SDA's slaughter their own?

Bob Ryan say it ain't so. Certainly you will. It will go something like, they weren't true Christian SDA's.

 

Africa. It figures.

 

Here is a SDA board that you could raise it on, it is called the Voluntary Online Adventist Forum. Obviously this would have sent shock waves through the SDA. Maybe they have some answers.

http://www.online-adventist.org/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/advent/Ultimate.cgi

 

Please! My brothers!

I know this is tempting to do, knowing that if the individual in question was a Catholic, let alone a Catholic priest, how the babble would go in all the forums.

But just as we do not like our "noses rubbed in it" constantly when we have the pedafile priest scandal paraded before us, let us not compound the sin by indulging in tongue clucking toward others, please. I am sure this is not the intention, but it will/may be perceived that way.

But if such is reported, a kindly measure of brotherhood in prayer would be appropriate, and so I would pray for and with all of our SdA participants for the poor individual in question as reported. I would also add that most SdA's are honorable men and women, just as all Christians are, hoping that all of you would include us Catholics as well.

We are all sinners and fall short of the glory of God...

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Almighty and eternal God, you gather
the scattered sheep

and watch over those
you have gathered.

Look kindly on all who follow Jesus,
your Son.

You have marked them
with the seal of one baptism,
now make them one
in the fullness of faith
and unite them in the bond of love.

We ask this through Christ our Lord.

Amen.

 

Seventh-day Adventist have "beliefs" that are voted on and agreed upon by its world-wide church.

Every 5 years they meet to review those "beliefs".

They are published on the web - and as it pertains to "military action" they have not changed from the start.

Adventists are known as "non-combatants" by virtue of the denomination's stand on "thou shalt not kill" and Desmond Doss (a decorated medic from WWII) was instrumental in originating the current military policies that are in place today.

(See http://www.homeofheroes.com/profiles/profiles_doss.html)

In other words the "Denominational practice" is historically documented - in favor of "thou shalt not kill".

The "equivocation" often "tried" by the "less than forthright" is to obfuscate the position of the denomination and "pretend" that the doctrines/rulings/world-leadership EVER endorsed or taught ANY of the incidental sins of any one local group.

This is VERY different than Popes raising up Papal Armies and slaughtering fellow catholics in the name of god.

It is VERY different than the RCC building Doctrines SUPPORTING the right of the church to persecute those that dissent?

It is VERY different from denominational leadership TEACHING the denomination that it is right to slaughter.

But those who deal in "something less than truth" would exert efforts toward "revisionism" and "hope" that the "reader will not notice".

Instructive.

In Christ,

Bob

 

The two men identified in the article have never had any of their own negative views (much less the desire to kill someone) EVEN BROUGHT UP to the SDA denomination.

But we must confess that anti-SDA groups did find "two men" that were guilty of crimes.

However - notice that there is NO effort by the denomination to make doctrinal arguments for them OR to claim that these two are "infallible" OR to claim that ANY SDA doctrine supports them in any way.

Can the RCC say the same of its POPEs???

Is the RCC really so desperate for "examples" that it would compare two men in Africa acting on their own - with the CENTURIES of Papal inquisition - torture - Papal Armies fighting Papal Armies AND the REFUSAL of the RCC to apologize FOR ANY specific atrocity in her history committed INSTITUTIONALY by that denomination?

I am suprised to find that this is the case.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob,

Please let us know when you will talk about the SDA people here, which has nothing to do with the Catholic Church. Thanks.

 

Bob, can you answer the original question: How does the SDA church address this?

So far, apparently, the SDA church addresses this by going, "Oh, look at how bad the Catholics are," which is a practice that has been condemned around her (comparing to other denominations instead of just looking at your own).

 

Bob,

The quotes marks around everything look really stupid. There I got it off my chest.

I thought the big problem everybody had with us Catholics on these boards was that we weren't outraged over something that went on 3-500 years ago. Her is comething in your generation and you, rather than dealing with it, turn it in to a dig against Catholics. Nice job Bob. It only shows the continued venom in your heart for the truth. It only shows that you have no good answers for "the hope that is within you " (I am quoting someone look it up. (1 Pet 3:15)). Everything you say is with regard to Catholicism. And well as the salt of the earth (the Catholic Church) you would be obsessed with it.

Blessings

 

My argument is that you are "attempting to equivocate" the slaughter of thousands of Christians by Popes and Papal armies WITH an incident in Africa where there happened to ALSO be two SDA members {where ONE was an X-official of the local SDA african conference} involved in the actions.

You efforts to "equivocate" could not be "more obvious".

Furthermore - NOTHING about that incident SHOWED denominational "Action" taken AGAINST anyone NOR did your reference SHOW that the denomination attempted to defend or justify the misdeeds EVEN THEN.

Failing to make your case - you simply complain that this attempt to equivocate on your part - is also displayed in a negative light.

As I said "you have to already BE RC" for that model to work.

In Christ,

Bob

 

There has been much flurry on this thread about the actions of 75 year old man - who may be guilty of crimes in Ruwanda committed at the time he was 70.

Since there is "supposedly genuine interest" in this incident, and though it may only be "pretended objective interest" on the part of "some" -- perhaps there is "real interest" by others.

So I will provide access to the details so we can all "see if it is true" that the SDA denomination was taking part in killing anyone OR that the denomination did not denounce the killing outright.

(you know, the attempts made by the RC posters to "equivocate")

http://www.adventist.org/news/issues/data/948929215/

I believe the Papal armies raised up to kill fellow catholic armies - and the papal armies raised to kill protestants - and to exterminate people groups (and the subsequent LACK of ANY apology FOR SPECIFICS by the RCC) stands "by glaring contrast" to this issue with a 70 year old man in Ruwanda.


In Christ,

Bob

[ August 31, 2003, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

If it IS true that LIKE the RCC - the SDA denomination had "its pope" calling for slaughter in Ruwanda (or anywhere else or at any time in history) -- OR that the SDA denomination was seeking to "justify slaughter" claiming that the victims were 'had really bad theology' (like the RCC in the Dark Ages claimed of its victims) --- THEN we might assign the SDA denomination the some role in infamy that we assign to the errant Christians of the RCC in the Dark Ages -

So -- lets "see".

Here is what the SDAs are publishing to the world on this incident

http://www.adventist.org/news/data/2003/01/1045672278/index.html.en

 

The "highlighted" text in my post speaks for itself.

Either you are not reading - or are having trouble with the words.

In either case - I am happy to help.

Would you prefer a shorter version?

Did you see the practice of "Demonizing the victims" that the RCC posters have done on this message board?

Did you see the practice of "justifying the evil" with doctrinal "rationalizing" that has been practiced by the RC posters on this message board for the centuries of slaughter practiced by the RCC in the Dark Ages?

This incident provides "that perfect contrast".

Notice the highlighted text of the SDA published response?

(I see you are having a hard time getting to that part of the post. Is there anything I can do to help you?)

In Christ,

Bob

 

The more we focus on the "contrast" in that statement published by the church - and the RC ones that have been made here and made by the RCC itself - the "clearer" this issue will become.

The freedom to "Call sin by its name" is found in only one of those.

Notice that Even Dr. Carroll of EWTN admits "the SAME would be done to Billy Graham by the RCC for what he teaches TODAY" if he lived in the dark ages.

And where is that "calling of sin by its name?".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, you just misquoted him. Please do not put in quotations what are not his actual words.

 

The point remains - Dr. Carroll claims that Billy Graham would have been "burned at the stake" (his words).

Dr. Carroll ALSO points out "The Pope has NOT apologized for ANYTHING specific".

The "contrast" between that statement about the entire dark ages - and the SDA statement about a feeble 75 year old who "aided" the monsterous activity in Ruwanda - is "instructive" to the Christian reader.

The "elephant" is not so easily "ignored" as the RC members are assuming so far.

Come over to the light - where you are "free" to call sin by its name when it comes to horrible acts of history.

In Christ,

Bob