Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
The Wanderer

The Wanderer Speaks

Recommended Posts

The Wanderer

The Wanderer Speaks

Quote

“Some people have secretly entered your group. These people have already been judged guilty for what they are doing. Long ago the prophets wrote about them. They are against God. They have used the grace of our God in the wrong way—to do sinful things. They refuse to follow Jesus Christ, our only Master and Lord.” (Jude 1:4, ERV)

Recently, I have been told, rather mournfully, that I am “guilty” of “accusing many of our leaders,” when in fact, I have called out one particular “leader.”

I do not currently intend to make any kind of apology for moral judgments offered on certain historical events and actions within “the Church;” (John 7:24) As I understand it, Habakkuk 1:4 is a valid "righteous judgment" that we can exercise today, wherever we see "wrong judgment" happening in the church.

With the advent of the internet and technology it is now possible to disseminate almost anything, on a world-wide basis, and to hoodwink thousands of others into not just believing in their supercilious DIVISION, but to also putting into practice the full force and evil madness of Division. Apparently, we are seeing how that people who are failing to learn from the past, will be doomed to future failure.

It is my current understanding that to remain silent on said matters is even more “wrong” than the making of much noise over the state of our current Churchianity and Evengelism; with their bruited, malicious, bullying tirades that we are currently seeing today from the affronted Jackson.  

In some of his recent Evengelism; Jackson stated that "I work for Jesus, and my number one role is to NOT add to the hurt, and my number two role is to be the agents of Jesus healing" to sin-sick souls! While Jackson states in one breath, that he wants to be the healing hands of Jesus and not cause anymore hurt;" in the very next breath he sneeringly asseverates that any church member calling him out with questions and challenges HAVE to be from "the forces of hell."

Jackson had a very special little "talk" recently and in his religionist/populist fashion noted to his AUDIENCE, (not congregation,) the following:

Quote

"Throughout his presentation, Jackson repeated the phrase, “we will not be deterred!” "We will not be defeated by the forces of hell, because we’re on God’s team, and I’ve read the end of the book and I know how it ends. This is God’s church, this is God’s territory.”  READ More

It would appear that Jackson thinks he can do a claw-back from the Territory of Jesus  here, and try to steal what is God's territory to make it his own. "I dont care" what you think, especially if you are from Africa!"  His use of the word "I" here is a very telling clue to his I trouble. We are allowing his religious polemics, and political point scoring. We are witnessing an antebellum flavored and racially and religiously profiled "testimony" about how all questions, especially if they are from Africa must be "by the forces of hell."

The Jackson Sect has left us with religiosity and holy-roller characterizations against anyone daring to question his populist assertions and the popular applause opinions of all his friends.

The Jackson Sect, (they all laugh when he laughs, all clap when he says questioners, especially from Africa) are "of the forces of hell") clearly echoes with the defiant challenge we have all had even here on the forum of: "get used to it."

Jackson proudly states "I dont care..." in relation to other people's questions and opinions if they are different than his. Is this the kind of one-doctrine leadership the church deserves?. It is my understanding that the church deserves better.

The attack we are seeing on our church will lead to further attacks on other doctrines if it goes any further; BUT it wont just stop there! I fear that this has the added twist of once again, not only bursting forth to destroy the church by DIVISION, but that this kind of polemics foisted onto the backs of innocent "brethren", can be seen in the history of ecclesial division and that this DIVISION could also threaten the lives of many more people this time. Historically, this would be definitely a step up from the more limited fracturing of just, say, individual countries, such as in the American Civil War, The Rwanda Genocide, the Nazi State, etc. Anyone can view and verify all of this in the pages of history and the records of ecclesial DIVISION of the past; with its horrific considerations that the priestcraft of The Jackson Sect may again be "leading" us into the very same kind of DIVISION.

One theologian says it much better than I could ever do:

Quote

"If the Church is not what it claims to be in terms of historical witness, then surely we must seek the Church’s truth in some a-historical and certainly spiritual realm. Almost all modern observers of the Christian Church are at least dimly aware—often acutely so—of Christian division, rancor, and sometimes gross complicity in socialized suffering and violence. One of the most common things one hears from the children of pastors, children who in adulthood have left the church, is that they were disillusioned and even angry at seeing what congregations did to their fathers and families. We can write that on a large scale with respect to the Church and her members." (Radner, Ephraim. Church (Kindle Locations 2564-2567). Cascade Books, an Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers. Kindle Edition).

I think it was Desmond Tutu whom I once heard talking about "the concept of Ubuntu. I remember one thing about Ubuntu as standing out to me:

Quote

"I am who I am, because of who we all are."

People! We need each other! Church cannot be done any other way! While this concept from "Ubuntu" sounds simplistic or non-theological at first reading; it does have many layers of complexity, and information. It sometimes makes me think that "others" "outside the fold" and not a part of the church, may in fact have a better understanding and practice of unity than we do. I have a good friend who recently said the following to me:

Quote

" Went to my first "small group" meeting with the folks from the new church we've been frequenting.  Lively interesting group!  Half of us weren't even SDA; and of the 4 that weren't, two of them had been disfellowshipped from other churches several years ago and were attending this church with no intention of ever rejoining the church."

Apparently, Jesus has similar ideas:

Quote

“If any person thirst, let them come unto Me, and drink.” “Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give them shall be in them a well of water springing up into everlasting life.” John 7:37; 4:14.

It seems to this writer that some have switched THAT water for a sip of the hot button  kool-aid of DIVISION

If, with these promises before us, we choose to remain parched and withered for want of the water of life, it is our own fault. If we would come to Christ with the simplicity of a child coming to its earthly parents, and ask for the things that He has promised, believing that we receive them, we should have them. If all of us would exercise the faith we should, we would have been blessed with far more of the Spirit of God in our meetings than we have yet received

Now the question is, will we come to the fountain and drink? Will the teachers of truth set the example? God will do great things for us, if we by faith take Him at His word. Praise God that we might see here a church-wide humbling of the heart before God, and a true revival, including, if needed, regime change. The Church does deserve better.

From a preliminary research effort; I think it is essential to consider the dynamics of DIVISION, and how people feed into DIVISION, and adopt it as a populist sort of a "defense of the faith," and how said DIVISION affects society at large. In my mind, the current kind of DIVISION confronting the church now is more dangerous than ever, and The Jackson Sect's Churchianity may be unleashing those very "forces of hell" that Jackson's Evengelism has been so bellicose about. What he is promoting is something that will has split communities and societies in ways that he is bound to lose control of, and in ways he has not thought of because no one can. The Adventist Pandora's Box has again been opened to forces that we cannot control. Everyone should be very concerned about the bigger picture on what this DIVISION is really accomplishing and what The Jackson Sect is really "leading" us all into.

Edited by The Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

JoeMo

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the Jackson sect?  I googled it and only got hits on Michael Jackson leaving the sect of JWs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
7 minutes ago, JoeMo said:

Pardon my ignorance, but what is the Jackson sect?  I googled it and only got hits on Michael Jackson leaving the sect of JWs.

It is a symbolic expression I just invented to explain in part, what I see from my meagre viewpoint..."president" of the NAD It will take Google a few days/weeks to get it in the Big Data.

Edited by The Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
23 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

."president" of the NAD

OOOHHH.  I respectfully call him "Danny Boy" - you know like the song. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger

Ok,...Well, that was....interesting. 

Not sure which concerns me more, "The Jackson Sect" or Wanderer's broadside... :shrug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
5 minutes ago, Lone Ranger said:

Ok,...Well, that was....interesting. 

Not sure which concerns me more, "The Jackson Sect" or Wanderer's broadside... :shrug:

One of my goals with the OP was to attempt getting people much more concerned about the subject at hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
30 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

One of my goals with the OP was to attempt getting people much more concerned about the subject at hand.

While some have already judged me; there are a few brief thoughts I would add for now. My "beef" is not solely with the vegetarian NAD.

In the comment section for THIS ARTICLE a church member from Africa wrote the following:

Quote

How many GC sessions were staged in Africa let alone outside America?how many GC presidents have represented any other race except the status quo? The sda church to this day is run on “white culture” drums are not acceptable because they "invoke ancestral worship,our people still believe and enact that those who serve at the pulpit must put on a jacket,conferences are run interms of race ie “black conference and white conference”

I agree with this man 100%, or, am I not allowed to, because he is not a woman?

It is not appropriate to blame just one source here, and I hope to post more references soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
54 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

One of my goals with the OP was to attempt getting people much more concerned about the subject at hand.

Could you just clarify "the subject at hand." Just so we are all on the same page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger

Wanderer: "YOU are out of line and over the top on this one. However, you have nicely shown us what a DIVISION looks like in work clothes! "

I'm just wondering how your broadside against the "Jackson Sect" is less divisive than my noting that my BS radar is off the charts...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo

I see the whole issue as nothing more than a distraction to our mission an believers.  Although I am a member of the SDA church, I see no reason to change my affiliation or my spiritual behavior over this.  I've been disciplined by the church before; and threatened with discipline on other occasions.  If I am disfellowshipped over my differences with the church, it's not a big deal to me.  My salvation is based on my relationship with Jesus; not my relationship with Adventism or any other denomination.  I would continue to attend the SDA church because I am a Sabbath keeper, I like how studious a lot of SDA's are (even though I sometimes don't agree with their premises), and I simply "like" grass-roots SDA culture more than the other religious cultures out there.  At least here in urban Colorado,  I would be happy to invite anyone to the church I currently am becoming active in.

Most of the people I know would not see any major changes in their churches because of these issues.  Female pastors would continue to serve.  Male pastors would offer loyal support to their female pastors.  The congregation would not allow this "distraction" to even phase them.  I would like to believe that they would continue to be a Sabbath-keeping intact congregation inside or outside of the denomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
6 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I see the whole issue as nothing more than a distraction to our mission an believers.  Although I am a member of the SDA church, I see no reason to change my affiliation or my spiritual behavior over this.  I've been disciplined by the church before; and threatened with discipline on other occasions.  If I am disfellowshipped over my differences with the church, it's not a big deal to me.  My salvation is based on my relationship with Jesus; not my relationship with Adventism or any other denomination.  I would continue to attend the SDA church because I am a Sabbath keeper, I like how studious a lot of SDA's are (even though I sometimes don't agree with their premises), and I simply "like" grass-roots SDA culture more than the other religious cultures out there.  At least here in urban Colorado,  I would be happy to invite anyone to the church I currently am becoming active in.

Most of the people I know would not see any major changes in their churches because of these issues.  Female pastors would continue to serve.  Male pastors would offer loyal support to their female pastors.  The congregation would not allow this "distraction" to even phase them.  I would like to believe that they would continue to be a Sabbath-keeping intact congregation inside or outside of the denomination.

After I left formal SDA membership, I began to attend another Sabbath keeping church.  Over time some of the ladies encouraged me to share comments in their class.  I finally began to teach that class.  Then slowly some of the men began to also attend the ladies class.  Finally only some elders were left in the "men's" Sabbath School class.  At that point, the elders came to me and told me that I could not - as a woman - teach a mixed class.   They decided the women's class should be joined with the men's class, with the head elder leading/teaching.  I kept quiet - but we soon left that congregation. 

I left formal SDA membership, because I could not share my views without censure.  I have continued to teach online.  Visitors to my website average around 25,000 per month - far more than I could have imagined teaching in my small Sabbath School class.  And no - I have not hidden that the teaching is by a woman.   The time is so very short, I can agree wholeheartedly that arguments over formal ordination of women are a distraction from our mission - to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the truths of His Word.  If the LORD has "called" a woman to teach,  HE will open the way for her - to fulfill His calling.  No worry on that.

This subject seems like one for the Townhall - not for the Theological Forum.   I've not seen much posted just lately of a Theological nature - to discuss.   It's mostly been SDA politics or USA national politics.   In other words - distractions - from our mission - our mission to understand the Word and teach it, thus helping men to trust their Creator.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
50 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Finally only some elders were left in the "men's" Sabbath School class.  At that point, the elders came to me and told me that I could not - as a woman - teach a mixed class.   They decided the women's class should be joined with the men's class, with the head elder leading/teaching.  I kept quiet - but we soon left that congregation. 

The time is so very short, I can agree wholeheartedly that arguments over formal ordination of women are a distraction from our mission - to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the truths of His Word.  If the LORD has "called" a woman to teach,  HE will open the way for her - to fulfill His calling.  No worry on that.

I know of one church that seriously discussed the issue of women's ordination and the women decided after studying the issue of teaching men that it was not their role and promptly resigned their teaching positions!

I also agree that this is a serious distraction from the end time work that this church should be doing and I wonder what is the cost of all the wasted time arguing and fight over this issue. The only ones who you could possibly say are happy about this are Satan and his followers, both demonic and human.

Given the circumstances of this turmoil in  the church over this issue, I could only think that any female going against the vote of the world church is in rebellion and I don't care how many claim to be called by the Holy Spirit as I do not believe the Holy Spirit would help create this mess we have in the church today. I would suggest that the story in 1 Kings 13 be carefully considered. A prophet came to another prophet who had been on a mission for God. The second prophet gave him instructions that were not consistent with the instructions from God. "He said unto him, I am a prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the Lord, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. But he lied unto him." v.13

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

This subject seems like one for the Townhall - not for the Theological Forum.   I've not seen much posted just lately of a Theological nature - to discuss.

I did consider at length which would be the best forum to post this in. I did not want to post it in The Town Hall because the rule there says NO POLITICS OR RELIGION."

There will be plenty of "theology" in this topic once it gets going. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
36 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

I know of one church that seriously discussed the issue of women's ordination and the women decided after studying the issue of teaching men that it was not their role and promptly resigned their teaching positions!

I also know women who have rejected the WOE dogma we are seeing. It depends who one talks to and what their AGENDA is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
On 11/3/2018 at 12:22 PM, The Wanderer said:

The Adventist Pandora's Box has again been opened to forces that we cannot control. Everyone should be very concerned about the bigger picture on what this DIVISION is really accomplishing and what The Jackson Sect is really "leading" us all into.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
5 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I left formal SDA membership, because I could not share my views without censure. 

I am sorry that you had to have that experience.  It should not have been a matter where you felt you had to leave, or if they chose to disfellowship. That must have been hard for you, and I am sure it did not just effect you; it likely effected your entire family and friends, if any of them were enjoying the class.

I understand through scripture, that the church does have a right, a scriptural right and obligation to at the very least, uphold their "official" beliefs", whatever they are. I dont have a problem with that part scripturally at least. I think you likely had to know well before it happened that there would be feathers ruffled, and what I see from my pea-brained view here in Canada is that when someone like you comes along with teachings to the church they attend; it is just a matter of respect for other people's beliefs. And that respect has to go equally, in both directions. (not anywhere close to saying I think that you were disrespectful). But people with "new" or "different" teachings from a church they are attending should respect other people's beliefs enough that they dont have to go all out and leave, (as you did) or to just cut you off from doing a class just because of such things.

Personally; if it was up to me in THAT specific church you were in, and at the time that happened to you; I would have been so happy that you even wanted to come in the door of my church; I would make some kind of effort for you to run your class, in a separate room, from other classes, as do many churches now, and they have done this for many years.And then you would of course still be sitting in the sanctuary with my family, praising The Lord together and listening to the Lord together, maybe singing, praying together. As long as I thought you would also show respect for the way my church needed to do things, you would have still had your class. I would also bet that many in your class would not give a toot sweet about what doctrines you were teaching; because you are a very nice lady, and I am thinking some would just be there because they like you. I have had a few class members over the years say "Oh good! Glad its you teaching!"  But I can assure all that it was not always because they agreed with me!

I once had a class for a year or so, and there was an unkempt fellow who came faithfully more than even any o the "regulars", and all of the other Sabbath School Teachers said "I dont want that guy in our class," "he is too disruptive."  Of course, I happily stated he was welcome in my class.anytime!  All I did was pick a point each in each lesson he was there for, and give him a full five minutes, sometimes a tad more depending on weather everyone seemed OK with how it was going That way he did not interfere with everything in the class and both ends of the deal seemed like it was a win win The Sabbath School and the class deserves to be able to count on going to a class where there is not a single individual

I dont know if  anyone realizes it or not but what I have been talking about here has nothing to to with WOE  The purpose of this topic is to research how the church DIVISIONS we project into the world may have or may be effecting  the political scene, and how some of our ""missionary" work has been complicit in violence, war, genocide, etc and also DIVISIONS that lead to all the infighting we are seeing now.

On 11/3/2018 at 12:22 PM, The Wanderer said:

Now the question is, will we come to the fountain and drink? Will the teachers of truth set the example? God will do great things for us, if we by faith take Him at His word. Praise God that we might see here a church-wide humbling of the heart before God, and a true revival, including, if needed, regime change. The Church does deserve better. The Jackson Sect's Churchianity may be unleashing those very "forces of hell" that Jackson's Evengelism has been so bellicose about. What he is promoting is something that will has split communities and societies in ways that he is bound to lose control of, and in ways he has not thought of because no one can. The Adventist Pandora's Box has again been opened to forces that we cannot control. Everyone should be very concerned about the bigger picture on what this DIVISION is really accomplishing and what The Jackson Sect is really "leading" us all into?

From a preliminary research effort; I think it is essential to consider the dynamics of DIVISION, and how people feed into DIVISION, and adopt it as a populist sort of a "defense of the faith," and how said DIVISION affects society at large. In my mind, the current kind of DIVISION confronting the church now with one doctrine or the other,  is more dangerous than ever, and . its nothing regarding WOE. Its a much bigger picture that we are seeing played out

In the next post, I will attempt one or two separate posts about history and church polemics. Ecclesial DIVISION is clearly a central problem when lodged within the social dynamics of conflict or unrest; whether casualty related to violence, or simply as a ready vehicle for VIOLENCE and its MAGNIFICATION of anything regarding DIVISION that they can!

On 11/3/2018 at 12:22 PM, The Wanderer said:

Now the question is, will we come to the fountain and drink? Will the teachers of truth set the example? God will do great things for us, if we by faith take Him at His word. Praise God that we might see here a church-wide humbling of the heart before God, and a true revival, including, if needed, regime change. The Church does deserve better.

I dont know if  anyone realizes it or not but what I have been talking about here has nothing to to with WOE  The purpose of this topic is to research how the church DIVISIONS we project into the world may have or may be effecting  the political scene, and how some of our ""missionary" work has been complicit in violence, war, genocide, etc and also DIVISIONS that lead to all the infighting we are seeing now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gregory Matthews

In my thinking as to where this thread belongs:  Not in Town Hall.  Real Issues in Adventism or possibly where it is now in Theology.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
15 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I kept quiet - but we soon left that congregation. 

I had a similar experience at a church I was attending for a while after I got "mad" at the SDA church I was attending for having a pastor removed from our church; and then some of the richer members of the congregation intimidating conference leadership to revoke his ministerial papers.  It got to the point where I was teaching once a month.  Everyone was constantly preaching warm fuzzy stuff about how Christians would one day take over the world through the love and power of Jesus - never mentioning anything about the trials and persecutions spoken of in Daniel and Revelation.  So I attempted to teach on Daniel 7 - 9 one day.  Halfway through the lesson, the pastor cut me off saying that this was not the time or place for this scary kind of preaching; "correcting" me by saying Jesus would return AFTER His believers had conquered the world for Him.  I was never allowed to teach there again; and was even discouraged from leading music.  I tried being the pew-sitter for a while - it didn't work; so I left.

I have known Rachel for a number of years.  From the beginning of our friendship I recognized her as a person with gifts for Biblical discernment and teaching.  I would attend her SS class faithfully until she changed churches.  If I was someplace close to her, I would go to the same church as she did just to attend her class.  If she had a small group in her home,  I would go.  The fact that she is not an ordained Pastor doesn't matter.  she has the "gift" (IMHO).

Authority to teach and lead is not given by the church; they are gifts from God.  Respect is earned; not granted by the church.  What good is a church-appointed leader if he/she is not respected by his/her followers?

I currently attend the class of a male teacher of the same caliber as Rachel.  because of his views, he cannot "officially" be a SS teacher in most SDA churches any more.  Even when he was an elected SS teacher, his class was known as the "heretic class" and was held in a remote part of the church.  Why would I follow a teacher who was in poor relations with the denomination?  Because what he is teaching in present truth - based on today's realities - not trying to preserve views of over 150 years ago that seem outrageous given today's environment, society and culture.

I thank God I live in Colorado where mast of the SDA's I know are open-minded and interested in bringing people to Christ; and if they want to be SDA's, that's okay too; but not required.  Where people believe we sin because we are sinners; not that we are sinners because we sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
9 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

But people with "new" or "different" teachings from a church they are attending should respect other people's beliefs enough that they dont have to go all out and leave, (as you did) or to just cut you off from doing a class just because of such things. 

I should have explained that my "new teachings" were "new" to me also - back 30 years ago when I was attending the SDA church.  I studied gradually - into the new beliefs.  Didn't happen overnight.  When I began attending the second Sabbath keeping denomination church, I still had not come to believe all that I solidly do today.  At the second church, I was simply giving insights on mostly OT lessons.  Didn't even get into my new beliefs.  

I am fully aware that my understanding of God - as NOT a Trinity of three persons/beings - sets me at odds with SDA doctrinal positions.  That is why I do not attend there.  I do not sing, "Praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost".  I do not believe that is Biblical.   I recently counseled a friend of mine to keep her mouth shut on such issues, if she wants to continue to blend in with the SDAs, and fellowship with them .

I personally decided that I should not "keep quiet".  That is why I left, and resigned my membership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

There are only a few - maybe just one or two - essential beliefs that one must hold.  Others help one trust the LORD more fully, or love HIM more fully - but are not essential to salvation.

I think the question being asked is whether we should spend time on the others.  How much time?  Should those questions divide us? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
1 hour ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I am fully aware that my understanding of God - as NOT a Trinity of three persons/beings - sets me at odds with SDA doctrinal positions.  That is why I do not attend there. 

I am thankful that some of us here have managed to transcend that DIVISION. We are actually friends; inspite of our "neck to neck" doctrinal discussions. I do feel the church can and should handle things better if they believe the Unity Fundy, I remember as a Sabbath School teacher, there would at times be someone who kind of wanted to take over or dominate the class discussions or teachings I was tasked with. I did have to set some parameters; and I dont think thats wrong. All I did was ask that each person in the class get to speak, and there was no need for any kind of "discipline. I remember some who would not like that; and it can be difficult for the teacher. I had a policy to let people have a fairly free discussion; but I had to draw the line with A Shepherds Rod group that raided us one sabbath. Somehow, their talk about AK 47s and Ezekiel 9, and their Montanna Militia Unit didnt seem to fit the Sabbath School Lesson. As far as your individual situation; I find myself wishing we could take our example of friendship/unity here and export it to people who need it. I know that you pray for me, and if you had chance, you would be on my doorstep with soup and sandwhiches when needed. There is no reason the church could not consider such an approach. There IS something for a ministry-minded person such as yourself & Joe to do in any church that is truly interested in practicing Bible teaching on unity.

As I mentioned earlier; this topic is more intended to examine historical markers that can trace how unity or lack thereof effects society at large. It is shocking to realize how competitive "missionary" work has torn the very fabric of society at times to the point where people are killed. The churches of the land have been complicit in certain conflicts which ended up in wars and racism. It is my current belief that certain of our leaders may possibly be leading us down a similar path, where DIVISION is going to get so out of control; that we will end up doing the same as others from the past. In the next post, I will get into a little more of the history I am referring to. In fact; I will expand on that Sabbath School Lesson and what happened because I want to draw parallels from the past, and compare to current and potential future events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
2 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

As I mentioned earlier; this topic is more intended to examine historical markers that can trace how unity or lack thereof effects society at large.

Are you asking about disunity within the church?   Or within society at large?  

Are you asking how disunity affects people? 

Not sure exactly what the topic is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
On 11/3/2018 at 12:22 PM, The Wanderer said:

rom a preliminary research effort; I think it is essential to consider the dynamics of DIVISION, and how people feed into DIVISION, and adopt it as a populist sort of a "defense of the faith," and how said DIVISION affects society at large. In my mind, the current kind of DIVISION confronting the church now is more dangerous than ever, and The Jackson Sect's Churchianity may be unleashing those very "forces of hell" that Jackson's Evengelism has been so bellicose about. What he is promoting is something that will has split communities and societies in ways that he is bound to lose control of, and in ways he has not thought of because no one can. The Adventist Pandora's Box has again been opened to forces that we cannot control. Everyone should be very concerned about the bigger picture on what this DIVISION is really accomplishing and what The Jackson Sect is really "leading" us all into.

 

7 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Not sure exactly what the topic is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
36 minutes ago, 8thdaypriest said:

There are only a few - maybe just one or two - essential beliefs that one must hold.  Others help one trust the LORD more fully, or love HIM more fully - but are not essential to salvation.

Could you please briefly list which beliefs you feel are essential, and which are supportive.

I would find this very helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lone Ranger
10 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

The Jackson Sect's Churchianity may be unleashing those very "forces of hell" that Jackson's Evengelism has been so bellicose about. What he is promoting is something that will has split communities and societies in ways that he is bound to lose control of, and in ways he has not thought of because no one can

Wanderer it seems to me you are doing a good job of fear-mongering and slippery-sloping without telling us exactly WHAT Jackson is actually doing that you are so upset with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×