I’ll never understand how parents can stay in the sanctuary when their child is being so disruptive. There’s a reason why most churches have a Mother’s Room. And if there’s no such room, they should consider taking their child outside of the sanctuary to tend to their needs where they won’t disrupt the service so much.
The Seventh-day Adventist Church and the 1982 BEM document: The synopsis of the purposes of the document are these: 1. Baptism: To encourage all churches to make no issue of the mode of or the age at baptism. If adult consent and decision baptism is practiced by immersion, that is acceptable, as equally is infant sprinkling. (No authentic Seventh-day Adventist could accept such a proposition. In past ages myriads of God’s faithful people died because they believed in adult believers’ baptism by complete immersion, following in the footsteps of their Saviour, and because they held infant baptism to be wholly unscriptural. How could Seventh-day Adventists ever agree to the equality of one form of baptism, which is predicated upon the words and example of Jesus, and the other one, which has no foundation within the Word of God?) 2. Eucharist: To encourage all to accept equally the various concepts, whether they be trans-substantiation, con-substantiation, or the fact that the bread and wine are symbols of the broken body and spilled blood of Jesus Christ. (The term Eucharist is certainly not a Protestant term, yet at least in one church in Auckland, New Zealand, and one church in Sydney, Australia, the communion has been referred to in their church bulletin as the Eucharist. This Catholicizing of the Adventist Church is not by accident. It is a deliberate effort to bring us under the banner of the Papacy controlled by Satan. (When we recognize the absolutely blasphemous claims of the Roman Catholic Church, which claims that the priest is the creator of his Creator, that in the wafer he creates Christ in reality; when one considers the claims that the priest can move Christ here and there, backward and forward, once again no earnest Seventh-day Adventist could ever accept such an abominable compromise. Also myriads of God’s people in the past lost their lives because they refused to accept such blasphemous claims of the Papacy.) 3. Ministry: To encourage all churches to work for the unchurched, but never to proselytize from other churches. (The acceptance of this agreement would lead to a total capitulation from the final message which we are commissioned by our God to give to the world-the loud cry of Revelation 18:4, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” They are to be called out because of God’s great love for them. They must be called out so that they will not continue in the sins of Babylon, and so that they will be protected from the plagues that will come after the close of probation. Yet today we are hearing voices in the Adventist Church, ministers calling for the same ministry as these ecumenical forces in our world. “Let us work for the unchurched.”) Note: Dr. Raoul Dederen, professor at the Seminary at Andrews University, was the Seventh-day Adventist representative at this meeting. Three years later… In 1985, the new SDA church Hymnal was published. In it is Hymn No. 402 (By Christ Redeemed): There is a major Catholic error in this hymn as verse two upholds the blasphemous doctrine of transubstantiation in the eucharist: “His broken body in our stead Is here, in this memorial bread.” Here two terms are set side by side as if they were the same-the Lord’s Supper, and the Eucharist. One is true, the other false. The Eucharist is a blasphemy against God, and is as much different from the Lord’s Supper, as black is different from white. But the authors of this book alerted the reader that every time the term “the Lord’s Supper” is used, it could also mean the Eucharist. And probably does. It’s an ecumenical ploy. Two terms are laid side by side, as if they are equal. And when that is allowed, the error always will win out. May 2, 1991: No wonder in this issue of the Adventist Review, Roy Adams could declare: “And we could go on if space permitted - to mention the WCC’s… accentuation of the Holy Spirit and the Eucharist. All of these emphases fit into the ambit of the three angels’ messages.” (The Third Angel’s Message warns that if anyone worships the beast, he will receive the wrath of God poured out without mixture in the seven last plagues. What is the center piece of Catholic worship?-it is the Eucharist. The Eucharist doctrine declares that Christ’s actual body and blood are in the round wafer and fermented wine. Roy Adams must have been drunk on Babylonian wine to make the statement he did.) {spiritofprophecy.ca}
This man should receive our prayers, not our criticism. He speaks according to God's Holy Spirit.
I agree with you 💯
Thank you Dr Vine for posting this version of this important lecture... Regards Pierre Louw - South Africa,
I’ll never understand how parents can stay in the sanctuary when their child is being so disruptive. There’s a reason why most churches have a Mother’s Room. And if there’s no such room, they should consider taking their child outside of the sanctuary to tend to their needs where they won’t disrupt the service so much.
The Seventh-day Adventist Church and the 1982 BEM document:
The synopsis of the purposes of the document are these:
1. Baptism: To encourage all churches to make no issue of the mode of or the age at baptism. If adult consent and decision baptism is practiced by immersion, that is acceptable, as equally is infant sprinkling.
(No authentic Seventh-day Adventist could accept such a proposition. In past ages myriads of God’s faithful people died because they believed in adult believers’ baptism by complete immersion, following in the footsteps of their Saviour, and because they held infant baptism to be wholly unscriptural. How could Seventh-day Adventists ever agree to the equality of one form of baptism, which is predicated upon the words and example of Jesus, and the other one, which has no foundation within the Word of God?)
2. Eucharist: To encourage all to accept equally the various concepts, whether they be trans-substantiation, con-substantiation, or the fact that the bread and wine are symbols of the broken body and spilled blood of Jesus Christ.
(The term Eucharist is certainly not a Protestant term, yet at least in one church in Auckland, New Zealand, and one church in Sydney, Australia, the communion has been referred to in their church bulletin as the Eucharist. This Catholicizing of the Adventist Church is not by accident. It is a deliberate effort to bring us under the banner of the Papacy controlled by Satan.
(When we recognize the absolutely blasphemous claims of the Roman Catholic Church, which claims that the priest is the creator of his Creator, that in the wafer he creates Christ in reality; when one considers the claims that the priest can move Christ here and there, backward and forward, once again no earnest Seventh-day Adventist could ever accept such an abominable compromise. Also myriads of God’s people in the past lost their lives because they refused to accept such blasphemous claims of the Papacy.)
3. Ministry: To encourage all churches to work for the unchurched, but never to proselytize from other churches.
(The acceptance of this agreement would lead to a total capitulation from the final message which we are commissioned by our God to give to the world-the loud cry of Revelation 18:4, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” They are to be called out because of God’s great love for them. They must be called out so that they will not continue in the sins of Babylon, and so that they will be protected from the plagues that will come after the close of probation.
Yet today we are hearing voices in the Adventist Church, ministers calling for the same ministry as these ecumenical forces in our world. “Let us work for the unchurched.”)
Note: Dr. Raoul Dederen, professor at the Seminary at Andrews University, was the Seventh-day Adventist representative at this meeting.
Three years later…
In 1985, the new SDA church Hymnal was published. In it is Hymn No. 402 (By Christ Redeemed): There is a major Catholic error in this hymn as verse two upholds the blasphemous doctrine of transubstantiation in the eucharist: “His broken body in our stead Is here, in this memorial bread.”
Here two terms are set side by side as if they were the same-the Lord’s Supper, and the Eucharist. One is true, the other false. The Eucharist is a blasphemy against God, and is as much different from the Lord’s Supper, as black is different from white. But the authors of this book alerted the reader that every time the term “the Lord’s Supper” is used, it could also mean the Eucharist. And probably does. It’s an ecumenical ploy. Two terms are laid side by side, as if they are equal. And when that is allowed, the error always will win out.
May 2, 1991: No wonder in this issue of the Adventist Review, Roy Adams could declare:
“And we could go on if space permitted - to mention the WCC’s… accentuation of the Holy Spirit and the Eucharist. All of these emphases fit into the ambit of the three angels’ messages.”
(The Third Angel’s Message warns that if anyone worships the beast, he will receive the wrath of God poured out without mixture in the seven last plagues. What is the center piece of Catholic worship?-it is the Eucharist. The Eucharist doctrine declares that Christ’s actual body and blood are in the round wafer and fermented wine. Roy Adams must have been drunk on Babylonian wine to make the statement he did.)
{spiritofprophecy.ca}
Wow, good info. Thanks