Thinking About Fear and Religious Liberty
By Monte Sahlin, December 8, 2015: Throughout my life it has been difficult for me to see how the crisis envisioned in the classic Adventist interpretation of Revelation 13 could possibly be connected with contemporary realities. I would listen to wild statements by those who saw such possibilities in all kinds of headlines and even obscure, “secret” rumors, look at myself in the mirror and say, “It is not rational.” I would give a quick read to books on “the Sunday law” and find them filled with historical and factual errors that made their central arguments unsustainable.
I understood why Ellen White wrote The Great Controversy near the turn of the 20th century. After all, at that moment in history there were possibilities of passing laws declaring America a “Christian” (meaning Protestant) nation and many states, especially in the old Confederacy, used local sheriffs to actually enforce blue laws without intervention from the courts. But as a Baby Boomer coming to adulthood in the 1960s, that was long ago and far away.
Things have changed in what seems like a few days. The leading candidate for President of the United States is openly advocating religious discrimination in the issuing of visas. About a third of the party that currently controls the U.S. Congress and most of the state legislatures seem to agree with this position.
Mainstream journalists and other leaders in the same political party have openly likened this to Nazi race laws of the 1930s and labeled it “Facism,” yet large numbers of Americans (although not a majority) support the idea of religious discrimination. Many of these are evidently Evangelical Christians, people who respect the Bible as do Adventists.
For the first time in my adult life it now seems possible that America might ignore or set aside the First Amendment protections of religious liberty. Most amazing to me is the people who vociferously defend a very broad interpretation of the Second Amendment and are at the same time willing to greatly narrow their view of the First Amendment. Is the gun more important than the “still small voice” of conscience?
I never thought I would see the day. Americans so filled with fear that they can be manipulated into giving up constitutional rights. Although, just a decade before I was born the American government put Japanese Americans, including native-born citizens, into concentration camps in a fit of the same irrational level of fear. The U.S. Congress has since officially gone on record recognizing the fundamental error of this occurrence, but the memory of many “conservative” Americans seems to be so faulty that they cannot recall things in relatively recent times. And it has come to light that President Eisenhower of my childhood did something similar with Mexican Americans, including native-born citizens.
The idea of terrorists hiding among average people can be frightening. I get that. More fearful to me are average people willing to let their fear and stupidity lead them to become part of a mob, to support policies that override constitutional rights. Adventists have long believed that tendency to be more dangerous than any terrorists. I confess to being skeptical over the years. The America of the 1950s and 1960s in which I grew up seemed incapable of such things. In my old age, I no longer feel that way. It is now more plausible.
Fear of terrorists. Fear of idiots running for president. Fear is fear. No one makes good decisions based on fear. That is why Jesus promises to drive out all fear. I need to hold onto that statement by our Lord and Savior. And so do you!
Monte Sahlin is the executive director of the Adventist Today Foundation, publisher of Adventist Today. He spent 44 years as an ordained minister employed by the Adventist denomination before he retired last year, including service at all levels of the organization. He is also a regular columnist and the author of 24 books and more than 120 research monographs.
Monte,
Very thoughtful and challenging.
Fear makes many people do irrational, nonsensical and illogical things, the most dangerous of which is reacting emotionally instead of evaluating the cause of their fear and acting rationally. Fear can also motivate us to analyze and measure the threats confronting ourselves and our nation and take practical and legal actions to be prepared to deal with them.
Irrational fear leads people to make inflammatory accusations against others, often without knowing the meaning of the terms they are using. For example, in American history, until the rise of liberalism in the last 30 years or so, immigration was regulated on the basis of what was for the benefit of the nation and lots of people who were viewed as threats were kept out. “Open borders” such as are advocated today have no prior basis in American history and advocates have taken to calling opponents “fascists” while practicing and supporting fascism. Fascism is a form of government that increasingly deprives citizens of their rights. Functional fascism has been growing exponentially under President Obama and the heart of his proposed “solution” to the threat of domestic terrorism is not to keep terrorist out, but more limits on constitutional rights (limits on legal gun ownership, a constitutional right.
Terrorism is a real and serious threat to America, but the greatest threat to the constitutional rights of Americans is not terrorism.
William Noel indicates that there is “no prior basis” for “open borders” in the United States. Actually, there is. From the founding of this republic until 1881 there was NO law restricting immigration. There were laws about citizenship, but for nearly a century after the American revolution the only way to distinguish visitors and immigrants getting off the ship was to wait and see who got back on for the return trip. Incidentally, our first immigration law was profoundly bigoted. The title tell it all: “The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1881”
I think you are overreacting to the overreaactor. There is a much greater lurking threat that doesn’t, on its face, appear to be against religious liberty. It concerns freedom of speech. And it actually, as an indirect affect, may be more insidious than what flows from the mouth of a presidential candidate, Monte.
And that is the manifestation of offensive language proscription most widely demonstrated on college campuses, including Yale. Being offended is now a crime on college campusus, with prompt and severe puishment, and has threatening ramifications as a new form of fascism. The current form of viral atheism has gained momentum by the offense argument directed at any vestige of Christianity so that all Christian utterances and symbols are being removed from public display at the expense of the majority to protect the sensibilities of a handful of an offended few.
Monte, the effort for rehabilitation of Adventist eschatology is an exercise in futility. It is kaput. You can retire from worrying about Rev. 13. Entertaining as it might be to find a current fit for the defunct template of the end time scenario obscures actual threats to freedom. Adventism isn’t important enough to be in the cross hairs, it never was, and won’t be. Scriptural predictions are a fantasy. There is no “revelation” in Revelations about current events.
Keep an eye on “offended” students as time passes and they gain control of the country.
I was a teen, 17, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and remember Sunday afternoon driving and picking up a soldier as were all called back to their base.
The fear and frenzy of Japanese citizens in the U.S. resulted in revoking of the Constitution to put them in concentration camps, forever a blight on this nation’s fearful attitude.
Now, prominent spokespersons are calling for registration of all Muslims, a violation of the First Amendment, and millions are willing again to ignore the Constitution. What if their religion is next to be registered? Fear is never the right incentive for hasty actions.
But why, of all times, is the idea being promoted to disseminate the edited version of G.C. as a timely book to be read by millions? Never has a more unscholarly survey of Christian history and its future been written. It is an embarrassment the church should avoid if the wish is to been as the embodiment of truth it so often claims.
The ideologues behind the intended disperse of the GC are definitely advising (or being directed by) the play callers for my favorite NFL football team. They appear to keep calling the same play (to my professional chagrin) even though it has failed to produce significant yardages after many repeats. There is a common sense idea that you don’t keep repeating what doesn’t work with expectation it will.
There is a blindness to reality endemic to traditional Adventism. So Elaine, all we can do is sit and listen to the white canes tapping on the pavement of futility and wonder to ourselves: Does Adventism create blindness in this manner, or does it attract the blind?
PS I remember the celebration when the war ended in 1945, I was five, and my parents tried to explain why the party. Still don’t understand war, though.
Bugs,
You have a vested interest in denial of the all but obvious. You are on the other end of Pascal’s Wager and therefore must deny everything…no matter how bad things look, or may get.
It’s like someone who is needlessly on death row, waiting to be executed at sundown. The sun is never about set, no matter how long the shadows have gotten, or how dark it gets. If you retain the attorney who has been assigned to your case, you would get a complete pardon; and then can then acknowledge what time of day it is.
Bugs,
Regarding signs of the end, you have an undeniable vested interest in denial. You are on the short end of Pascal’s Wager and therefore must deny everything…no matter how bad things look, or may get.
It’s like someone who is needlessly on death row, waiting to be executed at sundown. The sun is never nearly set, no matter how long the shadows have gotten, or how dark it gets. If you simply retain the attorney who has been assigned to your case, you would get a complete pardon—then you’d acknowledge what time of day it is.
Bugs, not like you to be quoting scripture, admittedly with added relevant questions: “Does Adventism create blindness in this manner, or does it attract the blind?” Birds of a feather?
Here is the original: Mt 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
The Ottoman Caliphate took the position that Muslims should not live voluntarily in the land of the infidel. Before that – it never came up.
I think Monte’s post and all the comments are bouncing off the revolutionary transformation of mankind caused by ‘Identity Politics’. The old saw, “all politics is local” is simply dead – it no longer reflects reality. Elaine can remember best how much location defined us fifty – sixty years ago. Man now has been totally uprooted from ‘place.’ Remember Jesus lived his life in a place essentially no bigger than couple hundred square miles. The same place Abraham was promised as an inheritance. And what town He came from, and His family background, their place in Israel, was the essence of His earthly identity.
The new universal Weltanschuung: In the words of Anthony Kennedy, “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life…”
Imagination, rather than ‘family’ and ‘place’ is the new authority for belief. Some Muslims believe some pretty awful stuff, and they increasingly believe it outside the context of place and family. Would anyone disagree with me that the perpetrators of the murders in San Bernadino imagined and defined their own concept of existence? A Facebook Pledge of Allegiance to ISIL? ISIS is the end-time prophetic restoration of the Islam’s “Place”. We all are longing for what has been…
Good article Monte!
We need to reach out to Muslims out of respect and love rather than out of fear.
When Christians hear stories of the goals of many Islamists, it is understandable that they begin to be afraid of Islam and be suspicious of the intentions of all Muslims. As a result they are often paralyzed by fear, and want to have as little to do with Muslims as possible. They have little idea of how to relate to their Muslim neighbors or respond to local and national issues concerning Muslims. Their fear can also inhibit them from sharing their faith with Muslims.
A more healthy approach is to see Muslims not as people to be feared and resisted, but as neighbors to be loved (Matthew 19:19; 22:39). If and when we are able to build relationships of trust, we may have the opportunity to ask the difficult questions.
Without a relationship of trust and an attitude of respect from our side (‘do this with gentleness and respect’, 1 Peter 3:16), Muslims cannot be expected either to listen to the challenges that we want to make or to our witness to Christ.
Adventist Christians need to be reminded that the vast majority of Muslims all over the world are not Islamists, and that Christians living in Islamic countries are not always persecuted and often have surprising freedom to live and share their faith.
Fear and Ignorance are the two ingredients of prejudice. The politics of fear by Trump are the essence of evil.
Sam,
In fairness, before you repeat that line about Trump again, please view this video to learn what he is actually saying, instead of what people are accusing him of saying:
http://video.foxnews.com/v/4651787119001/trumps-son-on-fathers-plan-to-ban-muslims-from-us-entry/?playlist_id=930909787001#sp=show-clips
Canadians are bringing 25,000 refugees and they have no fear. I saw on the news that they brought the first plane load of 162 Syrians and most all of them were Christians, and many spoke English. The response from these Syrians is that they are so grateful and proud to be in Canada and are eager to find work and make a new life for themselves. The sight moved me to tears. Those who helped bring them into Canada showed love and compassion to these people who lived in fear 24/7. Now they are safe and free. Thank you Canada!
Monte,
As I’ve thought about this topic some more, it appears to me that Adventists and peaceable Muslims have a very similar challenge in finding ways to free themselves from fear.
For Adventists, the fears from which we need to be freed are multiple. Fear of entering the “time of trouble” with an unconfessed sin potentially keeping us out of heaven is a big one. Fear of what the papacy will do compounded with repetitive generations of speculation building on prior speculation about end-time events is another. A third is the suspicion and condemnation some heap on others in the church who don’t want to continue repeating the evangelistic failures of the past. All have been very successful at taking our eyes off the wonderful salvation that God offers us and the power He offers us and preventing us from being effective ministers for Him. It is an overwhelming and spiritually-choking cloak that is difficult to throw-off.
For Muslims, throwing-off both the reputation surrounding their beliefs and the suspicion and fear created by the radicals among them is a very similar situation. Making it even more difficult is that virtually all Muslims in America have the majority of their families “over there” and the networks of radicals have become so pervasive in many places that resisting them in America comes with grave risk to their relatives back home.
Freedom for both requires the courage to stand for what is right in spite of the risks that may…
Welll said, Monte!
Tom
William Noel on December 8, 2015 at 12:17 pm said: “Sam, In fairness, before you repeat that line about Trump again, please view this video to learn what he is actually saying, instead of what people are accusing him of saying:..”
I saw and heard the entire video several times and I am not convinced. Brother Trump joins Brother Carson in that “twilight zone” where both have gone too far, way too far in Trump’s case. His clarifications, re-statements, and disclaimers, cannot hide the reality of what he actually said and the manner of conveying it against Muslims. He cannot retract or explain his disdain for the US Constitution. A national registry for Muslims?, asking persons-are you Muslim?, as they enter US, statements about Mexicans, Women, Blacks, etc.
Brother William, we need to pray for our country and brother Trump! He crossed the proverbial line.
He is a cultural phenomenon, television showman and billionaire whose business runs from real estate to clothing to international beauty pageants. On one issue he is 100% consistent and repeats it in every speech. He claims that Climate Change is a hoax. Trump does not believe climate change is real, tweeting out his skepticism with strong language and calling it a hoax on Fox News in 2014. In a 2012 Twitter post Trump charged that the concept of climate change was fabricated by the Chinese to hurt the U.S. economy. It all adds up to “mendacity” (lies)
Sam,
The Soviets practiced the policy of telling lies so often and for so long that the people couldn’t tell the difference between truth and lies, then when they began imprisoning those who opposed them and the people saw that it was physically dangerous for them to not embrace whatever the government told them, they started believing it. Even the religious leaders were co-opted and suborned into promoting “the party line.” We’ve been hearing “the party lines” for so long on global warming, that Islam is the religion of peace and that law-abiding citizens owning guns are a greater danger than the terrorists who are now among us. More than that, Liberalism has taught us that anyone who disagrees with them is anti-American and believing falsehoods. There is so much evidence disputing the theory of global warming that it must be questioned. The President’s abuses of freedom and abject failure to successfully prosecute the fight against terrorism that a large number of Americans are frustrated and ready to embrace any alternative who offers real change. I think that’s the basis of Trump’s popularity and why his proposal to limit Muslim immigration is resonating. He is the anti-politician and very pro-American, things Americans are hungering for.
“For the first time in my adult life it now seems possible that America might ignore or set aside the First Amendment protections of religious liberty.”
This is not about denying religious freedom in America. If we are so ill informed that we don’t know that the Muslim agenda is both civil and religious at one and the same time.
The very nature of their “religion” is contrary to the constitution of the USA. Their religion demands they kill anyone who opposes their god and this is what they are doing. They hate America and what we stand for in separation of church and state. And to claim we are discriminating against their “religion” is absurd.
Just like the Catholic church that will kill anyone who opposes their antichrist religion, Muslims will do the same. If we keep our head in the sand long enough, and defend their “religion” and allow them access without proper vetting, we are simply signing our death warrant.
Sad to say, more and more SDA’s are being duped into getting involved in political agendas in the name of “It is the right thing to do.” But the right thing to do is stay out of political difficulties and advance the kingdom of God. And we don’t do this by getting involved in politics.
And let’s at least understand that the only country in the world that defends separation of church and state is the USA. And we can’t support the “religious freedom” of those who would kill us in the name of their god.
Bill:”And let’s at least understand that the only country in the world that defends separation of church and state is the USA.”
Bill, please. Statements such as this say an awful lot about you, and nothing else. Unless it reveals the dreadful shortcomings of whatever education system you appear to have suffered under.
Every liberal democracy of the western world separates church from state, in theory and practice. India likewise. China simply does not recognise any role for church in society beyond that of a social club, and even that is suppressed. Most African states maintain the separation. What is true is that most Moslem countries, but not all, (eg Indonesia) are theocratic in nature, ie, the church is the state. Thing is Bill, old Israel (and for some modern Israel) is the archetypal theocratic state model.
Bill: “And we can’t support the “religious freedom” of those who would kill us in the name of their god.” Certainly not!
Only the US (and their allies including Australia and NATO) have the right to kill others in the name of their god (money? heaven forbid that the enemy Moslems should identify the US as a Christian country)! Does anyone know how many civilians have died in Iraq/Afghanistan/Syria/Lybia/etcetera in the name of pre-emptive strike against ‘terrorism?’ or punishment of presumed terrorist countries, or some other disastrous foreign policy failure?
The “separation of church and state” is to maintain religious neutrality; by definition in the US.
India is an inclusion of States with laws oriented to the religions of the area (voice anyway). Is this not the absolute opposite of “separation”?
What is a liberal democracy? What is the western world?
Many Countries have state religions and churches; not just Israel. Israel recognizes many denominations and therefore religions within such influence. What type of archetypal classification is that; inclusion?
Can you prove or do you know how many World Citizens would have died without preemption? Is there a difference in the right to kill and killing without right?
Serge, I agree with you that there has to be lines drawn and definitions in place. I also agree with the under current of your post; that in some cases the intention of the actions is not to protect. Is this not evil by definition? Does creating arbitrary classifications or pools change that; or only skew focus of the root problem and resultants?
Should we ask the questions in simplest form? Do groups of persons have the right to defend themselves or oppress others? Are “all” within society not obligated to stand and help when possible? Should “we” not expect such; even from those inclusive to specific classes?
World Citizenship creates substantial responsibilities; requiring knowledge and wisdom? Including alternate in wisdom of when not to interfere or think we are…
Serge,
Responding to your question, Does anyone know how many civilians have died in Iraq/Afghanistan/Syria/Lybia/etcetera in the name of pre-emptive strike against ‘terrorism?’ or punishment of presumed terrorist countries, or some other disastrous foreign policy failure?
I’m sure you have some number, probably an exaggerated guess; please share it with us. Your question is rhetorical, right? Here is my question to you: Can’t you see how disastrous Obama’s foreign policy failures have been? The entire Middle-east is horribly destabilized by the withdrawal of American Power. ISIS is undoubtably filling the power-vacuum Obama has created by withdrawing from Iraq.. GWB was simply continuing the geopolitical policies of the last 50 years of using American power to provide stability to an inherently unstable region. The Syrian refugee crisis, ISIS’ reign of terror, the engorgement of Iranian power and influence, are all the result of Obama abandoning America’s very successful, bi-partisan, half-century old, Mid-east strategy.
I use the term ‘successful’ in the political sense: in terms of what is possible. Things have gone from bad to very much worse. Obama has taken us to the precipice of a worldwide conflagration. Obama is the worst sort of ideologue – hopelessly blinded to errors of his ideology. He has empowered chaos in the Middle East all in the name of Ideological God: Equality.
Fair question William. I had in mind about half a million. I did a quick search and found a few sites devoted to the question. iraqbodycount.org lists 169,228 civilian deaths since 2003 invasion, and 224,000 including combatants, many of whom are American GIs of course. That is Iraq only, so if one adds the civilian deaths which have resulted from the flow-on wars resulting from the 2003 invasion to topple Saddam for daring not to have any WMD, then one could be getting up towards half a mil. I think the US is winning in the body count stakes.
As for policy. It was in fact the Republican Neo-Cons who changed the policy towards the Middle East which has resulted in the current chaos. Ask Earl if this was an accident.
You will recall Rumsfeld trumpeting that he intended for a ‘regime change’ in Iraq to result in the installation of democracy in Iraq, and the glories of that new system would be so desired by the nations around that they would all want to be democratic. What a fiasco of a policy that has turned into. Don’t blame Obama. There is little else he can do. Do you seriously think that more US soldier deaths will restore longterm order to a group of nations that have no idea how to govern themselves? ISIS is the result of the fall of Saddam, the shift in power from Shia to Sunni and the sectarian civil war that has followed. Oh Neo Cons, don’t you just love ya work!?
(Say Bugs, do NeoCons and NeoAdventists have anything in common?)
Serge,
The United States has dominated the Middle East since the death of Egypt’s Gamel Abdel Nasser. Using humanitarian and military aid and lots of money and occasionally military force the United States has done a reasonably good job of isolating its enemies and supporting its friends. Regional stability was exponentially better over the last forty years than now.
The current collapsing spiral of chaos and instability in the Middle East is a direct result of Obama’s foreign policy. Obama misguidedly withdrew American power from the region leaving the competing interests to, “fight it out amongst themselves” – Arab Spring indeed! The horrific refugee problem is a direct result of Obama’s withdrawal. And the situation is getting worse by the minute.
There were a total of 4,500 American casualties in Iraq between 2003 – 2013. A death rate that compares favorably with places like Detroit, Uluru or Alice Springs. The cost to this nation in blood and treasure bought an immeasurably more stable Middle East. Obama has thrown all we had accomplished away. This anti-war president has inoculated the entire region with the pestilence of war.
You wrote:“Don’t blame Obama. There is little else he can do.” I suppose we should blame George W Bush.
Obama is an ideologue. He has the blood of countless innocents on his hands. He is incapable of governing or even presiding over a government. He is a slave to his erroneous ideals.
You should absolutely blame George W and his NeoCon cronies. Absolutely. The WMD pretext for that war was an absolute LIE. Their agenda was precisely the chaos that now exists. Obama was left holding an out of control baby no-one can tame.
You do strike a cord in me bill as does trump remembering the letters from our missionary sisters family in west pakistan in the 50’s stating the heartach over their new converts Family members hunting them down and killing them for no other reason except their conversion to christianity
Bill, the USA is not the only country that defends the separation of church and state. Claims like this only serve to undermine your credibility, no matter what position you take on a topic.
I live in Australia where we defend the same values. And my neighbours in New Zealand do the same, just as other Pacific Island nations also advocate the separation of church and state.
Speaking of a “radicalized” individual, Mr. Sorensen seems to be working on claiming such a title. I wonder if he actually reads the strange things he writes. (I was going use the term “crazy” but not being trained in psychology, I don’t have the credentials to evaluate his mental state.) For example, according to Mr. Sorensen, Islam “demands” that Muslims “kill anyone who opposes their god.” and the Catholic church “will kill anyone who opposes their antichrist religion.” On second thought, I’m going to evaluate those comments as “crazy.” Mr. Sorenson should be very happy that Adventist Today permits those posting the freedom to express their opinions even if these opinions are absurd and totally counter factual.
“, I’m going to evaluate those comments as “crazy.” Mr. Sorenson should be very happy that Adventist Today permits those posting the freedom to express their opinions even if these opinions are absurd and totally counter factual.”
Dr. Taylor, I am not the one who lives in some “la la land” that borders on stupidity. You and others simply ignore the facts and hope to create some utopia here in America that is far from the reality we must deal with in this world.
Even if you don’t believe what EGW has written in the Great Controversy, you should at least consider the facts of history. Separation of church and state is a new and unique “experiment” in civil government and religion. And other countries want to overthrow this system of government.
The Catholic church has never denied their contempt for the USA and our system of government that demands separation between church and state. And all you have to do is research the Muslim faith to see and know they follow the same system.
Their success in attacks on America is precisely because of the ignorance of this truth and those who want to deny it in the hopes that its not true. So they call it “radical Muslims” when in fact, it is the true faith and nothing “radical” about it. Those they can’t persuade, they kill. Got the picture! If not, you and others better get and I mean soon.
Erv, you above all should understand the definition of discrimination. You contend Bill to be “radicalized”, please provide proof.
Come on, the concepts are simple. We hold no responsibility for nor offer anything for anyone other than US Citizens. It is actually discriminatory to contend anything otherwise. We are not obligated to protect or sanction anyone from themselves or even other Citizens; but do so within limited Criminal anticipated and actual Civility or declaration.
Then you move into validity in concept of profiling? How about anti-profiling? Did/do some within Islam (and Catholic) not impose upon anyone who oppose their religion; very seriously? Were these actions condoned or condemned by the associate class? Then do they not profile themselves?
We fight hard to protect existence (including this entity). The US Supreme Court recently ruled that entities are not responsible for the content of others posting; but do you not interfere in that privilege of exclusion, by your own choice?
All persons hold requirement of Soul; within knowledge of wisdom (ignorance is no excuse for the law). We, including the Church, fight to maintain the freedoms allotted to individuals; even those in descent (and lately even descent within ignorance in other worldly situations).
The question: should we not speak up in difference; or allow others to profile “us” because we have already profiled “ourselves”, whatever the class?
“Profiling” has become one of those demonized words in American politics because of claims that it is used to promote racial discrimination. It actually is a very misunderstood process that, if used properly, can be highly effective at both controlling crime and preventing terrorism.
Let’s imagine you witness a crime where the suspect is a white male, six feet tall and wearing a worn leather jacket and Nike running shoes with colored stripes on them. That is a profile and the police won’t go looking for a short, black female as their suspect. It is simply a method of narrowing the population to the group or individual most likely to be the offender and there is nothing racist or discriminatory about it.
The most common factor describing a terrorist is that they are Muslim, so they naturally become the first suspects and preventing them from entering America is but a first step until we can decided on ways to screen them effectively and keep terrorists out. Checking if they are they from a country known to produce terrorists would be a logical second question.
The Israelis are the best in the world at identifying and tracking potential terrorists so I think we would do well to learn from their experience and start using some of their techniques to both track the ones that are already here and keep more from coming-in.
Erv,
While I typically view the remarks of Mr. Sorenson in much the way you do, this time I must come to his defense because he is right: the Islam we see in the news does teach followers that it is their duty to kill anyone who does not become a follower of their god.
The concept of Islam that President Obama is so supportive of is the secularized form that he saw in Indonesia where they are very tolerant of other faiths and their culture is built on gentleness and respect for others. The Islam we see in the mideast and spreading violence so rapidly and dangerously is largely the centuries-old war between Shia and Sunni that has been complicated by the ultra-strict and violent Wahabbi sect from Saudi Arabia, who for decades have been funding schools around the world teaching their views and training operatives to spread their philosophy among other sects of Islam. As a result, all three very plainly declare that anyone who does not believe in their god is worthy of death and the Wahabbists have become the most zealous in their pursuit of killing non-Muslims, which they believe it is their religious duty. The Iranians with their desire to re-establish the Persian empire are leveraging all of this to destabilize the rest of the world. This is why two of the toughest enemies of Israel are Hezbollah in Lebanon and western Syria and Hamas in Gaza, both of them vigorously backed and controlled by Iran.
I have little respect for anyone’s opinion when they start calling another’s viewpoint crazy. What happened to the freedom of speech mentioned in some of the other comments?
Thank you for this thought-provoking article, and for the honesty and integrity with which it was written.
We should all be willing to re-evaluate our beliefs in light of current events and be willing to admit that either our interpretation of the Adventist prophetic message was wrong, or that our rejection of the Adventist prophetic warning was Biblically unfounded.
In no way to I read Mr. Sahlin recanting his beliefs and/or understanding to now proclaim that the Adventist prophetic interpretation is correct. That is not what I am saying, at all. What I do find refreshing is his honesty in admitting that “…Adventist interpretation of Revelation 13 could possibly be connected with contemporary realities.”
Another aspect of fear is that it stops many from truly knowing God and understanding His character, as the majority of Christianity is in it for the avoidance of judgement and condemnation, “obeying” to be saved, rather than lovingly following His precepts because they are saved.
“…Fear of idiots running for president…” I don’t know which candidate is the author’s idiot of choice. For me it is Donald Trump. I am having such a hard time finding a worthwile candidate to support during the upcoming elections. Carson’s been ruled out for me as well. The sad thing about fear is that it is working wonders for Trump, so I am already bracing my self for his presidential win 🙁
It will be very difficult for Trump to win the Republican Nomination, let alone the general election. His negatives are too high. Negatives in politics may not be the sum of politics, but it is very important.
May the Lord hear you, Mr. Abbott. Otherwise we’re doomed.
Be careful what predictions of failure you make because things change quickly in politics. I remember eight years ago when the mainstream media was saying Barack Obama’s negatives were too high for him to beat Hillary Clinton in the primaries. He got elected. Or, just a few months ago that Jeb Bush announcing he was entering the race would make all other Republican candidates fade-away. The last I saw, the polls had him in single digits.
By negatives, I mean poll negatives. They tend to accumulate, almost never going up. After a certain point high negatives make it increasingly difficult for a politician to get elected or re-elected.
Barak Obama did not have high negatives in the polling in 2008. Even now his negatives are not awful, though they are probably too high for him to get re-elected.
Hillary has big problems with her negatives. Carson has the lowest negatives of any candidate in either party and that may be a critical consideration if the Republican Convention brokers the nomination.
Trump will run for president in November as an independent if the Republicans don’t nominate him. He can not win. He can determine who does win. But it won’t be him.
I am not a prophet and this is just my opinion. I have been so wrong about so many things I wouldn’t ever say ‘trust me.’ But it is a forecast, you will certainly be able to if I was right or wrong. I always try to include the null hypothesis.
Trump might not be the first presidential candidate who overcame “high negatives” in the polls to win. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens and things could change a whole lot between now and the first primaries.
Pollsters are often wrong and the questions some pollsters use sometimes push responses toward a particular candidate or viewpoint. They’ve been having a hard time this cycle with accurately measuring either Trump or Carson because they are anti-politicians who don’t match the traditional conceptual basis for their questions, so some of them are openly admitting that their margins of error are much larger than in past years.
““…Fear of idiots running for president…” I don’t know which candidate is the author’s idiot of choice. For me it is Donald Trump. I am having such a hard time finding a worthwile candidate to support during the upcoming elections. Carson’s been ruled out for me as well. The sad thing about fear is that it is working wonders for Trump, so I am already bracing my self for his presidential win :(”
You are correct in that we have no “sane candidate” to vote for. Because none of them really want to deal with the issues as they really are.
Trump gains followers because of his honesty and won’t “play politics” like all the rest. People like that. But he has no qualification for the real difficulties any president will face. He is more like a “Hitler” figure that promises all kinds of success for the people of America. [Inappropriate sentence removed by moderator.]
Simply put, we are “between a rock and a hard place” because no one seems to understand or admit what we are faced with in the political scene in the USA.
We have a government who wants to play “mommy and daddy” to all their “children” and command and demand all citizens to come under their authority. We have Elitists who have worked their way to the top and will make laws for everyone else, they they themselves opt out of.
Many of us in the SDA church see the same scenario in the church. Both conservative and liberals see no viable leadership, but one the reflects our civil government.
So you don’t think Donald Trump is qualified to be President. OK, would you mind explaining what “qualifications” someone must have to be president? Many will argue that it is experience as governor of a state. Well, look at all the damage former governors Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton did. Some say that experience as a US Senator qualifies them. Well, look at all the troubles we’re having as a result of what former Senator Barack Obama has been doing to America.
I think perhaps Trump’s “negatives” arise from three primary sources: that he doesn’t talk like a traditional politician and he hasn’t served in any elected office and that he is a corporate leader, a role that in the eyes of liberal politicians makes him something close to Satan’s evil twin. Plus, he’s financing his entire campaign so he is beholden to none of the “special interests” politicians love to complain about. That leaves him free to manage by applying the principles he used to build his international business empire and become a billionaire. That is experience America needs desperately after all the damage done by officials who are driven by ideology instead of business experience. Yes, I expect he will “shake things up.” We need it and his popularity seems to be largely from him being the antithesis of what is causing us so many troubles.
“So you don’t think Donald Trump is qualified to be President. OK, would you mind explaining what “qualifications” someone must have to be president?”
Certainly not an ego maniac like Trump. And the fact that you can name a host of others with the same problem doesn’t make him qualified.
At this point, all we can hope for when we vote, or don’t vote, is this, whoever does get into office will respect the true meaning of separation of church and state and we continue to have some time to do the work God has assigned us to do.
God has used the SDA movement for over 150 years. But the qualification for the church to be God’s ordained means of grace is rapidly diminishing. At some point, the church will get a lot smaller and again be useful, or, it will get bigger and bigger as it embraces the generic Christanity the devil is advocating and the whole world adopting.
We can be sure that God will yet create a viable means of grace by the bible as a few people will realize that “truth is more precious than all besides.” EGW
Historically, every community of believer’s God has ordained has put itself in the place of truth as being more important than the message. And this is where the SDA church is today.
“At this point, all we can hope for when we vote, or don’t vote, is this, whoever does get into office will respect the true meaning of separation of church and state and we continue to have some time to do the work God has assigned us to do.”
On this point, Mr. Sorensen, I would have to respectfullly disagree.
If those of us who believe the Adventist message haven’t been wiling to get our act togehter for over 150 years, then Christ’s return shouldn’t continue to be deffered on account of our gross neglect. We don’t deserve any more time. If we couldn’t pull it off in over 150 years, why would we do so now?
I completely understand where you’re comming from and I commend you for your burden for souls, I’ve no doubt it is sincere. However, all this suffering has to end. The more time we ask for, the more babies are born which will, in turn, require evangelization down the road and this we’ll be trapped in a never ending cycle of praying for more time to finish the work! It’s a trap!! Let’s pray for His emminent return instead!
Besides, if love for God alone has not moved the Adventist masses who claim to believe the prophetic warnings to pour out their lives for the cause, if they start to do so now when they haven’t cared to do so before, then, more than likely, they are reacting to the fear of eternal damnation rather than working out of love for God and a genuine burden for the salvation of souls.
“Many of us in the SDA church see the same scenario in the church. Both conservative and liberals see no viable leadership, but one the reflects our civil government.”
Totally agree. The Biblical model for churches has been disregarded, to the detriment of the members of the church.
Fear is fear, Monte notes. And ‘no one makes good decisions based on fear. That is why Jesus promises to drive out fear. I need to hold onto that statement by our Lord and Savior. And so do you!”
So, how can Seventh-day Adventists embrace the Gospel of Jesus in such a way that it drives out fear? Looks like a simple answer to that simple question all by itself could increase NAD church membership by an order of magnitude (from 1 million to 10 million … ).
So can one ‘die daily’ and ‘take up one’s cross and follow Jesus’ and still run a business, go to school, serve in the military, try to get pregnant, raise a family, commute six hours a week, have a hobby, take a vacation, retire, grow older, fight disease, and be at peace with the realization that there is no explanation for pain and suffering that actually makes sense?
Is it time to think of terror killings by the hundreds as akin to automobile crashes that kill 1.24 million people annually around the world as simply part of the inscrutable nature of life today?
So how does the Gospel of Jesus come to take the terror out of terrorism?
I’m pretty sure the answer is not facilitated by either political or military strategy, just as I’m pretty sure that the universe is not purified of sin by simply killing all the sinners. After all, it is pretty biblically certain that when it comes to sin, we are all terrorists. Right?
So now what?
Bill,
You ask a good question, so I’ll take a first (and partial) swipe at answering.
I begin by asking what it means to be “your brother’s keeper?” There are several things I believe are NOT included in that concept.
1. That caring for refugees means you have to bring them into your homeland. Assuming Syrian refugees want to come to America is grossly arrogant and ignores that the first desire of a refugee is to return to their homeland.
2. That we have to allow in anyone who wants to come. It is far cheaper to improve the lives of the suffering in their homelands.
3. That we have to allow in people of a faith dominated by a desire to destroy all who believe other than how they believe. That isn’t caring for your brother, it’s endangering him.
On a personal level, we are seeing with ever-greater clarity just how powerless Christianity has become, so it is incumbent on us to individually and corporately be seeking the Holy Spirit with greater intensity. Only then can we become empowered to minister God’s love in ways that will turn even Muslims into believers in Jesus.
I first sensed FEAR in other SDA’s when at an SDA grade school. Kennedy was running for president and since he was a Catholic..it was going to be soon for the Sunday Law! Then at an SDA church I heard some say California was going to fall into the Pacific Ocean in about 1995.
Hebrews 2:15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
—
Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
What I find unfortunate is how many/most Adventists are afraid to talk in Sabbath school classes.
“Their success in attacks on America is precisely because of the ignorance of this truth and those who want to deny it in the hopes that its not true. So they call it “radical Muslims” when in fact, it is the true faith and nothing “radical” about it. Those they can’t persuade, they kill. Got the picture! If not, you and others better get and I mean soon.”
Any reliable depiction of what is in the Koran agrees with a picture of destruction of the infidels scenario. Of course, it’s trite to say that not “all” Muslims believe in this vendetta. Note, though, how few Muslims in this country express outrage against radical Muslim atrocities.
Insofar as I’m concerned the Donald has little credibility but more influence than he deserves. The citizens of USA would have almost as little hope in their future whether Trump or Hillary became President.
The current situation the world faces must be intellectually analysed, and logic used, as we determine how best to respond to the potential harm that can be focused on the ordinary citizens of the world, by a ungodly horde that accepts a philosophic creed that all non-members of said philosophy should have their heads removed. We are speaking of a religion that numbers over a billion members, that generally is composed of two factions, one by name of SHIA, and the other, Sunni; and many splinter sects of various beliefs that create hate and violence between all of the schismatic groups of ISLAM. These groups have been annihilating each other for 1500 years. Now they are taking their violent wars to the whole world, through TERROIST ACTS of seeking and killing all infidels, which are every single worldly human not of the Islamic faith of Mohhamad, in respect of their god, Allah. The Islamic people are controlled by the most fundamental and violent factions of both the SCHIA AND SUNNI segments. They maintain order through out the Islamic communities by violence of their own, lopping off hands, feet, heads. So the fear factor is sufficient to maintain the billion adherents in control. There is no negotiating with Islamic forces. Their religion permits them to lie, cheat, use delusion etc. To let “young refugees” into a country is inviting the enemy in as they will never accept the “culture” of the welcome country. But will seek to “demand” their culture, while on…
Your analysis isnt’ accurate when you drill into details about culture in the Middle East. Islam isn’t so much the problem as it is political leverages that hide behind the veil of religion to justify their ends. Most Muslims are not lopping off heads nor have any mandate to do so. What has let the small number of those 1.2 billion Muslims spread to widely is the globalization of this world through technology, etc. Dejected souls, unhinged people, readily embrace the suicidal evil of ISIL and they have access to these poor souls through the Internet. But it isn’t an entire religion, though it does have its divisions, etc., just as Christianity had its moments of terror during the dark ages, and has employed fear to keep order. So it isn’t Islam per se. It is political aspirations using Islam as the unifying cover up to what is really behind the efforts. Granted it is the religion front and center today, but it isn’t the real problem, anymore than Christianity was the problem during the Dark Ages.
Fear always drives the bus of irrationality and willingness to lose freedom over security and impound minorities that become the portrait of that fear. I do believe the ’60’s was a time SDA’s truly saw the possibilities of Sunday Laws. In 1962 the Supreme Court ruled on three or four Sunday closing laws saying Sunday Laws were Constitutional. The first Catholic president inforced the notion of the end is near. A popular Pope that got Vatican II going bring Catholics and Protestants closer together at the table, societal unrest, with assasinations, the Cold War always looking like it was on the brink of nuclear holacaust, and more conspired to bring fear in the possibility of Constitutional overthrow.
Now we have all of this front and center in what could be arguably even more dangerous times. We are even more globalized than at any other time in history interconnected by technology in such a way that we are in each others faces as never before. Crowded as it were on a planet rocking on its axis over climate change, environmental destruction, extinction of species, financial softness, dozens of mini wars, threats of pandemics viral and bacterial onslaughts. Yeah, it is fearful today and fear always drives irrationality and we are seeing that clearly as ever before.
N/A
Yes, fear drives irrationality and I could tell you some stories about what I’ve seen people do in a crisis situation that were utterly nonsensical and out-of-character. Still, over time, it drives thoughtful analysis and consideration of possible solutions.
Let’s imagine for a moment that you are feeling something about your health is not right and when you go to the doctor you get a diagnosis of cancer. Naturally, you are alarmed. Do you go back about your life and ignore it, hoping it will just go away? Or, do you take the time needed to get medical tests, learn more about the problem and identify ways to treat it? We’ve been severely alarmed by the terrorist attack in San Bernardino last week. What Donald Trump is proposing with regard to Muslim immigrants is the same as what your doctor would advise after giving you a cancer diagnosis: stop, analyze the problem and figure-out the best course of action going forward. It is neither racist or unconstitutional and is, in fact, authorized by American law that has been upheld by judicial review. So I wish people would just calm down, measure the threat and help find solutions instead of just hysterically screaming claims of religious discrimination.
William: Trump is going much farther than banning importation of Muslims in to the country. He is focusing on a primary group that paints fear. I suppose the US concentration camps for the American Japanese and Germans during WW II was another doctor’s order to sort things out? Trump wants isolation and scrutiny of Muslims, period, and is suggesting similar “solutions” as camps in our own country. This guy is completely dangerous and needs to be called out.
N/A,
I disagree because I have found no implication of what you claim in his remarks of published statements. While he has made references to how Japanese-Americans were treated during World War II, he was only illustrating that taking protective action against perceived enemies within our borders is not without precedent. The problem is that most reporters quit listening at that point and missed his emphatic statement that he was strongly against any suggestion of going that far. So the only people I can find who are talking about that are the ones who want to criticize him.
Life is full of difficult times when we need to stop what we’re doing, evaluate and decide the best path forward and that’s all Trump is asking us to do. By doing that he’s tapped into the huge volume of pent-up frustration the American public is feeling over terrorism and all the lies from the Obama Administration and other leaders on the topic. That amount of frustration is approaching what in other countries would risk triggering an armed revolution. Fortunately, in America our first course of revolutionary action is at the ballot box and it appears a large number of citizens are ready to act on their frustration. My questions are about the strength and durability of that frustration. Since I’ve never seen anything like the Trump phenomenon, I’m watching what happens with considerable interest.
The spirit of his remarks tell us that he is moving in dangerous areas as per the Constitution, William. I strongly disagree with your take on Trump’s message. It isn’t good and it makes no sense. The tendency is most dangerous.
Here is a good link that I think shares an accurate view of Trump’s remarks.
http://www.canonandculture.com/the-way-that-religious-liberty-ends/
Have a blessed Christmas and New Years! Be safe.
N/A?? i agree with most of your input, except the “fear factor” sense. Being a veteran of WWII & Korea, a reservist between. Reasonable people logically were aware that a nuclear war guranteed mutual destruction. A majority of the Earth’s people would die in a global holocaust, some instantly, others, over a few months. Sane people would desire to live rather than commit sucicide which is assured if the decision is made to use the A and H Bombs. even a mad man would be challenged, as we have experienced “MADMEN” in power in the past. And that brings us to today where suicide is one of the most potent weapons used by radical Islamists. And doubt that the supreme “Mullahs” are ready to wear the
explosive belts. All well and good for them if vulnerable brain damaged, brainwashed volunteers step up to the role. i don’t think the Mullahs believe 70 virgins are waiting for them in Paradise. Therefore the
“H BOMB” delivery systems must be forever denied to nthe radical jihadists. In a mutual destructionist war, where is the logic?? Especially if their is no one to pat the victor on the back, and offer congratulations. i believe most human creatures will not test fate, and if it happened, in most cases it would be instant incineration, so very small fear factor involved. Death is enevitable for all, so where is the general fear?? i’ve been around
since the 1920’s and don’t recall ever a time when the masses expressed a great fear of potential destruction.
For the radical ISIL suicide mindset they want to assure destruction as the theme of their echological beliefs that usher in the final Imam. So how does one address that “mass suicidal mindset”? Hence, the fear factor is in many ways worse and there isn’t any mutual destruction aspect. That does make this radical Islam fear factor more dangerous in some ways. Isolating Muslims in general, though, certainly isn’t the answer, as least from my perspective.
As one who sees in Trump a very disturbing fascist streak, I have mixed feelings about this issue. Monte’s blinkered analysis of the issue is the predictable consequence of a moral compass that always points left. I have watched with dismay as the Left has trampled on the 1st Amendment and trashed Christians with increasingly frenzied abandon over the past six years. Monte hasn’t noticed.
Trump’s proposal would certainly be an abrogation of U.S. treaty obligations, but I don’t see it as a 1st Amendment issue. Trump often doesn’t think before he speaks. But since the Left doesn’t seem to give much credence to the deadly threats and imprecations hurled against Israel and the West by Muslim leaders, I don’t see why they would take Trump seriously.
Imagine a religion that believed in the divine necessity of human sacrifice, the adherents of which would overwhelmingly give that religious belief supremacy over civil law? Isn’t there a point at which religion might need to be a defining consideration in determining immigration policy?
I’m not sure Monte, why you feel we should be more alarmed by Trump calling for a temporary moratorium on Muslim immigration than by Obama’s refusals to grant Christians asylum from true persecution, or his attempts to ban Christians from exercising their religious rights in the conduct of business.
Mind you. I strongly dislike Trump. The big positive – the only positive – he has going for him is that he is not HRC.
Nathan, you offer an inadvertent case study in how things can and will get worse because of ideological tribalism. You’re no idiot, so you see the danger that Trump represents. You hear the fascist streak in his rhetoric and see the fascist appeal he has among the body politic. You have seen him mock the physically disabled and say the most outrageous things, crude, and juvenile things that any national politician has ever said. Yet you clearly signal that not matter what he has said, or no matter what he represents (things that you readily acknowledge) you have nevertheless intentionally and unmistakably signaled a preference for him—or see him as the lesser of evils—over the leading candidate of the left; (probably) whomever that may be, but specifically HRC.
In other words, no matter how bad the candidate of the right clearly is to you; even one with a fascist streak by your lights is not as bad as his probable opponent if he gets the right wing party’s nomination.
Meanwhile, you fully recognize that people on the far right who may not be as informed, or as emotionally stable or secure as you are, are ready, willing, and eager (if not able) to not only lower, but absolutely disregard, the threshold and standards of what a POTUS can publicly say and officially represent and put Trump—who you accurately perceive as “having a very disturbing fascist streak”—in the highest office in the land, basically just because ‘he ain’t her.’
That is know-nothing ideological tribalism; but I can’t throw stones because I must confess that I favor Trump for the GOP nomination; and in lieu of that nomination, that is to say, if he is somehow denied the right wing party’s nomination, I hope that he sees fit to run as an independent. In other words, I am more willing to take the chance of him actually becoming President than I am someone of that party who I think could and probably would serve responsibly and even ably in that office. So my glass house is vulnerable to ‘stone’ charges of ideological tribalism as well.
No Stephen. It’s not ideological tribalism. It’s simply a matter of choosing the lesser of evils. I feel any of the Democrat candidates is far more certain to do vastly more harm to this country, continue to run roughshod over the Constitution, and harm the cause of liberty, – including religious liberty – than Donald Trump. No need or space to go into all the particulars here.
Nathan, why deny it man? It is only ideological tribalism that would have you, or anyone, perceive Donald Trump as the lesser of evils to say, Martin O’Malley. What has an O’Malley for instance done or said that is comparable in any way to what Trump has said? Admit Nathan, O’Malley is viewed as the greater of evils simply because he is a liberal and you are a conservative. It is O’Malley’s ideology in juxtaposition to yours that disqualifies him—even against Trump.
Confession (even of ideological tribalism) is good for this forum as well as other things.
Nathan,
Fascism is a form of government that rules using fear and intimidation to force compliance with the deprivation of liberties the public would not otherwise tolerate. So, how is a person a fascist if they speak-out against such actions? For decades we’ve been seeing growing use of fear and intimidation to force by liberal-socialists in American government to force citizens into tolerating increasing abuses of the law and infringements on the Constitution with the most systematic fascism being committed by the Obama Administration.
The Obama Administration and their acolytes want us to think anyone who speaks-out against what they are doing are the real fascists.
“As one who sees in Trump a very disturbing fascist streak, I have mixed feelings about this issue. Monte’s blinkered analysis of the issue is the predictable consequence of a moral compass that always points left. I have watched with dismay as the Left has trampled on the 1st Amendment and trashed Christians with increasingly frenzied abandon over the past six years. Monte hasn’t noticed.”
Examples, please. I have interest in this area.
“I have watched with dismay as the Left has trampled on the 1st Amendment and trashed Christians with increasingly frenzied abandon over the past six years. Monte hasn’t noticed.”
Examples that you see this happening, please. I am interest in this area. Thanks.
Adventism fantasized itself as the target of last day events with manufactured Scriptural support. It was a scheme based on a retro view of the “Papacy” and its revival as a demonic force. It had a historical precedent with a standard outlook as to what a reoccurrence of what “persecution” might look like, with Adventists elevated to target status.
But there is nothing standard about the perceived Islamic Terrorist threat. The incompetence of prophetical interpretation led Adventism to a dead end while missing entirely the real, abnormal, brand new, societal threat now present to the civilized world.
The “non-standard” aspect of the perpetrators centers on their the enemy (all non-Islamic culture) and the tools (suicide bombings coupled with mass murder) to achieve victory. It may be too much to say the world hasn’t seen this, but we haven’t. And that accounts for our fear. We know how to fight regular wars, but aren’t sure how to fight this one. Much of it is hidden in plain sight with sleeper cells and secret, normal appearing antagonists attacking in cold blood without visible warning.
It isn’t groundless fear that the presidential candidates are addressing. There is public resonance with anyone that speaks with certainty about a coping process. There is a yearning for leadership, not presently visible. No one knows what is or isn’t extreme in that arena. Adventism has nothing to offer.
So what you’re effectively saying Bugs is that this radical Islamic guerilla terrorism perpetrated in the First World is a type of trouble that we haven’t seen before in the world; and the message of Adventism and Adventist eschatology—that literally foresees unprecedented trouble in the world of an unprecedented variety from a variety unforeseeable sources that will commence a time of trouble (Mark 13:7-10, 19-20), and will precipitate, catalyze, and include persecution from the sociological forces and religio-political sources of “historical precedent”—has nothing to offer those who are fearful in the present and for the future.
That seems like a self-fulfilling prophetic statement of sorts. Here’s a newsflash for you Bugs, there are people all over the world who have been suffering from despotic religious and political persecution and terror for some time now. The time of trouble has commenced for many on various parts of the globe.
There are spiritual forces of good and evil at war with each other. The war will end in climactic fashion; and the forces of good will triumph. Adventism has that good news…and more good news…to offer; especially about fear.
Stephen, stop it already! You are mudding the water of my pure emission! There is no Catholic persecution. Adventism was wrong in predicting it. You can’t reasonably remodel its failed predictions to cover present trouble in the world except as an unfunny joke about failed prophecy.
Forces of “good and evil” are permanently installed in the world, always have been. Nothing new here so it has no current legitimate prophetical interpretation.
What is new is the religious imperative of mass murder and suicide bombings as an appropriate methodology to achieve the fiction of a moral conclusion. “Radical Islamic guerilla terrorism” is the extreme edge of the Moslem intent, based in its teachings. The greater threat is the Trojan Horse, the “camel under the tent” of cultural effect on the world by the body of Islam who may or may not eschew extremism to achieve a goal they secretly admire.
Adventism needs some proprietary good news to dispense as a newsflash. It hasn’t had any and is totally irrelevant in the present milieu.
It doesn’t take a theologian to read the newspaper. Here’s the funny thing, the increase in knowledge, and of evil, which has led to the proliferation of WMD and the increasing likelihood that they may get into the hands of criminally insane and sociopathic terrorists, and the moral declension in western society, particularly in the U.S., and the consequent calls for returning the nation back to God and to Christian and Biblical principals, and the concerted political effort of religious people in America to gain civil power for those expressed purposes, followed by ever-increasing moral decline, and a subsequent intensification of the cultural battles, followed by more wars, and rumors of war, and an increased frequency of earthquakes and other natural disasters, followed by continuing and intensified troubles in the Middle East, including wanton terrorism by radical Islamic jihadists, along with the quiet and steady mainstreaming and consolidation of social, journalistic, and political power in America of the Roman church and its adherents in society; followed by the nearly unprecedented publicity attending a widespread Roman Catholic clerical sex scandal (following who knows how many years, or decades of cover-up), followed by the nearly unprecedented resignation of a charismatically challenged conservative pope, followed by the ascendancy of a charismatic liberal pope to take his place—who subtly yet openly called for the end of the Protestant protest on the grounds that
…by more Middle East trouble, and continued jihadist terrorism, followed by the ascendancy of fascistic and xenophobic nationalists running for President and a hardening of constituencies who are sympathetic to same—with even otherwise reasonable people like you giving rationalizations, if not justifications, for such a candidacy—all adds up to nothing to you in terms of eschatology but all points to the end for those who have no fear of it.
Now that litany was obviously far from comprehensive; and among that litany were things that dovetail with Adventist eschatology; particularly Revelation 13. The extent to which you must deny or deemphasize or ignore or rationalize that which you see before your very eyes in order to maintain your status as a scoffer in good and regular standing is all but humorous.
It isn’t paranoia if the threat is real. It isn’t hysteria if facts support the fear.
It isn’t only terrorism but cultural collusion that Islam represents as a complex Trojan horse. It is a double threat based on the intent of Islam to create a world caliphate and its definition of all standing in the way of it as infidels. Where its numbers multiply to majority there is a massive cultural shift that moves that lifestyle to virtual fascists status, an antithesis to the free world. This has evolved in areas of London and Paris where miniature Islamic states have been created.
Hamtramck, near Detroit, is a US example of this process. Formerly a Polish/American enclave is now about 60% Muslim, now with an Islamic majority city council. The peaceful appearing attitude is belied by some public Islamic support of ISIS and Shira law along with the five daily loud speaker calls to prayer (most annoying to non-Islamic residents).
All other immigrant groups to America came and assimilated to be “American,” without intent to transplant their culture.
Islamic followers can’t adapt to American culture without denying their religion, so they won’t. Yes, Islam has coexisted in peace with others. It may here, but not without ultimately dominating the culture that American’s hold dear. That is why there is such a small denouncement of the extremists by Moslems. It is partly fear but mainly assent to the goal of world domination by Islam. Is this a raciest fear?
Larry, contra your remark about immigrants in America not transplanting their culture, it appears the opposite is true. Downtown Los Angeles goes on block after block after block of Hispanic stores, food, music, people. Chinatown in the downtown area and San Gabriel Valley, stores, food, shops,; Korea town and so on.
Adventism exemplifies this practice with its ethnic churches: Black churches, Japanese churches, Chinese churches, Samoan churches. Blacks especially, born and bred in the USA, few recent immigrants, have rejected the White man’s culture.
Unfortunately, radicalized Muslims are using the casual attitude of America towards immigrants to, well, murder Americans. Trump is apparently the only candidate to recognize the danger for what it is.
OK, Hansen. Your point isn’t without merit. I have seen visuals displays of cultural diversity in the manner you describe. But it’s a minor point compared to the Moslem influx. The difference is the unique hidden agenda of their mindset via their religion. You know exactly what I’m talking about. You conveniently ignored this line to make your picky point: “Islamic followers can’t adapt to American culture without denying their religion, so they won’t. Yes, Islam has coexisted in peace with others. It may here, but not without ultimately dominating the culture that American’s hold dear.”
Islam isn’t only a faith vehicle for seekers of enlightenment. Its “hidden agenda” is in plain sight, a political scheme to introduce a form of imagined paradise to the world. The paradise envisioned by the insiders, the Moslems, would be living hell to those outside. Evidence is illustrated by the lack of rush by anyone at all to their present enclaves, countries or communities.
I don’t advocate being fearful. It is way too early for that. “Trust, but verify.” Decisions have consequences. The churn of ideas in the presidential race regarding Moslem immigration is the process of decision making so that the consequences don’t ever appropriately need to inculcate fear.
Larry, If Islamic terrorists hook up with Black Muslims who influence common criminals to engage in destructive/violent behavior on a larger scale, immigrants won’t be the problem.
I favor proactive law enforcement over “rights”.
if monte is worried about fear being the wrong motivation for change, then he should abandon post haste his recent epiphany and attempt to resurrect the frightful predictions of end of time eschatology promulgated by adventists. talk about fear…if a threat is real then fear is an appropriate response. not all fear is to be shunned. God gave us the emotion so we could protect ourselves but when religion uses it to motivate and inspire, it has become the problem not the solution. i think monte unintentionally used fear to try and move his reader. by the way, there is a real threat from islam, even from only a few million, and trump’s language too raw and insensitive and emanating from that muslim threat, but crawling back to a dead eschatology of fear is hardly the appropriate reaction or response. Now that scares me.
Greg,
Fear is one of our basic human emotions. There is nothing wrong with being fearful. Fear is a good thing if it drives us to do what is necessary to resolve the cause, but dangerous if we let it distract us from recognizing danger and taking necessary action to resolve it.
The first step in resolving our fears is evaluating both the threat and our response to our perceptions of it. A child may resolve their fears of a monster under their bed simply by having a parent check and reassure them there is no monster. We can’t do that with terrorism and the true nature of the volume of lies we’ve been hearing from our national leaders got exposed last week by a pair of terrorists in San Bernardino. Those lies are probably our greatest danger because they are permitting terrorism to continue unrestrained and doing nothing effective to protect us from more attacks.
william,
you are point on and i agree with you. my response to monte is that he objects to fear being used to make decisions. he wrote, ‘Fear is fear. No one makes good decisions based on fear,’ then he proceeds to suggest a tired irrelevant eschatolgy of fear as something to reconsider and in which to take refuge. an unwitting prisoner of fear, he argues in its behalf as renewed insight and revelation. he’s traveling in circles and losing his argument in the process.
.
greg
Thinking About Fear and Religious Liberty Posted on December 8, 2015 by Monte Sahlin, December 8, 2015 said “Fear is fear. No one makes good decisions based on fear. That is why Jesus promises to drive out all fear. I need to hold onto that statement by our Lord and Savior. And so do you!”
There are many things that motivate us. But the most powerful motivator of all is FEAR. Fear is a primal instinct that served us as cave dwellers and today. Our most vivid memories are born in Fear. Adrenaline etches them into our brains.
Fear can be too powerful to use as a motivator because it can also paralyze – the classic deer in the headlights syndrome, fear will cause flight or worse: paralysis. Fear is a powerful motivator, but it is a negative one. I prefer to motivate someone by eliminating doubt. Doubt destroys motivation. If you can help a person get rid of it, you will motivate them positively.
Caleb was not afraid (Numbers 13:17-33). People can try to escape from fear. But we cannot escape from fear in these ways. Caleb reported the facts (Numbers 14:7-8.) The other men saw only the difficulties of the Promised Land. Caleb did not pretend that the giants (ISIS, for us) did not exist. “That is why Jesus promises to drive out all fear. I need to hold onto that statement by our Lord and Savior. And so do you!” Thanks Monte, for reminding us!
This article and the resulting forum prove at least one fact: Adventists (including those that follow this publication whether they are SDAs or not) are the most fearful and paranoid people on this planet. The irony is that, having been given greater insight into the future, Adventists should have an understanding of God that eliminates any need for fear.
Every generation of SDAs has had their list of current events on the horizon that may be the fulfillment of Revelation 13. And every generation has passed without the dreaded events from happening–at least on a macro scale.
I do not know if this time, we will have the time of trouble that Daniel spoke of in Daniel 12, but I do know that I am not going to worry myself into a frenzy over it. I do not have my head in the sand. I watch the news and I have opinions about each of the candidates for the U.S. Presidency. I also have opinions about the performance of our existing President. But no amount of concern or worry on my part will change what is going to happen. I have to do what God asks me to do regardless of any and all of the actions of others.
God told Joshua, three times, in Joshua 1:6-9 not to be afraid, to be very courageous, and that God would be with him. Jesus repeated this promise in Matthew 28:20.
All of this fear and loathing in Adventism shows a distinct lack of trust in God or an inappropriate attachment to this world. I say, “Get over it and get on with your job(s)”!
Matt 10:28 (KJV) And fear not them which kill the body, but are NOT able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Why is everyone only focused on Muslim terrorists? What about the Christian guy who shot up the clinic in Colorado? Based on his actions, should all evangelicals who oppose abortion be rounded up, tracked, etc? Since the media is concentrated on San Bernardino, we’ve forgotten that hate and violence is not confined to only one ideology.
That’s simple: there are so many more terrorists.
That’s easy! There are so many more terrorists and when they attack the body count is such a large multiple. The number who do such things as attack that abortion clinic are few where and “lone wolves” where there are tens of thousands of terrorists who are organized, supported and dedicated to killing “infidels” of whom their supreme targets are Americans.
Monte,
Much Bible prophecy is written in symbols precisely so we can consider the possibility that the prophecy applies to some other entity than we think–or in addition to the one we think–it does.
What has passed a “evangelism” has largely consisted of telling people what the symbols mean instead of teaching principles of Bible interpretation and encouraging them to study their Bibles for themselves. People have been left with the impression that adventist eschatology consists of “predictions” by William Miller and Ellen White.
What did the reformers of the 16th century consider to be the thing that identified or “marked” the first beast of Revelation 13?
When Ellen White wrote that people would receive the mark of the beast when coercion is employed against seventh-day sabbath keepers, was that a restatement (albeit more specific) of the protestant view of the mark of the beast?
Yet many SdAs are so focused on religious liberty for themselves, they have failed to see the big picture. Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it. How many SdAs defend the liberty of smokers, gun owners, those who disagree with them about elective abortion?
Should we have been careful about admitting to voting membership people who make a religion out of conspiracy theories? Ditto other fear mongers?
Roger, you say (as did Stephen above): “Much Bible prophecy is written in symbols precisely so we can consider the possibility that the prophecy applies to some other entity than we think–or in addition to the one we think–it does.” That is similar to the argument that the cold weather is a sign of global warming.
That means that prophecy is totally meaningless since there is no precision to be found in its interpretations. Imagination rules because one can find whatever he wants to verify a presupposition. This new, imaginative function of prophecy is the outgrowth of Jesus failing to return by now. Not one shred of Adventist prophecy has literally been realized so a disappointed constituency has to bob and weave to a new definition of prophecy.
Time to dispense with prophecy except for entertainment value since it is otherwise worthless.
You say: “Should we have been careful about admitting to voting membership people who make a religion out of conspiracy theories? Ditto other fear mongers?” But that is exactly what Adventism has represented for more than one hundred forty years. Without a conspiracy theory and fear mongering Adventism would never have seen the light of day. Those were the two basic elements of Adventism I grew up with.
Fear (of persecution) at the core of Adventist eschatology has prepped a body of people to be fearful. So it isn’t surprising to see the old fears piggyback on current threats as potential liberty hazards.
After 9/11 Bill Clinton said that when it occurred, his first thought was “Bin Laden.” Later he said that he could have taken out Osama with a drone strike before 9/11 but he was concerned about collateral damage and did nothing.
I had never heard of Osama before 9/11, wasn’t interested in the implications of the Cole bombing; apparently, the dangers and implications of both were known to people who could and should have done something about it, possibly preventing 9/11 in the process i.e., proactive policing
American politicians should be more concerned about American rights than human rights. Their first job is to take care of people in America. The “rights” of potential jihadists shouldn’t even be on the agenda. A simple look at the Redland’s jihadis when they arrived at the airport should have been enough to alert law enforcement. There is no human right nor should there be a political or legal obligation to give slack to potential murdering criminals.
500 years ago, people like Luther and Melanchthon were describing Muslim as enemies of the Christian West. Still don’t believe it?
When national leaders forget that their first responsibility is the protection of their citizens from outside threats, in time that nation falls victim to those threats.
Nations have self-interests, not friends. Other nations that serve those self-interests may be perceived as friends, but they never are more than servants of those interests.
Cultures think differently and where the mission and purpose in life of one culture is the domination and subjugation of others by force, any national leader who thinks allowing masses from that culture to immigrate into his own does not enable and hasten the accomplishment of their purposes is a fool. He respects neither the people whom God has entrusted to his care or the God who has given him that sacred trust.
Actually, Stephen, it is you – not me – who exhibits ideological tribalism! There…now it’s your turn. Isn’t pejorative labeling of opinions you don’t like far more mature and enlightening than actually having to substantively respond to ideas?
Nathan, perhaps you missed it, but I have already copped to ideological tribalism in my strategic ‘endorsement’ of Donald Trump for the GOP nomination—and in lieu of that nomination, for an independent third party run.
The fact that I am more willing to chance him becoming President simply because I think he would be easier to defeat in a general election campaign than would a rational, reasonable and civil sort of conservative, like Kasich or Bush, means that I have succumbed to ideological tribalism myself.
Is it the word and connotation of “tribalism” that prevents you from accepting this labeling? Conservatives are a funny lot—unless they are wielding civil power.
Monte,
I never thought I would agree 100 per cent with Monte on anything, but I believe he has a point here. Much of the country has gone through a time of weakness and been set up to accept PC and tolerance of lies, corruption, division, incompetence in our government, educational system, and immorality in general. Because of this we have fallen into a situation where people are fearful and insecure.
We should not be surprised if a backlash of angry citizens are ready to embrace a narcissistic radical loudmouth who could easily lead us down the road to loss of freedom, discrimination, and an armed citizenry and Yes, Sunday laws.
Or maybe he’s secretly working for the Democrats!
Sunday laws? Are you outta your mind ER? Get over it. Yes, I know everything is possible, given enough time, there is theoretically enough space in matter so that an eighteen wheeler could pass unharmed through a cubic mile of lead. The theory of Adventist persecution is as remote. Adventism isn’t important enough to be persecuted. Neither is the Sabbath. This persecution complex is nothing but an ego yearn to be proven right in the light of the abysmal failure of Adventist eschatology. Cherished beliefs, even when demonstrated to be crazy, are painful to abandon.
And of course you are entitled to fantasize your dream. But it keeps you bound in the paranoid sound proof chamber of Adventism where nonsense rules.
Bugs, I know they scared the ‘you-know-what’ out of you when you are a kid; with scenes of persecution and hiding in caves, and all that; and that as a result, you have now rejected any and everything associated with Adventist eschatology or eschatological prophecy of any kind. But you have never proven that anything predicted to happen cannot and will not happen.
Let me ask, were you given dates when certain things will have to have happened?
What proof, for instance, do you have that a national blue law that called for some recognition of let’s say…Sunday as a weekly holiday, could never be enacted; especially given the fact that related laws have been enacted on state levels? Of course, if and when this ever happens, you will likely have to continue to deny any connection to prophecy.
You are necessarily stuck in a denial loop.
Stephen, I lived in Colorado as a kid and was well acquainted with caves, rocks, and mountains. I knew how miserable it would be to winter there hiding from those evil, killer, Sabbath despising Catholics. I shiver now to think of it! But then I grew up and realized it was a mean joke, actually a church sponsored guilt trip to keep me and my family firmly on the Adventist highway of obedience. So I forfeited the trauma and replaced it with fun ski trips to those rocks and mountains (caves avoided), mingled with countless anonymous Catholics on the slopes with whom I shared a fun experience.
My trauma is kaput. Yours isn’t. There is a little trick we used to play on poor unsuspecting victims called Catch the Shrike. We conspirators gave them a gunny sack and convinced them as they were needed to stand in the forest in the darkness while we would surround them to chase the Shrike to them. There may well be some poor souls still waiting in some forest since we stayed home!
Well, you are the one holding the bag in the SDA version of that miserable joke. The church as conspirator has you holding the bag waiting for the Sunday law that has never come. Too late for it to salvage the 1844 prophecy disaster even if it does. Aren’t you getting a bit lonely out there? You can surrender the duping bag because the deceit is over. A ski trip to Copper Mountain, Colorado, my favorite, might cure your trauma and negate your denial!
Bugs,
One of the things God took away from me as he rebuilt my faith years ago was the fear about end-time events that you and I each learned in our youth. As I re-studied Matthew 24, I came to realize that Jesus was primarily talking about the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. The challenge I still find in that discourse is precisely separating what He said that applies to that time and what to the end of the world. The biggest thing that has removed my fear is reading about how God has cared for His faithful followers throughout history combined with the perspective that, should I be faced with actual religious persecution, my survival is not what matters but displaying the character of God so that others will be drawn to Him.
No longer living under that old fear has been a great relief allowing me to focus my attention on far more important and present issues.
Bugs, have you concluded at long last that I am lonely on this site? Well, congratulations Captain Obvious. I am a theologically moderate-to-conservative Adventist; and a black one who is politically liberal at that. I happen to live in one of the few localities on earth where I wouldn’t be lonely.
Here’s the thing, you have yet to give me any reason, much less any proof that a national blue law would or could never be proposed in the U.S., or why such a law would or could never be passed by even such a Congress as we have right now.
By the way, it is also obvious that Sunday is not observed by those who currently worship on Sunday the same way that Sabbath is observed by Adventists, so there may be no need or call whatsoever for the banning of secular afternoon activities and events; just as there is no call for banning such activities in places where some local blue provisions are now in force.
You lonely on this site, Stephen? Nope. Much more than that! I’m saying you are part of a small, shrinking remnant whose fantasy about Sunday laws is Lonely Ville. Most have moved on realizing it is a waste of spiritual time to harbor anticipation or grief over a deceased, irrevealvant issue.
And if a blue law was ever passed it wouldn’t in the slightest verify the expired time frame of your imaginative prophecy. If it actually ever meant anything, it at best, expired in 70 a.d., was incorrectly applied to modern time.
And I hear that Sabbath keeplng is growing by Adventist in “incorrect worship” similar to lawless Sunday keepers. You may be headed for more loneliness there, too.
Amen to Larry’s comment, of 15 comments above. There are many peaceful Muslims who are native born, who are suffering the backlash from other Muslims also native born who identify with the Quran’s demand that all infidels should not be permitted to live, but must be destroyed so ISLAM can become the religion of choice worldwide. Not only have the majority of Muslims congregated together in the USA as in France, UK, and soon in the whole EURO Union. There are already Muslim Congressmen in the Capitol, demanding Sharia law for their districts. Muslims permitted 4 wives, are breeding eight to one, of the West. They will not allow themselves to be assimilated into other cultures. They accept your offer of freedom of religion to overcome your majority, and then demand all the USA be forced to accept Sharia Law, OR ELSE, OFFER YOU A DEAL YOU REFUSE ON PENALTY OF HAVING YOUR HEAD REMOVED. This religion is different than all other global religions. Their god ALLAH, is not the Almighty God of Christianity, and welcoming those of the Muslim faith, is indeed, welcoming the enemy of the ALMIGHTY GOD. All of the false gods of the old Testament welcomed into your neighborhood, as was the Trojan Horse. Donald Trump recognizes the great threat it is. He speaks in a “hard voice” to alert you to the disaster that will result in the USA should the squeszy left say O’, we are a nation of immigrants, we must let them in. Trump isn’t a fascist. He’s a TRUE BLUE PATRIOT rising to the…
So, do I understand it correctly? It is the American Muslims and their sharia law that will conquer Protestant USA. Where is this mentioned in “Great Controversy” and SDA eschatology? Has the SDA church given up on its paranoia about Roman Catholics and switched their fear to focus on Muslims? I get the impression Monte Sahlin is advocating a revision of “Great Controversy.” Monte, perhaps your greater fear should be Ted Wilson. He may already be building your gallows!!
I will now remove my tongue that has been firmly implanted in my cheek.
cause, where all of the weak kneed, squirrelly, wanta be’s, will continue the present malaise, and rotten cancer, eating the guts out of our late great USA. Yes, Trump is a hard nosed SOB, and will refuse to permit the rest of the world to thrust their middle finger at us. They hate us. And this next election may well be our last, as a FREE NATION. Trump is no fascist.
When fear is the greatest motivating factor, rationality flies out the window. The fear of Sharia law in this nation is absolutely absurd, and Trump is feeding that frenzy and playing thousands like a great violinist. He’s a showman and entertainer who has accomplished his position of great wealth by a small inheritance (only $1,000,000 that all fathers give their sons). He brags that he will build an impenetrable wall around the U.S. and other fantastic ideas. Some fools believe he can do that.
The Democrats are quietly watching him with his antics which are furnishing more support than they could ever have paid for. Now, many Republicans are really becoming worried that he just MIGHT get the nomination and today Ben Carson said he might bolt the Republican party. They are in such disarray and consternation that has never been experienced in any presidential election year. At least it’s making history.
If a survey were taken today, it is questionable how many Adventists would support Trump; certainly, some here have already answered in the affirmative.
Earl, that denial of Donald Trump’s fascist streak sounds eerily similar to the belligerent, defiant, xenophobic nationalistic complaints in “My Struggle.”
Is that really how you prefer to explain the appeal of Trump and Cruz among angry and fearful white right wingers?
Why does Lawson say Adventists are among the most paranoid and fearful? Has he done a study? I don’t find this. Americans are insecure more than they should be partially due to the nonstop news on recent events. Never before in history has humanity had such access to what’s happening in the world, and they are insecure about it. At this time, I am only 2 miles from the recent carnage in California. I never felt in danger at any time. I only saw it as another sign of Christ’s final victory over evil.
I believe these any many other killers (Muslim or not) are demon-possessed and we will see more of it as time goes by. That’s an old-fashioned way of expressing present evil. But we have no reason to fear if we have claimed Christ as our personal Redeemer. Actually there are so many more ways to pass on–accidents, disease, old age, etc.
Now is the time to take our faith seriously and keep in daily contact with Jesus and have agape love for all people.
Well said EM. If we have Christ there is nothing to fear. We are to be rejoicing –to be exceedingly glad at the news today for we are more certain Christ will soon return. And when He does, all will be over for the wicked perish at the brightness of His coming. Amen!
EM: No study, just a lifetime of observations. I also was 2 miles from the recent attack in California and was not afraid. But many were afraid and many were talking about the implications toward last day events. Every time there is a natural disaster or major crisis, SDAs are quick to point out where we are on the prophetic timetable. Maybe by your definition, that does not equal paranoia, but it is at least an obsession with end of the world crises. In Matthew 24, Jesus gave us signs to know when the end is near to be reassured, not to be panicky.
Is there something wrong with being aware and hopeful concerning the end times being soon? That’s not an obsession! It’s really irrelevant though, because we are all near the end because we die the first death. The Bible says there is a second death. That is the reason I’ve always found this fear or obsession rather amazing since we are all going to experience it, and very soon.
My interest in being alive doing those end times is mostly curiosity to see how things come about.
I am not of the opinion that we can bring it on or not because God knows the end. We are not in control. The Bible indicates He delays so that more might be saved. And He is more wonderful and merciful than we can imagine.
This is my perception. Anyone with real evidence to the contrary may challenge it.
Most of the adherents of the Roman Church who have immigrated from Europe have been assimilated into a culture where the ideal is not merely “toleration” of religious diversity but equal standing for every citizen.
Most of the people currently flooding across our southern boarder aren’t interested in assimilation and would gladly impose their religious beliefs, religious practices and religious prohibitions on the general population of the U.S.
Did we once have a policy of admitting specific numbers of people from specific nations and requiring, at a minimum, that they learn English and be able to pass a test about our Constitution and bill of rights?
To what extent Muslim immigrants are refusing to become acculturated (assimilated), I don’t pretend to know but to whatever extent that may be true, it becomes equally true that we need to limit the numbers of people who immigrate from predominately Muslim countries.
I fear that Trump is using fear to promote a far-right political agenda but is there any other remotely viable candidate who understands the danger to our ideals?
I’m not opposed to individual Christians participating in the political process but for those of us who don’t hold public office, I recommend spending at least twice as much time promulgating the gospel as commenting on political issues.
Roger, part of your perception that you welcomed anyone to challenge read, “Most of the people currently flooding across our southern boarder aren’t interested in assimilation and would gladly impose their religious beliefs, religious practices and religious prohibitions on the general population of the U.S.”
Where is the evidence that this is true? What is it specifically that gives you this impression? In other words, until and unless you provide actual proof, or at the very least can provide compelling factual information that gives you this impression, I am challenging the factual veracity of your impression.
Another of your perceptions that you welcomed anyone to challenge read, “I fear that Trump is using fear to promote a far-right political agenda but is there any other remotely viable candidate who understands the danger to our ideals?”
With respect, that has to be one of the most paradoxical assertions (or “perceptions”) I have ever witnessed. How is it “remotely” possible for someone to use fear to promote a far-right (or far-left for that matter) political agenda, while understanding to the danger to any ideals? How can the use of fear to promote an extremist agenda even be compatible with anything remotely resembling an ideal? Are you trying to be facetious or something?
Stephen,
My father was raised in the Roman Church. The main reason he started calling himself a protestant about 1925 was that he decided each person should study the Bible for himself rather than being merely a follower of other men’s thoughts.
I was born in ’44 and Dad taught me a great deal about the Roman Church. For a really good description of “official” Roman doctrine in the 1940s and early ’50s, see the YouTube video, What Is the Problem With Religious Liberty. Traditionalists in the Roman Church think the “official” position since Vatican II (1959-’65) is a mistake. (Traditionalists include almost all of the adherents who have no more education than high school level.)
It is not uncommon for politicians at both ends of the political spectrum to use fear to motivate voters. Trump isn’t the only candidate to do so but he seems better at it than most of the other current “Republican” candidates.
If Dr. Carson’s position on religious liberty is the same as mine and if the Religious Right (who customarily vote Republican) discover it, he will loose a BIG chunk of his current support.
When I used the phrase, “our ideals”, I realized not everyone would know what I mean, namely, the ideal of NOT using civil laws to impose religious belief, religious practices and religious prohibitions.
Roger I accept and agree that the Roman church does not perceive or promote religious liberty as do their Protestant counterparts. So to the extent that those coming to America are adherent to, cognizant of, and/or conversant with the historical perspectives of the Roman church as relates to the concept of religious liberty, I agree that such individuals “would gladly impose their religious beliefs, religious practices and religious prohibitions on the general population of the U.S.”
That being said, I’m not sure to what extent this represents “most of the people currently flooding across our southern border;” and the fact that Roman Catholicism is able to claim that a plurality of nominal Christians in the U.S. are members of that community renders your point about (cultural religious?) assimilation moot, does it not?
Your point about Trump and ideals is more lost on me than before your explanation. Trump represents a caricatured personification of what the most prejudiced members of my ethnic community think about ‘the white man.’ To the extent that he remains the popular choice of a plurality of likely primary voters in the right wing party, those prejudices will not be on the wane; let’s put it that way.
Of course perhaps the best thing that can be said about Trump is that he is at least legitimately, constitutionally eligible to serve; in that he is a natural born citizen of the United States. Trump’s citizenship is INDEPENDENT of American immigration and naturalization law. Anyone whose citizenship results from and is DEPENDENT upon immigration and naturalization legislation is not (by any definition of the word ‘natural’) a natural born citizen; though they may be a legally born citizen.
“Most of the people currently flooding across our southern boarder (sic) aren’t interested in assimilation and would gladly impose their religious beliefs, religious practices and religious prohibitions on the general population of the U.S.”
You have not identified who those people are. The only ones coming through our southern borders are Latinos, not Muslims, and they have indicated no interest in imposing their religious beliefs as it is the largest religious denomination present in the U.S., with no need of imposing it on anyone.
Roger,
When you refer to the majority of immigrants crossing over our southern borders as being unwilling to assimilate, those are Latinos and are anxious to fit into the work place with all that is required. They are nearly all Roman Catholics, like millions from other countries who make up our citizens today. There is no need for them to impose their religious practices on us as they can simply continue their religious practices in the nearest Catholic church.
Elaine,
There is no more “need” for adherents of the Roman Church to impose their religious beliefs, religious practices or religious prohibitions on “us” than there is a “need” for Muslims to do so. There are, presumably, some in both groups who have no desire to use civil laws to impose those things on others.
There are some however (if you have evidence of how many, I’ll be interested), who consider it their duty to use every means available–including civil laws & boycotts–to get everyone to live by the lifestyle requirement expected of adherents of their own religion.
You can study the religious requirements of the Roman Church or Islam for yourself but I can illustrate my point by asking the rhetorical question, How many SdA advocate for smoker’s rights? Sunday keepers rights?
Over the last 50 years, I have worked diligently to help people stop smoking and realize that Sunday isn’t the biblical sabbath day AND I have worked for the freedom of those with wh
…whose religious beliefs differ from my own.
Attempting to prove a negative is a fool’s errand. Might as well ask how many are not concerned or worried about Sunday Laws?
Elaine,
If by, “Sunday Laws”, you mean laws prohibiting work on Sundays, I’m not “worried” about “Sunday Laws”.
I expect the day to come (I’m 71 and I expect it in my lifetime) when adults will be “required” to work on the sabbath day.
To say that the issue is when to worship God and that those that worship God on Sunday will someday have the mark of the beast is a HUGE misrepresentation of what I believe. Christians worship God every day of the week. HELLO?!?!
The issue is (it already is) whether to use coercion with regard to religious beliefs, religious practices or religious prohibitions.
Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone. (When is the last time you heard an SdA sermon on THAT topic?) Resting on one day of the week can illustrate entering into rest–a relationship based on what God does, not on what we do. Resting on the day HE rested is the better way to illustrate that great truth–a way to worship the creator AS creator.
When Jesus returns, we will not be judged on biblical our theology is. We will be judged on how we treat those with whom we disagree. Some Adventists suppose that every Christian who isn’t an Adventist will eventually become an Adventist or receive the mark of the beast and go to hell. That, too, is a misrepresentation of what I believe.
Some will say on that day, “Sabbath, sabbath” and the Judge will say to them, “Depart from me, you whose spiritual pride stinks to the high heaven.”
Roger, continue to fear that Sunday Laws will be enacted in your remaining lifetime, but with 20 years your senior I am unimpressed that any senior citizens, or anyone for that matter, can be required to work. What work would that be? Those in rest homes who are unable? Who will employ them as businesses cannot be forced to pay work demanded by such laws? There would be wholesale protests by millions of workers who now for years have been accustomed to 40/hr week with most getting weekends off.
Such a preposterous idea should be supported by reason and logic. But such an idea you propose is both irrational and illogical unless you can show a realistic plan and not one based solely on fear of an old prediction based on the state of the U.S. at the time they were written.
All prophecies are worthless unless there are specific timelines given.
With HIM there is no fear, only Love. We do not fear individually, we know where we are going. We do not fear for our families, we see those within conviction to step in and help. This is the privilege of being in a strong Body, HIS; and the other strong bodies serving HIM. Should we not reverence HIM for sending them and appreciate them for their sacrifices? Should we definitely not try to make their jobs harder?
We should Love others enough provide them (and yes within discrimination more) opportunities for the same. We do not fear for us; but Love them; especially those lost. We are commanded to spread the Word.
We are also Cesar; and make those choices. Should we not support the strongest of wisdom and conviction in such; just as we should in every vote? In alternate; are we not responsible for what happens in all cases? Maybe our lack of conviction creates the issues? Maybe we bring on last days ourselves?
We definitely do not have privilege to give up. We definitely continue to either serve HIM or not. Maybe we should start calling failures for what they are? Maybe we should start calling backseat drivers for what they are? Maybe a good idea might be to should start calling HIM what HE is and start reverencing HIM.
Larry, i am familar with that game, only in Missouri they called it “SNIPE HUNTING”. i got caught holding the bag. Usually some one got hurt, running and tripping over rocks.
Yes, you are right, we did too, my memory was warped. Thanks Earl.
To speculate about “Sunday Laws” one must travel to Pluto, far far away. The reason? The last shred of salvaging hope for Adventist eschatology is deposited there.
Fixation on such resides exclusively in the soundproof chamber of Adventism where blind pilots are determined to rocket their spacey craft to Pluto with a last ditch hope of resurrecting the corpse left by the 1844 disaster.
Just as the new novel idea that prophecies aren’t really specific so is the novel reinterpretation of Sunday laws by Roger’s new proposal that working on Sabbath will be required.
Monte’s article about fear applies here. The histrionic grasping of fear (functioning as distorted hope) by a few is the residue of desperation by which Adventism lorded itself as the star, by God, of the fairy tale end times. Fear is the mindless bludgeon that once pounded countless minds to become Last-dayers Adventists.
I acknowledge the right of one to believe what he wishes. Apparently the Pluto trip is very entertaining! However, why wallow publicly in the mud/fear of Sunday laws? Adventism Is left with a remnant who long for the good old days to escape the embarrassment of believing a fiction. That is really what is going on.
Fear wastes humanity regardless of its source. Adventism wasted 145 years marketing it. It never effectively radiated from the sound proof chamber. The “world” has not wasted one minute on this version of neurotic fear. Sorry, Pluto is vacant.
Bugs,
Your Pluto analogy would perhaps make more sense if there had never been any blue laws ever enacted, or if there were never any such laws in force, or if no one had ever contemplated any such legislation on any level. Then you could say that Pluto is vacant. But since such laws have been enacted, and are in force, then lo and behold, Plutonian life has been.
Now if you can get those who would like to bring America back to God and to the (rhetorically supposed) Christian principles of its founding; and get those who believe that the concept of separation of church and state is fallacious, and has been detrimental to the culture, etc., etc., to permanently denounce blue laws conceptually and constitutionally, then maybe what looks like life on Pluto is really an illusion.
If there are Muslims who insist on Sharia law, what makes you think that there are not Christians who at least favor—and who under the ‘right’ circumstances, might insist upon—national observance of a day of rest and family togetherness?
Or, in response to the war that radical Muslim jihadists are waging against western values and in predominantly Judeo-Christian cultures and societies, and the ‘secular humanism’ that has (according to many Christian leaders in America) resulted in moral decline in this nation, do consider a Christian backlash, with emphases on Christian traditions (Merry Christmas) to be out of the question?
If your ridicule could be redirected into actually addressing such questions, your credibility as a scoffer might be enhanced. But, I understand, that wouldn’t be as much fun.
I remember the blue laws and their effect on Sunday sales when I was a kid. Sorry, Stephen, they weren’t anti-Sabbath. They were anti-Sunday business. They didn’t require any religious behavior. When you went into a drug store, for instance, ropes separated the stuff legal to buy from what wasn’t, as defined by law. Most businesses were closed.
The blue laws are gone, a long time ago, a sad fact for you. Colorado still forbids car dealer sales on Sunday. And that is a relic that is now defended by car dealers (who lobby against the periodic attempts to repeal it) because they welcome a day when business gets a rest, universally applied, no exceptions. There surely are other anecdotal examples of the relics left elsewhere, but they aren’t serious fodder for your hopeful, unrealized, persecution complex.
Adventist eschatology is a relic, too. Time to move on. Get a life, a fun one, without fear!
Well, at least now you’re back on earth and have made an attempt to address salient issues in this nihilistic approach that you feel required to take.
Bugs, you may want to take the time to correct and update the Wikipedia entry on this subject (and I know that it is subject to such editing by the public). There are standing blue laws now in force in most of the states in the U.S.; most of which have to do with restrictions or prohibitions of alcoholic beverage sales, auto vehicle dealership sales, and/or hunting and fishing. Even in liberal Massachusetts, hunting is prohibited on Sundays to this day; and there is a “Day of Rest” statute requiring that all employees get one day off from work in each calendar seven-day week.
Up until 1990 it was illegal for department stores to be opened on Sundays in neighboring Maine.
In Minnesota attempts to allow Sunday liquor sales have been legislatively defeated as recently as earlier this year (2015).
Interestingly, in Michigan, vehicle dealers who observe the seventh-day Sabbath (as if there is another one) from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday may instead operate on Sunday rather than Saturday. This is interesting on a number of levels, not the least of which is that it indicates that the Sunday closing is some sort of ‘Sabbath’ recognition and acknowledgement.
Those no liquor sales on Sunday could be a problem for Adventist imbibers!
Many of the major retail stores have been operated by Jewish merchants for which Saturday was their best sales day. Their worship, like most retail business owners, is for the almighty dollar. BTW, it is the optimum time for Adventist churches to call for offerings.
Sure, there are some never applied laws on many books. A book has been written on such laws enacted at one time that were never used. States in the Bible Belt are so-called “Christians”, where incidentally, domestic abuse is the highest. Go figure.
The larger point in all this is that there are Christians in the United States who take their religion seriously and who are clearly willing to enact and enforce blue laws—laws that the Wikipedia entry defines as “laws designed to enforce religious standards”—in 2015.
But it’s like you are unwilling or unable to acknowledge simple contemporary reality to the extent that it coincides or conceivably, potentially coincides with any Adventist eschatology. I maintain that this is because of the traumatic fear that still imprisons you in your seventies despite your over-the-top protestations to the contrary. But then, I’m no shrink…I could be wrong.
But I’m not wrong at all about the willingness of some in legislative and executive power to enact and enforce “laws designed to enforce religious standards” in 2015. Being cognizant and/or aware is not tantamount to being fearful, my man—being in denial of contemporary reality is.
Stephen, please real ALL I wrote.
You seemed to have missed this line: “There surely are other anecdotal examples of the relics left elsewhere, but they aren’t serious fodder for your hopeful, unrealized, persecution complex.” How is that wrong? It negates at least half of your proposition.
You are a shrink, you rascal, I shoulda figured that out long ago! You are the only one on the forum, the whole world even, in touch with my “trauma.” Good job.
So I, too, am a shrink. You enjoy the persecution complex because you hope to be traumatized by ruthless blue laws and their prophecy fulfilling papal promoters. You masochist! It’s your last hope of reclamation of a defunct theology and is the evidence of your denial (grief?) and the embarrassment of falling for a deceit. To maintain a figment of fiction you exercise the innovative, but most meager argument, that lurking “religious standard” laws and those waiting in the wings fulfill prophecy. Adventism eschatology confirmed!
I recommend a “Sabbatical” in my private preserve, the Fields of Ambrosia, as a way of recovery from your persecution illness and the pain of buying the Kickapoo Joy Juice of Adventism! No fee. Look what it has done for me!
C’mon Bugs, existing, currently enforced blue laws in most of the states is more than “anecdotal examples of the relics left elsewhere.”
You’re ignoring the point, as you must. The point is that there are legislators and legislatures that have no qualms about making laws that are drafted and designed to enforce religious standards. There are also legislators, otherwise known as politicians, who under certain conditions are willing to suspend or ignore or misconstrue the Constitution. And there legislators in these United States who are resentful of the moral and cultural decline that they perceive to have taken place since we have taken deviated from the Christian principles and traditions on which they believe the nation was founded.
These is a real time description of real life; all of which you have to ignore and deny in order to declare with certainty that an attempt of reactionary theocracy in America will never be made. You have to willfully ignore, deny, and rationalize what you see.
I may be an irritant to you at this point.
Corrections: …currently enforced blue laws in most of the states are more than…
…resentful of the moral and cultural decline that they perceive to have taken place since we have deviated from the Christian principles…
Stephen I think it is you who is ignoring the reality of the situation. SO what if blue laws are enacted by state or federal legislators to enforce ‘family time’ or business hours or uphold certain non-defined ‘religious values?’
This is a far, far cry from the SDA teaching that the Sabbath test will come when a papacy restored to world dominion shall enact a law forbidding worship on Saturday. Please do not continue to confuse yourself as to the significance of insignificant blue laws. It is not the thin edge of any wedge that matters. Papal world domination, followed by specific anti-Saturday-Sabbath laws is what you are looking for, nothing less. Read Great Controversy again. It should help to clarify things for you.
No Serge, there is no confusion on this at all. Since you brought it up, you may want to consult these sentences insofar as a clarification is concerned, “When the early church became corrupted by departing from the simplicity of the gospel and accepting heathen rites and customs, she lost the Spirit and power of God; and in order to control the consciences of the people, she sought the support of the secular power. The result was the papacy, a church that controlled the power of the state and employed it to further her own ends, especially for the punishment of “heresy.” In order for the United States to form an image of the beast, the religious power must so control the civil government that the authority of the state will also be employed by the church to accomplish her own ends.
Whenever the church has obtained secular power, she has employed it to punish dissent from her doctrines. Protestant churches that have followed in the steps of Rome by forming alliance with worldly powers have manifested a similar desire to restrict liberty of conscience.”
So instead of merely looking for a restored “papal world domination” or “anti-Saturday-Sabbath laws” per se, we should be concerned with religious power seeking to control the civil government such that the authority of the state will be employed by the church (the nominal Christian church, nominal Protestants and Catholics) to accomplish her own ends.
Protestants will follow the Roman pattern in forming alliance with, and leveraging the power of the state to restrict liberty of conscience (see GC Chapter 25).
“When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result…The “image to the beast” represents that form of apostate Protestantism which will be developed when the Protestant churches shall seek the aid of the civil power for the enforcement of their dogmas. The “mark of the beast” still remains to be defined.” (Ibid p. 445)
Now Serge, please keep in mind I have only directly referenced and quoted from GC because you recommended that I reread it.
Sunday laws in America, enforced blue laws of any kind, laws “designed to enforce religious standards,” do not exist in a vacuum and do not come out of nowhere. Precedence/predicate for prophecy fulfillment has hereby been established.
Sorry Stephen, those sentences only muddy the waters further. Ellen is no better at history than she is at prophecy.
One must needs be brief. Her description of the rise of the papacy is too simplistic to be even close to reality. It wasn’t the church which took over the state, but the reverse.
Did the early church depart ‘the simplicity of the gospel?’ That’s a bit rich coming from someone who helped invent ‘the investigative judgement,’ and then included that bizarre, complicated idea as gospel for ‘the last days.’ Even Stephen wants to run a mile from it.
Fact is, ‘natural man’ and ‘spiritual man’ have always been present in human society. It is simply the natural tendency of natural man to build organisations and power structures, religious and political. The SDA church is no different.
Whenever the church has obtained secular power, she has employed it to punish dissent from her doctrines.” Are you sure of this? Is EGW correct here? Eg, when the Puritans and Cromwell got together to form an English parliament, the worst I can find that they did was to ban Christmas! If you know of their use of secular power to punish dissent from their doctrines, I’d like to hear it.
And finally, if the blue laws do not happen in a vacuum, perhaps you can detail which churches have conspired with the civil power to get them passed. How are they using civil power to enforce their decrees? Its all too fanciful for serious words.
Serge, I must say that you are the one who seems awfully confused (and confusing) as to what it is that you believe. I have been pretty candid as to what it is I believe and what I believe to be important and why. You can see what I have written in the archives of this site if you aren’t familiar with my beliefs.
I know that you don’t believe certain things, but you are the guy who referenced and referred me to The Great Controversy; and I’ve reminded you of that fact.
I operate from a different paradigm than you do insofar as my beliefs are concerned. I’m good with that; as you should be. As a Seventh-day Adventist, I subscribe to the interpretation of eschatological Biblical prophecy that is espoused by EGW in GC. My take on current events and public affairs is colored by that reality. Yours is not.
So why would you refer me to THAT interpretation, and recommend THAT interpretation to me, to clarify my own take on current events and public affairs (which I am always happy to do); when you disagree with that to which you have referred me, while I agree with it?
If you could point to something that I wrote with regard to blue laws in the United States that is at variance with the GC interpretation, then I could understand. But since you have not and cannot do that, then why did you refer me to that with which I agree, and recommend to me that with which you disagree for ‘clarification’? That is bewildering.
Good of you to admit, Stephen, that you confine your beliefs to the self-referential world of EGW’s perfervid imagination of the future. That her imagination is also totally outside of what is actually happening in this world comes as no surprise to all who have learnt that her credentials to divinely appointed prophethood are tarnished beyond hope of repair.
If you go to her online writings and search ‘universal sunday law,’ the real big picture (not a few blue laws in a few US states) you find such non-sense as this:
“As the Sabbath has become the special point of controversy throughout Christendom, and religious and secular authorities have combined to enforce the observance of the Sunday, the persistent refusal of a small minority to yield to the popular demand will make them objects of universal execration. It will be urged that the few who stand in opposition to an institution of the church and a law of the state ought not to be tolerated; that it is better for them to suffer than for whole nations to be thrown into confusion and lawlessness.” GC
Maybe in C19 this New-England-centric view meant something. But the world has drifted far from her sense of inevitability of how things would go. The prospect of ‘universal’ Sunday laws are more remote than ever. The false gospel of the IJ with Sabbath as its contentious centre-piece is a mirage. Come out of her, My people.
So, I note that you have no explanation as to why you would refer and recommend me to EGW and the GC for clarification (your word) of what I should think about the very existence of laws designed to enforce religious standards here in the United States, or the reactionary quasi-theocracy for which some extremists would prefer (for the stated purposes of returning America to God and winning the culture for Christ) as a counter to the moral declension (the cultural slouching toward Gomorrah) in American society.
What you have done of course is to once again hyperbolically mischaracterize my position; hilariously claiming that I have ‘admitted’ to “confining [my] beliefs to the self-referential world of EGW’s perfervid imagination of the future,” when in reality I acknowledged that “I subscribe to the interpretation of eschatological Biblical prophecy that is espoused by EGW in GC.” At this point I suppose you think that it somehow helps you to confuse ‘confining’ one’s beliefs to something and agreeing with a particular interpretive outline of prophetic events; just as you had earlier claimed that “[I wanted] to run a mile away from [the investigative judgment doctrine]” just because I believe that one who accepts Christ’s advocacy/intercession on their behalf cannot possibly lose any judgment or verdict.
Here’s your advantage, as a nihilist, agnostic, or atheist, you can simply say that you don’t believe whatever; that it’s all nonsense; while never standing for or believing anything—except nihilism.
I’m curious Serge, who or what do you interpret the first and second beasts in Revelation 13 to represent? And about what particularly do you interpret the Third Angel’s Message in Revelation 14:9-12 to be a warning?
Stephen, even though you appear not to have understood why I referred you to GC, does not mean I did not have a purpose in doing so. You were stressing how the blue laws represent some kind of fulfilment of SDA eschatology. I referred you to GC to see that for EGW, nothing short of a universal Sunday law will cut it. And not only in GC are these predictions to be found, but that is a start. However, once one rereads those EGW predictions in GC and elsewhere, one realises how restricted and defined they are by her C19 New England mindset. Nothing inspired in that at all.
And Stephen, you clearly said that you presented the material that you did because you believe in the EGW eschatology, even though elsewhere, you claimed ot have no interest in the IJ, ‘because I am not a theologian’ I believe was the excuse offered. Yet such a claim offers no escape from the fact that EGWs eschatology is all about the outworking of the IJ. Maybe you should make more of an effort to come to grips with the IJ, since you are so wedded to its eschatological ramifications.
And I don’t think it is nice of you to accuse me of nihilism/atheism just because I repudiate SDAism and its heresies. I have studied SDA theology to a greater degree than most. I know where the skeletons are in your theological closet. I also know by experience what Paul means when he says, ‘Christ is my life.’
There is, therefore, no point in a merry-go-round ‘you say/I say’ argument about Rev.13.
Not so fast Serge; I was not “stressing how the blue laws represent some kind of fulfillment of SDA eschatology” so much as I was stressing that the existence of currently enforced blue laws (of any kind) provide a predicate for the fulfillment of SDA eschatology.
Bugs had been stating that SDA eschatology has already and finally failed. I pointed to the existence of currently in force laws designed to enforce religious standards as evidence that our eschatological outline remains most viable because, among other reasons, there are people and politicians who are willing and able to enact and enforce such legislation in America; and there are people and politicians who are desirous of doing much more to return America back to God and to win the culture for Christ, and to return this nation to the Christian principals on which they’ve concluded it was founded, etc.
Here’s the thing Serge, you obviously believe that SDA eschatology is based on or grounded upon the 1844 theory of the investigative judgment which you reject. Therefore you reject SDA eschatology itself. I believe that SDA eschatology is based on Protestantism and on the prophecies of the book of Revelation; particularly chapters 12 and following.
You believe that I copped out because I have a fundamentally big picture take on the investigative judgment that does not focus on the details The Sanctuary, but rather on the bottom line results of Christ’s ministry.
I think you have copped out because you have thus far demonstrated a nihilist approach to Revelation 13—or you just aren’t demonstrating the courage of your convictions on it; whatever they may be. Just tell me what you believe, brother.
The poor in the Great Depression of 1930-1940 were those of little education, many with none. i recall the frequency in which many had to sign X for their signature. If they could get a job it was at 15-20 cents per hour. And most survived on the Government Relief programs for food., and church hand outs. The progeny of those, unfortunately, have inherited the same traits as their parents, many shunning education, and recipiants
happy to be on government dole for life, now into the 5th generation. The dole is never
sufficient to satisfy the desire for the same benefits as those who work, hence they are responsible for most of the crime and drug problems, and fill our prisons at a cost of approx $50,000. plus annually. And the politicos of the USA seem to like this situation as it guarantees them being re-elected. As a side light to this, many jobs cease to exist in this information age, and many don’t qualify for any job, so the government must provide for an ever increasing group of former workers, who have used up their unemployment benefits, but which the government doesn’t count as being unemployed, in their statistics. So the true real unemployment rate in the USA is not 5%, but 20% plus.
How easy to denigrate one’s ancestors who lacked the education of today. Many would stop at my parents back door, not far from the railroad track, begging for some work. We had nothing for them to do as we couldn’t pay if we had. But my mother always gave them a sandwich for which they were very grateful. Few of any of the population had more than a few grades of schooling. but were very hard workers but all businesses were failing. In prior years, most people lived on farms and survived on their own work, but the Dust Bowl made that impossible.
Looking down on poor folks as though it were all their fault is a very unChristian response to life’s tragedies. When people got sick, there was no way to pay for medical care. I saw it all and never forgot that there, but for the grace of God, could be me.
For whatever reason one is poor is sad. They need help, not just monetarily, but spiritually and physically. How many are unable to care for themselves due to poor diet and lifestyle (along with drugs and alcohol)? I suspect it is a lot–they need help as well and understanding and teaching. And not through those who condone immorality or stealing. Believe it or not, but we know of social workers who have told the poor to do just that. It would take an army of volunteers with values to work one-on-one with the poor and let them know they are valued and loved. If I could start over again, I would do that with Christ as my partner.
Hmmm, how valuable is free information worth?? To one of persecution beliefs?? Ah, the Kickapoo Joy Juice, in the Garden of Ambrosia, Ah Ah, make my reservation, Quick.
Earl, free information is worth every dime you pay for it1
Elaine, there is no denigration in my “factual” description of the signs of the times, as they were,and are lived out. My grandmother also passed out food to those appearing at her back door, mostly hobos, as the tracks were just a block away. My Mom walked 4 miles to work, worked 10 hours at 18 cents an hour in a basket factory, and then walked 4 miles home, usually in the dark both ways in 1936. She always found a job to support her 4 children. In the 1920’s, she was a telephone switching operator superior. i have feelings for those who keep struggling to feed their brood, but none for the more recent generations who’ve had the same opportunity for education and jobs, but refused to take advantage of it. Preferring to live off of others (tax payers) labor as parasites. i am not speaking here of those incapable of working because of physical or mental disabilities. Society has a responsibility for those unfortunates. i also touched upon the near future when jobs for those with lower IQ’s, and other problems,for which there will be no jobs will of necessity have to be provided with provisions by the State
If this was a poker game, Stephen, your hand would be fully exposed to the players. You don’t seem to notice your cards are tilted as a revelation to the players while you continue gulping Adventist Kickapoo Joy Juice. You are determined to pretend you hold a royal flush, diamonds. But we see no royalty, only puny numbers. We players will happily gain your chips as long as you keep tossing them on the table. You are broke and don’t know it. We now accept your fantasy chips, with a nod and a wink. That’s all you have left.
Conviction is the impenetrable vault of a man’s mind, in his own mind. Contrary evidence, facts, rationality, logic, all the normal weapons against conspiracy theories are ineffective. Fear, as the sparkling jewel inside, needs shelter at all costs because bankruptcy is perceived on the loss of it, an intolerable dissolution of conviction. Fear, in reality, is the ego on parade.
Stephen, I accept that bullets of reality will ever be tomatoes tossed against your vault.
Yeah, except I’m the one providing the facts regarding what religious-political operatives have done and have said, and what ‘cultural,’ historical, and religious motivations they have expressed, (including a far from exhaustive list of) what blue laws are on the books and currently in force, where, etc., and I could go on in terms of the reactions we see and have seen to terrorism and war in terms effects on civil liberties, as evidences or glimpses of what CAN happen. In other words I’m providing the prose, and all I get back from you is poetry—denial with flowery and imaginative, descriptive imagery.
You are basically saying, or ‘betting’ on, what CANNOT happen in the future, based on who knows what…Millerite time-specific predictions of the past, I suppose. Guess what, there are many millions of Christians who have interpretations of eschatological trouble and ‘tribulation’ who have never heard of the Millerites and don’t know anything about Adventists. Betting on what CANNOT happen in the future is what I’d call playing (or bluffing) a weak hand.
Coveting persecution because of Sabbath observance is the same as going rattle snake hunting and not finding any. The failure of both makes for very good days.
Well, what do you know; more poetry. This lingering lifelong fear of persecution is crippling you Bugs; in that it prevents you from hearing and/or accepting that you don’t need to be afraid. Who said anything about “coveting persecution”? Besides, being aware that rattle snakes do exist where you are makes you more informed and alert; and knowing that they are dangerous should influence you to avoid them; and knowing exactly where they are and how to avoid them keeps you safe from them. It also makes you wise enough to know that there are other, less deadly, things for which you can instead hunt.
Stephen, finding a predicate to Adventist eschatology is locating a rattlesnake only to discover it has no fangs and no rattles. Opps! It’s just a harmless garter snake!
Your unique talent is creating faux fangs and rattles to arm unsuspecting garter snakes. Your ability to thrive energetically in a mythical mental world is amazing and highly entertaining!
Bugs and Stephen,
We should be able to agree no one but God knows the future. It is impossible for any man to know the future. Period. No qualifiers. If God would choose to, He could reveal the future. Those who believed His revelation might be empowered to act like they knew the future. But their knowledge is limited to knowledge of the revelation, not knowledge of the future.
The disagreement is about who or what revelation to believe. As you say, Stephen’s cards are all face up – pretty much. We know what revelation he believes.
Bugs, what do you believe is ‘revealed?’. How, what, when and where? and of course, Who?
The future is upon us. We know nothing. What do you believe? Jesus Christ said: “Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that precedes from the mouth of God” How shall we live, if not by faith?
Well said William! The hand of revelation that I am playing are of cards that are not hidden at all. They are by definition face-up. And as I pointed out, there are now, and have been, many millions of (particularly Protestant) Christians who believe in some sort of eschatological trouble, or tribulation, or persecution; who have never, ever heard of Millerites, and/or who have never known what Adventists believe or have taught about eschatology.
The advantage that nihilists like Bugs have, or that folks like Serge (who deny that they are nihilists, but deny nonetheless) have, is that we don’t even know, and cannot determine, what it is that they believe…except in both cases, we know what they don’t believe…and that is all we are likely to know.
I suppose that I am not only agreeing with you/William, and with inspired revelation that the just will live by faith; but I am also suggesting that there are those who will perish via lack of belief, or faith, and via unbelief’s concomitant and inevitable counterparts—fear and denial.
Meanwhile all Bugs can do is wax poetically about a mythical, amazing, and entertaining mental world, and about a love god who is not conscience and intentional about love…as if that is not mythical and amazing, if not entertaining (of which if it is, it is marginally).
Very strange analogy, Larry. As a former rattlesnake slayer, I enjoyed a good fight with a rattlesnake–happy to chance upon one. I feel the same way when I chance upon something that is not connected to Adventism but validates it, the thrill that is.
Adolf Deissman, in his lexicon of koine when it was first identified, revealed, with an actual graphic reproduction, the historical “mark of the beast”. It was an imperial Roman seal affixed to legal documents such as property deeds. It pertained to buying and selling.
It featured an engraving of the emperor and his dates. It’s no coincidence that Adventism saw sinister developments of Rome in the “mark” of the beast, considering its lexicography. Check Deismann’s Bible Studies under the Greek word χάραγμα
No, Hansen, my analogy isn’t weird, you are! I mean in your delight with rattlesnake encounters! As a young pastor many moons ago, I traveled with a church member to O’Keene, OK, where there is (or was) an annual snake festival which included searchers combing the land for normally plentiful rattlers. The high temp was in the low forties, snakes stayed out of sight. We retreated, shivering, to town where many pens containing snakes were already erected. When we headed back to Wichita, we agreed it was a perfect day for hunting the creepy critters.
I know from experience how absent rattlers make a good day!
In Arizona where I know live, we are supplied with rattlesnakes with diamond marks on their backs, a few periodically in our subdivision. That’s enough mark on a beast for me!
I’m unimpressed by Adventism’s concern about the mark. Creators of early Adventism usually had a reason behind their propositions, but they were terrible in extrapolation, so I’m not surprised there is an actual source for their musing. I guess they pasted the 666 onto it.
I didn’t know the koine identification came so late in history. I just read a short biography of Deissman and he was a pretty remarkable guy.
Larry, Yep, I confess to likin’ to kill rattlesnakes. If that makes me weird, ,meh.
As for Deissman and the koine, he was/is credited with recognizing that the Greek of the Bible was common Greek, rather than a heavenly form of the Classical. Identifying the historic “mark” with Roman Emperors gives a lot more credibility to the Adventist interpretation than does Sr.White, yet I never heard about this from an SDA evangelist. It’s more sensational than some Jesuit nonsense and based upon fact rather than occult history of the Alberto school.
My limited experience killing rattlers was gained in Arizona, a lovely place. I liked to go into Sycamore Canyon the back way from the Cottonwood area. An early Congressional Medal of Honor was given to a U.S. Calvaryman fighting, not rattlers, but Tonto Apaches, in Sycamore Canyon.
I “baptized” an infant in Sycamore Canyon for fun but last I heard, he was in jail. Guess I Should of stuck to rattlesnake killing.
“Living by faith” is pronouncement of the obvious. There is no alternative.
To say that God knows the future but ignoring that he hasn’t done anything about it means he is OK with pain and suffering. If one buys the Great Controversy metaphor it appears he effectively lost the battle. You can argue Christ intervened to clean up the mess, to stem the tide, but that is the ultimate “living by faith” based hope since there is no possible verification. It is a conveniently reserved solution, but only for the future, where we cannot venture while alive.
William, we really don’t actually know where we came from, why we are here, and where we are going. Faith, belief, religion, conviction, create metaphor templates for feasible explanations. None are none righter or wonger than the other since they all are mental creations. Yes, I know that is the springboard to countless protestations.
Your profession of faith that “Man does not live by bread alone. . .” ending with your statement “How shall we live, if not by faith?” is a fine short version of what I just wrote!
I consider myself a Christian, not an agnostic or atheist. I, too, have a faith template which is the “bread” by which I live. It is structured without a great controversy metaphor, bound in the experience of Love that exports from Christ’s teachings and life. What the future brings is death, but I am comforted on my journey there by the experience of Love. What is after that? Wait and see.
Bugs,
Your faith template is blank. Believing in faith is like saying you believe in believing.
The who, what, when how and where are missing. I believe in that man Jesus of Nazareth who is called Christ. I try to believe the scripture like he believed the scripture. I don’t want to make up a personal Jesus all on my own. I know the historical Jesus is beyond the historian’s reach. I believe in the Jesus Christ that His disciples believed in. They believed he rose from the dead. They treasured what He said and wrote it down and taught one another His words, they taught one another about His faith.
God is OK with pain and suffering if Jesus is Christ. He became the answer to pain and suffering.
I believe in Him so I believe that death is vanquished. I will see. But I don’t wait to see. I believe.
What do you believe about Jesus who is called the Christ?
I applauded your profession of faith. Not because I agree, know exactly all it is, but because it is yours, your conviction. You have arrived at your minimum standard of belief, adopted the tenets you “like.” Yes, pick-and-choose is the process of arriving at an opinion, that is how you arrived at your faith. Faith is opinion based.
Conviction is the point of ego satisfaction where faith is elevated to judgeship. Where opinion moves to a kind of legal status by which others are measured and judged. That’s the reason for your question, “What do you believe about Jesus who is called the Christ?” Your estimation of me can be determined by my answer. It’s a trick question so you can decide if I meet a standard created in your mind. I know of no occasion when Christ exercised that subterfuge to gauge anyone. And that tells you what I think about Christ without falling for the trick.
“Truth” isn’t created by belief (opinion). It isn’t affirmed by belief, regardless of countless adherents. Faith applied to oneself is sacrosanct. It has no worth when applied to others. Each is responsible for his own. The first commandment forbids having oneself as a god, which what one becomes when requiring another to be like himself.
Religious belief is the crutch each person creates or adopts to assist the traipse through life. Whacking someone with it is artifact. No damage possible, except to the reverberation back to the whacker. Your faith is still fine with me.
Bugs,
“What do you believe about Jesus?” A trick question? An interrogatory subterfuge? A verdict? Jesus was always asking people what they thought of Him – and of the Messiah. He emphatically said He didn’t come to judge, but to save. I don’t judge you. I don’t want to judge you. Let me rephrase the question. What do you think about Jesus: That Jew, born of Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate, whose tomb is empty?
We are agreed: knowledge and truth are not created or affirmed by faith. Man’s heart is desperately wicked and deceitful above all else and his ‘faith’ is usually misdirected. Man covets power, not faith. In most people’s opinion, a motorized wheelchair rather than a crutch is a better way to traipse through life. Power is the thing we want.
If, “Faith applied to oneself is sacrosanct” then oneself has become an idol. El Falso Dios. Original sin.
I’m not requiring Bugs to be like myself. I’m inquiring as to what he believes (thinks) about a man who thought He was God. As Pilate said: behold the man As Pilate wrote: KING OF THE JEWS
Whacking you with my crutch would be totally rude. Just tell me what you think of Him.
Wow, William, you sure know how to mangle a reply! You say, ” Jesus was always asking people what they thought of Him – and of the Messiah.” Show me the “always” part. Skip the Jesus/Peter interview. And don’t include his “who do they say I am” as evidence.
Explain how one’s faith as “sacrosanct” creates an idol. It just means it isn’t fair game for attack. Original sin? What is that?
[“Faith” is usually misdirected] you say. How do you know that without being the all-seeing God about another person’s faith? See my explanation of conviction above!
When you say “Power is the thing we want.” Who is the “we?”
Why do you want to know what “you [me] think of Him?” Why does it matter? And didn’t you read my posit that conviction elevates opinion to judgeship (power), a violation of the first commandment? Are you tricky William the Idolater; maybe William the Crutch Wacker (a feeble swipe at humor in both references)?
No, I don’t idolize you, but yes, I still respect you and your profession of faith!
Bugs,
The woman at the well, the rich young ruler, the Syro-Phoenician woman, the rulers of the Jews, Pilate, Jesus’ own mother, and many others were challenged by Jesus’ questions and statements to examine what they believed about Him and about the messiah.
The object of faith is sacrosanct. If faith’s object is oneself’s faith, then faith is misplaced. The self and its faith becomes an idol. Eve’s original sin was to believe the serpent and to elevate her own desires and covetousness as more important than obedience. She exercised her will independently and contrary to God. She wanted power and status independent of the power and status associated with obedience.
‘We’ is most of us. “Usually” is my qualifier, I have no knowledge of others faith. I do see lots of self-centeredness in myself and others. I’m just guessing. Jesus was ‘always’ commenting on faith and prodding his listeners to examine the content and object of their faith. Do you want to dispute Jesus thought many people had weak and misdirected faith?
You said you are a Christian. I am interested in what you think. I always read your comments. I never doubted your word that you respect me and my profession of faith. Jesus, who is called Christ, is central to our shared Christian faith. What you think about Jesus Christ matters. Jesus said He came to save – not to judge. The servant is not greater than his Lord. I judge you not. I try hard anyway. I’m prone to falling. (not…
Thanks, William. Excellent reply, one of the few I have ever received!
My only additional statement would be that the term “messiah” meant something different to Christ’s contemporaries than the application you reference. That is, the Jewish people were looking for a deliverer from their hostage position to the Romans. That isn’t the same as the Savior of the world. You have to assume Christ was double speaking to encompass two different levels of messiahship. I’m not convinced he saw himself more than a deliverer of Israel, that came later as an interpretive expansion that followed the empty tomb.
As for my view of Christ, I don’t care about the proposition of saving the world. It’s a pipe dream. I do care about living life fully and find in Christ’s life and teachings and experience living benefits in their application in my life. God as love, Christ’s central attestation, is at the center of that. I expect to die with a smile and the assurance that all is well since God is love and if there is something afterward it will be because of that Love. This avoids egocentrism because God as Love radiates, is shared, and stimulates full life living on the part of others.
As mentioned several times this thread, no one knows the mind of the Creator. Who owns the Earth and the Cosmos?? Some one or something set in motion, approx 15 billion years ago, the Cosmos, unless we are using parameters that are totally without a factor/factors, denying mankind to be able to have any understanding of the time line element. Same factors include having any certainty of the actual age of the Earth. But what difference does it make?? Some one or something set in motion the facts of life we can know by recorded history (although some history has been denied, or revised, as to acceptance by the gullible or ignorant.) A point of this is many have accepted that 6 million Jewish people, Gypsies, and undesirables, were murdered by the Nazis in WWII. i know it happened, because i toured 2 on the sites. shortly after the war, viewing the evidence first hand, and personally interviewed survivors in the DP camps in Germany and Austria. So we on Earth owe a great debt to whoever provided the intelligence of DNA, the Genome, and man’s brain which is a massive computer; as well as the bounty of the Earth’s provisioning. Obviously the who, or what, or why, or when, was situated somewhere in the universes, as supposedly according to the factors involved, indicate the Cosmos is approx 10 million years older than the Earth. But what do we know for a certainty, nothing.
(CONTINUED)
Where Ellen White badly missed the boat was in her obsession with the notion that last day events would be characterized by battles among Christians. This was understandable, in that secular/pagan religions were not a part of the world she saw and experienced.
Scriptural prophecy, however, does not see a Balkanized world of professed followers of Christ duking it out for political power. Biblical eschatology sees political power as pagan – Rome and Babylon – denying God and distorting His character. Ellen White completely failed to foresee the rise of secularism and its morphing into a militant pagan morality that is increasingly intolerant of Christianity as a moral force in the public square.
If you are looking for signs of Biblical prophecy being fulfilled (they have been present in every generation since the dawn of Christianity) it is completely unbiblical to look for those signs in differences over Christian doctrine. Rather, look at those who use political power and force to oppress professed followers of Christ. It’s really not all that complicated once you get past the Papal paranoia which Ellen White and early Adventists inherited from their religious forebears.
Nathan, I might add: Militant Pagans have absolutely no scruples about wielding political power and welding it to religious belief. Its their MO. It’s also Islam’s (ISIS) big thing: totalitarian rule.
Christians and Jews have an intrinsic problem unifying the city of man and the city of God. Popes and Jesuits got a bad reputation trying to do that. They might try again, you never know. But right now they are the least of our worries and more likely are allies, not enemies, in these last days.
It must be perceived to be unfair to ask those Adventists who disagree with regular, historic Adventist interpretations of Revelation 12-14 particularly, to provide their interpretation of that portion of the Revelation of Jesus Christ; and more specifically, the first two beasts in Revelation 13 and the Third Angel’s Message in Revelation 14, because we never seem to get that information. For instance, Nathan has now asserted that “Ellen White badly missed the boat…in her obsession with the notion that last day events would be characterized by battles among Christians.”
What is most ironic in this assertion is the fact that Ellen White specifically indicated that last day events would be characterized by Christians coming together on common points of concern and doctrine.
“The wide diversity of belief in the Protestant churches is regarded by many as decisive proof that no effort to secure a forced uniformity can ever be made. But there has been for years, in churches of the Protestant faith, a strong and growing sentiment in favor of a union based upon common points of doctrine. To secure such a union, the discussion of subjects upon which all were not agreed–however important they might be from a Bible standpoint–must necessarily be waived… When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions,…”
then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result.” GC 444-445
Nathan also incorrectly states that “Ellen White completely failed to foresee the rise of secularism and its morphing into a militant pagan morality that is increasingly intolerant of Christianity as a moral force in the public square.”
If the first part of that assertion (that is, her failing to foresee the rise of secularism) were true, then she would not have pointed out, as she did, that “The Bible declares that before the coming of the Lord there will exist a state of religious declension similar to that in the first centuries. ‘In the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.’ 2 Timothy 3:1-5. ‘Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.’ 1 Timothy 4:1.
Stephen, a couple of questions, if you will:
1.”When the leading churches of the United States, …, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions,…”
What are the ‘decrees’ and ‘institutions’ here spoken of which shall be enforced?
2. “Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result.”
Is this the ‘image to the beast’ spoken of in Rev 13?
3. If this is the ‘image to the beast’ of Rev 13, how do you see the effect of this becoming universal? US population is some 300mil. World pop. is 4.3 Bil. So how does this affect the other 4 billion people, the vast majority of whom are not Christian and have zero interest in US politics? Is not EGW/SDA eschatology rather myopic in this interpretation of Rev 13?
4.How does a ‘universal sunday law’ operate, to put all of humanity to this final ‘Sabbath test,’ in this kind of world,ie, 1.4bil secular Chinese, 1.2 bil Hindus,(Hinduism is probably the most ancient of all religions) .8bil Muslims(apart from SDAism, the most recent), balance of Africans, secular Westerners and a few(relatively) Christians, most of whom are Catholic?
Satan will work ‘with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness.’ And all that ‘received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved,’ will be left to accept ‘strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.’ 2 Thessalonians 2:9-11. When this state of ungodliness shall be reached, the same results will follow as in the first centuries.” GC 444
The plain fact is that this contemporary rise in secularism has been met with a reactionary backlash of militant “Christian soldiers marching as to war;” who now want to win the (American) culture back for Christ and to return America back to God. These are now expressly stated verbatim motivations in response to the religious and moral declension that the Bible (and as a result, White) did foresee.
Interestingly Nathan sees the secular reaction to this as “intolerance of Christianity as a moral force in the public square;” whereas others, including myself, perceive vigilance on the proverbial wall of separation of church from state for the protection of the freedom, autonomy and independence of both against incursive institutional influence of either against the other.
Of course, as a Protestant, if and when one sees all of this in terms of “Papal paranoia…inherited from… religious forebears” without acknowledgment that such forebears were in fact the Protestant reformers themselves; then who can will be able to tell how one would interpret the symbols in eschatological Bible prophecy?!
Serge,
You’ve already said that you are unwilling to get into a he said/she said about Revelation 13 with me.
I’m beginning to see how this works with nihilism. I tell you what I believe so you can say “nonsense;” while you refuse to say what it is you believe about anything; or whenever someone asks you about anything in particular you won’t answer.
I’ll tell you what, why don’t you tell me what you believe the first two beasts in Revelation 13 represent, and what you believe it is particularly about which Revelation 14:9-12 warns against.
At that point I’ll address your questions to me as best I can. How’s that?
Now to what Abbot & Stephen believe. They are Christians, who accept the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, by faith, according to Holy Writ. According to the Bible, they will be in the eternal kingdom. As to Larry Boshell, he is a Christian, accepting the unique value of LOVE, as exemplified by the life of Jesus Christ, and lives by the love personified in the life of Christ, yet accepts no knowledge as presented in the Bible of the actuality of happenings, as in his mind there is no way to know for a certainty that the events and actions actually happened, as there is no way to ascertain they were real, and they do have a unusual make believe quality, and there is no way to know how many tales told over countless bon fires, for thousands or millions of years, before actually put into writing. Hence he seriously questions the story line is true. Yet, we read in the Holy Bible “by their fruits ye shall know them”. Who is to say, with any certainty that the great loving humanitarian, Bugs/Larry Boshell, will not arrive in the eternal Fields of Ambrosia, in the distant future, with his sole restored. i wouldn’t. What do we know, nothing!!
Yes,Earl. And your defense of Bugs’s right to the kingdom is also “according to Holy Writ”-straight from Matthew 25. Thanks for the reminder that right doing (orthopraxy) trumps right belief (orthodoxy), when it comes to separating the sheep from the goats, at least.
The tragically sad aspect I find in the story of the separation of the sheep and goats in Matthew 25 is how firmly the goats believe they were doing right. We don’t have to look far to find plenty of examples of “goats” around us today. One of the clearest profiles of a “goat” I have found is: 1) they argue that others should believe as they do; 2) they are often quick to heap scorn and suspicion on those who disagree with them; and 3) they criticize and condemn those who are actually doing any of the good works Jesus wants us doing.
Noel, the tragedy is that self-anointed mini-gods presume to know the mind of God about an imaginary place based on an extrapolated interpretation of Scripture. It has nothing to do with appropriate immigrants to nirvana. It has all to do with an ego attempt to assure that one is righteous over against the condemned. My way or the highway. Christ’s quotation in regard to wheat and tares, sheep and goats doesn’t matter when the interpretative intent is elevate oneself at the expense of others.
You, nor I, nor anyone has a clue of what “heaven” is, what it looks like, where it is, and most of all who will populate it. Opinions are rampant. None are based on eyewitness accounts. The truth is that heaven is an imaginary place. Qualifying, going there is equally imaginary. For eons paradise has decorated the minds of humans as the perfect alternative to pain and suffering. Christianity has taken a few words from Christ, filtered and amplified through the Catholic Church for a thousand years and has produced a contemporary version fitting of Heaven Envy.
I can’t say there isn’t a heaven, or that it doesn’t have rules for entrance exactly as you perceive. But there are as many version as there are religions, denominations, and people. Who has the inside track? Do you?
You don’t appear to be a judgmental person. So I don’t understand your posting of three rules for the identification of ineligible slugs. I may be misinterpreting your intent.
Bugs,
I don’t know what Heaven will be like. Paul told us no eye has seen it and we can’t imagine it. Those who have seen it in vision say there are no words adequate to describe it. So I can only expect that it will exceed anything I have imagined as good and perfect. Whatever it is like, I’m sure I will enjoy it because Jesus promised that He was preparing a place for all who love Him. Best of all, Jesus will be there and I’m looking forward to spending a whole lot of time with Him.
One of the benefits of religious belief is that one gets to choose what he likes for his belief system. By “likes” I mean prefers. There is a huge menu of concepts, ideas, theologies, dogmas, propositions, which cannot be adopted in the whole for obvious reasons, but are adaptable to individual picking and choosing the concepts attractive to those inclined to faith. One sets his own criteria. It also means that faith is an opinion based enterprise and its value resides only with the individual selector. Of course, one can find commonality of opinion with others, at least in the main, thus there are churches, religions, denominations, sects and other collectives.
William Abbot, in a previous post, suggested power is what men seek. He is correct insofar as faith or belief is marshaled as power over others who differ in belief. Judgment. There is human satisfaction, power, in “holding the high ground.” The presumption is that an individual has investigated all available propositions and has made the only, therefore the best, choices possible. Without the same selections, all other choosers are just wrong and worthy of some level of disdain.
Noel, you have expressed your faith in your recount of your belief in a real heaven where you intend to go and talk with Jesus. Perfectly fine with me. But your opinion is no entitlement to begrudge different views. The truth is, Paradise Envy is endemic to mankind, can only expressed as a dream, relief from death.
Bugs,
I’m not begrudging you anything. I simply choose to take God at His word.
Several points to make relative to Stephen’s end times scenario. 1. Belief in the Lord Jesus Christ, and daily seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is i believe at the lowest ebb of action ever, of those calling themselves Christian. Having trained as an observant since youth, my observation of the Christian experience in the USA is sad to note. In the 1920’s thru 1950’s, it seemed almost every family had a church affiliation. All dressed up and attending church as families. The Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, Nazarenes, Catholics, etc etc. Blacks & Whites, were the people i observed. i loved to visit the black neighborhoods in Washington D.C, on Easter, my my, the fabulous bright colors of clothing, purchased especially for the Spring season, and the children, also dolled up, and their hair and clothing perfectly groomed, that Moms spent hours preparing them for church. Always walking to their local churches as families. It was beautiful, i rarely am able to get out much anymore. i wonder if this is still happening in the USA. In the 1970’s
i attended with a neighbor, the local United Methodist church, on Easter, and on their daughter’s confirmation?? And on each occasion, not once did i hear the name of Jesus mentioned. Couldn’t believe that Mother Earth had taken the place of our Creator, Redeemer, Saviour, Lord. (CONTINUED)
i attended the Methodist church in the 1930’s, as it was the nearest church, as we lived out in the sticks. We heard Jesus preached every Sunday, with the occasional altar call. i was baptized when 8 years old, in the Baptist church, because they gave every one baptized a bible with their name printed in the fore pages. On Mothers DAY, all attending were given a Red Rose, if your Mother was still alive, and a White Rose if your Mother was in heaven. In the latter 30’s and early 40’s, while finishing high school, the local Presbyterian church had an active teen club, with a young minister, who had a very large old Packard touring car with an open folding convertible top, with two rows of rear seats, of which ten to 12 kids would go to swimming holes, or other outdoor events, on Saturdays. The Christ story was also preached at this church. i’ve heard, that all of these earlier mainline Christian churches, with the exception of the Baptist and evangelical churches, are minus the story of Jesus Christ, existing primarily for coffee and social sessions. So their churches have dwindled to a few members. My elder sister, recently deceased, was distressed that her United Methodist church, of which she was a charter member, had only 15 members left from approx 300 in earlier years. She left a substantial inheritance to the “HEIFER” (Red??) Africa project. (CONTINUED).
Stephen, as far as all Protestant churches to ever reach common ground, in order to offer a united front to opposition, is never to happen, especially
the SDA Church. You may be fearful of the Catholic Church supremacy in the future, which may not be all that unreasonable, as they as a country, The Vatican, are members with high standing in the United Nations. And the United Nations used the Jesuit Pope in September, to inaugurate the Global Warming (G.W.) project, of which the U.N. will be the organization to be given the authority to co-op the global nations, giving orders to each and all nations their marching orders, much as Brussels controls and orders all Euro Union members. This will be the first unifying project of bringing the world into a “One World Government”, of which the Vatican is the prime religious member. How will they respond to the opportunity given them as the prestigious world church. Follow the money trailh . You will note, Stephen, that with this Pope Francis, the first Jesuit to be honored with the top Catholic role in the life of the Catholic Church (even though they had power in the Spanish Catholic church of the Inquisition) with his appeal to all Protestants to come together in Unity, and many are responding.
Earl,
I agree with you that Seventh-day Adventists are not likely to join other Protestant churches in any ecumenical movement.
Just a note about the United Nations Global Warming two week sessions
in Paris, France, this month. Have you noted there was a lack of media news on the outcome. The 177 voting members were supposedly unanimous in approving the U.N. Program, of which the next 12 months will be utilized by the U.N. to bring a final program to the membership to vote on.
Earl,
The agreement is notable for binding no nation to anything. It’s sum is goals with no consequences for non-compliance. I don’t think much of Rev. Jorge Bergoglio and have no use for the falsity of anthropogenic cataclysmic climate change. But COP21 not the beginning of the end. Its mostly gas. Non-binding agreements are seldom consequential.
Earl, the Iliff School of Theology, the Methodist Seminary (located on the acclaimed Denver University campus) where I earned a MDIV degree in 1975 was at that time a fine mix of liberal and conservative professors and students. I was a Chaplain at the nearby Adventist hospital, conservative, and got along famously as the school was eclectic, but still a Christian Theological institution.
After graduating, I often responded to the their fund raisers with a gift. Not long after I graduated a PC shift started, and within about twenty years it was, according to the brochures they mailed me, absent any theology talk, transformed into bisexual, women’s rights, and what can be correctly called a far left agenda. No more money from me!
So Earl, the school is still there, functioning, but from the top down the Methodist system is anathema (If that school is a good sample) to the role of happy families attending church every week to hear about Christ. My judgment is that it hasn’t much to offer families in any traditional sense, though I haven’t personally sampled any of their churches.
I did attend a Lutheran church for a while around 2008 and found it less PC tinged. I did notice the lack of “Sunday outfits” clothing wise, with teenage girls showing up in halter tops and short shorts, few shirts and ties on men. You are correct that something has been lost along the way.
I’m a few years behind you (75). Are we getting too old for this place?
Bugs, You express a widely held sentiment by older folk, which every generation has experienced. Who was the ancient Greek (?) who deplored the young of his day?
But I can’t find anywhere in the Gospels or NT writings where the importance of dress was mentioned other than women covering their heads (a cultural practice still prevalent in those areas of the world).
Most pastors are happy to have people there, regardless of dress. In the Central Valley of California where summer temperatures are well into three digits, many of the men wear shorts and women in sleeveless tops and pants. Yes, the building is air conditioned, but they have to get out in the heat, also. (and I’m your senior by more than 20 years!)
Yes, Elaine, I have the old person affliction! Inevitable cultural changes fastened to the passage of time are less welcomed by the old than by the young. Memories gain gold gilding with age.
‘cont’d.
FWIW: I was the first to go against the conference president’s request that women wear no pants at camp meeting in Soquel. Before camp was over, many women thanked me and began wearing them, too! It was a ridiculous demand for people living in tents and on rocky, hilly terrain.
Excuses , excuses. Rebellious rationalizations. Some are just female Korahs?
Just think of all of those poor females through history who were oppressed wearing robes in rocky and hilly terrain. And those SDA women who were so inconvenienced for decades at Soquel. I used to hear that was there #1 complaint at Soquel…can’t wear pants.(NOT) Huh?
How come you didn’t include another Sabbath trashing post with the pants hit?
billybob, how did you manage to escape the Adventist Sound Proof chamber to make this noise? You are rude. Go back.
Hmmm, i have the door ajar to the chamber. In the 70’s at camp in Ontario, most women wore jeans, no questions asked, except for Sabbath, when dresses were worn, and men wore ties. Don’t recall ever, a word relative to dress at
camp. In general, i would not be comfortable by wearing casual dress in church services. But to each his own comfort level.
“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”
“The best way to destroy an enemy is to make him a friend.”
Abraham Lincoln
President Lincoln understood that America needed to be alert to those ideas that would tear down the constitution which is its very foundation.
The fear discussed in this article is not without cause. The Muslims who will be honest will admit they are supposed to subjugate the entire world. By the sword if necessary.
There ARE many Muslims who do not personally long for the use of the sword, but their religion is one of rote. They are “programmed” to obey whatever the leaders espouse.
I have SDA friends from the Philippines who tell me the Muslims there are very friendly towards SDA due to the embrace of the Sabbath and the rejection of pork. Hopefully this indicates that SDA are uniquely suited to reach out to and quite possibly proselytize Muslims.
What converts Muslims more than anything else is seeing the power of the Holy Spirit at work through believers in Jesus and doing great and amazing things. It is a power that is absent from their faith. Unfortunately, it is also absent in most Adventists because of our belief in the latter rain that has been turned into a teaching that the Holy Spirit will come at a date in the indefinite future, but is not available to us today. Fortunately, that isn’t what the Bible teaches. Jesus sent His disciples out to minister in the power of the Holy Spirit more than two years before Pentecost. So, why aren’t we infused with that power today? Because we don’t believe in the power of God! So we’re powerless to meet Muslims with confidence that our faith in Jesus will lead them to become believers.