Scribd
Upload
264 views2 pages

Will The Real Thinking Adventist Please Stand Up2

This document summarizes a blog post criticizing so-called "thinking Adventists" who reject the reliability of Scripture. It discusses how these Adventists accept the conclusions of higher criticism that date the book of Daniel much later than the text itself claims, in favor of scholarly references. The document argues that true thinking Adventists have recognized how higher criticism leads to denying many biblical events and teachings, and have chosen not to follow down that path of leaving the Bible in tatters. It concludes that these so-called thinking Adventists are simply products of the times and not real thinkers, being led astray just as others have in the past.

Uploaded by

lewildale
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
264 views2 pages

Will The Real Thinking Adventist Please Stand Up2

This document summarizes a blog post criticizing so-called "thinking Adventists" who reject the reliability of Scripture. It discusses how these Adventists accept the conclusions of higher criticism that date the book of Daniel much later than the text itself claims, in favor of scholarly references. The document argues that true thinking Adventists have recognized how higher criticism leads to denying many biblical events and teachings, and have chosen not to follow down that path of leaving the Bible in tatters. It concludes that these so-called thinking Adventists are simply products of the times and not real thinkers, being led astray just as others have in the past.

Uploaded by

lewildale
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Will the Real Thinking Adventist Please Stand up?

Part
Two
Posted December 1st, 2008 by Clifford Goldstein

For years now I’ve been a proud recipient of Dale Ratzlaff’s little scandal sheet,
Proclamation!, whose whole raison d’être is, apparently, to bash Adventism, all under
the guise of course of preaching the gospel, or at least his version of it (which seems to be
getting more and more Calvinistic).

Nevertheless, every now and then he gets it right, and below is a quote from his
latest issue (September/October 2008), which catches a deep truth. Writing about some of
those who have left the SDA church, he says: “Further, we did not only leave historic
Adventism; we also left liberal Adventism that demeans the law, the atonement of Christ,
the complete reliability of Scripture, and the sovereign authority of God including His
wrath.”

Heeee . . . heee . . . heee….

Though I do not quite sure how a guy who rejects the fourth commandment finds
the chutzpah to talk about those who “demean the law,” he’s sure got it right about the
liberals (actually, they’re “leftists,” not “liberals,” but that’s another blog), the self
proclaimed “thinking” Adventists that I talked about in my last blog.

Let’s look, for example, at what the so called “thinking” Adventist does with the
“complete reliability of Scripture.” I recently had an article on Daniel 2 in the Review
(Oct 16, 2008). Just good old, Daniel 2, kind of a cornerstone of Adventist prophecy.
Well, on another blog, one filled with “thinking” Adventists, a blogger went ballistic,
attacking the article because I actually was so closed minded to believe what the texts
themselves say about when the book was written.

I mean, how could I be so stupid, so narrow, that when the Daniel says--“And in
the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams,
wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him” (Daniel 2:1) or that “In
the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head
upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters” (Danel 7:1)--I
actually believe it? What a non-thinking Adventist I must be!

In contrast, this “thinking” Adventist then quotes a “scholarly reference” from the
New Jerusalem Bible (Catholic, I think), which states that Daniel was written between
167 and 164 B.C., and not during the reign of Babylon and Media-Persia as it says about
itself. So, what do we have? The Bible dates Daniel about 600 years before Christ, this
“scholarly reference” dates only about 160 years earlier—and which one do you think
this (so called) “thinking” (so called) “Adventist” accepts?
Guess.

Of course, true thinking Adventists have long ago seen what a dead-end higher
criticism leads to, and have made a conscious choice to not follow down that path, which
leaves the Bible in tatters: Abraham didn’t exist, God didn’t divide the water during the
Exodus (if there even were one), Jesus wasn’t resurrected from the dead, Jesus wasn’t
born of a virgin, Jesus didn’t pre-existent, Jesus isn’t coming again in the clouds, and so
forth. Maybe not all the so called “thinking” Adventists have gone that far yet (though
some probably already have), but just give them time.

The so called “thinking” Adventist is, really, nothing more than a product of the
times: the times says this, the “thinking” Adventist thinks this; the times says that, the
“thinking” Adventist thinks that. In contrast, the real thinking Adventist steps back, looks
at the big picture, has seen in the past how following the times has led folks (and church)
astray, and is determined through God’s grace not to fall into the same trap.

Pretty bad when Dale Ratzlaff is closer to truth than are these, ahem, “thinking”
Adventists.

You might also like