Generally speaking, i have always thot of myself as a “Conservative Seventh-day Adventist”. The main difference i see between the “Liberal Seventh-day Adventists” and the Conservatives, is that the Liberals believe that what you do has nothing to do with salvation. Therefore, there is no need to try to live a godly lifestyle. This view accounts for a lot of the compromise we see with the world that has come into the Seventh-day Adventist church in doctrines too, but most noticeably in lifestyles, with even homosexuality being accepted by some of the more “progressive” Liberals (currently liberals like to call themselves “progressives”, and conservatives like to call themselves “historicists”. i’m not interested in names, and even dividing them into these 2 lib/con camps is an arbitrary affair, but the fact is, everyone fits, to varying degrees, into one of these two groups).
Believing that what i do IS important in relating to my salvation, i identify with the conservatives. The Bible is very clear that no liars, for example, will go to heaven. Ellen White’s books are FULL of counsel on how to eat, dress, drink, sleep, every aspect of our lives. This is God’s will, to prepare us for the soon coming of Jesus, as only a holy people can meet a holy God.
Having said that, i have five main contentions with conservatives in the Seventh-day Adventist church. This
1. I believe the Bible is the WORD OF GOD, and that there are no mistakes in it. No, i’m not talking about the translations, and yes, i do know that the copyists thru the ages changed a bit, but in the original manuscripts, the words are the words of God himself – not “the ideas of God as given to man and then the men/women wrote words they chose”. In the SDA official beliefs it says the Bible is “infallible”, which is not the same as “inerrant”. Of course liberals believe in mistakes in the Bible, but many conservatives do too 🙁
2. Nature of Christ: Surprisingly, the Liberals are closer to the correct view than the Conservatives. The Bible and Spirit of Prophecy are very clear that Christ was born with no tendency to sin, but we are. What is difficult about believing that?
3. Most Conservatives are stuck in the past. No kidding 🙂 Really, they refuse to read Daniel and Revelation seeing the prophecies as anything pointing to the future. They’ve read so much of Uriah Smith’s stuff, and those who repeated what he wrote (most of which came from William Miller in the 1844 movement), that they are in big danger of repeating the Jewish experience of being destroyed for not understanding the prophecies which applied to them. Yes, William Miller was especially directed of God to arrive at his prophetic interpretations, but he had to have everything finished by 1843/4! Especially the 1260, 1290, 1335 days in Daniel, and the 7 Trumpets in Revelation cannot have possibly happened in their final fulfillment as i write this in 2008. Some of the liberals are starting to see this.
4. I forgot.
5. Unconditional Love is a concept not supported by any inspired writing. To think even that if God loves Satan now, and i’m supposed to be like God, then i should be loving Satan too?!?! From what i’ve studied, this phrase was first used in the 1950s by two psychologists in the U.S., then made a bit popular during the hippie ’60s, then entered Sunday-keeping churches in the ’70s, then the SDA church in the 80s, and by now this concept is deeply rooted among our people. What always amuses me is the violent (usually very violent) reaction i get from people when i tell them i don’t believe this doctrine. ha! So much for their love…. No, God says he “hates” bad people in the Bible like in IIChronicles 19:2, and the first 11 chapters of Psalms, and i believe it. He will kill all of the bad people at the end, showing how much “unconditional love” he has. May we repent and come to him before our names come up in the judgment which is going on now.
So while my heart is generally with the Conservative group, and supports their interpretation of the inspired word, these points need to be considered, repented of where we have done wrong, and then make a covenant with God that we will follow the truth, and nothing but the whole truth. So help us God.
Quite an interesting perspective. Particularly the origin of unconditional love. What sources do you have to support your time line of unconditional love?
I have been studying OT early prophets. The study has raised questions for me regarding inspiration. Ellen White appears to support dictation/verbal inspiration and dynamic/thought inspiration depending on which quote you read. Your thoughts?
This is THE most perplexing thing for me – because the Bible is very clear that the words are directly from God, and the early material with Ellen White’s name on it agrees perfectly, i must believe that over some later “Selected” messages.
.
Please look at my post updated today:
http://great-controversy-movie.com/blog/?p=71
.
Any comments/advice you have would be much appreciated.
Thank you for your comment. I hope to reply by the end of this week.
Sorry, I don’t understand how you come to the conclusion that the orginal Bible was inerrant and not the Bible we have today. Why would God perform a miracle in providing a perfect Bible through dictation and then not preserve it for us today? Doesn’t the loss of the perfect original affect your view of the Bible’s authority today?
Sorry, I don’t have an opinion yet on the contradiction you have cited in Ellen White’s early writings.
I need to resolve the issue of Bible inspiration and preservation first.
Thank you in anticipation of your answers.
The loss of the original, absolutely perfect writings, do not affect my view of the Bible, except in one sense – I believe it is more important to read the WHOLE Bible to get the overall picture rather than being able to just take one verse here and there. Because Ellen White clearly writes that words have been added when copies were few, to get it to lean to their established views and traditions.
.
But it is also clear that those places are very few, and that the vast majority of the words in the Bible are directly from God without any changing on man’s part.
.
Why didn’t God choose to preserve the original manuscripts? I don’t know. There are many things i don’t know. Why didn’t Jesus leave us with a movie of himself instead of just words? For that matter, why did he choose to come 2000 years ago and not today? No idea here. I’ll just leave it with God, and trust him to send his Holy Spirit when i do read his Bible, to lead me into all truth.
Thank you for your reply. I have done a lot more reading since my last post and I am forming firmer beliefs about inspiration. Regarding Jesus’ words, during my reading it appears that modern scholars believe that only Jesus’ voice is recorded in the Gospels, not his exact words. They argue that Jesus spoke Aramaic and therefore what we have in the Greek Bible is a translation. What are your thoughts on this matter?
I see just today on the official Ellen G. White website where they have a book condensed and adapted from George R. Knight, “Reading Ellen White”.
.
In it, there is the astonishing assertion: “The same kind of factual errors can be discovered in Ellen White’s writings as are found in the Bible.”
http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/herm-pri.html#verbal
.
Of course this goes directly against the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy, and even directly against the first of the 28 fundamentals of the Seventh-day Adventist church: “The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will.”
Quote- Ellen White’s books ar e FULL of counsel on how to eat, dress, drink, sleep, every aspect of our lives. This is God’s will, to prepare us for the soon coming of Jesus, as only a holy people can meet a holy God.- End Quote
Very profound summary regarding the purpose of Ellen’s White’s writings. Wonder what the church would be like today if we truely took this to heart that is what it means to be a holy people.