Adventist Online

A question about the Shepperd's Rod and Reform Movement (and whatever movement I have not mentioned but may need to know about)

This is a request for information, not an attempt to start a pointless debate.

Is there a reasonably simple, "sanitized" source of information about the Shepherd’s Rod and Reform Movement message? I wish to understand what they teach, without being troubled by their negative campaign against the SDA church, and their usual efforts to try to confuse the issues.

As I make SDA friends online, I am finding that many of them are of those persuasions, so instead of simply avoiding them as I usually do (and was taught to do), I wish to understand them, as impartially as possible. I am disappointed by the efforts of some of them to not exactly admit what they are, when I ask them directly, but I am refreshed by those who have told me plainly what they are, with no apparent dishonesty.

I am familiar with the documents from the Biblical Research institute, but those seem mostly historical, I wish to understand the movements as they exist today.

One more thing, the offshoots I met in my home country and the USA are usually engaged in trying to convert adventists to adventism (their brand of course), and not at all interested in unbelievers. But online I have met some offshoots that appear genuinely interested in sharing the message with unbelievers and reaching to the community. This I had never seen before, it challenges some of my past perceptions of how to easily identify them. I think that behavior is more common with independents, who are not the same as the Rods and the Reforms, at least in my understanding.

Views: 226

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

They left a document with me titled, Reformation Study Course, very lengthy,,, 20 chapters, which I have read about 2 years ago.

sky
sda defend.com!!!!

you mean Ron Beaulieu's omega countdown ministry?

sky

I used to read Vance Farrell's material when I was a theology student. I lost touched with him many years ago. He had some interesting things to say.
I can also understand if you have learned the healing arts, and it's hard to hurt people now that you know how to heal them. And then if there's a demand for medics in the military, all the better to be a medic. And God's people will surely make better medics than soldiers. And some wars you just can't be sure about, because they don't tell you everything.

If that's your conviction, that's fine. But you can not make it a church doctrine. This church is solemnly bound to follow the Bible. Jesus said:

Matt. 5:41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

That means do not refuse to bear arms. This is not a man who wants to have a chat with you. This is forced military service. Not in the capacity of a medic, but as a soldier, with armor, shield, and sword. And, if during that mile, you encounter the enemy, you will have to engage, and you may have to take a life. You will not be guilty of murder. You will have nothing to repent of. You where doing what the Lord told you to do.
I know some of these things are not easy for everyone to understand. If you grew up in the big city, you might see things differently than someone who grew up in the wild, wild west, where everyone owns guns. I was shooting guns when I was 10 years old. Kids needed to know gun safety because their parents owned guns. They had to. It was their duty, as citizens, to keep the crime rate down. In places where everyone has guns, there are no burglars, rapists, satanic serial killers, etc. They know that if they break into someone's house, they will probably get shot. So they find a place where people don't have guns. Maybe where you guys live. Good luck the next time some group of Satanists break into your house and torture and kill your whole family, as a sacrifice to Satan, and then make it look like you killed them all and then committed suicide.

In Switzerland, they have a law that every man must have a gun of a certain size, (not a pea-shooter), in his house, at all times. There is virtually no crime there, as you can imagine. Hitler commanded four of his generals to invade Switzerland, but they refused. They would not fight a country where every home had guns. It would have been suicide. That law saved their country from being invaded by the Nazis.

And how many lives where saved?
Sorry, but I have to conscientiously object to posting in the middle of the thread. It just gets kind of confusing and it's hard to keep track of. I'm not going to look through a whole thread, looking for new posts.

Now when you say the German government, are you talking about Hitler? Hitler was a traitor to the German people and a usurper. The real German government found those who cooperated with Hitler, in the concentration camps, guilty of war crimes. Some where tried and imprisoned. That would be an appropriate time to refuse to bear arms. But being a fanatic about it is kind of a bad thing.

Let's consider some things. If you saw a man with a bomb strapped to him, heading toward a crowd of people, you must assume that man intends to blow himself up and kill all those people. If you had a gun, (perhaps you where a security guard, police officer, or a sniper on the roof, or something), the most loving thing you could do for those innocent people he intends to kill, would be to kill that terrorist. You will have saved their lives. They will all thank you for it and say you ar a hero. You might get a medal. You will be able to witness to those people, and some of them might even be in Heaven, thanking you forever. And it would be a good opportunity to set the record strait and let the world know that Adventists are not fanatical about bearing arms, or joining the military or the police force.

The same would go, if you killed a serial killer. You will not only have saved yours and your families lives, but also the lives of all that murderer's future victims.
Well My problem with the Branch Davidians (the Rods) is anyone who likes getting up during a sermon in a normal SDA church to interrupt the pastor during his sermon and to push their views of the bible on a whole church during worship is just plain rude and inconsiderate. Some of you know me as a conservative adventists. (old fashion) But I dont agree with (the Rods) feeling it is their duty to beat other adventists over the head with their rods. If they want to help the church then they need to have bible studys with who ever wants to hear. Not force people to listen to them and beat them until the agree with their point of views. Anyone who trys to force their ideas on you turns people off to God. And that can't be a good thing.
I ran across this article that may shed some light on your question concerning the Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement. It is a research paper written in 2002 with footnotes for a History Class at the University of California-Santa Barbara. If you can find them, the books referred to in this research paper may give you even more light on the circumstances that happen during WWI & WWII and the origin of the SDA Reform Movement. Hope this helps. I will keep researching for more info.

http://www.history.ucsb.edu/projects/holocaust/Research/Proseminar/...

Have a Blessed Day!
Thank you for this link. Interesting reading. According to this paper ... it was not the official church (General Conference) that went against the 'noncombatant' status .... but just a group of un-named people within the church. I had not heard this before. I had always thought that the church owed them an apology. But according to this paper ... I would say not.
I agree with your whole post, Don.

It is true that when you volunteer for the military, it is different for Sabbath-keepers than it is for soldiers who are drafted. I was drafted and I got away with refusing to work on the Sabbath. There were about 4 of us SDAs in my unit who refused to work on the Sabbath. If we had been volunteers, we would have received a court-martial or, at the very least, an Article 15. But as it was, all they did was have us stay in our room on Sabbaths when we couldn't leave the barracks.

When you volunteer for military duty now, they figure that you know that you will have to work any time your commanding officer or NCO requires you to work, 24/7.
4 Him,

Did you read it very thoroughly? The official leadership of the church disfellowshipped Germans who refused to follow the leader's orders during the war. Many of these went to prison and some were executed for refusing to fight in the German military. Conradi was the principal SDA leader who made these decisions. He was president of the European division. That is very "official."

Look at this:


There was still the breach between the Seventh-day Adventists and the Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement after this meeting [in 1923], which needed to be healed. L.R. Conradi, the president of the European Division, tried to justify the actions of the German Adventist leaders by explaining that the General Conference had “given German Adventists tacit approval.” This tacit approval was to allow German Adventists to work on the Sabbath and bear arms. This explanation only made matters worse between the Adventists and the Reformers. Soon after World War I, the General Conference sent a delegation led by A.G. Daniells to try and heal the growing breach between the Adventists and the Reformers. A.G. Daniells stated that the “German [Adventist] leaders of the church have been wrong, but he also criticized the Reformers for setting up a separate organization and using misleading tactics to promote their views.” In the end, the Reformers were disfellowedshiped from the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The Reformers decided to create their own church where they “refused all military service and insisted on a rigid Sabbath observance”and they would “continue with original teachings and practices of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.” The Reformers no longer believed it was acceptable to be non-combatant during times of war. They believed the Seventh-day Adventists were no longer following the original teachings of the Church. In Gotha, Germany, July 14-20, 1925, “the SDA Reform Movement was first organized, officially, as a General Conference, when the ‘Principles of Faith and Church Order’ were drawn up and the name ‘Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement’ was adopted.”
Individual leaders do make mistakes frequently. But if it was not an official act by the General Conference ... then it was not the will of the people. It was the will of an individual leader.

And NO leader ... not matter HOW powerful ... has the right to disfellowship a member. The right to disfellowship lies within the local board and congregation.
remain faithful in the light that you have received, God knows them by name. I am one of those millions who received the adventist faith, I am not one of any so-called offshoots. I want to see them also to comeback. We cannot deny the mistakes of some leaders in our church but we have to remember that we are not warring against flesh and blood (Eph. 6:12) Sabbath is the ony zeall of loyalty and I also believe that tru this commandment God will gatherr us once more.

RSS

Site Sponsors

 

Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free


USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:
Amazon.com

 

© 2019   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service