Seventh-Day Adventism

No I didn't.
And the conversation you took out of context to prove your point was answered already, so #1 didn't apply (yet answered in a tone I didn't like) You misunderstood again because you were not a part of the conversation. It was between me and Bob, and we understand one another fine now so no worries.
Let it be.

Please move forward now

 

I hope you are female :thumbs:

 

Everytime I take this free Denominations test:

http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=christiandenom

some of the top 5 are:

Baptist (generic & Freewill)
SDA
AoG (Assembly of God)

 

Hey - I think we finally agreed on something!

Progress -- I'll take it!

in Christ,

Bob

 

So you flunked? :laugh:

 

Hmm

"sola scriptura"
"Pre-Mill"
"Trinitarian"
"Saved by Grace through Faith"
"66 books - not just 27"
"Literal 2nd coming"
"Literal Resurrection"

You are right - you probably would have scored high-SDA:applause:

 

What do the SDA believe about the Spirit as the third person of the Trinity?

 

Yep, there we go (today's results)
[i belong to a church of the bolded:
Southern Baptists]:

#1 Assemblies of God (AoG)
#2 Southern Baptist (SBC)
#3 Free Will Baptist (FWB)
#4 Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA)
#5 Church of Christ (CoC)

Quite frankly, I'd be happy to be
a member of a church (assembly)
of any of these Denominations.
None of them practice heresy or
resemble any 'cult' (except where
cult = don't think like me)

I even remember my paternal Grandfather,
Edd Edwards, when to the church by his
house: AoG.

Added late:
Needless to say, I have friends in each of
these Denominations.

 

HP: Picture Joe, RB, TCG, and a few others on a pulling sled in the pouring rain, with me yoked trying to move it over slippery ground covered in wet slimy clay. I am trying with all my might, slipping falling, trying again to strain against the yoke to move the sled but to no avail on the slippery clay. Joe calls out “Please move forward!” I reply, “I am trying!” :laugh:

 

A more fitting picture would be you and BR yoked to a sled in which are the writings of EGW, trying to move it over slippery ground covered in wet slimy clay. You are trying with all your might, slipping falling, trying again to strain against the yoke to move the sled but to no avail on the slippery clay. :laugh:

 

What form of government does the SDA have?
Congegrational? (most churches are independant
of the others?)

I notice there was no 'day of the week for worship'
question.

 

TCG: A more fitting picture would be you and BR yoked to a sled in which are the writings of EGW, trying to move it over slippery ground covered in wet slimy clay. I am trying with all my might, slipping falling, trying again to strain against the yoke to move the sled but to no avail on the slippery clay.

HP: Has anyone told you that all analogies have their shortcomings?

 

I have suggested no such thing. This is not about what "I believe" or BR believes.

All of EGW's writings concerning Christian doctrines are available to read, complete and finished since she is no longer with us.

You are missing the content of my questions. I did not ask BR what HE believes about EGW. I asked him what does the SDA church believe (this would be what do they tell their members concerning the possible inerrancy of EGW's writings on Christian doctrines).

Your analogy about an individual receiving new light and changing one's mind has nothing to do with a organizations stand on the completed writings of any specific author.

I am certain the SDA church has studied in depth the writings of EGW and would have the ability to answer my questions without any reservations. I don't think they would say "well, so far she has been inerrant, but that could change some day for us".

Her writings have ended, there is nothing else she is going to say that might change their minds.

Now Bob has spoken on behalf of the SDA, as only he could here since he is a SDA. He has answered that the SDA church believes EGW's writings concerning Christian doctrines ARE fallible. BTW Bob, do you have any official church statement that states Ellen is fallible? Just curious.

So I may ask a "good" question and inquire just which writings does the SDA church believe to be in error?

Never heard of a "bad" question or a question in "error". If there are none, then just say none! Whats the problem?

Now if the SDA church does NOT find ANY errors in Ellen's writings concerning Christian doctrine then it is decietful on their part to say that her writings on this subject can be fallible for they truly have already concluded that they are correct.

Here is how dumb this would sound........What you said is correct HP, but you could be wrong! Pretty stupid statement wouldn't you say? Well, maybe that is a bad question. Bad steaver, bad.:laugh: (just joshing ya bro)

God Bless! :thumbs:

ps. who told you I was beating my wife?

 

Again, are you female? (interesting wink earlier if your not)

If so...

and your 1/2 way good looking...

I could help you out of that wet and slimy slump !


Off riding for now, see you all later

 

The "fallible vs infallible" topic is distinctively Catholic - SDA's don't use it. Rather SDAs use the terms like "TEST of a prophet" and appeal to Paul's statement in Gal 1
"Though WE or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel OTHER than what has already been given let them be accursed".

The point is NNE is infallible -- EVERYONE must be tested "sola scriptura".

Seems like a hard concept for you Steaver - you seem to be married to this "infallible" model no matter what response is given. Kinda odd.

But then you go from that mistake to the next one -- arguing that IF we are not all infallible THEN we must all be IN ERROR!

And that is also another fallacy.

As I have stated repeatedly by way of illustration
ALL my posts are fallible but as it turns out ALL are correct.

You respond with "prove it show me which of your posts are in error" -- as if you did not understand the response at all.

And "you keep" doing that!

(Amazing that you would keep to your old trick on this topic eh??:laugh: )

See? "there you go again" (over and over and over again).

ALL my posts are fallible.

But as it turns out ALL my posts are also CORRECT.

Time to think about that for a minute Steaver...

Minute 's up.:thumbs:

In Christ,

Bob

 

Methodist Episcopal format with local conferences, Unions and then Divisions and finally "the General Conference".

Ellen White grew up as United Methodist as did several other key founders.

True enough - you would have had to be "Seventh-day Baptist" for that one to apply (or at least have posted favorably when I quoted D.L Moody).

in Christ,

Bob

 

And I quote "Third Person of the Godhead" --

Are you asking how old He is??

Or are you asking if the members of the SDA church that came out of the "Church of the Brethren" in the mid to late 1800's took a while to come around to the Trinitarian position?

 

HP: No one. I was simply trying to illustrate how one can suggest things that have no validity by the way one forms a question. It related to your asking a question which suggested that if the SDA’s thought the writings of EGW were fallible that they could point to an error. No offense, but the logic your question is enveloped in is skewed Steaver. They can believe that the writings of EGW are fallible, yet believe they are 100% correct. There is no contradiction or fallacy in that statement at all.

Somebody help me out here. Does anyone else see the point I am trying to make besides the man (that is for you Joe:wavey: ) in my mirror?
PS: Thanks BR. It appears that at least you do.

 

Thank you, Brother Bob, about the information of
SDA Polity.

I just find no great difference (Shirley Knott Heresy )
between the many types of Baptist and the SDA
(and other Millerite off-shoots).

 

Someone give me a whip for HP!



I gotta go for real now, back in a few hrs