I’m a Seventh-day Adventist
by Grace Pitt, January 29, 2015: (This phone conversation is based on actual experiences and comments heard in her church and in churches she has visited.)
“Hello… Oh, hi Jane. Yes, there is potluck this week… No, I don’t know what I’m taking yet… Yes, I enjoy potlucks too.
I’m glad that I’m an Adventist. I’m so happy God loves me. I know that this is the right church… Yes, I know you feel the same way too.
I’m so blessed. I feel I should help others become better Adventists. The Bible says we should go to others who are stumbling and help them… You know our church members have so many problems!
Last week at church all the children were making so much noise! What is wrong with their parents that they can’t keep them quiet?… You didn’t notice?… I think I’ll have to talk to their parents… What’s that?… Well, yes, I know Jesus called the children to Him, but I’ll bet He made them be quiet!
Did you see those people that came to church last week?… That one girl had green hair and huge earrings. I know that she isn’t an Adventist! I’ll bet she even eats pork! I don’t think they should come back to church until they learn that Adventists don’t do things like that. Why, the next thing we know, our children will be dyeing their hair green!!!
Did you see the dress Sally Brown was wearing the other week?… She knows Adventists don’t wear dresses that short! I had a talk with her… Pardon?… Oh, well, yes, I guess I’m glad she was still coming to church, but I’m sure she was a tare living right here among us… I’m just trying to help her be a better Adventist! She hasn’t been back since I talked to her. I knew she was a tare!
By the way, did you see Jim Smith at Tim Horton’s last night?… I’m sure that was a coffee in his hand. I’ll have to talk to him. Good Adventists don’t drink coffee!… Pardon?… Well, of course I love him. I’m just trying to help him be a better Adventist… Mrs White says you shouldn’t drink coffee, he should know that. God knows he’s sinning! I’ll pray for Jim.
Well, it’s been nice talking to you, but I have to run. I’m late for prayer meeting… Did you say your daughter was coming to visit?… I’m looking forward to meeting her at church next week! Hopefully we can be a good Christian witness to her!… Pardon…pardon…my cell phone is acting up… Did I hear you say she has green hair??????”
If Grace Pitt is hearing these comments in her SDA Church, can I suggest with absolute respect, that she considers joining another one? I don’t believe these comments are reflective of all SDA Churches everywhere, as sad as it is to say I don’t doubt for a second this is what she heard. I’ve heard similar things myself – we all have.
One thing these recited comments do reflect is how quickly people find themselves qualified to talk for all of us – as “the” voice of Adventism. It’s a funny position to take, given there are 20-million plus of us, found in nearly even country and cultural setting in the entire world. I just came back from Peru, visited the famous floating villages in lake Titticaca and what did I find in this exotic location – an Adventist church and school, also floating on the lake!
Has anyone ever heard such comments at a Baptist church?
A Lutheran? Roman Catholic?
It is very doubtful. There’s your answer. All the most trivial and irrelevant things have always been the concern of some Adventists BECAUSE that’s what and how they were taught.
If any or still being taught that jewelry, dyed hair, eating pork, drinking coffee and all those mentioned above, that is exactly why there will always be a few “soul-checkers” in the SdA church. The church that emphasizes such non-salvific ideas will always have the
few who believe it is their solemn duty to “remind” others about their errors or “sins.”
Christ never called any of those sins, but he surely called gossip and checking for the log in other people’s eyes and judging them.
Maybe not a Lutheran, or Anglican, but they don’t really “believe” in anything. They can have the opposite problem. Probably a Southern Baptist – they can be just if not more conservative than Adventists.
My point is that not all SDAs teach these things as “salvational” issues. We drink coffee officially as part of our Sabbath School group – shock horror. Not one even thinks about it.
Again, largely wars of the past between you ex-Adventists and the remaining bastions of conservative Adventism.
Steve. That first line was a good “Adventist” line. Should have been in the article.
I have a good friend who was raised in the Episcopal (Anglican) Church, and became Adventist in young adulthood. Thus, she did not experience what many did in my generation who grew up Adventist – a legalistic, investigative judgmental, fear-based experience schizophrenically contrasted with a good number of very nice people offering love, support, and encouragement. Two words for that spirituality: DIZZY CONFUSION.
My friend knew, from being consistently taught Anglican theology in Sunday school, that GOD LOVED HER, something she never doubted, even when confronted with less than gracious forms of Adventism in which God did not come across well. So however we might evaluate Anglican theology (they don’t believe anything?), maybe if we look a little closer we might learn something.
Have I heard these types of comments in other churches, (or in secular circles)? Yes. From what I have seen no church has a monopoly on judgmental attitudes. But it is also true that I’ve met some very accepting people in each of these other churches, (or secular circles). Again, none has a monopoly.. It was this realization that each of us on this planet – irrespective of affiliations – is in the same predicament that freed me from thinking of myself primarily as an “Adventist” and allowed me to start feeling part of the larger community of humanity.
The plethora of doctrines in Adventism almost obscures Christian love that identified the early church. They had very few doctrines, but plenty of love, so didn’t need to concentrate on obeying many doctrines.
The principles that Christ lived and showed are NOT expressed in the numerous Adventist doctrines. The church has lost its way in a maze of doctrines that must be affirmed prior to baptism. Compare that to the requirements in the early church of pagans.
This is sad. Ellen White denounced such Pharisaical thinking:
“There are many whose religion consists in criticizing habits of dress and manners. They want to bring every one to their own measure. They desire to lengthen out those who seem too short for their standard… They have lost the love of God out of their hearts; but they think they have a spirit of discernment. They think it is their prerogative to criticize, and pronounce judgment; but they should repent of their [own] error, and turn away from their [own] sins… Let us love one another. Let us have harmony… Let us have our hearts sanctified to God. Let us look upon the light that abides for us in Jesus. Let us remember how forbearing and patient He was with the erring children of men. We should be in a wretched state if the God of heaven were like one of us, and treated us as we are inclined to treat one another.”
(Review and Herald, 27 August 1889).
“If we err, let it be on the side of mercy rather than on the side of condemnation” (EGW Letter 16, 1887)
* “If we would humble ourselves and be kind and courteous and tenderhearted and pitiful, there would be one hundred conversions to the truth [of the Gospel] where now there is only one.” (9T:189)
* “A kind, courteous Christian is the most powerful argument that can be produced in favor of Christianity. Kind words are as dew and gentle showers to the soul.” (Reflecting Christ, p. 30)
* “Only by love is love awakened. To know God is to love Him.” (Reflecting Christ, p. 23)
* “The Saviour … will never abandon one for whom He has died.” (Desire of Ages, p. 480)
* “Let us love one another… Let us remember how forbearing and patient He was….” (Review and Herald, 27 Aug. 1889, p. 530)
* “It is not … religious privilege, which proves that we are members of the family of God; it is love, a love that embraces all humanity.” (Thoughts From The Mount Of Blessing, p. 75)
* “Salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ alone.” (1888 Materials, p. 811)
* “We must not think, ‘Well, we have all the truth… The truth is an advancing truth, and we must walk in the increasing light.” (Evangelism, p. 296)
What a wonderful list of insights!
Is it crazy to think that embracing the critic of the young woman with green hair and wildly flagrant earrings is the best way to embrace the young woman with green hair and flagrant earrings?
Shouldn’t we embrace them both? They both need unconditional love.
And we wonder why the church is losing it’s youth faster than any other denomination and growing so slowly in North America!
Interested in documenting that stat. Where did you get it?
I just read a demographer who was explaining why Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons lose adherents faster than any other sects.
Of course, from the parable of Jesua on The Sower, there should be SOME attrition from the truth no matter how well it is handled. (And some handling of “truths” by organized SDAdventism have been pretty poorly handled, I think we know.
God sees the heart. The critical church lady should consider this:
“. . . there may be an outward correctness of deportment without the renewing power of Christ. . . . By what means, then, shall we determine whose side we are on?
Who has the heart? With whom are our thoughts? Of whom do we love to converse? Who has our warmest affections and our best energies? If we are Christ’s, our thoughts are with Him, and our sweetest thoughts are of Him.”
(Steps to Christ p. 58)
And then there was the spouse of a prominent GC suit teaching cradle roll.
Telling the kiddies that Jesus didn’t love them if they didn’t listen to their parents during the week.
And then soliciting “offerings”.
Never listen to a grandparent saying give the SDA church another chance.
Yes, a true story.
I was an academy teacher for 22 years. It was like living in glass house. Every thing you did was scrutinize. I would say that phone conversation was a common SDA response. Every church has several pharisee’s, including Wislson 2.
I find it interesting that the LISTENER would choose to continue to listen without responding to these comments. As listeners we have a choice. Listening without responding demonstrates some “support” of what one is hearing. Each of us is in a different level of “growth” – most of us don’t have a clue as to the experiences which have shaped another. Often by dialoging with another we have an opportunity to open a window in that individuals mind that they have never considered before. Each of us must soo listen to God’s voice for He will NEVER lead us away from HIS way. Each of us are Students of THE WAY – NEVER REALLY “arriving” until Christ returns and in the twinkling of an eye covers us with HIS Righteous.
Truth…and very well said…(tho’ it seems the listener tried to redirect her towards a “kinder, gentler” position}. It is up to each of us not to give an “ear” to these misdirected thoughts/intentions, lest we also give silent affirmation that we condone, and also believe the substance in what is stated. There can be no “gossip” without a listener. Both are equally at fault. Imagine how quickly gossip would be quashed if all refused to hear it…a worthwhile goal! We are accountable for both ends of that conversation…
This is a very real list of comments heard in SDA circles during my entire youth. It got worse during a short mission assignment. A special meeting of the Elders was held to discuss seeing laundry on the line Saturday morning. They were unaware that the doctor had been performing emergency surgery at sundown on Friday.
The saddest irony of these criticisms is that the critics are guilty of breaking the SAME SDA rules that they’re hurling against the accused. While we condemn coffee drinking, we eat chocolate cake at CHURCH potlucks (the issue is ANYTHING that contains caffein!). We condemn the wearing of jewelry ONLY if it touches the skin, but we flaunt it on clothing (broaches) and hats! We condemn dying hair with bright colors, but as long as it looks natural, dyeing is ok (where’s the principle here?). We condemn meat eating, ostensibly because of health reasons, yet have you checked out the meatless buffet at church potlucks lately: loads of artery-clogging fat, tons of sodium, excessive sugar (healthy eating is the principle). So those who live in glass houses certainly should not cast stones. This is why our pastors need to preach PRINCIPLE, not one-dimensional rules, just as Jesus did, especially when he exposed and admonished the spiritual leaders of His time for their hypocrisy and for straining at a gnat (petty rules)!
Good point, Clarence. I ran across a website called “God Loves Jewelry” that resonates with me, about straining at gnats and being hypocritical about standards. Little $5 earrings are bad, but a $5,000 Rolex watch is OK…? http://www.GodLovesJewelry.com
It has been a long time since i last posted but it is good to see that atoday is alive. This thread saddens me for two main reasons. The first reason is that i have also encountered such individuals and it pains me that they sometimes lack empathy with those who are ‘less’ spiritual. We should all seek to be like Christ and be more loving and tactful.
The second reason is actually highlights a big irony. Grace Pitt shared the teleconversation to show us how some people treat others who are at a different level spiritually but I would propose that Grace is just as guilty if not more so as she is sharing somebody else’s behavior on the internet and not even on a phone call! It is so easy to see the sins of others and miss our own as has been demonstrated by the other person and many on this forum.
Compare these two statements ” Mrs White says you shouldn’t drink coffee, he should know that”
and this one ” This is sad. Ellen White denounced such Pharisaical thinking”
How about this one ” Never listen to a grandparent saying give the SDA church another chance.”
All these statements were said in this very thread so the question is which one is more holier and which is one is more sinful. Not one on this thread has offered to pray for her or showed empathy and understanding to the person on the Grace was talking ti. we can pat ourselves on the back and thank God that we are not as pharisaical as this person or causing the youth to flee the church as this person. It just shows that we should strive to remove the logs before we appoint ourselves speck removers. At least the person on the phone confronted the people she thought we erring rather than post it on a blog so that we could see how bad those people were.
Jesus spent a lot of time denouncing Pharisaical thinking, and He was not sinning by doing so.
He was merciful to sinners but spared no rebuke to the Pharisees for being “hypocrites” and “blind guides” who “strained at gnats while swallowing camels,” for being “fools” and “snakes in the grass,” a “brood of vipers” and “full of dead men’s bones,” and ready for “the sentence of Hell.” (Matthew 23:17,27,33)
. . .
The Pharisees loved money and were rich. They despised the poor and thought they were cursed by God.
The poor people heard Jesus Gladly.
The Pharisees were showy with their religion heaping religious symbols on themselves.
The Pharisees sought the approval of men.
Jesus sought the approval of God.
The rich Pharisees didn’t want to pay taxes and tried to trap Jesus into agreeing with them.
The Pharisees despised “sinners” and hated Jesus for eating with them.
Jesus loved sinners and even fed huge crowds of them.
Jesus cared for the health of people.
The Pharisees schemed to kill Him because He healed people on the Sabbath, their “lockdown” day.
The Pharisees put heavy burdens on the poor but would do nothing to share the load.
The Pharisees foreclosed on widows’ houses based on trumped-up charges.
The Pharisees loved to be honored and recognized. They preached but didn’t practice.
Jesus called them Hypocrites and said, “The things that men esteem are despised by God.” He also called them “snakes in the grass.”
The Pharisees painted themselves “white.” Jesus said their paint merely hid their evil.
The Pharisees started an unnecessary war that destroyed their nation.
But, by then, they had already killed Jesus.
The Pharisees were self-centered and arrogant.
Jesus was others-centered and humble.
The Pharisees wanted to rule the people they despised.
Jesus loved everybody (even the Pharisees) and only wanted to serve.
Theologically, the Pharisees were arguably closer to Jesus than anyone else, but they fought Him and killed Him.
BUT JESUS LIVES! But, where can we find Him?
“By their fruits you shall know them.” “Judge not…” How can you be a fruit inspector and not judge?
Jesus said: “You people judge by outward appearances; but I do not judge anyone.” (John 8:15).
Then why an IJ?
Good point, why? Isn’t the gospel of Jesus Christ enough?
Jesus did NOT say “Do not judge” but rather in the ultimate sense of presuming to know who will finally be saved or lost in the specific.
Of course he DID say to make discriminating judgments and not waste time with people who made clear they had already made a final rejection of truth. How strong a directive is “Do not cast your pearls before swine!”?
As far as the pre-advent judgment, God has known from eternity which humans would be saved or lost, so an “investigation” must have something to do with something else.
“By books” certainly meant the clearest and best way to retain precise and accurate information in the ancient world. This is nothing if not SYMBOLIC language. Juat as is “Christ entered with the veil in 1844” which is literalizing a symbol, in this case the obvious symbolic nature of the Wilderness Sanctuary.
(It is interesting that early pre-SDAs latched onto the Wilderness Sanctuary, the precursor of the Temple on Zion, rather than the Temple itself. This happened because they confused the “cleansing” of Daniel 8:14 with the “cleansing” on the Day of Atonement/Covering in Lev 16. And as every SDA must certainly know, those English translations are of two different words with different meanings.)
Why, then a pre-advent judgment, even if we delete the “book” talk so natural to early Adventism that sounds suspiciously inappropriate to many today?
Someone on another thread spoke to it precisely by placing it within the context of “theodicy” or justification of God. That is, to review with the holy angels and unfallen worlds BEFORE humans close their probation just how God has handled the situation of every human being.
That no sooner ends — and Christ comes — than the same process begins all over again. Every saved person will have close loved ones, friends, etc. who are lost. The role of the saved in Rev 19 and 20 especially during the millennium is to go over it all again. As theodicy. To find out from God’s viewpoint why some are saved, others lost, even though ALL were sinners.
That’s the Millennium Version of the investigative judgment, and it won’t be by books, either.
But that leaves out the lost. And so the next one is barely complete before the process begins all over again at what Rev calls the “last” judgment. Now no one at that point needs to “investigate” to see who is saved and who is lost. The saved have become more and more like God during the long millennial period.
And the resurrected lost certainly know they are lost. No, and here Mrs. White is helpful in that last chapter of The Great Controversy. NO MORE BOOKS BEING PORED OVER FOR INFO!!!
Rather, the entire history of the Great Controversy is replayed in “a vast panoramic vision” right from Lucifer’s initial rebellion down to that moment. Every lost person gets to see himself/herself from GOD’S viewpoint, and face the extremes God went to for his/her salvation. No one raises their…
It seems to me that Jesus’s scathing rebukes of the pharisees involved some kind of judgment.
But Jesus explicitly said “I do not judge anyone.” (John 8:15) So whatever it was, it was not judging, and it was not sin since He is perfect.
Now wait a minute. We are not to judge because of our limited insight and understanding. Jesus Christ was and is God, of one nature with Father and Spirit, the three a manifestation in time and space of the One Infinite God.
And by definition God judges everything at all times and what is sin for finite beings is sin precisely because it is the sole province of God.
But Jesus explicitly said “I do not judge anyone.” (John 8:15)
Romans 2:3
So when you, a mere human being, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment?
Come on Folks. People are people with some critical and some giving regardless of whether you are Adventist or Baptist or whatever. I have heard terrible stories of folk in other denominations also. We are too hard on ourselves. Personally I have found in my life long experience in the SDA church, most SDA’s are kind, thoughtful, and have been a blessing in my life, and I think are doing even better today, as we are coming to understand the love of God better. Simple Believer
Exactly thank you Claude for injecting some common sense here. I work in a totally ‘normal’ workplace in secular culture and it’s no different.
Some people might be shocked but churches aren’t meant to be places full of perfect people. If you ever find one let me know. Rather, they are places full of sinners, as Jesus made clear.
Yes, the problem is common among all faith groups. We also have the same opportunity to learn to follow God and to be transformed by His love.
When I saw the headline, I’m a Seventh-day Adventist, I wondered as to whether this was an SDA Anonymous admission. Is there a specialist who can assist the writer through the 12 steps of abstinence.
I’m a Seven-day Laugher! I know a put-on when I see it! Ha Ha!
are we really taking this “blog” seriously? It sounds like a decades-old story from an older generation (at least some of them). Every church I’ve been a part never had members like ths and were quite the opposite and inclusive of people who were different. It just sounds like 1970’s trite.
The Adventist Church has a diversity of DNA, among it a heavy dollop of heredity from the “Holiness Movement,” and the Puritans. The emphasis in these movements was to keep oneself unspotted from the world, and this included staying away from overt manifestations of evil, as in people who displayed nonconformist and antisocial tendencies. During the 1960s this “holiness” concern focused on the dangers presented by rock’n’rolling hippiehood; today it tends (so I have observed)to lash out at “Goth” types who value ultra-individualistic expressions of self (which in turn may contribute to unemployment among these types, leading to disparagement of “lazy, non-productive youth with no sense of responsibility.”
It is not wrong to desire holiness both in oneself and in others. Problems arise when the idiosyncratic behavior of others elicits scorn and belligerence among those who seek holiness. At that point, it would seem the perfect have moved from divine perfection into a kind of exaltation of carnal perfection that defines itself more by what it opposes and hates rather than by its impulses to redeem. The whole concept that we have much to fear from contamination by the world to which we minister was entirely discredited by the Master, who ate, drank, and traveled with what were in his days were considered the nadir of disreputability in the culture. Yes, we can be contaminated by the world, but Jesus has overcome the world and so have we, if we claim the grace of Jesus to remain firm in our mission.
We are all the girl in the green hair and flagrant earrings when we are looking in the mirror … and we are not alone …
“We don’t have every answer. This isn’t a scene from The Matrix, where the red pill sends us one way, the blue pill another. This is life, where the complexities of the entire Universe dwell within our skulls. Maybe we are conditioned to react to the immediacy of the drowning man, but without the visual stimuli, the soul fading to darkness leaves us frozen. Perhaps we are so uncomfortable with our own feelings that to accept the feelings of others causes us recoil. More disturbing still is the potential that we all carry those demons within us, and the shock of a situation like that not only shines the light of creation upon them, but allows them control of our minds. I don’t have the answer, but I wish I did. Perhaps with those answers I may have reached beneath the surface and helped the man to safety. Instead I stood, frozen, as he sank from sight.”
https://medium.com/human-parts/a-chance-encounter-with-lifelong-repercussions-f3934aa7d52b
Perhaps the problem is that we want answers and cannot live with ambiguity. We have never been promised to know everything (I believe that was the desire that the serpent took advantage of in the garden).
Adventists have often believed, and even taught that they had the answers to the future, convincing many, but sadly, they were not omniscient. Learn to live with uncertainty and enjoy the blessings of life and help others also to be blessed by your life.
Adventism has ambiguity in its DNA. Take for example the Trinity, which didn’t become a FB until well into the 20th century. We traditionally didn’t get into the minute discussions of the ‘mainstream’ Christian groups. If there any criticism I have is we are moving away from that historic ambiguous non-creedal approach, trying to be too much like other denominations.
Care to hazard what the universal appeal of creedalism and why Seventh-day Adventists are as susceptible as the next denomination?
The perfectionistic temperament abhors ambiguity, for where there is less than absolutely prescribed certainty regarding a course of belief or action, the possibility of apostasy lurks in the wings. Therefore we try to nail down narrow courses of approved behavior, then teach and enforce those narrow pathways on our children and fellow members. The Pharisees in Christ’s day did much the same thing, fearful that departure from absolutely perfect behavior would allow God to again send purifying whirlwinds into the land to carry away the whole nation as in Daniel’s day, and perpetuate a desperate rise-and-fall of good and evil, in which the Romans could never be vanquished. It did not seem to occur to the Jews of that day that righteousness is ultimately measured, not by the occasional errant or pious deed, but by the tenor of the life that loves God with everything it has and its neighbor as itself….
Saw a movie at church to day (Chocolat) that fits what Grace is describing in this blog-the problem of self-rightousness.
It’s always cute to see a caricature as long as people are able to discern it as fiction. Perhaps the editors and readers of AT aren’t familiar with caricatures?
“There’s so much good in the worst of us, and so much bad in the best of us, that it hardly behooves any of us, to talk about the rest of us.”
– Edward W. Hoch
“O God, I thank Thee that I’m not like other people!,” said the Christian.
“Dear Lord, please have mercy on me,” pled the sinner.
And the sinner is the one who went home justified.
– Luke 18:9-14
He has shown you what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
– Micah 6:8
May I know Thee more clearly,
Love Thee more dearly,
Follow Thee more nearly.
– St. Richard of Chichester
Yeshua was not a Christian. Religions organized after his earthly sojourn have been about Him rather than of Him, hence tunnel vision, exclusiveness, and judgmental mindsets.
I am often amazed at the lack of understanding of what brotherhood means. According to this site, it means that the term ‘a brother’s keeper’ no longer applies as it has come to mean ‘judge’. It seems that ignorance of Christian principles must be worn as a badge of courage. We come as we are and stay so. i thought the essence of Christianity was growth in Christ. I may be wrong, it seems.
Next, isn’t it rather silly that when the world is discovering the dangers of pork and coffee, that those who were at the forefront of this teaching are now saying it is OK to consume these things because it is not salvific. So what did Paul mean when he said if we destroy the body temple that God would destroy him? And are we really about heaven or being a part of a club? I find the little scenario shallow at best, with a strong tendency to promote folly and lead the unwary and the unknowing into certain danger. And rebellion for so is as wasteful as it can be. For in the world we seek to become the best at what we do but it seems to be fashionable to be the worst possible Christian; and the world scoffs at us for our inconsistencies. Blessings. I hope you see what I have said as love. I have spent my life in plucking others out of the burning.
“There are many whose religion consists in criticizing habits of dress and manners. They want to bring every one to their own measure…. They think it is their prerogative to criticize, and pronounce judgment; but they should repent of their [own] error, and turn away from their [own] sins.”
“Let us love one another. Let us have harmony… Let us have our hearts sanctified to God. Let us look upon the light that abides for us in Jesus. Let us remember how forbearing and patient He was with the erring children of men. We should be in a wretched state if the God of heaven were like one of us, and treated us as we are inclined to treat one another.”
(E.G. White, Review and Herald, Aug. 27 1889).
If God says that he expects His professed followers to be “peculiar” in the true sense of the word, then why is it as Christians we insist on being “virtual” which is nearly, but not quite? I would advise us to use a good dictionary like the Chambers and look up what PECULIAR means. I guarantee you a very pleasant surprise. One hint: the Pharisees were virtual; they never walked the talk. Who would wish to be them? Seek to be true followers of Jesus, do. It is simple and even a dummy can do it, once he reads God’s Word and honestly applies it.
When the King James translators used the word “peculiar” in 1 Peter 2:9, identifying Christians as a “peculiar people”, this is not what they had in mind. The word “peculiar” comes from the Latin word, “pecus” which means “flock”. The KJV translators were simply reflecting the idea that believers in Christ are the unique possession of God — they are His flock.
Actually the word in 1 Peter 2:9 is the Greek word peripoiesis, which has the idea of possession, or personal property. It is the preposition peri, which means “around” — connected to the noun poiesis, which refers to something that is made, or done. Kenneth Wuest, the Greek scholar, says “the Greek word means literally ‘to make around,’ that is, to make something and then to surround it with a circle, thus indicating ownership.” Thus, the New American Standard version translates this phrase as “a people for God’s own possession.” The NIV says, “a people belonging to God” and the NKJV says “His own special people.” Those are the correct translations.
And for heaven’s sake, please stop quoting Sis. White to prop up unbiblical opinions and attitudes that have no foundation in righteousness. For anyone can find just as many quotes against what this post seems to be advocating.
“Let us love one another… Let us remember how forbearing and patient He was….” (R & H, Aug. 27, 1889, p. 530)
“We must live together as brothers or perish together as fools.” (Martin Luther King, Jr.)
Patricia H. i agree with you completely in your first paragraph 3rd message up. But as Paul in 1st Tim.1-5 states, “everything God provides is good, and should be received with thanksgiving”.
These days almost every food has some contamination. Medical science has shown that coffee and red wine in small amounts daily are good. The problem is when any substance is put into the body in excess. Peculiarity that seperates us from all other Christians is sad. All Christians of the world are the remnant and saints of Jesus Christ. Thank you for sharing your faith.
Francis L. amen, AMEN.
The first cavil regarding “potluck” isn’t in any way a bad thing. The person reporting this as being some kind of offensive behaviour, isn’t really a very good potluck attendee or friend I would say, because in most cases one will find the ladies doing this in order to avoid everyone bringing the same or similar dish – albeit a potluck; but there is no real uncouth or annoying behaviour in doing this. This is just being downright petty.
2] RE: “I’m glad that I’m an Adventist. I’m so happy God loves me. I know that this is the right church”
——-
No one usually speaks in sentences put together in this fashion one after the other like we see above. It’s a classic set-up to exaggerate something in order to portray the other person in bad light. Anyway, with that being said, whether they are said together or separately, there is nothing really wrong with saying these things. Expressing one’s convictions, beliefs and opinions is well within their right to do so whether we may agree with them or not.
3] RE: “I’m so blessed. I feel I should help others become better Adventists. The Bible says we should go to others who are stumbling and help them… You know our church members have so many problems!”
——–
Again, there is nothing really bad per se in saying these things above. (Disclaimer: the next line is hypothetical). (This is the next line)-> If someone were to say: “I’m so blessed and you’re cursed so I pray that God will burn you in hell.” That would be justifiably a good reason to be concerned or alarmed about. But to quibble about someone saying “I’m so blessed” is really over the top.
4] RE: the noisy kids in church
—–
Let’s be honest here. The fact is that in most instances where children behave badly in church (and elsewhere) we find dead beat parents who don’t care two hoots about their unruly behaviour. Surprisingly, many children from affluent family backgrounds may often be more unruly than their not so affluent counterparts. Spoilt brats are very much a reality even in the church today. Imagine a carrot stick chewing kid suddenly sneak up from behind you in church and stick a carrot stick in your ears causing you some major pain? Or the blighter takes a ball point pen and starts scribbling on your car in the parking lot? Or climb on your car and break off your license plate? Then what?
The fact remains that 1] the kids were noisy and 2] their parents did nothing about it. The only thing done wrong by the person complaining about the noisy kids is to complain to the wrong person.
5] RE: the green hair, the short skirt and the coffee
——
Although I still feel these three ‘reports’ are very exaggerated and rather sensational in order to gain sobfan support, I would readily agree that the approach and reaction to these “reports” (the green hair, the short skirt and the coffee) is not the way one should behave, especially when this results in causing people to stay away from church. It should be noted though, that some stay away from church for trivial reasons and use this as leverage in order to gain major sobfan support.
The the “green hair, the short skirt and the coffee” reports are matters to be concerned about especially when pewple in the pews start getting hostile and the gossiping starts.
There are other ways to address these matters. Prayer of course being the first line of action, and showing them lots of love and kindness without necessarily condoning the “the green hair, the short skirt and the coffee.”
I want to address two issues that I see in this blog. First, the criticism the women on the phone involves what I will call a “racket” for lack of a better word. Rackets can be persistent complaining or making another wrong in some way. There is always a payoff and a cost associated with any racket. When you make another wrong you also make yourself right or to put it another way he/she justifies his or herself and invalidates another. The women on the phone was in essence saying look at me I don’t have green hair; I don’t eat pork or drink coffee. Look at how righteous I am. The cost, however, is always greater than the payoff. The cost is a loss of love or affinity with the one made wrong. It also results in a loss of influence and a loss fulfillment and satisfaction.
The second issue involves the idea of community. When we think of community we think of group, joint, cooperation. Antonyms would be segregation, estrangement and rivalry. A key ingredient of community is integrity. Without integrity nothing works. It deals with who we are for another: honesty, principle—each for the other.
When considering the content of this blog (criticism) we must ask ourselves what was its effect on the person criticized, the person making the criticism, the church community as a whole due to the lack of integrity.
WOW, do we get the message. A to ZED.
I’m sure this lady would have lots to talk about in her phone calls if some of the members choose to attend the Sunday service in Huntsville, Alabama, where the First SDA Church is starting to have Sunday worship services (in addition to Sabbath services) on Feb. 8. http://www.al.com/living/index.ssf/2015/02/seventh-day_adventist_sunday.html
That would be nothing to complain about. It’s okay to worship God every day, whether in church or at home.
In the meantime, humanity looks for purpose and hope in a world apparently going mad. Jesus, save us from ourselves.