| Author |
Message |
    
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 72
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 10:39 am: |       |
Don Sands refused to answer the question about the IJ and said: Loughborough taught that the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, where Daniel would stand in his lot, was encompassed in the first angel's message.
Don, the question was not about whether the IJ "encompassed" the 1st Angels Message--whatever that means. The question is what was the unanimous interpretation of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message by all the Pioneers? Was it the IJ? Yes or NO?
So forget misquoting Loughborough to avoid the issues. To be an Adventist, one had to believe that the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 was the visible and pre-millennial Second Coming. That is how the Advent Movement defined themselves. This is what made them famous and why they claimed to be fulfilling the 1st Angels Message. It was all about the proclamation of the Judgment Day, which for them was only the Second Coming.
Don said: James White and the others at the Review supported Loughborough in this assertion. So, I conclude that these pioneer Adventists came to view the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary to be the intended message of the first angel.
Ha! I did not ask what the Pioneers may have "intended"--after the fact. I asked how the Advent Movement defined the Judgment in Rev 14: 7. It is a question of history and fact. Was it the IJ? Yes or NO?
Why can't you answer the question? Here is the same question a little different. You need to answer it.
How did James and Ellen White, view the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message? Was it the IJ? And guess what? It does not matter what the date is. The answer will be the same whether it is BEFORE 1844 or AFTER 1844. It is the same answer regardless of the date.
Don said: The Second Coming belief was a disappointment.
And so too is your continued refusal to answer the question! It is obvious that don't want to answer it because it proves your theology worthless and wrong. So you dodge the question, --just like Goldstein and all the rest of the leaders. Pitiful. This is expected from those that work for the church. They don't know how to be honest, nor do they want to try. For them; to live is to double-talk and dodge the issues.
Don said: They contend that God led them through the experience, guided them from the error to the truth and brought them along to more truth.
What kind of double-talk is this? Whatever you are trying to say, it is beside the point under discussion. If we were in court the Judge would be turning to you right now. He or she would be glaring down at the witness stand--and you in it; once more instructing you to ANSWER THE QUESTION.
So I insist that you answer the question. Go ahead.
Don said: I see no other conclusion based on Loughborough's presentation and on James White's three years later.
What are you saying? What are trying to say? What "conclusion" have you reached? Stop playing games with us and answer the question. Because there are more questions to come…
Don said: There is still a difference in these essays presented by the early pioneers and later statements of a further developed "Investigative Judgment" doctrine.
Stop the double talk. You must answer the question. It is an important and critical point of history that must be settled.
So I am going to insist that you answer, or in the absence of an answer, assume that the answer is "no," because it is an obvious fact of history that the IJ did not exist during this time period. So how could the Judgment mean the IJ, when it did not exist?
The fact that you are trying to avoid admitting the truth about all this makes no difference. The facts are the facts, and there was NEVER a time in 19th century Adventism, --either before or after 1844-- when anyone said the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 was the IJ. IT NEVER HAPPENED!
So you can evade the hard questions all you want, which is what the SDA's are now famous for, but your inability to address the most simple of questions about Adventist history exposes you as a cultic apologist that cares little for the facts. That is the way it goes for all those that support TA. Pitiful.
Don whined: Your insistence on a YES or No is childish or lawyerish but not very impressive.
Ha! The TSDA's fail to understand that Traditional Adventism IS on trial. The church placed Dr. Ford on trial in 1980 at Glacier View. There he was framed him with false testimony from the leaders about Ellen White and the church history. Now it is time to put TA on trial for all to see. This is what has been taking place on this site for 7 years now. I am playing the role of prosecuting attorney against the myth and fraud that has overwhelmed the Advent Movement. And in case you have not heard, your side is LOSING.
So why would you be impressed with what is taking place on this site? TA is being exposed as a worthless and dangerous fraud, and your many attempts to defend it has fallen flat for to see.
What is "not very impressive" is the constant dodging of the issues and the non-stop refusal to deal with the facts in an honest and professional manner. All TSDA's do this and I don't think it impresses anyone anymore.
So I am acting like a lawyer for a reason, even as you are acting like a guilty and dishonest man. Your testimony on behalf of TA is hurting your cause not helping it. In fact, there has been no witness for TA that has made any sense or proven their case. And there never will be such a person because TA is a complete fraud. It has no support from Ellen White as the dishonest leaders have taught for generations.
Don said: A YES or NO would yield limited understanding.
Ha! Who are you to assume such a thing? Since when does a witness for the defense get to instruct the opposing attorney about how to frame the questions? Especially when he can't answer them? This is not how any debate works, much less the protocols of justice and fact-finding. Besides, this is only the first question in a long chain of questions that will follow. And you won’t do any better with them either.
Why not just admit that you refuse to answer the question because the correct answer will not support your views? This is what you really mean. So why not admit that you can't deal with this discussion any more because it is too difficult and the questions too hard?
Don said: Most issues of any note cannot be easily distilled to such brief answers.
Ha! The question that you fear represents a powerful distillation of the problems with the IJ. As you have discovered, this one simple question poses a great conundrum for all that support the IJ. The correct answer destroys the heart and soul of Traditional Adventism, upending everything the White Estate stands for and teaches. It ruins TA, to which I say good reddens! It's about time!
The answer to this question changes everything for the Advent Movement, even as it condemns all SDA's that think the IJ is anchored in the 1st Angels Message. It proves Glacier View to be a farce.
Don said: We need to discuss the issues more before my YES and your YES mean the same thing.
Ha! At this point, there is little that we can agree on. Nor is agreement the point of these discussions. It is truth and facts we want for the purpose of displacing the myth and legend that has overwhelmed the SDA church.
So your attempts to try and make your answer fit what you are supposed to say is very dishonest and against the search for truth. Thus you have spoken like a true Laodicean church worker. It's as if all SDA pastors have been trained in double-talk and diversion. None of them are honest and none of them can talk straight. They never tire of playing these word games and running from the issues. Pitiful. Absolutely pitiful.
Don, what more do you need to know before you can answer this simple question about Rev 14: 7? What on earth is left to discuss? There is post after post about all this? As well as quote after quote from the Pioneers.
"The prophecy of the first angel's message, brought to view in Revelation 14, found its fulfillment in the advent movement of 1840-44." --Ellen White, SR 356.1
"The writings of Miller and his associates were carried to distant lands. Wherever missionaries had penetrated in all the world, were sent the glad tidings of Christ's speedy return. Far and wide spread the message of the everlasting gospel: "Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come."
(The Great Controversy, page 368, par. 1, Chapter Title: A Great Religious Awakening.)
"In preaching the doctrine of the Second Advent, William Miller and his associates had labored with the sole purpose of arousing men to a preparation for the judgment." By which they meant the Second Coming.
(The Great Controversy, page 375, par. 1, Chapter Title: A Warning Rejected.)
Don Sands said: Perhaps their "present truth" is not our "present truth"?
Perhaps the moon is made of cheese? So what? Answer the question, or just admit that it is too difficult and retire-- before you do any more damage with your twisted and worthless religion.
As for this idea that truth changes, are you trying to say that the Judgment of the Second Coming --in the 1st Angels Message-- was later changed into the IJ after that Message closed? Many people embrace such a myth. But for this to happen, there must be a record from the Pioneers. Where is it?
However, Ellen White said that these messages could never be changed. So while there may be a different emphasis on doctrine at a later date, such as the Sabbath, this in no way means that they went back and changed the basic interpretation of Rev 14: 7 that brought Adventism into existence. It was impossible for them to go back a change the historic interpretation of the Judgment in the 1st Angels message and they never tried to do such a thing.
"Perhaps" you need to answer the question and stop dodging it?
Don said: Perhaps. We get closer to understanding such by reading the three-fold statement in its context.
Don, why not admit that you don't know Adventist history or theology well enough to defend your views. I understand all this history and theology. I have been dealing with these facts for decades while you have been naively supporting the myth and error of TA all your life. This is why you cannot deal with this discussion. Your brain has been captured by a dishonest cult.
You are the one that can't see straight to answer the most simple of questions. Not me. I am trying to help you, because like all TSDA's, you have most everything wrong. Which is underscored by the fact you can't even answer a simple yes or no question about the IJ! And that is just the first of many other questions that would also stump all TSDA's. So you look very foolish right now.
Those that run from the issues, like Goldstein, Pastor Don, and the White Estate, are running for a reason. It is because they have been caught with worthless and wrong theology. They have misunderstood most everything.
The only safe course for the SDA's is for them to stop the double-talk, evasion, and diversions, and admit their many errors and sins. They need to stop defending false doctrine and repent for Glacier View.
Bill Sorensen, the IJ apologist said: How is it people fail to understand Tom's question, or refuse to give a clear and concise answer?
I note that you have also been unable to address the question or answer it correctly. Pastor Don and apologist Goldstein are not the only ones that run from the first point of Adventist Reform. All TSDA's run from this question because it exposes their theology as a worthless and impossible fraud. I doubt you can address it either.
Bill said: The answer is this, no one before 1844 thought the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary was the issue surrounding this date. No one I know of at least.
Good for you--so far. Then the answer is "no." Why can't Don just tell the truth and admit the facts of history?
Let's see if this is what you really mean. I suspect that you are going to change this answer and then say "yes." This is what Don is trying to do as well. So neither of you is fooling anyone. I can see it coming…your real answer is going to be "no- yes." Which is typical of the TSDA's. They don't know how to think or talk straight.
Bill, make a note: I did not ask anything about before or after 1844 did I? No the question is simply about what Judgment is in the 1st Angels Message. We want the genuine interpretation of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. Why is that so hard? Was it the IJ or the Second Coming?
Bill said: How hard is this to say or conclude?
Apparently is very difficult for Pastor Don and all the TSDA's. That is why Don still can't bring himself to answer this simple question and neither will you be able to tell the truth. It has really stumped him, even as it has confused you.
Let's see if you can be any help to poor Don, the SDA Bible teacher and pastor that is having such a hard time.
Continued |
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 73
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 10:43 am: | |
Bill said: Now let's deal with the real issue Tom has raised.
Ha! Are you sure you are up to the challenge? Few TSDA's can face up to the real issues, much less solve them. Let's see how you do?
Bill said: Does our church today teach that the pioneers before 1844 believed it was the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, and even more importantly, (as Tom claims) do we teach people this false idea?
You are not stating the question correctly. No surprise here.
The definition of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message must be answered first. This is the starting point for understanding Historic Adventism, as well as the modern version.
Moreover, this question has nothing to do with-- after 1844 or before. The answer is still the same either way, because there was no change to the definition of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message at any time.
Bill said: Tom claims our church teaches people that before 1844 the pioneers held this view (that the IJ is located in the 1st Angels Message).
Ha! This is too funny. Where you been all these years? What do you think took place at Glacier View? And why is there a large thread on this site called Clifford Goldstein & The Investigative Judgment? I think the TSDA's have so confused themselves with their own double-talk that they can no longer make any sense to anyone. Now they are trying to deny the very points that make them famous!
Bill, I suggest you go back and read this thread.
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/295.html?1013659183
Listen to Goldstein promote the IJ--from the 1st Angels Message.
"If you are not grounded in the 1844 doctrine--if you don't have at least a rudimentary understanding of that teaching--then you are ill prepared for the time of trouble and the shaking….But if 1844 is not biblical, our message is false--we are a false church, teaching a false message and leading people down a false path. Either 1844 is true and we have the truth, or it is false and we have inherited and peddled lies."(p. 11)
So there it is! The modern SDA church does teach that the IJ is anchored in the 1844 Judgment message of Miller. And so too do you. All TSDA's claim that the Judgment Pillar from the 1st Angels Message is the IJ. This is what you say and what Goldstein says, and what Glacier View made official. How can you pretend otherwise?
Here is a quote from you to make the point on this same thread:
"Our pillars include the pre-advent investigative judgment for the church. And we don't need you to tell us otherwise. We do need you to be honest and abandon your duplicity in this matter." Posted on Friday, February 15, 2002 - 9:06 pm:
And again, Bill said:
The SDA church defines and established its own pillars and accept and rejected what ever it pleased by way of William Miller.
To try to "force" certain concepts on the SDA church because they were believed and taught by William Miller and then claim they are the "pillars" of the SDA church is convoluted and false.
We do not believe the church is judged at the second coming. But this is what Miller and his followers believed.
Tom wants to force the church back to pre-1844 and then build a false system of doctrine on their misunderstanding of the 2300 day/year prophecy. But there were a number of things that Miller and his people taught that we reject completely and we need not claim everything he presented are SDA "pillars".
Posted on Saturday, February 16, 2002 - 7:19 am:
So Bill, why would you deny the obvious? The position of TA is that the IJ is based, rooted, and anchored in the 1st Angels Message. In fact, you said that the SDA's are free to reject Miller's Pillars and insert the IJ back into the 1st Angels Message. So why deny your own words?
Of course Dr. Ford tried to deny this myth, but the administrator's thought they knew better than one of their most distinguished scholars. So they exiled the man that best understood the history and theology of the 1st Angels message, and forced all to embrace the IJ as a pillar from 1844 when such a position is impossible and absurd and was never embraced by any of the Pioneers.
Here is more of what you said:
Bill Sorenson also said on February 14, 2002 - 3:42 pm: Tom, Do what you will, Tom....you will never take our name SDA....nor will you take away the 1844 IJ.
You can start a new church or join some other one. But you will not change this one for we have the truth and it will not be altered.
You deny the pre-advent judgment. This is simply antinomian delusions. It is also a negation of the gospel you seem so intent to defend.
Us SDA's want to be judged while Jesus is still ministering in the heavenly sanctuary.....you want to be judged at the second coming. No thanks....I want Jesus to plead my cause while He is still the heaven priest.
You apparently want to be judged in your own righteousness after Jesus has left His ministry in heaven and comes to earth to receive His own.
Let the law and the gospel be clearly shown in the pre-advent Investigative judgment, and no rational person would want to miss it.
Sorensen the unrelenting
-------------------------
So Bill, why did you try and deny that the SDA's teach that that the IJ reaches back to the 1st Angels message? This is your own position as well as all TSDA's.
Why did you try and deceive us about such a point? THIS IS YOUR POSITION. This is what the Takoma Park Adventists taught, and Glacier View affirmed. This is what Clifford Goldstein promotes…
Pay attention: I am not saying that the Pioneers taught that the IJ was the Judgment in Rev 14:7. They did not; I am saying the OPPOSITE. They only said it was the Second Coming. It was those in Takoma Park that made up this IJ as a foundational pillar nonsense when there was no such pillar.
Pay attention: There are not two different versions of the 1st Angels Message. One before 1844 and one after. There are not two different ways to interpret the meaning of the Judgment in Rev 14:7 that Miller preached. After 1844, the Pioneers never changed his fundamental interpretation because they could not. Uriah Smith tried, but pulled back.
For the SDA's, the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message was always and forever the Second Coming and NEVER THE IJ. Not before 1844, and not after. It NEVER HAPPENED. (It was in Takoma Park where the IJ BECAME a fraudulent and fabricated foundational pillar for the church.)
Bill said: The fact is, our church teaches no such thing and never has. We never tell people that William Miller and his supporters thought that 1844 was the beginning of the cleansing of the sanctuary.
Traditional Adventism teaches that the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message is the IJ. This is what Goldstein clearly teaches in his book about 1844. This is what all TSDA's teach and what you have stated over and over. So why are you pretending otherwise?
While the TSDA's do not mention Miller when they promote and defend the IJ, (why would they?) they all say that the IJ is the Judgment pillar from 1844; in the 1st Angels Message-- when it never was. The fact that they don't know what they are talking about should start to become obvious at some point.
Bill said: And for Tom to imply and state this is what "Tacoma Park" Adventism is teaching is either a lie, or he is ingnorant beyond comprehension.
Takoma Park Adventism made up this idea that the IJ was the Judgment pillar from Rev 14: 7. In order to protect their legalistic view of the Gospel, they invented this myth that "the hour of his Judgment has come" was the IJ, when it was only the Second Coming.
Few understood or even noticed this subtle but fatal revision that set the stage, not only for Glacier View, but also for the very self-destruction of the Advent Movement. Note Ellen on this point;
We have nothing to fear for the future, except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history. - Life Sketches, p. 196
Let all SDA's pay careful attention; Ellen White never said that the IJ was a pillar from the 1st Angels Message. And neither did anyone else in 19th century Adventism. In fact, they all said that it was the Second Coming--even AFTER 1844. And they also said there could no changes to the pillars in these fulfilled messages that preceded the 3rd Angels Message.
I will use the quote that you posted, but there are many more just like them.
The Three Angels' Messages.--
The proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' messages has been located by the word of Inspiration. Not a peg or pin is to be removed. No human authority has any more right to change the location of these messages than to substitute the New Testament for the Old."
Here Ellen White is strongly saying that there is only one 1st Angels Message, and that its pillars can never be changed. She is correct. The Takoma Park apologists were wrong to try and change the Judgment Pillar from Historic Adventism into the IJ. And there were way out of line to pretend that this is what Ellen White also believed. She never did. We have all been deceived, even as the White Estate has horribly misrepresented Ellen White and the fundamentals of Adventism.
Continued |
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 74
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 10:51 am: | |
Bill said: We do teach that Miller and his supporters "thought" Jesus was coming in 1844. But in fact, after the event, it was discovered the "cleansing of the sanctuary" was not the second coming, but Jesus' judgment ministry in heaven.
Correct. But it changes nothing, nor answers the question on the table. The mistake that the Takoma Park apologists made was this: they confused the difference between the DEFINITION of the 1st Angels Message with the subsequent EXPLANATION for the disappointment. These are two very separate things. The Battle Creek Founders did not make this error. They made it clear that the interpretation of the 1st Angels Message can never be changed, regardless of what happened downstream.
Thus the Second Coming is only and always the Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message. This is what it will be until the end of the world. It will be nothing else and can be nothing else. The IJ came along later as an explanation for the delay of the Second Coming. It was the 3rd revision to Dan 8:14, in association with the 3rd Angels Message in Rev 14. It was never a pillar at all, much less in the 1st Angels message.
Bill said: And for Tom to keep harping otherwise is ridiculous. So, no, Tom, we do not teach the pioneers all believed the 1st angel's message was about a heavenly IJ.
Poor confused and disoriented TSDA's; they are lost in a world of myth and legend. Sad.
Pay attention: During the 1st and 2nd Angels Message; 100% of Adventist Millerites believed that the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 was the Second Coming. NONE of them thought this interpretation was the PAJ, much less the IJ that was not yet invented. It is ridiculous that the SDA's are so confused about the facts.
The Foundational Pillars of the Advent Movement are the Gospel, (#1 pillar) and the Judgment of the Second Coming, (#2 pillar). This interpretation of these twin pillars is locked in history and cannot ever be changed. This is what Ellen White has said over and over.
So why did the TSDA's do it? Why did they deceive generations by telling them that the IJ is a pillar from 1844, when it never was and never can be? Because in Battle Creek the leaders changed Miller's Protestant Gospel to the RC version, and it was never repudiated or corrected because the 1888 reforms failed.
So when the church retreated to Takoma Park, they took with them a false and legalistic Gospel of works, which needed to be defended from their many critics. Rather than correct the Gospel and retain Millers historic view of the Judgment in Rev 14: 7, they CHANGED the #2 pillar to be a Celestial Judgment about Santification and works. This fit perfectly with their false Gospel of works and now both Pillars reinforced and supported each other. Too bad that they were BOTH false.
When the RBF debates started in the 1970's, both the false Gospel and the false Judgment, the IJ, came under attack. Dr. Ford was correct to refute both of these points and not back down. He was correct and the church leaders very wrong.
Bill said: We do believe the SDA pioneers, some of whom also participated with Miller, changed their mind and saw it was a judgment message taking place in heaven and not the physical return of Jesus to earth.
Stop! While ALL the SDA Pioneers CHANGED their mind about Millers view of Dan 8:14 and the interpretation of the sanctuary in that text, NONE of them changed their views of the definition of the Judgment in the historic 1st Angels Message. NONE of them went back and revised the original interpretation that was viewed as fulfilled prophecy.
The fulfillment of the 1st Angels Message WAS Miller's PROCLAMATION that the Second Coming was the Judgment Day. This is what all the SDA Pioneers believed at all times. They never, never, never went back and changed Miller's 2nd pillar about the Judgment into the IJ. It is an irrefutable point of Adventist history.
Bill said: And so SDA's, including EGW, teach and endorse the fact that the first angel's message is/was about the judgment in heaven, counter to what Miller and others had thought previously.
Stop! This is not true.
Ellen White teaches that the 1st Angels Message is primarily and historically about the Millerite Movement. She also teaches that the Judgment Pillar is only the Second Coming. It is all her books. We have gone over it many times. While she embraced the new views about the Dan 8:14 and later on the IJ when it was invented, she never, never, never repudiated the historical pillars from the 1st Angels message, much less thought that the IJ was now part of that fulfilled message.
Bill said: Tom creates a "false dilemma" by trying to convolute the issue, and then claim no one can "change their mind" if the original understanding is not true.
Stop. There can be no "changing of minds" about history and fulfilled prophecy. The pillars in the 1st Angels Message represent Miller's promotion of the Protestant Gospel and the Judgment Day as the Second Coming. These "pillars" are beyond revision. This is what Ellen White keeps saying, but somehow Arthur White thought she said the opposite. NO ONE can go back and say that the judgment pillar in the 1st angels Message is now the IJ. That is impossible. Ellen White never did this.
"Let no one presume to move a pin or a foundation stone from the structure. Those who attempt to undermine the pillars of our faith are among those of whom the Bible says "in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils."
(Letter 87, 1905, pp. 2, 3. To Elder and Mrs. S. N.Haskell, February 25, 1905.)
Bill said: Since the apostles of Jesus did not see Him making an atonement for sin in His death on the cross at the time, and thought He had come to set up His physcial earthly kingdom, they can not "change their mind" and see they were wrong and endorse another position.
Forget it my friend. No one can change his or her mind about what Miller meant when he interpreted Rev 14: 7. Miller never changed his mind on that point, nor should he. He was correct. And his eschatology became "a firm platform" upon which the SDA's built their Sabbatarian theology.
“I was again brought down through these messages, and saw how dearly the people of God had purchased their experience. It had been obtained through much suffering and severe conflict. God had led them along step by step, until He had placed them upon a solid, immovable platform."
"I saw individuals approach the platform and examine the foundation. Some with rejoicing immediately stepped upon it. Others commenced to find fault with the foundation. They wished improvements made, and then the platform would be more perfect, and the people much happier."
"Some stepped off the platform to examine it and declared it to be laid wrong. But I saw that nearly all stood firm upon the platform and exhorted those who had stepped off to cease their complaints; for God was the Master Builder, and they were fighting against Him.”
(See: Early Writings of Ellen G. White, page 258, paragraph 3. Chapter Title: A Firm Platform.
The real point is that the modern SDA church has misunderstood the location of the IJ as well as how Ellen White defined the 1st Angels Message. They have repudiated the "firm platform" that Ellen White spent her life protecting and defending. Thus the SDA's have most everything wrong, yet they don't want to address, admit, or correct anything. They are true Laodiceans. How "wretched!"
Bill said: And if they did, we must reject their "new" position as false, since it is not in harmony with the first position. Therefore, Jesus is not the Messiah, He did not set up an earthly kingdom as His disciples believed He would.
Pay attention: The new sanctuary position did nothing to change the original definition of Miller's Judgment in the 1st Angles Message. The SDA Founders viewed Millers message as fulfilled prophecy, and thus it was beyond change or adjustment. It was Prophetic History. And so too were the pillars from the rest of the unfolding messages.
The only adjustments they could make would be associated with the 3rd Angels message. This was the only active message they could revise. And here is where the (incorrect) doctrine of the IJ resides within the Adventist paradigm. But regardless, the Pioneers made it clear that the pillars in the 1st Angels Message, from the Millerite period, COULD NOT BE CHANGED. In fact, to become an SDA in the 19th century, one had to first embrace the 1st Angels Message, which featured the Judgment of the Second Coming.
Listen to Ellen White make this clear:
"In like manner those who have had no experience in the first and second angels' messages must receive them from others who had an experience and followed down through the messages."
"As Jesus was rejected, so I saw that these messages have been rejected. And as the disciples declared that there is salvation in no other name under heaven, given among men, so also should the servants of God faithfully and fearlessly warn those who embrace but a part of the truths connected with the third message, that they must gladly receive all the messages as God has given them, or have no part in the matter."
(Early Writings of Ellen G. White, page 188, 189, Chapter Title: Spiritual Gifts. 1858.)
Those who think the IJ is the pillar in the 1st Angels Message, which is all the TSDA's, are not only wrong, but according to Ellen White they should "have no part" in Adventism. To reject Miller's interpretation of Rev 14: 7 is to disqualify one from being an SDA. How tragic that the church persecuted those, like Dr. Ford, that embraced the true Pillars and agreed with Ellen White. The leaders have made a horrible mistake. It must not stand.
Bill said: Quit "bickering" with Tom and make him explain exactly what he means, and then answer his question. Tom hopes to convolute the issue and then claim EGW did not really believe in the IJ.
WRONG. I never said Ellen White did not "believe" in the IJ. I am saying that she NEVER embraced this absurd position that the IJ was a pillar in the 1st Angels Message. Not only did she NEVER say any such thing, she always said that the Judgment Pillar in Rev 14; 7 is only and always the Second Coming. This is what all 19th century SDA's said.
Bill said: Maggie has exposed him years ago. Just because EGW did not believe in the IJ before 1844 does not negate the more mature understanding and interpretation. This is what Tom hopes to "prove."
Bill you just don't get it. There was never a time when Ellen White thought the IJ was the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. It never happened. And until you submit to the facts of history, you will never be able to understand this discussion, much less the Three Angels Messages --as understood by the Pioneers.
Bill said: She did say the "final" interpretation was immovable and thus she said.....
"The Three Angels' Messages.--The proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' messages has been located by the word of Inspiration. Not a peg or pin is to be removed. No human authority has any more right to change the location of these messages than to substitute the New Testament for the Old."
This is a good quote, but it refutes your position. There was no "final" interpretation of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. It was always and only the Second Coming. Thus it was never changed and never could be changed. This is what Ellen White is saying.
Just think about it for a second; Ellen White says that these messages, and the pillars they contain, are not to be changed or removed. Not by a "peg or pin." But yet, the TSDA's in Takoma Park come along and say that the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message must be dramatically changed and revised to become the IJ. And then they say that this is what Ellen White supports. What a colossal lie. What an incompetent and impossible position for anyone to take.
Miller's famous Judgment hour message about the Second Coming cannot ever be removed or changed into something else. Much less into something so legalistic and false that is wars against the Gospel, which is the #1 Pillar in the 1st Angels message and the foundation for the entire Three Angels Messages.
TA is based on the wrong Gospel and the wrong Judgment as well as an impossible and absurd interpretation of the 1st Angels Message. Dr. Ford was correct to stand up and protest this travesty at a time when few understood what he was saying. But now, after decades of study and research, the facts are clear and so too is the fraud in the White Estate. TA is a farce. It has no support from Ellen White as the church dishonestly teaches.
Bill said: Tom wants to apply this to the original interpretation. But she never said this about the first interpretation. Only the "final" interpretation which included the IJ.
WRONG! Miller's original interpretation about the Second Coming being the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 IS the final interpretation. He was not wrong on this point or about this text, which is not to be confused with Dan 8:14 which was changed.
Ellen White and all the Pioneers supported Miller's basic eschatology and thus the 1st and 2nd Angels messages became part of SDA theology and terminology. However, they did not go back and insert the IJ into the 1st Angels Message, and no amount of propaganda and incompetent scholarship can change this fact.
In conclusion, it will do no good to ask Don or any of those that have made a cultic pledge to support the IJ to answer any questions. They are unable and unwilling to process such damning information. But their incompetence and dishonesty changes nothing. The facts are the facts. The Pioneers were smart enough to leave a record that settles the matter and explains their position, and it is to this record all must go.
Too bad that the church has suppressed and misused the Pioneer record to create myth and doctrinal fabrication.
Woe is Adventism if they do not repent and return to the genuine version of the Three Angels Message.
Woe to the SDA's if they do not stop double-talking and repent.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform
|
bill sorensen (Billsorensen)
member
Username: Billsorensen
Post Number: 2543
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 1:27 pm: | |
Tom said.....
"Pay attention: There are not two different versions of the 1st Angels Message. One before 1844 and one after."
Tom, this so phoney for you to say, I could only wonder if you are even slightly rational.
YOU personally don't believe this statement. So what? Obviously, many do.
Our whole message, endorsed by EGW by the way, reinterprets what the Millerites "thought".
Why don't you just admit that in your opinion, the Miller interpretation was/is correct? But you can't do that, can you?
Why? Because Jesus did not come!!!!
And whether you like it or not, you and Dr. Ford and every other rational person must necessarily "re-interpret" what Miller taught.
Did Jesus come in 1844, Tom?
You know He didn't. Then you must necessarily re-interpret some aspect of his teaching. Don't you, Tom?
So, you claim, you have a right to re-interpret some of his teaching, but no one else can. If they do, they deny the point of his message.
But you deny the point of his message, don't you Tom? That is, Jesus is coming in 1844.
You can fool all the people some of the time, Tom. But you can't fool all the people all the time.
By the way, the people you "fool" are only those who want to believe you anyway. And they are willing to overlook your total inconsistency because they want to deny the SDA and EGW interpretation.
So, in the end, Tom, you don't believe Miller's interpretation either. You modify what suits yourself. And today, no one can endorse all that Miller taught unless they have "one wheel in the sand."
Give it a rest, Tom. Maggie exposed you long ago and many on this forum know it.
Sorensen |
bill sorensen (Billsorensen)
member
Username: Billsorensen
Post Number: 2544
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 6:19 pm: | |
One more point, Tom.
You wonder why Goldstein and other "influencial" people will not dialogue with you on this issue.
Here is one important reason why. You are nobody spiritually as far as they are concerned. That is, you do not "threaten" them and their influence and control of the people.
Don't be offended, Tom. I am in the same boat. Our influence is minimual at best and none at all at worst. We are not "professional" Christians.
History shows very few people are chosen by God to have enough dynamic influence to "change the world". And even those who did, felt totally inadequate and saw little results in their ministry.
Here are a few, Elijah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, John the Baptist, Luther, and Jesus Himself. Not to mention Paul who may have been the most significant "influence" in his day. These people all felt they had accomplished little in light of the need they saw for their ministry.
Supposing you could dialogue with Goldstein and prove him wrong. (Which you can't). Or, what if he proves you wrong, (Which he can)?
What can he gain?
If he proves you wrong, it is a "so what" situation for him and his peers. But if you could prove him wrong, how embarassing for him. That a nobody could actually win the dialogue.
So, you see, Tom, for him it is a "no win" situation. The principle is universal no matter the situation.
The leaders could never allow Elijah or any prophet, nor Jesus to "expose" them in any vital area. "Repentance" is impossible when political expediency holds the high hand.
"The church" doesn't worry about you, and it doesn't worry about me. They don't care if you are liberal and I'm conservative. we pose no threat to their "sweet" position with the people.
"Unconditional election" steels the mind against repentance and any need to carefully examine truth and/or error.
And although we disagree theologically, we both hate and detest "pluralism". Pluralism is pure politics. Anything definitive is avoided at all cost. Right and wrong in theology, soon mirrors the same attitude in actions and attitudes.
You must not condemn what people believe soon becomes you must not condemn people for what they do. Unity at all cost takes the place of sound doctrine and bible ethics.
In case I never post to you again Tom, here is a word of practical advice that Jesus followed in His ministry on earth.
1. Don't bicker with the powers that be.
2. Be about your Father's business.
This will solve your "spiritual" frustration. Like as not, you will not change the things that need changing in the church, and those things that don't need changing will endure unto the end.
Which is which? I don't think you know. And I think I do. But I have enough sense to know my influence is minimual at best and yours is no better. And so I conclude.....
"Give it a rest". And have a good new year.
Sorensen |
Don Sands (Don)
member
Username: Don
Post Number: 5192
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 6:58 pm: | |
unanimous interpretation of the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message by all the Pioneers? Was it the IJ? Yes or NO?
Loughborough's essay had the support of the leading Sabbath-keeping Adventist pioneers, so the answer is Yes.
|
Don Sands (Don)
member
Username: Don
Post Number: 5193
Registered: 5-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, December 27, 2008 - 7:29 pm: | |
Loughborough's essay can be found here:
http://investigativejudgment.wordpress.com/2008/11/28/the-hour-of-his-judgment-come-loughborough-1854/
Also here:
http://www.atomorrow.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=1780&post=92463#POST92463
The issue is:
Did the Sabbath-keeping Adventists view the First Angel's message "judgment" to be the investigative judgment; the preadvent judgment?
The answer is "YES". 
|
bill sorensen (Billsorensen)
member
Username: Billsorensen
Post Number: 2545
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 28, 2008 - 7:39 am: | |
Don said.....
"The issue is:
Did the Sabbath-keeping Adventists view the First Angel's message "judgment" to be the investigative judgment; the preadvent judgment?
The answer is "YES"."
Good answer, Don.
But it still won't satisfy Tom. You must confess that no one BEFORE 1844 believed that 1844 was the beginning of the IJ.
So, the answer is "no". No one before 1844 believed it was the beginning of the IJ.
He then concludes, "No one can change the interpretation of the 1st angel's message given by Miller and his followers."
And thus he concludes, the judgment message is still the second coming of Jesus to this earth.
Of course, Tom changes the message to suit himself. Miller taught that 1844 was the end of the world. Everybody rejects that interpretation for obvious reasons. That is, 1844 came and the world did not end.
So we must conclude either Miller had no message at all, or, 1844 refered to some other event.
As SDA's we opt for some other event.
In the end, no one can support and contend for Miller's original message. Not even Tom.
Sorensen
|
bill sorensen (Billsorensen)
member
Username: Billsorensen
Post Number: 2546
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 28, 2008 - 8:02 am: | |
And so here is Tom convoluted argument.....
"Let all SDA's pay careful attention; Ellen White never said that the IJ was a pillar from the 1st Angels Message. And neither did anyone else in 19th century Adventism. In fact, they all said that it was the Second Coming--even AFTER 1844. And they also said there could no changes to the pillars in these fulfilled messages that preceded the 3rd Angels Message."
He wants us to believe EGW NEVER believed, either before or after 1844, that the 1st angels message was the IJ.
And this is where Maggie exposed him as a fraud. For anyone who can read can clearly see that after 1844, EGW clearly endorsed the idea that the first angel's message was the IJ.
What this means is this, Tom can't get EGW on his side no matter how he twists and turns historical facts. Tom calls it "Tacoma Park Adventism" when in reality it is EGW Adventism.
No one who can read, is going to "buy" your theory, Tom. EGW clearly endorses the IJ and applies it to the first angel's message.
Just because no one did before 1844 does not mean no one can after the fact.
-BC- Mar
-TI- Maranatha
-CN- 85
-CT- Your Case Coming Up
<SI 93 <EI
<SB Your Case Coming Up! <EB
-PR- 01
-PG- 93
-TEXT-
<SB Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment
is come. Rev. 14:7. <EB
In 1844 our great High Priest entered the most holy place of
the heavenly sanctuary, to begin the work of the investigative
judgment."
Notice, she quotes Rev. 14:7
-BC- GC88
-TI- The Great Controversy [1888 edition]
-CN- 24
-CT- In the Holy of Holies
-PR- 02
-PG- 423
-TEXT-
Both the prophecy of Dan. 8:14, "Unto two thousand and
three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed,"
and the first angel's message, "Fear God, and give glory to
him; for the hour of his Judgment is come," pointed to
424
Christ's ministration in the most holy place, to the investigative
Judgment, and not to the coming of Christ for the
redemption of his people and the destruction of the wicked.
The mistake had not been in the reckoning of the prophetic
periods, but in the <SI event <EI to take place at the end of the 2300
days. Through this error the believers had suffered
disappointment, yet all that was foretold by the prophecy, and
all that they had any Scripture warrant to expect, had been
accomplished. At the very time when they were lamenting
the failure of their hopes, the event had taken place
which was foretold by the message, and which must be
fulfilled before the Lord could appear to give reward to his
servants."
This is not "Tacoma Park Adventism" as Tom would claim. This is clearly EGW Adventism that he would like to deny.
Sorensen
|
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 76
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, December 29, 2008 - 10:05 pm: | |
Bill Sorensen thinks there are TWO different versions of Rev 14:7. He thinks there are TWO DIFFERENT Judgment Pillars in the 1st Angels Message. But he is wrong. There is only one. The TSDA's have invented this ruse to hide their error.
There are not two different versions of the 1st Angels Message. One before 1844 --and another one after 1844. There are not two versions of the Three Angels Messages or Adventist history. This is absurd and very dishonest. The history of the Advent Movement is chronological; it is not running in two dimensions at the same time.
A "doctrinal Pillar" is called that for a reason. Because it cannot be moved. The very word is meant to prevent the replacement of something so permanent and strong by something else.
The Pioneers never said there were two Judgment Pillars, much less that they replaced the pre 1844 Pillar with another that was developed after 1844. This is madness. It could not happen and it did not happen.
The Founders could have done this if they wanted, but to do so they would have had to change their hermeneutics. But they never did. They said the opposite. In fact, out of all the disappointed Millerites, ONLY the group that would become SDA's held firm to the prophetic landmarks of the Millerite eschatology. All the others abandoned or changed the prophetic pillars, or tried to change them into something else.
The SDA Founders were the only ones that held fast to the basic prophetic interpretations of Miller and declared that his preaching of the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment WAS the FULFILMENT of the 1st Angels Message. (Even though Miller was wrong about the Judgment.) And that is why they never changed the Judgment Pillar of the Second Coming. This is the foundation of the Advent Movement. Not the PAJ.
"After the great disappointment in 1844, Satan and his angels were busily engaged in laying snares to unsettle the faith of the body. He was affecting the minds of individuals who had a personal experience in these things. They had an appearance of humility. They changed the first and second messages, and pointed to the future for their fulfillment, while others pointed far back in the past declaring that they had been there fulfilled. Satan exulted in all this."(EW p 166.)
Read Adventist history and understand that when Ellen White makes a remark about how the 1st Angels Message cannot be changed. She is endorsing Miller's Pillar, not the correction, which was the PAJ. Even though many people, even a number of SDA's, like Uriah Smith, wanted to change Millers Judgment Pillar and call it the IJ. But the Founders could not permit it and it did not happen.
They understood the historical development of the Advent Movement and it was their genius to protect this prophetic history, even as they added the Sabbath Pillar to the expanding apocalyptic.
Unlike the Takoma Park apologists, the SDA Pioneers understood that no one can change, (what they considered), fulfilled prophecy. Even though they knew that Miller had been wrong, and in their post 1844 minds thought that" the hour of his Judgment" SHOULD HAVE BEEN the IJ-- and not the Second Coming, it did not matter. Miller had fulfilled prophetic history, and therefore, his Judgment Pillar must stand in its place until the end of time as a witness to the doctrine of the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment.
The fact that Miller was wrong is beside the point of what he proclaimed and fulfilled. Thus, Ellen White said that Miller's error about the Judgment was the will of God. And thus the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message remains as Miller interpreted it. Rev 14: 7 is ONLY the Judgment of the Second Coming. Forever.
"The proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' messages has been located by the Word of Inspiration. Not a peg or pin is to be removed. No human authority has any more right to change the location of these messages than to substitute the New Testament for the Old. The Old Testament is the gospel in figures and symbols. The New Testament is the substance. One is as essential as the other. "
(Ms 32, 1896, p. 1. "Testimony Concerning the Views of Prophecy Held by Brother John Bell, 1896.)
So I repeat, the only Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message--as far as the Pioneers were concerned--is the Second Coming. It was never the IJ, nor can it ever be the IJ. And Ellen White never said it was the IJ.
Those who made this change in Takoma Park have repudiated the Pioneers and misunderstood the fundamentals of the Advent Faith. They have confused and ruined the SDA Denomination by the promotion of legalistic myths and historical fabrication.
Bill said: Tom, this so phony for you to say, I could only wonder if you are even slightly rational.
Bill, I wonder if English is your second or perhaps third language? I think we are each speaking a different language. I am trying to communicate church history to you. But you want to defend historical fabrications with double-talk and insults.
Just stop and think: How can there be two different Pillars in the 1st Angels Message--which Message closed up long before the IJ was invented?
This is some strange talk my friend. Your position is totally "phony" and wrong. There is only one time period in church history that is referred to as the 1st Angels Message. It only contains one Judgment Pillar. And it is the Second Coming; not the IJ. Period.
Bill said: YOU personally don't believe this statement. So what? Obviously, many do.
Bill, this is about history. I really do "believe" that there can only be one historic interpretation of the Millerite Judgment Pillar. It can only be defined as Miller defined it in Rev 14: 7, that is, meaning the Second Coming. This is the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message. There is not a second Pillar hiding in the shadows waiting to replace the original one after the disappointment.
Millers Judgment Hour Pillar is history. It is FULFILLED PROPHECY. How do you change that? Ellen White and the Pioneers understood that no one could change fulfilled prophecy. Little did she know that it would be the modern SDA's who would do the unthinkable and remove both the Gospel and the Judgment Pillars from the 1st Angels Message and replace them false doctrines.
This is why the SDA church is imploding. They have changed the very fundamentals that define, direct, and empower them. They have embraced the legalistic fraud of TA. And even now Pastor Don and Bill are trying to defend what is false and very wrong. Pitiful.
Bill said: Our whole message, endorsed by EGW by the way, reinterprets what the Millerites "thought".
No. No. No. All the SDA's were MILLERITES. They never repudiated Miller and in fact, embraced his theology. The founders built their Sabbatarian doctrines directly upon Miller's, with only some minor revisions, mainly to Dan 8:14.
Many are confusing Dan 8:14 with Rev 14: 7. This is a common mistake for the IJ crowd. While the SDA's corrected Miller's error about the sanctuary being the earth in Dan 8:14, --the day after Oct 22, 1844, --they never changed his original interpretation about the Judgment that defined Adventism and featured the Second Coming. Even though they also now taught that the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 was really the PAJ.
But they never changed Miller's Pillar. It is stunning and remarkable that they did not. And the fact they did not proves the genius of the Pioneers as well as the credibility of Ellen White's visions, which also prevented them from doing it.
The Second Coming is the doctrine that launched the Advent Movement. THIS was the featured doctrine that stirred up the Country and started a number of denominations. In its day, this was cutting edge eschatology that was far more correct then anything else being preached at the time. The date setting errors are beside the main point, which was about the pre-millennial Second Coming being the Day of Judgment.
Bill, the confused TSDA asked: Why don't you just admit that in your opinion, the Miller interpretation was/is correct? But you can't do that, can you?
I am having a hard time following your double talk, so I am not sure what you are trying to say.
Of course I can say that Miller was correct about the Second Coming being the pre-millennial Judgment. In his day everyone was teaching post-millennialism. That is, that the world would get better for 1,000 years and then Jesus would come to bless the earth.
Many thought that this prophetic period was about to start. But Miller stunned them all by pointing out that while he agreed that prophecy was about to be fulfilled, it would be very different from what everyone expected. There was not going to be peace or safety, rather, Jesus would actually come at the BEGINNING of the Millennium to Judge and destroy the world. Such an eschatological jolt made a huge impact. It upset the status quo and frightened many.
So good for Miller. He was a great man Protestant. He is the Father of Adventism. It is his Gospel and Judgment Pillars that represent the foundation for the paradigm of the Three Angels Messages. It is his interpretation of the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 that became a Pillar, not the later views of the SDA's. Such are the facts of history. They are irrefutable.
Bill said: Why? Because Jesus did not come!!!!
It is the PROCLAMATION of the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment that fulfills the Prophecy of the 1st Angels Message, (according to the Pioneers.) Not the Second Coming itself.
The fact that Miller's timing was off, and the Eschaton did not take place, is a matter that relates to Dan 8: 14, and thus it was revised immediately after the disappointment--but never Rev 14: 7. They could not change FULFILLED prophecy after the fact. And that is how they viewed Rev 14: 7.
Dan 8:14 was not a prophetic pillar, so they could revise and change it, and that is what they did a number of times. At last count there are 6 different versions of Dan 8:14 within Adventist history, and none of them have been correct. But Rev 14: 7 is not about being prophetically correct or not. Rather, it was about the PREACHING of the Second Coming. This is what became the fulfillment of prophecy--even though Miller was wrong.
As the SDA's developed, some wanted to also change Rev 14: 7. And why not? Miller was obviously wrong, and now it seemed like the Judgment Hour Message was about the events in Heaven. In fact, Uriah Smith wanted to make just such a change to the Judgment Pillar and call it the IJ. He thought that they were foolish to be so wrong as to confuse the Second Coming with the IJ, but the Founders would not let him. They always said that God was in the Millerite Movement, and thus Miller's Pillars must stand regardless of his errors.
Thus the PROCLAMTION of the Second Coming, in Rev 14: 7 became fulfilled prophecy, even as it terminated and could never be changed. Consequently, after the disappointment, the SDA's would refer back to Miller's Judgment Pillar, and claim that it was now referring to a Judgment in heaven, and later on the IJ. But this EXPLANATION is not to be confused with the actual contents and DEFINITION of Miller's Pillar, which can never be removed or changed. This is the point.
(All those that do not understand this critical distinction must go back and study some more.)
Bill said: And whether you like it or not, you and Dr. Ford and every other rational person must necessarily "re-interpret" what Miller taught.
Not when it comes to Rev 14: 7. He was correct about the Second Coming. The Judgment in the NT is the Second Coming; not the mythical IJ. Sorry.
But understand this; even after the SDA Founders concluded that Miller was wrong and the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 was now the PAJ, THEY STILL LEFT MILLER'S JUDGMENT DOCTRINE IN PLACE. They never, never, never, changed Miller's original Judgment Pillar.
It is stunning that the Pioneers did not make this change. Why? Because, this is what they really thought Rev 14: 7 meant from the late 1850's on. And even before that, they knew he was wrong about Dan 8:14 and the sanctuary. So why not change and correct Miller's theology in Rev 14:7? Why not correct his erroneous Pillar? Because they were being honest with prophetic history that was unfolding. They were not manipulating things, but trying to understand truth and nail it down.
The very fact that Ellen White had specific visions not to change the 1st Angels Message also proves that these visions were not of human origin. There was great pressure on the Founders to repudiate Miller's eschatology, but they refused to repudiate Miller or the Advent Movement. Although the vast majority of Adventists were quick to change the pillars, this small group did the opposite. They understood that they were developing an important eschatology paradigm for the last church. And so they were.
Too bad that it became ruined in Battle Creek, and again in Takoma Park. Too bad that there has never been a time when the SDA's properly understood the Three Angels Messages. Today, they have it so wrong that it makes no sense to anyone. Not even to those that try to defend it.
So when you see Loughborough, Smith, and Ellen White speaking about the IJ and associating it with Rev 14: 7, one must be very careful not to misunderstand what they are really saying. But most everyone has, thanks to the incompetent and corrupt White Estate.
But none of them are changing the actual pillar, even though it might seem that way to the uninformed. In hindsight, the Pioneers were brilliant. But few understand this because they have the wrong idea about their eschatology and the real definition of the 1st Angels Message.
Continued |
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 77
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, December 29, 2008 - 10:12 pm: | |
Bill said: Did Jesus come in 1844, Tom? You know He didn't. Then you must necessarily re-interpret some aspect of his teaching. Don't you, Tom?
The SDA's did change Miller's view of the Sanctuary, which focused on Dan 8:14. Here is where the SDA's correctly changed his incorrect view of the Sanctuary, which was the earth to be cleansed with fire, to a "Cleansing of the heavenly Sanctuary." This was the contribution of Hiram Edson. But under no circumstances did Edson, or any of them change Miller's historic interpretation of Rev 14: 7.
Historic Pillars do not change. Can you understand this? Even though they all thought--after the disappointment--that "the hour of his judgment has come" no longer meant the Second Coming, the Founders made certain that this became the Judgment Pillar from the 1st Angels Message anyway. It sounds illogical, but this is what they did. It was a genius move, led by the Spirit, that will one day, when it is better understood, save the Advent Movement.
Bill said: So, you claim, you have a right to re-interpret some of his teaching, but no one else can. If they do, they deny the point of his message.
We are trying to understand how the Pioneers viewed eschatology. This has nothing to do with my personal views, or yours. Not even Arthur White has any "right" to "re-interpret" the facts of history and change them into myths and fiction. Which is what happened.
According to the SDA Pioneers, Miller was wrong about Dan 8:14 being the earthly sanctuary. And so too did they consider him wrong about his definition of the Judgment in Rev 14: 7. But because they viewed his PROCLAMTION of the Second Coming as the prophetic fulfillment of the 1st Angels Message, they dared not, and did not, change Miller's Judgment Pillar in Rev 14: 7.
The Founders made certain that nothing could change the original pillar about the Second Coming. And this is what it still is today.
This is not easy material to understand, especially when everyone has been taught something very different from the facts. What confuses many people is that while the Founders left Miller's historic Judgment Pillar standing, unmovable, they went to work to redefine it anyway, even as they claimed it was really the PAJ.
This is what Don keeps posting. But he doesn't comprehend that Loughborough is not changing the actual "Pillar" in the 1st Angels Message, nor is he discussing such prophetic history. Rather, he promoting the new explanation and correction, which was connected with the 3rd Angels Message.
Why not change Miller's Pillar if it was wrong? Because both James and Ellen White would not let any of them do it for a number of reasons. But of course the Takoma Park church never explained any of this correctly, and went on to teach that the 1st Angels message WAS CHANGED into the IJ, when that never, never, never happened.
Many people confuse the definition of the historic Judgment Pillar, with the later explanation of Miller's error. This is what took place in Takoma Park. After a while, everyone assumed and thought that the IJ WAS the Judgment Pillar in Rev 14: 7. In fact, this is what the church actually taught--when it was NEVER true. NEVER.
THIS is why Goldstein, the author of 1844 Made Simple, refuses to defend his book online with Tom Norris. He understands that he has misunderstood SDA history and theology. He knows that he cannot defend his position that claims the IJ is the Judgment Pillar from the 1st Angels Message. So he ran away. And when Don opened up a new thread about Goldstein's book, and tried to rehabilitate him. He ran away again, embarrassed and tongue-tied.
I admit this is tricky and difficult material to master. Especially after so many generations of cultic and incompetent INDOCTRANATION on this point by the church. But the facts are the facts, and so too is the record of history. Thus no scholar or historian can refute the facts. Dr. Ford was correct and so too is Tom Norris. The IJ is not a Pillar in the 1st Angels Message as TA claims and Glacier View affirmed. Period. It never was. Nor can it ever be. Sorry.
Bill said: But you deny the point of his message, don't you Tom? That is, Jesus is coming in 1844.
According to the Pioneers. Miller was correct to preach the imminent Second Coming as the Judgment Day and the end of the world. This is how the Advent Movement started. This was the point of his message and purpose for it. The Founders said Miller was doing the work of God.
The fact that his timing was wrong is totally beside the point. He founded Adventism, which was based on the doctrine of the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment. It is based on Miller's view of the 1st Angels Message. That's why his Judgment Pillar is part of the Three Angels Messages.
Bill said: You can fool all the people some of the time, Tom. But you can't fool all the people all the time.
We are not trying to fool anyone about anything. It is the SDA leaders that have been fooling everyone with their impossible view about the 1st Angels Message. It is the White Estate that has been caught hiding documents and manipulating Ellen White's writings to promote false prophecy. They have been fooling the Advent people for generations, even as they are guilty of teaching the wrong Gospel and the wrong Judgment and the wrong version of the Three Angels Messages. No wonder the SDA's are dying.
Bill said: By the way, the people you "fool" are only those who want to believe you anyway. And they are willing to overlook your total inconsistency because they want to deny the SDA and EGW interpretation.
Ha! I see it another way. The people that fight the facts of history, do so because they are committed to tradition. They are willing to overlook mountains of evidence because they want to defend TA no matter the cost or how ridiculous they appear. Sad.
Bill said: So, in the end, Tom, you don't believe Miller's interpretation either. You modify what suits yourself. And today, no one can endorse all that Miller taught unless they have "one wheel in the sand."
Miller was correct about the Judgment being the Second Coming. Of course he was wrong about when it would take place. But so what? In his day, no one was promoting the pre-millennial Second Coming at all, much less any kind of Judgment. Thus he made an important and critical contribution to modern eschatology.
The SDA's have gone so far off the track about the sanctuary doctrine that it is destroying them. It is ironic that Miller's Judgment Pillar can save the day for them, if they repent and embrace it.
All SDA's need to better understand Miller, the Father of Adventism. The entire Adventist Community, (meaning those that have left and those that have stayed), must understand that ONLY Miller's Judgment Pillar stands in the 1st Angels Message. Not the IJ. And NEVER the IJ. It is not even a pillar anywhere. The leaders were misleading and deceiving everyone on this and other points.
Bill Sorensen said: One more point, Tom. You wonder why Goldstein and other "influential" people will not dialogue with you on this issue.
No. I don't wonder because I know the answer. Every time Goldstein tries to enter this discussion, which he has done a number of times, he ends up looking bad and embarrassing himself.
More than that, he is also not allowed to discuss certain topics, like Tithe. So he lurks from afar. Even now he is reading this post. (Clifford, Happy Holidays to you, my friend!)
Bill said: Supposing you could dialogue with Goldstein and prove him wrong. (Which you can't). Or, what if he proves you wrong, (Which he can)? What can he gain?
What is this "suppose?" I HAVE dialogued with Mr. Goldstein, many times on this site; there are at least two major threads that deal with his book about 1844. I have proved him wrong on both of them. So you are confused about the facts once again.
Besides, he is not a bashful or shy person. He would love to be able to silence the critics and stop this growing cry for honest reform. Then he would gain credibility and re-establish himself as a worthwhile SDA apologist. But he can't do it. He can't stop the discussion that has proven him wrong, nor does he dare enter, for fear of suffering more humiliation and embarrassment. So he stays away for a reason…
Furthermore, this site is open and free for anyone to prove their points or disprove mine. So I welcome any scholar or apologist to come online and try to refute the principles of Adventist Reform. We have been at this for 7 years now, and few dare try after seeing what happened to Goldstein.
In fact, Goldstein tried to make a deal with me, so that he could come online to discuss his obsession about Dan 8: 14 and AE. But he would only do so on the condition that I not bring up any other issues, like tithe, or the IJ. He was so fearful of discussing these issues in public that he actually went on the record and tried to get me to censor myself.
Although I would not agree, I went ahead and laid out the issues associated with Dan 8: 14 and AE anyway for him to disprove. But he ran away, refusing to even discuss AE, or anything else. Why did he run away? Because he is wrong. Wrong about Dan 8: 14 and Rev 14 and even the Gospel itself. That is why any apologist runs away from a public discussion.
Here is the proof:
--------------------------------
Thomas A Norris Posted on Friday, July 6, 2007 - 5:45 pm: In fact, Goldstein came online to express his surprise that Tom Norris supported the Little Horn position of Dr. Ford. So Norris explained his position to Mr. Goldstein, who promptly ran away and refused to discuss the matter unless I withdrew the 10-point Reform Agenda.
Cliff G Posted on Friday, December 22, 2006 - 7:12 pm: Tom-- I have to admit I was stunned to see you promoting the idea that Daniel 8:14 deals with Antiochus. I had no idea you believed that. Did you ever read Bill Shea's chapter in Volume one of the DARCOM series, "Why Antiochus is not the Little Horn," or are you--just like your hero, Des Ford--going to ignore what many consider the church's best defense?
------------------------------------------------
I replied on Dec 24, and explained that Dan 8:14 is about the Hanukkah Story.
http://www.atomorrow.com/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi?pg=next&topic=8&page=10937
Clifford refused to answer or deal with what had been posted unless I agreed to stop all other discussion about church doctrine. Of course I refused and then gave him a 10-point Reform Agenda for him to deal with. But as usual, he ran away once more for all to see. He not only refused to deal with my post about the Little Horn and AE, he refused to consider dealing with the 10 points that were also placed on the table for all to see.
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/8/12298.html#POST72086
Bill said: If he proves you wrong, it is a "so what" situation for him and his peers. But if you could prove him wrong, how embarrassing for him. That a nobody could actually win the dialogue.
If Goldstein could prove Dr. Ford and Tom Norris wrong, he would be the hero of the TSDA's. He might even start to sell some books. But he had not done this, nor is he able to do so. He has tried many times, only to retreat.
So Tom Norris has had a number of discussions, both online here, and in private. And guess what? Goldstein has lost every discussion. And he will always lose, until he changes his incorrect views. He is on the wrong side of the issues. Poor boy.
Bill said: "The church" doesn't worry about you, and it doesn't worry about me. They don't care if you are liberal and I'm conservative. We pose no threat to their "sweet" position with the people.
Bill, the Advent Movement is self-destructing in front of our eyes. Millions have left the church in disgust and confusion, and this problem is only getting worse- not better. I am on another site beside this one, and I can tell you that the SDA's name in the world is awful. No one is buying what the confused SDA's are trying to sell. So if the church leaders don't start worrying about this catastrophe, and fix it, then something is beyond wrong.
Bill said: And although we disagree theologically, we both hate and detest "pluralism". Pluralism is pure politics. Anything definitive is avoided at all cost. Right and wrong in theology, soon mirrors the same attitude in actions and attitudes.
I agree. We both know that neither the apostles, reformers, nor the Adventist Pioneers would ever support pluralism. That is like embracing polytheism, as if there were many gods, with their many different doctrines. It is absurd.
1Cor. 8:5 For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords,
1Cor. 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
Eph. 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling;
Eph. 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph. 4:6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.
Gal. 1:9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!
Bill, remember this; there is only one version of the Three Angels Messages, even as there is only one Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message. Which is the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment and the end of the world.
Bill said: In case I never post to you again Tom, here is a word of practical advice that Jesus followed in His ministry on earth.
Who are you kidding? You have been posting here for years and I doubt you can stop if you wanted.
In case I get run over by a bus and never post again, I suggest that you go back read all these threads and try to comprehend them. There is enough information posted here to save the floundering Advent Movement and put it back on track if they will only be honest.
Bill's advice to Tom Norris is this: 1. Don't bicker with the powers that be.
This advice goes against the Bible. Had it been followed, the Jews would have never defied the ruler of Egypt, and escaped to start their own Nation. So it is obvious that this advice is coming from your own head and not from the Spirit. So I think I will ignore it if you don't mind.
Moreover, Jesus and the apostles could have never preached the Gospel if they followed your advice. They were in direct defiance of the rules and doctrines of their religious and civil leaders--the "powers that be." Thus your advice would have stopped the Christian Movement from developing. It would have prevented Jesus from overturning the tables in the Temple. So how can you advice be correct? Jesus "bickered", argued, and embarrassed "the powers that be." And when it comes to the Gospel, all that follow him will defy those in religious authority who teach false doctrine. Sorry.
Of course Luther and the Reformers also defied both civil and religious authority and defied the Pope. The Protestants debated and "bickered" with their enemies just as Jesus and Paul did with the Jews, until war swept them all away.
So in conclusion, your first point is obviously dead wrong. The very name Protestant is code for those that stand up against both religious and civil authority. Those that are Protestant must reject your point, even as you need to confess your error. Can you do this? Can you admit your advice stinks?
Can any TSDA's ever come out and admit they are wrong?
Continued |
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 78
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, December 29, 2008 - 10:17 pm: | |
Bill also said: 2. Be about your Father's business. This will solve your "spiritual" frustration. Like as not, you will not change the things that need changing in the church, and those things that don't need changing will endure unto the end.
Bill, I am not frustrated at all. I understand the Gospel as well as the history of the Advent Movement. I sleep very well at night. It's just that I have spent so many years figuring all this out; it would be a sin for me to keep it to myself. So I am sharing my knowledge with the Adventist Community, for free, in order to help them understand what has taken place. It has nothing to do with frustration. It is about telling the truth to those that have been horribly misled and abused.
Besides, I am a witness to a crime in the White Estate. I am the man that caught Arthur White red handed hiding thousands of documents from the Adventist Community, and promoting a massive fraud about Ellen White, (in direct violation of the White Estate's charter. I am not going to be a party to such a crime. I am not going to ignore it or pretend that all is well.
The way I see things, I have an obligation to tell the truth and that is what I am doing here and elsewhere. The fact that this information makes the incompetent leaders uncomfortable and defensive is just too bad. But regardless, the fraud in the White Estate is not going to stand if I have anything to do about it. It just so happens that I can do a lot.
Moreover, to promote and discuss the Gospel to the confused and disoriented in Laodicea is exactly what heaven wants to see taking place. The last church is so wrong about so much, that unless there is a massive re-education program about the Gospel, which includes repentance and reform; those that claim to be part of the church are going to be thrown out.
Heaven is furious with every denomination, including and especially the SDA's, who were supposed to be promoting cutting edge Gospel eschatology, not prophetic error and doctrinal confusion.
Don Sands said: Loughborough's essay had the support of the leading Sabbath-keeping Adventist pioneers, so the answer is Yes. (The IJ is located in the 1st Angels Message.)
You fail to understand that L. was promoting the EXPLANATION for the disappointment. He was promoting the correction to Miller's sanctuary error of Dan 8:14. But he was not repudiating the Second Coming as the Judgment Pillar from the 1st Angels Message. You may think this is what he is doing, but it is not what any of them were doing. You have misunderstood the historical context of what was taking place because you want to see what you have been taught.
Don said: The issue is: Did the Sabbath-keeping Adventists view the Judgment Pillar in the First Angel's message as the investigative judgment?
The answer is "YES". :-)
This is a correct answer to your question, but not to mine. Pay attention: While they did indeed " view the Judgment Pillar in the First Angel's message as the investigative judgment" --a number of years after 1844; they nonetheless still declared that the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message is the Second Coming. This is the controlling fact of this discussion.
Sorry to be the one to tell you, but the SDA Pioneers were more complex and sophisticated then many realize. Few today understand what they were saying or why. Pitiful.
Don, let me additionally respond by quoting to you the very same discussion we had a number of years ago. It's hard to believe that we have been going over this so long, and yet you still pretend that you can't understand the issues.
Tom Norris Posted on Sunday, June 1, 2003 - 11:40 am: Don Sands said on Sunday, June 1, 2003: "You seem to be saying that Ellen White, having come out of the Millerite movement understood the first and second angel's message in the context of the Millerite movement?"
That is 100% correct. ALL the SDA founders were Millerites. Just like all the early Christians were Jews.
In fact, 2/3rds of the Three Angels Messages is derived exclusively and totally from the Millerite Movement as both the 1st and the 2nd Angels messages were, and still are, 100% Millerite.
Every SDA Pioneer proudly acknowledged this fact, which can be documented from every history book ever written by the SDA's or about SDA's. This is a fact of history.
The problem today is that this critical early history, and the associated doctrines, as well as so much other Adventist history in Battle Creek and Takoma Park have been ignored, revised, covered -up, and so dishonestly changed that the Movement today is in chaos and confusion. This is why nothing makes sense about Adventism today.
Don said: "and that she never spoke of the Investigative Judgment in the context of the First and Second angel's message."
That would not be a true statement. Ellen White, and Uriah Smith, and the others referred to the IJ as being associated with Dan 8:14 and the 1st Angels Message found in Rev 14: 6 and 7. But this is very misleading for two reasons.
First, the IJ did not really exist until after the Civil War (as a codified doctrine). And by this time the doctrinal Pillars of all three Messages had been set. Including the Pillar about the Heavenly Sanctuary, after the disappointment. So the IJ is a late developing doctrine that was added on to the true corrective pillar about the Sanctuary being in heaven and not the earth as Miller had taught.
Second, because the IJ was just the further development of the heavenly Sanctuary pillar (which dealt with the correction of Miller's Sanctuary error in Dan 8:14), it was always associated with Miller's 1st Message that was based on Rev 14, 6 and 7, and used to defend the 2300 days as correct.
But they were all careful not to try and actually place this new and unique doctrine (either the Heavenly Sanctuary or the later IJ) in Miller's historical Message.
Why? Because under the rules of Adventist eschatology, once a Message had expired, it was closed up forever.
While they could make corrections, as they did with Dan 8:14 and the earthly Sanctuary, these corrections only impacted the present Message, which was the 3rd. They never tried to go back and force those corrections, into the past Millerite Messages, which they considered fulfilled and terminated in the providence of God.
While all this is just routine Adventist history that cannot be denied or refuted in the slightest, the problem is that in the 20th century, when the church started debating the Gospel, the Takoma Park leaders took dishonest liberties with both Adventist history and the writings of Ellen White in order to make their case against Dr. Ford.
And in so doing they deliberately scrambled the facts and the theology about the Three Angels Messages. They essentially made up false history and false eschatology. They hid documents in the White Estate, wrote false history books, and put words in Ellen Whites mouth that she never said and could never say. And they did it so often, and with such authority through the Review that most everyone came to believe this absolute fabrication about 1844, 1888, and Ellen White.
In fact, things became so twisted that Glacier View essentially declared that the IJ was a fundamental doctrine that was located in the 1st Angels message and those, like Dr. Ford, who said otherwise, were guilty of attacking historical Adventism and rejecting the Pioneers.
So he and the Gospel were removed from the SDA church. And the legalistic IJ became the primary judgment pillar for the Adventist church INSTEAD of the Second Coming as Miller had taught. (This explains why there was so little emphasis on the Second Coming, yet great concern about the alleged Pre-Advent judgment of the church that was supposedly taking place way out in deep space.)
The fact of the matter is that Dr. Ford was not guilty and revising the Three Angels messages, THE SDA LEADERS WERE GUILTY OF THIS. Dr. Ford was innocent of those trumped up charges. The IJ did not, and cannot exist in the 1st Angels message, and not one Adventist Pioneer ever made such a claim, including and especially Ellen White!
And this fact will be the doom of the corrupt SDA hierarchy who has been caught red handed in this matter.
Don said: "I assume that you would agree that Ellen White spoke of the Investigative Judgment later on and outside the context of the first two messages."
Ellen White NEVER referred to the IJ as a Pillar.
She did make this correct claim for the earlier doctrine about the sanctuary referred to as the doctrine of the Heavenly Sanctuary. But as we have said, this is a very different doctrine from the later IJ, which was so legalistic and against the Gospel that Uriah Smith became its champion and chief spokesman in Battle Creek, not Ellen White.
So the IJ became a routine doctrine, because it came to represent the major correction about the incorrect Millerite Sanctuary theology that allowed for the formation of the 3rd Angels message.
But Ellen White would be the first to say that any and all doctrines must be defended by the Word or they must be removed. This is what 1888 was all about: Gospel debate and the Protestant hermeneutic. But that debate focused on the Law itself, not the IJ. The debate about the IJ would not take place until the 20th century.
In fact, Glacier View was simply a repeat of 1888, but this time the focus was on the IJ, not the law in Galatians. And the outcome was the same for both debates; the Gospel was rejected and the church became confused and disoriented, full of false doctrine and growing corruption.
Don said: "You have a passion for this matter. What makes the differentiation important? From your perspective, why is this important?"
I have a passion for this because I happen to think that the Adventists have the potential to lead the Protestant world into the final events. They alone have the necessary eschatological pedigree to articulate Protestant theology prior to the great time of trouble and the Eschaton.
In other words, the eschatological paradigm of the Three Angels Messages is the path of truth for the last days. The Adventist Apocalyptic is designed to prepare the world for the end of time. Too bad those who have been entrusted with this great responsibility have rebelled against their heavenly mission.
I have studied this in detail for years, and in fact, I think I still hold the record at the GC Archives as the longest resident researcher that they have every had. And during that time period, that was also spent in the White Estate, I found all the evidence necessary to completely and thoroughly expose this horrific cover up that the White Estate and others pulled off about 1844, 1888, and 1980.
Don Sands said on Sunday, June 1, 2003: "It is true that many Adventists of today apply the first angel's message of Revelation 14:6,7 to the Investigative or Pre-advent Judgment."
It is true. Especially for those that support the IJ. They do this because of v 7 that references the time of the Judgment, which was historically thought to have started in heaven on October 22, 1844, at the termination of the 2300days.
This is also why the IJ (and the earlier and correct Pillar about the Heavenly Sanctuary) are connected to Millers 1st Angels Message of Rev 14: 6 and 7.
But guess what? When Miller used this same text, he ONLY taught that this Judgment was the SECOND COMING. This was the only historic Judgment Pillar in the 1st or 2nd Angels message. The IJ was nowhere in site. And this fact about the Judgment, which is theologically correct, by the way, can never be changed or revised.
Not one SDA Pioneer ever tried to make such a change in his historic 1st message upon which the 3rd Angles message is founded. In fact, Ellen White is crystal clear about this point. No one was ever allowed to change any of these messages.
"I was shown three steps-- the first, second, and third angels' messages. Said my accompanying angel, 'Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages. The true understanding of these messages is of vital importance.'"
(Early Writings of Ellen G. White, page 258, paragraph 3, Chapter Title: Spiritual Gifts A Firm Platform.)
When these words were written, the IJ did not exist. So there is no possibility that anyone in Battle Creek would think that it was fine to go back an REMOVE the key theology about the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment. "'Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages."
But that is exactly what Kellogg and others tried to do in Battle Creek. He wanted to remove all this historic eschatology, and that was one reason why the church fled Battle Creek for Takoma Park.
But guess what? Because the Takoma Park leaders were deliberately covering up the 1888 debate, they never fully told the truth about what happened in Battle Creek. And this ongoing cover-up allowed for the development of a false version of SDA history and a false theology that subtly twisted eschatological truth and scrambled these historic messages so that Dr. Ford and his apostolic Gospel could be removed from Adventism.
So the leaders in Takoma Park did exactly what Ellen White warned them not to do. And they have paid the price of "woe," with more to come.
But we reap what we sow. And the Adventist Movement today is so confused and off the track that rather then being a source for truth in the dangerous 21st century, this body is a source for massive corruption and false doctrine that would outrage the Pioneers and bore everyone else.
Ellen White would be livid at how her reputation has been ruined by the White Estate. They painted her as being against the Gospel Reformer Dr. Ford at Glacier View, when she would have been standing at his side, just like she did with Waggoner in 1888.
http://www.atomorrow.com/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi?pg=next&topic=1780&page=2704
So Don, this site of full of discussion about the IJ. You need to try and understand it before you die. And at this rate, it is going to take you a number of lifetimes to try and comprehend this discussion.
Continued |
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 79
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, December 29, 2008 - 10:30 pm: | |
Bill Sorensen said: Don said....."The issue is: Did the Sabbath-keeping Adventists view the First Angel's message "judgment" to be the investigative judgment; the preadvent judgment? The answer is "YES"." Good answer, Don.
Ha! It was a good answer to the wrong question. The issue is the definition of the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message. That is question, and that is what must be answered before anything else.
Is Miller's Judgment Pillar the IJ? No.
Once this fact is admitted, then you can ask the question about how the post 1844 SDA's viewed Rev 14: 7 as a practical point. Then the answer would be yes. They "viewed" and "considered" and taught that the Judgment in Rev 14: 7 was really the PAJ; but at the same time, MILLERS PILLAR REMAINS. It could not be changed, even though it was now considered wrong. Strange but true.
Bill then said: But it still won't satisfy Tom. You must confess that no one BEFORE 1844 believed that 1844 was the beginning of the IJ.
Good point Bill.
If Don's answer of "yes" is correct, then what about Miler's original interpretation? He did not address it did he? He is avoiding the real question because it goes against TA.
Bill said: So, the answer is "no". No one before 1844 believed it was the beginning of the IJ.
Good for you! This is correct. I hope Don is paying attention?
Bill said: He then concludes, "No one can change the interpretation of the 1st angel's message given by Miller and his followers."
I did not reach this conclusion--the Pioneers did. They are the ones that said you couldn't change Miller's Pillar. But they can and did change the "interpretation of the Judgment." But even so, they never changed Miller's view as the Pillar in Rev 14: 7. It was only to be the Second Coming.
They may be right or wrong, but this is what they taught. And I think they were correct, even brilliant. Ellen White would not let anyone change Miler's interpretation about the Judgment because she had specific visions on this point. So don't blame me. I was not a Pioneer. I am just the messenger. Don’t shoot.
Bill said: And thus he concludes, the judgment message is still the second coming of Jesus to this earth.
It is the Pioneers that said this. I am just informing those that want the facts. SDA theology is built on Millerite theology. Blame the Pioneers if you don' t like what they taught. But don't change what they taught and pretend they support it. This is very wrong.
Bill said: Of course, Tom changes the message to suit himself. Miller taught that 1844 was the end of the world. Everybody rejects that interpretation for obvious reasons. That is, 1844 came and the world did not end.
I am not changing anything. Miller was obviously wrong about the timing of the Second Coming, but not about his basic interpretation of the Judgment message or the doctrine of the Second Coming. This is what the Founders said. It has nothing to do with what I think.
Bill said: So we must conclude either Miller had no message at all, or, 1844 referred to some other event.
It is a historical fact that Miller had a very powerful message about the Second Coming as the Day of Judgment and the end of the world. And while the SDA's claimed there were more corrections to be made prior to the Second Coming, such as the Sabbath, and that a Judgment in heaven must precede the end of the world, they never renounced Millers doctrine of the Second Coming, nor would they let anyone revise Rev 14:7 and say that it meant the IJ, even though this is what they now said it meant.
It is remarkable how they finessed this point, but today few have any idea what they were doing or how they were doing it. But under no circumstances can the IJ become the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Messages. It never happened. It goes against everything the Pioneers stand for and developed. It goes against the visions of Ellen White and the clear record of prophetic history.
Bill said: As SDA's we opt for some other event.
While the SDA's "opted for another event" --to explain the delay of the Second Coming--they never changed Miller's Pillar about the Second Coming being the Judgment Pillar.
This is the point that many misunderstand.
But Ellen White is very clear. And I posted a number of her quotes, which clearly said that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Angels Messages couldn't be changed. Those that stick with Ellen White on this point will come to understand things correctly. Those that ignore her, or think she did not mean what she said, --over and over, will remain confused and in the dark.
Bill said: In the end, no one can support and contend for Miller's original message. Not even Tom.
Wow! This is madness. The SDA church is BUILT on Millers view of the Second Coming as the Judgment. How can you not know this? Miller is the FATHER of the Advent Movement. To deny this is to repudiate the Three Angels messages and the Pioneers. A true SDA embraces Miller, not repudiates him.
Bill Sorensen said: And so here is Tom convoluted argument.....
"Let all SDA's pay careful attention; Ellen White never said that the IJ was a pillar from the 1st Angels Message. And neither did anyone else in 19th century Adventism. In fact, they all said that it was the Second Coming--even AFTER 1844. And they also said there could no changes to the pillars in these fulfilled messages that preceded the 3rd Angels Message."
-----------------------------
Bill, this statement above is not an "argument" or my personal opinion as you think. I am giving you the facts of history. The problem is that many are unaware of these historic points because the church has ignored them and taught something else entirely for generations.
I stand by that statement.
Bill said: He wants us to believe EGW NEVER believed, either before or after 1844, that the 1st angels message was the IJ.
Correct. Miller's interpretation became a sacred pillar for the SDA's. Even though they later--after the disappointment-- viewed the Judgment in the 1st Angels message DIFFERENTLY, they nonetheless held firm to Miller's view of Rev 14:7 AS A PROHETIC PILLAR. Why? Because they viewed it as FULFILLED prophecy, which cannot be changed. Listen to Ellen White on this point.
"When men come in who would move one pin or pillar from the foundation which God has established by His Holy Spirit, let the aged men who were pioneers in our work speak plainly, and let those who are dead speak also, by the reprinting of their articles in our periodicals. Gather up the rays of divine light that God has given as He has led His people on step by step in the way of truth. This truth will stand the test of time and trial. "
Ms 62, 1905, p. 6. (A Warning against False Theories, May 24, 1905.) (Ellen White, 1905, Manuscript Releases Volume One, page 55).
Those that claim the IJ is a Pillar in the 1st Angels Message are no friends of Ellen White. They are her enemy and the enemy of the Advent Cause. She says that that the Pillars cannot be moved, but yet, the SDA's have done this themselves. They have changed the very fundamentals that Ellen White said could never be moved.
THIS is why the SDA church is self-destructing. And when the warning cry went out by those that understood what was taking place. Persecution took place and Dr. Ford was exiled. What a great mistake. I hope it is not too late to make the necessary corrections.
Bill said: And this is where Maggie exposed him as a fraud. For anyone who can read can clearly see that after 1844, EGW clearly endorsed the idea that the first angel's message was the IJ.
Bill, don't say things that you can't back up. If you think you have any post that solves the issues in your favor-- then post it or at least give us a reference so we can all see whatever it is you are talking about. Otherwise, don't bring up phantom evidence.
What many fail to understand is that even though the Pioneers viewed Rev 14: 7 differently, after 1844, they still maintained that Miller's view could not be changed. In fact, it is remarkable that they did not go back and officially change the Judgment pillar. Because that is what one would expect.
In fact, Uriah Smith wanted to reprimand the Millerites for being so wrong, but Ellen White would not permit it. She said that God was in the Millerite Movement. He was behind Miller's Message, and thus she was instructed in vision many times that these past Millerite Messages and Pillars could never be changed.
In hindsight we can see why she was so firm and so correct. Because after Ellen White died, this change was made in Takoma Park. What was the result? A complete misunderstanding of Adventist history and theology. A disintegration of Adventism and a misunderstanding of the 1st Pillar, which is the Gospel, as well as the 2nd Pillar. Thus the SDA church self-destructed because they had mangled and misunderstood the very fundamentals that define the Advent Movement.
The only way out of this mess is to undo this great error about the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. The IJ is not located in the 1st Angels Message and Mr. Goldstein needs to confess this point and repent in front of the entire church. This is the only way for him to save his credibility-- as well as his soul. He needs to repudiate TA and undo the damage he has done over the years by a full confession to Dr. Ford.
If the SDA's fail to repent of TA, and return to the Fundamentals, they are doomed. The Pillars of the Advent Movement are called such for a reason. When they are moved or changed, the entire structure collapses. This is what has happened. The SDA's have misunderstood the first two Pillars in the 1st Angels Message.
Bill said: What this means is this, Tom can't get EGW on his side no matter how he twists and turns historical facts. Tom calls it "Tacoma Park Adventism" when in reality it is EGW Adventism.
Ellen White agrees with Dr. Ford and myself; not you or TA. I have been in the White Estate researching this material 30 years ago and you have never done any such thing. So be careful what you say, because you have never held any serious meeting about these things with either the White Estate or GC officials or any scholars or historians, and I have many times. Don't presume to know more than you do.
Bill said: No one who can read, is going to "buy" your theory, Tom. EGW clearly endorses the IJ and applies it to the first angel's message.
Bill, I am not giving you "my theory." But that of the Founders. While EGW does indeed "endorse the IJ" and "applies it to Rev 14:7" ; she does not do it at the expense of the original Judgment pillar of the Second Coming that stands in the 1st Angels Message. And if your mind cannot understand this distinction, then I am sorry. This is what they said and taught. This material is obviously too complex for you and many others to understand. So be it.
Bill quotes the GC, page 424: "In 1844 our great High Priest entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, to begin the work of the investigative judgment…" Notice, she quotes Rev. 14:7.
Pay attention Bill: She is not saying that the PAJ is now the new Pillar in the 1st Angels Message. It was not. Miller's Judgment Pillar was already there. This is the point. She is only giving the EXPLANATION and CORRECTION for the disappointment; which is very different from giving the DEFINITON of the Judgment Pillar from the 1st Angels Message. This point must be grasped in order to understand what the Pioneers were really saying.
Besides, she had already DEFINED the Judgment Pillar in the same book, well before the chapter about the IJ. Why is it that the TSDA's skip over the earlier chapters that they don't like and rush to the one about the IJ? Because they are taking things out of context and confusing themselves and everyone else in the process. You need to stop reading Adventist history backwards.
Bill said: This is not "Tacoma Park Adventism" as Tom would claim. This is clearly EGW Adventism that he would like to deny.
The rush to defend the IJ and place it in the 1st Angels Message did not take place in Battle Creek. But it did in Takoma Park. This is where all the TSDA's learned to ignore Miller and ignore Ellen White's clear definition of the Judgment Pillar in the earlier chapters of the GC. Thus all TSDA's gloss over the historic theology that is fundamental to understanding the Advent Movement and rush to the end of the book. Past the chapters of the disappointment to the place where the IJ is presented. (This is what you just did).
I suggest you back up and read the EARLIER chapters where she DEFINES the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message.
What a pity that the SDA's allowed the Three Angels Messages to become reduced to worthless confusion and double-talk. This is horrible and unnecessary. I warned the leaders many years ago that if they continue to allow a false version of the Three Angels Message to control Adventist doctrine, that one day it would all collapse in a heap of nonsense.
Rather then confess that Arthur White's version of TA is wrong. They tried to solve the problem by embracing "pluralism." Which is to say that anyone can believe any number of things about the pillars and it does not matter. They prefer this wicked policy to confession, repentance, and reform for obvious, but very wrong, reasons.
Unless the SDA's repent and become honest about the fundamental doctrines that define them, they are doomed.
"Let the truths that are the foundation of our faith be kept before the people. … We are now to understand what the pillars of our faith are,--the truths that have made us as a people what we are, leading us on step by step." Review and Herald, May 25, 1905.
Today, the SDA church does not correctly understand the history or the doctrines that define Adventism.
They have also misunderstood the mind and writings of Ellen White, and most everything else as well.
They have the wrong Pillars in the 1st Angels Message; the wrong Gospel and the wrong Judgment. Shame!
Here are some links about the IJ, there are many others:
1844 Made Simple
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/8/10902.html?1166507859
Ellen White and the Investigative Judgment
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/962.html?1021986869
Continued |
Tom Norris (Tom_norris)
Moderator
Username: Tom_norris
Post Number: 80
Registered: 7-2008
| | Posted on Monday, December 29, 2008 - 10:38 pm: | |
Bill, my friend, we have been going over this same ground for years now. Here is a discussion about this with you, about this very same point. You couldn't answer the questions then anymore than you can now. Take a look:
Bill Sorenson (Billsorensen) Posted on Wednesday, September 4, 2002 - 5:35 am: He quoted Tom Norris who said: "Ron, a critic of the TSDA's, claims that the First Message was revised after the fact, and that is when the IJ was placed in this message. Is this true? Do you agree with this? And if so, when did it happen and who did it?"
Bill Sorenson said: Tom.....You create a "false dilemma" and then suppose you have destroyed our message.
Actually, it was Hiram Edson who was one of the principle contributors to clear up the confusion on the events surrounding 1844.
Up to this time they did not deny that the first angel's message was dealing with "judgment". They just assumed the second coming of Christ was when this event transpired.
Both yourself and Dr. Ford and others have reverted to this false idea.
Only bible Adventism recognizes a judgment must necessarily precede the advent. Thus....a "pre-advent investigative judgment" of church comes before the second coming of Jesus.
The church must be judged before the second coming. And it was not at the cross, and not at the moment of conversion. It is a formal judgment that transpires in heaven and began in 1844.
This is what our pioneers discovered as they carefully considered scriptures. This keeps the law dynamic and applicable to the Christian community. It is a third use of the law system of truth.
You can deny this all you want but it will not negate the truth of the matter. You are simply an apostate Protestant like Dr. Ford and many others who attack this clear biblical truth.
We don't need EGW to prove it or affirm it. We are grateful for her ministry and God's willingness to use her and others to point us to this clear biblical truth. It is no enigma to me or to others who study the bible with prayer and an open mind. Neither does the doctrine negate the gospel as Ford and yourself and many others claim.
Any so called "gospel" that denies that Christians are under the law as a rule of life and denies that we are judged by the law to determine our destiny is apostasy from the bible.
Just because we cannot merit salvation by obedience to the law does not negate the law of love as the determining factor that defines true faith. The law creates fear. And fear and assurance work together to create the only viable motive to both create the Christian community and sustain it.
Sorensen
Tom Norris Posted on Wednesday, September 4, 2002 - 7:53 am: Bill Sorenson said on Wednesday, September 4, 2002: "You create a "false dilemma" and then suppose you have destroyed our message. Actually, it was Hiram Edson who was one of the principle contributors to clear up the confusion on the events surrounding 1844."
If the Dilemma is so false, why can't you clear it up?
If Edson has the answer, as you claim, are you saying that HE is the one who went back and placed the IJ in the First Angels message? And are you also saying that he invented the term and the doctrine that is called the IJ?
Bill said: "Up to this time they did not deny that the first angel's message was dealing with "judgment". They just assumed the second coming of Christ was when this event transpired."
Thanks for nothing. Please answer the question: Who went back and placed the IJ in Millers First Message? And when? THIS is the question on the table. Why can't you answer it?
Bill said: "Both yourself and Dr. Ford and others have reverted to this false idea."
It would appear that the TSDA's are the ones who have created both false doctrine and have reverted to double talk and evasion.
Bill said; "Only bible Adventism recognizes a judgment must necessarily precede the advent. Thus....a "pre-advent investigative judgment" of the church comes before the second coming of Jesus."
That is fine. Dr. Ford never said otherwise. Of course there must be a pre-Advent Judgment. But that was not the question was it? The question is how did the IJ get all the way back into Miller's historic First Angels Message that Ellen White said could NEVER be changed in the slightest. And when?
Bill said: "The church must be judged before the second coming. And it was not at the cross, and not at the moment of conversion. It is a formal judgment that transpires in heaven and began in 1844."
You are not being responsive to the question. How did the IJ get back into Miller's Message? And who did this? And when?
Bill said: "This is what our pioneers discovered as they carefully considered scriptures. This keeps the law dynamic and applicable to the Christian community. It is a third use of the law system of truth. You can deny this all you want but it will not negate the truth of the matter. You are simply an apostate Protestant like Dr. Ford and many others who attack this clear biblical truth."
The truth about what? Just answer the question. How did the IJ get placed BACK in the First Angels message? And who placed in back in there after it had closed? Calling Dr, Ford names is not an appropriate response, unless of course you are saying that Dr. Ford is the one guilty of doing what Ellen White said can never take place?
Bill said: "We don't need EGW to prove it or affirm it. We are grateful for her ministry and God's willingness to use her and others to point us to this clear biblical truth. It is no enigma to me or to others who study the bible with prayer and an open mind. Neither does the doctrine negate the gospel as Ford and yourself and many others claim."
Again. Dr, Ford and Tom Norris are both very grateful for the ministry of Ellen White. After all, she is the one who said, over and over, that no one could ever change any of the Three Angels messages. Apparently we are the ones paying attention to her while the TSDA's are taking positions that she would never support and did not support.
So one more time: How did the IJ get placed in Miller's famous and historic Message? And who put it there? And when did that revised position take place? How hard can this be for those who claim to be the experts about the Three A's?
Bill said: "Any so called "gospel" that denies that Christians are under the law as a rule of life and denies that we are judged by the law to determine our destiny is apostasy from the bible."
Dr. Ford and Tom Norris agree that the law has not been removed as a standard. But it does not come close to answering the question that was put to you does it?
So one more time: How did the IJ get placed into Miller's famous and historic First Angels Message? And who put it there? And when did that revision take place? How hard can this be for those who claim to be the experts about Bible Adventism?
The microphone is now yours once again. Try and see if you can answer the question this time?
Tom Norris, who is laughing at the confused TSDA's
Bill Sorenson Posted on Wednesday, September 4, 2002 - 1:42 pm: Well, Tom, God placed it there. Others only discovered it after the fact. It developed over a period of time as the pioneers carefully studied the issues.
The only one confused is yourself.
Sorensen
Ron Corson Posted on Wednesday, September 4, 2002 - 1:52 pm; Famous last words: God did it; I said it, that's good enough for me.
[Insert one Joe cartoon here]
Tom Norris Posted on Wednesday, September 4, 2002 - 8:25 pm: Bill Sorenson said on Wednesday, September 4, 2002: "Well, Tom, God placed it (the IJ) there. Others only discovered it after the fact."
Are you saying that God put the IJ in the First Angels messages and forgot to tell everyone until after the message was over? He must be a really stupid and bumbling god? And then, to cover his blunder, he told the Adventists to go back and pretend it was there all along? What kind of idiot, lying god do you follow?
Ha, this is the same line Ulrike used when she could no longer evade the question. She blamed God for all this Glacier View confusion, just like you did. This is really sad and very pathetic.
Here is the real discovery for all who seek truth and honest Adventist eschatology: The IJ was NEVER in the First Angels message, at any time, as Traditional Adventism theology teaches. THIS is the real discovery!
Moreover, God is NOT responsible for this IJ fraud, nor is Ellen White, or Dr. Ford. Rather, it is the leaders that have been peddling lies for decades. And Glacier View was the biggest of them all. The SDA leaders are responsible for this outrageous apostasy, not God. They have led the church into confusion and schism.
While the TSDA's and the hierarchy claimed to be the ones defending Ellen White's position, they were lying, which is their real father and god. Those that support Glacier View theology are enemies of Ellen White, traitors to the Three Angels messages, and rebels against the Gospel and all heaven.
No one can change any of these three messages, or claim, like Goldstein, that the IJ is the foundation of this church. Listen to Ellen White one more time, and try not to cover your eyes and ears. She has a message for this church:
"I saw a company who stood well guarded and firm, giving no countenance to those who would unsettle the established faith of the body. God looked upon them with approbation. I was shown three steps-- the first, second, and third angels' messages. Said my accompanying angel, " Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages. The true understanding of these messages is of vital importance." (Early Writings of Ellen G. White, 1858, also known as: Spiritual Gifts / and The Great Controversy. page 158, Chapter Title: A Firm Platform.)
Woe to the TSDA's, for they have scrambled these messages into apostasy. Woe to the hierarchy, for they have rejected the Gospel!
The gullible TSDA's have been shown to be very foolish indeed. Their leaders have cruelly tricked them. Today, the SDA church no more understands the Three Angels Messages, or the Gospel that is contained within this eschatological paradigm; than did the corrupt Jewish hierarchy understand their own apocalyptic, or the Gospel, in the days of Jesus and the apostles.
Glacier View was a total scam. The IJ NEVER existed in 1844, much less in Miller's historic First Angels message, as the leaders dishonestly told everyone. This fraud was just an excuse to fight against the Gospel and remove it from the Adventist Apocalyptic so that the leaders could hijack this denomination and turn it into their Private Corporation and personal plaything.
Bill said: "It (the IJ) developed over a period of time as the pioneers carefully studied the issues. The only one confused is yourself."
How can the IJ be developed over years, AFTER the First Message had long closed up, so as to end up residing in Miller's original Message that Ellen White said could NEVER BE CHANGED? Your position about this is a historical impossibility and an eschatological absurdity that totally rejects the hermeneutical foundations of the Adventist Apocalyptic; not to mention common sense.
No wonder Goldstein ran away! He was smart enough to realize that something was terribly wrong with his Glacier View theology. No wonder the leaders cannot openly discuss this issue and have taken great pains to censor and silence this discussion. They have been caught promoting one of the biggest scams in modern religious history. But it is coming unraveled for all to see. Woe is them!
Let's be clear about what is taking place: The SDA church has been caught in the act of manufacturing and promoting false and heretical doctrine that no Adventist Pioneer, much less any Apostle or Protestant, would ever support, including, and especially Ellen White. The SDA church is running a rich, moneymaking scam, just like the Mormons, and so many others.
The IJ, as understood by the 20th century leaders is a false Pillar. It is a fraud. It is time to apologize to Dr. Ford and get busy Reforming Adventism before it is too late.
It is time for the TSDA's to come to their senses, if possible, and study the Three Angels messages in the true light of Adventist history and the Gospel so that the Adventist Movement can return to the Protestant fold and finish the work of the Apostles and Reformer's.
Who will be the first from this crowd to confess? Ulrike? Dr. Hubert? Sorensen? Goldstein? Johnsson? Paulsen? Come on, don't be shy. It is time for the TSDA's and those of the unbiblical hierarchy to listen to the Laodicean Message and REPENT of Glacier View!
--------------------------------------------------
It is time for the SDA church to stop their cover up about what Ellen White really believed and taught. TA has most everything wrong, including and especially the very Pillars that launched the Advent Movement.
But "truth is still truth." And facts are still facts. The SDA church has lost their "bearings" BECAUSE they have repudiated the "foundations" of the Advent Faith. BECAUSE they have embraced myth and legend, and "erroneous theories." BECAUSE when confronted with their errors, by Dr. Ford and others, they have refused to confess and repent.
What a pity that the Advent Movement has turned into such a tragedy. They were supposed to prepare the church for the Second Coming, but now they are a self-destructing and confused cult for all to see. They aren't prepared for any kind of natural disaster, much less the end of the world and the great Judgment Day! And they could care less.
Why?
Because they have repudiated the very Pillar of the Second Coming that defines and anchors their eschatology and mission. Replacing it with a legalistic and false doctrines that the NT knows nothing about. There is no Celestial Judgment of works to investigate the Santification of the Saints. Which is a doctrine that repudiates Gospel. So how can that be a Pillar?
What a relief it will be to all those Gospel loving SDA's to find out that the IJ was NEVER a Pillar anywhere in the Three Angels Messages. What good news for Adventists. And what bad news for all the law obsessed TSDA's who have been so badly fooled and deceived.
If only they would listen to Ellen White?
"Not a pin is to be moved from the foundations of our faith. Truth is still truth. Those who become uncertain will drift into erroneous theories, and will finally find themselves infidel in regard to the past evidence we have had of what is truth. The old way marks must be preserved, that we lose not our bearings."
(Letters 395, 1906 p. 4. to Elder S. M. Cobb, December 25,1906.)
The only Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message-- is the Second Coming. This is the greatest of all Adventist landmarks, and the most sacred Pillar, following the Gospel. Like the Gospel, it can never be changed, much less replaced by the legalistic mistake call the IJ.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform
Bill, Don; No need to reply for a while as the site is going through some changes. I hope this long running thread will be transferred to the new site under the Adventist Reform section. Then we can continue.
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page