Former Bible Teacher

I taught Bible classes to high school (and some younger) students attending Seventh-day Adventist academies for almost twenty years.

I had been baptized at age twenty into this particular SDA sect of Christianity, mostly on the strength of their attention to "Sola Scriptura," i.e. teaching "The Bible, The Whole Bible, And Nothing But the Bible." That's kind of the idea of SDAism; it's their self-image, their perceived purpose as one denomination among the rest of them.

I studied history and Bible at one of their colleges, and took my BA in "religion" into my career as a certified SDA Bible teacher. I officially represented Christianity and their unique brand of it to the students sent to their school, from whom I received a steady paycheck, and my wife and I got hefty discounts on tuition which we used to send our two daughters almost all the way through their comprehensive K-12 program, and one daughter through a Bachelor's degree at my alma mater.

I recently retired myself from teaching in their school system. I had already pretty much quit attending their churches. After breaking off employment with them, I was mentally much more free to look back on what I had been doing for the last twenty-odd years.

It's a long story, but I will close this opening post by offering this insight I've gained recently, after doing some study of Buddhism, A Huxley's experiments with psychedelic medicines (his book Island is worth your time, I promise), and Terence McKenna's lectures on the Psychedelic Salon:

The Bible (which I've come to know personally and intimately pretty thoroughly, IMHO) is great as a storybook of how Judaism and Christianity were established on principles of love and altruism. For many, it remains their connection to God. But as a book of teachings and doctrines, it knows nothing of what has come into existence as "modern Christianity." It doesn't command that denominations be created. It doesn't hint that hierarchies of churchmen should have power over ... anything.

The Bible's goal seems to me to be to get people to live out the Golden Rule. An impartial examination of the history of the last two millennia demonstrates that it has largely failed to accomplish that goal. (I say "largely," because I'll admit I've come across good souls whose lives are exceptions to this conclusion, but they are too few to lift up as exemplars of "bible power.")

Why did the Bible fail to make people loving, compassionate, altruistic? I am not sure. I think it has to do with the choices made by the early generations of Christians, the ones who set this religion down the path of greed, corruption, striving for political power, and eventually the splintering of Christianity into the thousands of sects worldwide, most of whom agree with all others on fundamentals but exclude all others from participation in their mission because details are fixed upon which become the basis for each church's isolation from all others.

They all claim to be the True Church. They really do! They have become adept at hiding those claims, now that so many observers have outed them on this built-in toxicity to their dogma. But almost 100% of unique Christian denominations hammer on one deep theme: 'we found the true path to heaven, and if you want in, you need to come with us on the way we found.'

So, having come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a meaningful form of Biblical Christianity to be found in the world anymore, I'm putting it aside, perhaps permanently. I'm very interested in expanding my consciousness of other kinds of spirituality, and in forming friendships with kindred souls.

Thanks for listening.

-Jim

 

Hi Jim, I enjoyed reading your post.

I guess I have some questions for you, such as:
Why do you believe that "claiming to be the True Church" is a "built-in toxicity to their dogma"? Does it have to be so? Isn't there a "right" or "correct" way to serve God? And if there is a "right" or "correct" way to serve God does that make that way toxic?

Do you believe in the existence of Satan? If you do, isn't his purpose to lead people away from serving God? Then wouldn't it be in Satan's interest to obscure the "right" or "correct" way to serve God? Making multitudinous other incorrect paths so that people would get frustrated trying to find the correct path and so give up looking or even go so far as to believe God doesn't exist?

Just wondering about your thoughts on the matter but if you don't want to discuss it that's okay too.

 

Faith is personal, not only what the group says and feels. I will say before the Bible I stole, cheated, lied, etc. It's still a process but I haven't done anything like that in years because I know that it is wrong not only because it's written but because the religion allowed me to see my actions through the eyes of others. My inheritance was divided into thirds. One for my living expenses, one for the future (saved) and one for charity. I barely spend money so I can imagine giving at least half away.

 

That is just sad. Anyone who needs a higher power to inform him that he must be good obviously lacks empathy. It is common sense, after all, to know that one should be good for the sake of being good, not because a tyrannical sky daddy tells you that you will burn for eternity if you are bad. It is very disconcerting to imagine people claiming they would do bad things if their god was proven to not exist, because that means they are sociopaths. If the only thing preventing you from doing bad things is an imaginary friend, there is no hope for you.

 

You obviously didn't read my post entirely. I said before I did, after the first thing I realized was that through the eyes of others my actions were wrong. That I knew for years. Go bully someone else. You're not only a bigot but you're grossly misinformed. Don't latch onto me just because I disagree with you. There is no hope for you, you shameful bigot.

 

Sticks and stones. By the way, great Christ-like attitude you have been showing lately.

 

OlderWaterBrother, thanks for your reply, your interest and your questions. There were a few, so let me try to do them justice...

Why do you believe that "claiming to be the True Church" is a "built-in toxicity to their dogma"? Does it have to be so?
For two reasons. First, I am convinced their particular denomination is built upon error. In that sense, claiming something which is inherently false is in fact "True" is a dangerous form of misdirection, and when the former believer is faced with facts they are unnecessarily traumatized by the experience (potentially, anyway).
Second, I am also convinced that the Bible has been erroneously interpreted for centuries regarding what it teaches on the more general topic of "church." That particular branch of theology is called Ecclesiology (study of the church itself, the organization, etc). It's something I've not only been tasked in the past to teach many times, I've also personally studied to figure out what I believe about it.
When I compare the facts of both Old Testament and New Testament history and the words of the prophets, priests, and apostles to the current situation within all the various forms of Christianity, I see so many fundamental differences that I'm forced to conclude that if any version of "truly biblical" church organization exists out there, it does not reside within any of the organizations usually called "denominations."
I'm becoming convinced that the Bible never intended the pitfalls of the denominational concept to be allowed any influence over the dissemination of its truths.
Moreover, even if I'm wrong on that, most intellectuals and academics within SDAism recognize the constant threat to their church's message posed by its persistent and inherent tendencies to withdraw not only from the wider world which presumably needs that message, but also from other Christians or other potential allies. This is a discussion in which I participated during my time within the church, and which I've observed continuing since I left.

Isn't there a "right" or "correct" way to serve God? And if there is a "right" or "correct" way to serve God does that make that way toxic?
The second question first: no, obviously not!
But to the first question, which strikes to the heart of SDA identity, I can no longer agree with SDAs that their way is a correct way to serve God, much less THE correct way to serve God. If I am convinced that their church is founded upon lies, mistakes, and cover-ups, then this is the only honest conclusion to be reached.
More generally, I am just not convinced anymore (and boy, I sure USED TO BE convinced, I promise you) that there is a right or correct way to serve God. This is because I'm not sure that the Bible, especially as received and taught by men the last two thousand years, is an accurate presentation of the will of God for humankind. There may be other ways to experience God. I'm not sure necessarily what all those are, but I remain open to the possibilities.

Do you believe in the existence of Satan? If you do, isn't his purpose to lead people away from serving God? Then wouldn't it be in Satan's interest to obscure the "right" or "correct" way to serve God? Making multitudinous other incorrect paths so that people would get frustrated trying to find the correct path and so give up looking or even go so far as to believe God doesn't exist?
I think I do, mostly. But your follow up questions harmonize pretty well with the conclusions I outlined above, in my view. I mean, I think I know where those questions were supposed to lead (especially since I used to use very similar ones in my own teaching career), but then again, why should we necessarily assume that Satan has NOT succeeded in controlling the will and actions of sufficient numbers of free moral agents so as to actually use Christianity for his nefarious purposes? It's difficult in taking the long view of Christian history, especially as we attempt to remain objective about it, to ignore all the ways in which otherwise well-meaning Christian men, women, and churches have utterly obeyed Satan's will, even as they were utterly convinced they were serving God.

 

I wrote an essay elsewhere which offers my post-Christian critique of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, which just today I learned (through a Facebook message, no less!) that I have been officially dropped from as a member.

Please, if you're interested, read and comment:
http://jimmiles.hubpages.com/hub/What-Twenty-Years-in-the-Adventist-Church-Taught-Me

 

So where/when was the your conversion experience coupled with the power of the Holy Spirit that transforms and changes a person in the blink of an eye?

That is what I see all the time, everywhere, people disillusioned, doubtful, looking into and trying to adhere to all the "rules" in the Bible. It's futile and ludicrous to try. THAT was the purpose of the "Law", to illustrate just how incapable man is to attain to the degree desired without the intervention of God's Spirit.

Absent a real conversion and "indwelling of the Holy Spirit" it all makes little sense beyond the basic laws common to all civilizations, and the simplistic "do unto others" that most latch onto because it is warm and fuzzy.

Until a person actually has an experience like those recorded in the New Testament of the early church's dynamic transformations after the day of Pentecost, it will remain on the fringe of understanding.

That is another thing few people do, read between the lines.
Consider Peter, a big brute of a guy, kinda a loudmouthed asshole really, grabbing a sword and attacking with little thought or provokation in the garden. Yet later when questioned he showed his true colors, denying any knowledge and turning tail and running like the oafish coward that he was.
Fast forward a few days to the day of Pentecost.
After the coming/filling of the Holy Spirit we suddenly see Peter step forward boldly and without fear proclaiming the message. He continued to loudly proclaim the message of Jesus without fear until he was martyred. Certainly not the same man who turned tail and ran when simply asked "You knew the man, didn't you?"
That transformation was immediate and instantaneous.
That is what is absent from many Christians lives/experience.

Jesus spoke very specifically about a "supernatural" event/occurrence in the life of a believer that has somehow gotten completely overlooked, discredited, and often discouraged, at times out right persecuted. (a number of the people killed in the Inquisitions were Christians who I guess we would call Pentecostals today, who exhibited signs and wonders of the gifts of the Spirit.)

Why?
What took place that this "baptism in the Spirit" no longer occurs?
Nothing, it still happens and it still is THE being born again.
It is the power and love that is life transforming that is the meat of it and what has been absent in many churches/denominations for centuries.
Therefore man tries to "do good" and teach/understand the Bible, but honestly without an actual real relationship with God via his Spirit as outlined in the NT, it is a futile attempt doomed to failure.
It's putting the cart before the horse.

That is what you have experienced and see today.
It sadly for many has become a religion based solely on the scripture yet devoid of personal experience and power.

 

Thanks, NoxiousGas, for the reply. And for offering some good insights, too.

To answer your question, I would say that I never experienced what you describe as a conversion experience, born again, and filling with the Holy Spirit. I used to say that I did, but looking back, I honestly was doing exactly as you described-- simply adopting what most civilizations have used as their basic laws plus "do unto others," which would look like a transformation to observers of my life changes, but which really took no more miraculous power other than my own free will. I chose to stop living by my own vague, inarticulate values and morals, and start living by that of the group which I claimed as my own (and which eagerly granted me membership).

And I agree that much of what is called "Christian Living" today isn't much better. In the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the raw power of the Spirit as described in the Book of Acts and experienced by the Apostles is frowned upon whenever it brings about any kind of emotional expression. Most congregations frown on normal contemporary music (some refuse even to clap); few of the biblical spiritual gifts besides are encouraged, except the one they claim Ellen G. White had; most of the churches I attended would be considered dead by most current Christian standards. The last church I attended was the Orlando First Baptist Church. There was more of what you described as born again "spirit" in that one Sunday service than in ALL THE SABBATH SERVICES OF MY 25 YEARS AS AN SDA COMBINED.


Your indictment of Christianity is interesting. Your conclusion is that Pentecostals and the persecuted saints during the Inquisition are among the few examples who rightly represent the religion. I disagree. I can't help but look back on the history of Christianity and see a religion as fully man-made as the scriptures they all fight over for interpretation rights. If anything, it's a failed religion. It's good works fail to outweigh its evil deeds. There are other religions like it. But it seems to be the predominant one where I'm from, and not surprisingly therefore was the one which most successfully bid for my attention.


What I mean by calling myself "post-Christian" includes:

• I am not an active member of any church.
• I am not a follower of or a believer in any non-denominational group or individual.
• I have not become an atheist or agnostic.
• I know so many religious categories and labels, but find none which fit my perception of myself.
• I am reluctant to be confined to a single viewpoint on spiritual matters, while acknowledging that I did do that up until fairly recently.
• To communicate that last point while avoiding any more specific labels, I identify myself by the break I have recently made from all organized religion, specifically Christianity, but not limited to it.
• I am not claiming any superior knowledge or understanding of spiritual things. I did once do that, as do most people who accept the role of Christian Teacher (perhaps not as a spoken claim, but certainly with an implied approval of the label others applied to me).
• Contrary to the above point, I now confess to understand less and less a daily increasing number of things about God, gods, good & evil, origins and destiny. Things which I used to be very certain that I understood.

 

I think you have misunderstood my reference to the Pentecostals. My point is that throughout history there has always been a thread of Christianity that believes/manifests the Spirit with signs and crap like in the NT, and they have often been the target of persecution, as you have just confirmed in regards to the Adventist church.
My question has always been "Why?". If these folks are showing the same manifestations that were recorded in the early church, why condemn the same manifestations, then or now?

Christianity never made sense to me or was anything other than "stories" until that evening when some power surged through my being and I began singing out praises in a language I never learned.
Then it was like EUREKA!!!!

One thing I have learned over the years via various methods; meditation, prayer, psychedelics experiences, etc. is that the Bible and Christianity are of God and contain/teach of God and mans relationship,
BUT (here is the important part)
God is not constricted nor restricted to merely the Biblical perspective.
The Bible contains God, but God is not constrained by it.

The Bible is actually rather narrow in what it purports to deal with, God's relationship with man as illustrated through metaphor, allegory and the history of the Hebrews, but not a whole lot else.

That is another important thing to bear in mind and answers a lot of lame-assed questions about what the Bible doesn't mention.

As I have said elsewhere here, if I were writing a book about auto repair, I doubt I would include chapters about growing fresh tomatoes.
Same holds true for the Bible, a lot of people discount it because it doesn't cover EVERYTHING, but that is an opinion borne out of a lack of knowledge rather than an abundance of it.

But, same as is said about LSD and sex, same holds true with genuine "born again" conversion, if you haven't experienced it, you haven't got a clue.

 

Christ discipline was never intended for popular consumption. Many are called but few choose to listen. The teaching of the kingdom of heaven is esoteric, (hidden), both heaven and god being invisible to man at large and the approach to god is an intimate journey, "when you pray do so in secret as your father knows you in secret. Those who do the will of god are those who become self realized as opposed to those paralyzed by the fearful constructions of ego or false and insecure sense of self, "they know not what they do." All are inherently children of god created by god. Satan is a metaphor for the effects of false accusation, the accusation being that man is essentially unworthy of his inheritance in creation. The accusation is a vain apprehension of what is so based on the belief that man had usurped the power of god over creation by being disobedient, a purely arrogant conception.

Those who believe that doing the will of god comes from a list of right and wrong actions or rules in a book cannot relinquish their sense of indignity inspired by their sense of righteousness. Penal code is a creation of a hardened and bitter heart, i.e. moses allowed you to divorce for hardness of heart, but there are no marriages, (contracts of fealty,) in heaven. To them only the spilling of blood satisfies for spilling of blood but since it is the hunger and thirst for rightness that satisfies and not an eye for an eye, they remain blood thirsty. These ones are the scribe and pharisee who neither enter in themselves nor let any one else enter, clinging to suspicion and failing to learn the lesson of forgiveness because they think they are the keepers of the unerring word of god, a pile of documents. The living word of god creates what is and it is his judgment that describes it. God created man in his own image and likeness and saw that is was good.

Man does not suffer a perverted and sinful nature, but a case of mistaken identity, sin, missing or misreading the sign of god. and the reason it persists even in gods supposed church is the result of a filing error, putting new wine in old wine skins and ending with the glaring contradictions talked about, like do not kill versus god sacrificed his son as payment for the sins of men versus as you forgive you are forgiven. It is institutionalized tradition that purposely trades away the apprehension of natural inheritance, holy spirit, in attempt to regulate behavior, demand sacrifices or payment through legal tender versus I desire mercy not sacrifice. These are not the acts of ungodly men but men with god endowed virtue learning so well a profoundly bad lesson

jimmiles, given your testimony as to your sincere efforts and beliefs it could be expected
that you would disavow in your sincerity the path you had taken but your conclusions about what you see now I disagree with. You are obviously disillusioned meaning you have recognized you were operating under false pretenses. You conclude with all righteousness that you were dealing in the precepts of doubting men and not the spirit of god. This little glimmer of awakening hurts your eyes and you recoil because your eyes the lamp of the body have become dark adjusted, your light, (truth,) becoming darkness, (man is inclined toward evil). However if the eye be sound the whole body will be full of light. Your disillusionment is only the beginning of the restoration of sight as your sincere seeking begins anew.

 

I'm thoroughly enjoying this thread, ppl. Please...continue.

 

very well put, as always.:2thumbsup:

 

Only god is good and evil is a contrary opinion, a dispute about what is good. What god has joined, creating man in his own image and likeness no man may put asunder. A garment of life fashioned of unlike threads, good and evil, or god and satan both exerting powerful influence over our lives, is an abomination to good, in turn your well being or sense of wholeness and a product of a split mind. A mind that has a debate over authority. A laborer of the harvest, those exercising gods will in being have the god given authority to heal the sick and feed the hungry, not to substitute for gods judgment. It is the holy spirit that teaches all things, bible school does not

You were created to create the good being endowed with male and female creative principle, not to enslave yourself and your brother to the verdicts of a guilty conscience. A guilty conscience is not the voice of god but the longing to know him and be reunited with your good. Forget the idea that you can achieve good judgment, judge not. The world you see now is a world appearing according to your judgments and that world appears chaotic and mean spirited. Forgive the world and your brother the verdicts that present this perception to you. As you judge so you are judged or so the world appears to you. Do not judge by appearances but rather use right judgment, i.e. god saw that it was good, very good. The holy spirit will teach you to see the world as god created it. We are reminded of gods judgment which is final and forever, god loves his son. Your final judgment and redemption is the last one you make.

 

How do you know you are on the right path if you have not yet been judged?

Couldn't Satan take advantage of your sincere desire to be on the right path?

Couldn't Satan use your conviction to the extent that you couldn't see God if he were shaking your hand because you thought he could be in only one place instead of beholding him in all things?

Even if one child were led astray wouldn't God spare no effort to guide him back?

What is the right way to serve God, does God have use for example of farmers, mothers, a good meal?

 

Interesting post. So what you are saying is basically you were "with" them as long as you needed a career,etc from them but now that you are "retired" you have thrown away the mask that you wore to keep your career? Very interesting. Of course you know that this makes you a hypocrite...right? And you know that turning and biting the hand that "fed" you for all those years makes you look pretty shady too...right?

 

Interesting leaps in ad hominem logic! No, as most of the others who replied saw clearly, that is NOT what I was saying. I leave it to others to make up their minds about who is shady-looking.

My personal evolution of values and beliefs has continued since my first post here. For more on this, see: http://jimmymiles.blogspot.com/

 

An interesting question considering your previous comments on judgement.

Yes.

Yes, if I understood your question correctly

Yes. Thus the parable about leaving the herd behind to go and look for the one stay lamb.

The way of Love, love of God and love of neighbor.

Yes, God does not ask us to to take up a "new career" of service to him. We can still be farmers, mothers and makers of good meals, just it so it shows Love and brings honor to God.

 

Is that an answer? In the interest of clarity and correct devotion as you desire. Having relinquished my vain ignorance, insisting I could discern that I and the world at large were unworthy exactly as I had been taught by every man around,
I could then hear and see the immutable judgment of our creator as we are created in his image and likeness and called his work good, very good. God loves his creations it is only we that complain convinced we have good judgment and can see the errors of the world. God wants to be known and becomes apparent when we lay down our vain apprehensions.

The sins of the father are passed on to his sons generation upon generation not through inheritance but through education. To miss the sign is to have not seen the right indicator. For god to be omnipotent is not to be more powerful than any other assorted power, but to be the only power. Only god is good. Can we see god? If not how can we see good if only god be good. And if we be created in god's invisible image, have we seen at all the truth that exists in each other? I can see an apple or an orange and tell the difference between them, but I cannot see the true spirit of a man except through the spirit god gave me and the spirit god gave me knows only what he created, nothing else exists.

I understand the popular position is that man was able to turn away from god will because god had given him a free will of his own. If man is free to choose, then why the penalty or charge for choosing?