You see I was writing about Everlasting Gospel according to Revelation
Gene when you say " they are not the gospel"
And you say "it is about Jesus message"
I actually do not see in that much of Gospel defined
Of course we do not have to agree either... Your referring from Galatians has been thrown in
If you are SDA member I recommend you a book called "Apocalyptic vision and Neutering Adventism"
How you define gospel, it would do exact that "Neuter" it.
We would became just another Christian denomination among thousands -not anymore God´s peculiar people
Of course if you are non SDA I do understand your view -Then you have not received Three Angels Message in verity
Gene what you missed is that we do not subscribe to your second chance gospel. Maybe the happy clapper may be your only chance to convert to your devil inspired gospel.
Yes Elijah, it was meant to be referring to here... As I read it it was also my conclusion, exception was the article about Walter Veith.. That is why I arose the question originally. I was once also instructed that Spectrum tolerates both conservative and liberals..
True Pr Kotilanien, It is a strange thing the norm would be you was either the one or the other. But they seem to be able to straddle the fence with one foot in each camp.
So that is the way we are being categorized. However, there has been claimed that Spectrum magazine marginalizes conservative comments especially by admins.. nowadays use of trolls etc. . don´t know whether it´s true..
Then there are claims marginalizing conservatives by Bill Knott.. here is one example:
...so there are many ways to impact and influence
AUGUST 5, 2015
Few accusations in twenty-first century North America more rapidly gain traction than the claim that somebody or some group has been “marginalized,” in part because of our sad history of doing just that to successive waves of those who didn’t fit the self-image of the dominant Anglo-European culture.
First Native Americans, then African-Americans, were not only relegated to the sidelines, but in a still-unfolding and tragic story, grossly mistreated—then denied access to the justice system, the political establishment, and, of course, the mainstream economy. Generations of Irish, Italian, Eastern European, Hispanic, and Asian immigrants know the frustration of being kept on the margins of cultural power and success by both overt and subtle prejudice, regulations, and paranoia. Social marginalization is a real—and painful—issue that God’s remnant must consistently redress by illustrating that it is still the welcoming and inclusive community envisioned in the teachings of both Jesus and the apostle Paul.
But there is a kind of marginalization that is both healthy and necessary for the church to practice. Recent events have underscored why now may be the moment for God’s people to thoughtfully and systematically exclude those elements that have proved themselves hostile to our life together. Our authority for doing so is none other than the apostle of inclusiveness—Paul himself—who famously declared that “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28, RSV1).
Paul also tellingly wrote: “Take note of those who do not obey what we say in this letter; have nothing to do with them, so that they may be ashamed” (2 Thess. 3:14, NRSV2), and “Have nothing to do with godless and silly myths” (1 Tim. 4:7, RSV). In other words, exclude such people; marginalize such foolishness.
In the cacophony of opinions swirling before the recent General Conference Session in San Antonio, we quickly learned that there were honest, constructive voices—even when they disagreed with each other—that deserved to be part of the necessary conversations in which the church was engaged. They spoke with civility, practiced humility, and left us all the better for the good thinking they caused us to do, even when we weren’t initially attracted to their ideas.
But there were—and are—other voices who by their shrillness and their vitriol gave ample illustration that they don’t have the health of the body in mind, but instead, their own advantage. They make their living off our pain: they build their reputations even as they wound and rend the body of Christ. Unrighteous ad hominem attacks upon church leaders, respected theology teachers, and almost all who disagreed with them became their stock in trade. And sadly, the collective Adventist media rewarded them in just the way the national advertisers reward the angry pundits who slash and burn on Sunday morning television.
So here’s a call to shut our ears, protect our pulpits, change the channel, and withhold our dollars from those of whatever ideological camp who practice the uncivil and unrighteous behaviors we witnessed before San Antonio. Yes, move them to the margins; draw the boundaries of our community in such a way that only repentance and changed behavior will again allow them full inclusion.
It falls to the body of Christ to defend itself when it is under attack from foes without—or within.
I used to work over year in Publishing House of SDA headquarters in my country Finland. I was Assistant Editor and my boss was quite (or very) liberal from my point of view, however I admired his commitment, his devotional life, his Christian maturity and he was very fair to me, and I respect him so much -although I did not agree with his Theology. You see we don´t have to agree on everything -we just need to live life according to our Savior´s instructions "Love one another" with respect...
Thanks for your reply Pr. Kotilainen. I begin to realize you have experience in dealing with the Liberals, I have none of that. All I can do is to rely on what I feel is true and right. What we see is the Liberals come out with their new ideas, some are in harmony with the Bible. Sometimes it is easy to spot the faults that some of these have. Other times it is very hard to see if it is true or false.
Yes brother Elijah, what I have been wondering is that how does one become Liberal? What are the reasons leading to that viewpoint - often times I have discovered that many liberals among SDA´s are 3rd or 2nd or 4th generation Adventists perhaps gotten tired of beast prophecies and wanting emphasize Gospel not understanding that Prophecy and Gospel cannot be separated... This from Rev. 14:6 Everlasting Gospel..
Thanks for your reply Pr. Kotilainen. Yes, by and large, the generational issue seems to generate the liberals is also my experience indeed. I myself find it hard to relate to this because I came across the present truth message at a mature age. The fire and brimstone messages did appeal to me. I do admit over the years I have mellowed a bit, but I do not like any compromise on the three angels message as some of the liberals seem to favour.
I know many will come from the four corners of the world to join with the patriarchs. But I do not see that there would or should be any compromise on the Present Truth.
The SDAC has the Present Truth and watering it down to be able to reach other denominations is not something I approve of at all.
We must remember that truth is progressive too and knowledge increases, therefore we need to update our awareness and knowledge constantly.
We are publishing wonderful books all the time as example one of the people I have followed closely is Professor Jaques Doukhan.. He comes from Jewish background as well as Clifford Goldstein, Steve Wohlberg, Doug Batchelor and many others..
Jewish people have had much deeper understanding of Bible. than others Besides that is something EGW predicted to happen just before Christ comes back.
Are you saying that Gentiles aren't as good at interpreting the bible as Jews can be??