John wrote - "When did the Adventists change from Philadelphia to Laodicea? Why? Was it a timeline; a particular prophetic date? Did a particular organisation get formed to be the Laodicea of prophecy?"

Sorry my initial response failed to answer these questions. I believe the Philadelphian Era ended and the Laodicean Era began in 1844 (according to the historical view of prophecy).

I believe the 7 churches symbolize the history of Christendom - beginning with the apostolic believers and ending with the translated believers.

I believe the focus of prophecy is the remnant within each Church Era and how they interact with the rest of Christendom and the world at large.

The SDA Church was organized by God after the Great Disappointment in 1844 for the sole purpose of finishing the Gospel Commission, which involves experiencing and expressing the 3AM's.

Thomas, your questions regarding organized religion have been cussed and discussed since apostolic times. The conclusion, according to the word of God, is - organization and membership are one and the same thing. Baptized members joined the church. Leaders are voted to serve the church family - the body of Christ. How can an individual believer vote himself to serve himself? God has always functioned through an organized body of believers - in heaven, here and in the new earth.

Acts
2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Matthew
18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell [it] unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican.

1 Corinthians
12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
12:28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Colossians
1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.

1 Timothy
3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world and lose his soul?

quote:

---

Mike had asked,
What is the "straight truth" that will cause a shaking among Laodiceans? Is it being preached today? how can we identify the message? and is it purifying the membership of Adventism?

---

And then Mike had gone on to establish that SDA is the true last church because of its prophetic timeline - being the Laodicean Church starting in 1844, commissioned to preach the last warning message (3Ams) to this world because God is love and will not destroy without warning first.

Thus the SDAs have found a way of being the "remnant church" by using prophecy in perverted light, so that they find no need for the "fruit of the Spirit" in their life. So the SDA Church prides itself in being the Remnant according to prophecy but not according to spirit. For does not the prophecy indeed say that they are Laodicean? So if they had the spirit they would not be able to be the fulfilment of prophecy as Laodicean. Since they have the sure word of prophecy they do not need the spirit.

Is this the message that has shaken the Laodicean Church?

For over 140 years the church has been pacifying its conscience and stupefying itself with this doctrine (of being the remnant church - according to prophecy and not according to spirit) that it holds in this perverted light. Why is it perverted light? It establishes a sense of security, smugness, pride, conceit, and vainglory. Thus the church sees nothing wrong with itself, except that they are not quite zealous enough.

Is this the message that has shaken the Laodicean Church?

If God is Love, would he choose a lethargic, Laodicean church to bring the final warning, with a message that could not even rouse the messengers, never mind it ever getting through to the hearers?

Is this the message that has shaken the Laodicean Church?

• but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; for it is not by might nor by power (nor by prophecy) but by 'my spirit' says the Lord

Not until the remnant will be sought for and recognised according to 'spirit' will there be any truth.

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. Revelation 3:20

ANY MAN, is not restricted to Laodiceans. 'Any man that opens the door' is not a Laodicean!

The purpose of prophecy was not to establish various entities/denominations as the true church in its corresponding era, but to warn against that very deception by revealing the spiritual condition/s of their deception. In so that, ALL WHO HAVE AN EAR TO HEAR what the spirit saith to the 'churches' may overcome and repent and be saved.

What is the "straight truth" that will cause a shaking among Laodiceans?

Shalom

John:
You sound rather certain that you have ears to hear, and just as certain that the bulk of SDA Christians do not. That is the impression I obtain from reading your material. You make some rather sweeping condemnatory statements concerning the SDA church. I was wondering if perhaps you could tell us whether you can think of anything good regarding the SDA church too. Surely you can think of something universally positive about SDAs just as easily as you can universally negative. —LK

John,

Your sweeping condemnatory statements concerning the SDA church, as Pastor Larry has aptly stated, is in violation of our forum rules.

I trust you didn't mean to come across that way?

Far be it. There is no thought of condemnation, but rather to the contrary.

Shalom - Peace be with you

Then, John, can you explain what your intent was behind your previous post that Pastor Larry and I have both taken exception to?

John, that is a very short answer after a very continuous string of troubling posts. You have not added one positive thing at all, only denied you have it in for Seventh-day Adventism. Now friend, look back over just a few of your remarks. I think you will find some problems there.

October 17, 2003 04:34 PM
The true church is only ever defined as a spiritual body, and never as a physical entity/denomination.

Thus the concept of being the remnant, without the spirit of him whose remnant one is, is null and void.

You are wrong here. The church is manifest in both aspects. there is a spiritual body and a physical body, visible and invisible as the common terminology runs. If you want to look for this concept, you will find it in both the Bible and the Spirit of prophecy. Now the idea of being the remnant without having the Spirit, where are you getting that? SDAs do not believe that we can be God's people in the end and not have the Spirit of God. It is true that Cliff Goldstein wrote an item on this but some of us have refuted it, as I did in my book _Real Grace for Real people_. We do understand that connected to the church organization until the shaking are wheat and tares both. The shaking will make evident who is and is not truly on the Lord's side. You seem to have a bit of George Storrs in you, a gripping dislike of spiritual bodies embracing any kind of organized form. The organization of the SDA church, we believe, is of God. Again, the Bible and the SOP will confirm this, if you accept those as authority as we do here at Maritime.

October 17, 2003 04:39 PM
The Adventist concept of hanging their hope on a future shaking, which will purify the entity/denomination and thereby acquire its spiritual state of remnant, is a terrible deception of Satan, so that they do not repent and overcome TODAY, but wait for tomorrow.

John, the shaking is only future in the sense of its climax and completion. We believe along with Ellen G. White that the shaking has been underway since the 1840s at least when her first statements concerning the shaking came. I do not know where you are coming up with this "Adventist" concept of a "future" shaking. Who is more Adventist than Ellen G. White? It is dangerous to be waiting for something that has been underway for a century and a half. Fortunately, by no means are all Adventists guilty of this. Your statements are too sweeping. You have no means of reading the heart of every Adventist.

November 02, 2003 10:26 AM
Now that the mask of Adventism is partly off, and a breach has been made in one of the walls (remnant doctrine) that Adventism has built between itself and God, while smugly thinking that it is between themselves and the world.

As the bride leaves her home, her own life, to become the wife; take on the new life of her husband, to give herself body, soul, and spirit to him (where have you seen such a marriage lately?). With all your strength, with your entire mind, with all your heart, with all your soul! It is such a marriage today, living each day that 'one life' with the Lord (which by the way is a delight). This is not church religion. This is not church going. This is not Adventism.

The "mask of Adventism partly off" implies a deception Adventism is wearing. Remnant doctrine is Bible doctrine; it is part of the beliefs of the church. Again, I remind you that the forum rules of MSDAOL say that the teachings of the SDA church shall be respected. You are not doing that here but the contrary. Adventism has not built the doctrine of the remnant between herself and God, but the teaching has been derived from the Bible. If you want to deal with it in Bible terms look up what Gerhard Hasel has written about the remnant: Scripture through and through with nary a reference to the writings of Ellen G. White. And the "smugly" part. This is your own invention or surmising. If you could pause from between your sniper-shots at God's people, you might see that in fact the remnant doctrine is no bulwark of smugness but of self-reproach and responsibility. Our mission is to carry the three angel's message of Jesus love and mercy in His gospel of power tot he world—something which we have not always done well.

The marriage analogy is biblical. Your use of it to promote an anti-church-organization viewpoint is not. By all means, I expect that many Adventists want to see a closer relationship between themselves and Jesus. But there is no disconnect between the idea of a church organization to push forward the message of Jesus and relationship to Him in the end-time context as you suggest. Organized religion is not evil. Indeed, Paul warned that everything should be done decently and in order, something that organized religion is meant to facilitate. Would you have us have disorganized religion?

November 03, 2003 07:11 PM
THEY THINK THEY HAVE ALL THE TRUTH.

They do, eh? This is a flat out universal condemnation. I don't believe I've ever known one person of any stripe in my years in the church, speaking to persons stationed everywhere along the spectrum of conservative and of liberal thinking in the church, who really thinks they have all the truth. Names and addresses of those who think they have all the truth please. I am waiting.

November 08, 2003 05:25 PM
Thus the SDAs have found a way of being the "remnant church" by using prophecy in perverted light, so that they find no need for the "fruit of the Spirit" in their life. So the SDA Church prides itself in being the Remnant according to prophecy but not according to spirit.

For over 140 years the church has been pacifying its conscience and stupefying itself with this doctrine (of being the remnant church - according to prophecy and not according to spirit) that it holds in this perverted light. Why is it perverted light? It establishes a sense of security, smugness, pride, conceit, and vainglory. Thus the church sees nothing wrong with itself, except that they are not quite zealous enough.

Again, you here throw a rather blanketing accusation. I already noted above that your notions have a high ratio of error to truth and fact. You do not understand the ideas of church organization, of remnant, nor of Laodicea, shaking, or some of the other points which you so grandly make. No need for the fruit of the Spirit? To the contrary. Many Adventists are seeking for the fruit of the spirit. How do you know the hearts of Adventists, that they are rife with security and smugness and pride and conceit and vainglory? How is it that you tell us that the church sees nothing wrong with itself, when we have, at various times, come out and quite said so?

Consider for example the 1973 and 1974 General Conference Annual Council appeals to the church that said that we were here because of our spiritual failings and that this church has delayed the second coming of Jesus? You won't see any denominational pride in those documents. Our leaders acknowledged the unfortunate condition of many among our people at that time. Why don't you mention that? Is it because it didn't occur to you, or because you didn't know about it, or because it doesn't fit your machine-gun-of-denominational-condemnation approach?

I think we can agree with you that we have a great need to have more of the Spirit and that the church is not all that it can be. But you are assigning the reason for such problems in places where you are mistaken.

You are in violation of the forum rules here too because you have not respected the beliefs of this church which God organized and raised up through His servants.

Pleased think on these things. Unless your approach changes you may be discontinued from the forum.
LK

Sorry I did not have time to answer more. I'll post as soon as I get opportunity. Thanks,

Shalom

John, while you are working on your response to Pastor Larry I would like to address your earlier posts. I've been away until today. Again, I subscribe to the traditional SDA historical view of the 7 churches, therefore my understanding of the Laodicean message is consistent with Sister White and our founding fathers. I realize your conclusions do not concur with this view point. And I am not here to say you are wrong and I am right. To each his own. I am merely expressing what makes sense to me. I respect your right to disagree.

I think it is safe to say we agree on the overall condition of the Laodicean Church and Era - lukewarm, smug, content, complacent and inactive (not unlike Israel during the time of Christ). At least 50% of the remnant membership has to be guilty of this condition otherwise God would not have labeled them as such. Yes, the wheat and tares grow together until the counsel of the True Witness shakes and sifts the church.

And I think it is safe to say we disagree on the counsel to the Laodicean Church. "Let him hear" - who is doing the speaking and listening? I believe the counsel of the True Witness has been entrusted to the faithful SDA's within the SDA church. They do the speaking for Jesus.

The ones listening are lukewarm SDA's in the church. Some will respond favorably and others will not. Those who don't will leave the church. Only the faithful remain. Once purified the SDA church will proclaim the 3AM's to the world under the power of the latter rain. Once everyone everywhere has either accepted or rejected their message Jesus will return in the clouds of glory.