Doctrine Statement of Seventh Day Adventist

[BobRyan]

Interesting link on the history of beliefs of the SDA

Click here

that link is missing the list of 22 beliefs for the denomination compiled by Ellen White and published in our year book....oh no wait! ... there isn't one.

ok ..well ..never mind.

 

[OldRegular]

You need to get out more - and meet more Catholics.

They do not claim that the Pope's "ex cathedra" statements are only "infallible" if he is given the gift of prophecy, they do not connect the two at all.

And they will fight tooth and nail on their forums if you bring up the idea "the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)"

Enough about Catholics - lets talk about Seventh-day Adventists.

in Christ,

Bob

Ms. White was a false prophetess, just like Joseph Smith, just like all the popes, and just like Joel Osteen and all the Word Faith ??preachers?? are false prophets/prophetess' of this day and time!

 

[BobRyan]

Ms. White was a false prophetess, just like Joseph Smith, just like all the popes, and just like Joel Osteen and all the Word Faith ??preachers?? are false prophets/prophetess' of this day and time!

is that just a pontifical proclamation on your part or ...??

Is that your same pontifical assessment of all the prophets in the church of Corinth -- in 1Cor 14 "when you come together...each one has a revelation"?? where "prophecy is a sign to believers" -- starting with "Desire earnestly spiritual gifts - especially that you may prophesy" 1Cor 14:1

At what point are you recommending pontification as the way to oppose the gift of prophecy??

Certainly Joseph Smith is a false prophet -- I don't know if Osteen claims to be a prophet at all.

 

[Yeshua1]

is that just a pontifical proclamation on your part or ...??

Is that your same pontifical assessment of all the prophets in the church of Corinth -- in 1Cor 14 "when you come together...each one has a revelation"?? where "prophecy is a sign to believers" -- starting with "Desire earnestly spiritual gifts - especially that you may prophesy" 1Cor 14:1

At what point are you recommending pontification as the way to oppose the gift of prophecy??

Certainly Joseph Smith is a false prophet -- I don't know if Osteen claims to be a prophet at all.

There are NO Prophets in the church since John passed away though, as while we can debate if there remains a gift to prophesy, there are no offices open, as God did NOT gave to us any additional revelations after John died, so your prophetess and Joseph Smith are both bogus!

 

[OldRegular]

There are NO Prophets in the church since John passed away though, as while we can debate if there remains a gift to prophesy, there are no offices open, as God did NOT gave to us any additional revelations after John died, so your prophetess and Joseph Smith are both bogus!

You forgetting Darby?:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Yeshua1]

You forgetting Darby?:smilewinkgrin:

he was as much of a prophet as Calvin or luther were, as all of them were gifted to teach the Bible, but none were infallible!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Bob Ryan, who forbade you to speak to Gerhard Ebersoehn or discuss his theories?

 

[BobRyan]

There are NO Prophets in the church since John passed away

Are you simply pontificating that point as your own personal truth - or did you actually have a "sola scriptura" doctrine declaring it?

Because I have sola scrptura doctrines refuting it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob Ryan, who forbade you to speak to Gerhard Ebersoehn or discuss his theories?

Someone on one of these threads recently said that even these people here on BB are not discussing much with you because they do not follow your ideas much at all. I too do not recognize much at all of what you say.

I believe you yourself would admit that your views are so eccentric that you do not know of many who would agree with them. My "logic" in discussing ideas on this board is not that I am going to convince the person debating with me - my logic is that the objective unbiased reader will review the subject - pay close attention to details - and be informed. And also that I will have new material for my study topics in the case where the subject has applicability to other people as well.

And aside from your hatred of the SDA church - which I do think you express effectively - I don't see you making a Bible argument that is compelling, sans all the emotion and vitriol. So the benefits in that case are not as easy to realize.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Someone on one of these threads recently said that even these people here on BB are not discussing much with you because they do not follow your ideas much at all. I too do not recognize much at all of what you say.

I believe you yourself would admit that your views are so eccentric that you do not know of many who would agree with them. My "logic" in discussing ideas on this board is not that I am going to convince the person debating with me - my logic is that the objective unbiased reader will review the subject - pay close attention to details - and be informed. And also that I will have new material for my study topics in the case where the subject has applicability to other people as well.

And aside from your hatred of the SDA church - which I do think you express effectively - I don't see you making a Bible argument that is compelling, sans all the emotion and vitriol. So the benefits in that case are not as easy to realize.

in Christ,

Bob

I told you before, to please not close your posts with <<in Christ,

Bob>>.

Now I shall let you yourself give the CORRECT answer to my answer to you --- THE TRUTH :

<<<When reason vacates in regard to a given subject, the only weapons of argument left are in the hands of emotion. The simplest emotional weapons to wield are name-calling ,disparaging remarks, vitriol and acrimony for those deemed adversaries. All such ad hominem tactics provide nothing of persuasive substance, except to those whose reason has also been vacated on that same subject.>>>

Now you can see why I ask you to please not close your posts with <<in Christ,

Bob>>.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

But since you denied not that you were TOLD to not converse with me, I accept you were in fact ORDERED, not to. Thanks, Bobbie.

 

[nate1989]

Do u guys know how one becomes born again christian.

 

[BobRyan]

But since you denied not that you were TOLD to not converse with me, I accept you were in fact ORDERED, not to. Thanks, Bobbie.

Why don't I respond to your posts??

You are telling me that examples like this fluff are not "self evident"??

Please be serious

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Do u guys know how one becomes born again christian.

Romans 10 comes to mind.

9 [e]that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
10 for with the heart a person believes, [f]resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, [g]resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be [h]disappointed.”



Eph 2
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

"The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his." 2Timothy 2:19.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Gerhard Ebersoehn View Post
But since you denied not that you were TOLD to not converse with me, I accept you were in fact ORDERED, not to. Thanks, Bobbie.

Why don't I respond to your posts??

You are telling me that examples like this fluff are not "self evident"??

Please be serious

in Christ,

Bob

I call the man Bobbie like my brother, man. He calls it <<self evident fluff>> the man!

Eish!

However... it's <<self evident>> that he was ORDERED not to talk to old harmless Son of Eber.

That means, 'son of a bush PIG'!

So it's understandable no one wants to be friends with me......! Now I see, thanks Bobbie! --- e-e, brother Bobbie!

 

[nate1989]

Thx bob ryan

 

[Yeshua1]

Are you simply pontificating that point as your own personal truth - or did you actually have a "sola scriptura" doctrine declaring it?

Because I have sola scrptura doctrines refuting it.

in Christ,

Bob

The office of a prophet meant that one had direct revelation from God to give forth unto his people, and had to always be 100% accurate...

We have had NO revelations from God since canon was completed of the scriptures unto us, and your prophetess was NOT always accurate either!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Now Dr. Walter Feith also knows ...

Now we must wait and see ...

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

The office of a prophet meant that one had direct revelation from God to give forth unto his people, and had to always be 100% accurate...

We have had NO revelations from God since canon was completed of the scriptures unto us, and your prophetess was NOT always accurate either!

EG White was never <right>. She was always wrong because her and SDA understanding and doctrine in principle and generally, are wrong... are misses by a mile... are WILL-WORSHIP 100%...

...IN FOLLOWING AFTER THE PAPAL POWER...

I saw it last night when I attended Dr Walter Veith's 'seminary'.

SDA will NEVER get it <right>, or come, <right>. They're a hopeless case.

I so FEEL for the dear people, though!