Student suspended after refusing to step on Jesus

[Sola_Fide]

Investigative judgement was not the issue the two of you were discussing at all. Investigative judgement was something you dredged up (as you usually do as you're fixated on it) in order to justify your contention that Seventh Day Advantists don't fit your rather narrow definition of 'Christian'. That was the only way that subject came into your discussion.



Did it ever occur to you that, if you have your heart set on changing Mr. Drake's religion for him, the least you could do as a preparatory step is learn to spell 'figurehead'? Because Mr. Drakes a pretty bright guy, and I don't think he's going to be particularly swayed by the conversion arguments of an illiterate.

Or did you wait until he logged off so you could come try to convince us he's a Seventh Day Advantist? Because if that was your grand plan, you're a sick little puppy. Amusingly so, since we would all consider that funny as hell. But sick nonetheless.

It's Adventist, not Advantist...so unlike my misspelling of figurehead (I don't have spell check turned on on my phone), your misspelling betrays a lack of understanding of the issues.

Believe me, I understand why you think all of these squabbles about doctrine are meaningless. It's because you don't love the Lord Jesus Christ, and so naturally you don't care about defending the gospel against false gospels like the apostles did.

You don't understand the gospel, and if you think I'm being "narrow" in my definition, then you haven't read the books of Romans and Galatians to understand how severely narrow Paul was. The issue of the atonement is the central doctrine of Christianity. If you get the atonement wrong, like all of these cults do, you get everything wrong and you lose the gospel.

 

[acptulsa]

It's Adventist, not Advantist...

I stand corrected.

so unlike my misspelling of figurehead (I don't have spell check turned on on my phone), your misspelling betrays a lack of understanding of the issues.

What issue? The issue of Advent? The fact that they consider it a weekly event while most protestants consider it annual is more important than the fact that you're using some figurehead to turn Mr. Drake from one religion to another? I don't agree.

Believe me, I understand why you think all of these squabbles about doctrine are meaningless. It's because you don't love the Lord Jesus Christ, and so naturally you don't care about defending the gospel against false gospels like the apostles did.

And you can believe me that I understand why you perform all these squabbles and try to accuse everyone who understands someone else's doctrine as being someone who subscribes to someone else's doctrine. It's because you're in Satan's pocket, and do his bidding daily.

You don't understand the gospel, and if you think I'm being "narrow" in my definition, then you haven't read the books of Romans and Galatians to understand how severely narrow Paul was.

And if you're as narrow as I am in your definition of 'gospel', you'd discover that it's enlightening to read Jesus' words, and discover that He wasn't narrow at all. Then when you used the word 'love' it wouldn't come across as such a foreign word to you.

 

[jmdrake]

None of this is about investigative judgement, which is the issue at hand. Ellen G. White (the lone figurhead that you accept as the authoritative person to interpret the Bible, as other cults do) says two things:

1. In 1844, Jesus moved from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place to begin a work of judgement to investigate who is worthy of His atonement by their works

2. That Jesus pleads our repentance and faith before the Father

Number 1 is wrong because as the verses in Hebrews I showed you, Jesus already made atonement for His people and perfected them. He already entered the Most Holy Place ONCE for all and presented His blood to the Father. A believer is NEVER judged by his works for salvation. A believers works have nothing to do with his salvation. It is Christ's blood alone. No person is ever worthy of salvation, and one can never do enough to be worthy.

Number 2 is wrong because again it brings works into the equation of salvation. Christ does not plead the saint's repentance and faith before God, as if my sin-tainted repentance and faltering faith could avail before a perfect and holy God. Christ pleads His blood alone before the Father on behalf of His sheep. It's is Christ's merits which avail before the Father, not anything in man.


These things are why Seventh Day Adventism is not Christianity.

You are self deceived. As I showed you in 1st Corinthians, Christ reconciled the entire world, elect and non elect, at the Cross. But individual atonement happened later. Again, that's why were are to be "ambassadors for reconciliation." Paul wouldn't admonish us to tell others to "be reconciled" to Christ if they were already individually reconciled. Further since the Most Holy Place is the presence of God (the mercy seat represents the throne of God) as long as Jesus is in the presence of God He is in the Most Holy Place. And I showed you that the Bible says Jesus LIVES TO MAKE INTERCESSION FOR US. In other words, intercession is going on right now.

Lastly, you are continuing to lie and claim that you are only attacking Seventh Day Adventists, when the truth is you are attacking Christianity as a whole. You know this. You have done so in the past. All Arminianist churches, Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, etc, are your enemy. Why do you persist in the charade that you are only talking about Adventists? Are you afraid of being exposed as the fraud that you are? Everyone that frequents the religion subforum has seen you exposed as a fraud and a non Christian. You're just exposing yourself further here.

 

[jmdrake]

Good grief! I haven't been following this thread. Nothing goes sideways as fast as a thread with Christianity in it.

Nothing goes sideways as fast as a thread Sola_Fide jumps into with his anti-Christian agenda. And back to the original point. I'm glad the Mormon stood up for Jesus. I suspect he will make it into heaven faster than many "Christians" who attack Mormons. I don't agree with the Mormon faith, but I applaud this particular Mormon's faith. (As in faith that God will vindicate him for standing up for right).

 

[jmdrake]

Believe me, I understand why you think all of these squabbles about doctrine are meaningless. It's because you don't love the Lord Jesus Christ, and so naturally you don't care about defending the gospel against false gospels like the apostles did.

You don't understand the gospel, and if you think I'm being "narrow" in my definition, then you haven't read the books of Romans and Galatians to understand how severely narrow Paul was. The issue of the atonement is the central doctrine of Christianity. If you get the atonement wrong, like all of these cults do, you get everything wrong and you lose the gospel.

Ah. So you're starting to let the truth about your own hollow self leak out. You no more think acptulsa is a Christian than you do I. That proves, as I've been saying, that this has nothing to do with the investigative judgment or Michael the Archangel (I see you've dropped that now that I busted you on John Calvin and Jonathan Edwards) or any other SDA belief. You believe that everyone that doesn't accept your version of the Gospel, which is that God is an evil tyrant that creates babies solely so that He can barbeque them for eternity, isn't a Christian. Sorry, but I do not and will not accept your grotesque mischarecterization of my loving heavenly Father just to appease you.

 

[Ender]

It's Adventist, not Advantist...so unlike my misspelling of figurehead (I don't have spell check turned on on my phone), your misspelling betrays a lack of understanding of the issues.

Believe me, I understand why you think all of these squabbles about doctrine are meaningless. It's because you don't love the Lord Jesus Christ, and so naturally you don't care about defending the gospel against false gospels like the apostles did.

You don't understand the gospel, and if you think I'm being "narrow" in my definition, then you haven't read the books of Romans and Galatians to understand how severely narrow Paul was. The issue of the atonement is the central doctrine of Christianity. If you get the atonement wrong, like all of these cults do, you get everything wrong and you lose the gospel.

◄ John 8:15 ►

"Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man."

If Jesus judges no man, then who are we to judge anyone.

 

[jmdrake]

What issue? The issue of Advent? The fact that they consider it a weekly event while most protestants consider it annual is more important than the fact that you're using some figurehead to turn Mr. Drake from one religion to another? I don't agree.

For the record, the "Advent" in "Adventism" refers to the belief in the literal second coming of Jesus Christ. In contrast, Sola_Fide believes that the prophecies Jesus gave in Matthew 24 refer only to the destruction of Jerusalem (SDAs believe they were dual prophecies), and that the coming of the kingdom of God prophesied in Daniel and other places refers to the growing influence of Christendom throughout the entire world. Now so many Protestant churches are "Adventist" in some form or fashion that the word no longer carries the distinction it once did. That said, Adventists don't go for the pre-tribulation "Left behind" rapture belief that seems to be growing in popularity.

 

[acptulsa]

For the record...

Interesting enough, and only partly review. But it doesn't change the fact that his remarks considering Ms. White and his belief that she's a figurhead [sic] is much more germane to his insistence that anyone who states SDA dogma without lying about it must be portrayed as belonging to the church, as opposed to any alleged hatred I supposedly feel toward the Son of God.

So, if you're not a lawyer for Jesus you don't love Jesus. Well, then. And here I thought Jesus didn't particularly care for Pharisees...

 

[Lucille]

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/03/2...ainst-student-who-complained/?singlepage=true

Just in time for Holy Week, this “Stomp Jesus” story has developed some intriguing twists and turns.
[...]
Today Fox News reports:

University Files Charges Against Student who Refused to Stomp on Jesus

A Florida Atlantic University student who filed a complaint against his professor after he was ordered to stomp on the name of Jesus has been brought up on academic charges by the school and may no longer attend class, according to documents obtained by Fox News.

The report continues:

Hiram Sasser, director of litigation at the Liberty Institute, told Fox News the university’s behavior is “outlandish” and called their press release “inaccurate.”

“We believe the university punished him in retaliation for him exposing the class assignment to the public,” Sasser said. “Sadly, it is a testimony to the indoctrination that some of the public schools and universities are engaging in – to demonize anything that was valuable in the culture.”

h/t http://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/03/persecution-in-america.html

It's fascinating, is it not, how those who deny Jesus Christ, from Roman emperors to petty academic professors, are observably obsessed with forcing others to symbolically reject the name of Man's Lord and Savior:

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Wait a minute. You're saying that these three religions which all key on this figure Abraham have no relationship with each other because you don't believe this key figure was a historical figure? So, are we arguing that the fact that there's a Abraham that plays prominently in each religion, and the fact that he has sons named Isaac and Ishmael in each religion, is merely a coincidence?

Because that, buddy, is one hell of a coincidence for three unrelated religions.

And if Abraham, father of Isaac and Ishmael, is Abraham, father of Isaac and Ishmael, is Abraham, father of Isaac and Ishmael, then God is Yahweh is Allah, and the details of his construction is merely a subject of disagreement among distant cousins. Right? Because any other argument is just stupid.

Let's not go throwing our brains out with our bathwater around here. There's enough religious warfare around without the would-be peacemakers losing our minds too.

Great post. I couldn't have said it better. If they are all related, then what's the point in arguing the nature of belief each religion has? It's not like you can assume that each religion even has a uniform belief. What's more, you are starting with the assumption that Abraham is not a historical figure, a faulty premise which you then use to lure people into a debate that would otherwise be completely useless if it turns out you were wrong about your assumption that Abraham never existed. Surely three unrelated religions didn't just imagine up the same exact person as their ancestor...

 

[PaulConventionWV]

After-school detention maybe?

Had to sit alone during lunch?

 

[PaulConventionWV]

I can maybe understand what the teacher was going for in this "activity" , being that symbols or words hold no power unless you give it to them. But he seriously needs his head examined if he thought a predominately christian class that he would not cause a huge problem by using the word jesus as an example. He could have very easily used a slew of other things.

The idea that nothing has meaning unless you give it meaning is not necessarily true when we get to the philosophical and metaphysical origins of reason, which is used to figure out what has meaning. Because, if nothing has meaning and we are the origin of meaning, then life really does not have meaning. So asking someone to admit that life has no meaning is going to evoke a lot of anger and resentment, for lack of a better term. It's basically telling someone that they should accept the fact that there is no god and the meaning they impose on God is a figment of their imagination. That's not only offensive, that's an attack on the Christian religion in its most blatant form. If that was really the lesson, then this professor does not know enough to teach it because they obviously don't understand why people impose meaning on things in the first place. Sometimes it's because they believe things actually DO have meaning. This isn't the same thing as stepping on the name of someone who doesn't like you as if to say, "their opinion has no meaning." This is akin to stepping on the name of a figure whom you greatly respect to signify the idea that they really have no meaning and any meanning you give them is simply a product of your mind. So if anyone thinks this lesson had an iota of reason or intelligence in it, they need to consider the fact that imposing meaning on something is not always arbitrary and telling someone to deny the concrete nature of the meaning they impose is like telling them their life and everything they believe is based on a fiction. It's the most heinous of noxious and absurd beliefs that it's okay to tell someone their beliefs are arbitrary because it precludes any real meaning except that which you impose, which you really have no way of knowing. It is arrogant, pretentious, and presumptuous.

 

[jmdrake]

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/03/2...ainst-student-who-complained/?singlepage=true


h/t http://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/03/persecution-in-america.html

Florida Atlantic University is a publicly funded institution. (Just looked it up). So will mainstream Florida Christians stand with this Mormon student and demand the university either fully reinstate him or face a total cutoff of funds? That would be epic! I won't be holding my breath though.

 

[green73]

UPDATE:
Professor In 'Jesus Stomping' Placed On Administrative Leave
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/03/2...ping-incident-placed-on-administrative-leave/