light for the Jewish nation. They want to stop the increase of light. They not only refuse to search the Scriptures for themselves, but they do all in their power to prevent others from searching."   Ellen White, RH, June 29, 1886.

Dr. Ford NOT WRONG:

While many TSDA’s assumed Dr. Ford is “wrong,” (because their religious leaders said so,) none can prove him wrong on the key issues under debate.  This is the problem.  While it is easy to say he is wrong, proving it is another matter.  Many have found this out the hard way, and I see this is how you are going to learn, if you ever learn. 

All this is a replay of what happened in 1888.  This is how the SDA’s act, they are great pretenders and hypocrites.  They hate new truth, and will take quick action to persecute and silence any that push things too far.  If they exiled Ellen White and Waggoner, why be surprised when they exiled Dr. Ford?  This is how they act.  Sad.

"Even Seventh-day Adventists are in danger of closing their eyes to truth as it is in Jesus, because it contradicts something which they have taken for granted as truth but which the Holy Spirit teaches is not truth."   Ellen White, TM 70-71.

Over the years, many have tried to prove Dr. Ford wrong, but none have even come close.  In fact, if you do some homework, you will discover that Clifford Goldstein was unable to defend the IJ in a debate with Tom Norris. 

Did you know that?  Have you read this material?  He would not even come online to defend his book about 1844 & the IJ, nor would he agree to a face-to-face debate with Dr. Ford.  I understand his fear.  No one likes to lose.  He knows he cannot prove his case for the IJ, so he hides from public debate, where all would quickly see his errors. 

This is how low the SDA’s have sunk.  While they once took great pride in debating their opponents in public, for all to see, now they run from any such exchange because their positions are laughable and easily defeated by those like Tom Norris or Dr. Ford, who have the facts.

Here are some links that you need to read and deal with:

1844 Made Simple
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1166507859

Clifford Goldstein & the IJ
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/288.html

Ellen White, 1844 & 1888
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/1010.html

Goldstein & 1888
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1093202844

http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1092172825

The Fraud of Traditional Adventism
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=235

The Judgment in the 1st Angels Message

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=227

Dr. Ford
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=240

In addition, no one has been able to refute Dr. Ford’s long and detailed AToday Interview.  I suggest that you read this material and try to better understand the issues.

Dr. Ford Interview
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … /intro.cfm


David said:  Matthew 24 is using Historicism - therefore Jesus Himself is outlining the Historical method for us.

Tom said:  Matthew did not understand, nor embrace, any of the later developing eschatological schools of thought that have developed over recent years.  So you cannot make such an absurd claim.

Moreover, Jesus in not teaching hermeneutics but giving the church prophecy.

Do not overlook the fact that when Jesus made his predictions in Matt 24, they were future.  Both the destruction of Jerusalem and the great Tribulation were FUTURE.  Which means that Jesus is obviously using the Futurist approach.  This should be obvious, but perhaps in your passion to defend SDA tradition, you overlooked this point?

However, after 70 AD, some of this prophecy is now fulfilled and thus part of Matt 24, (30 or so years after it was written) now belongs in the Preterist category, (because it has been fulfilled), even as the entire passage reads like “pre-written history,” which best describes “historicism.”   

So you can see that Jesus prophetic words cannot fit only one view of interpretation as you assume.  Thus Dr. Ford is correct to reject these rigid hermeneutical categories that have been recently developed.  He has done nothing wrong, much less against the Gospel.  So stop pretending he is from the devil and that the AP is a dangerous tool. 

The Gospel itself contains elements of both preterism and futurism, even as the Gospel Story is viewed as progressive history for all to see.  While the birth, death, and resurrection of Christ are in the past, the Great Tribulation, Second Coming, resurrection of the dead, and Eternal Life are future events.  So Dr. Ford is correct to realize that these man made views of prophecy do not have to be rigidly followed, as if they were Gospel doctrine. 

Today, there must be a new approach to understand 21st century eschatology.  The old views, and many of the old doctrines and myths, cannot be defended, which is why the SDA’s needed a scholar like Dr. Ford to correct the errors of the past and find new ways to better understand both Daniel and the book of Revelation.  But of course, like the Jews, the SDA’s also resisted the call to go forward and find more Gospel truths.  Sad.

Here are some links for further study:

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

http://www.2300days.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicism_(Christianity)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicis … rpretation

http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_historicism.html

http://www.atsjats.org/publication_file … d=25=1=pdf

http://www.atsjats.org/publication_file … d=25=1=pdf

http://www.historicist.com/historicism/blog

http://www.whyapostolic.com/html/ribera.html

http://www.midnightoilbooks.com/pages/h … -books.php

http://www.bytrent.demon.co.uk/dawkins/dawkins06.html

http://www.enotes.com/topic/Historicism_(Christianity)

http://historicist.tripod.com/

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG … lation.htm

David said:  Jesus is clearly giving an order of events - he uses words and phrases like "And then..." repeatedly - meaning after one event happens AND THEN this is going to happen. It's HISTORICISM and not anything else. You're trying to confuse the "literal/local vs. symbolic/spiritual" when it comes to prophecy having two fulfillments.

Tom said:  In Matt 24, Jesus is clearly giving a future prophecy; one that has a short term meaning, the destruction of Jerusalem, PLUS a long term meaning about the destruction of the world at the end of time.  Thus it is really FUTURISIM he is using, even though time would morph some of this prophecy into the past and thus reclassify it into the Preterist category.

So “historicism” cannot stand alone, as if it explains everything.  There are additional ways to view prophecy, and Dr. Ford has refused to be trapped by outdated and dubious formulas.  This is why he teaches the AP; to explain that prophecy can have a primary fulfillment and also a secondary meaning in the future.

David said:  DO YOU EVEN BELIEVE IN THE HISTORICISTS METHOD?

Tom said:  First off, the word "historicist," within the context of SDA theology, means Traditional Adventism.  It is code for an outdated and incorrect prophetic interpretation that features the IJ in Dan 8:14 and Rev 14: 7.  I repent of such gross error and refuse to believe, and so too should you.  Such views are wrong.

While the SDA’s inherited the historicist view from the Protestants, they have gone on to create their own, unique definition of historicism that is different from all others.  They have not only taken it to legalistic extremes with their strange view of the IJ and the Sabbath, but they have also arrogantly declared all others wrong, refusing to even consider that they could be wrong and in need repentance.

But no matter what method of interpretation is used, the SDA's are still wrong about many of their 19th century prophetic positions, even as they are about the Gospel, and many other important points of doctrine.

Furthermore, there is no salvation in the historicist method of interpretation any more than there is in the age of the earth.  So why pretend?  The traditional classification of hermeneutics into the various rigid schools of interpretation is arbitrary and outdated.   There must be new and improved methods to better understand prophecy.  And this is exactly what Dr. Ford was doing by refusing to force prophecy into these pre-packaged schools of interpretation.  Good for him!

You have much to research and learn my friend.  I suggest that you carefully read this paper by a leading SDA scholar and try to get a better grasp of this rather complex discussion.  See;

The End of Historicism?  Reflections on the Adventist Approach to
Biblical Apocalyptic—Part One, by Jon Paulien, Andrews University

http://www.atsjats.org/publication_file … d=25=1=pdf

David said:  This apostelesmatic principle is made up and has no foundation.

Tom said:  The AP is a scholarly attempt to better view and understand prophecy.  It is a common sense hermeneutical tool that correctly defines prophecy as having a primary meaning, as well as a secondary fulfillment, in the future. 

So the AP is based on textual observation and the need to view prophecy from more than one school of interpretation.  Which makes perfect sense, because it is arbitrary and problematic to pretend that only one method of interpretation can be used to understand prophecy.  It will not work.

However, because Dr. Ford repudiated the IJ, the SDA’s attacked all his views in a futile attempt to protect Traditional Adventism’s view of the Pre Advent Judgment.   His view about the AP was also attacked in the process.  But of course Dr. Ford is correct about the IJ and the AP.   

David said:  Ellen White uses HISTORICISM. The Great Controversy is a prime example of this. Oh, but wait - It was probably changed and rewritten and we can't trust her writings??!!!??? Isn't that what YOU always say?

Tom said:  The SDA’s inherited the historic method from the Millerites. Which turned out to be primitive and full of error.   However, the first chapter of the GC shows the AP in action.  While this strange term was not coined back then, the AP fits this passage perfectly, and correctly defines how prophecy can have multiple fulfillments.

As for Ellen White, there is no reason for you not to know my position.  It has been explained many times on All Experts and other online Forums. 

One has to be very careful when dealing with Ellen White’s writings, or even assuming what she believed.  Why?  Because the White Estate has been very dishonest, misleading, and incompetent.  I know this because I have been in the White Estate, and I caught them hiding thousands of documents that do not support Traditional Takoma Park Adventism. 

I know that the White Estate has been part of a long running fraud about Ellen White and her views, and I have gone public with this information.  Until they confess what they have done and correct the record, no one should believe anything that they say or publish.

David said:  Which leads into my next question which I have asked a couple of times before: Why do you constantly slam Ellen White and her writings - claiming they cannot be trusted because they have been changed, etc... BUT you have no problem using her to try and uphold this "apostelesmatic principle"?

Tom said:  You must not have read my “writings.”  Neither Tom Norris (nor Dr. Ford) “slams” or attacks Ellen White as you claim.  If you think this, then you have not read my views about Ellen White as you claimed in you additional e-mail.  I suggest that you read the material before you try and refute what you don’t understand.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … hite-3.htm

However, it is true that I do not embrace the White Estates version of Ellen White.  This is because their version is not true or historically accurate, not because Ellen White is a fraud. 

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

In fact, this popular view that Ellen White was a fraud and plagiarist is very wrong.  She was neither.  Nor was she an OT prophet or a NT apostle with doctrinal authority, as the SDA’s pretend.  The modern SDA’s have been very reckless and wrong about Ellen White.  This must be corrected.

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

Ellen White, who was a prolific writer and a founder of the SDA church, is a great historical source, and I will continue to use her as such, always making sure to use her words in the proper historical context.  Something that the White Estate still does not understand.

Furthermore, the real Ellen White was a Gospel reformer.  She pushed the church forward to find new truth, even as she called for open and honest theological debate.  Listen to Ellen White and understand that her views support Dr. Ford’s views as well as present call to reform the SDA church.

"There is no excuse for any one 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." 

Review and Herald, Dec. 20, 1892

"Those who sincerely desire truth will not be reluctant to lay open their positions for investigation and criticism, and will not be annoyed if their opinions and ideas are crossed."

Ellen White, Review and Herald, July 26, 1892

"Those who cannot impartially examine the evidences of a position that differs from theirs, are not fit to teach in any department of God's cause." 

Review and Herald, February 18, 1890

Those who support Traditional Adventism, both in 1888 and today, are wrong on many levels.  They are not seekers for truth, but dishonest, legalistic defenders of tradition and error.  Shame on all those that fight against Gospel Reform in the SDA church.

Sal- the SDA Critic at All Experts.Com

As for your view of Sal, it is paranoid, unchristian, and short sited.  Sal has every right to criticize the dishonest and double-talking SDA’s; regardless of how many errors he may embrace.  His errors, do not excuse the errors of the SDA’s in any way, nor give them a pass. 

Nor does it help the discussion for SDA’s to claim they have all the truth and everyone else is wrong, as they stick their fingers in their ears refusing to hear.  All Laodiceans are wrong and condemned in the Pre Advent Judgment of the church, including the arrogant SDA’s, who have embraced some spectacular and obvious errors, like the IJ.  So no wonder there are so many critics swirling around the self-destructing Adventists. 

The SDA’s have no one but themselves to blame for all this debate and division that has overwhelmed them since the 1970’s.  Glacier View was a step too far, and the Denomination has been going downhill ever since. Until both leaders and people get honest, and face up to the real issues, the SDA’s will continue to self-destruct.  Adventist reform, which is based on the pioneering work of Dr. Ford, is the only answer for the Advent Movement.

There is no need to be angry at Sal for voicing his honest views.  While he does not pretend to be an SDA, he has studied what they teach, and like many, he finds it very wrong and against the NT.  He is correct.  Millions have also reached this same conclusion, and many continue to make the same discovery every day.

Sal seems to be honest and open for truth, unlike the double-talking SDA’s who dare not enter into public debate.  I look forward to further discussions with him, because I know he will try to be fair with the evidence.  Unlike most SDA’s that refuse to honestly deal with anything that refutes their doctrines. 

Moreover, Sal is no different from the hundreds, even thousands, of other SDA critics who find the cultic arrogance and doctrinal errors of the SDA’s intolerable.  So he is not picking on the SDA’s for no reason, and neither has MILLIONS of SDA’s left the church for no reason.  Something is very wrong with SDA theology and management.  Don’t blame the critics.  Wake up and deal with the real issues!

Today, there is no excuse for the SDA’s to be so confused, divided, and unable to correctly understand their own history, mission, and theology.
There is no excuse for all the division, error, and incompetence that has overwhelmed the modern Adventist Movement. 

None of this is the fault of Sal, or the Roman Catholic Church, or Dr. Ford, or Tom Norris.  The SDA’s are destroying themselves with so much false doctrine and corruption, and thus they have no one to blame for their bad press and self-destruction but themselves.

Furthermore, this popular and arrogant idea that the SDA’s are morally and theologically superior to the RC's is absurd and against the teachings of the NT.  All are sinners that can only be saved by the Gospel.  And at this point, the SDA’s have no right or authorization from Heaven to correct the Catholics or anyone else about doctrine.  At least not until they get their own house in order.

If you doubt this, read the following words from Jesus and see for yourself:

Matt. 7:3 Why do you look at the speck that is in your brothers eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

Matt. 7:4 Or how can you say to your brother, Let me take the speck out of your eye, and behold, the log is in your own eye?

Matt. 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brothers eye.

When the SDA’s get their own house in order, and correctly understand the Gospel and Prophecy, they can with good conscience, try to reform both the Laodicean Catholics and the Protestants, which is their self-proclaimed mission. 

But until then, they have no right to correct anyone because the Adventist church has rejected the Gospel in 1888, and many times since.  They have also officially rejected and changed the original prophecy of the Three Angels Messages, in 1980, even as they now embrace pluralism, myth, and much false doctrine.  They have no credibility to correct anyone until the first become healed.

While I admit that the RCC has many false doctrines, so too does the SDA church.  So what is the point of the SDA’s attacking them?  The NT calls this hypocrisy, and thus the SDA’s have no permission or theological right to act in such a pharisaical manner.

As for this idea that everyone else is deluded and deceived but the SDA’s, that is an absurd, cultic, and laughable position.  If the SDA’s teach only pure and true doctrine, why have so many SDA’s left the church over the past 30 years in disgust?  Why do their top theologians repudiate the IJ and many other doctrines and declare them wrong? 

Such self-serving rhetoric by the SDA’s about how right they are is neither honest nor helpful.  And the sooner this confused denomination understands how many false doctrines they actually teach, the better, because then they can repent and work to make the necessary corrections rather than blaming everyone else for their own failures.  And this is exactly the point that Jesus is making in Matthew 7.

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

David said:  In your last response you stated:

"I feel sorry for Sal; he is relentlessly asked the same questions, mostly about the Sabbath, over and over and over.  No matter how many times he states his views, there are those who still want to argue the same points again and again, always with the same result."

David then said to Tom:  To begin with the vast majority of questions Sal receives he sends to himself or one of his partners does (this is all part of his "job"). And - If this site is for Seventh-day Adventists then why are 2 non-Adventists (yourself and Sal) on here answering questions about Adventism?

Tom said:  I doubt you have any basis to claim that Sal is not being honest as he answers peoples questions about what SDA’s teach.  I admire the way he politely puts up with the same questions over and over, ignoring the many insults hurled at him by those who claim to be superior Christians because they worship on the 7th day.

Often times, those that send questions to Sal are Traditional SDA’s trying to defend their many false doctrines.  And guess what?  These people are not looking for truth, or for an honest debate about the issues.  They think they have all the truth possible, when in fact they are outrageously wrong about OC Sabbath keeping, the IJ and Tithe, and many other things.   

Moreover, you are correct to state that Sal is not an SDA, nor has he ever been an SDA.  But you are wrong about Tom Norris.  He has always been SDA, born and raised.  So I understand the issues and the debates, as well as the diet and culture, including the doctrinal development of the Advent Movement in Battle Creek, Takoma Park, and Silver Spring.  This is why I’m here, so that the SDA Community, as well as the critics, like Sal, can have access to the true facts about Adventist history and theology.

David said:  Neither one of you represents in any way what Adventism does - so who is defrauding the people???

Tom said:  What “does Adventism” do? 

Answer:  They mislead people about the Gospel and church history.  This is shameful.

Who is the ideal Adventist today?  Doug Batchelor of Amazing Facts? 

Ha!  That confused Jew understands neither the Gospel nor the Adventist Apocalyptic correctly.  So who represents the ideal SDA today?

Today, Adventism is so broken and dysfunctional that there must be wholesale repentance and a new message, the 4th developed.  There must be a great reformation in the SDA Community so that the work of the Advent Movement can continue.

David said:  You and Sal seem to be "friends".  He is always recommending you as a knowledgeable person to others. And here you are feeling sorry for him - a Roman Catholic (quite possibly a Jesuit). Is this a coincidence?  The website WWW.THEIRSECRETS.INFO has you listed as a JESUIT infiltrator. I'm just conveying the info and stating things as I see them.

Tom said:  I have never met Sal, but I often read his answers.  While I disagree with him on a number of doctrinal and historical points, he is also correct on a number of points.  I think he is honest, sincere, and well meaning, which cannot be said for most SDA’s.

As for me being a RC?  This is absurd.  The only religious schools I attended were SDA.  I have been an SDA from my birth in the Takoma Park San in 1951.  While I am still an SDA, it is the New Covenant version that I embrace.  I have long ago repented of OC Adventism and so too should you.

In conclusion,

You need to:

1.  Stop being so defensive, it will prevent you for honestly searching for, and finding truth.

2.  Stop being so gullible.  Do not believe what the church leaders teach and publish unless these views can be sustained under open examination.  When the leaders hide from the critics, like Goldstein does, and refuse to answer the questions, then you know that they are both wrong and cowardly.  Don’t follow such wolves in sheep’s clothing.

3.  Do not presume to Judge Dr. Ford, or in any way speak evil against those who belong to Christ.   

Rom. 14:4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

4.  Deal with the big issues.  The AP is a simple hermeneutical tool.  It is not a major point of Gospel debate.  Which means that even if Dr. Ford is wrong, (which he is not); it makes no difference to anyone’s salvation or to the fate of the IJ. 

However, if Dr. Ford is correct when he says there is no IJ pillar in the Three Angels Messages, then such a major point changes everything, even as it overturns Traditional Takoma Park Adventism, and reduces Glacier View to a foolish farce of epic proportions.  This one point alone overturns the IJ, and makes further discussion moot.

5.  Acknowledge the need for Adventist Reform.  Admit we are living in the last days and confess that the SDA church is very confused and full of error.  It needs Gospel Reform.  It needs to return to the genuine and original pillars of the Three Angels Messages, even as it goes forward to develop and proclaim the 4th and final Advent Message.

I encourage you to keep studying the issues,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#8 04-15-14 12:39 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

1)  AN IMPORTANT VIDEO MESSAGE TO YOU FROM DESMOND FORD
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org.au/gods-new-thing/

2)  DR DES FORD INTERVIEWS DR ELIEZER GONZALEZ, THE NEW CEO OF GOOD NEWS UNLIMITED
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org.au/dr- … unlimited/

3) GOSPEL FELLOWSHIPS: THE MANUAL
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org.au/wp- … estern.pdf

4)  Dr. Ford Sermons
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org.au/res … o-sermons/

4)  ARTICLES BY DR. FORD
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org.au/art … y-dr-ford/

Offline

#9 05-21-14 3:08 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 758
Website

Re: Dr. Desmond Ford

Des Ford Writes Three New Books!
       
May 1, 2014

Dr Desmond Ford has been busy! He has written not one, not two, but THREE new books.Here is the title of each and a brief description on what you will find in each one. We are planning to publish them in print soon. But for now each book is available for purchase as an ebook from amazon.com on the links below.

1.  Why God?

This book sums up the current logical and scientific evidence for God’s existence, and then illustrates the fact of divine sovereignty as demonstrated in well-known lives. The experiences of John Newton, William Carey, Hudson Taylor, Charles Spurgeon, Gladys Aylward, Adoniram Judson, Martin Luther are chronicled with emphasis on events that statistically are beyond chance. Every reader will here find encouragement and hope to successfully meet the challenges of everyday life.

Purchase the ebook here.
http://tinyurl.com/kcsw7m9

2.  Your Biography: As Revealed  by the Seven Saints of Genesis

The Bible is a marvellous picture-album and the potential of every life is there sketched. The chief seven characters of Genesis portray the various stages in every believer’s walk of faith, and the opening six books of the Bible do the same. In this book you will find uncovered heights and depths of the inspired records never seen before. The appendix offers unassailable evidence for the divine origin of the Bible.

Purchase the ebook here.
http://tinyurl.com/jvmqcso

3. How To Live in a Topsy Turvy World

This volume traces the historical reasons for our world’s ideological and existential chaos. Why is our world like this? Are there some keys to understanding it and to negotiating its dangers? How should we live? The chaos of this world can only be survived by those who know and live the Christian gospel. The nature of that gospel is described so clearly that none need miss the blessings purchased by Christ for each one of us.

Purchase the ebook here.
http://tinyurl.com/n6cdj4l

Eliezer Gonzalez, for Good News Unlimited

http://www.goodnewsunlimited.com/des-fo … new-books/
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.com

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB