the work these societies are doing makes me proud to be an Adventist
ellen

Jesus never criticized or showed hostility to those who were hated or discriminated by his own people, i.e. the Romans, the Greeks, the Samaritans, the Publicans, or other pagan Gentiles. To the contrary, he consistently taught his people to love and accept them, without adopting their lifestyle or values. But there was one group he couldn't suffer and who was the object of his criticism: the intolerant, hateful, and sometimes violent, and extremely conservative religious right of his time. Perhaps we need to spend more time pondering about Jesus' attitude to those who "belonged to the Babylon" of his time. As we do this, we will learn from him important lessons of love, tolerance, and humility.

I always thought it was hypocritical of Ellen White and Adventists to condemn other Churches for keeping Sunday, saying it was really the pagan day of Sun god worship. But then go and promote and celebrate Christmas, which is actually the birth day of the Sun god, and the festival is 100% Babylonian!
The supposed Prophet of last days, Ellen White, wrote how every Church and house should have a Christmas Tree in it, which is actually a symbol of Nimrod's resurrection.

The Church holds to controlling Cult and Sectarian views.

Pago, the Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ. It is not, nor will it become, a false religion. Unless you mean that Jesus founded a false religion. In no way are we the Beast, we don't even come close. Only if you read into it the bigotry and prejudice of anti-Catholicism does it look that way. I would remind you that Ellen White's name adds up to 666.

You did not get the memo. The Jesuits are ancient history. Opus Dei is the new boogeyman. There is no Jesuit conspiracy.

Pago, I looked it up and found there is a Jesuit conspiracy! I couldn't believe it. How could I have been so blind? This guy quotes the Bible, so it must be all true. They even believe in the Bible alone.

http://www.vaticanassassins.org/the-plan/

As of April 13, 2011 Elder Bishop Eric Jon Phelps has founded and begun Reformation-Bible Puritan-Baptist Church. It is a church founded for the preaching of the true gospel of the Risen Lord Jesus Christ (I Corinthians 15:1-5) to White-raced peoples of North America, Europe, Southern Africa and Australia.

Yes indeed, you should worry about those Jesuits. Bishop Eric says so!

We misunderstand Babylon if we see it in an "us" vs. "them" dichotomy.

The story of Revelation is clear. A faithful woman goes into the desert. When we next go to the desert, we see a faithless woman. Then we see the remnant. In keeping with the prophets of the Old Testament, there is continuity between each of these. It is God's people who prove faithless--and yet a remnant prove faithful. But it is US.

Christians through the ages have seen the church as bride and harlot, as Jerusalem and Babylon. Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, noted this in his presidential address earlier this month: "As Dorothy Day remarked: 'The Church is the radiant bride of Christ; but her members at times act more like the scarlet woman of Babylon.'"

Luther had spoken of the Christian as "simul iustus et peccator"--Vatican 2 used very similar language to speak of the church:

... the Church, embracing in its bosom sinners, at the same time holy and always in need of being purified, always follows the way of penance and renewal. The Church, "like a stranger in a foreign land, presses forward amid the persecutions of the world and the consolations of God"(14*), announcing the cross and death of the Lord until He comes."(84) By the power of the risen Lord it is given strength that it might, in patience and in love, overcome its sorrows and its challenges, both within itself and from without, and that it might reveal to the world, faithfully though darkly, the mystery of its Lord until, in the end, it will be manifested in full light. Lumen Gentium 8.

See also the writings of Hans Urs von Balthasar. http://wquercus.com/faith/casta_meretrix.htm

"We should not water down our message just to please the crowds (naturally, we have to stay courteous, loving and open while preaching it. Again, what a challenge!)."

Anonymous7, for me the challenge is finding a way to believe God is loving while still believing He is going to burn billions of people alive, many of them for worshipping (!) Him on the wrong day of the week on a round world where the International Date Line is decided (and changed) by a committee.

So, in reality, God depends on a committee to decide who burns.

This is absurd, at best, and dishonors God, I believe. Worst of all, it harms people psychologically, especially children!
_____________________________________________

Historical positions of International Date Line (see map):

Over the years, the position of the International Date Line has changed several times. Until 1845, the Philippines were on the eastern side of it (the same side as the United States). It was on the eastern side of the line because it was a Spanish colony and most Europeans arrived there via the Spanish colonies in South America.

Indonesia, almost directly to the South of the Philippines, was a Dutch colony and most European arrivals came via the Cape of Good Hope. Thus Indonesia was to the west of the International Date Line.

After the independence of the South American countries, most people traveling to the Philippines also came by way of the Cape of Good Hope, so it was decided to change from the east of the line to the west of the line.

Alaska, originally claimed by Russia, was to the west of the International DateLine because most travelers arrived there by way of Siberia.

When the United States bought Alaska in 1867 the line was moved to the west of it.

The most recent change in the line was in 1995 when Kiribati moved a large segment of it to the east, so that the entire nation would be on the same side of the International Date Line. As with all other changes in the International DateLine, the change was made by a government with local interests.

http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astronomical-applications/astronomical-inf...
_____________________________________________

The Sabbath is entirely arbitrary because the line is arbitrary.

God is not unreasonable, surely, far less a tyrant.

Please consider the possibility that "Babylon" is, in reality, such extreme, authoritarian, damaging views of God.

Thanks and God bless you,

Maggie

The definition and identity of Babylon is very clear cut and simple: Any religion or institution that subscribes to" "My Way Or the Highway" is Babylon. Tom Z

Graeme,

Neat.

Be sure to wear some flowers in your hair. :-)

Maggie said:

"Anonymous7, for me the challenge is finding a way to believe God is loving while still believing He is going to burn billions of people alive, many of them for worshipping (!) Him on the wrong day of the week on a round world where the International Date Line is decided (and changed) by a committee."

Maggie, are you a Christian? If what you wrote above is true then I guess that you find it challenging too to believe that Adam and Eve were condemned (with all humanity suffering the consequences of their acts)() for just eating a fruit.

As for the Sabbath observance, it has nothing to do with the International Date Line but with the sun only.

Elaine:

Maybe the Israelites back then didn't know that the earth was round (though when you read some texts, you wonder) but God knew. And to say that it is man, not God who decides WHEN the sabbath begins, relegates it to very human time setting.God is no longer in charge of what day one should worship on is rather baffling. Are you a SDA?

Tom Zwemer - Wed, 11/30/2011 - 16:28
The definition and identity of Babylon is very clear cut and simple: Any religion or institution that subscribes to" "My Way Or the Highway" is Babylon. Tom Z

you mean......like Christ?
Matt 12:30 “Whoever is not with me is against me,....... "

Its seems its not as clear to you as what you might think......

Yeah, Michael but don't walk above the 66th parallel.

By the way, whom did God designate to count by sevens after the first Sabbath - Adam was busy eating apples and Cain was busy killing his brother. Where were the day counters?

This would be a good place to launch into the New Moon thingy - or not.

How long is the sabbath day in the Arctic Circle? Is it the same as at the equator?
The equator is the only place where day and night are equal lengths (day and night defined by Gen. 1).

Where does sabbath go when one crosses the International Date Line? If we rely on the established order, it has been assigned by man; IOW, man decides the next day is either abbath or another sabbath, or that it goes from Friday to Sunday. Is God in charge of defining the "seventh day"? Rapid transit was unknown when man wrote the Bible and it was never meant for modern times but for the Israelites who had always lived in the same time zone.

Sirje
You might consider that it took many thousands of years before people developed the technology to deal with living above the 66th parallel. Its not exactly a short trip on the technological curve from the garden of Eden picking fruit whenever you want to gnawing seal blubber in an igloo in the arctic circle.

All you and Elaine seem to be suggesting is that that God should not have said anything about the Sabbath till everyone had atomic clocks, whereas I say God can do it as seems best to him since its his show so to speak.

If ya'll think its such a bad plan your gonna have to take it up with him. Most of us around here are a little low on the Heavenly pay scale to be complaining about how God does what he does.....

You play your cards Elaine, the rest of us that believe God is bigger than just the Israelites, will play ours. We will see how it all works out.
Though I seem to remember something about God creating a whole planet and there not even being Israelites on the planet until Jacob when God changed his name from from 'Jacob' to 'Israel.

God is certainly arbitrary wanting just Jews to keep the Sabbath.
The 1999 edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica gives a world population of 5,848,739,000, of whom 14,890,000 were Jewish. This means that Jews are 0.25 per cent of the world's population.

Elaine, you are merciless....
You ask questions that the poor guys cannot answer. Of course they will "come up" with something, but it will be the "samo samo" we already know.
Keep asking your questions, I love it!!!! (Though, honestly,.... I feel bad for those guys...)

Fr Jim wrote: Pago, the Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ. It is not, nor will it become, a false religion. Unless you mean that Jesus founded a false religion. In no way are we the Beast, we don't even come close. Only if you read into it the bigotry and prejudice of anti-Catholicism does it look that way. I would remind you that Ellen White's name adds up to 666.

Funny Bride of Christ, murdering tens of millions of people who didn't agree with her teachings over the middle ages.

And sorry, Ellen White's name does not add up to 666. Firstly, letters in English have no numerical value. Secondly, W does not expand into VV (except for possibly in Dutch). W had the same value as V or U. So even if you took the Roman Numerals in her name, they do not add up to 666.

Unlike Vicarius Filii Dei, first stated in the Donation of Constantine, a fraudulent document used to conquer and take over lands from Europe to the Americas and slaughter many. Vicarius Filii Dei has been applied many times by Catholics to the Pope, and even applied by Pope Paul VI to himself in both 1965 and 1968. It has even been used in collections of Canon Law which have been said by popes to be "entirely without fault". For over 1000 years it has been an official title of the pope, because it has been used in official literature and has been pulled out many times whenever the pope had to exert his authority and influence over powerful people like kings and emperors.

But this will be news to many Spectrumites and Fr Jim, who choose to only read Catholicised literature. Remember, the Catholic church is very capable and proficient at removing (destroying) information which portrays them in a bad light.

And Sirje, yes, I am aware that my handle, Pagophilus, refers to the Harp Seal. I prefer the literal translation - ice lover.

"Funny Bride of Christ, murdering tens of millions of people who didn't agree with her teachings over the middle ages."

Pago, I'm not a Christian but neither am I a slanderer. The figures you cite orginated in the minds of bigots and not the real world. The Western Christian church was forever stained by the crimes it either committed or were complicit in, but we're talking thousands, not millions. Adventists in Rwanda participated in the massacre of more people in one month than Roman Catholics executed in three hundred years by means of the Inquistion. We should not excuse the crimes of the past, but neither should we lie about them to make ourselves look good and others look bad.

As for vicarius filii dei, isn't that the function the SDA church ascribes to itself--that of being the representative of Christ in this world? I distinctly remember a quote from a certain church lady to the effect that the GC is God's highest authority on Earth. Traditional Adventists don't reject the concept of the Vicar of Christ; they just don't like it when others arrogate to themselves the honor that is rightfully theirs.

Aage said:

"Pago, I'm not a Christian but neither am I a slanderer. The figures you cite orginated in the minds of bigots and not the real world."

Aage, obviously you are not a student of history either. Do some research and you will see that we are not talking about thousands only. Catholic persecutions lasted for centuries. There were between 5,000 to 30,000 Protestants killed during the St. Bartholomew's massacre alone. Add to this the killing of Waldenses, Cathars, etc, all the people that Rome called heretics. Add to this the persecutions during the multiple crusades. And, of course, don't forget the inquisitions that lasted several centuries.

Concerning the genocide in Rwanda, maybe some SDAs were involved. But as it is written in an article in Wikipedia,

"Conversions to Evangelical Christianity also increased after the genocide, while attendance in Catholic churches has decreased. Observers believe this is due to the participation of some Catholic priests in the genocide."

Also read this article from the BBC. You may learn something.

Anonymous 7
You need to make a distinction between crimes in which the medieval church was complicit, and the crimes that the church orchestrated. We don't hold Protestant churches responsible for the many thousand Africans who died during several hundred years of Western slavery, although this crime against humanity was sanctioned by nearly all Protestant churches. We don't hold the Roman Catholic Church or the SDA church responsible for the massacre in Rwanda, although prominent clergymen from both churches were complicit in these foul deeds, even leading them in several cases. We don't categorize the Catholics who were killed during the 30 year war (1618-48) as victims of Protestant persecution, even though the armies who did the killing were aligned with the Protestant churches of Northern Europe. Nor do we blame German Lutherans and Adventists for the crimes of WWII although the majority of both groups endorsed Hitler. Clearly we use a double standard when we're speaking of crimes in which the Catholic church was complicit.

When all is said and done there remains many thousands of people who died because of direct actions taken by Catholics and Protestants to protect their faith from encroachment and poaching by the other and by outside groups, but we're not talking millions by a long shot. The Spanish Inquisition was mostly led by the Spanish crown, and the Pope even tried to intervene with Ferdinand and Isabelle to mitigate the disaster. The original Inquisition was a legal instution and it did not work fast enough to process the enormous numbers of heretics of Protestant imagination. Many of the transcripts of the cases that went through the Inquistion still exist. It goes without saying that an institution that operated out of countries that were almost 100 percent Catholic, would not get their hands on enormous numbers of heretics since there weren't that many.

Above i have spoken about the church all too often welcoming the foul embrace of the state, and throughout AD history, we see the horrendous consequences of this unholy alliance. If anything qualifies as 'Babylon', this is it.

Sorry Fr Jim. You can't escape that easily.

FIrstly, Ellen Gould White does not add up to 666 because W does not equal VV. Its numerical value is equivalent to a single V. Therefore you are 5 short, at 661.

Secondly, Paul VI did apply that title to himself. One time it was a slight variation, but the title is included (remember that word order in Latin can change). It reads "adorandi Filii Dei
hic in terris Vicarii Petrique successores...". The other time (in 1968) the sentence begins "Adorandi Dei Filii Vicarius.....".

It's interesting you say that VFD was never used as a title by the Pope, because I have evidence to the contrary. Leo IX - In terra pax hominibus AD 1054, John XXII - Licet juxta doctrinam AD 1327, and Paul VI in 1965 and 1968 as I have mentioned.

And Sirje and Fr Jim, yes, tens of millions were murdered by the church. We're not just talking about the inquisition, but because the Catholic church, unlike other churches but like the Muslims, does not believe in separation between church and state, and demanded and received control over kings, emperors, nobles and other officiaries. It handed people to them to be killed, or simply told them to do it. Funny, because other churches are trying to lead people to Christ and into the heavenly kingdom (my Kingdom is not of this world said Jesus), but the Papacy would like to set up a kingdom here by force, by false interpretation of the Bible intimating Peter was given the keys to the kingdom and the popes were his successors, and by a fraudulent document which they have quietly removed from Canon Law but never actually officially condemned or admitted it to be a fraud despite it being proven a fraud over 500 years ago.

And you suggest, Fr Jim that I am being deceptive and am Babylon. How about you? We can already see the extent of your deception. Perhaps you are Babylon, because at least your name is blasphemous. Jesus said not to call any man Father, except our Father who is in heaven. But at least you're not the antichrist, because your name doesn't add up to 666. It has an M in it, bringing it to over 1000.

Bill, we protest because Spectrum is supposed to be Adventist. It isn't. It's pro-Catholic (and in the process of being taken over), pro-Gay and pro-Darwinian Evolution and anti-everything that the SDA church stands for, beginning with Ellen White.. If it was run by the Skeptics, or whoever else, it wouldn't be a problem. But we're only fighting with words. We're not going to get the inquisition out (an instiution that the current pope was head of, with a name change) nor are we going to hand the transgressors over to Guantanamo Bay to get tortured, but we will fight.

Actually, Pago, Spectrum is an organ of the Roman Catholic church and Fr. Jim is the leading correspondent. ;-)

You might as well believe that as you are so gullible that anything can be claimed. If you consider Spectrum not to be an official Adventist publication, you would be wise not to condemn it because if it were, I doubt that you would be allowed to contribute to this blog.

Anonymous7
"There is a difference between the Protestants and the Catholic church and it is that the Catholic church positioned herself as the corrector of heretics."

And the Protestant churches did not? You're just indulging in historical partisanship. Before the Enlightenment put an end to theological fatwahs, both Catholics and Protestants suffered from homicidal inclinations in religious matters. Direct your thanks at Thomas Jefferson and not to Luther and Calvin.

Pago
Anybody can pull millions of imaginary victims out of the air when there is no historical accountability for the claim. You "know" that these figures must be right because you've determined that the RCC is Satan's church on Earth, and nothing less than millions of victims makes therefore any sense.

Pago, Ellen = L+L=100,
Gould=U+L+D=555,
White=a double 'U' = 2 'V's +1 =11.
Total these three numbers, and we have, 100 + 555 + 11 = 666.
So Ellen Gould White, the prophetess of Seventh Day Adventism, has a name that adds up to 666, and it is the number of a name and not of a title.

Both of the quotes you give do not use VFD as a title. In fact these are descriptors. Look at the whole sentence:

Qui summi Dei numine et voluntate principem locum in Christi Ecclesia, obtinemus, adorandi Filii Dei hic in terris Vicarii Petrique successores, ...

We who the supreme God providentially wills, and maintains, in the principle position over Christ's Church, the honorable Vicars of God's Son upon this earth - Peter's successors, ...

Notice how it does not add up to 666 as it doesn't say VFD. It is PLURAL not singular. When I point this out the usual response is "well it's close." That doesn't cut it. You don't even have to know Latin to just look at it and see it doesn't say VFD. In the other one it says the "Vicar and Caretaker." Notice the conjunction? So it doesn't add up either. Why do I have to go over all of this again? VFD has never been and is not a papal title. The proper title is Vicar of Jesus Christ, but you don't use that because it doesn't add up. Why must you lie?

The total population of Europe did not reach that level in the middle ages. If I accuse you of killing 100 trillion people would that make sense? It is IMPOSSIBLE to kill more people then were alive at the time. In fact Protestants, and Adventists, have never had that much problem killing Catholics. So once again, if we are wrong then so are you.

What do you call the man who sired you? Father. It says "call no man father" but you do. Shame. And Paul says he is Timothy's spiritual father, so I guess Paul was evil? Are a parody or for real?

Fr Jim, you don't get it. W does not expand into two V's or U's. That's misuse of Roman numerals. And Bill, VFD is an official title. You need to look at more evidence. Prescott was mistaken in many of his assertions. Much more evidence has come to light since then.

Bill, Adorandi Dei Filii Vicarius begins "On the worshipful vicar of the son of God..."

Blasphemous, just as Revelation declares.

don't you think God factored in diverse time zones? ...

Moses sure didn't know about time zones...maybe not even about the round earth!!!

way back when I was a junior in camp meeting, a returned missionary regaled us kids with mission stories. He had two churches, in the Fiji Island area...one church on either side of the date line.
He was authorized by his conference to maintain sabbaths at both churches on different days as follows.

Fridays at his home church, he would do the maintenance, prepare the sermon, and hold vespers.
Next day, Sabbath, he would hold church, then pot luck then get in his boat and head for the other island where it was friday afternoon.....so halfway there, he could turn on the radio to Armed Forces radio and get the ballgames back in the USA.

Arriving at the 2nd church on friday afternoon, just hours after holding sabbath services on saturday at the home island, he would do the maintenance, hold vespers, next day do SS and church, then potluck....after which, he would get into his boat and head back to the first island...halfway there it suddenly became sunday afternoon and he could turn on the radio again and once home the TV.

This went on for 3 weeks out of the month, but the 4th week he was supposed to "take off".
So on friday afternoons, he would tell the deacons what to do for the next days SS and church, and at sundown, his boat would take him from a sacred friday night to the next island arriving on saturday night in time to party or take in a movie..... the next day sunday would be a day off, then monday the boat trip back to the first island would have him arrive on sunday for another day off....

so by choice, for 3 weeks in a row, he would celebrate sabbaths at two different places on different actual days. Then one week per month, he would travel in a way that he avoided needing to restrict his activities to "sabbath stuff".

Moses never knew about the dateline, or above the arctic circle, where sometimes the sun wont rise for months...and if it went down on friday night, does that mean the next two months are sabbath?

so tho the "sabbath was made for man", it was the Brits who decided that the astronomical observatory at Greenwich, England would be the center of mapping the world, the zero or 360 degree line......and 180 degrees away would have to be a dateline....because they didn't want the confusion over which day it was to be centered at their home.

suppose you and your kid depart Japan for Seattle on your kids 18th birth day...he can drink on the outbound portion of the flight, but as you cross the dateline in the north pacific, he goes back one day to before his birthday and they have to take his drink away.

as my shrink, Larry the Cable guy would stay...."now, that's some funny stuff"!!!!

Deleted.

I, personally, do not doubt that the papacy is the antichrist portrayed in prophecy, that "sits in the temple of God," that is the faithless bride that rides the seven-hilled beast (as recognized by Catholic authors such as Dante), that gained its domination after 538 and had western supremacy until secular states started chipping at it from 1798 following. I think the patterns through history of alliances with secular power and persecuting minorities in the name of Christ are clearly antichrist. It forbade its clergy from marrying and enforced fasting disciplines. Its teaching on the immaculate conception serves to keep Jesus from being a full participant in our humanity as we receive it from Adam. It made the clergy a separate caste that could not be judged by the state and that had to be obeyed by the laity because they were ontologically different. Yes, this had consequences in how the hierarchy reacted to the sexual abuse crisis. Point being--you can make a case for identifying the papacy as antichrist without reference to phony things such as "vicarius filii dei." Luther certainly did so. See his arguments in the Smalcald Articles. http://bookofconcord.org/smalcald.php#article4

Adventists are by no means unique in making this identification. This is the historic Protestant claim. This is why the Reformers felt justified in breaking off.

But does this mean we have to view ever Catholic with suspicion, and every priest as an agent of Satan? No. Does this mean we need to make this prominent in writings? No.

We are better off citing historic Protestant sources to show that this is the historic Protestant position, and, when we speak of Catholic teaching, to cite contemporary documents such as the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Jim seems to have some info on some massacres of Catholics at the hands of Adventists. I am interested in his documentation. Please share...no sarcasm intended.

Lemuel S.

"Adventists are by no means unique in making this identification. This is the historic Protestant claim. This is why the Reformers felt justified in breaking off."

And if I may add, pastor, that this is the reason Jesuits have sought to counter this claim with some of their own:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futurism_(Christianity)

Unfortunately, a good number of the Protestant world also accepts one or the other of these teachings (thank you, Scofield), and since Des Ford some Adventists (at least Preterism).

I agree one does not need the Vicarius Filii Dei argument to make the case against the papacy, we have an aboundance of historical evidence we can use.

Kind regards,

Lemuel S.

Bill
I'm surprised that an educated person such as yourself would actually give credence to the ludicrous application of the 1260 day prophecy of Daniel and Revelation to a claimed rule of Roman Catholicism from 538-1798 AD.

First of all, you have the problem of converting the 1260 days into years, then you have the problem that nothing of lasting significance with respect to the RCC happened either in 538 or 1798. Surely, you don't subscribe to the idea that the RCC received a 'death wound' in 1798? Or that the RCC came into its own in 538?

Thirdly, the so-called rule of Roman Catholicism over Western Europe is a myth. The church was hugely influential, but its secular power was extremely tenuous. Seeing the RCC as a ferocious beast of apocalyptic dimensions has little to do with history.

Fourthly, by using the 538 AD date as the effectual ascent to power of the RCC, Adventists weaken their unhistorical argument that it was the papacy that changed the Jewish Sabbath into the Christian Sunday.

And as a PS, how do explain that God is so parochial as to limit virtually all prophecies to Western Europe? How do you make sense of Daniel and Revelation to a Chinese?

John
That story of worshiping across the international date line is really funny.

Aage, what you wrote really shows that you are definitely not a student of history. To say that "the so-called rule of Roman Catholicism over Western Europe is a myth" is to show oneself particularly ignorant about the subject.

Please, inform yourself. This should not be difficult to do with the internet or a good library. I am sure it is possible to find good material written by impartial people (that is, not written by a Catholic, nor a SDA,nor a person hostile to the Catholic church to avoid any accusation of being biased).

Then, once you are informed, you will be able to answer the questions by yourself.

Elaine,

Of course Sabbath reckoning is possible on around earth. It is not because there are "interesting" situations in some places that the whole principle should be dismissed. God instituted the Sabbath and you should go to Him if you have any problem with it.

Concerning prophecies, I don't know where you see that only the US is present. Europe is present and the Middle East also.

You should know that prophecies are often given in relation to God's people. This is why you don't hear about Chinese in the Bible for example as there was no significant contact between them and Israel.

But prophecies show a dynamic situation. Earlier, God's people had to deal with nations/empires such as Babylon, the Medo-Persian empire or Rome. At the end of times, it will be with the USA as this country has become the most powerful/influential one (and not always for the good).

God also instituted circumcision, the sacrificial system, and the multiple Levitical laws.
Did He ever abrogate them? Was Paul wrong in making such drastic changes to include Christians? Are you claiming that there should be a continuity of Judaism with Christianity with no changes whatsoever? If changes, what are they, and should they be the Christian's guide or should he follow the Law found in the OT?

Elaine, I don't know if you are talking to me but I will answer just in case you are.

You asked interesting questions. But I would like you to answer them.

Did God ever abrogate the circumcision, the sacrificial system and the multiple Levitical laws?

If yes, how and why?

If it was to be abrogated later, why did God promulgate them in the first place?

Do you think that the apostles had the authority to arbitrarily change God's regulations (above all when you consider the warnings against doing so in the Bible)?

Answer these questions and you will have your answers.

Jim, I asked you for a historical instance where your claim that Adventists have "no problems" killing Catholics.

Lemuel S.

Lemuel, Adventists are Protestants. Protestants killed, and still kill, Catholics. Oddly the same people who pretend horror at the Spanish inquisition seem to ignore the Protestant inquisition. Once again, if our history proves us wrong then your history proves you wrong. I am going to din that into your head every time this comes up. You don't get to play double standard.

I suggest that everyone read The Construction of the Other: The Antichrist by Josephine Massingbaerde Ford of Notre Dame University, published in the Andrews University Seminary Studies journal (Autumn 1995) and provided online: http://www.auss.info/auss_publication_file.php?pub_id=900&journal=1&type....

Of particular interest is her discussion of the Antichrist (p. 221-230) as the corpus diaboli, i.e., that the Antichrist is a collective entity rather than an individual person; is essentially religious, particularly Christian; and that it represents the collective evil within the Church. This collective evil is in contradistinction to the righteous, who can be compared to the remnant of Israel.

While Bill Cork is certainly correct in stating that the Seventh-day Adventist Church's position regarding the identity of the Antichrist is well-represented in historical Protestantism, I take interest in noting that the collective and religious/Christian characteristics of the Antichrist are prominently featured in writings that significantly predate the Protestant Reformation, such as the writings of Tyconius (370-390) and Beatus of Liebana (730-798). I infer from Ford's extensive citations to the writings of Joseph Ratzinger that the current Pope finds this corpus diaboli perspective to be compelling. (See notes 89, 98, 102, 109, 112). She expressly indicates the Pope's view: "Ratzinger states that Antichrist belongs to the Church." (p. 225).

Catholic theological scholarship is very rigorous and there is much Seventh-day Adventists can learn from others. It is a shame that agitators, in their ignorance, would protest against invitations that are extended to Catholic scholars to speak to Seventh-day Adventist seminary students. As we learn from others, we can identify refinements to our doctrines and teachings and communicate what we believe in a more cogent, precise, and careful manner.

Phil, see this: http://wquercus.com/faith/casta_meretrix.htm

Jim, documentation please. Again you spew accusations of Catholics being killed in the streets of the US. Where's the beef?

Adventists murderers because John Calvin burnt Serevus at the stake?

Your logic is like saying the Cubs won the 2005 World Series because they were as Chicago as the White Sox were. We're not looking for a "free pass". We are looking for proper logic of which you don't appear to have.

Lemuel S.

Jack C,

Perhaps you may want to look into the other identifying characteristics of antichrist. While certainly the Soviets persecuted Christians they also killed millions of their atheistic own. Along with scores of other religious types. But the persecuting impulse has been shown by all religious and non-religious groups throughout the ages. Therefore identification of antichrist lies with many other factors as well.

Lemuel S.

Lemuel, I am treating you as you treat us. Protestants murdered Catholics ergo your faith is wrong. I can post thousands of our martyrs, again. I can post about church burnings for example the Philadelphia riots. Guess what year those happened? 1844, gee isn't that a special year for Adventists? Your logic is that because Catholics did bad things then Catholicism is wrong. I am just using YOUR logic against you.

http://www.hsp.org/node/2549

Jim I never said because Catholicism did bad things that it was wrong. She is wrong because of her theology for one. She is wrong on ecclesiology. The Philadelphia nativists were wrong in attacking Catholics. Be cause they did they are as damned as anyone. I still have yet to see the documentation that Adventists were involved in the killings. Or condoned it for that matter.

Lemuel S.

From the article Phil Brantley posted:

____________________________________________

THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OTHER:
THE ANTICHRIST

Neyrey and Malina see the process of labeling as providing
"a social distancing device, . . . thus dividing social categories into polarities
such as the good and the wicked."

They remark negative labeling as a
"social act of retaliation," which challenges honor, signifies aggression,
or constitutes a means of defense.

Negative labeling can lead to lethal
consequences.

These scholars also see one of the phases of the process
of labeling as "the actual processing of the deviant by the creation of a
retrospective interpretation of the deviant's life."

http://www.auss.info/auss_publication_file.php?pub_id=900&journal=1&type...

____________________________________________

I'm not a sociologist, psychologist, historian, or the second cousin twice removed of one, but I ask you, with Adventism's fixed attention, and very identity based on labeling the Evil Other, is it really surprising that Adventists rolled over in Nazi Germany and disfellowshipped Jews and praised Hitler?

Which, BTW, makes the "apology" that "we didn't know" kind of nauseating, because, for pity's sake, when they disfellowshipped Jews, that had to "know."

(Disfellowshipped Jews for their own good, of course. There are always good reasons.)

Better the Jews be the Evil Others than the Adventists.

Human nature is scary.

The 64 Million Dollar question is, why didn't German Adventists see Hitler as antichrist?

(Possibly because they couldn't see themselves as antichrist?)

Lemuel
Nobody has contested that the Pope was the head of the Western Church, and that church and state often were locked in a foul embrace, but that doesn't mean that the Roman Catholic Church ruled Europe. European nations were led by kings who did everything in their power to limit the influence of the Church, and they were more often successful than not. In the 1100s the papacy was reduced to a pawn of the French throne, and the papal sea was moved to Avignon. It's a myth that Canossa was emblematic of Catholic power in the Middle Ages. I realize that the ludicrous 1260 day-equals-years prophecy interpretation demands of Adventists that they disbelieve history on this point. If you believe EGW's Great Controversy you are not at liberty to acknowledge the truth about European Medieval history--just as you're not at liberty to believe what archeology and geology tells us about the last ten thousand years of human history (not to speak of the millions of years that preceded the Sumerians, the Chinese and the Egyptians.

If the Roman Catholic Church was Satan's chosen tool to rule the part of the world that matters to Western Christians, I don't think we have that much to worry about as far as the future is concerned (and the Chinese can certainly relax). If the greatest threat to humanity is the resurrection of the Medieval Catholic Church--if that's the best his infernal majesty can do--he is not worthy of much respect. If Satan were all he's cracked up to be, he would have gotten into the movie industry or something spectacularly successful. Instead he put his money on a church--if Adventists are to be believed--that in Europe only commands the loyality of a small minority of its own members, and, incongruously, he's managed to tarnish the reputation of this chosen Church, and lessen its already waning influence by leading thousands of priests into lechery and crime (surely, it was not God who did that?). That was one dumb move on Satan's part, if you ask me (which I'm sure you wouldn't.)

If you do not know which ones I will be happy to supply them.

Elaine

Please provide them. It is always good to speak about concrete things instead of guessing.

And before I forget it, when exactly did the papacy rule Western Europe, o learned one? (I told you that I too had the gift.)

Aage

Aage, why not try to study the period called the Middle Ages, O ignorant one :-) This will be a good start.

Bring back your homework. it will be graded...

Darrell,

We are not saying that the Pope was to have political power 100% of the time. We are saying the office of the papacy has dominance in the politico-religious for the majority of the time. It is interesting to note that before the Avignon stage of papal history the Church crusaded against the Albigenses and Cathars while chasing the Waldenses around. After Avignon she was roaring just as loud, persecuting the Hussites. The overall trend shows politco-religious dominance during the middle ages. This is what caught the eye of the Reformers. It became more recognizable in the decades following the Reformation as the Religious Liberty movement began to grow in Protestantism.

Lemuel S.

Pagophilus writes:
"Bill, we protest because Spectrum is supposed to be Adventist. It isn't. It's pro-Catholic..."

Right on Pago!

"There is ANOTHER universal and TRULY CATHOLIC ORGANIZATION, the SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ." Neal Wilson. Adventist Review, 3/5/1981.

Spectrum is doing its job. No need to protest any longer Pago.

Resources:

ANTI-CATHOLICISM IN AMERICA: The Last Acceptable Prejudice by Mark S. Massa SJ

The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice Philip Jenkins

Darrel
I stand corrected. The 1300s indeed (and not the time of Innocent III, when the Papacy was doing much better.)

Anonymous7
I'm still waiting for an answer.

Aage

I already gave you an answer. I told you to study the Middle Ages. You have to study this for yourself. This is the best way to be convinced.

Well if you make it your mission to not let anti-Catholicism go unanswered on the web, then you will have no rest, just like if I made it my mission to make sure no anti-Adventism went unanswered. Indeed, I would get no rest if I just tried to answer all the anti-Adventism that gets spewed on this blog alone. That said, if you really want to engage in effective apologetics for Catholicism, I suggest you show the other side more respect. Calling your opponents ideas a mishmash, and Alice in Wonderland fantasies, may get you cheers from people who already agree, but anybody on the fence or on the other side will immediately tune you out.

Anonymous7, are these the questions you are referencing?

"Did God ever abrogate the circumcision, the sacrificial system and the multiple Levitical laws?

If yes, how and why?

If it was to be abrogated later, why did God promulgate them in the first place?

Do you think that the apostles had the authority to arbitrarily change God's regulations (above all when you consider the warnings against doing so in the Bible)?'

I was asking for answers. Have you answered them?

No, I don't find any record of God abrogating these laws. With Christ establishing the New Covenant, "old things are passed away," and these were only some of the "old things" that are no longer necessary to be observed.

Do you recognize that there were changes made from Judaism to Christianity? What do you believe were those changes?

Elaine Nelson - Wed, 11/30/2011 - 20:58

“Michael, maybe you can give us the date and text when sabbath was given to Christians. In the accounts of the giving of the Decalogue it explicitly is given to the Israelites (brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery).”

*********
Elaine,

The Bible states that Abraham did keep God’s Commandments. How did he manage to do this centuries before the giving of God’s Law at Sinai? As you can see, your argument from silence does not hold water. Elaine Nelson - Wed, 11/30/2011 - 20:58
“Michael, maybe you can give us the date and text when sabbath was given to Christians. In the accounts of the giving of the Decalogue it explicitly is given to the Israelites (brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery).”
*********
Elaine,
The Bible states that Abraham did keep God’s Commandments. How did he manage to do this centuries before the giving of God’s Law at Sinai? As you can see, your argument from silence does not hold water.

“Because Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” [Gen. 26:5]

If God’s Law was not known prior to Sinai then Cain did no wrong when he killed his brother. Can you explain this?

Elaine,

I was kind of answering your questions by asking a few of my own because I want you to open the Bible to fin the answers of your own questions

For example, you said: No, I don't find any record of God abrogating these laws."". So, in this case what do you do of the tearing off of the curtain separating the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place when Jesus died?

"Bill, we protest because Spectrum is supposed to be Adventist. It isn't. It's pro-Catholic..." (Pago)

To the extent that those who write here agree on anything, it's that bigotry is a bad thing. The fact that we speak up against anti-Catholic falsehoods and slander is not that we're enamored of Catholicism. We simply believe that historical truth--and human decency--matter. It's unfortunate that the SDA church has elevated 19th century prejudice against Catholics into dogma, but it doesn't make it any more true. We're against hurting other people by means of distortion and lies. That's why most of us would speak up against the Protocols of the Elders of Zion with just as much vigor. Not because we're in favor of Judaism, but because we're against bigotry.

As for being pro-Catholic: if anything, I'm afraid the indefatigable Fr Jim, has painted a picture of his church that few of us find attractive. I may of course misrepresent him, but the impression he gives is that humility is not a word that Catholics need to use when reviewing 2000 years of church history. According to Fr Jim the RCC has had its share of bad actors, just like any other church, but the church itself is above criticism. None of its dogmas ever got anything wrong; no ex-cathedra statement on doctrine by a Pope was ever deplorable. The church as an institution has walked on water for 2000 years. In fact, just like the Adventist church Fr Jim's RCC is the apple of God's eye, the darling of Heaven, God's only true church--and God help those who criticize it. Thirty years ago I said good-buy to that kind of church; I'm not about to reenter another one like it. But as for lying about either church, it's simply bad form and it hurts real people.

Michael, where did you go?

Elaine responded to your sarcasm by quoting: IT WAS NOT WITH OUR FATHERS THAT GOD MADE THIS COVENANT, BUT WITHN US, WITH US WHO ARE HERE, ALL LIVING TODAY." (Deuteronomy ) which pretty much says that the Decalogue was given to the Jews - but not just any Jews, certainly not any before the ones gathered at the base of Mt Sinai. This kinda leaves out a bunch of Bible heroes.

Elaine Nelson said:

"Abraham obeyed the commands that God gave him: to leave his home town and go to another country. To limit God's command to the Ten Commandments is to ignore the many things God has told people throughout the Bible outsidei the Decalogue.

Murder is innately known to be wrong. The taking of a human life requires no commandment to realize that. Suggesting that the Ten Commandments were given before Sinai cannot be documented and a "commandment" is never identified in the Bible as being limited to the Decalogue.

As for sabbath, you have failed to give a single Bible text showing that sabbath was given to anyone but the Jews; in fact, in Jewish history no one was allowed to observe any of the Jewish Law unless he had previously been circumcised; IOW, was converted to Judaism, and the Jews were not proselytzers.

Claims have been made for many things that cannot be found in scripture. Should we no longer claim that we should be guided by the Bible and the Bible only? Where is there a NT text informing the former pagan Gentiles that now that they have become Christians they are to obey the Jewish Law? The sabbath cannot be found outside the Jewish Law.

Elaine"

Oh, so Abraham was allowed to lie, covet, steal, take the name of the Lord in vain... Do you think that it was really so?

You said the murder is wrong. Sure and stealing too, and lying... But this is not the point. Without a law, there is no sin, the Bible says. So, it means that without a law, Abraham would have be allowed to murder anyone he wanted. Somehow, I doubt that God would have accepted such a situation (but I can be wrong).

Also think about what you are saying. If the commandments covered by the Decalogue were not given to God's people before Sinai then it means that Jacob and his descendants were allowed not to honor their parents, kill, lie, covet, lust, have idols, take the name of the Lord in vain... Do you think that God would have accepted that? Again, I doubt it.

By the way, it is interesting to notice that the Sabbath was required to be observed before the giving of the law on mount Sinai (read read Ex 16:23-30. The Sabbath is declared to be the Sabbath of the Lord even before it appears in the 4th commandment at mount Sinai. This is a proof that even the giving of the law, the Sabbath existed and was considered holy by God (see verse 23 of Ex 16).

Dean Darroux - Thu, 12/01/2011 - 14:47

“Somebody help me understand why will the Sabbath be the issue in the end time if the focus of Revelation is between Christ and Satan? In II Thess. 2 Paul is clear, many will perish because they refused to love The Truth.” What Truth? That “Jesus is the way the truth and the life.”

*********
I don’t know whether the Sabbath will be the final test for humanity, but this I know, even Ellen White did state that as far as doctrine is concerned, we need to rely on what the Bible teaches, and as I search Scripture I do not find said doctrine in it.

What I do find there, though, is what Jesus said about eschatology. He predicted that our eternal destiny will be based on the way we treat “the least.” Who are “the least” today? Do the unborn qualify as members among the least? I hope they do. What does this tell us about the U.S. who legalized the killing of “the least” members of humanity?

And what about my Adventist Church which led the way in the legalization of abortion? This took place in 1970 in our Castle Memorial Hospital in Hawaii and it spread to at least five Adventist hospitals, and the church never publicly repented of this great sin nor repudiated such action. The Lord is merciful and forgiving, but the condition is repentance and confession. I hope our new president will include the respect for human life in the revival and reformation program he is pushing for.

Elaine Nelson - Sat, 12/03/2011 - 20:58
“Nic,

Abraham obeyed the commands that God gave him: to leave his home town and go to another country. To limit God's command to the Ten Commandments is to ignore the many things God has told people throughout the Bible outside the Decalogue.”

*********
Elaine,

Please compare what the Bible says with your explanation:

“Because Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” [Gen. 26:5]

Notice that the Bible makes reference to “commandments,” “statutes,” and “laws.” Are you saying that all those commandments, statutes and laws point to a single order to leave his country?

Evidently, your argument from silence proves nothing!

Elaine said:

Simply read the story of Abraham's twice lying to the Pharoah, which means he coveted her sufficiently to lie about her as his wife.
"Sin existed in the world long before the Law was given. There was no law and so no one could be accused of the sin of law-breaking, yet death over all from Adam to Moses, even though their sin unlike that of Adam, was not a matter of breaking a law" (Rom. 5:13).
Regarding the manna, the Bible stories are not always in exact sequential order: Moses refers to Yahweh's command about a rest on the sabbath, something that is never even mentioned previously; evidently the writer's assumption that this was somehow known before. This is similar to the belief that Moses wrote the Torah, despite the description of his death. There was no emphasis or intent that the Bible was written in a continuous chronological order; in fact, there are duplications and the books are definitely not in dated order.
For someone telling a story, to interject an event as if it were previously known is not considered good writing; but since there were many stories interwoven in the Bible, such an order should not be expected.
In addition, to ASSUME that the Law (plus sabbath) was a command given in Eden is totally without documentation; yet it is the SDA position, which is not found in the Bible. Seventh-day Assumptions?
Elaine

Elaine, the fact that Abraham lied twice doesn't mean he was to do so or that God condoned it. Even a pagan was able to see it was wrong. Also, you cannot covet what is already yours. Sarah was already Abraham's wife. Abraham didn't lie because of covetousness. According to the Bible, he lied because he feared for his life.

Concerning Romans 5:13, don't get it wrong. When Paul is speaking about the law, is he saying that there was no law at all or is he speaking about some particular laws (if there was no law then Adam and Eve would not have been kicked out from Eden, or Cain would not have been condemned...)?

About the manna, there is a chronology. Look at Exodus 16:1. It is indicated that the Israel was in the Wilderness of Sin during the second month after they left Egypt. The story about the manna took place when they were in that location in that month. Now, turn to Exodus 19 and you will see that Israel arrived to mount Sinai on the third month (see verse 1) and they received the Ten Commandments during the third month. So there is no doubt that the Israel received the manna (and also the Sabbath commandment which went along) before the giving of the law at mount Sinai.

Fr. Jim - Tue, 12/06/2011 - 10:58

“Nic, the sins of various members of the Church do not mean that she is the antichrist. Jesus spoke of the wheat and the tares. It is a huge jump from sinner to Satan. We are NOT the antichrist.”

Antichrist mean opposed to what Christ stands for. Talking is cheap! Anybody can claim to be for Christ, but only behavior can reveal our true character. My position is that any individual or organization that behaves like the enemy of Jesus Christ, is antichrist either partially or totally.

Fr Jim

666 refers to Nero who commanded worship. Both Rome and Tacoma Park have a person whom they
believe speaks for God. neither forces worship but encourages reverence that belongs to God alone. Will an instituion in the future elevate a person to the position of power to demand
worship? Several contemporary institutions now crowd the edge.

In the long history of Rome, there have been times when the linkage between the Vatican and civil powers were bed fellows. The Church would pronounce heresy and the civil authorities would executed judgement. A similar situation existed under Calvin and others not of Rome.

Tom Z

Fr. Jim - Sun, 12/11/2011 - 08:50

“Nic, that is not what scripture says. That is just an easy out to justify anti-Catholic bigotry.”

What does Scripture say, according to your understanding? Antichrist is made up of two words: “Anti” which means against, and Christ. I did not even mention the Catholic Church! Did you notice that? What basis did you have to conclude that I was speaking against Rome? Here is what I said. Read it again and tell me where I went wrong!

“My position is that any individual or organization that behaves like the enemy of Jesus Christ, is antichrist either partially or totally.”

This is what I said. Where is the reason for you to disagree with me on this? If Antichrist does not mean "against Christ" then what is the meaning of Antichrist for you?