So many parallels with Catholicism, and so much hope in He who saves us from our sinful nature. Thank you, Colleen/Nikki, for your faithfulness to the gospel.
I am Catholic and no, it's not like the Catholic Church - except that (as I have noticed) the SDA pioneers borrowed from all over the place. For example, they apparently borrowed the concept of sinless perfection from the Wesleyans. However, the SDA always seems to take good doctrines and corrupt them, or take the bad and make them worse.
Brian, now that I have finished listening to this podcast, I want to ask you something. What parallels between the SDA and the RCC did you hear discussed? I didn't hear any. The main topic that was discussed was original sin. That's a Catholic doctrine! So what parallels did you hear?
@@jimmu2008 It's a matter of definition, here. Reformed theology acknowledges man's inherent sinful nature more than pointing to a single sin which is 'original sin.' If you define 'original sin' as this, and RC theology has a similar, succinct definition, then Roman Catholic and reformed theology agrees. When I was Catholic, though (reaching back over 40 years, now, things may have changed in the Vatican), original sin had something of a fungible definition and the corresponding sacrament which dealt with this (baptism)...one priest taught that we were forgiven of just the guilt of original sin while another priest would teach that just the shame of original sin was covered, and on and on. This caused me much confusion and frustration...what's the current teaching of the RCC about this?
Excellent discussion! Thank you ladies so much. This was very helpful in showing how the Bible shows we have a spirit! FYI - Regarding Jehovah's Witnesses & The State of the Dead they teach the exactly the same as SDA. Individual JWs may explain it as soul sleep because they wrestle with cognitive dissonance &/or they feel it will better accepted by others than what is their actual formal theological position. I grew up with the illustration of the box & nails - take the nails out of the box and you do not have a box anymore. Therefore take away our breath and there is no longer a person/soul/spirit. They teach we cease to exist and are only alive in God's memory to be brought back in the resurrection (they don't like to use the word "created, or recreated). I hear so many JW apologists state JWs believe in soul sleep but that is not the reality. JWs explain that when Adam & Eve ate of the tree they lost their good relationship with God and began to die from that day forward. To support this they used an illustration of an electric fan. You can unplug it which cuts off the energy force, (aka our breath) but the blades of the fan do not immediately stop, but begin to slow down to a stop. I was raised and lived as a devout JW until my 40's when I began to question things. This was the teaching and understanding that I was always taught. Blessings to you!!
JWs and SDAs are cousins and share the doctrine of physicality, or "soul sleep", as well as a belief that Jesus is Michael the archangel. Your description of a physical human with no spirit but breath is what Adventists also believe. Thank you for sharing your experience as a former Jehovah's Witness. We really have a former worldview-as well as spiritual ancestors-in common!
I wanted to add that in addition to JWs teaching the exact same thing as Adventism regarding the state of the Dead - to explain why Adam didn't die on that literal day that he ate the fruit, they apply the one thousand years being the same as one day to God (2 Peter 3:8-9) to Adam having lived for 930 years before dying. In that sense they explain that Adam did die in that day - meaning before 1000 years had passed since he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good & bad.
This was one of the things I noticed after I was confronted with the SDA. Adam being the first to sin, according to Paul, was a subject of disagreement for Mac. It was when I first noticed his aversion to Paul's writings and I called him on it. Then years later when visiting the Conroe SDA, the leader had my viewpoint. I turned and looked at my friend who seemed unaware of the situation. I think more than anything that demonstrated how deep he had dove. Blessings Ladies 🕊️
oooh....... you ladies believe in the original guilt. I've always thought we've inherited a sin nature not the guilt. so that does mean when it says in Ecclesiastes 12:14 For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil." is God going to bring the fact that Adam disobeyed as part of the evil that was done by us? When Coleen said we sin before we were even born because of Adam, my neck twitched a little. what do you think of this verse? “The son will not bear the punishment for the sin of the father, nor will the father bear the punishment for the sin of the son” Ezekiel 18:20
We are not punished for Adam's eating the fruit. Rather, we are imputed with spiritual death-condemned as sinners-because we are born in Adam's likeness. He is the head of the human race, and his sin determined humanity's natural state of "dead in sin". We are not punished for Adam's sin, but we are by nature dead in sin because we are born naturally in Adam. Romans 5:12-21 really does explain this reality. Verse 12: Death reigned from Adam until Moses even though man was not guilty of the transgression of Adam (my paraphrase). The law identified sinful behavior and revealed that humans were sinners by nature as they committed sins that defied the law. But those acts of sin were not what made us sinners. We are sinners because we are born spiritually dead in sin. When we trust and believe in the Lord Jesus' completed atonement for sin, we pass from death to life. We are now defined by our new birth: born of God. We are no longer in Adam; we are now in Christ, and we are now spiritually alive. This reality is why Jesus said to Nicodemus: "You must be BORN AGAIN" (Jn. 3:3-6).
In short, Adventists makes sin less, Christ less, God's law less and man more. They are legalists who make their sanctification the basis of their justification. In that regard their theology is indistinguishable from the RCC.
@@ColleenTinker thanks for your thorough response. I can agree with a good portion of your explanation but where I'm lost is when you seem to be conflating being born in sin with being an actual sinner before even committing an evil act. I can understand we're born under the curse, consequences of Adam sin however, I do not think his sin was imputed into all humanity. The imputation of the guilt of Adam is conditional upon you sinning. The imputation of Christ righteousness is conditional upon you believing. You're under the consequences of Adam's fall from birth but you're guilty for your own sin. One must ratify the work of the cross to be saved and also one must ratify the disobedience of Adam to be condemned. They perish because they refuse to love the truth so as to be saved. People are condemned because they reject Christ. Also, the holiness of God is important. Sin cannot dwell in heaven with God but babies who pass away young are without a doubt with the Lord. How would it be so if they were born sinners?
@@hansmo8282 , the Bible, not I, is the word that says we are born condemned. Jesus Himself stated it in John 3:18: "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." And John 3:36: "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." Ephesians 2:1-3: "And you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience, among whom we all also formerly conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest." Death is the consequence of sin. We all die in Adam. We are born in sin, unable to seek, please, or know God (see Romans 3:9-18). We are not credited with Adam's sin (as Romans 5:12-14 makes clear), but sin was "in the world", and we are sinners by nature. God is the One who brings us to life with Christ when He shows us what Jesus did and gives us faith to believe. As for the babies-if God was able to give John the Baptist the Holy Spirit from the womb (Luke 1:15)) so that he recognized the unborn Jesus when Mary entered the house, He can reveal Himself to any baby who dies in infancy or in utero. God is not limited by our mature cognition. Our spirits can know Him without the "help" of our cognitive minds. In fact, I believe that this spiritual life is sometimes aided in old age by dementia; people are more able to receive the truth about Jesus when their habituated arguments are short-circuited.
This logic is not flawed but the foundational premise is. It's wrapped up in what they're calling the "nature of man" described at the start which culminates at 10:51-10:57. Colleen says "We have to understand that we have spirits AND bodies". This is a traditional Christian view which cannot be defended from the Bible and based purely on traditional thinking. The Jewish understanding of the soul is "the entirety of a person, even the blood in their veins". There is a lecture of the Evangelical scholar Dr Edward Fudge, who wrote "The Fire That Consumes" speaking on the Greek origin of the idea of the immortality of the soul. (linked in a reply comment in case it gets blocked)
Did you listen to the entire podcast? The idea of a human spirit is not based on tradition but on the Bible. We use many texts, and our being created in God's image is NOT a physical phenomenon. "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth." (Jn. 4:24) Adventists have traditionally dismissed the idea of a human spirit with the brush-off, "Oh, it's a tradition. It's Greek dualism." Yet these excuses have no biblical support. They are born out of a presupposition that God is physical, and we are purely physical. Here is an article that may be helpful: lifeassuranceministries.org/proclamation/2008/4/humanslivingbodies.html
Please think about the passage from 2 Corinthians 5 that Colleen read in this podcast. How could Paul say "we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord" if we did not have souls or spirits that somehow continue to exist and live? How could he say, "whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him" if our spirits cease to exist at death? Now, of course, even after death, our spirits do not have an independent existence. Our spirits will continue to exist because and only because God wills our existence.
@@ColleenTinker Hello Colleen, it's an honor to have your direct reply! In the referenced video from Dr Fudge he addressed the idea of body + breath as the article you linked describes as the accurate biblical interpretation. The Greek word for spirit here IS breath, the base of which is the English source for pneumatics. In context it eludes not to a disembodied entity but more of the "very essence of a person". See 2 Cor 2:13 & 12:18, 1 John 4:1, Eph 4:23. It's especially keen in the footnote for 1 Cor 14:15 that points out "Paul here seems to be using the phraseology of some of those in Corinth who were proud of being "in the spirit" as if that were superior to anything else. Paul points out that being "in the spirit" is not helpful unless it produces understanding". That producing of understanding idea is seen on the modern translations of 2 Cor 2:13 which drop spirit in favor of "my mind wasn't at peace". That fits into the modern language and understanding of biology that the "essence" of a person is in the mind, where a person does their thinking. To sum it up and kind of put you on the spot, do you think Dr Fudge's biblical and historical research on the soul and hell were wrong? The latter half of his book traces the historical origins to extra biblical sources such as Greek thinkers and "church fathers" like Tertullian. Is he not correct?
Hi, with all the bible verses such as 2 Corinthians 5, revelation 6 and the countless number of NDE testimonies of atheist people seeing the after life (hell or heaven) and come back born again believer, why do you choose to go that route?
If you were driving on a road and suddenly came to a place where the bridge was out, and those on the road would fall to their deaths in the chasm below, would you stop and put up a sign and warn the motorists who were coming behind you? Or would you simply detour and leave the dangerous road unannounced, allowing countless cars to crash to their destruction? We are not inventing a case against Adventism. We are showing what Scripture really says, and we are explaining how Adventists have been deceived and taught error as truth. Believe me, I was shocked as I discovered how completely I had been deceived and led to believe that my own beliefs were TRUTH-but in fact, they were dreadful counterfeits. Adventists need to know the true gospel and their true need of Jesus' substitutionary blood atonement.
So many parallels with Catholicism, and so much hope in He who saves us from our sinful nature. Thank you, Colleen/Nikki, for your faithfulness to the gospel.
I am Catholic and no, it's not like the Catholic Church - except that (as I have noticed) the SDA pioneers borrowed from all over the place. For example, they apparently borrowed the concept of sinless perfection from the Wesleyans. However, the SDA always seems to take good doctrines and corrupt them, or take the bad and make them worse.
Brian, now that I have finished listening to this podcast, I want to ask you something. What parallels between the SDA and the RCC did you hear discussed? I didn't hear any. The main topic that was discussed was original sin. That's a Catholic doctrine! So what parallels did you hear?
@@jimmu2008 It's a matter of definition, here. Reformed theology acknowledges man's inherent sinful nature more than pointing to a single sin which is 'original sin.' If you define 'original sin' as this, and RC theology has a similar, succinct definition, then Roman Catholic and reformed theology agrees.
When I was Catholic, though (reaching back over 40 years, now, things may have changed in the Vatican), original sin had something of a fungible definition and the corresponding sacrament which dealt with this (baptism)...one priest taught that we were forgiven of just the guilt of original sin while another priest would teach that just the shame of original sin was covered, and on and on. This caused me much confusion and frustration...what's the current teaching of the RCC about this?
Always a blessing to listen to this podcast, I learn so much. Thank you for all you do!
Excellent discussion! Thank you ladies so much. This was very helpful in showing how the Bible shows we have a spirit!
FYI - Regarding Jehovah's Witnesses & The State of the Dead they teach the exactly the same as SDA. Individual JWs may explain it as soul sleep because they wrestle with cognitive dissonance &/or they feel it will better accepted by others than what is their actual formal theological position. I grew up with the illustration of the box & nails - take the nails out of the box and you do not have a box anymore. Therefore take away our breath and there is no longer a person/soul/spirit. They teach we cease to exist and are only alive in God's memory to be brought back in the resurrection (they don't like to use the word "created, or recreated). I hear so many JW apologists state JWs believe in soul sleep but that is not the reality. JWs explain that when Adam & Eve ate of the tree they lost their good relationship with God and began to die from that day forward. To support this they used an illustration of an electric fan. You can unplug it which cuts off the energy force, (aka our breath) but the blades of the fan do not immediately stop, but begin to slow down to a stop.
I was raised and lived as a devout JW until my 40's when I began to question things. This was the teaching and understanding that I was always taught.
Blessings to you!!
JWs and SDAs are cousins and share the doctrine of physicality, or "soul sleep", as well as a belief that Jesus is Michael the archangel. Your description of a physical human with no spirit but breath is what Adventists also believe. Thank you for sharing your experience as a former Jehovah's Witness. We really have a former worldview-as well as spiritual ancestors-in common!
@@ColleenTinkerThank you Colleen!!❤
I wanted to add that in addition to JWs teaching the exact same thing as Adventism regarding the state of the Dead - to explain why Adam didn't die on that literal day that he ate the fruit, they apply the one thousand years being the same as one day to God (2 Peter 3:8-9) to Adam having lived for 930 years before dying. In that sense they explain that Adam did die in that day - meaning before 1000 years had passed since he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good & bad.
This was one of the things I noticed after I was confronted with the SDA. Adam being the first to sin, according to Paul, was a subject of disagreement for Mac. It was when I first noticed his aversion to Paul's writings and I called him on it. Then years later when visiting the Conroe SDA, the leader had my viewpoint. I turned and looked at my friend who seemed unaware of the situation.
I think more than anything that demonstrated how deep he had dove.
Blessings Ladies 🕊️
oooh....... you ladies believe in the original guilt. I've always thought we've inherited a sin nature not the guilt. so that does mean when it says in Ecclesiastes 12:14 For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil." is God going to bring the fact that Adam disobeyed as part of the evil that was done by us? When Coleen said we sin before we were even born because of Adam, my neck twitched a little. what do you think of this verse? “The son will not bear the punishment for the sin of the father, nor will the father bear the punishment for the sin of the son” Ezekiel 18:20
We are not punished for Adam's eating the fruit. Rather, we are imputed with spiritual death-condemned as sinners-because we are born in Adam's likeness. He is the head of the human race, and his sin determined humanity's natural state of "dead in sin". We are not punished for Adam's sin, but we are by nature dead in sin because we are born naturally in Adam. Romans 5:12-21 really does explain this reality. Verse 12: Death reigned from Adam until Moses even though man was not guilty of the transgression of Adam (my paraphrase). The law identified sinful behavior and revealed that humans were sinners by nature as they committed sins that defied the law. But those acts of sin were not what made us sinners. We are sinners because we are born spiritually dead in sin. When we trust and believe in the Lord Jesus' completed atonement for sin, we pass from death to life. We are now defined by our new birth: born of God. We are no longer in Adam; we are now in Christ, and we are now spiritually alive. This reality is why Jesus said to Nicodemus: "You must be BORN AGAIN" (Jn. 3:3-6).
In short, Adventists makes sin less, Christ less, God's law less and man more. They are legalists who make their sanctification the basis of their justification. In that regard their theology is indistinguishable from the RCC.
@@ColleenTinker thanks for your thorough response. I can agree with a good portion of your explanation but where I'm lost is when you seem to be conflating being born in sin with being an actual sinner before even committing an evil act. I can understand we're born under the curse, consequences of Adam sin however, I do not think his sin was imputed into all humanity. The imputation of the guilt of Adam is conditional upon you sinning. The imputation of Christ righteousness is conditional upon you believing. You're under the consequences of Adam's fall from birth but you're guilty for your own sin. One must ratify the work of the cross to be saved and also one must ratify the disobedience of Adam to be condemned. They perish because they refuse to love the truth so as to be saved. People are condemned because they reject Christ. Also, the holiness of God is important. Sin cannot dwell in heaven with God but babies who pass away young are without a doubt with the Lord. How would it be so if they were born sinners?
@@hansmo8282 , the Bible, not I, is the word that says we are born condemned. Jesus Himself stated it in John 3:18: "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." And John 3:36: "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." Ephesians 2:1-3: "And you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience, among whom we all also formerly conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest." Death is the consequence of sin. We all die in Adam. We are born in sin, unable to seek, please, or know God (see Romans 3:9-18). We are not credited with Adam's sin (as Romans 5:12-14 makes clear), but sin was "in the world", and we are sinners by nature. God is the One who brings us to life with Christ when He shows us what Jesus did and gives us faith to believe. As for the babies-if God was able to give John the Baptist the Holy Spirit from the womb (Luke 1:15)) so that he recognized the unborn Jesus when Mary entered the house, He can reveal Himself to any baby who dies in infancy or in utero. God is not limited by our mature cognition. Our spirits can know Him without the "help" of our cognitive minds. In fact, I believe that this spiritual life is sometimes aided in old age by dementia; people are more able to receive the truth about Jesus when their habituated arguments are short-circuited.
This logic is not flawed but the foundational premise is. It's wrapped up in what they're calling the "nature of man" described at the start which culminates at 10:51-10:57. Colleen says "We have to understand that we have spirits AND bodies". This is a traditional Christian view which cannot be defended from the Bible and based purely on traditional thinking. The Jewish understanding of the soul is "the entirety of a person, even the blood in their veins". There is a lecture of the Evangelical scholar Dr Edward Fudge, who wrote "The Fire That Consumes" speaking on the Greek origin of the idea of the immortality of the soul. (linked in a reply comment in case it gets blocked)
Did you listen to the entire podcast? The idea of a human spirit is not based on tradition but on the Bible. We use many texts, and our being created in God's image is NOT a physical phenomenon. "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and in truth." (Jn. 4:24) Adventists have traditionally dismissed the idea of a human spirit with the brush-off, "Oh, it's a tradition. It's Greek dualism." Yet these excuses have no biblical support. They are born out of a presupposition that God is physical, and we are purely physical. Here is an article that may be helpful: lifeassuranceministries.org/proclamation/2008/4/humanslivingbodies.html
Please think about the passage from 2 Corinthians 5 that Colleen read in this podcast. How could Paul say "we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord" if we did not have souls or spirits that somehow continue to exist and live? How could he say, "whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him" if our spirits cease to exist at death?
Now, of course, even after death, our spirits do not have an independent existence. Our spirits will continue to exist because and only because God wills our existence.
@@ColleenTinker Hello Colleen, it's an honor to have your direct reply! In the referenced video from Dr Fudge he addressed the idea of body + breath as the article you linked describes as the accurate biblical interpretation. The Greek word for spirit here IS breath, the base of which is the English source for pneumatics. In context it eludes not to a disembodied entity but more of the "very essence of a person". See 2 Cor 2:13 & 12:18, 1 John 4:1, Eph 4:23. It's especially keen in the footnote for 1 Cor 14:15 that points out "Paul here seems to be using the phraseology of some of those in Corinth who were proud of being "in the spirit" as if that were superior to anything else. Paul points out that being "in the spirit" is not helpful unless it produces understanding". That producing of understanding idea is seen on the modern translations of 2 Cor 2:13 which drop spirit in favor of "my mind wasn't at peace". That fits into the modern language and understanding of biology that the "essence" of a person is in the mind, where a person does their thinking. To sum it up and kind of put you on the spot, do you think Dr Fudge's biblical and historical research on the soul and hell were wrong? The latter half of his book traces the historical origins to extra biblical sources such as Greek thinkers and "church fathers" like Tertullian. Is he not correct?
@@ColleenTinker Oh, and yes, I did listen all the way through your episode. It would be disingenuous to comment if I didn't hear you out entirely!
Hi, with all the bible verses such as 2 Corinthians 5, revelation 6 and the countless number of NDE testimonies of atheist people seeing the after life (hell or heaven) and come back born again believer, why do you choose to go that route?
You simply want to damn Adventists, and are building a case for how to do that; based on salvation by works.
If you were driving on a road and suddenly came to a place where the bridge was out, and those on the road would fall to their deaths in the chasm below, would you stop and put up a sign and warn the motorists who were coming behind you? Or would you simply detour and leave the dangerous road unannounced, allowing countless cars to crash to their destruction? We are not inventing a case against Adventism. We are showing what Scripture really says, and we are explaining how Adventists have been deceived and taught error as truth. Believe me, I was shocked as I discovered how completely I had been deceived and led to believe that my own beliefs were TRUTH-but in fact, they were dreadful counterfeits. Adventists need to know the true gospel and their true need of Jesus' substitutionary blood atonement.
Its my first time to meet you and I NÈED to Know more about what is Happening there /Taa./ KEN KOKE of WABAG Enga Province of PNG.