Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
Sign in to follow this  
Gregory Matthews

Doctrine Static or . . .

Recommended Posts

Gregory Matthews

See:

https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2020/moribund-state-contemporary-conservative-adventist-hermeneutics

And what about early Adventism? Did our founders always hold unswervingly to all earlier positions? Were they "conservatives?" The record disputes that our pioneers held rigidly to all earlier theological views. In fact, in several areas they proved to be pragmatic, if not malleable. For example, on Christology, our earliest position was closer to Arianism, the doctrine that Jesus was “begotten” of the Father at a point in time and therefore subordinate to the Father in all things. We later switched to our current Trinitarian position. We also once believed that the Ten Commandments are salvific. But gradually, after the 1888 Minneapolis GC session, where presentations on Righteousness by Faith predominated, we moved away from this doctrine and now see the “schoolmaster” reference in Galatians (3:24-27) as inclusive of the moral law. This was not a small shift, but EG White (EGW) was instrumental in helping with the pivot. In other areas such as the short lived “shut door” doctrine, our pioneers initially linked the events of 1844 to “the final call for salvation,” insisting “the door of salvation was shut” to those who rejected this message. The closest EGW came to repudiating this teaching was her concession that this was a personal belief (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 74) and not one she received in a vision. Though we never disavowed this view outright, after 1844 we found a new application in the Investigative Judgement doctrine, and allowed the “shut-door” teaching to die of neglect.

In addition to changing positions on doctrine, we hold positions that go beyond biblical claims. Vegetarianism is one such case, . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pierrepaul

It's an interesting question. And it challenges many of the old axiomatic assertions about "truth".

But let's take a look at what we do know.

(a) The revelatory writings which now comprise the Bible were revealed progressively. A person reading exclusively the Old Testament would not have the same understanding that we have;

(b) As we gain greater knowledge about the natural world, we have had to re-evaluate certain textual interpretations. For example, certain Christians held to the flat earth and/or geocentric theory on the basis of many texts (e.g. the stars being "placed" in the sky; the sun being created after the earth; Christ's coming being seen by every eye simultaneously, the notion of a single universal sabbath, Joshua commanding the sun to stand still, etc.). We've had no problem re-evaluating those texts to harmonize them with a spherical earth and heliocentric solar system, understanding that the Bible was written from the point of view of men without this knowledge. We even retain many of these notions in our language as figures of speech (e.g. sunrise, sunset, shooting star), knowing full well that the figure of speech doesn't describe a literal reality. We allow these figures of speech to try to shoehorn certain prophecies to conform to certain preconceived notions (e.g. many SDAs see the 1833 Leonid meteor shower as a fulfillment of the "falling stars" prophecy, even though we know full well that no stars we involved in that phenomenon - we recognize that Jesus wasn't giving a lesson in astronomy, so we allow Him to refer to meteors as "stars" without calling Him a false prophet).

Our understanding of God has also changed. Certain passages in Genesis portray God as less than omniscient. In Genesis 18:21, God has to set out on a fact finding mission to see if the messages that have reached Him are true. As the Bible was revealed, a different view of God emerged.

A similar process involves our growing knowledge of the natural world. Today we know about light refraction and rainbows. We know that given the dimension of the Ark described in the Bible, there is no possible way that 2 of every species known to man could have fit on the ark. We know that the sun predates the earth. We know that the stars predate the earth. Despite EGW's comments on "amalgamation of man and beast", we don't condemn an entire race on the basis of Ham's curse. We know that none of the modern romance tongues (French, Italian, Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese, etc.) were created at Babel, but rather grew out of local variations and dialects of Latin.

Jews and Christians re-evaluated our understanding of days and the Sabbath in light of the spherical earth and the International Date Line. SDAs had no problem adopting a spherical earth understanding of the Sabbath. Men re-evaluated their understanding of God based on the progressive revelation of the Bible. We re-evaluated our understanding of "falling stars" and "moon to blood" based on our knowledge of meteors, comets and lunar and solar eclipses. We re-evaluated our understanding of Biblical texts governing slavery based on a quasi-universal condemnation of slavery as evil. We re-evaluated OT capital punishments against adultery and sabbath-breaking based on modern notions of justice and separation of church and state. Protestants re-evaluated the Eucharist despite the clear text "this IS my body", since we know full well that the wafer stays a wafer and the "wine" stays "wine". We re-evaluated the interpretation of "wine" in the wake of the temperance movement and witnessing the ravages of drunkenness in 19th century America. 

But there remains certain beliefs, teachings, traditions that have risen to the level of "sacred cows". I fear that the SDA church, despite its relatively small size, recent vintage and relative unimportance within Christianity, is still far too institutional, inflexible and laden with tradition and inertia to adapt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stinsonmarri
On 5/21/2020 at 6:39 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

See:

https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2020/moribund-state-contemporary-conservative-adventist-hermeneutics

Quote:

And what about early Adventism? Did our founders always hold unswervingly to all earlier positions? Were they "conservatives?" The record disputes that our pioneers held rigidly to all earlier theological views. In fact, in several areas they proved to be pragmatic, if not malleable. For example, on Christology, our earliest position was closer to Arianism, the doctrine that Jesus was “begotten” of the Father at a point in time and therefore subordinate to the Father in all things. We later switched to our current Trinitarian position. We also once believed that the Ten Commandments are salvific. But gradually, after the 1888 Minneapolis GC session, where presentations on Righteousness by Faith predominated, we moved away from this doctrine and now see the “schoolmaster” reference in Galatians (3:24-27) as inclusive of the moral law. This was not a small shift, but EG White (EGW) was instrumental in helping with the pivot. In other areas such as the short lived “shut door” doctrine, our pioneers initially linked the events of 1844 to “the final call for salvation,” insisting “the door of salvation was shut” to those who rejected this message. The closest EGW came to repudiating this teaching was her concession that this was a personal belief (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 74) and not one she received in a vision. Though we never disavowed this view outright, after 1844 we found a new application in the Investigative Judgement doctrine, and allowed the “shut-door” teaching to die of neglect.

In addition to changing positions on doctrine, we hold positions that go beyond biblical claims. Vegetarianism is one such case, .

Matthew Quartey are one of the many modern SDA that appears to make the pioneers seem to be antiquated and rigid. Again, he wants to compare them with a Jesuit priest who views were different then those that Constantine hand pick for the Nicene group. Arian, did not believe  that YAHSHUA could still be DIVINE and an ALMIGHTY BEING but take on a flesh like body. He could not see nor understand that there is nothing impossible for THE ALMIGHTY ONES who have created the entire Universe and then set everything in motion. Arian could not understand that THE FATHER, HIMSELF created the flesh body for HIS SON and that none of us then or now can understand the POWER, and THE MYSTERY of THE ALMIGHTY ONES. The Bible clearly states emphatically that THEY can only revealed THEIR SECRETS that is a mystery to us. Yet, Matthew writes as many SDA does what they think they know when the do not have a clue!

SDA today do not realize themselves that the pioneers left many of the Catholic views and still did not understand the wise and diabolic mystery and scheme of Lucifer that he wrapped in the Catholic religion. If he and the church would take time out and follow the path that YAHWEH gave through the pioneers who study and open up the door. They all constantly said to take the Bible and there you will find that Nimrod who first rebelled produce a religion that has formed every religion known in this world. EGW in the book Patriarch and Prophets, she showed clearly how Nimrod confederacy was founded in rebellion; a kingdom established for self-exaltation, that YAHWEH was not to be reverence and honored. Yes, I agreed with the Bible had this confederacy been permitted to continue at that time, a mighty power would have banished righteousness in the earth infancy! Flesh beings were and still are endeavoring to substitute laws to suit the purpose of their own selfish and cruel hearts. Nimrod system formed the priesthood of females instead of male. Their sole purpose was sex and they distorting ELOHIYM’S earth calling it “mother earth,” using it as the female sex organ and plants and trees pushing up from the earth as the male sex organs. They knew about the sacrificial system, but they polluted it! The male was chosen for the priesthood because YAHSHUA would become flesh like a man! Men as priest would show that THE FATHER loved the world, they HE gave HIS SON to died, rise, and become THE PRIEST KING of the world like Melchizedek. We today do not know that order, but we view it in Heaven with YAHSHUA. It is not like the Levitical order at all. If Matthew’s and others would study the Bible, they would know Ex Chapter 24. The Levitical order was a substitute order. The original priesthood earth had to do with the birthright and the first born son was initiated for this privilege!

The SDA thinks that they are rich and need of nothing! Oh, but they do! Daniel Chapter Seven is so misconstrued it is unbelievable! The first three beasts Daniel saw were three kingdom's religions that were depicted. These religions were important, Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar belong to Nimrod. The people never finish building the city and yes, Afrikans returned later to the city and also formed city states (history prove this). The Chaldeans were all Hebrews which simply mean Eber’s children. Abraham was born in southern Turkey near Syria, let make sense! The Chaldeans wared, lost and many were brought to Babylon over the centuries and other’s through trade migrated just like we do today. In all times people have done the same thing only more advance with technology! The priest of Babylon did not die they passed on their belief through their culture or ethnic people. Nimrod was an Afrikan man so what! Study your history and you find all ancient people had great knowledge of the stars. What we should ask is how were they so knowledgeable? We actually learned from them, how do you think we navigate over the sea and study astrology so well. The Babylonian priest were the best and when the Chaldeans took over Babylon the Chaldean master it like a university system. Go back and read Daniel Chapter 2!

Now, the Persian the first of Japheth children was introduce and again their religion was phenomenal. Their belief system showed some of the angels spirit body ( you know they had four faces and look like beast and also had a manlike face), which is how you come up with the trinity. They are the one who started this monotheistic concept and they imitated the birth of YAHSHUA with Mithra and the Romans especially Constantine adored this belief! The Persians had captured Nimrod’s belief of the trinity and that he was the supreme being. His wife and her son Tammuz were like the TRUE TRIO IN HEAVEN! Mithra became to represent YAHSHUA falsely and to keep the lie alive his birthday is December 25. Interesting I might say accepting a lie when you know it is a lie. Yet, you put no difference between the HOLY and the unholy. How? By celebrating and believing a birthday that YAHWEH, nor YAHSHUA told you anywhere in the Bible to keep. Really SDA, really!

Then we have Greece, the great combiners! They loved the Egyptians belief, their belief which transform into what today we called Philosophy. Their religion was called theology they worshiped Theos, the gods on Olympus Mountain. The Greeks were the bomb, Rome like their belief and political system and USA does too! Matter of fact all of the Europeans during the Middle Ages adopted their belief system and changed the Bible kinda to appear to be like this false belief! So, the fourth beast had all of the three beast which Rome adapted but if you really look close Daniel never spoke about the heads, John did! The heads were all seven of the world empires after Nimrod who oppose YAHWEH and HIS people throughout time. They were Egypt, Assyria, Neo-Babylon, Persia, Greece, Pagan Rome, and Papacy Rome. John saw five fall that would be from Egypt to Greece, one is that is Pagan Rome who was still in power, when John had this vision. Finally, a short one will come which would be Papacy Rome who only politically lasted 1,200 years compared to the other kingdoms or empires! This is what SDA miss during the pioneer's time. EGW did something she should have not written in the Spirit of Prophecy. I realize what time and period she lived in and what was the belief of her day. I also believe she gradually moved away from these false prejudice ideas.

In the Chapter about Babylon, she started strangely putting down Ham that he was curse, he was not! Nowhere in the Bible did Noah or YAHWEH curse Ham. Ham came into the tent saw his father naked and saw his baby boy there. He immediately called out to his older brothers who was standing outside the tent. That is all the Bible says and that the older sons went in backward to cover their father up! Noah woke up and knew what his grandson had done. Unto him is not correct at all! We do not know what his grandson did and the Hebrew word “bane,” is a family word for son, grandson, daughter, children, or child according the subject. We know because Noah curse Canaan and he was to a servant not a slave twice over to his brothers, Kush, Mitzráyim, and Punt! Canaan never ruled over his brothers, nor have his children. Canaan also had to paid debt to his brothers. Noah next said that Canaan would be servants to his uncles and he nor his children ever ruled over them as well! Where in the Bible does it state that YAHWEH! had to come to Shem first, it did not! HE came to Canaan first and the Bible proves it in Genesis. What is so wrong with that? HE is no respect of person, period!

Finally, in 1888 Matthew was totally wrong because why was Waggoner and Jones ostracized and EGW sent to Australia? There was more they discuss it was concerning the Holy Convocation which included the Sabbath found in Lev Chapter 23! The Church refused it and got rid of President Butler too! Here YAHWEH was leading them to more light and new men had joined the church like Leroy Froom, Jerry Moon, and others who wanted to accept the same views as the other Protestant Churches who followed the trinity belief of the Catholic Church. It is clear in EGW writings and manuscript that she did not believe in the trinity. Did she not understand THE HOLY SPIRIT, no she did not! YAHWEH did not reveal to her everything just like HE did not reveal everything to all of the prophets in the Bible except one John! EGW express before she died that THE HOLY SPIRIT was still a mystery to her, but she said it will be understood in the latter days. Many just accept THE FATHER and THE SON, while the Bible states THREE from YAHSHUA HIMSELF!

The pioneers were on the right road, but like Israel they had to start with the milk first. They were beginning to hear the meat; but they too fail as others who Satan sent in to start discourse. Uriah Smith also became a problem and there you have it, Israel failures all over again. There will not be another movement, instead YAHWEH will call out a remnant those who are faithful to all past and present truth!

Blessings!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...