Adventists for Tomorrow

bob_2

Member

Registered: 12-28-08

Posts: 3,790

Apostasy: Who defines Truth?

Apostasy by definition :

1 : renunciation of a religious faith
2 : abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection

In the January 2010, Adventist World (NAD Edition), Angel Manuel Rodriguez has an article, "What is Apostasy". Note this significant excerpt:

In Christian history two specific instruments have been credited with that authority. The first was the teaching ministry of the Christian church. That is to say, the church through its relgious leaders interpreted and defined truth for believers. This understanding was rejected by the reformers.

The second instrument is Scripture. The Bible is the only and exclusive instrument by which truth is defined and falsehood identified. Adventists have embraced this last position. Apostasy incorporates the view of heresy just summarized, but points to the moment when the presence of heresy is so abundant and radical that individuals are considered to be fully separated from biblical truth, and from Christ as the truth. In that case there is a falling away from the truth and from God's saving grace. Apostasy is the result of a slow process of spiritual defection from biblical truth.

Question, is Rodriquez suggesting that Paul could have been an apostate. His position on the Sabbath and other things that SDAs disagree with, does that make Paul heretical to SDAs?

Another question, as with the Sabbath the Bible, especially the NT, does not clarify succinctly what "TRUTH" is, don't we have to boil issues down to what is salvific and what is open for good men to differ on? 

One last question, the SDA church has been progressive with "TRUTH", has it not. Is it not guilty of apostasy itself, changing from a once held belief?

Last edited by bob_2 (01-21-10 6:46 pm)

bob

Member

Registered: 12-28-08

Posts: 296

Re: Apostasy: Who defines Truth?

=bob_2]Apostasy by definition :

1 : renunciation of a religious faith
2 : abandonment of a previous loyalty : defection

In the January 2010, Adventist World (NAD Edition), Angel Manuel Rodriguez has an article, "What is Apostasy". Note this significant excerpt:

In Christian history two specific instruments have been credited with that authority. The first was the teaching ministry of the Christian church. That is to say, the church through its relgious leaders interpreted and defined truth for believers.

This understanding was rejected by the reformers.  It appears that the SDA church only rejected the RCs interpretations and added their own through the writings of Ellen White.   

The second instrument is Scripture. The Bible is the only and exclusive instrument by which truth is defined and falsehood identified.  Adventists have embraced this last position.     Apostasy incorporates the view of heresy just summarized, but points to the moment when the presence of heresy is so abundant and radical that individuals are considered to be fully separated from biblical truth, and from Christ as the truth. In that case there is a falling away from the truth and from God's saving grace. Apostasy is the result of a slow process of spiritual defection from biblical truth.

As seen through the eyes of Ellen and the hierarchy.  There is no room for individuals to express their views.

Question, is Rodriquez suggesting that Paul could have been an apostate. His position on the Sabbath and other things that SDAs disagree with, does that make Paul heretical to SDAs?

Of course SDAs would never outright call Paul and apostate Bob.  They just gloss over what is controversial to their understanding.  They have no recourse as long as they place Ellen at the top of how to understand scripture.

Another question, as with the Sabbath the Bible, especially the NT, does not clarify succinctly what "TRUTH" is, don't we have to boil issues down to what is salvific and what is open for good men to differ on? 

One last question, the SDA church has been progressive with "TRUTH", has it not. Is it not guilty of apostasy itself, changing from a once held belief?

The church has been progressive as well as regressive.  As long as it continues to use Ellen as the magnifying glass it will fight internally over which of her thoughts are the correct ones.

Last edited by bob (01-22-10 12:03 pm)

don

Member

Registered: 12-28-08

Posts: 1,121

Re: Apostasy: Who defines Truth?

They have no recourse as long as they place Ellen at the top of how to understand scripture.

Adventists, such as your's truly, are a small group of people studying big topics. One of the big topics we have studied from James White's day onward is that of Spiritual Gifts. James White believed that his wife had a manifestation of the spiritual gift of prophecy as described by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 12-14; similar to Philip's four daughters who prophesied. We have drifted from James White's emphasis on his wife's "spiritual gift". Her life and ministry reveal a practical, spirit-led (IMO) individual who followed what she believed to be her responsibilities to her community of faith.

We are incorrect to resort to Ellen White as our primary and inconvertable source for Biblical interpretation. We need to learn how to rightly divide the Biblical word of truth.

For those of us who believe in her spiritual gift, her writings are highly valued. Thus we pay attention to her counsel to use the Bible as the final determiner of truth.

Last edited by don (01-23-10 12:39 am)

bob

Member

Registered: 12-28-08

Posts: 296

Re: Apostasy: Who defines Truth?

They have no recourse as long as they place Ellen at the top of how to understand scripture.

Adventists, such as your's truly, are a small group of people studying big topics. One of the big topics we have studied from James White's day onward is that of Spiritual Gifts. James White believed that his wife had a manifestation of the spiritual gift of prophecy as described by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 12-14; similar to Philip's four daughters who prophesied. We have drifted from James White's emphasis on his wife's "spiritual gift". Her life and ministry reveal a practical, spirit-led (IMO) individual who followed what she believed to be her responsibilities to her community of faith.

We are incorrect to resort to Ellen White as our primary and inconvertable source for Biblical interpretation. We need to learn how to rightly divide the Biblical word of truth.

For those of us who believe in her spiritual gift, her writings are highly valued. Thus we pay attention to her counsel to use the Bible as the final determiner of truth.

Actually the church has placed her on pedestal that has come back to haunt it.  Ellen did make big mistakes that the church has tried their best to hide.  It is no wonder so many have lost faith in her and will not recognize anything she has written.   We now know that her "spiritual gift" was not from God.  The debate now is if she conjured them on her own or if she was led by an outside force.  Some have continued to hide from the facts, but the facts are as plain as the nose on my face.

We need to learn how to rightly divide the Biblical word of truth.

And when you do I believe the conclusion will greatly differ from now held beliefs.

Last edited by bob (01-23-10 11:01 am)

bob_2

Member

Registered: 12-28-08

Posts: 3,790

Re: Apostasy: Who defines Truth?

If you cannot explain your beliefs through the Bible alone, you do not have the truth. The problem with EGW is when you do what she herself urges, it does not test well against the "Gold Standard" of the Bible, does it???