Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
B/W Photodude

The Days of Wine And Roses

Recommended Posts

B/W Photodude

The Days of Wine And Roses

"Dan “crooner” Jackson, in the midst of his now famous not-so-charming fulmination, bursts into Sinatra’s song, and then, without missing a beat, rightly declares our old days of Wine And Roses and Legalism over.  But the theme song lingers.  Jackson owns it.  And he owns the updated, refined, sensitive, cultured version of Laodicea-La La Land.""   

http://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2019/1/11/the-days-of-wine-and-roses

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.

Kevin H

Elder Jackson is their latest villain. He gets to join the list that includes the post 1888 Mrs. White, Willie White, A. G. Daniels, W. W. Prescott and others. Of course they have a history of as time goes by they end up baptizing their villains saying that they were actually good historical Adventists and attack the new villains of the time they are living in as the ones who started to cause the problems. So if time were to last and this sub-group of Adventism were to remain true to their past history, in about 100 years Elder Jackson will be painted as a strong supporter of the ideas of Folcrum7 and that the problem's did not start until later as they give their new list of villains.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
On January 12, 2019 at 2:29 AM, Kevin H said:

Elder Jackson is their latest villain. He gets to join the list that includes the post 1888 Mrs. White, Willie White, A. G. Daniels, W. W. Prescott and others. Of course they have a history of as time goes by they end up baptizing their villains …

Oh Pulease! Who has been the villain of the liberal left of the church ? Who even has a well known Adventist writer comparing him to Hitler?! Sorry, Jackson does not get to join any such list!

Seriously,  it is well past time for the Wilson haters to do some serious Biblical study on the concept of "lawlessness."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rudywoofs (Pam)

from Fulcrum7's article:

Quote

All hail the shaken booty’s of the Hallelujah Hooey Hop

 

LOLOLOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kevin H
8 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

Oh Pulease! Who has been the villain of the liberal left of the church ? Who even has a well known Adventist writer comparing him to Hitler?! Sorry, Jackson does not get to join any such list!

Seriously,  it is well past time for the Wilson haters to do some serious Biblical study on the concept of "lawlessness."

I'm sorry B/W but this is Adventist history. I read some books such as "With Cloak and Dagger" which complains about how ideas came in to the church in the 1950s. Also those who are critical of the trinity has a quote spreading around the internet saying that the trinity was brought into the church in the 1950s by Froom.

Yet when I was at Andrews, in the White Estate I read similar complaints of ideas that "With Cloak and Dagger" said came in the 1950s, only these complaints were written in the first decade of the 20th century, 50 years too early, for "Cloak and Dagger" and of course the villains  from the complaints written in the early 20th century was whining about these heresies being brought in by the post 1888 Mrs. White and people such as Willie, Prescott and Daniels.  Much of what I read in "Cloak and Dagger" was a repeat of the complaints of the early 20th century, only the names and dates changed.

Also, that statement that the anti=trinity statement is saying about Froom, is almost (if not identical) to a quote from the first century of the 1900s only instead of blaming  Froom for brining in the trinity in the 1950s, it blamed Prescott for brining in the trinity in the 1890s.

The minister's who's views grew into what became the so called "Historic Adventists" and who's views are reflected in Folcrum7,  have a history of spreading a gospel of the good news that the church is going to hell in a handbasket and that they are the only true and faithful Seventh-day Adventists. And if you read these publications they started out with the list of heretics bringing in a new, false theology, starting with blaming the post 1888 Mrs. White, and the other names I repeat. But as time goes by they no longer have the post 1888 Mrs. White as a heretic bringing in these ideas but pretend that the ideas they are criticizing are newly coming in and the people who their great grandparents criticized as horrible heretics, are later pictured as faithful to this train of thought. If time was to last and history were to repeat itself in about a century Historic Adventists would hail Elder Jackson as a firm supporter of the ideas of Folcrum7 and have a new person to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
8 minutes ago, Kevin H said:

The minister's who's views grew into what became the so called "Historic Adventists" and who's views are reflected in Folcrum7, 

Most who say they are "historic" Adventists, are in fact something else. They don't know what they are talking about when they parrot ancient complaints and try to insert those into current issues. Also, if they actually would read Froom's material before whining about it; they would have a tough time making their "complaints" stick.

I agree; F7 is a bunch of hooey. lol

Edited by The Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
22 hours ago, Kevin H said:

I read some books such as "With Cloak and Dagger" which complains about how ideas came in to the church in the 1950s. Also those who are critical of the trinity has a quote spreading around the internet saying that the trinity was brought into the church in the 1950s by Froom.

Yeah, I got the book laying on my desk that I will get to one of these days. Might be an interesting read.

However, not sure where the rest of the post was from as the thread started out regarding the behavior of Dan Jackson. I know some are in his corner and few will address the issues of:

The vote at the GC was a vote of delegates from the worldwide church, regardless of whether the NAD and a couple of other divisions are getting their knickers in a twist over it. Elder Wilson has the job of implementing the voted motions that pass at the BC convention. While true, he may support those votes, it is not his doings. Jackson is not in charge of the church regardless of how much temper tantrum throwing he does.

Jackson's conduct in telling those who disagree with him to "buzz off" was conduct unbecoming a pastor and especially one who is leader of an entire division. What is that teaching your children? Telling people to "buzz off" is about as close as he dare come to giving the proverbial "one finger salute" without actually going there.

 

Share this post


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

Most who say they are "historic" Adventists, are in fact something else. They don't know what they are talking about when they parrot ancient complaints and try to insert those into current issues. 

I would say there are people on both sides of the controversy that just love a good fight. Both sides of this "discussion" need to be aware of the Adversaries efforts to take captive those not on their watch.

22 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

I agree; F7 is a bunch of hooey. lol

F7 is only one of many good websites out there that are not trying to bring in deceptions into the church. However, there is one or two that post very unChristian stuff on that site and I am surprised they allow it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pierrepaul

I have a different opinion on Fulcrum7. They usually remind me of the sorts of people who are never happy unless they are complaining about something, and are often on the look out to find or dream up some reason to be offended or outraged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rudywoofs (Pam)

I agree with some of what Fulcrum7 publishes; some of it I don't. — which is sort of what I find in all groups.  So... I use what I like, discard what I don't, and thank God that He didn't clone us to think and behave identically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
4 hours ago, pierrepaul said:

They usually remind me of the sorts of people who are never happy unless they are complaining about something, ...

Seriously?! Just do a review of reader comments between F7 and the well known liberal site and compare the general level of dissatisfaction and general surliness of the two groups. It would almost beg for someone to do a qualitative/quantitative analysis for the "true" level of complaining.

Another thing I notice is that few will actually respond to an article for what it says, but would rather just complain that they are complainers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
B/W Photodude
1 hour ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

I agree with some of what Fulcrum7 publishes; some of it I don't. — 

They really are not part of a "vast right wing conspiracy!" Different people can write on different topics and some is interesting and some isn't. Don't like it, move along! There are writers there that I will not read because I tend to think they are over impressed with themselves and are seriously ethically challenged. But others write well thought out articles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rudywoofs (Pam)
2 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

They really are not part of a "vast right wing conspiracy!" Different people can write on different topics and some is interesting and some isn't. Don't like it, move along! There are writers there that I will not read because I tend to think they are over impressed with themselves and are seriously ethically challenged. But others write well thought out articles.

Agreed.  F7 is no more of a conspiracy group than Spectrum is.  I think both use bombastic writing styles at times to make a point — which sometimes comes across as "mocking" — which, of course, would not set well with the "opposition" (whoever *they* are)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
23 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

would not set well with the "opposition" (whoever *they* are)...

good comment re "the opposition." lol Its like when people say "they say..." no one ever says who "they" is or are.

Share this post


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

There are writers there that I will not read because I tend to think they are over impressed with themselves and are seriously ethically challenged. But others write well thought out articles.

I definitely do agree with this statement. I did recently read an article there that came close to curling what little hair I have left on top of my head; but I believe it was you who cited a link there recently which I did find very well-written.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kevin H

There is both a liberal extreme in the church and a conservative extreme in the church. Folcrum7 tends to be one of these two ditches. Too often Spectrum publishes articles from the other extreme. I am equally scared of both camps, yet I also believe that both camps point out facts that it is important for us not to forget. These two extremes, on both points, rather than being outright wrong (although they are on a couple points here and there) they tend to do more of a dividing of truth between them, with the truth being a straight and narrow path between the two.

My biggest concern about Folcrum 7 is that they tend to want to pretend that these two ditches are the only two options. Since one is critical of Mrs. White and questions 1844 and that God can really change our lives, since they accept Mrs. White (when filtered through people like Elders Washburn and Wilkinson) and accept 1844 and the gospel changing our lives, they picture themselves as the only true group. They use scare tactics (such as in the book "With Cloak and Dagger" to try to scare people into their group.  I've had "historical Adventists" tell me that I do not exist. That there are only two choices; to either believe exactly like them, or to believe exactly like Des Ford. But there are different sub groups of Adventism that do not fit those two categories.

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

If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×