Kland, the 28FB are sound, biblical doctrines. Do you agree? If not, why not? The GC Session has never included false doctrines. I doubt they ever will.

Kland, the 28FB are sound, biblical doctrines. Do you agree? If not, why not? The GC Session has never included false doctrines. I doubt they ever will.

It doesn't matter how many times the truth is divided and subdivided.

M: Kland, the 28FB are sound, biblical doctrines. Do you agree? If not, why not? The GC Session has never included false doctrines. I doubt they ever will.

J: In agreement with you, MM. The 28FB is our guideline and it is, or should be, the basis on which we baptize people and accept them into the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Our church is rather liberal when it does not disfellowship those who come to a slightly different understanding of our basic doctrines. Should we be more conservative?

Is our church on a wrong path when we elect officers who deviate in their acceptance of our basic doctrines? Is it appropriate for an electronic ministry for Adventists and teaching others the faith of Adventism when it uses "officers" with deviating understanding of our 28FB?

Personally I feel we should be liberal in the views of participating members while it is against the purpose of this mission when moderators are permitted to present views that are in opposition to our basic 28FB.

M: But if they changed the FB to include a doctrine I believe is wrong or unbiblical I would simply disregard it. I would not, however, reject the Church as unworthy of leadership or conclude it is no longer the voice of God when in GC Session.

K: Am I understanding you correctly that you see there could be a possibility of including a doctrine you believe is wrong or unbiblical of which you would disregard, but yet you would not conclude it is not the voice of God?! That is, you are saying the voice of God could include doctrines which you believe are wrong or unbiblical. Really?

M: Many decisions are voted on during a GC Session. Do they get every single vote right? I don't know. I have never bothered to check. As it relates to the FB I care very much. So far, all 28 FB are biblically sound. I very much doubt a GC Session will vote to include a false doctrine in the FB. But if they did - it would not lead me to conclude they are not voice of God when in GC Session. Just because they get one thing wrong doesn't mean everything else is wrong. A mute point, however, because so far they have gotten all 28 FB right.

M: Kland, the 28FB are sound, biblical doctrines. Do you agree? If not, why not? The GC Session has never included false doctrines. I doubt they ever will.

K: If you keep straddling the fence, it may not be good for your health. You said, "But if they did". So you're saying that if the FB included false doctrine, it would still not lead you to "conclude they are not voice of God when in GC Session". That is, the voice of God could include false doctrine. Which boils down to what we've been asking you. Who gets to determine whether they are Biblical or non-Biblical, the truth or false. So far, all you've offered is that you get to decide.

M: It doesn't matter how many times the truth is divided and subdivided.

K: What you're really saying here is that the church should discipline members for even that which isn't specified in the 29+/- FB. So why have them if you are going to use what they don't say against members?

There is no need to doubt, to be fearful that the work will not succeed. God is at the head of the work, and He will set everything in order. If matters need adjusting at the head of the work God will attend to that, and work to right every wrong. Let us have faith that God is going to carry the noble ship which bears the people of God safely into port.--2SM 390 (1892). {LDE 52.1}

Has God no living church? He has a church, but it is the church militant, not the church triumphant. We are sorry that there are defective members, that there are tares amid the wheat. . . . Although there are evils existing in the church, and will be until the end of the world, the church in these last days is to be the light of the world that is polluted and demoralized by sin. The church, enfeebled and defective, needing to be reproved, warned, and counseled, is the only object upon earth upon which Christ bestows His supreme regard.--TM 45, 49 (1893). {LDE 52.2}

The bulwarks of Satan will never triumph. Victory will attend the third angel's message. As the Captain of the Lord's host tore down the walls of Jericho, so will the Lord's commandment-keeping people triumph, and all opposing elements be defeated.--TM 410 (1898). {LDE 52.3}

If it ever happens, and I seriously doubt it will, then we can talk about it. Until then, it is a mute point and does not deserve our time and attention.

God the eternal Father is the Creator, Source, Sustainer and Sovereign of all creation. He is just and holy, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness. The qualities and powers exhibited in the Son and the Holy Spirit are also revelations of the Father. (Gen. 1:1; Rev. 4:11; 1 Cor. 15:28; John 3:16; 1 John 4:8; 1 Tim. 1:17; Ex. 34:6, 7; John 14:9.)


What should be done to those who do not recognize that the qualities and powers exhibited in Christ are also revelations of the Father? What if someone should say that those qualities and powers exhibited by Christ are only partial revelations of the Father?

The RCC is a counterfeit. The SDA Church is the Remnant Church of prophecy.