Adventists for Tomorrow

Our mission is to provide a free and open medium that will assist individuals in forming accurate, balanced, and thoughtful opinions regarding issues within and without the church.

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Due to a large increase in spam, I have frozen forum registration. If you are new to the site and want to register, e-mail me personally at vandolson@gmail.com. Thank you.

#1 01-22-13 12:19 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Herb Kersten, an SDA Evangelist from Austrialia claims that he can defend and rehabilitate the SDA doctrine of the Investigative Judgment.  So we will see how he does.  More to follow.


http://hkea.org.au

See also:

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-2.htm


Daniels Gospel

The Seventh-day Adventist church is a Gospel movement whose primary purpose is to bring men and women to realise that God declares them righteous when they receive the gifted righteousness of Christ by faith. As a result, positive cataclysmic change occurs in the life in the form of obedience to the Law of God. It is significant this message is also found in the prophetic books of the Bible, to prepare Christians for the times preceding Christ’s return. One such book is Daniel.

The teaching arising from Daniel 8:14 is a gracious doctrine. If it isn’t gracious it isn’t gospel.

HKEA offers fresh Gospel insight into this teaching, exposing justification by faith as central in the book of Daniel. It is good news for all who are in Christ. All evangelical denominations are encouraged to study the links below as a magnificent expansion on John 3:16.

Herb K

http://obamaaa.wordpress.com/daniel/

Offline

#2 01-22-13 1:52 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Subject:  Tom Norris’ Comments About the IJ

To:  Tom Norris, of Adventist Reform in America

From: Herb Kersten, SDA Evangelist, Victoria, Australia

http://hkea.org.au
http://hkea.org.au/daniels-gospel/

Herb said:  Hello Tom, we've never met or exchanged views yet your response to a questioner about my work on Daniel 8:14 quite missed the mark. 

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-2.htm

Tom Norris replied:  Hello Herb, glad to meet you.  Actually, we did meet online, at JR’s ATomorrow Forum in 2008.  You came online and briefly joined our discussion about the hidden documents in the White Estate.  Here is what you said:

Herb said: I have now learned that in 1988 the EGW Estate quietly released never-before-seen EGW documents relating to 1888 and surrounding issues. (4 Volume set headed '1888 Materials' - 2000 pages). I say 'quietly' because many people I have spoken to about this did not know about these documents.

Can the EGW Estate please explain why the 100-year delay? I understand that EGW requested (in her Will) that her documents be made freely and readily available to the church and the world.

Blessings,
Herb Kersten
Evangelist
HKEA

Tom Norris replied:  Good question Herb.

Why was the White Estate hiding all these documents and what do they contain? Why can't Dr. Burt or Douglas face up to this repeated question and answer it?

The longer the White Estate runs from this and other questions the guiltier they appear. Why? Because they are guilty.  They run for a reason. To answer the questions is to incriminate themselves. So this is why they are hiding from this discussion about Adventist Reform.

http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1237985658  (July 31, 2008 - 2:54 pm:)

So we have met online before, and now we meet again.

In case you are wondering, the White Estate is still refusing to confess that they were hiding and manipulating Ellen White’s writings, -- including misrepresenting her views about the IJ.  But to their credit, they have posted the hidden Ellen White documents that I found in the White Estate.  They are now online at the White Estate website. If we can ever get past the problems with the IJ, we can talk about Ellen White if you wish.

Hidden Documents
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm

The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-1888.htm

White Estate 1888 Collection
http://egwtext.whiteestate.org/publicat … genumber=3

So as you can see, we have met before.  But welcome again to the public discussion of Adventist Reform.  At this point, thousands have been educated about SDA church history and doctrine.  Many are glad to see that a path of Gospel truth has emerged that will save the SDA’s from their Old Covenant legalism of Traditional Adventism. 

You are invited to embrace Adventist Reform.

Moreover, I am not one of those critics that think the Advent Movement is wrong and useless.  On the contrary, I think there is much truth within Adventist theology, which is why it should be corrected, updated, an reformed, so it can fulfill its’ noble mission to prepare the last church for the 2nd Coming.

So we are both supporters of the Advent Movement, and thus we should also be united on wanting to see Adventism correct its’ many errors and mistakes and go forward from an Old Covenant frame of mind to a better, New Covenant mindset. 

The basic premise of Adventism is correct; the end of the world will come, and so too the Time of Trouble.  Which means that the Adventists were not wrong to focus on eschatology and this mission must continue to move forward.  We should agree on this point.

Who Missed the Mark?

However, as I responded to questions about your SDA views, I don’t think I missed the mark at all.  In fact, I see that you avoided the specific points I made, so that you could push forward a diversion about the Hebrew word for cleansed in Dan 8:14.  This stunt is not going to work.

You need to focus on the points that were raised and refute them if you can.  Not promote a tangent, which is easily refuted.  If you can’t, then you lose the discussion; you should repent of the IJ, moving forward to embrace the genuine PAJ, which is the Laodicean Message.

So let me explain the ground rules for any discussion:

I gave you 7 specific propositions that proved the IJ wrong.  I even claimed they were “irrefutable,” daring you to try and prove otherwise.  So you must address each of these 7 points, one at a time and try to refute them. Why did you ignore these points and run from this challenge?  Were you hoping no one would see this great dodge?

Those who claim the IJ is true, do not get to set the agenda and control the debate, censoring those who do not agree with them.  While that is how the Denomination operated for many decades, the Internet has changed how information reaches the public.   There is to be no censorship of the facts or ignoring the issues. 

In other words, the denominational days of censorship, diversion, and double-talk has past.  All the issues and facts are now in the public domain for all to see.  They must be addressed, regardless how uncomfortable it makes some feel.   It is the search for truth that drives Adventist Reform, not myths, cover-up, and lazy half-truths.

So let’s try to focus on the issues shall we?

Here again are 7 irrefutable points that prove the IJ wrong.  The first one alone, is sufficient to reject the IJ, and so too any of the others.  If the IJ is to survive as true doctrine, someone must successfully refute these points.  Go to it!  This is your chance to rehabilitate the IJ for all to see.

** 7 Irrefutable points **

1. Jesus does not support the SDA interpretation of Dan 8:14; He embraces another view, which all that follow Christ must also embrace.

2.  The Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church cannot be in the OT or the book of Daniel.  If the PAJ exists at all, which it does, it must be found in the NT.  Only the NT can define Gospel doctrine for the church, not the OT.

3.  The PAJ of the last church is found in Rev 3: 14.  It is not found in the OT book of Daniel as the SDA’s claim.  Here is the true doctrine of the Pre-Advent Judgment, which applies to every church and denomination today, including the SDA’s! 

See link below:

First Angel's Message & the Pre-Advent Judgment
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ge-Pre.htm

Understanding the Pre- Advent Judgment
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1154462379

4.  Neither the OT nor the NT supports a “Celestial Judgment” to examine the believer’s sanctification.  There is no such Judgment in the Bible.  The IJ is an error, and no amount of double-talk from the SDA’s can change the theological or historical facts.

5.  No serious scholars or historians support the IJ, nor has any church or denomination ever embraced this teaching, except for the SDA’s, and most of them now repudiate this doctrine, including their best scholars, like Dr. Ford and Raymond Cottrell.  The SDA’s are being very dishonest to pretend otherwise.

6.  While Traditional, Takoma Park Adventism defines the IJ as a fundamental “pillar” of the Advent Movement, anchored in Rev 14: 7.  This was never true.  Not one Pioneer, including Ellen White or Uriah Smith made such a claim.  In fact, there is no such “pillar” in any of the Three Angels Messages, nor is this doctrine the reason why Adventists exist, as many have been indoctrinated.

The doctrine of the 2nd Coming as the Day of Judgment is the reason why the Advent Movement came into existence.  Rev 14: 7 was only interpreted as being the Judgment of the 2nd Coming.  The later developing IJ, (1857) had zero to do with the doctrinal development of any the Three Angels Messages, which pillars had already been erected by 1847.

7.  The doctrine of the IJ is associated with long list of additional false, legalistic doctrines from the SDA’s, such as tithing, OC Sabbath keeping, Jewish food laws and perfectionism, just to name a few.  It is not a stand-alone error, but one of many that must be repudiated.

The IJ repudiates the Gospel and marginalizes the 2nd Coming, which is the real Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message.   It refutes the Gospel and the Foundational pillars of Historic Adventism, which means it must be repudiated by anyone who claims to embrace the Three Angels Messages.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Herb, these 7 points will stand the test of time.  They are irrefutable.  But you are welcome to try and prove otherwise.  We can have a public discussion about the IJ; I will set up a thread over at the Adventist for Tomorrow Forum and you can try to prove your case.

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/

However, I predict you will lose in the first round, (if you ever show up) because the SDA’s are not able to face up to the real issues, which condemn them.  You have already followed this pattern by trying to discuss diversions instead of dealing with the real issues.  But it will not work.  Adventist Reform is all about straight talk about the issues.  No double talk and diversions allowed.

Here is a link that has been set up for our discussion:  I will make the first post and introduced the agenda.  You can respond by trying to make your case.

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtop … 573#p11573

SDA’s Not Honest

Let’s be clear about the present State of the Advent Movement.  It is very dysfunctional, divided, and full of much false doctrine.  The IJ is only one of a long list of doctrinal errors that must be corrected.  But yet, the leaders refuse to admit this obvious situation and repent, preferring censorship, propaganda, and double-talk to the search for truth.  Such strategy does not honestly address the issues.  Thus, you are part of the problem when you employ these same tactics when you should be part of the solution.

For the record, I am an eyewitness to the theological debates that led to Glacier View.  I was working as a private researcher in the GC Archives when I first met Dr. Ford in 1979.  He had been summoned to Takoma Park to prepare for his Glacier View trial, which focused on Dan 8:14 and the IJ. 

So I know the details, as well as the documents and have followed this debate closely over the years.  You only know what you have been told by others.  And what your employer has told you to believe.  So let’s not pretend you have any first hand knowledge about these things, much less that you comprehend the paradigm shifting nature of Dr. Ford’s work about Dan 8: 14.

I refuse to allow slander and rumors to become part of the public record, as if the many myths about Dr. Ford are true when they are not.  I know Dr. Ford and his views in detail, and I can tell you that not only is he an honest church scholar, he also understands the Gospel and church history, which few SDA’s can claim with a straight face. 

The real problem with Dr. Ford is that he understood the Gospel and his SDA contemporaries did not.  Nor do the SDA’s today, and this includes you my friend.  Anyone that embraces the IJ, or tithe, or the Old Covenant Sabbath, does not, not, not, understand the genuine Gospel of Christ.  (This corresponds to #7 on the list).

In fact, the reason I went online in the late 1990’s, was to counter the outrageous propaganda that was circulating in the Adventist Community about Dr. Ford, 1888, and Ellen White.  What passed for church theology and history at that time was very wrong on numerous levels.  Dr. Ford’s critics acted like the Pharisees that killed Christ.   They were saying the most untrue and outrageous slanders about him and his theology, proving that they had the wrong spirit and the wrong Gospel.

One of those critics was Clifford Goldstein, a great supporter of the IJ who had written a popular, anti-Ford book called 1844 Made Simple.  He was one of the first that came online confidently thinking he could easily defend the pro IJ position.  He was shocked to find out otherwise.   And so too were many others. 

Goldstein was unable to answer the questions put to him, just like you, and he even refused to discuss his book about the IJ.  He made a fool of himself for all to see as he ended up running away in humiliation, proving to everyone that his views were absurd and wrong.  You will fare no better.

Here are the links to this discussion.  I suggest that you contact Clifford Goldstein and see if he will help prepare you.  Perhaps the two of you can defend the IJ and make Dr. Ford and Tom Norris look foolish?   If so, now is your chance.

1844 Made Simple-2002
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1013659183

1844 Made Simple-  2006
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1166507859

Herb, you are not the first paid apologist to stand up and slander Dr. Ford, claiming the IJ true Gospel doctrine.  Nor will you be the last.  But I refuse to allow you to go unchallenged.  People have asked me about your views and I have responded to your public analysis of Dr. Desmond Ford’s work on Dan 8:14.  You really don’t know what you are talking about.

Your attempt to pretend Dr. Ford is in error, and that somehow you have figured out how to vindicate the IJ, is laughable.  Which is why you ignored my 7 points that render the IJ impossible and worthless seven times over. 

But why not face up to the real issues?  Why not search for Gospel truth?  Do not let the fear of being wrong stop you from finding the genuine Gospel of Christ.  Eternal life is worth far more than what the SDA’s can pay you.

Dr. Ford is the most intelligent and honest of all 20th century SDA scholars.  You are not in the same league, nor do you appear to be searching for truth.  You are a PAID APOLOGIST, just like Goldstein who also could not defend the IJ.  I do not trust such hired workers.

So you had better know what you are talking about if you think you can rehabilitate the doctrine of the IJ.  The fact that you have decided to ignore the real issues and play word games, (with a word that is only used once in the Bible), makes your efforts all the more suspect and useless.  Church doctrine is not based on rare Hebrew words, and this fact alone is enough to render the IJ false and prove you incompetent and dishonest.

While you are paid to claim that Dr. Ford’s work is wrong, (like Goldstein) I support Dr. Ford without any financial bias to cloud my judgment.  Your mercenary and trite views are nothing but dishonest double-talk easily refuted.  The facts are what they are, and so too those who fight against the Gospel.

Although you claimed you were honestly reviewing Dr. Ford’s work, that was not true.  You don’t even understand his work, much less the Gospel.  So let’s tell the truth shall we?  I know Dr. Ford and understand his Gospel views.  I interviewed him in detail, and you have misrepresented him on a number of points and thus it is you who has “missed the mark.” 

I suggest that you carefully re-read my All Experts post, as well as my interview with Dr. Ford and deal with the real issues, if you dare.

See:

The IJ & Herb Kersten
http://en.allexperts.com/q/SeventhDayAd … ment-2.htm

Reflections On Adventism; an interview with DR. DESMOND FORD
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … /intro.cfm

Herb Kersten said:  It also carried what I thought was an unkind spirit. 

Tom said:  Those that understand the Gospel have a Gospel Spirit.  They understand how to treat wolves, Judaizers, and false prophets. 

Neither Jesus nor Paul spoke kindly to those who stubbornly fought against Gospel Truth.  Jesus blasted the Pharisees and Paul did the same to those of the Circumcision Party.  I embrace the “Spirit of Christ” by calling out those in the church who are enemies of the Gospel, wolves in sheep’s clothing.  So be warned, I am not nice to wolves.

Let me be clear; anyone today that embraces the IJ, tithe, and Old Covenant Sabbath keeping are following in the same wicked footsteps as the 1st century Pharisees and the Circumcision Party.  They must be strongly condemned by those that follow the genuine Gospel.

Matt. 23:13  “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people; for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.

Matt. 23:14 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense you make long prayers; therefore you will receive greater condemnation.

Matt. 23:15  “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.

Phil. 3:1  Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things again is no trouble to me, and it is a safeguard for you.

Phil. 3:2  Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision;

Phil. 3:3 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, 

Herb said:  I don't wish to slice and dice every single aspect of the IJ with you but it am keen for you to focus on the marvellous gospel meaning of 'nisdaq' in Daniel 8:14.  The evidence is quite overwhelming that it means 'justified' in the Pauline sense.

Tom said:  First off, why don’t you wish to get deep into the topic of the IJ that you think is so wonderful?  You are the one that claims to be an IJ expert, even to the point of correcting Dr. Ford.  So don’t be shy, stand up and be one, --if you dare.  Refute the 7 points if you can, and stop promoting false diversions.  There is nothing “marvelous” about any Hebrew word in Daniel.

Second, the rare Hebrew word used in Dan 8: 14 for “cleansed” does not mean what you claim!  Here are 40 Bible Translations.  The vast majority do NOT use the word cleansed, and those that do, still do not mean what the SDA’s claim, which is why no church or denomination has ever embraced the IJ.  None of them think it is in the Bible.  And they are correct.  Here are some examples, starting with how the Jews view this passage.

Daniel 8:14
Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB)
14 And he said unto me, Unto erev-boker two thousand and three hundred; then shall the Kodesh (Sanctuary) be vindicated.

Daniel 8:14
New Century Version (NCV)
14 The angel said to me, “This will happen for twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings. Then the holy place will be repaired.”

Daniel 8:14
Revised Standard Version (RSV)
14 And he said to him,[a] “For two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary shall be restored to its rightful state.”

Daniel 8:14
Today's New International Version (TNIV)
14 He said to me, “It will take 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated.”

Daniel 8:14
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
14 And he saith unto me, Till evening -- morning two thousand and three hundred, then is the holy place declared right.

Daniel 8:14
New English Translation (NET)
14 He said to me, “To 2,300 evenings and mornings; then the sanctuary will be put right again.”

Daniel 8:14
Lexham English Bible (LEB)
14 And he said to me, “For two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings, then the sanctuary will be restored.”
-------------------------------------
Only the worst translations, like the KJV use the word “cleansed.”  But even so, none of these translators think there is a connection to the IJ.  ONLY the SDA’s have made this mistake.

Daniel 8:14
New King James Version (NKJV)
14 And he said to me, “For two thousand three hundred days;[a] then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.”

40 Bible Translations of Dan 8:14
http://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Daniel%208:14

Clear Word Blasphemy

While the SDA’s claim the rare Hebrew word for “cleansed” supports the IJ, they are being very dishonest and foolish.  See how the Clear Word Bible, which is an SDA Paraphrase, takes a view that is not supported by ANY translation of the Bible.  Those who tamper with the Bible so that they can avoid repenting will not pass any Judgment.  The SDA translation of this passage is outrageous, cultic, and deceptive. 

CWB - "He said to him, 'After two thousand three hundred prophetic days (or two thousand three hundred years), God will step in, proclaim the truth about Himself and restore the ministry of the Sanctuary in heaven to its rightful place. This is when the judgment will begin, of which the cleansing of the earthy sanctuary was a type.'" 

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/clear_word.htm

Clear Word Book Review
http://thinking-christian.blogspot.com/ … -word.html

SDA Scholars Refute Traditional View

It is one thing to be honestly wrong for lack of knowledge, but another thing to turn away from Bible truth.  The former is what happened with the development of the IJ in the 19th century.  However, we live in the 21st century, and the latter is what is now taking place.  We have far more knowledge of the Bible today, and thus there is no longer any excuse to cling to false doctrine and clear theological error.

Listen to the late Raymond Cottrell, a well-known SDA scholar; tell the truth about this one Hebrew word that the IJ crowd thinks is so wonderful.  He agrees with Dr. Ford, and all other serious scholars, and thus he correctly repudiated the IJ, like all honest, educated SDA’s must do.  The original Hebrew passage of Dan 8: 14 refutes the SDA view and makes the IJ impossible.

Dr. Cottrell speaks to this point:

“According to the KJV of Daniel 8:14 the sanctuary is "cleansed" (following the LXX instead of the Hebrew text), and the traditional view equates this presumed moral cleansing with the ritual cleansing of the earthly sanctuary on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16).

But the word the KJV translates "cleansed" in Daniel 8:14 is nisdaq, which means "made right" or "restored" but never "cleansed," whereas the word for cleansing in Leviticus 16 is taher, which always refers to ritual cleansing.”

Raymond Cottrell on Dr. Ford
http://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/librar … 2part4.cfm

The Hebrew word  'nisdaq' in Daniel 8:14 fails to support the SDA view of the IJ.  This is the real point.   This is the truth of the matter.

So why do you claim this is a “marvelous” word that supports the IJ?  The original text does not say what the SDA’s claim.  Period.  The passage is not talking about a Celestial Judgment or a heavenly sanctuary.  The SDA view is absurd and impossible for many reasons, linguistics being only one nail in the coffin of this incorrect doctrine.

See also:

Glacier View 1980: Des and the Sanctuary Review Committee
http://spectrummagazine.org/node/1643

Meaning of Nisdaq
http://www.andrews.edu/~davidson/Public … q_dan8.pdf

Herb says:  Daniel 8:14 portrays a pre-advent judgment of the righteous that sits on the platform of justification by faith #not Hanukah#. 

Tom said:  Wrong.  You are not an apostle, so you have no basis to make such a claim or statement.  Who says Dan 8:14 supports the IJ?  Not the Jews who wrote the book of Daniel and not Christ or the apostles either. 

So where is the authority for such doctrine?  Where is the scholarship that claims Daniel 8:14 is a “platform of JBF”?  Luther never said such a thing.

Your opinion about doctrine, or that of your employer, is not the basis for Gospel doctrine.  One can only make such a claim for the IJ if there is sufficient authority.  You have no such authority or basis for the IJ.  Uriah Smith is not sufficient, and neither is Ellen White.  Sorry.

So I say again; where did Jesus teach the IJ?  Where did the Apostles?  (See #1 Point) 

Unless you can show Christ teaching the IJ, there can be no such doctrine.  There is no such doctrine.  Which is why the SDA church has lost so many members and why they cannot grow in educated countries.  Their best scholars stood up and told the truth about Dan 8:14.  They now admit that Hanukkah is the meaning of this passage.  But the church leaders refused to repent, and to this very day they are still trying to revise the history of Glacier View and continue to slander Dr. Ford for telling the truth; all to defend false doctrine.  Shameful!

Do not misunderstand; the SDA’s were CORRECT to determine that there must be a Pre Advent Judgment for the church.  But Dan 8:14 cannot be it for a number of reasons.  However, there is a true PAJ, and it is to be found in Rev 3: 14.  I suggest you embrace it before it is too late.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ge-Pre.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-1.htm

Herb said:  This is why your questioner referred to my work harmonising gospel with IJ. 

Tom said:  Wrong.  The questioner had already read Dr. Ford’s views and correctly determined that the IJ was false.  However, when he saw your propaganda, where you claimed to have “reconciled the Gospel with the Investigative Judgment,” he naturally wanted to know if this was true.  You even claimed that you had new insights about the original Hebrew and Greek.  So THIS is why the questioner asked for help to understand what you were saying.

Good for him to keep an open mind and to take the trouble to find the facts.  Bad for you to be promoting such false and absurd views that have no merit whatsoever.  Shame on such deceivers.  This is how wolves act, not sheep that follow the Good Shepherd.

Herb said:  Your lengthy response failed to answer the questioner's key point but launched into a diatribe against the supposed dishonesty and power-hungry mania of SDA leaders etc. 

Tom said:  My response was full of relevant information that proves the IJ false.  Of course, you ignored it, because this is how the SDA’s operate.  They only see and hear what they want, and thus they are truly blind and wretched, unable to understand Gospel truth and having no inclination to repent and learn.

Moreover, your “key point” is nothing but a false diversion.  If this is your best point, you have already lost the debate.

While I understand you are a paid SDA apologist, whose job it is to place the denomination in the best possible light, this makes you a wolf, not a disciple of Christ.  You obviously serve and follow the SDA hierarchy, and thus you are not even allowed to search for truth, much less stand up and tell the truth if you stumbled across it. 

So let’s stop playing games.  Millions have left the SDA church for good cause.  Why?  Because the vast majority has correctly understood that the Denomination is dishonest and wrong about most everything, including and especially the IJ. 

No wonder Jesus calls the SDA’s blind and wretched in the real PAJ of the last church, for so they are.

Rev. 3:15  ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot.

Rev. 3:16 ‘So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.

Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,

Herb said:  Relevant papers supporting my conclusion can be posted on this site if you approve.

Tom said:  Feel free to post your materials anywhere you want.  Adventist Reform is not about censorship, but the open search for truth. 

Like I said, I will open up a discussion thread at the AT Forum, where you can address the 7 Propositions that disprove the IJ.  There you can make whatever comments you want and post your information in a targeted manner.

Herb said:  In our dialogue, let us both demonstrate the effect of the gospel we both love.

Tom said: We follow a very different Gospel.  You are an Old Covenant SDA, while I have repented and moved forward to become a New Covenant SDA.  So this is not about being nice, but about following the NT, which includes harsh and blunt language for those who refuse to embrace the genuine Gospel of Christ.

Let’s talk further,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#3 01-23-13 2:09 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Debate or No Debate?

If there is going to be a profitable discussion about the IJ with Herb, I don’t think we are off to a good start.

It seems that Herb, the SDA apologist, is not open to hear the facts, much less reconsider that his views could be in error.  With such a closed mind, how can anyone find truth?

Matt. 6:22  “The eye is the lamp of the body; so then if your eye is clear, your whole body will be full of light.

Matt. 6:23 “But if your eye is bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!

Here is Herb’s rating of my All Experts response to him.  He thinks my post was unclear, impolite, and lacking in knowledge.  If true, he should have no trouble proving his case for all to see.

http://www.allexperts.com/expert.cgi?m= … xpID=70484

However, such a closed attitude is no surprise.  This is the way most all SDA apologists, Pastors, and church workers behave when confronted with the facts that prove them wrong.  They close their eyes and pretend not to see. 

Why? 

Because like the Pharisees of old, they are not free to seek truth, nor do they have any desire to change their cultic ways.   They are fully committed to the Old Covenant status quo that is the source of their living.  So be it.

Discussion Agenda

Regardless, here are the 7 points that comprise the agenda for our IJ discussion.  When we tried such a debate a few years ago with Clifford Goldstein, he would not address, much less answer, any of the questions put to him by Tom Norris, which is why he ran away.   

I suspect the same thing will happen here, --if Herb even has the courage to come online at all.   I doubt he will be able to address the issues, much less prove his case.  So I don’t think there will be any discussion.  Which, of course, speaks volumes about his worthless and false positions.

Here is the agenda for our discussion:


** 7 Irrefutable Points Proving the IJ False **

1. Jesus does not support the SDA interpretation of Dan 8:14; He embraces another view, which all that follow Christ must also embrace.

2.  The Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church cannot be in the OT or the book of Daniel.  If the PAJ exists at all, which it does, it must be found in the NT.  Only the NT can define Gospel doctrine for the church, not the OT.

3.  The PAJ of the last church is found in Rev 3: 14.  It is not found in the OT book of Daniel as the SDA’s claim.  Here is the true doctrine of the Pre-Advent Judgment, which applies to every church and denomination today, including the SDA’s!

4.  Neither the OT nor the NT supports a “Celestial Judgment” to examine the believer’s sanctification.  There is no such Judgment in the Bible.  The IJ is an error, and no amount of double-talk from the SDA’s can change the theological or historical facts.

5.  No serious scholars or historians support the IJ, nor has any church or denomination ever embraced this teaching, except for the SDA’s, and most of them now repudiate this doctrine, including their best scholars, like Dr. Ford and Raymond Cottrell.  The SDA’s are being very dishonest to pretend otherwise.

6.  While Traditional, Takoma Park Adventism defines the IJ as a fundamental “pillar” of the Advent Movement, anchored in Rev 14: 7.  This was never true.  Not one Pioneer, including Ellen White or Uriah Smith ever made such a claim.  In fact, there is no such “pillar” in any of the Three Angels Messages, nor is this doctrine the reason why Adventists exist, as many have been indoctrinated.

The doctrine of the 2nd Coming as the Day of Judgment is the reason why the Advent Movement came into existence.  Rev 14: 7 was only interpreted as being the Judgment of the 2nd Coming.  The later developing IJ, (1857) had zero to do with the doctrinal development of any the Three Angels Messages, which pillars had already been erected by 1847.

7.  The doctrine of the IJ is associated with long list of additional false, legalistic doctrines from the SDA’s, such as tithing, OC Sabbath keeping, Jewish food laws and perfectionism, just to name a few.  The IJ is not a stand-alone error, but one of many that must also be repudiated.

The IJ repudiates the Gospel and marginalizes the 2nd Coming, which is the real Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message.   It refutes the Gospel and the Foundational pillars of Historic Adventism, which means it must be repudiated by anyone who claims to embrace the Three Angels Messages.
---------------------------------------------------

Let’s give Herb some time to gather his thoughts and his courage. He has boldly declared to be smarter than Dr. Ford and Tom Norris combined, even to the point of claiming to defend the IJ and prove it true.  Let’s see if such hubris can stand in public debate?

So Herb, feel free to address the first proposition.  Post up the teaching of Jesus that you claim supports the SDA view of Dan 8: 14 and the IJ and educate all of us on this “wonderful” doctrine.  I will respond, and we can go back and forth on that first point until we can go no further. 

Then we can take up the next point and thus work through all 7 propositions. 

In the end, it should be self-evident who is on the right side of Gospel Truth and who is shooting blanks and embracing false doctrine.  Then all may choose what is truth and what is error.

I am waiting on Herb to try and defend the IJ.  Where is Herb?

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Offline

#4 01-28-13 10:10 am

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Waiting For Herb?

While we are waiting for Herb Kersten of the SDA Evangelistic Alliance to come Online to defend the IJ, let’s examine some of his views.  This Australian claims to be smarter than Dr. Ford, and to have found great insights in the book of Daniel, so this should be interesting.

HK wrote:  Daniels Gospel, by Herb K

The Seventh-day Adventist church is a Gospel movement whose primary purpose is to bring men and women to realise that God declares them righteous when they receive the gifted righteousness of Christ by faith.

As a result, positive cataclysmic change occurs in the life in the form of obedience to the Law of God.

It is significant this message is also found in the prophetic books of the Bible, to prepare Christians for the times preceding Christ’s return. One such book is Daniel.

The teaching arising from Daniel 8:14 is a gracious doctrine. If it isn’t gracious it isn’t gospel.

HKEA offers fresh Gospel insight into this teaching, exposing justification by faith as central in the book of Daniel. It is good news for all who are in Christ.

All evangelical denominations are encouraged to study the links below as a magnificent expansion on John 3:16.

Herb K

http://obamaaa.wordpress.com/daniel/
---------------------------------------------------------------

Tom said:  We can start the discussion right now without Herb needing to log in.  We have his views above, so we will break-down his position statement about Daniel and then respond:

HK said:  The Seventh-day Adventist church is a Gospel movement whose primary purpose is to bring men and women to realise that God declares them righteous when they receive the gifted righteousness of Christ by faith.

Tom said: This description of the SDA’s being a “Gospel Movement” is fictional and against the record of history.  The purpose of the SDA’s was to prepare the world for the 2nd Coming, which in their day was new doctrine, and so too was the 7th day Sabbath.  It was their most featured and promoted doctrine. 

The facts of history are clear; the SDA’s were an apocalyptic movement that did not fully understand the Gospel.  In fact, at no time in their history have they properly understood or officially embraced the correct relationship between the law and the Gospel.  Not in the 19th, 20th, or 21st centuries.

Moreover, when they had the chance in 1888 to understand the Gospel and embrace the Protestant doctrine of Righteousness by Faith, Uriah Smith rejected the doctrine and the leaders exiled both Ellen White and EJ Waggoner for their trouble.  This resulted in the destruction of the Battle Creek Empire 14 years later, forcing the leaders to retreat to Takoma Park where they repeated the very same mistakes.

Glacier View, in 1980, was a repeat of the 1888 rejection of the Gospel.  It was also followed by another great schism, as the SDA church slowly self-destructs for all to see a second time.

The Denomination has never understood nor embraced the Protestant doctrine about Justification by Faith, nor have they been honest about 1888 or Ellen White.  To pretend otherwise is to mock history and deny the facts. 

Herb, like all those who promote Traditional Adventism, is just throwing theological terms around, even as he is fictionalizing Adventist history for his own ends.   His statements about doctrine and church history are false, amounting to nothing more than reckless double-talk, easily refuted.  And this is the guy who claims to be smarter than Dr. Ford?  No evidence of that as yet.

HK said:  As a result (of the Gospel), positive cataclysmic change occurs in the life in the form of obedience to the Law of God.

Tom said: Here is same old Uriah Smith doctrine that views the Gospel as power to obey the law.  This is what the SDA’s have always taught and what they still teach.  Their false view of salvation, REQUIRES law keeping.  This is what they are really all about; law, law, and more law, of which the 4th commandment is their favorite.

However, the Gospel of Christ does not teach that anyone should keep the Sabbath holy by refraining from work.  Rather, Jesus teaches the OPPOSITE by promoting work on the Sabbath.  At the same time, he grants all that follow him immunity from breaking the Law of the 4th commandment. 

The SDA’s have embraced the Sabbath of the enemies of Christ, and they are so blind they don’t know it.  They have the OC Sabbath when they should have embraced the NC version. 

Time for SDA’s to repent.

While the SDA’s keep trying to defend, obey, and promote the Law of 4th commandment, Jesus does not approve.  While they are correct about the 7th day being the only day for a NC Sabbath, they are way off when it comes to understanding this Gospel doctrine from the Lord of the Sabbath.

SDA Sabbath vs. Gospel Sabbath
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=836

(*If you place your ear to the screen, you will hear Herb’s head, exploding.)

Let all understand, this description about how the SDA Gospel promotes “positive cataclysmic change,” which “occurs in the life in the form of obedience to the Law of God” is crass legalism and false doctrine. 

Herb and the SDA’s are following in the same path as the Judaizers who infiltrated the apostolic church and caused so much trouble in Galatians.  He is promoting a false Gospel and a worthless Christ.  The SDA’s are OC minded, blind to the changes of the NC, wanting to remain under Law.

HK said:  It is significant this message is also found in the prophetic books of the Bible, to prepare Christians for the times preceding Christ’s return. One such book is Daniel. The teaching arising from Daniel 8:14 is a gracious doctrine. If it isn’t gracious it isn’t gospel.

Tom said:  This claim that Daniel features the Gospel is ludicrous and impossible.  There is no clear articulation of the Gospel in the Old Testament, nor does any OT writer have any authority over the Church.  It is the NT that must support NC theology.   From a hermeneutical point of view, our friend Herb is way of the mark.

Moreover, there are no credible scholars who take such a position any more than they support the IJ, which is the real point of Herb’s double-talk.  Traditional Adventism is a mountain of error, diversion, and myth.  It is self-destructive for the SDA’s to continue to embrace this convoluted delusion.

The 4 Gospels contain the Gospel, and so too Paul’s book of Romans in a very organized manner, but not the OT book of Daniel.  This is an absurd position. 

In fact, Paul teaches that the Gospel was hidden to those in the OC, having only been made public in the 1st century.  Such an apostolic position renders this SDA double-talk outrageous and clearly against the NT.  No one should run to Daniel to find or understand the Gospel.  All must go directly to Christ in the Gospels.  In the NT.

Col. 1:25 Of this church I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God,

Col. 1:26 that is, the mystery which has been hidden from the past ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints,

HK said:  HKEA offers fresh Gospel insight into this teaching, exposing justification by faith as central in the book of Daniel.

Tom said:  HKEA offers a CONFUSED and ABSURD Gospel that is not worth two cents.  They offer stale and dishonest ideas in a futile attempt to defend Traditional Adventism.  They are religious frauds, hired by wolves to do their bidding. 

HK said:  It is good news for all who are in Christ. All evangelical denominations are encouraged to study the links below as a magnificent expansion on John 3:16.

Tom said:  Let all understand that Herb is promoting bad news and cultic delusion.  He is leading people AWAY from the Words of Christ, which fact alone exposes him as a wolf. 

The book of Daniel is not the proper source to learn the Gospel and this might explain his problem.  Perhaps Herb has never really read the Words of Jesus?

Few SDA’s have any idea what Jesus really teaches in the Gospels.  They have been brainwashed into thinking Christ paid tithe and promoted the 4th commandment as well as the IJ.  But if they ever took the time to actually study the NT without blinders, they would see their folly.

Let all understand: Those who want to hear the genuine Gospel must go to the Gospels and learn directly from Christ what is truth.  No one should follow false and confused prophets that lead AWAY from Christ, nor should anyone believe those who have an agenda to please their employers.   

All are encouraged to go directly to the Word and find the genuine Gospel.  That is, the NT.  NOT THE BOOK OF DANIEL.  Accept no substitute for the Gospel teaching of Christ.  There is only one Christ, one Gospel, and one New Covenant Sabbath. 

Now, where is Herb?  He knows we are waiting for him because I sent him a note on his web site.  Here it is:

From Tom Norris on January 28, 2013 at 2:39 am

HK said:  "Your comment is awaiting moderation."

Tom wrote: "Herb K has been invited to have discussion with Tom Norris of Adventist Reform about the Gospel and the IJ. A thread has been set up for their discussion."

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb
Kersten
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=1173

See also:

Tom Norris’ IJ Comments
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2013/1/tom-norris-ij-comments.htm

"So far, Herb has not come online. We are all waiting:"

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

http://obamaaa.wordpress.com/daniel/
---------------------------------------------------------

Tom said:  So where is Herb the SDA Evangelist who thinks he is smarter than Dr. Ford?  Where did he go?  I know Dr. Ford and what he teaches about the Gospel, and I also know what the NT teaches.  What Herb and the SDA’s teach is utter nonsense and false doctrine.  It cannot be defended.  No one should believe anything they say or teach, especially if he cannot come online and defend his views.

Tom Norris, for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#5 01-30-13 11:09 am

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Where is Herb, the SDA Evangelist who thinks he can defend the IJ? 

He has not responded to my e-mails, nor will his website process my comments, which are still "awaiting moderation" and approval to be posted.

2 | tom norris
January 29, 2013 at 6:40 am

"Your comment is awaiting moderation."

http://obamaaa.wordpress.com/daniel/

Tom asked:  How long does it take to get comments “approved”?
------------------------------------------------------

At this point, the discussion has started without him, and so far he is losing badly, unable to respond to the 7 propositions that prove Traditional Adventism impossible and wrong. 

So, like Clifford Goldstein, Herb is frozen with fear and trembling, unable to even enter this discussion with Tom Norris because he knows he cannot prevail or even come close.

This is expected.  No one can defend the IJ, or tithe, or even the OC SDA Sabbath.  These doctrines are so false, wrong, and outrageous that they are easily refuted and condemned for all to see.

Let all understand the great need for Adventist Reform.  Traditional Adventism is dead, and so too the IJ.  This is Good News for those who seek the genuine Gospel of Christ.

Tom Norris, for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#6 02-01-13 12:51 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Where is Herb, the man who claims he can defend the IJ?

Why is he hiding from us?

He claims to be smarter than Dr. Ford and Tom Norris combined!  So why has he failed to show up and answer the few questions put to him about the IJ? 

Answer:  Because the IJ CANNOT be defended as credible or true doctrine.  It is neither.

Which is why no one will show up here to defend the IJ.  Not Herb Kersten the SDA Evangelist or Clifford Goldstein the apologist, or even Doug Batchlor, who runs a high profile propaganda machine called Amazing Facts.  No one can do the impossible and turn false doctrine into truth.  Such religious magic tricks will no longer work.

Let all understand, the IJ is NOT the Pre-Advent Judgment of the church.  It never was.  There is no such doctrine in the Old Testament.  But a PAJ does exist in the New Testament.  The real PAJ is not Dan 8:14, but rather, Rev 3: 14.  Once this theological fact is understood and embraced, the Advent Movement can repent and go forward.  But not before.

It is time for the Adventist Community to repent of the IJ and embrace the genuine PAJ.

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Offline

#7 02-02-13 12:32 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Here is an e-mail that I sent to Herb.  Let's see if he will respond?

Herb,  Where are you?

There are hundreds of people waiting for you at the Adventist of Tomorrow Forum.  After all your public boasting, they want to see if you can defend the IJ as you claim?  And if you really are smarter than Dr. Ford? 

Many in America view Dr. Ford in a very favorable light.  Your attempts to slander and refute him are not well received and you have been challenged as a result.   Now you need to respond, if you can.

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=1173

If you never show up, people will assume the worst, and of course they will be correct.  The IJ cannot be defended; Dr. Ford was correct all along and so too Tom Norris of Adventist Reform.

So I understand if you have decided it would be best not to try and defend Traditional Adventism on this American website where no censorship is allowed.  You would not last very long in any such debate because you are unable to answer the first question, much less all seven.

If I were in your place, I too would run away.  I would also find another job that does not make war against the Gospel.  Traditional Adventism is wrong on many levels and the sooner you admit this fact and repent, the better for all. 

Adventism needs Gospel Reform, which is the point of Adventist Reform, and you are welcome to join and start helping move Adventism forward, not backwards.

You are caught in an impossible position.  It must be very uncomfortable for you, especially because anyone can go online and watch your positions be exposed as great error.  The Internet has leveled the playing field and now anyone can find the facts which condemn the IJ, as well as a long list of other SDA errors, such as tithe and OC Sabbath keeping.  So there is no place to hide my friend. 

It is time for the SDA's to stop their dishonest double-talk and repent for their many false views, of which the IJ is the cornerstone.  The genuine Pre-Advent Judgment is calling all to repent and embrace the genuine Gospel of Christ, including his active and reformed, 7th day Sabbath.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#8 02-04-13 3:47 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Hello Tom,

I am time pressed & travelling.  I love brevity.  I am blind-copying this email to Dr Ford, as he needs to know.

Tom said:  Welcome.  We are all “pressed for time” as each day brings us closer to death.  This is why it is so important to understand the Gospel correctly.  I am sure Dr. Ford would agree.  Please give him my best regards.

Herb said:  CONTRARY TO YOUR STATEMENTS: I am not a paid employee/apologist of the SDA Church.  I work full time in the enterprise software space (SAP, Oracle etc).  I am also a volunteer gospel lay evangelist.

Tom said:  I was responding to a question on the All Experts site about you and your claims about the IJ.  The questioner said you were an “SDA Pastor” and I assumed it was so.   

If you don’t want people to get the wrong idea, I suggest that you clearly state on your website that you are NOT an SDA pastor or even a trained theologian.  Because this is what you appear to be.  I don’t think people know you are just an amateur and not a professionally trained theologian or historian.

In fact, in your Acknowledgments section, you thank over a dozen SDA “pastors” and theologians.  So let’s not pretend that you are acting “independent” of SDA church or their doctrines.  You are not.  You support them and they have approved what you teach.

Here is what I was asked:

“Tom, I have a question concerning the 1844 Investigative Judgement (IJ). You see, first i believed the IJ because of what the SOP tells us. Then i found out the gospel and the IJ contradict each other and i was totally convinced by Dr. Desmond his point of view concerning the IJ. I already made up my mind that the IJ was an erroneous teaching.”

“However, i found video presentations and a website of a pastor named Herb Kersten.”

“He tries to reconciliate the gospel with the Investigative Judgement. Since you are a truth-digger like me, would u mind visiting his website and read his articles concerning 1844 and shed your personal opinion on this matter?”

Rogier,
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Herb, you should know that this questioner is satisfied with my response and with Dr. Ford’s position; he correctly thinks the IJ is “a huge error,” and so too does the vast majority of the SDA Community.  Unless you have a mountain of evidence to disprove the experts, like Dr Ford, you are wasting everyone’s time.

Here is what he said:

“First of all i would like to express my gratitude because you are very sincere in your quest for truth. I used to be a traditional Adventist for almost 7 years but now i can step back and look at the SDA church from an extern point of view and behold the doctrinal mess the church is preaching.”

“I think it's a religious crime to preach another gospel and use that other gospel to create a money-making bureaucracy.  I thank God for people like Desmond Ford, Walter Martin, John Ankerberg. I am thoroughly convinced that many people fall into the SDA trap because traditional sound Protestantism seems almost dead.”

“In the beginning i thought you (Tom Norris) were just a Jesuit spreading disinfo and confusion, i can't believe how blind i was.”

“Right now i came to accept the IJ as a huge error, the work-based gospel as a serious error (mildly put), Daniel 8 as talking about Antiochus Epiphany and the three angels' message judgement as the judgement of this world instead of the judgement of the saints (there is no such thing)…”

Rogier,
Groningen, Netherlands
-------------------------------------

So Herb, you and the rest of the SDA’s are wasting their time trying to rehabilitate and save the IJ.  It is so easily defeated that that it will never be embraced by anyone with a working brain and a computer. 

Blame Dr. Ford if you want, but also blame it on the fact that there is no support for this error in the NT.  NONE.  So the IJ is doomed and so too any that cling to such false doctrine that Christ never taught.

Second, your website leads people in America to believe you are the Australian version of Doug Batchelor, with his Amazing Facts circus of error.  This is not good. 

Third, you have clearly gone public in support of Traditional Adventism, including the IJ, so you are indeed an “apologist” for SDA doctrines, including the promotion of Ellen White.  Why did you just deny it?  One can be an apologist without being on their payroll, and you are clearly a cheerleader for SDA doctrine.  How can you deny such an obvious point?

Herb said:  HKEA is a ministry independent of the SDA church, although a year ago it was recognized as a supportive ministry.

Tom said:  In America, it is the “independent ministries” that cause a lot of problems.  They were the greatest critics of Dr. Ford and the most legalistic and full of slander.  Your claim to be an IM places you in very bad company.  It is also no excuse to promote false doctrine and pretend you are an expert when you are only an amateur and part time volunteer.

Herb said: I do not defend the traditional IJ doctrine but have tried to blow gospel air into a pre-advent judgment the platform for which is forensic justification.

Tom said:  I do give you high marks for “blowing” lots of hot air around.

Perhaps your intentions were well meaning?  So what?  False doctrine is false doctrine.  There is no such doctrine in the Bible as the IJ.  Period.  So you can try to make it sound better all you want, it will not matter. 

Furthermore, the IJ is not only false and against the Gospel, it is also against the fundamentals of the Three Angels Messages.  You would know this fact if you paid attention to what Dr. Ford was saying about church history. 

You need to pay more attention to what Dr. Ford is saying if you want to learn Gospel truth.  You have made a big mistake to buy into the official SDA position that Dr. Ford is wrong about Dan 8: 14.  He is not.  The SDA’s are wrong, and so too any that support them.

Herb’s Website says:  The Judgment of professing believers in Christ is underway now and occurs before Jesus returns.

Tom replied.  No.  There is no such judgment taking place now.  Nor did any such judgment start in 1844.  The IJ is not the PAJ of the church.   

So we are at an impasse.  The burden of proof is on you to show Jesus and the apostles teaching this doctrine.  If you can’t do this, and you cannot, then you must repent and stop teaching doctrines that lack the proper Gospel authority.

This is why the first proposition placed on the table is about Jesus’ view of Dan 8: 14.  Unless you can find him singing the praises of your special Hebrew word, and teaching the IJ, you cannot hope to prevail.

When it comes my turn to respond, I will be able to show Jesus supporting the typical Jewish view of Dan 8:  14, which is Hanukkah.  You will not be able to show him teaching the IJ.

Herb said:  I have never vilified Dr Ford. 

Tom said:  First off, in 1980, the SDA’s leaders vilified and exiled Dr. Ford for his views about the IJ.  They called him a heretic and worse.  And ever since, the Adventist Community has been divided over whether Dr. Ford was a saint or a sinner. 

Those that understood the Gospel thanked Dr. Ford and repudiated the IJ.  Those that thought him guilty of heresy, continued to embrace the IJ and promote a false, Judaizing Gospel, which is what you have done.  There is no in between as you pretend.  To embrace the IJ in any form, is to stand with those who exiled and vilified Dr. Ford and the Gospel.  This is what you have done.  You are guilty by the bad company you keep.

So you are standing in the wrong line, even as you have set yourself up to be the judge and jury, correcting Dr. Ford, a world-class theologian, whose library you are not qualified to dust. 

Dr. Ford is a true Gospel expert, a genuine scholar and professional about the book of Daniel.  You are not so qualified.  So why are you holding yourself out as such?   While you may be a genius when it comes to software, you are not even close when it comes to theology and church history.  (Please post up your resume so we can see what, if any, qualifications you bring to this discussion?)

Moreover, you are arrogant to think you are qualified to “cross examine “ Dr. Ford, as if you were a skilled and serious theologian and his peer.  You are none of those things.  Nor have you conducted an honest “examination” of his views, which I have already pointed out in my initial response on All Experts.  You played fast and loose with the material, ignoring critical points that proved you wrong.  Sorry, but I am not impressed.

Herb said:  Prior to Glacier View I studied under Dr Ford for 2 years at Avondale College.  My relationship with him today remains friendly, respectful and polite.  We still dialogue from time to time.  I heartily endorse his teaching on the Christian gospel although we differ on some aspects of apocalyptic prophecy.

Tom said:  First off, if you believe in the IJ, you do NOT believe the same Gospel as Dr. Ford or Tom Norris.  Period.  Maybe such a myth makes you feel good, but I can assure you that your version is not even close to what is taught in the NT.  To be blunt, the Christ I follow is the not the same as the fraud you promote, so let’s not pretend we agree on the Gospel.  We do not.

Second, do not misunderstand the kindness of Dr. Ford as an endorsement of your false views.  No doubt he wishes you could understand the Gospel and be saved, but he also knows you are on the wrong path.  There is only one Gospel, and it is not what you teach, so you do the math.

Third, I can tell you were a student of Dr. Ford’s because you have adopted a number of his Gospel sayings, as if they were your own.  But you must have been a poor student, because you have misunderstood the genuine Gospel. 

Anyone that embraces the IJ, tithing and OC Sabbath keeping does not, not, not, understand the New Covenant.  This is the problem with the SDA’s, they don’t understand the Gospel or even the fundamentals of the Three Angels Messages.  But yet they pretend otherwise.  Sad.

Herb said:  As a gospel evangelist I stress salvation in Christ by faith and forensic justification as the correct stimulus for loving obedience. 

Tom said:  You preach a false, “distorted” Gospel.  Your views are wrong.  Period.  If Paul were alive today he would curse many of your SDA doctrines as he did those of Peter and James. 

Gal. 1:6  I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;

Gal. 1:7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

Gal. 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

Furthermore, the object of the Gospel is not to “stimulate obedience to the law.” The Gospel does not serve the law, nor is that the point of following Christ, who does not teach that the 4th commandment must be kept holy by refraining from work.

Like all SDA’s, you do not understand the proper relationship between the law and the Gospel.  Until this blind spot is corrected, the Gospel cannot be understood correctly, and neither can the Sabbath.  We can discuss the doctrine of the Sabbath after the IJ if you want.

SDA Sabbath Vs. Gospel Sabbath
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=836

Herb said:  Key Points by HK.  The traditional IJ doctrine is void of good news. The flawed remedy it offers is ‘salvation by character development’ which is just wrong.

Tom said:  The IJ was wrong from the very start of its invention in 1857.  Of course such legalism is wrong.  Some SDA’s understood this back in 1888, including Ellen White, but not Uriah Smith.  So the SDA’s self-destructed over the Gospel, retreating to Takoma Park where they went on to repeat their Battle Creek errors.

After Glacier View, the leaders pretended to make some improvements to the IJ, as you are trying to do, but it could not stop millions from correctly leaving the church.  The IJ is false no matter how it’s promoted.  Those who embrace it are turning their backs on the genuine Gospel of Christ. 

While some innocently embrace false doctrine, that is not the case today as Dr. Ford and others have explained this error, so there is no longer any excuse.  The IJ is false doctrine, and this fact is in the public domain for all to see.

So I stand with Dr. Ford, and with all the rest of the world, in refuting the IJ.   There is no such doctrine in the Gospel Story!  Don’t try to find a way to rehabilitate false doctrine.  There is no such thing as a PAJ in the OT, much less in Dan 8: 14.  Sorry.

If there is a PAJ, it must be in the NT.  This point is to be discussed when we deal with the 2nd proposition.  It represents new doctrine for the Advent Movement.

Herb said:  I’ve thrown a pebble into the pond that sends waves of relief across much of the flawed IJ landscape.  That pebble is the Biblical meaning of ‘nisdaq’.  Correctly understood, it goes a long way to answering the 7 points you raise.

Tom said:  Get over yourself.  It is Dr. Ford who sent waves of Gospel relief to the SDA Community by denouncing the IJ.  You are preaching a false, tired Gospel.  Ford taught the true Gospel; what you are promoting a foolish and false doctrine. 

Furthermore, your special little word hardly makes a difference.  Did Jesus point out this special word in Dan 8: 14 and teach the IJ?  Did Peter or Paul, James or John?  No, no, no, and no.  So that ends the matter. 

Your spin on this Dan 8: 14 does nothing to defend the IJ.  And it goes nowhere.  You are wasting your time on minor points easily refuted.

Moreover, this point should be discussed with proposition # 5.  It is not a very important point as you think.

Herb said:  It is true ‘nisdaq’ only occurs once, but it’s just the niphal form of  ‘tsadaq’.  There are 40 OT uses of ‘tsadaq’ – providing us the inspired dictionary for ‘nisdaq’. It is ratified by how the NT also transliterates it into ‘justified’. 

See http://www.logosapostolic.org/hebrew_wo … ustify.htm

Tom said:  Herb, you just don’t get it, do you?  Jesus often quoted from Daniel.  Why did he not quote Dan 8: 14 and point out this wonderful word and teach the IJ?  Did he forget?  Was he too busy?  Did he make an error?

The NT is the “inspired” dictionary for the Gospel.  Not the book of Daniel.  What is the matter with you to talk this way?  The book of Daniel is not part of the Gospels or the NT.  So why are you trying to pretend otherwise? 

This is your real problem.  You do not understand proper hermeneutics, which is an important science for any theologian.  Dr. Ford and Cottrell understood hermeneutics.  You do not.  Which is why you are not qualified to instruct or correct such professional scholars.  You are a rank amateur, lacking the necessary knowledge, discipline, and skill sets to understand, much less teach, biblical doctrine.

Repent of the IJ before it is too late.  Give up these cultic ideas about the Gospel being found in Daniel.  Such a true confession will not destroy the Advent Movement as you assume, but save it.  I strongly suggest that you study the Words of Christ in the Gospels to find the Gospel.  The Gospel is not to be found in the book of Daniel.

Herb said:  Most Jewish Rabbis today correctly see ‘nisdaq’ as ‘justified’ or ‘exonerated’. 

Example:

From: Chaya Sara Silberberg, Chabad.org [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, 13 December 2012 2:40 PM

Subject: Chabad.org: Ask the Rabbi {Ref. No. 2540649}

Dear Herb, the primary meaning of the word tzedek is righteousness. Thus, a tzaddik is a righteous person. As a verb, tsadak is used to mean “he was right.” So the word “nitzdak” in Daniel would have the meaning “he was [found to be] right/correct/not guilty” – or, in the translation on our site, “exonerated.”

I hope this has been helpful. Please feel free to contact me if you want to discuss this any further.

Chaya Sarah Silberberg
Chabad.org

Tom said: Ha!  Why play word games?  Why did you not ask if the Rabbi embraced the IJ?  Why did you fail to ask what the Jews teach about Dan 8: 14?

Answer:  No Rabbi embraces the IJ, and you know this fact.  All Rabbi’s agree that Dan 8: 14 is about the Hanukkah Story.  So you need to stop playing word games, which do not matter.  Diversions and double-talk are not the same as facts.  The fact is that the Jews have the correct view of Dan 8:14.  The SDA’s were not raised up to re-write the history of the world. 

Herb said:  In his unpublished commentary on Daniel, Dr Raymond Cottrell wrote “cleansed is interpretation and not translation”. He says it comes from the LXX.  I agree. 

Tom said:  Herb, why would you quote Dr. Cottrell?  He agrees 100% with Dr. Ford.  He is on the record as saying that Dan 8: 14 is all about Hanukkah.  He has repudiated the IJ. 

So you are being very dishonest with these quotes, as if Dr. Cottrell supports your views.  He does not!  Stop the double-talk.  Stop being dishonest with your sources.  Those you quote in support of the IJ, repudiate the IJ.

Herb said:  D8:14 is the only instance in the LXX where the LXX departs from its established practice in rendering ‘tsadaq’ as justified and renders D8:14 with the aberration ‘cleansed’.  (It is suspected this was done to aggrandise the Maccabean victory over Antiochus, which they saw as the fulfillment of D8:14. Can’t prove it but Dr Steven Weizman – non-SDA scholar – agrees). 

Tom said:  This is old news.  The SDA’s have been trying to defend the use of the word “cleansed” for many years, especially as one translation after another moved away from that word in order to better fit the context.  You have found nothing new or paradigm shifting.  So stop pretending.

Look at this article from the 1960’s and this book from 2003.  It’s the same old SDA nonsense about Dan 8: 14 that has been used to defend the IJ for years.  Give it up!

Daniel 8:14 and the Cleansing of the Sanctuary (1967)

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archiv … -sanctuary

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=0164695266 … gsc.page=1

The Good News of Daniel 8:14 (2003)
http://books.google.com/books/about/The … PjcjA6ei4C

by Daniel E. Augsburger

Seventh-day Adventist authors and Bible scholars have maintained a fairly consistent understanding of Daniel’s major prophecies, though significant disagreements have taken place. One well-known difficulty, and the theme of this study, has been the Church’s historic preference for the word “cleansed” in Daniel 8:14 over the word “justify“ which some modern translations use.

Is there a difference, and what does it mean to my salvation? This book explores 4 main thoughts:

1. It clarifies the word “cleansed,” and clearly shows the validity of this choice for the translation from the Hebrew;

2. It compares the judgment described in Daniel 8:14 with other scenes of judgment described in Daniel and Revlation; 3. It compares the Day of Atonement activities described in Leviticus 16 with these scenes from Daniel 8, showing them to be the same event, with the original Hebrew words accurately describing the judgment from different perspectives; 4.

It establishes why the investigative judgment is not only necessary but welcome news, describing God’ work on behalf of His people to restore them to their rights and privileges.  Paper, 94 pages.

http://www.lmn.org/catalog/product_info … ts_id/3981

In fact, this same tired defense keeps being published by the SDA’s every few years.  Over and over they try the same double-talk.  But it no longer works.  The Gospel is not to be found in any OT book, much less the pre-advent judgment of the church.  (This point is #2 on the list of 7 IJ errors.)

So it is futile to try and save the IJ through the use of Hebrew word games.  It doesn’t matter what word is used in Dan 8: 14.  No word or passage in the OT can render the IJ true doctrine.  And in fact, regardless what word is used, all agree that the context is about Hanukkah.  NONE but the SDA’s see the IJ.  None!  Why?  Because it is not there.

Herb said:  Thus ‘cleansed’ in D8:14 sits on LXX error on which the historic SDA platform for the IJ sits.  I have sought to correct this.

Tom said:  Who are you to try and correct any translation of the Bible?  Are you a biblical scholar or ancient linguistic specialist?  If not, who are you to correct the many scholars that have worked on translating the Bible?  You are not qualified, so spare us your amateur attempts to correct the world so you can save the IJ for the SDA’s.  You are wasting everyone’s time.

There is no error as you assume.  The translators were all well aware that Dan 8: 14 is about Hanukkah.  No matter what word was used, Dan 8: 14 has always been about Hanukkah and will always be about that time in Jewish history when the Temple was captured by heathens and retaken by the Jews.  There can be no debate about this historic fact, which renders any suggestion about the IJ absurd and impossible.

Herb said:  I do not have ample free time to engage with you in lengthy debate. 

Tom said:  There is no need for a lengthy debate.  This subject is not that deep or difficult.  Nor is it about the meaning of any words in the book of Daniel.  The first proposition alone is sufficient to prove the IJ false.  So, here it is.

1. Jesus does not support the SDA interpretation of Dan 8:14; He embraces another view, which all that follow Christ must also embrace.

So Herb, you must show Jesus teaching the IJ.  You must show him quoting from Dan 8:14 and explaining the IJ.  It’s a very simple task, upon which the fate of the IJ hangs. 

If you can somehow get past this question, there are 6 more and then you are home free.

Herb said:  If you see that as me fleeing the battle zone it would be quite wrong. 

Tom said:  If you refuse to address and answer the 7 Propositions, then you will be branded a coward and a quitter, just like Clifford Goldstein who refused to answer these same questions.  Then he ran away.  Let’s see if you can do any better?

Herb said:  My research on this matter has been in the public domain for years.

Tom said:  I don’t think you have any original research.  None that I have seen.  What you are saying has been said long ago by the SDA’s, over and over.  Besides, you are not a proven and degreed scholar like Dr. Ford.  You are not an expert about the things you promote.  You are just being used by the SDA’s to defend their great error of Glacier View.  Sad.

If Dr. Ford is against your IJ views, and so too Dr.Cottrell, and even the entire world, then you might want to consider the possibility that perhaps you and the SDA’s are wrong.  Has this ever occurred to you?  If not, give it some serious thought.

Herb said:  You consider my focus on ‘nisdaq’ a dishonest diversion from the main issues; I see it as the golden key that addresses most of the issues. 

Tom said:  The Gospel Story is not dependent upon any Hebrew words from the book of Daniel.  Your obsession over a singular word in the OT is a useless diversion from the teachings of Christ and the NT. 

While you claim you have found the secret to defending the IJ, it is just wishful thinking.  You are shooting blanks and promoting false doctrine.  In fact, you are leading people AWAY from Christ and his Words.  Are you sure this is what you want to be doing?

Herb said:  You have done Adventist Reform In America a service by drawing your reader’s attention to it. 

Tom said: First off, understand that the person who asked the question about you has since determined the IJ to be a worthless fraud.  But he was from Europe. 

However, I can assure you that you have said nothing that would convince any thinking person in America to support the IJ.  Most SDA’s have already rejected the IJ and want nothing to do with it, which is why the SDA church in North America is self-destructing.

So the more people that read our discussion, the worse it will be for the SDA’s, who are self-destructing because of the IJ.  This is sad and unnecessary.  You are on the wrong side of church history.

Second, your inability to address and honestly answer my 7 points will underscore the impossibility and absurdity of the IJ.  I look forward to your attempts. 

So we are not going to waste any more time about Hebrew word games in Daniel.  Rather, we need to turn our attention to what Jesus teaches.  If you can’t find him clearly teaching the IJ, then that is the end of the matter, and all that follow the genuine Christ must repent of the IJ.

Thus, it is Jesus who must settle the debate about the IJ.  Not Daniel.

Herb said:  Feel free to post this email as my official reply to your lengthy thread.

Tom said:  I think this went well.  I will post your response on both the All Expert Site as well as the Adventist of Tomorrow Forum. 

You may also send an e-mail to Ryan Van Dolson, and he will help you sign up on the Adventist of Tomorrow Forum, where you can post freely.

Adventist for Tomorrow
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/index.php

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=1173

I look forward to your attempt to address the  ** 7 Irrefutable Points Proving the IJ False.**   If you are pressed for time, just respond to the first point, and then we can take our time and work our way through them all, if you can last that long. 

Here once again is our discussion agenda, note that it includes the NEW DOCTRINE about the PAJ in #3:

** 7 Irrefutable Points Proving the IJ False **

1. Jesus does not support the SDA interpretation of Dan 8:14; He embraces another view, which all that follow Christ must also embrace.

2.  The Pre-Advent Judgment of the Church cannot be in the OT or the book of Daniel.  If the PAJ exists at all, which it does, it must be found in the NT.  Only the NT can define Gospel doctrine for the church, not the OT.

3.  The PAJ of the last church is found in Rev 3: 14.  It is not found in the OT book of Daniel as the SDA’s claim.  Here is the true doctrine of the Pre-Advent Judgment, which applies to every church and denomination today, including the SDA’s!

4.  Neither the OT nor the NT supports a “Celestial Judgment” to examine the believer’s sanctification.  There is no such Judgment in the Bible.  The IJ is an error, and no amount of double-talk from the SDA’s can change the theological or historical facts.

5.  No serious scholars or historians support the IJ, nor has any church or denomination ever embraced this teaching, except for the SDA’s, and most of them now repudiate this doctrine, including their best scholars, like Dr. Ford and Raymond Cottrell.  The SDA’s are being very dishonest to pretend otherwise.

6.  While Traditional, Takoma Park Adventism defines the IJ as a fundamental “pillar” of the Advent Movement, anchored in Rev 14: 7.  This was never true.  Not one Pioneer, including Ellen White or Uriah Smith ever made such a claim.  In fact, there is no such “pillar” in any of the Three Angels Messages, nor is this doctrine the reason why Adventists exist, as many have been indoctrinated.

The doctrine of the 2nd Coming as the Day of Judgment is the reason why the Advent Movement came into existence.  Rev 14: 7 was only interpreted as being the Judgment of the 2nd Coming.  The later developing IJ, (1857) had zero to do with the doctrinal development of any the Three Angels Messages, which pillars had already been erected by 1847.

7.  The doctrine of the IJ is associated with long list of additional false, legalistic doctrines from the SDA’s, such as tithing, OC Sabbath keeping, Jewish food laws and perfectionism, just to name a few.  The IJ is not a stand-alone error, but one of many that must also be repudiated.

The IJ repudiates the Gospel and marginalizes the 2nd Coming, which is the real Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message.   It refutes the Gospel and the Foundational pillars of Historic Adventism, which means it must be repudiated by anyone who claims to embrace the Three Angels Messages.
--------------------------------------------------------------

Herb, let’s make this a little more interesting;  Why don’t we each agree to change our minds as the evidence unfolds?  In other words, I will be willing to change my view and support the IJ, if you can show me sufficient evidence.  Dr. Ford will no doubt make the same pledge.  The question is will you?  Can we make such an agreement to follow truth, and stick to the Gospel facts?

Here is my review of where we are at so far.  You are free to respond as you see fit, and articulate your own summary.

Tom Norris’ Conclusion #1

1.  Herb K is not an SDA Pastor, scholar, or historian, only a part time, amateur who promotes SDA theology as a volunteer.  You were also a student of Dr. Ford.  But none of this shows you to be an expert or a professional theologian.  Your lack of qualifications shows that you are not anywhere close to being a peer of Dr. Ford or Raymond Cottrell, so as to correct or instruct their views.

2.  Your obsession with the Hebrew word for cleansed in Dan 8: 14 is a useless diversion.  Such a point is better discussed in #’s 4 or 5, if you ever get that far.  Jesus is the head theologian of the church and unless you can find him teaching the IJ and embracing the SDA view, you have lost the discussion.

3.  The Advent Movement is self-destructing because of the IJ.  Unless the SDA’s repent of this error and apologize to Dr. Ford, they are doomed to cultic irrelevance, unable to go forward and embrace their noble mission to prepare the last church for the 2nd Coming.

I look forward to your response,

Tom Norris, for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#9 02-07-13 9:54 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Herb K responds to Tom Norris:

Herb said:  It is perplexing why you would publicly launch into such personal and bitter invective against me without putting some questions to me first, in the interests of accuracy. Your responses contain numerous errors of fact:

•    That I am an SDA Pastor - despite the clear announcement on the HKEA website that I am a volunteer who works in the information technology industry – see http://www.hkea.org.au/index_files/hkeaboard.htm

•    That my research paper cross-examines Dr Ford - despite the manuscript title ‘Cross Examining The Investigative Judgment’.

•    That I defend the traditional IJ doctrine - despite my repeated challenge that D8:15 does not read ‘cleansed’ but ‘justified’- cutting across the traditional SDA position and breathing OT and NT gospel air into the verse.

•    That I am obsessed with one Hebrew word in Daniel not supported by the NT - despite forty OT uses of the root word ‘tsadaq’ (a verb) outside of the book of Daniel combined with additional NT support that transliterates its derivatives as the basis for forensic justification.

•    That the manuscript supports the traditional SDA IJ position.
This it does not do.  It does not support ‘cleansed’ or ‘salvation by character development’ or ‘lack of assurance’ arising from judgment or a 'two apartment heavenly sanctuary'. This is the clearest indication you have not even read the manuscript. In an ancillary document it even argues for the more accurate translation “then shall holiness be justified” instead of “then shall the sanctuary be cleansed”. 

•    That D8:14 supports Hanukah - This is simply impossible when ‘nisdaq’ means ‘justified’ (not ‘cleansed’).  Even more so when ‘qodesh’ means ‘holiness’ (not sanctuary).

•    That D8:14 supports Hanukah - This is again not possible. There is compelling evidence the LXX departs from its own established practice in rendering ‘tsadaq’ as ‘justified’ (in 40 other instances in the OT) except in D8:14 where it mysteriously reverts to ‘cleansed’ probably from a desire to see fulfilment of the verse in a Maccabean victory over AE.

•    That my discovery of ‘nisdaq’ as ‘justified’ as ratified by NT transliteration is not a new discovery at all - despite no prior evidence that makes this key point, namely that ‘nisdaq’ is the seed of forensic justification in the NT.

•    That HKEA website is "an Australian version of Doug Batchelor" -
apart from going to the same hairdresser there is no hint of such duplication or intent.

•    That I do not know the gospel - despite the HKEA ‘brand’ has been the Christian gospel (as both the NT and Dr Ford proclaim it) since HKEA’s inception and which has raised the ire of SDA conservatives.

•    That I am an amateur - this is bizarre considering you never asked me for my academic qualifications before publicly launching your invective.

Reading your mega-verbose responses is like trying to drink from a fire hose. If you had the gift of brevity and exercised the fruits of the Spirit I would be willing to engage in further conversations with you, time permitting.  The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

Offline

#10 02-09-13 1:08 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Can The IJ Be Saved?

We did not have to wait too long to hear a response from Herb, the SDA evangelist from Australia, who claims he can explain, defend, and rehabilitate the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment.

Herb claims to be smarter than Dr. Ford, and thinks Tom Norris is impolite, unclear, and lacks the necessary knowledge to understand this topic. 

http://www.allexperts.com/expert.cgi?m= … xpID=70484

If true, this should be an easy and quick debate for Herb to win.  The SDA’s will then hail him as the man who saved their most precious doctrine, upholding the outcome of Glacier View.

Issues Not Addressed

As I suspected, Herb has refused to address the 7-Point IJ Agenda, preferring instead to make wild charges and diversionary objections.  This is the typical response from those intent on defending the IJ.  Clifford Goldstein would also act this way, so this is par for the course.

In fact, Herb actually claims that I have not even asked him any questions.  Which is rather bazaar, because I have posted up 7 major questions, a number of times, asking him to address each, starting with the first.  Why would he say such a strange thing? 

Let’s see if Herb can score any points for the IJ?  Here is his response to my last post and my reply:

Complaints & Errors?

Herb said:  QUESTION: It is perplexing why you would publicly launch into such personal and bitter invective against me without putting some questions to me first, in the interests of accuracy.

Tom said:  Herb, I don’t think you are seeing things clearly.  But this is not a surprise.  Those that try to defend false doctrine are easily perplexed, as they have a hard time understanding the real issues.  They often engage in denials, tangents, and diversions.  This is what you have done from the start and you need to stop the double-talk and deal with the issues, if you can.

First off, I have placed a 7-point discussion agenda on the table, repeatedly, for you to answer.  Why do you pretend otherwise? Why have you failed to address these points?  Did you not see them?

Like I said previously, you don’t get to control the agenda and censor the questions you don’t like.  This is an old trick of the SDA’s and I am not going to put up with it.  If we are going to have an honest, worthwhile discussion, you must address the 7-points that I have posted and deal with them.  I have no problem responding to any point you raise, but yet, you refuse to address my primary case.

Stop running from the issues and pretending there are no questions on the table for you to address.  Please answer these 7 points, in order, if you can.  If not.  You lose by default.  Do you understand?

Second, I have not made any rude or “bitter” comments as you claim.  While you may not like to hear what I have to say, because it makes you look bad, that is the nature of debate.  I am not here to support false SDA doctrine, but to bluntly refute it. 

So Herb, you have to be strong enough, and professional enough, to deal with the issues without taking them personally, or acting like a spoiled child.  If you can’t do that, then you are going to have a hard time, like so many others who have tried and failed to defend the IJ. 

Moreover, if you have any specific complaints, please post up the offending remarks that you claim are “bitter invective,” and I will be happy to address them.  If they are out of line, and not conforming to Gospel protocol, I will apologize and make a retraction.  But if not, you will have to deal with some pointed words that you obviously do not like.  Sorry.

Furthermore, it is my viewpoint that you do not understand the Gospel, nor are you being honest about doctrine or church history.  I could be wrong.  But you will have to prove I am wrong, just as I must prove you wrong.  Which is already taking place for all to see.

Complaining like a child in order to get some sympathy, is not going to work.  You need to address the real issues and answer the questions put to you by Tom Norris.  Stop running from the 7-point discussion agenda.  Face up to the real issues and deal with them. 

Herb said:  Your responses contain numerous errors of fact:

Tom said:  There is no intent on my part to misstate any facts.  If this has taken place at any point, I will be the first to apologize and make whatever corrections are necessary.  But you need to be specific and coherent, so I can respond.  I reject the charge and wait for you to try and prove that I have misstated the facts.

Herb’s List of Alleged Errors Made By Tom Norris:

Herb said:   That I am an SDA Pastor - despite the clear announcement on the HKEA website that I am a volunteer who works in the information technology industry – see http://www.hkea.org.au/index_files/hkeaboard.htm

Tom Replied:  This point has been correctly addressed.  I believe you when you state that you are not an SDA Pastor.  In fact, in my conclusion #1, I stated that “Herb K is not an SDA Pastor, scholar, or historian, only a part time, amateur who promotes SDA theology as a volunteer.”  Did you miss this?  Apparently so.

I also said that your website is misleading because it makes it seem that you work for the SDA’s and that you are a professional Pastor or theologian.  I suggested that you clear up this confusion with a disclaimer.

Here is what I also said:

“I was responding to a question on the All Experts site about you and your claims about the IJ.  The questioner said you were an “SDA Pastor” and I assumed it was so.”
 
‘If you don’t want people to get the wrong idea, I suggest that you clearly state on your website that you are NOT an SDA pastor or even a trained theologian.  Because this is what you appear to be.  I don’t think people know you are just an amateur and not a professionally trained theologian or historian.”

So Herb, your complaint is groundless.  I take you at your word that you are not an SDA pastor, or even a retired pastor.

No points for you!

Mixed Metaphors About the IJ

Herb said:  That my research paper cross-examines Dr Ford - despite the manuscript title ‘Cross Examining The Investigative Judgment’.

Tom Replied:  How does one “cross examine” a doctrine, or a concept? 

Can a doctrine take the stand in court and answer questions?  No. 

So once again, you are being sloppy and imprecise with your words as well as with your thoughts.  One cannot “cross examine” the IJ, so your title is foolish, wrong, and misleading.

cross-ex·am·ine (krôsg-zmn, krs-)

v. cross-ex·am·ined, cross-ex·am·in·ing, cross-ex·am·ines
v.tr.

1. To question (a person) closely, especially with regard to answers or information given previously.

2. Law:  To question (a witness already examined by the opposing side).
v.intr.  To question a person closely.

cross-examine vb (tr)

1. (Law) Law to examine (a witness for the opposing side), as in attempting to discredit his testimony Compare examine-in-chief

2. to examine closely or relentlessly

cross-examination  n
cross-examiner  n

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cross-examine

Dr. Ford Not Wrong

Tom said:  Herb, you are an amateur, that can’t even write a title that makes sense.  Perhaps you should stick to software instead of throwing rocks at serious scholars like Dr. Ford, pretending you have some deep insight about the Gospel.  You are being very foolish for all to see.  After all, if you can’t get the most simple of points, like a title, correct, how can you be trusted to deal with complex matters?

Luke 16:10  “He who is faithful in a very little thing is faithful also in much; and he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.

Dr. Ford is a genuine Gospel Evangelist, you are not.  Which is why the very first words to defend the IJ, - the Title - are incongruous and illogical, just like the doctrine you are trying to save. 

However, I understand why you used the term “cross examination.” This is a legal term, which is fitting, because Dr. Ford was placed on trial at Glacier View about the IJ.  He was the star witness, examined by the SDA leaders and found guilty of heresy. 

Now you think you can place him on the witness stand of public opinion and show him to be wrong.  Many before you have tried this same stunt, but to no avail. 

You can forget such delusions so long as I am around.  I am not going to let you deceive the unsuspecting, and revise the history for the SDA’s who clearly rejected the Gospel at Glacier View.  Consequently, I am placing you on the witness stand, and cross-examining you, even as I allow you to do the same to me.  I have no doubt of the outcome.

In fact, many people have already seen my previous response to you on All Experts and have determined that the IJ is worse than they ever thought.  It is viewed as a “huge error” that gets worse over time, not better. 

The IJ, regardless how it is viewed, or which version, is false doctrine, and Dr. Ford is very correct to take this view.  Your feeble attempts to defend it and prove him wrong are falling flat for all to see.

So you are once again playing word games and showing us that you do not pay close enough attention to the details.  The IJ is not a person, not subject to “cross examination.”  You are really claiming that Dr. Ford is wrong, and you are attempting to prove it.  But he is not wrong.  You are! 

So I stand by my previous remarks:

“Moreover, you are arrogant to think you are qualified to ‘cross examine’ Dr. Ford, as if you were a skilled and serious theologian and his peer.  You are none of those things.  Nor have you conducted an honest “examination” of his views, which I have already pointed out in my initial response on All Experts.  You played fast and loose with the material, ignoring critical points that proved you wrong.  Sorry, but I am not impressed.”

Once again, your complaint is groundless, even as your title makes no sense. 

Herb, I see a pattern of sloppy double-talk, evasion, and diversion.  Is this how you intend to defend the IJ here in America? If so, you are wasting everyone’s time and making yourself look foolish in the process.  I hope you can get serious and make some cogent points, but so far you are blowing nothing but hot air.

No points again!

Herb said:   That I defend the traditional IJ doctrine - despite my repeated challenge that D8:15 does not read ‘cleansed’ but ‘justified’- cutting across the traditional SDA position and breathing OT and NT gospel air into the verse.

Tom said:  The basic point of the IJ is about a Celestial, pre-Advent Judgment of the church, (the saints), which supposedly commenced in 1844 and is still ongoing in heaven today.  In fact, this is what the SDA’s teach, and this is what you said you believed.  Here is a quote from your website:

Herb said: “The Judgment of professing believers in Christ is underway now and occurs before Jesus returns.”

Tom replied: “No.  There is no such judgment taking place now.  Nor did any such judgment start in 1844.  The IJ is not the PAJ of the church.   

So we are at an impasse.  The burden of proof is on you to show Jesus and the apostles teaching this doctrine.  If you can’t do this, and you cannot, then you must repent and stop teaching doctrines that lack the proper Gospel authority.

This is why the first proposition placed on the table is about Jesus’ view of Dan 8: 14.  Unless you can find him singing the praises of your special Hebrew word, and teaching the IJ, you cannot hope to prevail.

When it comes my turn to respond, I will be able to show Jesus supporting the typical Jewish view of Dan 8:  14, which is Hanukkah.  You will not be able to show him teaching the IJ.”
--------------

While I understand that you are trying to add some Gospel concepts to this great SDA error, it takes far more to than Hebrew word games to sustain the IJ.  Protestant hermeneutics does not allow the Old Testament to control NT doctrine, much less be the source of it.

In order to claim that the IJ is a true Gospel doctrine, you MUST first establish this point from the NT; from the very words of Christ in the Gospels.  Which is why I keep asking you, over and over, to show us what JESUS, the head theologian of the church, teaches about Dan 8: 14.  Why do you keep avoiding this first of 7 propositions?  Why do you fear going to the Gospels to find truth?

Answer:  Because you cannot show Jesus or the apostles teaching the IJ.  You already know this or you would have posted up this information, which is so critical to defend the IJ.

So once again, you are shooting blanks and avoiding the real issues and the 1st question I keep asking you.  This is not going well for you, and if you continue to double-talk and run from the issues, it will get worse.

No points!

Herb said:  That I am obsessed with one Hebrew word in Daniel not supported by the NT - despite forty OT uses of the root word ‘tsadaq’ (a verb) outside of the book of Daniel combined with additional NT support that transliterates its derivatives as the basis for forensic justification.

Tom said:  It is not wrong to be obsessed with Gospel truth.  But you are obsessed with error.  You have already admitted that you think “nisdaq” is “the golden key” that addresses most of the IJ issues. 

So if this were true, I can understand why you have fallen in love with this Hebrew word. 

But once again, you are wrong.  This OT Hebrew word, regardless how it is translated, is not the key to defending the IJ or understanding the Gospel.  This is a point that you need to understand. 

Pay careful attention:  The book of Daniel is not part of the NT or the Gospels.  Repeat this point over and over until it sinks into your mind.  Look at any Bible; Daniel is not in the New Testament.

No one should ever read any OT book, much less Daniel, in an effort to find or understand the Gospel.  I don’t know why such a point should even have to be made?  But the SDA’s are so confused, they don’t understand this most simple concept.  Or at least they don’t want to understand such a point, because it proves the IJ worthless and wrong.

This is why the first question put to you is about Jesus’ view of the IJ.  You must find Jesus clearly explaining and teaching the IJ for it to be considered Gospel doctrine. 

Consequently, I have asked you to address this point over and over again.  When are you going to show us what Jesus, the highest authority in the church  teaches about the IJ?  We are all waiting.

Herb, your obsession with some “golden key” from the Old Testament reminds me of how the Jews acted towards Christ.  They too embraced trivial diversions in the Old Testament in order to refute the Gospel.  But Jesus was not fooled:

John 5:38 “You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.

John 5:39 “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;

John 5:40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

Herb, why do you fear the Gospels?  Why do you run away from Christ?  if you want to understand the Gospel, including the Judgment, you must stop searching for “Golden Keys” in the Old Testament.  You must go to the NT and learn from Jesus.  At this point you and the SDA’s are acting very much like the Jews.  Sad.

No points!

Herb said:  That the manuscript supports the traditional SDA IJ position.
This it does not do.  It does not support ‘cleansed’ or ‘salvation by character development’ or ‘lack of assurance’ arising from judgment or a 'two apartment heavenly sanctuary'. This is the clearest indication you have not even read the manuscript. In an ancillary document it even argues for the more accurate translation “then shall holiness be justified” instead of “then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” 

Tom replied:  The Adventists have taught numerous positions about Dan 8: 14, starting with William Miller.  All of them are WRONG!  Your spin is the equivalent of re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.  Which is to say it does not matter.  The IJ ran into an iceberg named Dr. Ford.  Dooming this unique SDA doctrine that is headed into the depths of the sea.

Herb, you must not have read my post about the IJ where I explained the history of the Dan 8: 14.  You need to read this information and understand it.  See; “The Changing Sanctuary Doctrine” in the “Follow Up” to:

The Investigative Judgment
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-2.htm

Here is some of that information:

The Many Views of Dan 8:14

There has been 6 different doctrines of Dan 8:14 in the Advent Movement.  It was not until the 4th revision in the late 1850’s, when the doctrine became legalistic.  Before that, there was the 3rd Revision, which was called the “Cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary”  While this was wrong, it was not legalistic.  There was no character perfection associated with this early and innocent SDA view.

So when you say “traditional,” you are not referring to the 3rd view, but the change that took place after it.  But so far, every view of the IJ has been wrong, and now it is time to finally get it right.

Moreover, your views fit with the 6th revision, which took place after Glacier View:

The 6th Revision

The post Glacier View leaders were naturally anxious to stop the debilitating Glacier View schism and promote church growth.  They were weary of all the angry debate over the IJ. So they had to act.  Although the Conservatives loudly protested any change to their victory at Glacier View, it was to no avail because it was obvious that Dr. Ford's Gospel was far superior to Uriah Smith's legalistic theology, and therefore, the sixth revision to Dan 8:14 was about to take place.

Within a decade after Glacier View, the Review back tracked about the Sanctuary Doctrine and started to promote most of Dr. Ford's Gospel views, (without ever admitting this), even as they took steps to silence the legalistic Conservatives.

At the same time they also introduced a new policy called "pluralism," which allowed both sides of the IJ debate to embrace either the fifth or the more recent and Gospel friendly, sixth version. Such a compromise was designed to allow the church to move forward without having to admit that they had been wrong about Glacier View. 

Notwithstanding all this post Glacier View politicking and propaganda, the hierarchal leaders now declared that this celestial "investigation" was not about who was "good enough" to be saved--but rather--who had “saving faith in Christ.” 

In addition, instead of the saints being placed on trial, as Uriah Smith taught, the new version placed God on trial, claiming that he needed to prove that he was just and fair.

Here was a very different teaching about the PAJ that represents the sixth revision to Dan 8:14. It promoted points that were never contained in Uriah Smith's legalistic version, even as it used semantics to hide the real issues.  But regardless, this new spin about the Sanctuary was officially promoted by the Denomination as if the IJ were a Gospel friendly doctrine.  Such a plan could only work if everyone ignored the facts and forgot about Dr. Ford and Glacier View.

Today, after SIX revisions of Dan 8:14, no one should be under any illusion that the sanctuary doctrine is correct or unchangeable. As if it has not undergone numerous and repeated revisions over time. 

The fact of the matter is that Dan 8:14 is the most problematic, revised, and controversial doctrine in the SDA church. Consequently few today correctly understand its complex and checkered history that has destroyed the mission and the message of the Adventist Movement.

The failure to correctly understand the Pre-Advent Judgment has left the SDA church mired in theological chaos and endless schism that will never be resolved until the Seventh and final interpretation of Dan 8:14 takes place. 
------------------------------

So Herb, you just don’t know what you are talking about.  You don’t understand the details of Adventist history or theology.  Nor do you seem to care much about the facts.  Sad.  This is why you are not fit to challenge Dr. Ford or correct him.  You lack the knowledge, experience, discipline, and honesty. 

No Points!

Herb said:  That D8:14 supports Hanukah - This is simply impossible when ‘nisdaq’ means ‘justified’ (not ‘cleansed’).  Even more so when ‘qodesh’ means ‘holiness’ (not sanctuary).

Tom replied:  Ha!  Why is this impossible?  Because it makes the IJ impossible and wrong?  Too bad.  The facts are what they are, and so too world history.  Why did you fail to ask your Rabbi friend the meaning of Dan: 8: 14? 

Answer:  Because you don’t like the answer, which is Hanukkah.  So rather than embrace well established history, the modern SDA’s want to revise world history to fit their false views.  Absurd! 

The SDA’s have no right, nor mission, to dishonestly revise Judaism or world history.  Such attempts are cultic and outrageous.  The SDA’s need to learn from history, not try to change it to fit their false doctrines. 

No doubt you are one of those that think wine in the Bible is non-fermented grape juice, if so, this is just another example of the SDA’s trying to change world history to support their false views.  They do this about many other things, including the Sabbath.  (You could no more win a debate about wine or the Sabbath, then you can the IJ.)

The SDA Scandal of Abstinence
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=238

No Points!

Herb said:  That D8:14 supports Hanukah - This is again not possible. There is compelling evidence the LXX departs from its own established practice in rendering ‘tsadaq’ as ‘justified’ (in 40 other instances in the OT) except in D8:14 where it mysteriously reverts to ‘cleansed’ probably from a desire to see fulfillment of the verse in a Maccabean victory over AE.

Tom replied:  Regardless of the Hebrew word used, or the translation, the history of the Jews cannot be changed.  Dan 8: 14 has always been viewed by the Jews as the Hanukkah story, and so it shall ever be.  No one even wants to change such well-established history, EXCEPT the SDA’s.

No spin on any OT word is going to change and revise world history.  The Jews are united on the meaning of Dan 8: 14.  There is no debate with them or with scholars.  The only people in the world who are divided, confused, and angry about Dan 8: 14 ARE THE SDA’S.

Wow! Something is very wrong with such a situation.  The SDA’s are too easily diverted from their primary and necessary mission to prepare the last church for the Second Coming and the end of the world.  They are way off message, even as they are self-destructing because of Glacier View and the exile of Dr. Ford and his correct view of the Gospel.

Thank heaven for Dr. Ford, who stood up and pointed to Christ and to the Gospels.  He saved the Advent Movement, and gave it hope through the Gospel.  He also refused to turn his back on the 7th day Sabbath, as so many did.  Thus he was leading the church to find the active and Reformed Sabbath of Christ, which completes the long quest of Sabbath Reform for the SDA’s.

80th Birthday Tribute to Dr. Ford
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=226

SDA Sabbath Vs. Gospel Sabbath
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=836

Jesus, a Jew, also supports Hanukkah.  Did you not read Dr. Cottrell’s confession about discovering this fact in a Hallmark Card Shop? 

Listen to Dr. Cottrell, who supports Dr. Ford:

"My first great shocker about the ‘IJ, Daniel 8:14 and 1844’ was when I read a Hallmark Hanukkah Card in a store that explained the entire story about how the FIRST Hanukkah, and how it lasted for 8 days because that's how long the oil lasted that they'd found in the Temple, once they had "cleansed" the Sanctuary" and set it back up for proper worship.”

“The Jews had even carried OUT every single stone that had been used in the alter because they couldn't take a chance of having a stone in the alter of God that would have such a history of holding up a pig at one time! The Hallmark Card Company had gone to great lengths to tell this story correctly, and they did it!"

"And there I was reading the story WELL OVER 2000 years later that fit a part of the puzzle that at one time had me greatly perplexed. You don't need to go to what "the Christians" think Daniel 8:14 is talking about, but just go to the JEWS who it was written for and ask THEM what the meaning was all about and you'll see that it had nothing to do with 1844, but everything to do with 165 B.C. instead! "

Dr. Raymond Cottrell
---------------------------------------

So Herb, you have said NOTHING that changes the facts of history.  So the SDA’s are not fighting against Dr. Ford, but against the history of the Jews and every translator of the Bible.  They are making cultic fools of themselves for all to see, even going so far and to publish their own view of the Bible where they change Dan 8: 14 to reflect their great error.

Herb, understand that you have been caught up in this utter nonsense and stubborn error.  You need to step back and understand that the IJ has turned out to be a huge error.  You need to humble yourself and repent; embracing the genuine Gospel that Dr. Ford teaches-- before it is too late.

No Points!

Herb said:  That my discovery of ‘nisdaq’ as ‘justified’ as ratified by NT transliteration is not a new discovery at all - despite no prior evidence that makes this key point, namely that ‘nisdaq’ is the seed of forensic justification in the NT.

Tom said:  You have not discovered anything new or true.  Rather, you are part of the Denomination’s post Glacier View propaganda that has tried to make the IJ seem more Gospel friendly.  Your views fit nicely with the official plan to clean up this troublesome doctrine.

But it is all a big waste of time because the Gospel is not to be found in the OT.  And neither is the PAJ, which is a true concept.  The fact you think both are featured in Daniel, is laughable and doctrinally impossible.

If you want to have any chance at rehabilitating the IJ, you MUST find Christ teaching this doctrine in the Gospels.  If you fail, then this is the end of the matter and you need to repent. 

So stop with this nonsense about special Hebrew words and show us the IJ from the teachings of Christ.  Also show us the PAJ from his words.  I dare you!

No Points!

Herb said:  That HKEA website is "an Australian version of Doug Batchelor" - apart from going to the same hairdresser there is no hint of such duplication or intent.

Tom said:  I didn’t think Doug Batchelor had enough hair to have a barber?  Maybe he is just going through the motions with his barber, pretending he has hair?

Regardless, my comments should have been taken as a compliment because Amazing Facts is a large operation, and they too promote the IJ, and a whole host of other false SDA doctrines, just like you.  They are not only online, but also on TV.  No doubt you would love to run such a propaganda shop?

http://www.amazingfacts.org/

No Points!

Herb said:  That I do not know the gospel - despite the HKEA ‘brand’ has been the Christian gospel (as both the NT and Dr Ford proclaim it) since HKEA’s inception and which has raised the ire of SDA conservatives.

Tom replied:  No one that embraces the IJ can claim to correctly understand the Gospel.  And when a long list of other false doctrines are added, like tithe, and Old Covenant Sabbath keeping, - that proves the charge beyond a doubt. 

So I don’t say this lightly or with tongue in cheek.  Your view of the Gospel is so wrong and confused that I have no doubt you are following a false and worthless Christ.  Many do this, which is why the entire Laodicean Church has been called blind and wretched by Christ in the genuine PAJ.

Many that claim to embrace the Gospel have no clue how wrong they are.  Which is why Jesus teaches that “many” who claim to follow him will be denied Eternal Life.

Matt. 24:5 “For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many.

No Points!

Herb said:  That I am an amateur - this is bizarre considering you never asked me for my academic qualifications before publicly launching your invective.

Tom replied:  First off, you are the one who denies being a trained pastor, only a volunteer evangelist, who works full time on software development.  So are you changing your story, do you now claim to be an expert theologian and one schooled in ancient linguistics?

Second, I did ask you to show us your resume so we could see how you compare with Dr. Ford, who you seek to teach and correct.  Here is what I said to you previously: 

“Dr. Ford is a true Gospel expert, a genuine scholar and professional about the book of Daniel.  You are not so qualified.  So why are you holding yourself out as such?   While you may be a genius when it comes to software development, you are not even close when it comes to theology and church history.  (Please post up your resume so we can see what, if any, qualifications you bring to this discussion?)”

See: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … rris-1.htm

So you have accused me of acting in a “bizarre” manner for not asking for your qualifications, when it was one of the first questions I asked.  This underscores your inability to grasp the issues and shows that the details and facts easily elude you.

I think you need to apologize and admit you are wrong on this point.  While you are at it, post up your resume for us, as previously asked, to see how you compare to Dr. Ford.  I doubt you are qualified to challenge him on any level.

No Points!

Herb said:  Reading your mega-verbose responses is like trying to drink from a fire hose.

Tom replied:  A fire hose is designed to put out large fires with great pressure; it is not meant for drinking small amounts of water. 

So I think you may be mixing your metaphors again, but I understand your point.  You had no idea you were going to be so easily blown away and “hosed” down in this discussion. 

In fact, you are so stunned, that you have not been able to address the 7-point agenda,  much less answer the first of seven questions, and I doubt you will ever try.  You know it is impossible.

So I get it.  I have seen this happen many times, so don’t feel bad.  The IJ cannot be defended.  Those who try are easily blown away by the force of the Gospel facts.

The Gospel Story is long, complex, and powerful.  It is not easy to understand this ancient teaching, requiring those who master it to have a working knowledge of world and church history, especially Judaism, as well as understanding all phases of New Testament theology. 

Those who cannot deal with such a vast amount of data, have no business teaching the Gospel Story to anyone.  Nor can they claim to be experts, like Dr. Ford. 

I remember 1980 when many complained that Dr. Ford wrote too much and had too many facts.  Thus many used this absurd argument as an excuse to not read his material and judge him wrong.  His critics claimed his work on Dan 8: 14 was just too big and complex to understand.  So he must be wrong.

How can you have too much truth, and too many facts?

Matt. 25:29  “For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.

Warning:  Those that teach the Gospel will be held to a higher standard, so be warned.  Dr. Ford and Tom Norris stand on a mountain of Gospel facts, while you stand in the valley of the damned, confused and lost, lacking much knowledge.

James 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.

The fact that you have been overwhelmed by a few posts, unable to address the issues, or answer the questions, proves that you are an amateur, in too deep and well over your head.  You are not a real evangelist at all, because you don’t know the Gospel or understand the Judgment.

You miss even the simplest points, like my request for your resume, which you claimed I never made.  You are obviously not ready for prime time, my friend. 

Understand that there is a record being made of our discussion. Every word is online for all to see.  So I suggest that you slow down and take a deep breath, and reread what has transpired so far, because at this point you are flailing around and making little sense.  You have not scored any points and at this rate you never will.

You have given no evidence why anyone should support the IJ, nor will you ever be able to do so.  But you are welcome to keep trying.

So once again, I ask you to focus on the 7 -point agenda, and request that you address these issues, starting with #1.  Can you do that? 

If not—you should repent of the IJ and start working to Reform Adventism.  Both Dr. Ford and Tom Norris want to help the Advent Movement go forward, you too are welcome to join Adventist Reform, becoming part of the solution, not part of the problem.

No Points!

Herb said:  If you had the gift of brevity and exercised the fruits of the Spirit I would be willing to engage in further conversations with you, time permitting.

Tom replied:  First off, there is no such spiritual gift as brevity!  So once again, you have been caught making up doctrines and misusing the scriptures.

Second, you have yet to address and answer my 7 points.  So don’t pretend that you have seriously “engaged” in an honest discussion, and now you are so busy that you have to run off and save the world. 

All you have done is complain and make false charges, all the while avoiding the real issues, refusing to even address the first question put to you over and over. So who are you kidding?  There is a written record for all to see, do you understand this fact?

Furthermore, let me explain something to you;  those who believe in the Gospel are under an apostolic injunction to “always” ANSWER THE QUESTIONS of their critics.

1Pet. 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;

So if you are a Christian, you are duty bound to answer my questions about the IJ.  Please do so.

No points!

Herb said:  The fruit of the Holy Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

Tom replied:  The fruit of the Spirit is not false doctrine, double-talk, or diversion.  Nor does anyone with the Spirit refuse to answer questions about doctrine or show where Jesus supports doctrine. 

The very fact that you are trying to lead people away from the Gospels, and deep into the Old Testament proves you are a charlatan and a fraud.  Daniel is not the Good Shepherd; Christ is.  I suggest that you try and understand this point and follow the right person.

John 10:14 “I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me,

Moreover, when it comes to dealing with wolves pretending to be sheep, the Spirit says “beware.”  And beware does not mean be nice to wolves, but to expose them and chase them away.

Matt. 7:15  “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

As for brevity or timidity, they are not gifts at all.  But I do prize the gifts of Gospel knowledge, faith, and power.  Dr. Ford and Tom Norris have these gifts; you do not.  Sorry.

1Cor. 12:8-9 For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit,

2Tim. 1:7 For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and discipline.

Sorry to be the one to tell you; but you have the “spirit of error.”  Not the spirit of truth.  Which explains why you do not teach the Gospel correctly.  Maybe you want to follow Christ, but unless you repent of the IJ, you are a dead man preaching a worthless, cultic Gospel.  So I suggest that you repent before it’s too late.

1John 4:6 We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

Herb, you and I have different Christ’s and different Sprits, as well as very different views about many doctrines, including the Judgment and the Sabbath.  Those who refuse to listen to the written words of apostles, preferring to run to the Old Testament to find salvation and truth, are following the spirit of error.  This simple test condemns your twisted views.

2Cor. 11:4 For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully.

John 14:26 “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

John 15:26  “When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me,

Note that the Spirit points to the words and teaching of Christ, --NOT to Daniel.  And when Jesus did make a specific reference to Daniel, it was not Dan 8:14 but Dan. 12:11.

Matt. 24:15  “Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),

Christ defines and teaches the Gospel, of which the Judgment is a part -- NOT Daniel.  The Gospel is not to be found in any OT book, nor is Daniel to be viewed as an apostle.

So once again, I ask you to answer the 1st question put to you, over and over and over;  what does Jesus teach, in the Gospels, about the IJ?  How does Christ view Dan 8: 14? 

Unless you can answer this first question successfully, and the other 6 that follow; you are just wasting time.  Proving that you are unfit to preach the Gospel, because you don’t even know where it is, much less what it is.  Shame on you!

At this point, you have not scored a single point for the IJ.  I don’t see how you are going to avoid an embarrassing shut-out, but you are welcome to keep trying.

So I await your response, and hope that you will be able to show us how Jesus supports Dan 8: 14.  If you can’t do this, then you lose by default. Which means you should stop promoting false doctrine to the public.

However, I am sure there must be some educated and skilled SDA pastor or scholar in Australia that would face up to these 7 points.  (I can’t find any in America). 

If you can find one, or two, or ten, please invite them to view this thread and let’s see if they can make a better case for the IJ then you have done.

Tom Norris: Conclusion #2

1.  Herb has made a number of false charges and childish accusations that have been easily refuted.  He should reconsider his weak position and consider the possibility that Dr. Ford is correct and the IJ beyond rehabilitation.

2. Herb has also repeatedly failed to address or refute the 7-Points that Tom Norris has put forward.   Even though there is an apostolic command to answer the critics, it does not appear that Herb is able to do so.  Which means he should join the majority of the Adventist Community in repudiating the IJ, apologizing to Dr. Ford and the public.

3.  The Advent Movement is self-destructing because of the IJ.  Unless the SDA’s repent of this error and apologize to Dr. Ford, they are doomed to cultic irrelevance, unable to go forward to embrace their noble mission to prepare the last church for the 2nd Coming.

Herb, I look forward to your response, but only if you are going to follow the agenda and address the 7 points that I claim prove the IJ false.  If not; we don’t need to hear any more of your confusion and double-talk. 

Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,

Rev. 3:18 I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see.

Rev. 3:19 ‘Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent.

Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Tom Norris, for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#11 02-09-13 8:14 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Discussion Update:

As expected, Herb the self-proclaimed IJ expert, has had enough.  He has run away in a huff, abandoning all attempts to rehabilitate the IJ and “cross-examine” Dr. Ford or Tom Norris.  He has discovered that he does not like to be "cross-examined," especially by someone who has the facts to make him look so wrong about so much.

Like a child at school, he claims to be the victum of bullying by Tom Norris. 

Such a fictional excuse is meant to justify his continued refusal to address my 7 Questions that refute the IJ.  He knows he can’t even answer the first point, much less prevail on any of the rest.  So running out of diversions, he makes a quick getaway, all the while screaming (yelping) foul, as if he has been wronged.

Let all understand how to expose a wolf and chase it away.  Their great weakness is the NT; they are fearful of the Gospel, and thus they run from the words of Christ, which must be forced upon them.  It works every time.

Matt. 7:15  “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

Let all see what a wolf looks like as it is chased away from the sheep. 

See the wolf named Herb, run away into the night….

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform
--------------------------------------------------------------

Herb wrote:

To Tom Norris:

Sensible dialogue with you is not assisted by your impolite un-Christian spirit, ongoing mis-information and inacurracies, personal insults and slurs and your mega-verbose responses that resemble a flailing fire-hose out of control.

Online etiquette has been replaced with cyber bullying.

Nothing can possibly be achieved with this approach.

Write what you wish. Readers are quite able to discern what spirit drives you. 

This ends my dialogue with Tom Norris.

Herb Kersten
http://www.hkea.org.au

Offline

#12 02-13-13 12:03 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Herb,

Sorry you had to run away.  I was looking forward to your public response to the 7-point Agenda that I claimed disproves the IJ, 7 x’s over. 

However, I knew you would run away.  I knew you could not address, much less answer, even the first question.  So this is no surprise.  This is always the outcome with the so-called SDA experts.  They always run away because they are so wrong about so much. 

Understand that the SDA’s don’t just have one error concerning Daniel 8: 14 and the PAJ, but legions of additional errors they also cannot defend. 

So the outcome would the same if we had a discussion about tithe, the Lord’s Supper, Eschatology, or the Sabbath.  No SDA can stand up to a doctrinal  “cross examination” and you have underscored this fact for all to understand. 

At this point, it is clear that you are not smarter than Dr. Ford or Tom Norris, nor have you come anywhere close to rehabilitating the IJ.  In fact, you have done the opposite. 

More than that, you preach a sneaky, false, “distorted” Gospel, which makes you a fraud, a cunning enemy of the Kingdom of God.  Listen to what Paul thinks about your convoluted, SDA Gospel.

Gal. 1:6  I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;

Gal. 1:7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.

Gal. 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

Gal. 1:9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

You enter this discussion with an uphill battle.  The entire world has already rejected the IJ, even as the vast majority of the SDA Community has done the same thing.  Why?  Because it is obvious to all but the most cultic and brainwashed, that Paul never preached such a doctrine, thus making it “contrary” to what the apostles preached.

Anyone reading this aborted discussion about the IJ will correctly conclude that you don’t know what you are talking about.  Your Gospel is not of Christ, or Paul, and neither is your arrogant refusal to answer the questions, as if you can censor what you don’t like and manipulate the outcome.  Not going to work.

Paul curses you, and so too do I.  This is no game.  You are a wolf, working for other wolves to deceive the sheep.

Herb’s Viewpoint

Of course you have a different viewpoint.  You think Tom Norris lost our little debate, even as I have been judged by you to be almost brain dead, unable to carry on a civilized discussion with someone as sophisticated and smart as yourself. 

In fact, after you ran off, unable to answer my questions, you reported to the All Experts site that Tom Norris has almost no knowledge and that he is very “impolite” and “unclear,” impossible to understand.

http://www.allexperts.com/expert.cgi?m= … xpID=70484.

If this assessment is true, how do you explain losing a public discussion to the Village Idiot?  What does that make you?

Herb, is it really possible that you have not understood my comments to you? 

Do you really think my questions were so rude or incoherent, so disjointed and worthless, so as not to deserve a response?

Really? 

Or could it be that you have shut your eyes and closed your mind so that you don’t have to face up to your great error about the IJ and repent?  This is what SDA’s do all the time, so this is no surprise.  You are acting like a typical, dishonest SDA.

Could it be that your supposed “golden key” of truth that supports the IJ in Dan 8:14 is actually worthless SDA drivel and impossible nonsense? 

Could it be that your whole spiritual world would collapse in a heap if you admitted that the IJ is false and Dr. Ford’s version of the Gospel correct? 

So you deny the facts that prove you wrong and run away.

You need to understand that an IJ based Gospel, is a total fraud.  Period.  Regardless how it is twisted and revised to get some distance from the gross legalism of Uriah Smith and the Battle Creek SDA’s. 

Jesus does not teach the doctrine of the IJ in any form or fashion.  Period!  Those that fail to admit this irrefutable fact are “blind,” and thus they are promoting a false Christ and worthless Gospel, even as they claim, like you, not to be blind.

John 9:39 And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.”

John 9:40 Those of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?”

John 9:41 Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains.

John 10:1  “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber.

John 10:2 “But he who enters by the door is a shepherd of the sheep.

Let me repeat, Jesus does not teach the IJ, or approve of your confused Gospel, much of which you copied from Dr. Ford in an attempt to cover up your own false doctrine.  (More on this point later.) 

The Good Shepherd does not support the IJ, and anyone that thinks otherwise has been deceived into following spiritual thieves and robbers who come to abuse and mislead the sheep.

IJ Cannot Be Defended

Herb, I don’t think you are fooling anyone but yourself.  You have only made the IJ look more laughable than it already is over here in America, if that were possible. 

Dr. Ford and Tom Norris were scoring Gospel points easily, but not you.  You scored no points at any time.  Zero!  And when pressed to stop the double talk and answer my few (7) simple questions, you ran for you life, unable to address even the first point, which is about Jesus’ view of the IJ.

In other words, you ran off the field, and away from the NT, before the discussion even started.  You refused to follow the agenda or answer a single point. This makes you not only a coward and a quitter, but also a blowhard and a false prophet who is prancing from church to church preaching your false Gospel insights. 

You do know that there is an online record of this discussion on both the All Experts and Atomorrow websites?  Do you think anyone in America will agree with your double-talk and cowardice?  Will anyone in Australia? 

IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=1173

All Experts- The IJ
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-2.htm

This short discussion about the Pre Advent Judgment has been a train wreck for you.  It will stand as a public memorial to the death of the IJ; a teaching moment to show everyone the utter impossibility and futility of trying to promote such false, incorrect, SDA doctrine. 

So you have done a service for truth, even though that was not your intention.  There is a genuine PAJ, but it is not in the book of Daniel.  Only Christ can judge the Church, and so he has in Rev 3.  I suggest that you try to understand correct Gospel Eschatology and stop living in an SDA dream world of delusion and cultic double-talk.

Complaints Refuted

As for your childish complaints, anyone can read our dialogue and see if you have been unfairly or unkindly treated as you claim.  It is an absurd, sour grapes charge, made by someone who has utterly failed to make their case.  You stand embarrassed and humiliated for a reason.  I feel sorry for you, but this is as it should be.  Truth and error, as well as Sheep and Wolves, are enemies not friends. And so it shall ever be.

Moreover, your charge that I have been promoting “misinformation and inaccuracies” is not true, as a simple reading of our exchange will prove.  This is just an obvious excuse to cover-up the fact that you don’t know what you are talking about, as you flee the scene of this public defeat.  I get it.  But this is not about you, but the Gospel.  One day you might understand this.

Furthermore, this idea that you have been “bullied” and thus unable to address the issues is as laughable as it is fictional.  Apparently you do not understand the “cross examination” process.  While you think it fine to “cross-examine” Dr, Ford’s views, you have failed to answer any of the questions put to you by Tom Norris.  This is not how any discussion or cross -examination works. 

Shame on you for refusing to answer my questions, it shows that you cannot defend the IJ as you claim.  And double shame on you for running away, pretending that you have been unfairly treated.

In fact, let me explain that if we were in civil court, you would not be able to avoid any of the questions put to you.  The Judge would make you answer my 7-Points or be thrown in jail for contempt.  He would not let you run out of the courtroom in tears, complaining about mistreatment.  He would say:  “answer the questions or sit in jail until you do.”

In addition, there is an apostolic mandate that requires you to “always” answer the doctrinal questions of the critics.  But you don’t seem to care much about the NT as you seem obsessed with the OT, like the typical, OC minded SDA. 

As for your reference to me acting like an out of control “fire-hose” of information, you misunderstand.  While it might feel like things are out of control for you, not so for me.  I have full control of the Gospel facts, which is why you were so easily blown away for all to see.  And why you are now on the run, heading for cover, away from the many questions that you cannot face, much less answer.

So you are the one out of control and dripping wet, red-faced with embarrassment, caught with legions of error, running away as fast as you can go.  I am ready to continue this Gospel discussion any time you want.  I am not running away, nor do I need to.   

So whenever you think you are ready to get back on the witness stand and face up to the 7 Questions that prove the IJ wrong, I will be happy to accommodate.  Or perhaps you can find an SDA expert who would like to step up and address the questions you refuse to answer?  That would also be fine.

Australian Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing

Herb, don’t misunderstand, you make some very good points about the Gospel and you are a very good, talented speaker.

In fact, it is clear that you have studied and adopted many of Dr. Ford’s Gospel points, phrases, and mannerisms as your own. 

In fact, I was stunned at how much you sound like Dr. Ford in a sermon I heard on your website. (The Gospel in a Nutshell). 

You were using many of the “exact” same texts, phrases, terms, quotes, and observations.  All with the same Australian accent.  Had I noticed this before, I would have said something to you.

Now I understand what you are up to; you are trying to be the next Dr. Ford, except you embrace the IJ, while he has repudiated it. 

So you are a great deceiver, trying to make it appear that you are just like Dr. Ford, but only smarter and full of more truth, while he holds to Gospel error. 

But it won’t work.  You are not Dr. Ford, nor do you preach the same Gospel that he does.  Not even close.  You two only “sound alike,” but you are a fraud who has cloaked himself in the wonderful Gospel preaching style of Dr. Ford, when in fact, you oppose and repudiate his Gospel.

It is obvious that you have carefully studied his theology and aped his sermons, taking much of his work as your own.  I find this very cunning and dishonest, which is par for the SDA’s.

This is why the term wolf applies to you and all such frauds that are deceiving the sheep.

Of course, many have already tried this stunt in the US.  After Glacier view, most of the pastors adopted the anti legalistic views of Dr. Ford, trying to make their IJ based Gospel sound better.  They too adopted a number of his Gospel sayings and moderated their views away from legalism, but yet they too refused to repent of the IJ and their other errors. 

However, I don’t think any of them have impersonated Dr. Ford to such an extent as you have done.  Now I understand the game you are playing and I condemn it.

How long have you been trying to copy Dr. Ford?  And why have you failed to fully embrace what he teaches? 

Until I listened to this sermon of yours, I had no idea that you were trying to be a Dr. Ford impersonator.  While this may be viewed as flattery, the fact that you refuse to embrace what Dr. Ford is really teaching about the Gospel is troubling and great cause for concern.  It means you are a cunning wolf, playing games with the sheep.

Let’s be clear, you are an imposter who has adopted and plagiarized Dr. Ford’s speaking style and mannerisms; you have studied and copied many of his Gospel phrases, stories, and even full sermons. But yet you totally rejected the genuine Gospel he teaches.  What a wolf you are!

Matt. 7:15  “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.

Your updated, post Glacier View Gospel is not valid or true.  It is very different from Dr. Ford’s Gospel.  (Does Dr. Ford know what you are doing?  Did he give you permission to copy him so closely, even word for word in your sermons, without giving him proper credit?) 

At this point, while you are a smooth, professional, and confident speaker, you lack the proper theological discipline to fully understand the Gospel, and thus you stand in great danger of “disqualifying” yourself for Eternal life.

1Cor. 9:26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air;

1Cor. 9:27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

So Herb, I know Dr. Ford and his correct Gospel theology.  You are not the Second Coming of Dr. Ford, in spite your attempts to copy and emulate him.  You preach a false, counterfeit Gospel, which is why you had to run away from our discussion, when caught. 

Matt. 24:24 “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.

Understand that you lost this discussion before it started, as no one is able to defend the IJ, least of all you, an amateur, part time evangelist who is trying to achieve fame by copying the speaking style of Dr. Ford.  It won’t work.  Sorry.

Your failed attempt to defend the IJ is a necessary warning to any who may think this strange doctrine should be, or can be, defended in the 21st century.  There is no defense for such a false and absurd doctrine, which is why you had to run away.

The public needs to understand how easy it is to debunk this great error that is ruining the Advent Movement.  As everyone can see, it only takes one simple question, not even 7, to bring the IJ crashing down in a heap of error.  It is so simple anyone can do it!

Herb, why not face up to the fact that you are unable to show us how Jesus supports the IJ and repent of this great error? 

Just imagine how much better you could preach if you fully understood the Gospel?  But of course you hold to many other false doctrines as well, like all SDA’s, including this myth about wine that the foolish SDA’s continue to promote as true.  So you have much to repent about, not just the IJ.  Which means your Gospel is really worthless and very wrong.

Repent

Why not repent and ask Dr. Ford to help you understand the genuine Gospel?  He will help you if you ask, even as he will forgive you for attacking his work and disrespecting a great scholar who only wants to help the Advent Movement go forward.

Herb, you know you can’t defend the IJ, as you boasted, nor have you come close to showing that Dr. Ford is wrong about Dan 8: 14.  This is clearly why you have run away.  Why not admit the obvious and repent?  This is your only hope.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the IJ has (once again) been proven wrong for all to see. 

Herb has failed to score any points in his futile attempt to rehabilitate the IJ and prove Dr.  Ford, and his Gospel, wrong. 

Consequently, he has fled this discussion, angry and embarrassed like a scared wolf. 

This is the fate of all such wolves that promote false, anti-Gospel doctrine to the sheep.  They will eventually be confronted with the genuine Gospel; exposed, and chased away by those who know better. 

Matt. 10:16  “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves.

Let all the sheep beware of the many wolves that stalk them. 

Let all beware the SDA’s, they are dishonestly working to deceive, control, and destroy the sheep

Acts 20:29 “I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock;

Let all see the fate of a wolf named Herb.  He has been chased away by the light of the Gospel, yelping as flees into the darkness...

Today, no clear thinking, New Covenant minded, Christian will ever embrace this outrageous, anti-Gospel error, which was never taught by Christ or his apostles, much less the OT Prophet Daniel.  Those who teach the IJ, in any form, are false prophets and wolves.  Let all beware.

Matt. 11:15 “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#13 02-15-13 10:53 am

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Here is another response from the person who asked the original question about Herb K.  He has not been impressed by his failure to answer the questions put to him by Tom Norris.  In addition, he thinks Herb is too focused on his ego, and that he is working a scam for money.

Subject: Herb Kersten

Question:

Dear Tom,

I very much appreciate your efforts to rebuke Herb Kersten. He is dishonest, he proliferates himself as an expert whereas he is most definitely not. He seems more in love with himself than with Jesus.

Would a real gospel minister charge $100 dollars for a few presentations? This is from his website:

PAYMENT OPTIONS

1. Purchase online:  click on ‘Buy Now’ button top left.

2. Direct Deposit: Commonwealth Bank Of Australia, 259 Lygon Street, Carlton (email us for details).

The $98 price includes shipping to anywhere in the world.  View our videos on iPad or any Tablet or SmartPhone. Attendances increased as each subject was presented.

Australian presenter Herb Kersten uses hundreds of animated PowerPoint slides that make each subject come to life. Professionally filmed in front of live audiences in Melbourne, Australia.   Nothing boring here! 

Preview the 8 subjects:

1. Global Financial Crisis—Did The Bible Predict It?

2. Know The Future Without Tarot Or Nostradamus

3. Are The Ten Commandments Still Relevant Today?

4. Worldwide Amnesia Epidemic

5. History’s Huge Hoax

6. Mark Of The Beast

7. What Is 666, Babylon & Armageddon?

8. Where Are The Dead?

For $100 dollars you get a perverted gospel that does not save and send many people to hell. What an offer! only a fool would refuse that right? It becomes pretty obvious after a while that the whole SDA organisation is dishonest and corrupt top to bottom.

Many of the leaders will be those in the last days who will say "Lord Lord, did we not do many wonderfull things in thy name? and Jesus will answer them "i never knew you, depart from me ye workers of iniquity".

Herb Kersten is obvious an amateur-theologian making money of perverting the real true gospel.

The issue in the endtime will be those who preach the true Gospel and accept it, those are sealed by the Holy Spirit, and those who follow a false gospel which is represented as the mark of the beast on the forehand or on the righthand.

Every minister of this false gospel is somebody who preaches an antichrist-gospel.

Maybe Herb is thinking to himself, "well it doesn't really matter, after all, i am talking about Christ and His righteousness a lot, don't i?". That's the only impression you can have when he admits he wants to breath gospel-air into the Galatian IJ.

Just like you, Tom, I am extremely upset that these folks get paid for blunt lies. Anybody with a sincere desire to know the truth and a healthy amount of intellect will dispose everything that has to do with the false gospel and embrace the good gospel.

Remember that Jesus said he would return after the good news of the kingdom is being preached into all the world. Unfortunately SDA pastors are presenting a counterfeit gospel. We have a work to do here, as soldiers for Christ.

I just feel i needed to share that, i just read his articles and he is so dishonest that i just could not help expressing how firmly i am opposed to his lies and the fact that he abuses Jesus' name to generate himself a little income.

God bless you,

Rogier

Offline

#14 02-16-13 12:38 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Dear Tom,

I wrote a little article about Herb Kersten. perhaps you can post it on your website to make people aware of who he really is and what he really stands for.

Herb Kersten Evangelical Alliance (HKEA); not evangelical at all

Although Herb Kersten claims to be an independent minister he is obviously a trained SDA brainwash-machine in sheep clothing. He presents his cultic doctrines in a scholarly fashion like somebody who has been pushed to the front by the SDA church to promote their false teachings; impressing the audience rather than truthfully addressing the audience seems to be the motto. One cannot but help to wonder whether there is some secret money-motive involved. It is obvious Herb is not an independent minister. Not only does he refer to the books of Ellen G White, sells his own video presentations with SDA propaganda for a whopping 98 dollars, but he also states on his website explicitly that:

“The Seventh-day Adventist church is a gospel movement whose primary purpose is to bring men and women to realise that God declares them righteous when they receive the gifted righteousness of Christ by faith.  As a result, positive cataclysmic change occurs in the life and in a positive attitude to the Law of God.  It is significant this message is also found in the prophetic books of the Bible, to prepare Christians for the times preceding Christ’s return.”

Is this really so? Is the SDA church a gospel movement? Let’s find out!

Herb states on his website:

“The Ten Commandments are eternal and binding on all Christians as a standard of conduct but not as a means of salvation. Click here for convincing Bible authority that Christians living in the last days prior to Christ’s return will most certainly be keeping the Ten Commandments .

It seems Herb lacks common sense; either the 10 commandments are binding and you are judged by them as a means of salvation, or they are not binding and they are not a standard for salvation, you cannot have it both ways. Let’s investigate how he defends his schizophrenic assumption and how he defends 10 commandment keeping for the people of God in the last days.

His arguments are rather silly and are refuted over and over and over again on the web. Now let’s cross-examine the wolf-side of Herb. He claims 10 commandment-keeping is necessary because Jesus said:

“He who has my Commandments and keeps them,
he it is who loves Me”.

“If you keep my Commandments you will abide in
my love”.

“He who has my Commandments and keeps them,
he it is who loves Me”.

“If you love Me, keep my commandments”:

The Apostle John has the same opinion as Jesus.
He said: “And by this we do know that we know Him if we keep His commandments”

“He who says I know Him and does not keep His commandments, is a liar and the truth is not in him “

For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments and His commandments are not
burdensome”.

Obviously these statements are talking about the commandments of Jesus in the new covenant, NOT the 10 commandments! How do we know? Because John always consistently refers to entole when he talks about Jesus’ commandments and he uses nomos to refer to the 10 commandments. Also the context itself makes it clear that this is the case.

“If you want to enter into life, keep the Commandments”.

Here Jesus was addressing a Jew under the old covenant.

So far it is already obvious that Herb is not interested in the real truth, he has already made up his mind that whenever it reads in the New Testament “commandments” it is always speaking about the 10 commandments. It is obvious this is the SDA wolf-side of Herb. Now let’s dig a little deeper in his wrong assumptions.

He says on his website:

“The New Testament opposes the law as a method
of salvation, not as a standard of conduct. The
sad thing is that anyone who defends God’s law
today is suspected of either being Jewish or a
legalist who doesn’t understand God’s grace
toward sinners. It is true you are not saved by the
Ten Commandments as a method of salvation, but
the question is this: “Does it still apply as a
standard of conduct?”

Here again, we see Herb his obsession with the 10 commandments. Let’s see how he tries to justify, or in Herb his word; nitsdaq,  the claim that we are to uphold the 10 commandments as a standard of moral conduct. Herb has astonishing evidence for his claim! Wow can’t wait to check it out!

“I now present new evidence that is little known to
those Christians who reject the Ten
Commandments. If they knew this evidence they
would review their position I am sure. The
evidence comes from John, the same person who
wrote the Gospel of John that everyone loves so
much. And John is writing almost 65 years after
the crucifixion. This is very, very important
because if the Ten Commandments were abolished
when Jesus died, then you would not expect John
to support them 65 years later. John describes the
type of Christians who live up to the time when
Jesus returns. He is describing last day Christians
– he is describing you and me in 2009. Here is the
new evidence that answers our question for once
and for all. We offer you clear, Biblical proof
about this question for all Christians living in the
time just before Christ’s return.”

Here are the verses of his amazing discovery!

“And the dragon was enraged with the
woman and he went to make war with the
rest of her offspring who keep the
commandments of God and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ”.

“Here is the patience of the saints. Here
are those who keep the commandments of
God and the faith of Jesus”.

“Blessed are those who do His
commandments that they may have right
to the tree of life”. Revelation 22:14

Unfortunately this doesn’t prove 10 commandment-keeping at all! Like is just mentioned the Greek term used here is entole which always refers to the commandments of Jesus. So what are His commandments? To believe in Jesus and to love your neighbor as yourself. It is really THAT simple! Herb is trying to confuse the sheep and teach doctrines of man rather than the word of God. Think about it; which commandment is better; to not steal, murder, cheat on your wife/husband OR to love your neighbor as yourself? You see, the 10 commandments are not a great moral standard at all. It doesn’t tell you to clothe those who are naked, it doesn’t tell you to donate money to the poor, it doesn’t tell you to LOVE! Just like the entire Mosaic law it says “do this and thou shall have eternal life!”.

Herb goes on:

In another vision, John sees the “ark of His covenant” in the heavenly sanctuary.
In the heart of the earthly Sanctuary was the Ark of the Covenant which contained the “tables of the testimony” or the Ten Commandments. That is why what John saw in Revelation was referred to as the ‘tabernacle of the testimony’ or the heavenly Sanctuary containing the Ten Commandments. The Ark of the Covenant is the first piece of furniture discussed in Exodus 25:10

You would think the building itself would have been described first. However the entire Sanctuary service would have been unnecessary without the Ark of the Covenant containing the Ten Commandments, because sin is the breaking of the Ten Commandments and the Sanctuary services dealt with the sin problem. The fact that we have all broken the Law means we all need a Savior. Special laws for the Jews called ‘ceremonial laws’were written in a book by Moses and put against the side of the Ark of the Covenant In stark contrast, the Ten commandments were places inside the ark. contrast, nowhere in the Book of Revelation does John see the book of Moses. This is because those “handwritten requirements” were abolished when Jesus died on the cross. See Colossians 2:14 But the Ten Commandments remain. This explains why Jesus said: “If you love Me, keep My commandments” in John 14:15 and why John says “Blessed are those who do His commandments”

It is obvious that Herb relies on human wisdom to decode revelations. Just because John says he saw an ark at the end of the seventh trumpet does not mean there is a literal ark! Look how the bible applies imagery:

The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.

Revelation is not a literal display of literal events. It is SDA propaganda to say that the law of Moses that was placed beside the ark contained only the ceremonial law. This is a lie, it contains the entire Mosaic law including the 10 commandments (google 613 Mitzvot). In any case let’s get back to the ark of the covenant. Can it be possible that the ark has a symbolic meaning as well? Not only is this possible, it is the most logical assumption. So what then did the ark represent? As Christians, we no longer look to the Ark but to the Lord Jesus Himself as the propitiation and atonement for our sins. Jesus IS the ark of the covenant!

Herb gives us a table to try to validate his lie that the endtime church keeps the 10 commandments:

The Book of Revelation is the last book of the Bible.
It is entitled to have the ‘last say’ on whether
today’s Christians should keep the Ten
Commandments because it was written more than
60 years after the Cross. Sandwiched between two
verses that show the “tabernacle of the testimony”
(Rev 15:5) and the “ark of His covenant” in the
heavenly sanctuary (Rev 11:19), are two verses
saying that Christians in the last days will “keep
the commandments of God” (Rev 12:17 and Rev
14:12). The Table gives you 100% confidence the
‘commandments of God’ in Revelation mean the
Ten Commandments.

Herb simply assumes based on the fact that the often bible talks about commandments when it refers to the 10 commandments it ALWAYS talks about the 10 commandments, which is simply not true. We already know that John meant the commandments of Jesus and not the 10 commandments. This is the SDA-wolf side of Herb mixed with a little bit of subtile-snake like arguments.

Ofcourse it is not enough for Herb to twist scripture. There is a problem with the fact that the New Testament calls the Sabbath day a shadow in colossians 2: 16. Claiming it talks about ceremonial Sabbaths. Most protestant theologians agree that every Sabbath was ceremonial and that all these sabbaths therefore were done away with, there is so much evidence online to debunk the SDA lie that Colossians 2 16 doesn’t say what it says that I will not dig into it right now. Just check out for example http://www.lifeassuranceministries.org/about.html and knock yourself out.

Herb has 4 massive problems with people who say the 10 commandments were nailed to the cross. He claims critics cannot answer his claims. Now let’s look at his reasoning and answer the criticism briefly:

Massive Problems Emerge
Three massive problems arise from the email response (see Addendum) we received from a popular evangelical ministry:

(i) If the Ten Commandments are supposedly „made obsolete‟ under the new covenant why does John see them in vision (65 years after the cross) in the heavenly sanctuary? Why does he describe the final conflict in the last days as a conflict between „commandment keepers‟ and the agents of Satan? (Rev 12:9, 17). How can the Ten Commandments be the basis for the last day conflict prior to Christ‟s return if they are obsolete?

I just answered this “problem” so I won’t deal with it again.

(ii) If it is correct that Jeremiah 31: 31-34 depicts a future introduction of a new covenant to which believers in Old Testament times were not entitled, then heaven will comprise of two entirely different groups: those saved under the old covenant, the basis of which is the Ten Commandments - and those saved under the new covenant, the basis of which is God‟s grace. This depicts a God who arranges two different ways of salvation to suit different times. Such an approach would cause a second rebellion in the New Earth as it does not present a God who is just and who never changes. Scripture consistently depicts God as One who does not change. See Hebrews 13:8; compare Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Psalm 55:19; Malachi 3:6; James 1:17.

Perhaps this is the software-engineer in Herb who thinks God is acting like some sort of computer. The bible makes it plain that everybody in all generations are saved by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Jews kept the law and that was accounted to them as righteousness by faith. Christians believe in Christ and that is accounted to us as righteousness by faith. Herb, please grow up spiritually, remember you are a pastor of a flock! It’s your duty to be a GOOD shepherd, please get rid of your cultic SDA doctrines and embrace the one true gospel.

(iii) The email suggests that God “sees the Law as perfectly pristine, inflexible and impossible for man to keep”

1. If this is correct then believers in Old Testament times were given a Law to which obedience is impossible and from which horrible curses flow when breached. (Deuteronomy 28:15ff). A God of love does not tease mankind by bringing in a law that cannot be kept and which inflicts horrendous punishment for breach.

Herb clearly doesn’t even read the bible. The bible itself says nobody was able to keep the law of Moses. But their efforts were accounted as righteousness. Again God is not some computer that does everything the way you think he should be doing things. You CANNOT keep the law, only Jesus could and he kept it perfectly! Herb needs to stop belittling the righteousness of Christ and to ego-boast our own sinful natures!

(iv) If the Ten Commandments are obsolete for today‟s Christians, we have discarded the only piece of writing ever produced by God‟s own hand and replaced it with the human presumption that the commandment of love is its substitute rather than its essence.

Herb clearly does not want to LOVE, he wants to be righteous in his own sight. Herb clearly wants to look in the mirror and say “ohw boy look how righteous I am, I am almost as righteous as the great I AM”. Is it special that God himself wrote the 10 commandments? Absolutely! The old covenant was big thing for the Jews!

The 10 commandments represented the old covenant, but that is no reason to believe the 10 commandments are still in effect today. The New Testament clearly says the old covenants, the 10 commandments, have been done away with!

Now let’s turn to the next topic: the investigative judgement (IJ). Herb Kersten tries to give readers the impression that the IJ can no longer be defended due to the fantastic work of some SDA committees:

"Criticism of the Adventist interpretation of Daniel 8:14 continues to be ventilated by some folk who may be misinformed because out-dated arguments continue to be belabored which have been discredited since the release of DARCOM and other SDA works. There are however a number of residual issues which do require resolution.

In 1980 Dr Ford challenged traditional Adventist teaching on the investigative judgment. It may be that the Church was caught somewhat unprepared to deal with the volume of material Dr Ford brought to bear at that time. It is not so today. A similar situation in 2004 would probably yield a different outcome as many resources are now available"

Funny how back in 2004 when he wrote the article he could still claim this to be the case. However in recent years there are tons of websites exposing the IJ as a fraud and only a donkey with two brain cells will accept this view. It is pretty ironic to defend a low-iq doctrine in a paper that presents itself as scientifically accurate. In any case let’s see how Herb demolishes the IJ.

It is obvious Herb considers himself more gifted than Desmond Ford to deal with the subject of the IJ. Desmond Ford rightly condemns Herb his teachings as is obvious in the next confession:

"Dr Ford has graciously made numerous materials available to me and shared dozens of emails in circumstances where endorsement of his views was not guaranteed. The confidential nature of those emails is upheld although he has not insisted on it."

Of course Herb denies that Daniel 8:14 is talking about Antiochus Epiphany. After all, he is pushed forward by the SDA denomination to make that which is detestable make appear truth again. He offers no sound arguments so I won’t even go into it. It’s like his brains act like malfunctioning software. He swims in a pool of wordgames and assumptions to make it appear as if he knows what he is talking about. Unfortunately for him the bible can only be discerned in a spiritual way, it is not some sort of code that can be decoded by applying human wisdom and reasoning.

Now let’s look Herb his statement that the IJ can be found in Hebrews. I am not even going to go deep into it because his arguments are so outdated and blatantly false that I can destroy his thesis concerning Hebrews in a few lines.

He claims that if Jesus went to the equivalent of the most holy place on earth, in heaven itself, the writer would have uses the term “hagia hagion”. This term is found in Hebrews 9:3. However if the writer of Hebrews would use that term to apply to heaven itself it would mean that heaven itself also had a “hagio” without the “hagion”. Therefore the writer uses “ta hagia” which can be interpreted according to context. Now let’s look at Herb his ability to interpret context:

Herb upholds the impossible position that Hebrews 6:19 is talking about the first veil of the heavenly sanctuary:

"Others point out the phrase resembles the language used in Exodus 26:33 and Leviticus 16:2, 12, 15 which always refer to the second apartment. Others see a parallel between the verse and verse and 10:19, 20 where Christ’s flesh is not the veil but points to the inauguration of the sanctuary. This view supports the proposition that at His ascension Christ dedicated the sanctuary as a whole and not a specific apartment.

The phrase “within the veil” is not found elsewhere in Scripture so there is no support to secure a precise meaning, however if the author of Hebrews is talking about the “second Chapter 7 veil” in 6:19 why did he not use the specialised phrasing hagia hagion? It is reasonable to conclude that the verse does not refer to the second apartment but the sanctuary as a whole. The verse of itself and on its own does not clearly establish that the Day of Atonement ministry was fulfilled at the Cross."

Despite the ridiculous claim that the interpretation of Hebrews 6:19 talks about the first veil he is simply lying to your face! He says that the expression  “within the veil” cannot be found in the bible and therefore WE have to interpret it according to OUR insight! Now what would be more ironic than to supply the Herb the Great intellectual with astonishing new evidence to demolish the criticism concerning the IJ with a source of 114 years old. Let’s see what Ballinger had to say concerning the veils:

AN APPEAL TO THE READER.

And now I appeal to the reader: When the Holy Spirit in Heb. 6:19 tells us that Christ, our forerunner, has entered "within the veil," which department am I to understand is referred to by this term? Let me again call attention to the fact that the term "within the veil" is used in Heb. 6:19 without qualification, it being taken for granted that the reader is familiar with the term, and will know without explanation to which apartment it refers. Never for a moment would the student of the Hebrew Scriptures think of applying that term to the first apartment. When we go to the Old Testament to see which apartment is referred to by the expression "within the veil," we find the term applied invariably to the holy of holies. How dare I, then, in the face of this overwhelming testimony of Scripture, apply the term "within the veil," to the first apartment, a place to which the Spirit of God never applied it?

Ballinger points out that the expression "within the veil" is used multiple times in the Old Testament.

Now how can you possibly uphold the idea that the Jews to which Hebrews was written were confused about which veil was meant in Hebrews 6:19? Is Herb even interested in what the bible teaches?

Conclusion:

Herb espouses the good old SDA cultic doctrines in a new jacket. He pretends to be an intellectual with new astonishing info to support false SDA doctrines. He calls himself “evangelical” but he is not! You cannot be evangelical and at the same time hold fast to the doctrinal errors of the Seventh Day Adventist church.

Perhaps Herb wants to bring the SDA church more in harmony with the gospel, but if this is the case then compromise is impossible. I have zero trust in the integrity of Herb.

I have had contact with a webmaster who own hundreds of SDA propaganda sites. In the exchange of e-mails it was obvious the webmaster was not interested in the truth and was lying all the time, pretending to have nothing to do with the SDA church and then later turn around and admit it etc.

These people are probably well paid to present a counterfeit gospel in the endtimes we are living in. Let everybody become aware of the snake cult-tactics of the SDA church. I would like to finish this cross-examination with some verses of the bible:

1Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

2And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

3Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,

4Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

5To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

God His blessings to those who uphold the one true gospel!

Rogier,  Groningen, Netherlands

Offline

#15 02-16-13 5:42 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Question for Tom Norris:

Dear Tom,

I very much appreciate your efforts to rebuke Herb Kersten. He is dishonest; he proliferates himself as an expert whereas he is most definitely not. He seems more in love with himself than with Jesus.

Tom said:  Herb is a very talented speaker.  He could do great things for the Gospel if he would only repent of his false SDA doctrine. 

In fact, this is what the SDA’s must do if they want to go forward to complete their noble mission to prepare the church for the Time of Trouble and the Second Coming.

Moreover, I should also say that he is correct to focus on the Pre-Advent Judgment, which is a very real part of Gospel eschatology.  No other denomination teaches a PAJ, and the SDA’s get credit for the discovery of this important biblical concept.

However, the SDA leaders misunderstood what they discovered, and now they need to admit their error and apologize to Dr. Ford and to the world for being so wrong for so long. 

While the Adventists have spent the last three decades trying to pretend Dr. Ford is wrong, they have wasted their time and made fools of themselves.  As a result, they have lost credibility, along with millions of members as they continue to self-destruct for all to see.  They need to stop and repent before things get worse for them.

There is a PAJ, but Herb and the SDA’s have the wrong version.  They need to repent of the IJ, and only embrace and promote the genuine PAJ, which is found in Revelation, not in the book of Daniel. 

All SDA’s need to make this correct change as soon as possible.  Then their blind eyes will be open to understand the Gospel and NT eschatology for the 21st century.

Rogier asked:  Would a real gospel minister charge $100 dollars for a few presentations?

Tom said:  The NT records many Gospel sermons made by Christ, Peter, and Paul, etc.  However, none of them charged money for the privilege.  Why?  Because the Gospel is free.  Thus a real Gospel evangelist should preach the truth about the Gospel without cost. 

Rev. 22:17  The Spirit and the bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.

Rogier posted:  Australian presenter Herb Kersten uses hundreds of animated PowerPoint slides that make each subject come to life.  Professionally filmed in front of live audiences in Melbourne, Australia.  Nothing boring here! 

Tom said:  The SDA’s spend many millions of dollars every year on fancy graphics and slick media presentations.  This is why they own a large media center to produce nonstop propaganda for radio, TV and film production.

http://www.adventistmediacenter.com/

The SDA’s are all also over the web, supporting legions of websites that covertly support their false doctrines.  All in an attempt to make false doctrine look appealing, interesting, and true.  Let all beware…

Rogier posted:  Preview the 8 subjects:

1. Global Financial Crisis—Did The Bible Predict It?

2. Know The Future Without Tarot Or Nostradamus

3. Are The Ten Commandments Still Relevant Today?

4. Worldwide Amnesia Epidemic

5. History’s Huge Hoax

6. Mark Of The Beast

7. What Is 666, Babylon & Armageddon?

8. Where Are The Dead?

Tom said:  The SDA’s refuse to repent and move forward.  Rather, they are using their Billions $$ to try to clean up Traditional Adventism and make it seem correct, even exciting and important. 

But they are wasting their time, as these topics are the same old tired propaganda that has already been rejected by the Adventist Community in America, as well as by all others. 

What they are selling is a scam.  It does not reflect either Protestant or Adventist truth.   Nor does it make any sense to anyone but a cultic-minded SDA.

Today, Adventism should be promoting 21st century, cutting edge, Gospel Eschatology.  Not 19th and 20th century error and confusion.

Rogier said:  For $100 dollars you get a perverted gospel that does not save, and sends many people to hell. What an offer! Only a fool would refuse that right?

Tom said:  Few people buy this nonsense today.  The more the SDA’s try to promote their views, the more people get angry with them.  Traditional Adventism no longer draws people.  This is why their churches are half empty, unable to grow.  Adventism is virtually dead.  This is the real problem.  The present course is not sustainable, nor should it be.

Rogier said:  It becomes pretty obvious after a while that the whole SDA organization is dishonest and corrupt top to bottom.

Tom said:  This is true.  They are one of the most dishonest and slick organizations in the world.  Yet, they claim to follow Christ and to be doing his will better than all others.  However, their arrogant behavior and their many false doctrines prove otherwise.

Rogier said:  Many of the leaders will be those in the last days who will say, "Lord Lord, did we not do many wonderful things in thy name? and Jesus will answer them "i never knew you, depart from me ye workers of iniquity". Herb Kersten is obvious an amateur-theologian making money of perverting the real true gospel.

Tom replied:  Yes, Herb, and all the SDA leaders will never receive the gift of Eternal Life unless they repent of their false Gospel, starting with the IJ and a personal apology to Dr. Ford. 

Rogier said:  The issue in the end time will be those who preach the true Gospel and accept it, those are sealed by the Holy Spirit, and those who follow a false gospel which is represented as the mark of the beast on the forehand or on the right-hand.

Tom said:  The Gospel will be the greatest issue at the end of time.  Those who get it right, will be given Eternal Life, but those who embrace a false view will be lost. 

The vast majority will be lost.  Let all “strive” to understand the genuine Gospel of Christ.

Luke 13:23 And someone said to Him, “Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?” And He said to them,

Luke 13:24 “Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.

Matt. 22:14 “For many are called, but few are chosen.”

Rogier said:  Every minister of this false gospel is somebody who preaches an antichrist-gospel. Maybe Herb is thinking to himself, "well it doesn't really matter, after all i am talking about Christ His righteousness a lot don't i?".

Tom said:  Many throw theological terms around, not understanding what they really mean.  In Herb’s case, he doesn’t want to know.  He is on a mission to save Old Covenant Adventism through rehabilitating their greatest error, the IJ, which Dr. Ford has correctly exposed as false.

As we can all see, Herb is on an impossible mission, which has just blown up in his face.  Rather then admit the obvious and repent, he wants to shoot the messenger, getting angry with Tom Norris for telling the truth.  (This is a normative response from those who cling to a false Gospel.)

Gal. 4:16 So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Herb has not come close to saving Adventism or the IJ.  Rather, he is part of the Adventist problem when he could become part of the solution.  Sad.

Rogier said:  That's the only impression you can have when he admits he wants to breath gospel-air into the Galatian IJ.

Tom said:  The Achilles heel of the SDA’s is the book of Galatians.  This book was the reason why the great 1888 debate took place.  Because the leaders failed to reach a correct consensus about the law and the Gospel, the SDA’s lost their Battle Creek Empire and retreated to Takoma Park, where they repeated their same errors, as Glacier View became a repeat of the catastrophic 1888 debate.

Unless the SDA leaders repent and better understand the Gospel, as well as the history and theology of the Three Angels Messages, they will lose their modern day Empire, which is already in serious, self-destruction mode. 

The Advent Movement, which gave the entire church a much-improved platform of modern eschatology, is dying because of their great rebellion against the Gospel.  Sad and unnecessary.

Rogier said:  Just like you I am extremely upset that these folks get paid for blunt lies.

Tom said:  The religious marketplace is full of frauds paid for selling worthless doctrine.  The SDA’s are hardly the only ones that do it. 

All of Laodicea, meaning every church and denomination, has been judged by Christ as being blind, naked, and wrong about the Gospel.  So all are guilty.

All that seek Gospel truth should be very upset with the state of the church, whatever denomination they come from. 

Rogier said:  Anybody with a sincere desire to know the truth and a healthy amount of intellect will oppose everything that has to do with the false gospel and embrace the good gospel.

Tom said:  Today, there has never been a time when so much knowledge is so easily available to anyone with a computer.  Consequently, there is no excuse for anyone to misunderstand the issues or fail to find the Gospel.

Luke 11:9  “So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

Luke 11:10 “For everyone who asks, receives; and he who seeks, finds; and to him who knocks, it will be opened.

Rogier said:  Remember that Jesus said he would return after the good news of the kingdom is being preached into all the world. Unfortunately SDA pastors are presenting a counterfeit gospel. We have a work to do here, as soldiers for Christ.

Tom said:  Well said!  And guess what?  You have helped push the Gospel forward. 

You were right to remain open to those who claimed to have new light.  And you were also correct to test what Herb was preaching, and reach out for answers from others.  Because of your questions, you exposed a wolf on the hunt for sheep, and now he has run away for all to see.

No SDA teaches a correct Gospel.  Not one of them!  They may try, like Herb has done, but it will never work so long as they refuse to repent of the IJ, and many other false doctrines they pretend are true.

Rogier said:  I just feel i needed to share that, i just red his articles and he is so dishonest that i just could not help expressing how firmly i am opposed to his lies and the fact that he abuses Jesus' name to generate himself a little income.

Tom said:  Those who honestly seek to follow the teachings of Jesus, - have the Spirit of truth.  Consequently, they can quickly identify those with a spirit of error because they double-talk and run away from the words of Christ.

All it took was one simple question about Christ to expose Herb, the SDA, as a wolf.  He knew he could never show Jesus teaching the IJ. 

So after failing to deflect and divert this fundamental question many times, he had to either face up to it, and repent, or escape the discussion, with a snarl and growl.  Thus, when wolves run, they run away from the teachings of Christ.  He is their enemy.

No one needs what the SDA’s are selling. 

None that follow the genuine Gospel need to fear the Judgment of the 2nd Coming or doubt their Eternal Life.  All can read the Words of Christ for themselves, not needing to depend on the confused and self-serving views of either wolves or those who have been hired to control the flock.

John 10:11  “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

John 10:12 “He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd, who is not the owner of the sheep, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.

John 10:13 “He flees because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep.

John 10:14 “I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me,

Let all keep very close to the Good Shepherd, repudiating both wolves and the hired hands, neither of which care about the sheep.

John 5:24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

Eternal Life is only for those who believe and carefully follow the words of Christ.

Thank you for your support of the Gospel.

Tom Norris, for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

Offline

#16 02-18-13 10:33 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Hi Tom Norris!

Thanks for such an emphatic assertion and clear position on the correct handling of the Scriptures.

I also find the SDA handling of the book of Daniel and many others to be ridiculous and dangerous. But I thank God for helping me and my family to transition out of SDA into Christ!

Bless you Tom.

Philemon, Nakuru, Kenya

Offline

#17 02-19-13 3:09 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Tom,

I left the SDA church because it majored in the minors (IJ!).

All human organizations have error. But to make something radically removed from the center of the gospel a major concern is too large an error.

I now serve at Sabbath Grace Fellowhsip (www.sabbathgracefellowship.com).

Ted Noel

Offline

#18 09-06-16 6:33 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Legal Proceedings Threatened to defend Investigative Judgment: Australian SDA Attacks Freedom of Speech | By Tom Norris Sept 6, 2016

From Herb Kersten:

Be advised you have 48 hours from 6.45am (AEST) 7 September 2016 to remove the web pages http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ebuked.htm and http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … s-herb.htm and any other negative commentary about me on blogs and such like, after which legal proceedings against you, the hosting company and registrants will commence without delay from my USA based attorneys who specialize in these matters.

Do not under-estimate my resolve. You may reply if you wish to hermonholdings@optusnet.com.au

Sincerely,
Herb Kersten
Melbourne, Australia
——————————————————————————————————————————

Tom Norris said:  First, Herb, take a deep breath and try to remember that you claim to be Christian.  Does Christ teach that we are to sue those that refuse to embrace what we teach?  Forcing them to pay attention to our point of view under threat?  Hardly.

Gal. 4:16 So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Second, why not admit you were proven wrong by Tom Norris (and Dr. Ford) about the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment?  Then you ran away in a huff for all to see.  This is what Goldstein did as well, so you are not the only one that has lost this debate.  But at least Goldstein did not threaten to sue.

I suggest that you take your defeat like a man, admit you were wrong, and learn the proper lesson.  Do not depend on civil courts and lawyers to help you defend any Gospel doctrine, much less false doctrine.  That makes no sense, my friend.  Jesus teaches no such nonsense.

Third:  If it makes you feel better, we can have another debate and I can prove you wrong all over again.  My points will be the same, and so too, will the outcome.  You will lose.  In fact, get all your SDA pals to come and help you in the next debate, then you can blame the loss on them.

Fourth:  Those that teach the genuine Gospel do not pay any attention to bullies and blowhards.  So we are not going to take down any posts, so you can continue to deceive people about church history and doctrine.  Besides, truth is a defense to any legal claim for defamation or slander, even as Truth is why you lost the debate in the first place.  Here is some information about defamation laws.

Online Defamation Law

The Bloggers' FAQ on Online Defamation Law provides an overview of defamation (libel) law, including a discussion of the constitutional and statutory privileges that may protect you.

What is defamation?

Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice. State laws often define defamation in specific ways. Libel is a written defamation; slander is a spoken defamation.

What are the elements of a defamation claim?

The elements that must be proved to establish defamation are:

a publication to one other than the person defamed;

a false statement of fact; that is understood as

a. being of and concerning the plaintiff; and

b. tending to harm the reputation of plaintiff.

If the plaintiff is a public figure, he or she must also prove actual malice.

Is truth a defense to defamation claims?

Yes. Truth is an absolute defense to a defamation claim.

https://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/leg … defamation

Herb, you have no case.  You lost the debate fair and square.  While our short debate was, no doubt, embarrassing for you, it is time for all Adventists to stop embracing cultic myths and fabrications and repent about the IJ and Glacier View.  However, rather than better understand the Gospel and repent, you are now appealing to Civil Law to help you enforce false doctrines.  Such threats against free speech and truth telling is against the Gospel.  Shame on you and the SDA’s!  Scientology acts the same way!

Let me know when you find a Court in America that will litigate the validity of the IJ.  I will be happy to show up and defeat you, and the IJ, once again for all to see.

Gospel regards,

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform

Offline

#19 09-06-16 7:43 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Angry IJ Defender Embarrassed; Throws Temper Tantrum & Threatens Litigation:

Herb K said:  Thomas Andrew Norris:  this legal dispute is not about the "validity of the IJ".  It is about your online publishing of libellous and defamatory comments about me.  My USA Attorneys specialise in online libel/defamation. They have examined the content of your blogs. They will seek a Court Order in my behalf to have your content removed and financial damages.  You have until 6.45am AEST 9 September to do so. 

Tom replied:  Herb, who do you think you are?  Please stop threatening my right to speak freely in America, the place where religious freedom triumphed.  You set up an online public ministry, making a number of bold claims, which turned out to be false.  Here in America, we have the right to comment on such things.  If you don’t like it, too bad.  Don’t enter the public arena and start debating about doctrine if you can’t deal with losing.  And let’s face it; YOU LOST!  Your views are flat out wrong, and so too your slanders of Dr. Ford. 

Like I said, truth is a defense to your utter nonsense and error. 

So do what you think you have to do my friend.  Maybe more people will come to understand that the IJ is utter nonsense and error, and that you do not know what you are talking about as you slander Dr. Ford and pretend the IJ is great truth.

If you think such bullying tactics will win converts for the SDA’s, you are sadly mistaken.  No wonder they are losing ground by the day.  Pathetic.

I suggest that you re-think all your positions.  You are not seeing things clearly or correctly.

Sad.

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Offline

#20 09-06-16 9:02 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Herb, the litigator for the IJ said:  Put this on your blog:  I, Herb Kersten respect a person's right to hold a different view and to share it online.  What this is now about is not freedom of expression or validating the IJ by legal process, but the use of libellous and defamatory language against individual in online blogs. 

My USA attorneys specialise in online libel and defamation and have read all the threads and comments here and they are of the opinion that Tom's and Rogier's language is libellous and must be removed.  Requests for removal have been put to Tom Norris and About.Inc but without success. By continuing to ventilate on this blog Tom is only digging himself in deeper and against his interests should proceedings commence. 

I repeat: my proposed legal action against Tom Norris is NOT about validating the IJ as Tom's headlines of today mischievously suggest.  Let reason prevail and let Tom edit out all personal slurs, labels, defamatory imputations and such like on these threads so legal action can be averted. He has been given reasonable time to do that. If he desists, my attorneys have no choice but to proceed against him. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Herb,

You are wasting everyones time, embarrassing yourself, and the SDA Denomination too.  Apparently you don’t understand Civil Law any better than you comprehend Gospel eschatology.  You don’t have a clue or a case.  You are a public person, caught promoting religious error.  You entered into a public debate online and lost so badly that you ran away.  You have no damages, other than your bruised ego. 

You need to face the fact that you lost a religious debate about the IJ, and looked very foolish in the process.  Then you ran away for all to see.  And now you are trying to cover-up your failure by trying to pull down your failed debate with threats of litigation.  Wow!  What kind of Jesus do you follow?  I don’t recognize him.  I think he is a fraud and so too are you.  You do not understand or practice the Gospel, and you have been caught for all to see.  Too bad for you and your worthless, misguided ministry.

In America, there are laws to protect free speech. Some of them are even meant to protect the public from those like yourself that promote fabrications and nonsense.   You see, here in America, there is a public interest for honest discussion and different points of view.  In fact, the State recognizes the need to protect comments in the public domain, and Adventist Reform will use these protections to speak out against your pathetic views.  People need to be warned about false doctrine and religious predators like yourself.

Maryland Defamation Law and the Qualified Privilege

According to one scholar, there are four basic common law qualified privileges: (1) The public interest privilege, to publish materials to public officials on matters within their public responsibility; (2) the privilege to publish to someone who shares a common interest, or, relatedly, to publish in defense of oneself or in the interest of others; (3) the fair comment privilege; and (4) the privilege to make a fair and accurate report of public proceedings.

A defendant, in a defamation suit, may assert a qualified, or conditional, privilege. “There are circumstances in which a person will not be held liable for a defamatory statement because the person is acting ‘in furtherance of some interest of social importance, which is entitled protection.’” Woodruff v. Trepel, 125 Md. App. 381, 391, 725 A.2d 612, 617 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1999), cert. denied, 354 Md. 332, 731 A.2d 440 (Md. 1999).

http://www.cosgrovelawllc.com/02-15-16- … ilege.html

I agree that we should let reason prevail.  Which means to me that you need to admit you are wrong and repent of the IJ.  No legal action in the world is going to turn the IJ into truth, so you can forget this absurd strategy.  You are being very foolish, even as you are proving to all that you cannot defend the IJ as you boasted.  Repent of the IJ and accept the Gospel before it is too late.

Very sad.

Tom Norris for Freedom of Speech

Offline

#21 09-18-16 2:51 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Herb Kersten said: 

Tom, We have joint goals:

MY GOAL - I merely ask that the web page http://www.atomorrow.org/fluxbb/viewtop … 273#p12273 be removed.  The conversation trail is only about you and me over the IJ - although you do most of the talking.  Apart from "Rogier" there are no other substantive comments from other people.  It is therefore no big loss if the page is removed.  I am asking you do this because the headline "Seventh-Day Adventists: Herb Kersten Rebuked, herb Kersten, Dr. Ford" is automatically generated by Google (see attached) when my name is googled.  This has caused personal loss and damage to my reputation in my secular employment.  Removal of the page will prevent this negative search result.  The search result also points to your web page, replete with personal imputations against me (see attached summary of what our Attorneys have identified).

YOUR GOAL - I presume you wish to avoid legal action and liability for my legal costs. My USA Attorneys specialise in online slander and defamation. They have been briefed, have given their legal opinion and are ready to proceed if I so instruct.  However, they advised me I must first give you the opportunity to take the page down. If that fails, they will be instructed to seek a Court Order to force search engines, the owner of the website, the webmaster and the hosting company to take down the offending webpage. In such an event I will also be claiming my legal costs from you.

We can achieve our respective goals quite easily.  All you need to do is remove the web page http://www.atomorrow.org/fluxbb/viewtop … 273#p12273 and any other negative personal comments you make about me on other blogs.  Then we are done and legal action is avoided.  It is that simple. 

This is NOT about the IJ.  It is not about whether suing is the Christian thing to do. This is about your libellous comments on the said web page that are readily picked up by search engines, causing me personal loss and damage.

Let me know if you intend to remove the page and when it will be done.

If I do not hear from you by Thursday morning 8 September 2016 you can expect to hear from my Attorneys and costs will be sought from you.

Herb Kersten

Offline

#22 09-25-16 2:24 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

The IJ Is Dead

In an attempt to cover up his failed discussions about the IJ, Herb K continues to threaten Tom Norris to stop exposing his errors to the world.  But such censorship is not going to happen.  Anyone foolish enough to think they can rehabilitate Uriah Smiths worthless, 19th century views about eschatology, attacking Dr. Ford in the process, needs to be exposed as a fraud for all to see. 

Everyone needs to know that the IJ has been disproven over and over again. Herb’s boast that if Glacier View took place in 2004, instead of 1980, that Dr. Ford would have been proven wrong, - is an absurd and laughable statement; wishful thinking for the foolish.  There has been no new evidence to support the IJ, and there never will be; because there is no such doctrine in either the Old or New Covenants.

Herb wrote: 

The 1980’s and today

In 1980 Dr Ford challenged traditional Adventist teaching on the investigative judgment. It may be that the Church was caught somewhat unprepared to deal with the volume of material Dr Ford brought to bear at that time. It is not so today.

A similar situation in 2004 would probably yield a different outcome as many resources are now available which were unavailable then. Authoritative material is readily available in electronic form, facilitating research. Scholars worldwide from different persuasions can be readily contacted by email and the Internet burgeons with vast material of varying quality. The information age of 2004 provides ready access to materials that were limited to the select few in 1980.

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5 … /intro.pdf

Herb, pay attention:  while the church was unprepared to understand the truth about the IJ in 1980, they remain in the same dark position today.  You are a prime example.  You and your SDA pals are blind as bats to the Gospel, and yet you think you are great theologians.  This would be funny if were not so serious.  Shame on you all.

There is no real debate about the historical or theological facts that disprove this great 19th century, SDA error.  The facts today that disprove the IJ are stronger than ever.  Which is why you ran away when I presented you with 7 simple ways to disprove the IJ.  You could not refute the first point, much less any that followed.  And now you want to force me to take down your embarrassing failure to defend the IJ that only proves you are shooting blanks.

You seem like a delusional man, supporting a dishonest cult that is guilty of one of the largest publishing frauds in church history.  The problem here is not with the facts, which are clear to all but the blind, but with the SDA Denomination, which is corrupt and arrogant.  Those religious frauds, like Herb, that support the false teachings of the SDA’s, need to be exposed as false teachers, liars, and fools. 

Herb said:  We have joint goals:

Tom replied:  I don’t think so.  My goal is to move Adventism from an Old Covenant mindset, forward to a New Covenant paradigm.  Do you agree with this Gospel premise?  I doubt it.

The 3rd Angels Message has terminated.  The 4th Angels Message is the next phase of Adventism, and it does not contain the IJ, or many of the false, Old Covenant doctrines like tithe, or this myth that drinking wine is sinful, which is a Muslim doctrine. 

The 4th Angels Message, which was also called the Loud Cry of Rev 18, is the point of the Three Angels Messages.  This is the last phase of the Three Angels Messages, which emerges just before the great tribulation and the end of the world.  This is where the Advent Movement must migrate, and where 21st century eschatology meets reality and correct prophecy.

Today, there is a new information, methodology, and Gospel insights that can make Adventism relevant again.  I have been online for the past 15 years promoting this new paradigm, called Adventist Reform, that can save the Advent Movement.  What have you been doing to help save the Advent Movement? 

Answer; slandering Dr. Ford and fighting against genuine Adventist Reform.   You are not helping the Advent Movement, but holding it back. 

So we have competing goals, my friend.  We are not on the same side of the Gospel debate.  You stand with the error, corruption, and self-destruction of the 3rd Angels Message, while I am focused on the next level of truth, the 4th Angels Message.

Don’t shoot (or sue) the messenger.  The IJ is so easily refuted, as you experienced, that it is impossible for anyone, no matter how talented, to defend it.  It’s like trying to defend the church’s view that the earth is the center of the universe.  At some point, the evidence becomes overwhelming, even to the church leaders, and what was once considered great truth is now great error.  The IJ is great error.  And so too many other SDA doctrines.   

Dr Ford is like Galileo; he has disproven what had been considered sacred truth for all to see.   I think it is time for all the IJ supporters to admit the facts and apologize to Dr. Ford.  That is also one of my goals.  Is that one of yours as well?  I doubt it. 

It took the Church 350 years to admit that Galileo was right.  I don’t plan to wait that long to hear the SDA’s admit that Dr. Ford was correct.  They had better do it soon, or there will be nothing left of the Advent Movement but confused memories.  The facts are in for those that want the truth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After 350 Years, Vatican Says Galileo Was Right:

ROME, Oct. 30— More than 350 years after the Roman Catholic Church condemned Galileo, Pope John Paul II is poised to rectify one of the Church's most infamous wrongs -- the persecution of the Italian astronomer and physicist for proving the Earth moves around the Sun.

With a formal statement at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences on Saturday, Vatican officials said the Pope will formally close a 13-year investigation into the Church's condemnation of Galileo in 1633. The condemnation, which forced the astronomer and physicist to recant his discoveries, led to Galileo's house arrest for eight years before his death in 1642 at the age of 77.

The dispute between the Church and Galileo has long stood as one of history's great emblems of conflict between reason and dogma, science and faith. The Vatican's formal acknowledgement of an error, moreover, is a rarity in an institution built over centuries on the belief that the Church is the final arbiter in matters of faith.

http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/31/world … moves.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you see, we have very different goals.  You think the Earth and the IJ is still the center of the universe.  But I must call out those that refuse to be honest with the evidence, while you slander Dr. Ford and promote false doctrine as if true.   We are opposites. 

If you think I am going to run away and hide because some cultic SDA zealot from Australia is upset because he lost an IJ debate, you need to think again my friend.   The IJ is a dead doctrine.  It is holding back, confusing, and destroying the Advent Movement.  The faster it is repudiated the better.

Now if you want to join me in reforming Adventism, I am listening.  Perhaps we can team up and move Gospel Reform forward?  THEN we would have joint goals.

Herb said:  MY GOAL - I merely ask that the web page http://www.atomorrow.org/fluxbb/viewtop … 273#p12273 be removed.  The conversation trail is only about you and me over the IJ - although you do most of the talking.  Apart from "Rogier" there are no other substantive comments from other people.  It is therefore no big loss if the page is removed. 

I am asking you do this because the headline "Seventh-Day Adventists: Herb Kersten Rebuked, herb Kersten, Dr. Ford" is automatically generated by Google (see attached) when my name is goggled. 

This has caused personal loss and damage to my reputation in my secular employment.  Removal of the page will prevent this negative search result.  The search result also points to your web page, replete with personal imputations against me (see attached summary of what our Attorneys have identified).

Tom said:  First, let’s be honest; the goal of your website is to defend and promote the false doctrine of the Investigative Judgment for your SDA pals.  You actually sell a DVD set of worthless propaganda from your site.  So stop pretending this is about your secular job.  You are in bed with the SDA’s, and you have made them look bad with your poor showing.  Sorry.  You deserve to lose, because the IJ is false doctrine.  If any of them think they can do a better job, I would be happy to embarrass them as I did you.

2300 YEAR DVD

A UNIQUE DVD SET The content of these four DVDs firmly establish the 2300 evening mornings of Daniel 8:14 as meaning 2300 years. New evidence is introduced from the book of Daniel itself without reliance on the 'year-day principle'.

BUY THE SET OF FOUR  You will have the right tools to dispel your doubts and intelligently handle the objections of time-worn critics over this issue. A great conversation starter with former members, current members and believers from all walks of life.

Professionally filmed by a skilled technical crew in front of a live audience, hundreds of animated PowerPoint slides are used to prove the case. Highly visual with new facts bring certainty to your faith. For too long the magnificent gospel panorama in Daniel 8:14 has been shrouded in mystery, controversy and useless debate. Fresh, new Biblical evidence from within Daniel itself. Knowledge of Daniel will increase in the end times - and here it is.

http://hkea.org.au

So Herb, stop pretending that you are an innocent person that has been slandered on the Internet.  No.  You are a false SDA shepherd; a religious con man that is slandering both Dr. Ford and Raymond Cottrell.  You don’t understand the Gospel as you claim.  So you had better take down your site, because it is full of religious nonsense that cannot be defended, which is why you ran away from a debate about the IJ.  You can’t back up what you promote and sell, because it is false, impossible doctrine.  This is the point. 

I have no regrets that someone wrote to All Experts and asked me about your website and your boasts about the IJ.  I reviewed both and told the truth.  Your site is full of SDA nonsense, which you cannot defend.  Nor can you prove Dr. Ford or Tom Norris wrong.   You have been exposed as a religious fool for all to see. There is no such doctrine as the IJ anywhere in the Bible, and you have not come close to proving such a delusion. 

In fact, you lost our IJ debate, so badly, and so quickly, that you have done a service for the cause of truth.  Anyone that Googols this topic will see how easy it is to defeat this anti-Gospel doctrine that you and the SDA’s promote as if it were truth.  Your complete failure to defend the IJ, as advertised, will be a good lesson until the end of time. 

7 Points that disprove the Investigative Judgment
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … gative.htm

Herb, why not admit you lost the debate instead of trying to cover up your debacle?  While I understand that such a confession would put a halt to your propaganda sales, and get your SDA pals upset, but isn’t Gospel truth worth it?  There is no Eternal Life for those that promote false, anti-Gospel doctrines, much less for those that use force to defend error. 

The SDA’s are heading in the wrong direction; they continually refuse to move into the light of the New Covenant, even as they claim to follow Jesus.  Everyone serious about following the genuine Christ should stay clear of this dishonest, hypocritical, and legalistic Denomination.

Wolves need to be exposed in order to protect the sheep.  You and the SDA’s deserve to be exposed so that the public can be warned.  The IJ is impossible doctrine; those that promote it are not following Christ, much less the modern evidence, which categorically proves this 19th century teaching to be misunderstood, outdated, and totally false.  Those that promote it are acting very foolishly.  They have their own, twisted, dark agenda.

Second, why would anyone in the secular world care about the IJ, and the fact that you could not defend it, as you bragged?  I don’t see how your religious website, and your failures to defend what you think is wonderful doctrine, cause you problems at work?  Unless you work for the SDA’s.  Then they too would be embarrassed that you lost an IJ debate for the world to see over and over.   So I get the problem, but it is your problem, not mine.   Your idea of slandering Dr. Ford has backfired.  You are the one that was exposed as wrong for all to see. 

Now if you mean people are laughing at you, personally, for believing a silly doctrine, well, they should laugh.  The IJ is a horrible doctrine, one so bad that no one but a few SDA’s embrace it.   We know in the 21st century that it is not true theology, which is why no church in history, except the SDA’s embraces it; and even now their best scholars have repudiated it.

You should be free to believe in whatever crazy religion you want without prejudice, regarding your secular employment.  So I don’t understand how your religious views, or your failed religious debates, can hurt your secular employment.  Something is not making sense.  (I think your employer may be SDA, and they do not like being so easily exposed as dishonest.  Again, that is your problem.)

Third, this is how the Internet works.  You created a website promoting the IJ.  People asked me to comment on your views.  Consequently, we had a public, online debate.  You are for it; I am against.   

However, you lost so quickly, and so badly, that I can understand why you and the SDA’s would like to hide and censor this failed discussion.  But this is not how it works.  Dr. Ford was correct in 1980 and he is still correct today.  Deal with it.  This truth will never change.

It was a great mistake, as well as a waste of time, for you set up a large web site on behalf of the SDA’s.  It was even worse to defend Glacier View, attack Dr. Ford, and try to rehabilitate the IJ. 

Did you think you could do this unopposed in the public square?  Did you not anticipate that those who have embraced Dr. Ford’s correct views would expose you as a fraud?  Just because Dr. Ford is retired, that does not mean his paradigm shifting work was for nothing.  His work will stand the test of time, while Uriah Smith’s IJ views have long ago been disproved.  Which is why you never came close to proving Dr. Ford wrong in a debate with Tom Norris. 

Don’t blame me for your failure, or the fact that an online record has been made for all to see over and over.  You lost.  The IJ lost.  The outdated SDA narrative lost.

This is how the Internet works.  It is not for hiding debate or suppressing discussion.  Social media exposes ideas and creates discussion; it also makes censorship impossible.  Thus, it is good that whenever someone searches for the IJ, they will see your failed attempt to promote and defend it. People today need to know that Dr. Ford was telling the truth, while the SDA leaders were hiding documents and being very dishonest about both church history and theology.

Today, the SDA’s promote utter nonsense and endless error, for which they must be held accountable.  People have a right to the facts.   The world is full of false religious teachers and worthless doctrine.  Those that know better need to speak up.  Here in America, we have the right to speak out about religion.

Fourth, I have no power to take down any pages at All Experts or the other website.  They are not my sites.  But even if there were, why would I take down anything that tells the truth and helps expose SDA error?  Why would I want to cover up and hide a debate where a self-proclaimed IJ expert was proven wrong for all to see?  That would be dishonest, which is no problem for you or the church, but this is not how any Gospel person should act.

Fifth, if you want to teach the IJ in the public square and sell DVD’s, you need to do a better job.  Because it is clear that you cannot defend it.  However, if you want to have another debate to try and redeem yourself and the IJ, I will co-operate.  But you will lose again.  The IJ cannot be defended; it is false and impossible doctrine because Jesus never teaches it.  But such a fatal point is only one of many.  The IJ is a dead, and so too anyone foolish enough to embrace this anti-Gospel error.  Adventism cannot go forward until this issue is resolved.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ … /intro.pdf

Herb said:  YOUR GOAL - I presume you wish to avoid legal action and liability for my legal costs. My USA Attorneys specialise in online slander and defamation. They have been briefed, have given their legal opinion and are ready to proceed if I so instruct.  However, they advised me I must first give you the opportunity to take the page down. If that fails, they will be instructed to seek a Court Order to force search engines, the owner of the website, the webmaster and the hosting company to take down the offending webpage. In such an event I will also be claiming my legal costs from you.

Tom said:  You presumed wrong.  I am not fearful of the legal system.  Only those that have done wrong need worry.  Do you think you are the only one that has access to lawyers?  America is overrun with lawyers, so they are not hard to find. While lawyers have their place, it is the Constitution that matters most.  There are very powerful legal protections for free speech in America. 

In 1996, in the landmark case Reno v. ACLU, a unanimous Supreme Court specifically extended the First Amendment to written, visual and spoken expression posted on the Internet.  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Source: First Amendment, U.S. Constitution

Our public, religious, discussion on the Internet is protected free speech in America.  I am free to speak my mind, regardless if you like it or not.

Moreover, you are going to have to come here.  You can’t have a trial in America, while you stay in Australia.  So do whatever you want.  But nothing short of a public confession about the IJ will help you with your bad, online reputation.  Can you walk away from the SDA’s, which seem to be a source of income for you, and determine only to follow the facts?  Can you let go of your cultic delusions and religious double-talk and say you are sorry to Dr. Ford?   In short, can you repent and embrace the Gospel?  Do you even know what that means?

Herb said:  We can achieve our respective goals quite easily.  All you need to do is remove the web page and any other negative personal comments you make about me on other blogs.  Then we are done and legal action is avoided.  It is that simple. 

http://www.atomorrow.org/fluxbb/viewtop … 273#p12273


Tom said:  We have different goals.  You want to promote Old Covenant, 19th century theology, complete with double-talk, censorship, and the use of bullying tactics; while I want to promote New Covenant, 21st century Adventism with Gospel truth, freedom, and transparency.  We are at great odds, even as we have a different Gospel, and a different view of religious liberty and eschatology.

Herb said:  This is NOT about the IJ. 

Tom said:  It is all about the IJ, and the need for serious, honest, Adventist Reform.  Did you think this was about you?  Silly boy, you are not the issue or the point.  You are just one of many religious clowns that promote worthless religion in order to make money.  This is about embracing the genuine Gospel versus a fraud, and saving the Advent Movement in the process.

Herb said:  It is not about whether suing is the Christian thing to do. This is about your libellous comments on the said web page that are readily picked up by search engines, causing me personal loss and damage.

Tom said:  First, losing a religious debate, and being attacked for your false views is not actionable slander or liable.  You are a public figure that entered the online world boasting that you could prove Dr. Ford wrong.  You even pretended to admire him as you defamed him.  Such hypocrites are the worst of traitors.  But regardless you failed for all to see.  You deserve whatever bad labels you have been given because you are not an honest man, much less a Gospel man.

Christians may use the legal system, which Jesus did in the Gospels and Paul in the book of Acts.  (That is why Paul went to Rome; he had a trial pending.)  So the issue is not about using the legal system, but rather, the promotion of knowingly false doctrine.  Which is what you are doing. You have been correctly called out for slandering Dr. Ford and being very wrong about doctrine.  Thus you deserve whatever negative association you get for supporting the IJ and attacking Dr. Ford and the Protestant Gospel that he promotes.  Sorry.

Those so foolish as to champion the IJ, will pay the price whenever the facts are pushed to the front.  Which is why you lost so badly in our online debate, and why you want to cover it up in the worst way.  Sorry, but you are not going to get a pass.  You lost.  The IJ lost.  The SDA’s in power have lost.  Dr. Ford is vindicated.  Don’t deny it.  Deal with it! 

Herb said: Let me know if you intend to remove the page and when it will be done.

Tom said:  Let me know when you are ready to reject the IJ as false doctrine and confess that you are dead wrong to both Dr. Ford and the world.  When will this be done?  Let me know and then we can talk further. 

However, if you continue to teach this error, then your failed debate will stand online until the end of time as a warning to all that the IJ cannot be defended.  It will also stand as a pattern to easily refute this false and silly doctrine that has destroyed the Advent Movement.  Don’t blame Dr. Ford, the Internet, or Google, or pretend that you are being treated unfairly by Tom Norris or the bloggers.  You lost a public, online debate fair and square, but yet, you are so dishonest, so anxious to sell false SDA doctrine, that you are trying to cover up this failed debate.  Those that promote or teach a false, IJ based Gospel are not innocent.  The NT teaches they are blind, stupid, and foolish.  They will incur a special punishment on the Day of Judgment.

Matt. 18:6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

James 3:1 Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment.

Herb said:  If I do not hear from you by Thursday morning 8 September 2016 you can expect to hear from my Attorneys and costs will be sought from you.

Tom said:  First off, in America, the other side rarely covers the legal costs.  So forget this worthless threat.  That may be the case in some other countries, but not here.  So you had better plan to pay your own way, my friend.  Moreover, not only will you lose, but you may also be hit with a counter-complaint, which would ask damages of you.  Considering you live on the other side of the world, I would re-think your threats and your theology.  Neither are working very well. 

Luke 14:31 “Or what king, when he sets out to meet another king in battle, will not first sit down and consider whether he is strong enough with ten thousand men to encounter the one coming against him with twenty thousand?

Luke 14:32 “Or else, while the other is still far away, he sends a delegation and asks for terms of peace.

Conclusion

In 1980, the IJ was exposed as false doctrine for all to see.  Dr. Ford and Raymond Cottrell, and millions of other SDA’s were not wrong to repudiate this impossible teaching.  And neither are billions of former and present Christians.  The IJ is a dead doctrine, with no hope of rehabilitation.

Anyone today, no matter how educated or pious, that tries to pretend great theological proof has been discovered since 1980 that proves Dr. Ford wrong is a liar; a religious con artist with a self-serving, anti-Gospel agenda.  It would only take a few minutes to expose such a person as a religious fool, which of course is what happened in our quick online debate that you are trying to cover-up and hide. 

What kind of a quack would try such a stunt in this instant age of knowledge?  Do the Australian SDA’s think we are stupid in America?  Or that we can’t follow the facts and understand our own Church history?  Adventism was born in America, and Glacier View took place in America.  Unlike so many from your part of the world, we know this history very well.  Neither the historical or theological facts support the IJ or anything close to it.  It is great error, not some wonderful pillar in the Three Angels Messages. 

All Adventists owe Dr. Ford, an Australian, a big thank you for telling the truth about the IJ and standing firm for the Gospel and the fundamentals of Adventism.  Those Australians that did not support Dr. Ford should be ashamed of themselves; embarrassed for embracing such wrong doctrine.  Your recent and ongoing attempt to slander and defame Dr, Ford has fallen flat.  The Internet will make sure that the whole world knows the truth about the IJ and those foolish enough to promote it.

Today, the Advent Movement is near death, at the very time when the end of the world seems so near.  This is very wrong.  Adventism needs to be revived, reformed, and updated into a New Covenant paradigm, where 21st century Gospel eschatology is credible and true.  This is the destiny of the Advent Movement; to prepare the church for the Second Coming and the great tribulation that precedes it.  But they must first admit their errors and repent, embracing the Gospel with both hands. 

Why don’t you get serious about Eternal Life by standing up like a man and repenting of the IJ?  Why not embrace serious, credible, Adventist Reform?  The true church at the end of time will be a repenting people.  Why? Because they have embraced so much false doctrine.

Matt. 3:2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

Rev. 3:19 ‘Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent.

Matt. 11:15 “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Offline

#23 09-30-16 11:13 am

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: IJ Discussion: Tom Norris & Herb Kersten

Herb,

I see you complained to Dr. Ford?  Asking him to “intercede re the blog that troubles" you. 

While I am always happy to hear from Dr. Ford, you can hardly expect him to take issue with those that defend him.  How ironic that you would appeal to him to hide your failed attempt to defend the IJ. Considering you have launched a public campaign to slander and declare him wrong about the doctrine of the IJ.   Do you understand that Tom Norris is defending Dr. Ford and his correct Gospel theology, while you support the anti-Gospel outcome of Glacier View?  Your false Gospel condemns you for all to see.  Sorry.

Gal. 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

Gal. 1:9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

So what is the point of complaining to Dr. Ford?  Your behavior, like your theology, makes little sense.  You should be ashamed of yourself for trying to win a theological debate with the use of threats, force, and back channels.  Such tactics do not reflect the teachings of Jesus, and you must know this fact.

Now if you are ready to apologize to Dr. Ford and admit that he was correct to repudiate the IJ, and that this confused doctrine was never a “pillar” in the 1st Angels Message, then we can talk.  Or we can have another debate and you can try again to rehabilitate the IJ.   Your choice.

But we all know that you will fail again, and so too, do you.  Which is why you are trying so hard to cover-up your losing debate.  But it won’t work.  The IJ is a dead and worthless doctrine; it cannot be saved and it is time for all Adventists to stop fighting against the Gospel and repent for Glacier View.   

The Advent Movement will continue to fragment and self-destruct until both leaders and people admit that Glacier View was a travesty and apologize to Dr. Ford.  The present path is not sustainable.  The 3rd Angels Message is dead and the time has come to bury the corpse. 

The Advent Movement must repent for Glacier View and go forward to the next and final paradigm, which the pioneers called the 4th Angels Message.  Eschatology and the great time of trouble are not going to wait for SDA’s.  The end of the world is closer than ever before and it is time for the Advent Movement to wake from their deep sleep and repent for their many doctrinal errors and embrace credible Gospel Reform.

Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”

I hope this helps,

Gospel Regards,

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB