You are not logged in.
Dale Ratzlaff and Proclamation <BR> <BR><blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1><b>quote:</b></font><p>Posted on Wednesday, January 07, 2009 - 12:59 pm: <BR> <BR>-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------ <BR>Dale Ratzlaff, IMO, is irrelevant because he will not rein in Colleen Tinker, his second cousin's wife, appointed as editor of Proclamation. Tinker is the one that has declared SDAism as Satan originated in the study found here: <BR> <BR><a href="http://www.formeradventist.com/studies/topical/thu" target=_top>http://www.formeradventist.com/studies/topical/thu</a> mbnailsketch.html <BR> <BR>Scroll down to [The Bible Study section, go to Thumbnail Sketch of SDAism] the last paragraph. This is disgusting and makes Tinker and Ratzlaff irrelevant, period. I told Dale to quit sending his paper to my mail box long ago. Does that answer your question???<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> <BR> <BR>Question: Was I right about this group. If their motivation is to destroy, rather than build up, what is their value. Proclamation has a destructive air about it. The SDA church should not be torn apart like this but reasons given for beliefs and positions, but selfishness, covetiousnesss of position, vengenance for past actions, if that is the motive, of what value ist the group?? <BR> <BR>Why doesn't Proclamation just move on with the Gospel, why the destructive bent???? Openness does not mean posting every hateful word of those that are "formers", does it????? <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Bob_2 on January 13, 2009)
Offline
Why did Jesus expose the Pharisees? Why did Paul expose those who were trying to put gentile Christians under the Torah? Adventists are trying to put mankind under a pseudo Torah and should be exposed for trying to do so. Bravo "Proclamation" for standing up to the giant. You are taking good aim. <BR> <BR>Why do former Mormons expose the Mormons and former JWs expose JWs? In fact Why do SDAs expose the RCC, JWs and Mormons? Come to think about it Adventists expose all other Christians as being false. But of ccourse that is OK beings they are the true church and all. DUH! <BR> <BR>My bobservation for today. Bob
Offline
If we are out to save souls, shouldn't we be serious about it and not condemnatory as some of the letters to the editor obviously are. Make suggested improvements if you believe in one universal (catholic) church. <BR> <BR>The tone of Proclamation bothers me. It's as if they are trying to embarass the SDA Church rather than save or reform. By calling it Satanically originated, I was born into it. I believe I have progressively grown, but that it was not Satanically originated. <BR> <BR>Do the Tinkers feel they worshipped Satan until they joined Redlands Trinity E-Free Church?? I think they overstate that. If you listen to Colleen's story, it is more one of not having status in the SDA church. What she has encouraged her children to say about the SDA church is unfortunate, everyone has a spiritual progressive walk with Jesus if they are a true Christian. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by Bob_2 on January 13, 2009)
Offline
I think Colleen has at times said things that are not in the best interest of formers. That said, she is a power house and able to get much done. Who knows what goes on between Dale and her. He may be reining her in. She certainly isn't nearly as vocal as she has been. She is a very talented lady. I have learned much from her. Dale is a wealth of knowledge on the covenants and has done much to help Adventists see through SDA doctrine. His book "Sabbath in Crisis" helped me understand the covenants and set me free from the yoke I was carrying. <BR> <BR>So, I respectfully disagree with your analysis of "proclamation". Anytime someone exposes the establishment I suppose some people will think the exposer smug. Others will praise the exposer for helping them to see new light. At any rate "Proclamation" is working. Read the comments of praise in the letters section. Then read the "smug" letters the yoked SDAs send in. What an embarrassing lot they are. Very few SDAs that respond are gracious. Too bad. <BR> <BR>Now let me expound on your thought that Colleen was out of order saying that the church was satanically originated. We all agree that the Mormons, Scientology and JWs were not of God's bidding, so whose bidding would you say gave them birth? If it is not from God then where is it from? There beginnings were certainly not just mere mistakes. They started from the get go teaching false religion. Mormons have extra Biblical books that they revere. Scientology has its books by L. Ron Hubbard that govern the believers lives. Would you say that it would be off base to say that they are satanically inspired? I sure wouldn't <BR> <BR>Now put the beginnings of Adventism into the perspective I have given above. Still think Colleen was off base? Sincerely, Bob <BR> <BR>(Message edited by bob on January 13, 2009)
Offline
All I can say is that the law demands perfection, and if we do not meet it, it condemns us to death. That is why Paul said that those who put themselves under the law must keep the whole law (to perfection). But he also showed that if we chose to take this impossible, fleshly, works path, that we adhere to another gospel and that Christ died in vain and grace is not grace. We walk after the teachings in the Gospels and Epistles through the work of the Holy Spirit that Jesus promised us and he writes the law (the spirit and character of God) in our hearts. <BR> <BR>Now, if EGW's message was perfection and the keeping of the law and standing without an intercessor in the IJ, then what spirit was the message coming from? <BR> <BR>If people want to believe that God used a 33rd degree Royal Arch Mason to start a remnant church, that's their choice. <BR> <BR>If people want to believe that Hiram Edson had a vision with no witnesses even though there were plenty as John Baptised Jesus. There were also witnesses when Elijah and Moses visited Jesus and witnesses when Stephen was stoned, but if they want to believe Edson, who stood alone, that's their choice. <BR> <BR>I do not take lightly the fact that Crosier, a friend and close associate of Edson in the preaching and printing of the millerite teachings, along with myriads of others, chose to walked away from it all. There were an estimated 50,000 that held to the millerite prophecy. After the "dissappointment" of 1844 there was a head count of about 100 in 1849. And if you read the history, many early converts were mere kids who fell under the peer pressure and guilt feelings from those who were poor bible students themselves. <BR> <BR>And that EGW, who was such a stickler to clarity and adherence to refrain from any semblance of confusion and impropriety, allowed for the cultic symbol of the obelisk, which is a condemned idol in the bible, to be placed on her and James' resting place. Did Satan leave his mark? <BR> <BR>We were warned of false prophets seeking to decieve even the very elect. Satan is not going to use just strong established beliefs to weave his error into. He is described as portraying an angel of light. That means he will bring convincing revelations to weave his error into that the decieved will assume is new light. <BR> <BR>You can Bow to Joseph Smith or C.T. Russell or L. Ron Hubbard or even Ellen G. White or whomever to look for them to interpret the bible for you, but I'll take God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. I don't need anybody telling me that the reason that I need to get it her way because we have to learn in months what she took years to learn because Jesus will be here within a few years. Or that if we had been studying our bibles we would not need her writings. It's been 164 years since her IJ started and Christ was supposed to return in short order of it's commencement? And some would be food for worms, but others present at the meeting would be alive. <BR> <BR>What people fail to realise is that what you have in EGW is powerful truths mixed with errors that belie the true Gospel.
Offline
The SDA Church has more to offer than EGW. Otherwise, I know I wouldn't be wasting my time here. Nor would you Cadge or Robert Shields. I taught Sabbath School, was a Head Deacon, and was born into SDAism. When I "rejected" EGW, and put her in a devotional catagory, I found that the SDA church, if they would look at New Covenant Theology, and Christ's Law, that they would not be so confounded with so many factions. But to say it was Satan originated is a definite overstatement. If true, let's dismantle this forum's attempt to salvage anything from it. I'm not into the occult. I would be for shutting down if I believed what Colleen Tinker has stated of SDAism. I have not found a perfect church or denomination yet, have you? <BR> <BR>When Calvin and Luther can hold the positions they do in Christendom after the lives they lived to say nothing of David, a man after God's own heart, how can we state such things about the origins of SDAism, as flawed as it may be.
Offline
Bob, how in the world could you use Mrs. White's writings as devotional? There is so much error implanted along with truth that no one that doesn't already have a good grasp on truth will definitely be deceived. Much of Testimonies are full of rebukes of her poor followers. <BR> <BR>Dr. Russell Kelly has done a study about "The Great Controversy" and has said that there are over 200 errors in that book. "Desire of Ages" along with "Great Controversy" is full of plagiarism. "Child Guidance' is full of impossible requirements. Anyone who would argue that any of her books are inspired by God have never taken the time to examine them, read the critics or are not allowing the Holy Spirit to guide them. <BR> <BR>(Message edited by bob on January 14, 2009)
Offline