Open full view…

The cancer of apostasy — ADvindicate

Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:10:43 GMT

George Evans
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 15:23:20 GMT

David wrote, >The thing about cancer is that everyone seems to agree on what it is. What?! tqm144000 and I don't agree. You and I don't agree. Your ultra-conservative camp do all agree that cancer is anything other than what they think, but that's about it. We do all agree that evolution is cancer. And there is a semblance of agreement that homosexuality is, at least, carcinogenic. But WO has proved to be SDA's autoimmune disease. God introduced WO as a cure, and ultra-conservatives are fighting it like the plague. >The swift and sure response to Des Ford was the last good thing that happened in this church. I can agree with that, except our response actually wasn't quick enough. It would have been better to nip it in the bud at Palmdale. If that had occurred, the whole thing could have been done before now.

Wed, 11 Jun 2014 15:31:55 GMT

"I went to GNU many times and heard him [Ford] mention Antiochus one time." -Glenn Hansen How many flies does it take to spoil the soup? "Jesus invited us to find rest in Him, not the Sabbath." -Glenn Hansen This is a false dichotomy. Jesus and His Sabbath are not separate. Jesus and the truth about the little horn are not separate. He is Truth. All of it. On every subject. Every truth He gives us is given because He loves and cares for us.

George Evans
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 15:40:34 GMT

Glenn wrote, >They know little of what he said and judge his entire ministry by one sermon he gave at PUC. Excuse me! I had several relatives who dealt with Ford for several years at PUC. We have studied what happened in detail. In summary, Ford was a ringer. He was brought in to divert the church away from the true gospel, and that resulted in 40 more years of wandering in the wilderness that we have just begun to wake up from. collins wrote, >This article is correct. Human nature is the same today as it was 3000 years ago. We are repeating history. Truer words could not be spoken. We have repeated the same 40 years, four time now, since 1844. And God's remedy has remained the same. He says, Let Me cleanse your back room.

Glenn Hansen
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 15:47:03 GMT

Collins, Maybe your soup would be spoiled by one [gnat] but I can assure you that I had a delicious spiritual feast. Great illustration of straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. As far as I know, Des is/was a fine Christian gentleman who clearly proclaimed the matchless charms of Christ. I thank God for his ministry

David Read
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 16:52:01 GMT

George, you need to read comments more carefully before you comment on them. When I said that everyone agrees on what cancer is, I was talking about literal cancer, the medical condition. I then immediately contrasted literal cancer with metaphorical cancer--heresy in the church--and stated that we do not agree on what that is. So we agree that we don't agree, in the church, on what is heresy and what isn't. That was the whole purpose of my post. By the way, while you and I agree that evolution is heresy and metaphorical cancer for the church, there's not even agreement on that in the church. Spectrum constantly promotes Darwinism.

doug matacio
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 17:09:15 GMT

David, I take the 28 fundamental beliefs as the line between what the church believes and does not believe. One of the reasons such a document is necessary. Comments on Spectrum are evaluated based on the FBs. If there is a need to change any of the FBs or add or subtract, a thorough vetting process is necessary. We cannot change, add, or subtract based on a mere majority vote (for example 1,021 GC delegate votes to 1.020 GC delegate votes). We need a consensus to alter the FBs.

David Read
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:45:51 GMT

The 28 fundamentals are a very partial and incomplete statement of what Adventists and Christians believe and what the Bible teaches. If we don't believe anything that isn't in the 28, we've serious problems. See, here, for example:

Richard Thomas
Wed, 11 Jun 2014 20:59:42 GMT

> @victormarshall > Is it possible we do have a prophetic pathologist in our midst? Sure, there are 66 of them and just like days of old, they are either hated, not believed, or dismissed as not relevant. > @georgethe54th > Does your mother or wife impress you as someone who is evil and needs to be put away? No. Once again George, you judge poorly. > @hansen > Strange that something so “important” was eclipsed by matters that some would call inconsequential now i.e., food offered to idols and so forth. Paul also never preached on not murdering anyone, does that make it: maybe not for everyone? Maybe the reason Paul did not spend time preaching on the adherence of fourth commandment was because it was a well understood and accepted commandment like: thou shall not murder. We also do not have all of Paul's letters, like the one he mentioned that he wrote to the church in Laodicea. And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea. (Col 4:16) > @georgethe54th > God introduced WO as a cure Who is this God you speak of George, He can't be found in scripture. Did you make him up?

doug matacio
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:00:55 GMT

> @dcread > The 28 fundamentals are a very partial and incomplete statement of what Adventists and Christians believe and what the Bible teaches. If we don't believe anything that isn't in the 28, we've serious problems. The 28 Fundamental Beliefs along with the Baptismal Vow are tests of fellowship for Adventists. As such they distinguish between what we believe and what we don't believe. With regard to the article you linked, FB #23 does speaks to the issue of Christian marriage and family life. It is not necessary to spit out every detail of possible sexual deviance in the FB statement itself. But all such behavior undermines Christian marriage as taught by FB #23.

Elizabeth Iskander, M.D.
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 06:19:54 GMT

Doug: "It is not necessary to spit out every detail of possible sexual deviance in the FB statement itself. But all such behavior undermines Christian marriage as taught by FB #23" Doug, I hope you will read about the increasing *prevalence* of unclean, unnatural sexual behavior even inside marriage. Then consider the deafening silence of the church despite the increase of heterosexual sodomy.

Thu, 12 Jun 2014 10:46:31 GMT

I think changing some of the FB's ambiguous language to clearer statements of truth is an ok idea, but really as long as the SDA Church continues to baptize people who really don't believe what the church believes, regardless of how clear the FB's are, we will see no difference. Many seem to believe the way I see Glenn Hansen believes about Des Ford. Just preach the “matchless charms of Christ" regardless of the doctrines that define for us who Christ is. I recommend F. Canales' "The Eclipse of Scripture and The Protestantization of the Adventist Mind."

doug matacio
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:35:46 GMT

Elizabeth, please understand that my post does not imply that the FBs are set in stone. I fully support the preamble to the FBs.

Elizabeth Iskander, M.D.
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:42:01 GMT

Doug, Do you support /articles/2153 changes in the FBs?

doug matacio
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:57:19 GMT

FB #22 states, "Because our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit, we are to care for them intelligently." It is not possible to list every possible way that human beings abuse their bodies in this statement. However, I would be open to changing the next sentence to read, "Along with adequate exercise and rest, we are to adopt the most healthful diet possible and abstain from unclean foods identified in the Scriptures, and unclean sexual practices."

Elizabeth Iskander, M.D.
Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:00:04 GMT

Thank-you Doug! You are right! I was too wordy! So how do we insert your wording, "and unclean sexual practices", on the GC '15 agenda? Do you know all the paths to getting an item on the GC '15 agenda? Must additions go through a study path? Could GC give this as an agenda item to the Division FBRCs? Is there a date that closes additions to the agenda?

doug matacio
Fri, 13 Jun 2014 18:34:44 GMT

Here is some info about a committee that is currently working on changes to the FBs: One change that could be on the 2015 agenda that you might be interested in is this: The second sentence of FB #23 reads: "For the Christian a marriage commitment is to God as well as to the spouse and should be entered into only between *partners* who share a common faith." They are considering changing *partners* in that sentence to *a* *man* *and* *a* *woman*. As far as how to initiate the process of change, you might try e-mailing the secretary of Elder Artur Stele, who is the chair of the committee on changing the FBs.

Fri, 13 Jun 2014 18:54:14 GMT

I believe that would be a prudent amendment.

Gerry Wagoner
Sat, 14 Jun 2014 12:41:11 GMT

I reckon so.

Jeremy Vandieman
Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:30:14 GMT

hugo, this is a very well-written article...thank-you :)

Laura B
Sun, 22 Jun 2014 01:41:48 GMT

Very good article, Hugo. I never considered comparing apostasy to cancer, but it's an apt comparison. We've bought too much into being "tolerant" and "politically correct."