Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Questions and conversation about religious beliefs, Scripture, the Spirit of Prophecy, and Creation 7th Day Adventism
User avatar
Pastor Chick
Posts: 80
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 3:03 pm
Location: Kisoro - Uganda
Contact:

Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby Pastor Chick » August 3rd, 2013, 9:54 pm

Much is written in the inspired writings about "Church authority" and "independent spirits." Let me begin this topic with the following passages from the remnant messenger.

The world’s Redeemer has invested His church with great power. He states the rules to be carried in cases of trial with its members. After He has given explicit directions as to the course to be pursued, He says, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever (in church discipline) ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 8:18). Thus the highest authority, even the heavenly, ratifies the discipline of the church in regard to its members when the Bible rule has been followed.
The word of God does not give license for one man to set up his judgment in opposition to the judgment of the church, neither is he allowed to urge his opinions against the opinions of the church. Unless there was church discipline and church governments, the church would go to fragments. They could not hold together as a body....
In the conversion of Paul is given us important principles, which we should ever bear in mind.
The Redeemer of the world does not sanction the experience and exercises in religious matters independent of His organized and acknowledged church, where He has a church.
Many have the idea that they are responsible to Christ alone for their light and their experience independent of Christ’s acknowledged body in the world. But this is condemned by Jesus Christ in His teachings and in the examples of facts given to us for our instruction. Here was Paul directly brought into the presence of Christ,—One whom Christ was to fit for a most important work, one who was to be a chosen vessel unto Him—yet He does not teach him the lessons of truth he must learn; He arrests his course, He convicts him. He asks Christ, “What wilt Thou have me to do?” The Saviour does not tell him directly but places him in His direction in connection with His church—They will tell thee what thou must do. (15 MR, 130, 131)

If the world sees a perfect harmony existing in the church of God, it will be a powerful evidence to them in favor of the Christian religion. Dissensions, unhappy differences, and petty church trials dishonor our Redeemer. All these may be avoided if self is surrendered to God and the followers of Jesus obey the voice of the church. Unbelief suggests that individual independence increases our importance, that it is weak to yield our own ideas of what is right and proper to the verdict of the church; but to yield to such feelings and views is unsafe and will bring us into anarchy and confusion. Christ saw that unity and Christian fellowship were necessary to the cause of God, therefore He enjoined it upon His disciples. And the history of Christianity from that time until now proves conclusively that in union only is there strength. Let individual judgment submit to the authority of the church. (4T, 19)

I invite others to participate by adding additional inspired counsel and instruction from the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy.

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby JamesPrest » August 4th, 2013, 6:00 am

These are all beautiful statements. I love them all. I have a question though. At what point do the following statements hold weight, if the followers of Jesus are to implicitly obey the church? I find many instances in history, where, because the church was violating principle, the principles set forth in these statements were followed under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. For instance, to strictly hold to the statements that you set forth, would be to remain a Jew that rejects Jesus, a Catholic that rejects protestantism, a protestant that rejects Adventism, and a Seventh-Day Adventist that rejects Creation Seventh-Day Adventism. Personally, I have had a lot of difficulty with the Seventh-Day Adventist church, and the Seventh-Day Adventist Reform Movement over this issue. At times I found them violating principle, and requiring me to do the same. When I quote the statements below to them, to show that my only intention was to obey the Lord, they would quote statements just like the ones that you have above and require me to bow to church authority. All I desired to do was to keep the laws of health, to help a girl who we believed had a broken ankle, hold to and preach pure doctrine... etc. But the churches, quoting statements like you have above, denied me this right. Anyways... I would love your thoughts.

I will highlight those parts of the statements that I am asking about most specifically.

Quotes from Desire of Ages:

“In the kingdoms of the world, position meant self-aggrandizement. The people were supposed to exist for the benefit of the ruling classes. Influence, wealth, education, were so many means of gaining control of the masses for the use of the leaders. The higher classes were to think, decide, enjoy, and rule; the lower were to obey and serve. Religion, like all things else, was a matter of authority. The people were expected to believe and practice as their superiors directed. The right of man as man, to think and act for himself, was wholly unrecognized.

Christ was establishing a kingdom on different principles. He called men, not to authority, but to service, the strong to bear the infirmities of the weak. Power, position, talent, education, placed their possessor under the greater obligation to serve his fellows. To even the lowliest of Christ’s disciples it is said, ‘All things are for your sakes.’ 2 Corinthians 4:15. {Desire of Ages 550.2, 3}
Quote from Desire of Ages:

Many claim that a position of trust in the church gives them authority to dictate what other men shall believe and what they shall do. This claim God does not sanction. The Saviour declares, ‘All ye are brethren.’” {Desire of Ages, 414.3}
Another Quote from Desire of Ages:

In matters of conscience the soul must be left untrammeled. No one is to control another’s mind, to judge for another, or to prescribe his duty. God gives to every soul freedom to think, and to follow his own convictions. ‘Every one of us shall give account of himself to God.’ No one has a right to merge his own individuality in that of another. In all matters where principle is involved, ‘let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.’ Romans 14:12, 5.” {Desire of Ages, 550.6}

Quote from Testimonies Volume 5:

“The foundation of Christianity is Christ our righteousness. Men are individually accountable to God, and each must act as God moves upon him, not as he is moved by the mind of another; for if this manner of labor is pursued, souls cannot be impressed and directed by the Spirit of the great I am. They will be kept under a restraint which allows no freedom of action or of choice.” {Testimonies for the Church, Volume 5, 725.2}

Quote from Pamphlets:

“Preaching Contrary to Established Doctrines.

“‘The angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them forth, and said, Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.’ We see here that the men in authority are not always to be obeyed, even though they may profess to be teachers of Bible doctrine. There are many today who feel indignant and aggrieved that any voice should be raised presenting ideas that differ from their own in regard to points of religious belief. Have they not long advocated their ideas as truth? So the priests and rabbis reasoned in apostolic days: What mean these men who are unlearned, some of them mere fishermen, who are presenting ideas contrary to the doctrines which the learned priests and rulers are teaching the people? They have no right to meddle with the fundamental principles of our faith. But we see that the God of heaven sometimes commissions men to teach that which is regarded as contrary to the established doctrines. Because those who were once the depositaries of truth became unfaithful to their sacred trust, the Lord chose others who would receive the bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness, and would advocate truths that were not in accordance with the ideas of the religious leaders. And then these leaders, in the blindness of their minds, give full sway to what is supposed to be righteous indignation against the ones who have set aside cherished fables. They act like men who have lost their reason. They do not consider the possibility that they themselves have not rightly understood the word. They will not open their eyes to discern the fact that they have misinterpreted and misapplied the Scriptures, and have built up false theories, calling them fundamental doctrines of the faith.

“But the Holy Spirit will, from time to time, reveal the truth through its own chosen agencies; and no man, not even a priest or ruler, has a right to say, You shall not give publicity to your opinions, because I do not believe them. That wonderful ‘I’ may attempt to put down the Holy Spirit’s teaching. Men may for a time attempt to smother it and kill it; but that will not make error truth, or truth error. The inventive minds of men have advanced speculative opinions in various lines, and when the Holy Spirit lets light shine into human minds, it does not respect every point of man’s application of the word. God impressed his servants to speak the truth, irrespective of what men had taken for granted as truth.

“Present Dangers.

“Even Seventh-day Adventists are in danger of closing their eyes to truth as it is in Jesus, because if contradicts something which they have taken for granted as truth, but which the Holy Spirit teaches is not truth. Let all be very modest, and seek most earnestly to put self out of the question, and to exalt Jesus. In most of the religious controversies, the foundation of the trouble is, that self is striving for the supremacy. About what?–About matters which are not vital points at all, and which are regarded as such only because men have given importance to them. (See Matthew 12:31-37; Mark 14:56; Luke 5:21; Matthew 9:3.)” {Pamphlets #154, 10.1-11.2}

Quote from Anonymous:

(This last quote is not from the Bible or Ellen White's writings, however, I appreciate it because I believe that it rightly sets things in their proper places in the idea that it gets presents, though I may not agree with the terms used.)

“God is the only authority. He ordains some as stewards, directors, organizers, to see that things are done, decently and in order. But to none of those in these positions of trust does the Lord grant any authority over the least of His children. Says the Saviour, ‘One is your master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren.’ The members of the body of Christ would do well to understand this.“

I welcome your thoughts! Thanks! And the Lord's blessings to you!

User avatar
Lucan
Posts: 104
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby Lucan » August 5th, 2013, 5:25 pm

Hi James,

Thanks for the question and quotes. While others may have more to add, my immediate observation is that all of them deal with individual men within the Church, not with the Church as a whole. The quotes you shared speak of men who oppose other men who teach differently than they do, who trust in their position to give them authority, etc. As you quoted, she writes that "no man, not even a priest or ruler, has a right to say, You shall not give publicity to your opinions, because I do not believe them. That wonderful ‘I’ may attempt to put down the Holy Spirit’s teaching."

She does not say that "no assembly of the Church, not even the full body, has a right to say, You shall not give publicity to your opinions, because we do not believe them." That is the harmony of these statements; while no individual is to have authority over the consciences of God's people, the voice of the Church is the voice of Christ in the earth.

This of course brings us to the question of why we do not still belong to Judaism, and for this we can turn to one of the two foundational premises of Protestantism: a rejection of the arbitrary authority of the Church. Unfortunately, many independent spirits will regard all authority of the Church as "arbitrary." That is not the case. It is arbitrary Church authority - authority that is usurped from what is explicitly God's domain - that is to be rejected. The Church takes her authority from Christ, and if she ever attempts to usurp His authority, then that authority can be nothing but "arbitrary." The line here is not a fine one, but it is missed by many - arbitrary authority must be rejected, but to reject valid authority is to reject the one who gives it. To reject all authority and to reject no authority are equally dangerous errors.
- Lucan Chartier

User avatar
Pastor Chick
Posts: 80
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 3:03 pm
Location: Kisoro - Uganda
Contact:

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby Pastor Chick » August 5th, 2013, 10:01 pm

I ran upon these statements tonight:
God has made His church a channel of light, and through it He communicates His purposes and His will. He does not give one an experience independent of the church. He does not give one man a knowledge of His will for the entire church, while the church, Christ’s body, is left in darkness. (3T, p. 414)

The church of Christ is in constant peril. Satan is seeking to destroy the people of God, and one man’s mind, one man’s judgment, is not sufficient to be trusted. Christ would have His followers brought together in church capacity, observing order, having rules and discipline, and all subject one to another, esteeming others better than themselves. Union and confidence are essential to the prosperity of the church. If each member of the church feels at liberty to move independently of the others, taking his own peculiar course, how can the church be in any safety in the hour of danger and peril? The prosperity and very existence of a church depend upon the prompt, united action and mutual confidence of its members. When, at a critical time, one sounds the alarm of danger, there is need of prompt and active work, without stopping to question and canvass the whole subject from end to end, thus letting the enemy gain every advantage by delay, when united action might save many souls from perdition. (3T, p. 445)

I shall post other statements as I find them.

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby JamesPrest » August 6th, 2013, 4:24 pm

Brother Lucas:

I also noticed that a common thread was that it never referred to a church entity, but rather to individuals. However, I do believe that there is a time when it can apply to the church as well.

I said:

“To strictly hold to the statements that you set forth, would be to remain a Jew that rejects Jesus, a Catholic that rejects protestantism, a protestant that rejects Adventism, and a Seventh-Day Adventist that rejects Creation Seventh-Day Adventism.”

While I do agree with the statements that you and pastor McGill set forth, and believe that they have their proper place and bearing in the church, there comes a point when the voice of the church no long represents the voice of God. I take it that this line is crossed when the church contradicts the law and the testimony. For instance, the SDA church violated 1 Corinthians 6:1-9 in the imprisonment of two of our brothers (CSDA). Did not the SDA’s voice represent the voice of God? No, because the voice of God speaks directly contrary to their actions. It can be the same with doctrine as well.

While it is true that these statements refer to individuals telling others what they must believe and do, it is extremely dangerous, if not heresy, to say that the church can tell others what to believe and do. This would simply be patterning after Roman Catholicism. Yes, it is true that pure, true church authority, is the voice of God. But all the great fallen churches claim their voice as God’s. What fallen church wouldn’t?

Brother McGill:

I have a lot of statements that I could quote that are quite similar, and perhaps more specific, that express the very sentiments that the statements you quoted above do. My only thing is that there comes a time when, because of a departure from truth and righteousness on the part of the church, the voice of the church no longer represents the voice of God. Looking at sacred history, this has happened many, many times over.

Below is a chapter from my book of public rebuke to the Seventh-Day Adventist church. It rightly expresses exactly what I am trying to say and the point that I am trying to make. I don’t have a problem with church authority. I don’t mind the church, or even individuals giving me directions. What I mind, is, and I believe you would yourself, being required to believe or do something that I cannot honestly and conscientiously believe or do because of my personal knowledge of the law and the testimony.

A thought that I want to write an article on is this: What is the difference between church authority and “the commandments of men”? I find that churches in general, like to refer to verses on church authority, when they should be referring to verses regarding man-made commandments. The Jews did this, the Catholicism did this, Protestantism did this, and now the Seventh-Day Adventist church is doing this. There is a mighty difference between the authority of God and the authority of men. I believe the issue is important, because the commandments of men cause souls to be ruined for time and eternity.

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby JamesPrest » August 6th, 2013, 4:26 pm

The intention of this article is to bring to view several different Bible texts and Ellen White statements that are presented as Adventist arguments which validate Catholicism to its core. The reason that it is desired for these arguments to be exposed is because they actually hinder the furtherance of the gospel of Jesus and all true reformation.

While there has been much hesitancy to use the following statement from Ellen White, for the reason that it can be used to justify practically every sin and abomination in the book, it finds its proper application in this article. Here it is:

“God wants us all to have common sense, and He wants us to reason from common sense. Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.” {Manuscript Releases, Vol. 6, 354.3}

Now we enter our list of Adventist/Catholic arguments:

#1: (Adventist/Catholic Argument): “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” Romans 16:17.

During the reformation of the 16th century, those faithful reformers of their times protested against the corruptions and false doctrines held by the Roman Catholic Church. Romans 16:17 is a wonderful verse for Catholic clergymen to use in aiding them in their efforts to shut away the light of heaven from shining on their flocks. True reformation often results in separation and division, and just because someone is preaching a message or teaching a doctrine that causes divisions and offences contrary to what we have learned, does not always mean that we should avoid them. “Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.” Catholics would love for their members to avoid listening to the Protestants and Adventists that teach doctrines contrary to what they have learned in the Catholic Church. Adventists use this same verse in a way that effectually cuts them off from being corrected if they are in error, just like the Catholics do.

“The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God’s people should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition and worship they know not what.” {Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, 707.1}

#2: (Adventist/Catholic Argument) “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” 1 Corinthians 1:10.

Is Paul saying that we should all speak the same errors and that we be perfectly joined together in doing evil and judging wrongly? Of course not. Please consider the following statements carefully.

“God calls for unity among His people in these last days, but there cannot be unity without firm adherence to right principles.” {Manuscript Releases, Vol. 10, 46.2}

“Christ calls for unity. But He does not call for us to unify on wrong practices. The God of heaven draws a sharp contrast between pure, elevating, ennobling truth and false, misleading doctrines. He calls sin and impenitence by the right name. He does not gloss over wrongdoing with a coat of untempered mortar.” {Manuscript Releases, Vol. 17, 306.2}

“After a long and severe conflict, the faithful few decided to dissolve all union with the apostate church if she still refused to free herself from falsehood and idolatry. They saw that separation was an absolute necessity if they would obey the word of God. They dared not tolerate errors fatal to their own souls, and set an example which would imperil the faith of their children and children’s children. To secure peace and unity they were ready to make any concession consistent with fidelity to God; but they felt that even peace would be too dearly purchased at the sacrifice of principle. If unity could be secured only by the compromise of truth and righteousness, then let there be difference, and even war.
“Well would it be for the church and the world if the principles that actuated those steadfast souls were revived in the hearts of God’s professed people. There is an alarming indifference in regard to the doctrines which are the pillars of the Christian faith. The opinion is gaining ground, that, after all, these are not of vital importance. This degeneracy is strengthening the hands of the agents of Satan, so that false theories and fatal delusions which the faithful in ages past imperiled their lives to resist and expose, are now regarded with favor by thousands who claim to be followers of Christ. {The Great Controversy, 45.3-46.1}

Now back to our Catholic argument. “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” 1 Corinthians 1:10.
How fitting would this verse be for Catholicism back in the days when the reformers were teaching things that were different from the teachings and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, which reformed teachings caused divisions and ended up causing a great separation? Were the protesting reformers and the Catholic Church all speaking the same things and being perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment? Well of course not. And praise the Lord for that! This argument is used by Adventists today, in many cases hindering all true reformation in the church, just like it had done back in the Dark Ages. “Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.”

#3: (Adventist/Catholic Argument) “Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.” Proverbs 11:14.

This verse appears to be greatly abused by churches today and clergymen of the same. Says Christ:

“Be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.” Matthew 23:8-10.

Thus we have one Teacher, one Father, one Master, one above us—Jesus Christ—and the rest of us are all brethren; we are all equals. This being the case—that we are all equal before God—having only one true Teacher over us, we too are part of that multitude of counselors.
Churches abuse this and similar verses in different ways, one of which will be addressed here. Says Peter:

“No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” 2 Peter 1:20.

This is simply to mean that no man nor group of men have the right or place to get together and independently and privately interpret the Scriptures for others, much less require others to accept their interpretations on pain of excommunication. What happens, however, is that the clergymen of the church get together, privately interpret the Scriptures and require others to accept their interpretations, and then say, “In the multitude of counsellors there is safety.” Anyone who opposes the interpretations of this group by holding different views, are told that they are privately interpreting the Scriptures, falling to see that this is exactly what they have done themselves. They also fail to realize that since we are all brethren in Christ, that we too are part of the Bible’s “multitude of counsellors” and actually have a say in that counsel.
It is claimed by these independent groups of counselors that we should accept their private interpretation of the Scriptures because there is safety in group counsel. While it is true that there is safety in group counsel, it doesn’t change the fact that we are all part of the counsel. Nor does it change the fact that sometimes the multitude of counselors are corrupt and/or in error. The Roman Catholic Church is a great example of this. The Jewish counsel of Jesus’ time is an even better example. Virtually the entire Jewish counsel was corrupt and in grave error, with the exception of Gamaliel and perhaps a few others. Remember, “Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.” If the council is corrupt or in error, is there any safety in it? Of course not.
Adventists today use the respected text above to justify their getting together and privately interpreting the Scriptures for others and requiring acceptance of their interpretations in order for one to become a member of God’s church. All of this is out of harmony with the plain teachings of the word of God.

“The church is built upon Christ as its foundation; it is to obey Christ as its head. It is not to depend upon man, or be controlled by man. Many claim that a position of trust in the church gives them authority to dictate what other men shall believe and what they shall do. This claim God does not sanction. The Saviour declares, ‘All ye are brethren.’ All are exposed to temptation, and are liable to error. Upon no finite being can we depend for guidance.” {Desire of Ages, 414.3}

#4: (Adventist/Catholic Argument) “Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words of knowledge.” Proverbs 19:27.

“Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.” It is dangerous to just assume that if someone is teaching something against what you believe, that listening to them may cause you to err from true knowledge. It is dangerous to just assume that they are speaking lies. It is our responsibility to listen to what they are saying and to test it by the word of God before we rashly shut our ears away from hearing what we believe is error (See Bible text and statement below). Imagine Roman Catholicism using this verse to compel their members not to listen to the message of Adventism. What then? “Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.”

“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” 1 Thessalonians 5:21.

“Precious light is to shine forth from the Word of God, and let no one presume to dictate what shall or what shall not be brought before the people in the messages of enlightenment that He shall send, and so quench the Spirit of God. Whatever may be his position of authority, no one has a right to shut away the light from the people. When a message comes in the name of the Lord to His people, no one may excuse himself from an investigation of its claims. No one can afford to stand back in an attitude of indifference and self-confidence, and say: ‘I know what is truth. I am satisfied with my position. I have set my stakes, and I will not be moved away from my position, whatever may come. I will not listen to the message of this messenger; for I know that it can not be truth.’ It was from pursuing this very course that the popular churches were left in partial darkness, and that is why the messages of heaven have not reached them.” {Testimonies on Sabbath School Work, 65.1}

#5: (Adventist/Catholic Argument) “There have ever been in the church those who are constantly inclined toward individual independence. They seem unable to realize that independence of spirit is liable to lead the human agent to have too much confidence in himself and to trust in his own judgment rather than to respect the counsel and highly esteem the judgment of his brethren, especially of those in the offices that God has appointed for the leadership of His people. God has invested His church with special authority and power which no one can be justified in disregarding and despising, for he who does this despises the voice of God.” {Acts of the Apostles, 163.2}

The claim is that Acts of the Apostles 163.2 says that to disregard or despise the authority of the church is to despise the voice of God. Therefore, it is claimed, we should just believe and do whatever the General Conference says.

Let us read another statement:

“O, my very soul is drawn out in these things! Men who have not learned to submit themselves to the control and discipline of God, are not competent to train the youth, to deal with human minds. It is just as much an impossibility for them to do this work as it would be for them to make a world. That these men should stand in a sacred place, to be as the voice of God to the people, as we once believed the General Conference to be,--that is past. What we want now is a reorganization. We want to begin at the foundation, and to build upon a different principle.” {The General Conference Bulletin, April 3, 1901 par. 25}

In other words, the voice of the General Conference represents the voice of God only when the voice of the General Conference is representing the voice of God. If the General Conference is speaking contrary to the law and the testimony, they aren’t representing the voice of God. It was the same with the Jewish church, and it is the same today. Again, “Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.”

#6: (Adventist/Catholic Argument) “There are a thousand temptations in disguise prepared for those who have the light of truth; and the only safety for any of us is in receiving no new doctrine, no new interpretation of the Scriptures, without first submitting it to brethren of experience. Lay it before them in a humble, teachable spirit, with earnest prayer; and if they see no light in it, yield to their judgment; for ‘in the multitude of counselors there is safety.’” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, 293.1)

We believe that the reader has sufficient enough information to answer this argument so long as it is understood:

a. That God does not sanction the claim that those in positions of trust have a right to tell others what to believe. (See DA 414.3)
b. That the Bible only is to be our creed, the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. (See GC 595.1 and RH, December 15, 1885 par. 16)
c. That God wants us all to have common sense, and He wants us to reason from common sense. That circumstances alter conditions and change the relation of things. (See 6MR, 354.3)
d. That the Roman Catholic church would love to use this statement to see to it that no one believes contrary to her dogmas.
e. … etc.

And in this we make defense of our case, not because we feel a need of it, but for the sake of those honest inquirers who may be benefited by it.
All further objections that might be given hereafter against said series of articles may not be answered, not because there are no answers to give, but merely because of how easy it is to come up with hundreds of objections which could easily eat up our time should we choose to spend it unnecessarily in answering objections made by those only desiring a battle. “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” Romans 14:5.

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby JamesPrest » August 6th, 2013, 4:34 pm

This question is about the focal point of my point:

If we are all supposed to bow to the voice of the church (which I believe we should, WHEN it is representing the voice of God), then why did the CSDA come out of her?

Such action is a perfect violation of church authority.

User avatar
Lucan
Posts: 104
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby Lucan » August 6th, 2013, 4:55 pm

Hi James,

The last (and longest) paragraph of my reply was in response to this question. Since you are re-asking it, did you find my answer unsatisfactory?

The example you mentioned (imprisonment vs. 1 Cor. 6) is a prime example of what I called "authority explicitly usurped from God's domain," as the Scriptures make plain that protecting the Church's reputation and vengeance itself are the prerogative of God, not the Church. Obviously any attempts to contradict or override God's plainly stated Word are a usurpation of authority. Again, it is "arbitrary authority" that is to be disregarded.

Regarding why we came out of the SDA church, I think the following quotes should answer succinctly:

First Quarter Sabbath School, Lesson IX, February 29, 1896 wrote:"When the early church departed from God and imbibed pagan errors, she became Babylon. When she united with the state, she fell, and, as an organization, was the body of Christ no longer. While the Reformation churches held fast to the word, Christ was with them. Then they crystallized their various errors into creeds and endeavored thus to confine God's word, they made themselves daughters of Babylon. When some of them united with the state, they fell, and God had to use other people, called out of Babylon to carry forward His work. Now among these very churches which came out of the second Babylon, confusion reigns; and now great Babylon, including later daughters, is in adulterous union with the kings of earth , and is endeavoring to make that union stronger. God calls no church Babylon which holds to His word, and follows the light that shines from it, even though there are in its membership many who do not know Christ When the controlling influence of a church is downward, it erects some other standard besides God's word."

First Quarter Sabbath School, Lesson X, March 7, 1896 wrote:"It has ever been true that a backslidden body, one that has turned from God's word to men, from God's power to the state, was never reformed in itself. Invariably God's message has called out those from the fallen church who would do His will and preach His gospel. Israel went down to Egypt for help, and their captivity and loss of power followed. Out of the captives God gathered a faithful band to do His work. The Jewish church failed, and God called out the apostolic church to do His bidding. The Roman Church failed, and out of it God called the churches of the Reformation. Some of these churches failed to advance, and God called out others to bear His gospel to the world such as the Baptist, Methodist, Congregationalist, Disciple, Adventists. His last 'called-out' people will know no standard but His word, no power but His Spirit."
- Lucan Chartier

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby JamesPrest » August 8th, 2013, 5:12 pm

Brother Lucas,

You answer was satisfactory enough. I just want to figure out how the CSDA would deal with said situation of a member with an “independent spirit” as manifested in believing to teaching differently. The reality is, is that fallen churches don’t exactly acknowledge when they are in error. So what I want to find out about the CSDA church, is how they deal with a situation where a church member believes or teaches that the CSDA believes something that is claimed to be contrary to the word of God. Inspiration repeated declares this:

“Precious light is to shine forth from the Word of God, and let no one presume to dictate what shall or what shall not be brought before the people in the messages of enlightenment that He shall send, and so quench the Spirit of God. Whatever may be his position of authority, no one has a right to shut away the light from the people.” {Testimonies on Sabbath School Work, 65.1}

Sacred history reveals that this counsel also applies, not only to individuals who would attempt to determine what shall and shall not be taught, but also to churches who would do the same. Every fallen church of sacred history since the Jewish church reveals that they reached a point where free investigation of the Scriptures was no longer permitted by its members, but instead, were required, on pain of excommunication, to conform to the interpretations of fallible mortals that found expression in a creed. This is contrary to plain instruction. When the Bible is the only creed, with no human interpretation offered, the Holy Spirit can easily correct the body if it is in error. However, when a creed is set and exalted, if the Holy Spirit would correct it, those who bear the Spirit’s message of correction are threatened with church discipline and disfellowment. This has happened over and over again since the time of Jesus:

“These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.” John 9:22.

So… I am interested in seeing how the CSDA deals with those who believe differently. While I do not quote the following as authority, please consider the stated position of the early Adventists, and do tell me if this is the position of the CSDA church.

James White said:

“On the subject of creeds, I agree with Brother Loughborough. I never weighed the points which he has presented, as I have since I began to examine the subject myself. In Ephesians 4:11-13, we read, ‘And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets,’ et cetera. Here we have the gifts of the church presented.
“Now I take the ground that creeds stand in a direct opposition to the gifts. Let us suppose a case: We get up a creed, stating just what we shall believe on this point and the other, and just what we shall do in reference to this thing and that, and say that we will believe the gifts, too.
“But suppose the Lord, through the gifts, should give us some new light that did not harmonize with our creed; then, if we remain true to the gifts, it knocks our creed all over at once. Making a creed is setting the stakes, and barring up the way to all future advancement. God put the gifts into the church for a good and great object; but men who have got up their churches, have shut up the way or have marked out a course for the Almighty. They say virtually that the Lord must not do anything further than what has been marked out in the creed.
“A creed and the gifts thus stand in direct opposition to each other. Now what is our position as a people? The Bible is our creed. We reject everything in the form of a human creed. We take the Bible and the gifts of the Spirit; embracing the faith that thus the Lord will teach us from time to time. And in this we take a position against the formation of a creed. We are not taking one step, in what we are doing, toward becoming Babylon.” {The Early Years, Volume I, 453.6-454.3}

“In presenting to the public this synopsis of our faith, we wish to have it distinctly understood that we have no articles of faith, creed, or discipline, aside from the Bible. We do not put forth this as having any authority with our people, nor is it designed to secure uniformity among them, as a system of faith, but is a brief statement of what is, and has been, with great unanimity, held by them. We often find it necessary to meet inquiries on this subject, and sometimes to correct false statements circulated against us, and to remove erroneous impressions which have obtained with those who have not had an opportunity to become acquainted with our faith and practice. Our only object is to meet this necessity.” {Fundamental Principles, 1872, 3.1}

I said this above and would like to comment further on it:

“Every fallen church of sacred history since the Jewish church reveals that they reached a point where free investigation of the Scriptures was no longer permitted by its members, but instead, were required, on pain of excommunication, to conform to the interpretations of fallible mortals that found expression in a creed.”

I know that often the claim is put forth that the church (whoever they are referring to), is not in doctrinal error. This is a most dangerous position to take, and contrary to inspiration:

“There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ. The Lord designs that our opinions shall be put to the test, that we may see the necessity of closely examining the living oracles to see whether or not we are in the faith. Many who claim to believe the truth have settled down at their ease, saying, ‘I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing.’ But Jesus says to these self-complacent ones, Thou ‘knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.’ Let us individually inquire, Do these words describe my case? If so, the True Witness counsels us, saying, ‘Buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eye-salve, that thou mayest see.’ {Review and Herald, December 20, 1892 par. 1}

I look forward to your reply.

David Aguilar
Posts: 63
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 4:28 pm

Re: Church Authority and Independent Spirits

Postby David Aguilar » August 10th, 2013, 1:53 pm

Hi James,

You wrote:
Brother Lucas,

You answer was satisfactory enough. I just want to figure out how the CSDA would deal with said situation of a member with an “independent spirit” as manifested in believing to teaching differently. The reality is, is that fallen churches don’t exactly acknowledge when they are in error. So what I want to find out about the CSDA church, is how they deal with a situation where a church member believes or teaches that the CSDA believes something that is claimed to be contrary to the word of God. Inspiration repeated declares this:

“Precious light is to shine forth from the Word of God, and let no one presume to dictate what shall or what shall not be brought before the people in the messages of enlightenment that He shall send, and so quench the Spirit of God. Whatever may be his position of authority, no one has a right to shut away the light from the people.” {Testimonies on Sabbath School Work, 65.1}

Sacred history reveals that this counsel also applies, not only to individuals who would attempt to determine what shall and shall not be taught, but also to churches who would do the same. Every fallen church of sacred history since the Jewish church reveals that they reached a point where free investigation of the Scriptures was no longer permitted by its members, but instead, were required, on pain of excommunication, to conform to the interpretations of fallible mortals that found expression in a creed. This is contrary to plain instruction.


To respond, I would say, "Come and see." The Spirit and the Bride say, "Come."

As I've said to you in a couple places, I truly believe that the best remedy for your concerns is experience. Without your participation in fellowship (the forum posts are a good start) then the things we type are merely words. When you have a living experience, then you will know for yourself that we are they who bear about Yahshua's character.

If a set of of examples might help to comfort you on this matter, I can give you another of how we handle differences in viewpoints. Just last night, I gave a Bible study that examined (based mostly on the Bible, but I mentioned a couple of S.O.P. quotes in passing) the difference between the concepts of the "will" and the "character." Pastor "Chick" appeared to be having some connection problems, and so he missed much of the study. Afterwards, however, he mentioned to me that he had a subtly different take on some of what I had shared - perhaps a matter of wording, perhaps a matter of understanding.

This turned into an excellent discussion from which I think that both he and I (as well as those who had remained in the room after the official study was concluded) were blessed.

Now, while this was not exactly a matter of a "public teaching," in terms of the Church teaching something to the world as a matter of our collective viewpoint, this incident does reveal several things:

1) The Spirit of this Church is the Spirit of Yahweh. We are "one" with each other, even though we remain our individual persons, with individual viewpoints that can be brought into harmony without playing "follow the leader" in terms of everyone holding the exact same beliefs, expressed in exactly the same way.

2) Doctrines may be understood differently by different people, and still be correct in terms of leading to sanctification and everlasting life. As long as the doctrines conform to the principles of Christianity and Protestantism, as long as they lead to an acceptance of the Gospel that "kills sin in the heart," then they should be heard.

3) The value of real-time conversations simply cannot be overstated. Live discussions yield so much blessing and benefit that really cannot be duplicated in any other manner, so this leads us right back to my first response. "And the Spirit and the Bride say, 'Come.' And let him that heareth say, 'Come.' And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." (Rev 22:17)


Return to “Doctrine and Theology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests