Adventist Online

"Proselytizing is the act of attempting to convert people to another opinion and, particularly, another religion." -- Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proselytism.

Does the Seventh-day Adventist Church proselytize? Should Christians proselytize in countries whose laws ban proselytizing? Any comments/views?

 

Views: 623

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yes, Christians should proselytize, even in "closed" countries where laws ban proselytizing.

.

As a church we teach that "we are to recognize human government as an ordinance of Divine appointment, and teach obedience to it as a sacred duty, within its legitimate sphere." (Acts of the Apostles p.69)

.

But the verses quoted by MsMS show that, as Christians, we are under the jurisdiction of a higher law. Laws will eventually be made that will ban the keeping of the Sabbath too, but we must decide -- are we going to obey God, or shall we obey man?

 Some of the greatest converts of all time have come from countries or other religious beliefs that were  forbidden by law and today  they still share their testimony among those in their country  . Was not Martin Luther and Jerome and  many many others  persecuted and even put to death for their Hold on Christs Love for them and were willing to share it  despite the price on their heads that may of been offered t o kill them??

What happene d when Russia in the past had  forbidden  bibles from their borders ? Has not other lands still laws that prevent prosselytizing and has that stopped the Gospel of truth  or the hunger for the truth from changing lives?  I am here refering to Muslim lands such as Arabia ,  .Jordan . lybia,syria , lebanon , etc etc... Are any  wanting to serve their  master in reaching others across the seas openly  or even in secret to reach others I pray that the ywill go like  Caleb did when he asked  Joshua for the mountain regions t o be given to him  that as of yet were not conquered . Unselfishly risking your life so the truths we stand for can be heard i sf ar more noble than  warming  a pew where u are  at ease and in little danger  hmm/?

Thank you for your comments. These are good comments. Frightening though? Does anyone know how the General Conference would view this? Can the GC please make a official guideline for our members in my country to follow? Over here, churches get burnt for using the word "Allah". So far no killing or arrests for proselytizing. No one (including the Catholics and Protestants) here has openly proselytized the Muslims yet.

 

For your information, I just got word that the abridged Great Controversy which was printed by our Union as part of the Great Controversy project removed all references to the Roman church ... that means the Three Angels' Message is removed. Is this what the General Conference President Ted Wilson intended for his Great Controversy project?

 

I do not know where you are but the GC should not be changing the message of the Great Controversy if that was done.  God gave Ellen White the messages He did for a reason.  While I can understand translating her books into other languages or even writing them in easier form, the basic message should not be tampered with.  That is not abridging a book, that is writing a new book and trying to pass it off as something it isn't.  Are you sure that the references to the Roman Catholic church were removed?

Yes, you need to provide the valid documentation for this, otherwise there is no justification for giving out a reduced message.

I managed to get hold of a copy and to read it. It contains selected chapters from the Great Controversy. Some of these selected chapters still contain references to the Roman Church and it looks like these chapters are presented as in the original, but my concern is that important chapters which explain the Three Angels' Message that is, what Babylon is and what the beast is and what its mark is, these chapters are excluded.

Then there must not be much of substance

For some reason most of what I posted did not go through.  I will try again.  We should not be leaving out the most important parts of a message.

I also looked up about changes that EG White made in the Great Controversy which seemed to be minor changes in wording like Roman from Romish and makiing sure sentences were clear and written with respect.   Inspiration and the 1911 edition of the Great Controversy. http://www.whiteestate.org/vault/GCCh24bio.html

 

Another article, the Voice of the Spirit, pp. 88-95,  http://www.whiteestate.org/books/vots/vots.html , talks about changes to the Great Controversy for different parts of the world. But even there it does not sound as if the message should have major parts left out. 

As for Ellen White :

The Great Controversy was one of Ellen White's favorite books. In 1905 she declared: "I am more anxious to see a wide circulation for this book than for any others I have written."[53] Some years later she again commented: I appreciate it above silver or gold, and I greatly desire that it shall come before the people."[54] pp. 83 http://www.whiteestate.org/books/vots/vots.html

Maybe I am wrong but to me it is irresponsible to leave people with a diluted message that might leave them unprepared for the conflict ahead.  And if Ellen White thought it was important, then why are we watering it down?  It is one thing to leave out a sentence, it is another to leave out sections or chapters.

I agree.

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