BlackSDA: Is Capitalism Biblical And Should (sda) Christians Be “going Along” Wi - BlackSDA

I. The Crisis
II. The Cause
III. The Root CauseIV. The Alternative
V. The Resources
VI. Decision Time
VII. The Endtime Mandate
VIII. The Biblical Challenge
IX. The Project
X. Further Information

I. The Crisis
One of the foremost questions posed by unbelievers concerning Christianity, and God in particular, is: How could God exist when there is so much suffering in this world? Where is "your God" when so many people are gratuitously dying? They cannot reconcile how a loving God can allow all these things to go on. But in reality, the question that should be asked is : Where is God’s Church and His people in this world? Where are his supposed “ambassadors” and “representatives” in the face of the world's humanitarian needs? There are hundreds of million suffer and die from chronic malnutrition. Around 1.1 billion do not have access to clean freshwater, with an additional 1.5 billion not having proper sanitation resulting in a total of over 5.3 million deaths a year. An estimated 1.3 billion people lack access to basic healthcare resulting in the suffering and death of tens of millions each year from preventable and/or treatable diseases. Over 46 million babies worldwide are killed every year through the practice of abortion. Many more are orphans without a proper home; abjectly poor; uneducated and without the hope of an education. Many more are unable to be functional in society due to a disability which, with the proper aids and/or assistance, can be surmounted or coped with. Can God’s Church do something to redress these injustices and downright evils? And if yes, then should it not do it?

II. The Cause
To state it frankly there is a single, subtle, yet powerful (actually: “empowered”) evil that is preventing the Church from “Triumphing” over these problems. It is “subtle” because no one seems to recognize it as what it really is, or even wants to denounce it. It is “powerful” (actually “empowered”) because it only gets its power from those who consider it to be worth the godlike status that it has been given. What is this hidden evil. Well to find out one simply has to ask "why is the Church actually not doing works that will heal the world of its problems. Why isn’t the Church growing crops to feed the world’s hungry? After all were not Adventist Educational Institution established in areas where agricultural skills can also be developed. Why is freshwater unavailable to so many when the world surface is 70% water, and that thousands of feet deep? Why is there not a better alternative for women when they are intending to have an abortion for social and/or economic reasons? And so on. Well, the primary, if not, the only reason that comes to one’s mind is that: ‘the Church does not have that kind of MONEY to provide such resources.’ And that usually silences that debate. This supposed “reality” is viewed as the final arbitrator in these matters and comes to decide how much, if any, humanitarian work the Church will or could do. Sure this is the right answer for many in this world, but should it also be accepted as truth by God’s people? Is this world economic’s system a true measure of the world’s (i.e., this planet’s) “economy”, or is it just a subjective spurious system driven by, and at the profit of, those who have, at whatever level of this pyramid-like scheme they are on, at the expense of those who do not have. In the end, it is those who are at the very bottom of this pyramid who have all the weight come and crush them (i.e., the poor and suffering of the world).

III. The Root Cause
Consider this fact. The single most influential factor in any nation’s economy is not the value of raw materials and natural resources, nor the tools and machinery needed to process theses materials, but it is the “human factor.” It is what men and women believe that their knowledge, innovations and services are worth to others. This is tangibly reflected in “labor costs.” These labor cost almost always make up 70-75% of the value of a nation economy. This means that in a powerful economic engine like the United States of America, if labor costs were subtracted from its economy, its GDP/per capita value would go from its present value of $41,800 to around $10,000. Furthermore, consider this other fact. In 2005 the U.S. had a $12.5 trillion dollar economy, yet the total value of non-fuel raw materials used domestically during that year was a mere $58.9 billion dollars (source: usgs.gov). That represents a meager 0.005% of its economy. This is all due to the fact that by the time a shapeless raw material has reach a final useful form, it has gone through and been affected by so many cumulative and varying levels of this “human factor” that it suddenly is now worth up to hundreds of times its primitive value. As a consequence, a house that has a value of well over $750,000 in the American economy actually only has less than $2,500 worth of raw materials in it; or a mid-size car worth around $18,000 has less than $250 worth of metals and raw materials. Compounded to that (pun will be intended), have you ever, or are you having to, pay a mortgage almost 3 times more than what its principle value was. Or does anything justify a professional athlete making in 8 month of work, or rather play, 3 times more than what a surgeon will make in a lifetime. There is a widely accepted saying that states that: “Money makes the world go round” but the facts clearly indicate that it is ‘People who make the world go round.” All this to say that it is the human factor in economies that have come to make things so unbalanced and so unattainable for many.

IV. The Alternative
What would happen if God’s people pooled their knowledge, know-how and resources, to labor for those in need. For example, what if instead of Seventh Day Adventist working for various secular industries and companies, what if they instead came together and formed denomination owned and operated companies/industries. If they in turn did not charge labor cost, but had their needs met by the other, similarly operated, denominational companies/industries, then at the base of all of this, and at the very least, only the money needed for raw materials would be needed.
So many humanitarian accomplishments could then be made because of such a system by those who would benefit from it:
-Intensive, and more efficient farms can be established and operated for those in need of adequate nutrition.
-Proper sanitation and freshwater could be supplied to many. (If the oil and gas industry can retrieve oil from hundreds of feet below the ocean floor, process it and then transport it thousands of miles away by tankers and/or pipelines, overland and/or under sea, with pumping stations and all, surely freshwater can be produced and/or filtered from various bodies of water and distributed to those who need it.)
-Would-be aborted babies could be spared by being purchased for adoption through legal means from willing mothers who would also not incur any debt from the expenses related to the pregnancy and birth of the child.
-The sick and those with health ailments would receive much more medical care. -Many would receive an education and would eventually help themselves out of poverty.
-(And the addition of a church annex and fellowship hall would not cost, e.g., $4 million at the detriment of the needy who would greatly benefit from these sums of money).
Consider this alternative method as a mega-do-it-yourself project, in essence similar to, e.g., a group of construction friends getting together to freely build a backyard deck for a friend with materials they purchased at a hardware store and equally shared the costs.

V. The Resources
Of course, one will now ask: Where will all these raw materials come from? Isn’t the world running out of sufficient resources? The answer is actually: no. What the world is supposedly running out of is what economist considered as “economically viable" resources, i.e., what would not demand more effort and better technology to procure. This planet contains sufficient resources to meet this world present and future needs many times over. The oceans alone are a vast reservoir of untapped resources ranging from polymetallic nodules and metal rich sediments to dissolved minerals. While these resources (in International Waters) are freely available for exploitation, the UN Law of the Seas (LOS) requires that developing countries receive (at least) 1%-7% of the withdrawn resources, which is exactly what this project plans to do. Furthermore, if all known technologies today were fully and widely implemented in world economies, the present need of resources would drop considerably. All energy needs would all be met by renewable, clean systems. How much waste is generated annually because things are subjectively considered to be “uneconomical.” Many times it is less costly to discard something that requires a trivial repair and buy a new one. The same goes for items and materials that can be recycled but are not. The $140+ billion dollars spent annually in the U.S. alone on commercial advertisements could easily feed all of the world’s hungry. All of these wastes are a direct result of individualism, commercial competition and the profit-making mentality. In actual direct contradiction to the supposed “economical” argument they propose, these actions rather significantly waste and reduce the amount of resources that could be available to help others with.

VI. Decision Time
Do the people of God have to live that way? Do they have to be constrained by such an unGodly system? Yet we are either convinced that this way is the only way to live by, as if it was God’s own way, or we are left with no other apparent choice than to go along with it. Whether we believe in this system or not it still greatly affect our every day life and our ability to minister in behalf of those who really need it. How many would like to become missionaries, but under this current economical system, it would not be feasible. How can God’s people help others in need, if they in turn become people in need. Clearly there must be a way to overcome this major hurdle. And if ever the people of God can rise above this worldly system and live according to the many Godly principles found in the Bible which are categorically opposed to all of this, it is now. In this computer age, when the basis of most technologies are in the public domain, (or, if need be, can be licensed), the knowledge, the freedom, the educational resources and the human power (i.e., 20+ million people) are all available to accomplish this through a Biblical, needs-based economy (cf. Acts 2:44,45; 4:32-35 [36, 37]) of Apostolic times that will allow for the mandates of God to be carried out. (e.g., Isa 58:6-12; Mat. 25:31-46). (And no, there would not be a need to "sell all.")

VII. The Endtime Mandate
It was Christ’s method to meet the needs of the people he taught, and it is his method alone will give true success in reaching the people (MH 143). Surely this is also to be the Church’s. If we were to present this dilemma to Jesus, He would, as He did before, likewise say: “You give them something to eat. (Mark 6:37). As “the decisions of the last day turn upon our practical benevolence” (TM 399); and as Isaiah 58 is indeed stipulating the conditions for God’s covenant with His people through the fuller understanding/observance of His Glorious Sabbath (by taking care of those in need); and since Christ's main criteria in separating the sheep from the goats mainly focuses on how those in need are treated (Matt 25:31-46), then shouldn’t God’s people be taking all the necessary means to bring about these works? Indeed: “there is need of a deeper, stronger, more constraining testimony on the power of the truth as seen in the practical godliness of those who profess to believe it.” (Mar 107). Then will the ‘good news of God’s Kingdom’ be fully preach as a witness to the nations of this world (Matt 28:13) as the world will clearly see what healing the principles of God bring. Then will the (benevolent) character of Christ be perfectly reproduced in his people (COL 69; read in its context of pp. 62-69). The world will no longer ask: “Where is your God?” or “What kind of God is this?”, for His people will truly be representing Him on earth (COL 68).

“It is the darkness of misapprehension of God that is enshrouding the world. Men are losing their knowledge of His character. It has been misunderstood and misinterpreted. At this time a message from God is to be proclaimed, a message illuminating in its influence and saving in its power. His character is to be made known. Into the darkness of the world is to be shed the light of His glory, the light of His goodness, mercy, and truth. This is the work outlined by the prophet Isaiah in the words, "O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! Behold, the Lord God will come with strong hand, and His arm shall rule for Him; behold, His reward is with Him, and His work before Him." Isa. 40:9,10. Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love. (COL 415)

VIII. The Project
You may have noticed that such an undertaking takes extensive planning, precise structuring, and efficient organization. Among other things it will require the establishment of a legal entity to “house” and facilitate this project and for physical provisions to be made to accommodate a potential membership/population that can grow, through the project's various ministries, by as much as 50 million people per year. Yet in terms of the required finance and work time needed to implement this project, extensive feasibility studies have shown that each participant in the project aged 21 and older would only have to spend up to a total of US$2,800, disbursed as needed over a period of 7 years; and some would have to work onsite for only 2 weeks per year over this same period (e.g., during a work vacation period).

IX. The Biblical Challenge
On the one hand there is a worldly system known as “capitalism”. A spurious, unwritten, enslaving, survival-of-the-fittest/richest law which encourages unbridled selfishness, greed, strife and oppression. On the other hand there is the liberating, caring, peacemaking, Sabbatical system of God, which reaches out a saving and indiscriminating hand to all those in need. Therefore “choose you this day whom you will serve” (Jos 24:14, 15). If you consider this man-valued system, championed by western nations (of which 80% of their population are Christians) and obediently adhered to or desired by the rest of the world, whether rich or poor, to be worthy of the godlike value it is given, then by all means, do no changes. Give it its “worth-ship”! Let it continue to dictate who will eat or starve, who will live or die, who will hear, understand and experience the Gospel or go to Christ-less grave. Let it continue be to god (1 Kgs 18:21, 24). There is really no difference with this and when ancient pagan nations would themselves mold and shape little statuettes from various metals and then ascribe to them godlike qualities and do whatever these gods supposedly told them they should do, even passing their children through the fire, and then the people of God virtually or actually adhering to these standards in trying to conduct the work of the Creator God. (cf. PK chap. 14). But remember, you actually cannot serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other (Matt 6:24). Hundreds, if not thousands, of times more can be done than what is currently being done. [Matt. 25:14-30]. Case in point, while the Church has a net growth of around 1 million members per year, yet the world has over 130 million new births each year, with another ca. 56 million people dying to mostly Christless graves. Clearly there is much more that needs to be done in regards to global evangelism. Furthermore a global Church of over 14 million baptized members only has around 16,000 credentialed missionaries worldwide, and much more can be done than only employing 4600 people for global humanitarian work with the paltry results of reaching out to only 0.009%, at the most, of the actual number of people in need, and with about US$ 7.00 worth of annual aid per person aided (ADRA). In this light of what is not being done to even “one of the least of these” (Matt 25:46), the Church can only expect one judgement if Christ was to bring about the end now. (vs. 41-44, 46). Under the proposed economic plan of the NJK Project, the output of all of these areas of missions and ministry would be significantly increased. Literally every member would be able to participate in global evangelism, missions and humanitarian work. The annual average of $7.00 per person aided would come to represent at least $1400 worth of annual aid.

And in case you have not noticed it yet, “Revelation’s Babylon” does not solely have influence in ecclesiastical matters but her “sensuous” i.e., contra-God, anti-Sabbath, principles and practices also lead to the rise and propagation of a worldwide spurious economic system (Rev 18). Clearly God considers His Sabbath to be more than a day of Worship or a day off occurring every seventh day. It is also the basis the everyday lifestyle and "economy” of His people. Correspondingly, the Mark of the Beast, to be enforced through economic means by the second beast of Revelation 13 is based on more than only a day of the week as it seeks to completely undermine and obliterate the true character of the Creator God by substituting His Sabbatical economic principles for self-centered, materialistic ones. The combined, threefold light of the Three Angels’ Message (MS 52, 1900) must be given to counter this religious, socioeconomic counterfeit.

X. Further Information
To have more information concerning the accomplishing of this endeavor to help those in need, you can go to www.njkproject.info. If you would like to participate in the project’s web-based Biblical Research and Productions Institute, simply email WBSC@njkproject.info.

Ronald Monestime
Director of the NJK Project
(a.k.a. Mount Zion Project; Holy City Project)
Email: contact@njkproject.info

“In God's great plan for the redemption of a lost race, He has placed Himself under the necessity of using human agencies as His helping hand. He must have a helping hand, in order to reach humanity. He must have the cooperation of those who will be active, quick to see opportunities, quick to discern what must be done for their fellow men.” (1 SM 99)

welcome NJK, glad you joined... this is a discussion forum first and foremost so we ask that you interact rather than post long treatises about something that interests you..... Please take this recommendation to heart, you don't want to be accused of pushing a product or advertising something.....

this thread will be closed for now....

after talking with NJK via PM, he assured me that he was interested in starting a discussion, so let the discussion begin....this topic is now open....

Update:
Visit the NJK Project's blog at http://njkproject.blogspot.com
It presents some pertinent issues that form the basis of, and show the necessity for, this planned Global Humanitarian Mission and Ministry, both using Biblical parameters.

Currently examined topics are:
1. Book Preview: The Biblical Interpretation of Daniel's 70 Weeks (Dan 9:1-27)
2. Testimony to the Church - Part 1
3. Book Preview: God All Mighty! (Divine Foreknowledge or Divine Foreplanning?)
4. The Church Triumphant
5. Ed Reid: 7 Year Christian Mortgage
6. Text Proof - Reply to TC1 Message
7. The Ministry of David Gates
8. Daniel 11 - The Text - North vs. South
9. Our Final Test
10. The Sealing of God's People - Part 1 (Ezekiel 8)
11. The Sealing of God's People - Part 2 (Ezekiel 9)
12. The Heart of the Elijah Message (Malachi 4:5, 6)

[These topics can be discussed here]

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 18 November 2009 - 12:22 AM

I think there's great value in the concepts of Sabbath/jubilee economics, justice, and relating. Totally agree that the root of the day is more than a comment on timekeeping. It speaks to creation's universal connection under God.

If followed to its full end, however, it does away with the distinctions between insider and outsider. This is not something that many people are prepared to embrace because the consequences for doctrine and living are significant.

It's still early but the OP sounds as if it too holds an insider/outsider view of humankind. Which is interesting.

At first glace this seems to be a mix of good ideas about humanitarian efforts and bizarre ideas - like floating cities that separate the Christians form the others. It's bad enough that in the future we are going to separate the Christians (heaven) from the others (hell), do we really have to start now? It seems the work to be done is not more separation, but working in the existing cities we have.

Having said that, I may have missed the point - will have to take a closer look.

These subjects are too serious unto our soul & salvation to bundle them up like this. This is a dis-service to YHWH & us, pls less discuss one of these subjects at a time?

NJK, will you pls start a couple of new threads from this one?

Capitalism as defined in the dictionary is this:

"an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market"

That is biblical and allowable to the people of God. Paul when he was making tents was a capitalist and he used his access to the marketplace as a means of ministering the gospel. The virtuous woman of Proverbs 31 is a capitalist; she makes goods and sells them; she invests in property. Lydia in the book of Acts was a capitalist; she was a seller of purple (which means she was wealthy). Nowhere is it stated or implied in scripture that one could not make money by running a profitable venture.

What is not allowable is covetousness, exploitation and greed... and if you think those things only occur in capitalism, you are delusional.

In His service,
Mr. J

This post has been edited by awesumtenor: 03 December 2009 - 08:26 AM

Sorry for the delay in response here. Although I had kept this forum page active on my browser tabs, I did not notice the comments that were being made here.

Important: I have discussed in length the various issues on the Holy City project on another discussion forum and have reposted it on my website’s CAQ section. You may want to browse through that discussion first as it may answer many ‘commonly asked questions.’

Aza

Quote

I agree. In fact, I believe that the reason why God gave these principles in Israel’s Economy was to safeguard His people against such literally “murderous” injustices we also see in today’s economic world, where “live and let die” is the dominant and prevailing philosophy.

Quote

Could you elaborate on your insider/outsider view. I do not quite get it?

Avonia

Quote

The point of this Humanitarian Works and Gospel Ministry Project is not to ‘separate just for the sake of separation’ in a reclusive monastical way. The separation that will inevitably take place by this endeavor is both necessary and practical. First of all, none of the global and significant ministries that are planned by this project can be done if there is not a large gathering of Biblically-like minded people. If great distances have to continually be overcome, then that will be a crippling obstacle. Secondly, as stated above, the most resource intensive work that this project will do is to engage in preserving the very life of would-be aborted babies in a ministry that is currently being called Aborting Abortion. Now, as stated in the initial post, as this ministry alone can cause the (dependent) population of this project to grow by, now, as much as 60 million people per year, then the project’s cities and dedicated industries will be a necessity to adequately house, and provide for, this rapidly expanding population. I currently do not see any country in the world that would accept to see such a growth within its territorial borders as they are ultimately still liable for this population in its borders, even if they were granted some sort of political autonomy (which is not likely to be done). Case in point Native/Indigenous populations in western countries. So the only option that is left is to build floating cities, and in international waters. The recent popularity of large cruise ships shows that this is all quite feasible, and really more exotic/luxurious than “bizarre”.


EliYahh

Quote

I understand and will work shortly on posting some of my blog’s posts in separate threads.


awesumtenor

Quote

In the light of what the Bible actually teaches, I cannot fully agree with your wishful/rationalized view of what Capitalism is in inevitable reality. If it is to be such a harmless and pure system then why can’t the 81% of Christians in First World countries model this. (And just for the record, the “rhetoricized” ‘delusional comment’ you made, which, at best, is a “sucker punch”, and at worst, a cheap shot, was not at all necessary. You could have ascertained my actual understanding on these socio-economic issues if you had bothered to find out what I have said on these issues, e.g., on my linked website. At the very least, ask the simple question instead of veiledly casting aspersions. I fully know that other worldly economic systems have their faults, many common to Capitalism. I am however not even defending any of these worldly systems. I am rather defending what the Bible has to offer, and surely it has much more to offer than Capitalism. Also, for your own benefit, I must also tell you that, I have dealt with such sly attitudes as yours in the past discussions on this topic, and those who have had such attitudes have only proven them to have been the desperate, hysterical, defensive tactics of people who feel threaten by what the Bible actually has to say on these issues. They’ve all acted as if their cherished gods were being reduced to rubbles right before their eye, which in fact is the very case. So may I recommend that you first thoroughly verify your views with what the Bible really teaches before making such false, and “straw man”, insinuations. I have seen this “pretext” approach used before and it really is not Biblical.)

In regards to your comments, first of all, Paul was working on an extraordinary, extensive, itinerant ministry, which had more financial needs than regular ministries, and he did not want it to be an added burden on the quite poor and stricken Jerusalem Church, so he engaged in tent making to also provide for the cause by (self-)supporting his own ministry. However Paul himself strongly encouraged a willful collective wealth sharing for believers, based upon the God-ordained example in the distribution/collection of manna (2 Cor 8:7-15). All of the early believers worked in some sort of trade. The disciples themselves had been fishermen. The “Virtuous Woman” of Proverbs 31 is engaging in work to ultimately provides for her family and also for those in need (vs. 20). Jesus’ father, and Jesus Himself were engaged in carpentry. That is not the “capitalism” per se, that I have denounced. (In fact, these are merely all varying forms of “employment.”) What the Bible teaches, and recommends, especially in times of need as it exists today, is that these externally obtained funds be used to meet the collective needs of all other believers. This is the Inspired and Endorsed, Biblical example that I am advocating and seeking to (re-)implement so that God’s work can be done without having to pay the exorbitant, senseless prices that competitive-based capitalism compiles and then dictates. The Spirit of Prophecy is quite clear that it is this ‘Systematized Benevolence’ that God wholly approves of (2 SG 230, 231; MB 137). So the issue here is not that I am saying that ‘all work is evil,’ it is what is done with privately obtained wealth in regards to meeting the needs of other that makes all of the difference between today’s practised Capitalism and a Biblical Economy. And additionally, there really is absolutely nothing Biblical about “competition”, and without it, Capitalism, as it exists today, would completely “deflate.”

Furthermore, it must be stated that the “Virtuous Woman” in Proverbs 31 is being cited as an example in Israel to what a woman can be. From the opening question in vs. 10 it can be seen that this was indeed rare in Israel. The pro-active, collaborative efforts on her part, to come to the aid of her working husband, will help to improve the fortunes of her family as a whole. In other words, it was being shown here that the woman’s active participation in the income of her family was perfectly within the will of God, and the increase from her work, based on this foundational spirit of collaboration, was part of the blessings which He envisioned for His people. This is also how the Spirit of Prophecy understood this. (See e.g., FLB 256 and RC 173).

Based upon the Biblical template, in my project, I fully allow for the basic trading with other country as a means of revenue, even the lending with interest to foreigners, as God allows (Deut 15:1-11ff), however, as God wants it to be, usurious profiting will not be done “domestically” i.e., upon fellow believers. (See on this page) Interestingly enough, most of this foreign revenue will be used to provided for the infants that would more than likely have been murdered, but-for this ministry. So it also certainly is not a ‘Believers-enrichment’ scheme.

This common topic is discussed in more detail on the CAQ section on my website.

NJKProject, on 09 December 2009 - 09:18 AM, said:

All human groups eventually have to deal with the questions of boundaries, sectarianism, and insularity. Groups formed to serve a narrowly defined population often come up on these questions early.

For example, the first generation of Seventh-day Adventists took the position that the door of salvation was shut behind them, that those peer Adventists who returned to mainline denominations had abandoned the truth of God, and those denominations were Babylon's harlot daughters. None of this sort of thing inclines one to be too neighborly; even Mrs. Jones' vegetable dish might be cooked with bacon fat... avoid it.

And so the insider group defines itself not just by what it is but also by what it keeps out, what it refuses to recognize as "alike", and what it treats as "foreign" or "other" and so withdraws from.

The ancient Israelites also came upon these issues, and several of their group rules highlighted the walls between their insiders and other nations' outsiders. They were reluctant to dismantle those walls when God called them on it.

What God has challenged for me time and time again is the tendency to translate difference into a value distinction: rather than stop at specializing in vegetarian products, I might go further and criticize competitor products and the local dairy farmer. I don't think that kind of approach is helpful to the wider food market, even if it temporarily advantages "me and my house."

AzA, on 09 December 2009 - 06:15 PM, said:

I honestly am not sure why what you have said should apply to the NJK Project, and this may simply be because I know what the project really is all about, while you seem to be speculatively dealing in what you think it is, or should be. As I have said before, the objective of this project is not to ‘separate just for the sake of separation.’ This necessary separation has quite practical reasons. Every country has its esteemed values that it wants to protect, and civil immigrants just cannot come to such a country, go against these codified values and expect to be accepted or stay. The NJK’s plans to fully adhere to Biblical values, mainly to continually be in a position to help the now over 100,000,000 human beings who die annually from quite preventable/curable causes (cf. Matt 25:31-46; Isa 58). Only adherence to the ways and principles of God can ensure that this can be done, hence, in part here, the (ideological) reason for a physical separation. The main practical reason has been stated in my last post. 

As stated in the front page of the NJK Project’s website, this planned country is fully open to anyone who wants to be able to do these much needed works. I really could care less how the rest of the world chooses to (continue to) live. That is entirely their problem and any resulting “Biblical peculiarity” from the NJK’s lifestyle stance, will not now cause me to shy from being different to the glory of God. Your apparent ‘conformity to everyone and everything else in the fear of seeming to be different’ is certainly not advocated anywhere in the Bible. In fact, it was when God’s people have chosen to live in this compromising way that they were in a state of full-blown apostasy. Israel did not fail in their mission because God had called them out to be a separate and peculiar people, but because they refused to accomplish the various outreach mandates that God had given them in regards to the rest of the world. Their separation was to aid in this Grand Mission, but they lost track of that fact. The NJK Project will ever have that failed example, among several others, before them as a warning of what the refusal to follow God’s “straight and narrow” ways will result in.

NJKProject, on 10 December 2009 - 07:37 AM, said:

It's so interesting that you say this with such ease. What I've noticed in the Bible is a whole array of values.

NJKProject, on 10 December 2009 - 07:37 AM, said:

Let's assume you demonstrate something interesting. What are your plans for sharing it with the rest of the world?

Avonia, on 10 December 2009 - 10:17 AM, said:

That is because of the fact that while the Bible does have “an array of values,” Jesus Christ has shown us which ones are still fully binding upon Christians. He has also given us the template on dealing with others that He did not specifically address. (Cf. Acts 15:1-29)

Avonia, on 10 December 2009 - 10:17 AM, said:

 
I assume by this question that you are not simply asking how I plan to promote the Project itself to others. This will be done in the most effective way, which would be various forms of public announcements, mainly in Christian circles. I however suppose, and correct me if I am wrong, that you mean ‘how do I plan to share the values of the NJK with other peoples.’ Frankly the NJK will primarily, if not entirely, focus on meeting the vital needs of the affected billions of people in world. If the rest of the world wants to emulate this quite noticeable example, whether personally and/or nationally, will be their decision. The NJK can, and will only, lead by modelling a national Christ-like example which will serve as a tangible witness to other nations (Matt 24:14). In more practical terms, as stated on this page of the Project’s website, in implementing its humanitarian works, the NJK will be operating over 4000+ “missions campuses” located near the 4000+ population centers of the world that have a population of 100,000 people and more. From these campuses, missions to smaller and/or remote areas will also be done. In this way, and with a planned continual, but rotating occupation of these campuses by NJK citizens, the NJK will also always have a quite significant, permanent  “territorial” presence.

NJKProject, on 10 December 2009 - 08:37 AM, said:

Why did I make the comments I made? Because of statements like the one you posted today. I can only respond to you based on what you say. Your thoughts are not yet accesible to me.

So... your not caring about how others live -- was that rhetorical overstatement for the sake of this conversation? Or how you truly feel?

NJKProject, on 10 December 2009 - 08:37 AM, said:

I wonder what makes you think I'm afraid of difference. Diversity runs all through nature, and I enjoy it quite a lot.

What nature tends to do with its diversity is to make a willow a stronger willow, and an oak a stronger oak. It tends not to make willows into oaks.

I think it's great that you recognize the risk of insularity that comes with creating a specialist group. Outreach is one asset for people concerned about that. Another asset is a clear sense of the difference between function and value. As Paul wrote, the eye cannot say to the hand "I don't need you." There's a lot of positive potential in your commitment to service; I wish you well with it.

 

AzA, on 10 December 2009 - 11:13 PM, said:

While ‘my thoughts may not be accessible to you’, I have posted my views and objectives on my repeatedly referenced website. So when comments are made here, I assume that people are responding to what I have also stated, and made clear, there. I really do not have the time to restate everything that is written there in this forum. So if one really wants to know what the project is indeed all about, then consult the website.

AzA, on 10 December 2009 - 11:13 PM, said:

I can see where the misunderstanding could occur here, however as you have noticed, it was in the line of a “rhetorical overstatement.” What I specifically meant by “the rest of the world” are the current people (e.g., people in rich First World countries) who have the means and education to do something much more significant for the billions of people in vital need in the world, but rather choose to live on in a revered selfish, individualistic, wasteful and indifferent way. The NJK Project will focus all of its resources in coming to the aid of the neglected people of the world who are dying from quite preventable causes, and those who have chosen to live their selfish lives, honouring and heeding the “survival of the richest”dictates of Capitalism can continue to live so, as they choose. As the saying goes: ‘You can bring a donkey to the watering trough, but you cannot force it to drink.’ The projected saving of tens of millions of lives annually by the planned NJK’s Humanitarian works, mainly because the selfish ways of Capitalism will have been replaced by the much more effective ways that the Bible has to offer, will be a quite noticeable witness that these people will see, and can easily understand, if they will want to. So no extraordinary effort will be specifically made towards trying to convince them of what they choose to ignore. And that is indeed ‘the furthest worry or care from my mind.’ Wasting any effort to also tend to such willfully blind people will only result in people in critical need continuing to needlessly suffer and die.

Quote

The raising of this “diversity” issue here is effectively a “red herring.” When you made your outsider/insider comments earlier in regards to what you thought my project was about, it seemed quite clear to me that you considered that the NJK Project was trying to ‘separate people in a monastical, “holier-than-thou,” way.’ And based on the comment you’ve added here, you seem want to retain in some form such incorrect view of the Project.’ That is not at all the intention of the project. The resulting ‘chips will simply fall where they may.’ When like-minded come together to accomplish a specific task, two such distinct groups will naturally be formed. “Difference” and “diversity” are not necessarily one and the same. Diversity implies a change from a common source; while difference mostly stem from two distinct sources. As an example, in relation to my project, believing, advocating and practising abortion is not a “diverse” view from what the Bible teaches in regards to the sanctity of life, but a “different” one. Such inherently “different” views will naturally cause a separation amongst people depending on which ones one want to adhere to.

AzA, on 10 December 2009 - 11:13 PM, said:

I highly suspect that this comment was made in the similar, commonly observed, knee-jerk reaction that ‘living in a society that seeks to equally meet the needs of all, as the NJK plans, will result in a bland, homogeneous society.’ That would be, and is, the furthest thing from what the NJK Project actually has planned. (See e.g., here or here). So as the NJK aims to equally provide everyone with the same needed resources, their can and will be a great “diversity” in each type of resource available to the public, just like (equally) producing automobiles to meet the needs of everyone can still allow for various designs.
While a willow does not have to, and really cannot, become an oak, if the willow, or even the oak, is contented with being anything less than all that they can be, then the whole of nature is detrimentally affected. The NJK aims to cooperatively facilitate everyone to achieve all that they can achieve, to the benefit of all, for this is really the ultimate purpose for why God has given all of us various talents.

AzA, on 10 December 2009 - 11:13 PM, said:

To be clear here, I am not “creating a specialist group.” Just endeavoring to establish the foundation and framework where, what the Bible shows that God expects of His people, particularly His highly blessed, endtime people, can readily be accomplished, and that, mainly by freeing themselves from the hamperings of the prevailing spurious Economic philosophy and system today.

AzA, on 10 December 2009 - 11:13 PM, said:

Again, to be clear here, the NJK is not seeking to draw from a ‘superior class’ of people. Anyone who wants to join can, and will, make a contribution towards the Project’s final goal, if they fully invest the various talents that God has blessed them with. This is what Jesus Christ’s parable of the Talents (Matt 25:14-30 cf. COL 325-365), which is the central part of His ‘package of Eschatological Parables’ in Matt 25, clearly teaches. Indeed, these three parables of: The Ten Virgins (vss. 1-13); The Talents (14-30); and The Sheep and the Goats (31-46) reveal the key “elements” that will assure final victory for God’s people, namely, respectively, the Holy Spirit, a Whole Investment of Given Talents; and Good Works in the form of Humanitarian Works. Cf. This related post on my blog.)

AzA, on 10 December 2009 - 11:13 PM, said:

Thanks! The ‘costs have been counted.’ All that the Project really needs now are people with the good will to bring about these Biblical goals. This will take the Spirit-led disposition of the Apostolic Church (Acts 4:32ff).

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 04:18 AM, said:

What's so offensive about this statement is the disregard for all of the people reading the same scripture who have been moved to a different conclusion.

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 08:20 AM, said:

I do not understand the point that you are trying to make here. Could you elaborate. 

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 08:45 AM, said:

I might have misunderstood you - but what I heard you say was that "being Biblical" means opposing abortion. From my perspective, this is similar to many other personal demands people make about universal "obvious" interpretations. Like, creation/evolution. Homosexuality. Mixed marriages. Not seeking medical attention. Women and the church. And so on. Looking to the Bible when determining the morality of these and other issues often results in some really poor choices because we ignore all of the other, more appropriate, ways of knowing.

This is why I'm questioning what you mean by "humanitarian." Because you are mixing it with "Bible based." I'm trying to understand your basis.

 

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 11:07 AM, said:

On especially this issue, I hope I was absolutely and unequivocally clear. The wanton, premeditated and systematic taking of another person’s life is clearly condemned by God in the Bible as murder and a violation of His Sixth Commandment. How much more for the whimsical reasons why abortion is practised today, all ultimately having to do with economical reasons. A Bible believing Christian can only submit his or her opinion to God’s clear will here. It is furthermore an incontrovertible observed scientific fact that Life begins at conception. Thus the wanton terminating of it, at any point after this, is murder. The only acceptable exception that can be made to this is in a “Life for life” situation where the very life of the mother is clearly threatened by the pregnancy.

Quote

In all seriousness, if you know of a Bible text that contradicts this view of ‘abortion as murder’ than do state it so that it can be considered.

Quote

First of all I cannot consider none of these cited issues here on the same level as abortion, simply because of the fact that none of them are ‘life or death’ issues.

Briefly in regards to the issues that you cite, a proper exegetical study of the Bible, and all that this entails, is needed in order to hold a Biblically sound view of them. Here is my current observed and/or studied opinion of them:

Creation/Evolution - The point that seems to cause people to believe in Evolution instead of Creation are the discoveries of certain “artifacts” that seem to indicate a date of existence that surpasses the ca. 6000 years reported in the Bible. First of all, I think that these dating methods have yet to prove to be reliable or exact. Secondly, the Bible seems to allow for in the Creation account of Genesis, that this planet, and all of its unshaped elements, could have been created long before God set out to organize this planet for habitation and create life on it. Furthermore, the Bible is clear that God created fully grown and developed living things, so they could have been aged to the point that they needed to be in order to be fully functional.

Also, as the saying goes, if Darwin had had access to a microscope, he would not have developed his theory of evolution. “Spontaneous generation” surely would have been seen to have been based upon an ignorance of the microscopic world.

Homosexuality - I think that the Bible (both in the OT and NT); and God’s anatomical sciences, are clear that homosexuality is both a deviant, and non-natural, state and practice. People today may believe that they are born “gay,” but if one would properly psych analyse them, they’ll will be able to pinpoint when, where and why their “wires” got crossed. There is no such thing as a “gay gene,” and any assumed, entrenched same-sex disposition by someone has really all various been effected on the mind by various external influences.

Mixed marriages - From what I understand, the “mix marriage” issues in the Bible have nothing to do with race, per se, but with an Israelite vs. non-Israelite / Believer vs. non-Believer incongruity. Only this is seen as an “unequal yoke”.

Not seeking medical attention - No where in the Bible is it taught that medicine should be shunned. That is predominantly a Jehovah Witnesses’ unbiblical aberration based upon a incorrect understanding of passages such as ‘not consuming the blood in meats.’ God endorse life and the prolongation and saving of it.

Women and the church - From what I have seen, the reason why women were not permitted to function in a priestly role in the Bible was all based upon the fact that it was Eve who led Adam to sin. Both were distinctly cursed for this sin, but the woman was then made to be subservient to her husband (Gen 3:16-19). So it is apparently based on this that a woman could not engage in a task that symbolically involved the making of atonement for sin, i.e., a priestly role. As sin is continued to tangibly be dealt with, even if at a lesser tangible extent in the NT era, through the various functions of an ordained pastor, I think that this restriction still applies. This does not mean that a woman cannot function at all in the Church. The God instituted ministry of Ellen White clearly shows this,. However, I think that it does still mean that a woman cannot function in ordained, pastoral exclusive/specific, functions.

Quote

It would be interesting to hear what “other, more appropriate, ways of knowing” you recommend for the above issues.

Quote

Now, none of these stances which will be a part of the foundational basis on the NJK Community will affect who will receive its Humanitarian Works. This is all based upon the ministry of Jesus who fully ministered to people who were suffering from even ‘sin-inflicted’ diseases. However this will not mean that such sinful practises should, or will be practised within the Community of the NJK, if for no other reason, than the practical one, (as God’s righteous ways ultimately all are), that, as various current developments in the world have shown, this will really only result in ‘shooting oneself in the foot’ and just perpetuate the current problems. There is no need for the NJK Project if that is to be the (e.g.,) America Jr. basis upon which it is to be founded, instead of its planned solid Biblical foundation.

In my experience, I have only repeatedly seen that careless, shoddy and poor Biblical studies are the root cause of all issues of contention and differences in, at least, the Christian Church. Choices can be made outside of the parameters set out in the Bible, and today we have the clear demonstration of what this results in. Only poor, or no, Bible study leads to “poor choices,” and thus, detrimental results. Also proper, i.e., Godly, Science, does not contradict the Bible’s teachings.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 11:26 AM, said:

So "open to anyone" means open to anyone who wants to conform to your thinking. Dangerous waters.

I do commend you for taking steps toward the alleviation of suffering in the world. I hope Christianity at large takes similar steps.

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 01:54 PM, said:

That is just the quip/trite, and quite “popular” thing to say, but is really just your unsubstantiated, private opinion. In your self-evident, relativist-based view, you do not have to substantiate, or justify, any statement you can make. If my views are not Biblical than that is what is “dangerous waters.” Otherwise there is nothing “dangerous” about following God’s will. If you think that they are unbiblical, then why don’t you point out where they are, instead of making spurious false accusations? Like I said above, and on the front page of my website, to try to do these self-sacrificing works in an “America Jr.” model is absolutely futile, as concretely proven today.

Quote

Does not “Christianity at large” know about the vital needs of the world??? The reason why they are not doing, or planning to do, anything significant to alleviate them is because those who can, namely First World Christians, are too busy ‘chasing their tails,’ as it were, trying to keep up with their dysfunctional economic system. As the Bible says, ‘you cannot serve both God and Mammon’ and that goes for professed Christians also.

I honestly, really do not even begin to see how, as, at the very least, a Christian, and presumably an SDA Christian, you would think that a Bible based project would endorse, allow and condone Biblically condemn, sinful practices, in any way!?!

And just for the record here, as it was plainly stated in the opening post on this thread, the NJK Project has parallel plans for a Biblical Research Institute comprised of 400+ researchers to deal with all Biblical Issues.


 

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 11 December 2009 - 03:37 PM

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 01:15 PM, said:

That I am a "relativist" - that's true. And I've worked very hard to become so. I do not consider solely pointing to the Bible either substantiation or justification. Many atrocities in the world have been committed by people doing so.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 01:15 PM, said:

I don't think whether something is "biblical" is highly correlated to whether it is moral. And whether something is "biblical" often has more to do with the person making the claim than it has to do with the Bible. Just look at the wide array of conclusions people reach reading the same text.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 01:15 PM, said:

Agreed.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 01:15 PM, said:

I suspect that much of what we define as sin has little to do with sinning - and much of our sinning is not addressed by our code. I see a very poor correlation between people who work hard to keep the code and right action. Said more simply, we can learn much more about sinning by simply paying attention to cause and effect than we can by reading the Bible.

NJK, I am trying to understand more about what you are proposing. Would you be more comfortable just giving me a list of acceptable questions?

interesting twists... as my social work professor use to say, "don't get defensive on me!!" lets continue the dialog...

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 05:18 AM, said:

I'm not sure this is a workable assumption. When the apostles went out and about they worked with the folks in the moment. Can't think of a case where they said "Y'know what, forget this conversation business -- go read my scroll."

Which doesn't mean it didn't happen. Just I can't think of an example.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 05:18 AM, said:

What's your basis for assuming that those who consciously choose a different path from you are "willfully blind" and a waste of time? Is that the sum of your experience?

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 05:18 AM, said:

You have said that separation from the main was a necessary function of your community. You referenced the ancient Israeli example as precedent for that claim, and you've said that the precedent is important to comply with today because the contemporary main is unGodly. What is the purpose of defining your course as "what God expects of His highly blessed endtime people" if you don't think that other courses are not what God expects? Are you now saying that separation isn't necessary? Are you not pursuing it because you think God requires it of you?

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 05:18 AM, said:

I can understand why you've offered this dichotomy given your example and some of the other belief commitments you have. But the premise is not persuasive to me in part because I understand the universe to be single-sourced: one Author, not two. I also understand humankind to be single-sourced.

In other words, while we differ on this particular premise, our difference does not lead me to frame you or your ideas as having another source. In the same way, I've chosen not to frame those who hold different beliefs as having another source.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 05:18 AM, said:

Y'know, if someone said this to you, your best bet is to approach them for clarification.

And if lots of people are making similar comments, perhaps you might start asking why they all understand your proposal in a similar way. It may help you improve the way you design and communicate it. It would be a mistake to view all feedback as "knee-jerk," especially since this is not a hostile audience and a few posters have already stated they can see some merit in your idea.

NJKProject, on 11 December 2009 - 05:18 AM, said:

Product diversity is not the same as population diversity. Product diversity is about output and range. Population diversity is about composition and potential. There's nothing irrelevant about discussing group composition and potential when your proposal requires group formation.

Quote

Well said.

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 04:12 PM, said:

That explains a lot! What’s the point of entering into a discussion when “relativism” is to be the final arbitrator. In such a case, I guess you can believe whatever you want, nothing is really right, nor wrong. It’s all “relative.” I think that 6000+ years of man pursue of this view, conceived by Lucifer himself while in Heaven, has shown that the “pain and pleasure” way is not the way to get to know and determine what is right or wrong. When there really is no point of reference, no specific point of destination, and no compass to guide, then that is a “trip” that I surely do not want to embark on. I choose to trust God’s knowledge, imparted through His expressed and revealed will, and live my life according to it.

While many “atrocities” have been (falsely) done in the name of God (e.g, religious persecutions, the Inquisition, the Crusades, religious, sectarian wars, U.S. slavery (in “ideological” part)); much more has been done in atheistic independence of Biblical views (e.g., the Holocaust, Soviet-style Communism, various wars and World Wars, the (Terrorists) nuclear bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, the Rwandan and Serbian Genocides, 2 billion+ abortions, etc.)

When you find an author, philosopher or guru who even begins to compare with what God has done, and can do, then I’ll give them a hearing. (Isa 45:21-25; 46:9-11).

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 04:12 PM, said:

I have studied the Bible for myself and found it to be unimpeacheably true. My faith is not a “second-hand” faith as it does not depend on what others have done, (or not done) with it, or claimed from it. If that had been the case then I would surely be an unbeliever today. While I was even studying theology at Andrews University, if I had simply chosen to differentially accept what my professors, or seminary “doctor”, were “reciting” in certain key teachings as sound Biblical truth, I then probably would have an uncertain/wavering faith today. Following the Berean example, I challenged what these assumed learned men were saying, especially as some key things really did not “hold any water” and studied them out in more depth for myself, and found out what the Biblical truth really was on these matters. I therefore now have an even more solid faith in the Bible, especially when compare to any man’s reasonings. So for me, the Bible is quite reliable and trustworthy, and also in determining was it “moral” and “immoral.” Why shouldn’t I trust the wisdom of the actual Master Designer of this universe and all created things as to what is right or wrong, true or false. Like I said, if you know anyone who can verifiably do better, then make him/her known.

Since you self-evidently do not accept all of what the Bible has to say, then I really hope for yourself that your view is based on something more tangible than simply what ‘Preacher Doe and/or his followers, falsely said or did.’

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 04:12 PM, said:

Again, the ‘pain or pleasure’ approach is not what I want to subscribe to. The Bible states that e.g., Murder and Homosexuality are wrong and an abomination, and that really settles it for me. And if you really do look at the “cause” of things you will indeed find the “immoral root” that has resulted in the various action and behaviours that the Bible has condemned as wrong. I think that even in your ‘cause and effect’/ ‘pain or pleasure’ way that 2 billion+ dead babies, HIV, AIDS and the violation of anatomical congruity is proof enough that something things are concretely wrong with such practices. Just because something can be done, that does not make it right.

Avonia, on 11 December 2009 - 04:12 PM, said:

You are the one who thinks my views are unacceptable, and dangerous, then you are the one who concretely point out why, even if you do not use the Bible as a reference point, but please, at least be scientific, if you can. And, like I said, it is vitally foundational to your stance that whatever you may believe is never wrong so really, what’s the point of questioning any of your beliefs?!?

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

  

Working from an “unknown” doesn’t begin to truly resolve anything. Anything can be justified with this approach. If you really wanted a Biblical precedence for the self-evident, logical stance of ‘not restating everything that can so easily be accessed and read elsewhere,’ then look at the ministry of Jesus where He repeatedly asked the people who would question Him, ‘what have you read’, ‘What does the Law and/or the Prophets say’, ‘What is written in the Scriptures’ and even ‘what have you seen or heard.’ Then if there were still honest, unresolved issues, then He addressed it. As I said before, I really do not have the time to give everyone a guided tour of my Project’s site. If you are really interested, you can first read my views on the site, and on my related blog, and if you then still have any valid/honest further questions, then I’ll respond to them.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

That was actually said from concrete, current observation. When people can see, hear and read of the billions of people in vital need in the world today, but prefer to go on with their indifferent, more-than-enough lives, and let these others suffer and die, then that is “willful blindness” and indeed it is a waste of time and resources to beg them to favorably respond to what they have deliberately chosen to ignore.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

Being blessed simply means having been given various, special knowledge and resources, as the SDA Church has been, and just like Ancient Israel was. However, if you read the history of our pioneers you will see that these institutional blessings were given for a particular, even conditional, purpose, and that is to be able to be in a position to do something significantly tangible for others in need. If a Global Church with such resources cannot, or is not, doing this then, there blessings are not being used for what God expects of them as variously indicated in the Bible and in the Spirit of Prophecy. (You can read my blog for more on this). Again, the separation that will take place by the NJK Project is more practical than ideological. If you think of another way to house, materially and vitally support and care for, at least, a potential of up to 60+ million new (infant) people per year; or even, a more efficient way to be in a position to even be capable of helping such people, and others, in vital need, then present it. It is only natural that those who continue to believe that Jesus Christ really does not expect His Church to maximize their given resources and capabilities in order to do something much more significant for those in need, remain in a distinct group than those who do, and strive to actually accomplish this.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

While ultimately everything on this planet comes from the same source of God Himself, there comes times when thing radically break away from each other into two distinct/different and not merely diverse groups. E.g., all were angels in heaven, until one third decided to oppose God and His ways. Physically, they were all still angels, but Spiritually some were “Good” while others were “Evil”. All human are descendants of Adam and Eve, and then Noah, however some chose to live their lives in accordance to God’s will (the “Son/Daughter of God”) while others did not (the “Son/Daughters of Men”), and so on. In God’s intelligent creation, differences are also determined by cognitive choices that are made, and Truth ultimately is what separates these previously common groups.

Also while we may have the same physical source, e.g., the Bible, how we choose to interpret/ apply it, or what we choose to do with what we have read and understood makes all of the difference. E.g., Sunday Keepers vs. Sabbath Keepers.  

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

That is why I started that statement by saying: “I highly suspect”.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

Believe me, the chosen exp​ression and communication of this Project has its definite purpose. If someone really objects to something that is said, or if it conflicts with their views,  then first do verify for yourself, if what you consider to be true, really is. Frankly, and in all seriousness, I do not have time to, effectively, “babysit” Seventh-day Adventists on self-evident, and clear, Biblical issues, especially when they also have (ready) access to the Spirit of Prophecy; and I have certainly not been burdened in any way with this, quite to the contrary. Of course, if you had previously read my blog, you would have probably perceived this already.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 12:38 AM, said:

For any group or organization to function as an harmonious whole instead, of being in hampering dysfunctionality, its members must all have the same foundational views and objectives, and in this case, this is best achieved by what the Bible actually has to offer. Based upon this foundation, any diversity that exists will either solely serve to more effectively meet that common object or if necessary align itself with it. This project cannot truly function if people want to hold on to differing views and opinions that ultimately only conflict with the main goal.

Quote

I don't think anyone here has asked you to do anything.... frankly and in all seriousness, strong people don't need leaders... Thinking people don't need leaders either.... so while I hear the pitch you are making, to me, your premise and your basic assumptions about what the bible is, who God is, and the state of humans give me pause... however as the song says, "Its your thang... do what you want to do...." Carry on and I wish ya the best....

Quote

No .org has ever been as monolithic as your statement above...not ever... good luck with that one.... The bible offers nothing.... its voice is the one we give to it... The Creator of all offers, the question is do we understand what is being offered... no doubt you believe you do and that's between you and he....

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 04:26 AM, said:

I seek to understand how things are in relationship – from a systems perspective. I find this to be a much more demanding pursuit than deciding and asserting.

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 04:26 AM, said:

The best disciplines have the perfect amount of creative tension—the right amount of rub. They are usually not very comfortable at all.

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 04:26 AM, said:

The reference point is the connection inside of you to Source. It's not the Bible. The Bible is a reflection of all the ways people experienced and perceived this connection.

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 04:26 AM, said:

You are created in the image of the Master Designer. Why are you shortchanging yourself?

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 04:26 AM, said:

Your thinking on this lacks discipline.

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 04:26 AM, said:

Untrue. I fully accept you just the way you are. But sometimes, functioning in a larger circle is a simple as somebody pointing out that it exists—and looking at it for the first time.


NJK, it's been nice talking with you. I appreciate your intention to work well in the world—and the actions you are taking to back it up. Many blessings for the project.

Clay, on 12 December 2009 - 07:48 AM, said:

Interesting philosophies. Are there any Scriptures to support this premise that “The Bible offers nothing...”? We can claim whatever we want about the Bible, but unless properly substantiated, it does not make it Biblical. 

I am not sure any corporation would be successful if, e.g., employees would come to work whenever they “felt” like it, or do what ever they thought was right, however wrong it may be, or despite the directives from the top. The NJK Project does not aim to be “monolithic”, but united in the Truth; and according to the Bible, that’s Biblical!

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 12:13 PM, said:

A circular argument at best i.e. proving the bible by the bible... if that is your choice, so be it, I'll pass on that particular ride... The truth according to the bible.... the bible has truth solely on your interpretation of said bible, so then if it has not occurred to you yet that the bible has only the voice we give it via our interpretation, I don't think we (you and I) are ready to have that particular discussion..... Lastly, just because you say that's what the bible says does not make it so....

As I said earlier though, its your project, wish ya the best...

Clay, on 12 December 2009 - 01:19 PM, said:

That is the “natural” way of seeing things. As the Inspired song goes ‘With the Spirit of the Living God, I do not have to be “Only Natural”’ - Steven Curtis Chapman.  I didn’t realize that I was dealing with some people who do not accept the Bible as Inspired, or the source of Truth. Must have been that “SDA” in this forum’s name that deceived me. I guess when you want to be popular much more than Biblical you have to accept anything!

When it comes to proving the Bible, I use the same basis as God suggests: Prophecy (e.g., Isa 44:6, 7; 46:9-13). Having already verified that these are true, and that, beyond the input of man (e.g., Dan 9:24-27), I therefore can view the Bible as Inspired by God Himself, and thus the final arbitrator in matter of right and wrong. (2 Pet 1:20)

In all sincerity, but frankness, this common “interpretation” argument is the choice Teflon cop-out of the Biblically uninformed, uneducated and illiterate. If you do not believe that this is what the Bible says/teaches then just produce the countering Biblical view. It is as simple as that! 

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 12 December 2009 - 01:54 PM

 

Avonia, on 12 December 2009 - 09:18 AM, said:

That was a "working thesis" based upon observed data and developments.

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 12:53 PM, said:

Thank you for sharing....it seems that two dimensional thinking in a multi-dimensional reality serves you well.... take care....

Clay, on 12 December 2009 - 03:28 PM, said:

God's dimension is indeed paramount... and obviously, "pigeon-holeing" me is your best/only resort.

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 12 December 2009 - 03:35 PM

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 02:31 PM, said:

Not quite my friend, your responses clearly prove that you have chosen to pigeonhole yourself, not to mention others who you labeled as uninformed, uneducated and illiterate.... however, it seems to work for you, and I am happy that for now you enjoy the lane you are in..... again I wish you all the best...

NJKProject, on 12 December 2009 - 05:29 AM, said:

Yes... The people approached Jesus with an issue [A went to B] , and then he engaged them based on their domain and their experience. Sometimes that was scripture, if he was talking to scribes and religious leaders; sometimes that was parables, especially if he was talking to the masses; sometimes it was the prevailing wisdom of the time or what their ruling classes had said. Always their domain. He didn't always correct their misconceptions, but he sure did stretch them. So -- to recap, when they approached him with a question, he mined their domain to help them move from their world out towards his perspective.

Here, you approached a group with a new proposal [B went to A]. You posted your proposal complete with apostasy warnings, and then referred us to your website. Recap: you approached the group; the group did not approach you. You did not first listen for the local dialect or try to meet it in its domain, but you initiated a monologue and an immediate bind: Join me or be proved willfully blind.

By contrast, when Paul went to Athens to introduce them to a resurrected Christ, he took a different approach. B went to A. He walked around their biggest pantheon, acknowledged their customs, and did so respectfully. He connected himself to the Athenians by citing their common source, he spoke their philosophical language, and he connected Epicurean and Stoic tradition to his own. Only then did he shoot for a stretch, and he could have laid a stronger context for that too. In any case, some laughed, some asked him to come back, and some sought him out. He cast no judgement on any of these groups. He did not refer them to his scroll. Or ding them for not interpreting Aratus in the same way he was. I suppose he also realized he was not the only apostle in Asia Minor.

You weren't at all mislead about this being an Adventist community. And you might be surprised at the constructive things forum members do in their work off-site; Elijah has 7,000-plus compatriots he knows nothing about. You seem to have difficulty with the fact that we are committed believers who are nevertheless quite different from you. Yet we can and do encourage you to do what you feel called to do even as we ask questions about the assumptions you're making and the coherence between your assumptions, conclusions, and reality.

This is going to be at least the third unconditional blessing you'll get today.
Love you, bro. Feel free to stick around and join in the conversations.

so now i'm glad i waded through the other parts of this thread. because of the reminder that the groups of people were met where they were and then encouraged to grow. it gives me a bit more hope.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

Clay, on 12 December 2009 - 05:13 PM, said:

Of course in your (assumedly) assimilated, semi or whole pluralistic and relativist view, you are defaultly deceived to believe that an ‘adherence to God and the Bible to the exclusion of all worldly philosophies’ (1 Cor 2) is “pigeon-holeing oneself” I surely didn’t expect to get this treatment on a forum that claims to be SDA. As Elijah would say: why do you actually hamper yourself by limping on two irreconcilable opinions.... (1 Kgs 18:21). Textbook manifestation of Laodicean symptoms (Rev 3:14-19). If you cannot understand this, then you are really beyond hope. and in such a case I can only plead Pro 26:4 & Psa 14:1 to you and Avonia for now. I have plans to fully exercise Pro 26:5 in the future in regards to such worldy views, but certainly not now. I do not have the “needed” resources to even begin wandering into such aimless and pointless pursuits. Too much more pressing, important and vital things to tend to.

Clay, on 12 December 2009 - 05:13 PM, said:

When sound Biblical statement cannot be made in answer to Biblical issues, but solely worldly philosophies and skewed hearsay statements, then that is the telling proof of being “Biblically uninformed, uneducated and illiterate.” I have yet to begin to see any proof to the contrary where this applies.

Clay, on 12 December 2009 - 05:13 PM, said:

One can never go wrong in staying in God’s ways. (Psa 16:11; Dan 3:16-18; DA 224-225)

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 13 December 2009 - 08:05 AM

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

Sorry I did not assume that the “dialect” on this “SDA” website should have been more worldy;
nor that I would be dealing with SDA “Athenians, Epicureans and Stoics.” I certainly have no time for that.

Aza and beanchild

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

I guess the “spirit of Elijah” was my paramount guide here (1 Kgs 17:1; PK 120-121; 129-142; 177-189, Mal 4:4-6)

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

God knows you all are not doing me a favor here, nor does this Project live or die with your endorsement.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

Actual/true, i.e., Biblical, Commitment is tangibly made evident solely by if Biblical teachings and practices are endorsed. Like I have said, the current ways of the Church are not Biblical, so any claim to being “committed to the Bible” are simply self-deceived, “professions.” If you do not think this is true, then simply prove my Biblical support of this wrong.

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

In the presumed light of your apparent sincerity, however self-convinced it may be, I can only thank you for you“blessings.” (Still I am not sure what “condition” I did not meet in order to merit them). But the only thing I can do with such professions is read them! Thanks anyway, I guess!?!

AzA, on 12 December 2009 - 11:43 PM, said:

When you’ve read what I have posted we can have a worthwhile Biblical conversation, an not a futile exchange of personal opinions. At least it will be for me, and really, on my side, that is all that can be determinative right now.

I think, and know, that I have done all that is required of me in regards to sharing this project. The information needed to answer most of the questions that may exist have been posted on my website and my blog, including what the Bible’s endtime view is on your cited 7000 people statements. This may not be the ‘politically correct’ or “cool” way to proceed on a forum, but due to my time constraint for much more pressing things, this will have to do. If the assumed SDA Believers on this forum, did not have ready access to Bibles and the Spirit, then I would have an obligation to, as it were, ‘teach geometry in Graduate School.’ Other than that it is just a sad evidence to, and result of, the (revered) systemic dysfunction that exists in the Church. It is just “blind leading the blind.” (Mat 15:14) If you really want to understand my views on these issues, then the pertinent information has already been made available. Like I said, and meant before, I do not have time to effectively “spoon-feed teenagers.” The food’s been bought and cooked, feed yourselves!

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 13 December 2009 - 07:42 AM

NJKProject, on 13 December 2009 - 05:32 AM, said:

Hurling insults is so beneath one as enlightened and insightful as you claim to be... however it fulfills some need I am sure, and I am glad you were able to get that need met.... based on your responses it is clear that prolonged dialog with you would probably be frustrating for you, and I am okay with that.... have a good one my friend....

Quote

this statement gave me a chuckle... thanks NJK.... I suppose had one gotten to know the locals, you would have found out that there are many that could teach but instead came to exchange ideas and interact.... I get it now, you've come to teach... and have found unwilling students... oh well....

Clay, on 13 December 2009 - 07:49 AM, said:

What "insults"??? Point them out. Statements of observation and fact are not "insults". ...And please do let me speak for myself as to what needs I would seek to fulfill. Answering yourself is a circular approach.

NJKProject, on 13 December 2009 - 12:43 PM, said:

Point them out? Surely when you wrote them you knew what they were... let's not play games, you seem to be an intelligent person.... If on the other you cannot recognize insults when you write them, then there may be a larger perception problem...

Clay, on 13 December 2009 - 07:58 AM, said:

It was indeed meant to be humorous, in form. Interesting extrapolated view on your part... in that case, then let the "locals" sign of for this Graduate Course and see if they could handle what is being "taught." I'll respond to any pertinent question on topic, but surely will not (re)-teach "geometry." 

Clay, on 13 December 2009 - 01:48 PM, said:

Believe me, I do not even have to try to “play” anything here. It all is just determined by which side of the Spiritual fence you’re, and want to continue to be, on. In this ongoing Great Controversy between Good and Evil, just Biblical “rebuke” can, and will, always solely be surfacedly "perceived"/considered as “insults.”  (E.g, Mat 12:34; 15:7; 16:3; 22:18; 23:13, 14, 15, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29, 33; Luke 3:7; 11:40, 44; 24:25; Acts 7:51, etc). Perhaps I should have used some of these descriptive words for people who: claim to be SDA’s, and all such a sacred profession should entail, but cannot support statements through proper exegesis, or with sound Biblical arguments; quibble about form and communication vs. content and cause; are more concerned with adherence to “netiquette” than seeking to understand a Biblical message; and prefer to see themselves as “confused gentiles” rather than assume their Biblical duties and responsibilities.

What else can I say, we all have our roles to play in this GC, and so far you all are perfectly fulfilling the parts. (e.g, “nominal SDA’s” - look it up). ‘Spiritual things are indeed spiritually discerned!’ (1 Cor 2:14-16). As it was inferred earlier, this Project is indeed for the “Spiritually Mature.”

NJKProject, on 13 December 2009 - 01:51 PM, said:

NLK, let us suppose that one of three Pathfinders sitting around a campfire stands up and heads into the woods. If the two others get up and follow him we have a leader. If they don't all you have is a boy taking a walk in the woods.

NJKProject, on 14 December 2009 - 02:53 PM, said:

sure NJK, whatever you say.... thanks again for another amusing response...

This thread devolved in about a day. Which is a little disappointing.

AzA, on 14 December 2009 - 08:25 PM, said:

disappointing but predictable...

Suit yourselves! I guess we can all just speak from what we know. Just to think that this is all because you all just won't click a link!?! Talk about "predictable" you are all actually prophetic!

NJKProject, on 14 December :31 PM, said:

more jokes.... you've assumed we haven't checked your link.... we may be prophetic, you my friend are quite predictable.... take care...

 

Clay, on 14 December 2009 - 11:58 PM, said:

I think you can only speak for yourself here, Clay. Well let's just confirm the data here (or lack thereof): Which of the respondents here actually has? (As much as possible cite date & time so that this can be concretely verified.]

Ohhh, I'll take God's Word/Prophecies over your human reasonings/predictions every time.... Just going where you all are insistent on ending up!


Interesting that you find this all so amusing. As they say, "Knock yourself out!" (cf. ??a ?:9-?3)  

This post has been edited by NJKProject: 15 December 2009 - 09:57 AM

Stratei
Notwithstanding the plethora of Biblical examples that can be cited here that show that Biblically/Spiritually speaking, Truth is not determine by a ‘majority of people’, but actually by what Truth really is in substance; (a Biblical analysis that obviously cannot be entered into here), applying Pro. 26:5 here considering they are all said to be “Pathfinders”:

Quote

(1) At the very least we simply have” ‘one pathfinder who went into the woods and two others who decided to stay behind.’ (Unless of course you are obsessively “zealous” about this “leader” business. - But you would have to read in my blog to get this.)

(2) To a more sequitur extent we have: one “pathfinder” who either found a path, or decided to “blaze” one, as his training, profession and function fully allows, in order to make it through the woods, and two others who, at the very least, didn’t feel that this wasn’t within their competence, function and/or duty (or simply “chickened out”).

Some things just cannot be “shared” no matter how much one would want to. (Matt 25:8, 9)

You're going to have to be a lot more substantive here to begin to make any point.

And just to think here that ‘the children of this age are indeed wiser than the children of the Light.’ (Luke 16:8)

This post has been edited by NJKProject: Yesterday, 11:19 AM

Quite evidently here, a default, if not also, concerted (as that (self-righteous) ominous

Clay, on 14 December 2009 - 11:58 PM, said:

indeed seemed to suggest), “silent treatment” is now in effect - the weapon of choice for those who indeed, really just have nothing (substantive) to say. I thought that it was ‘

Clay, on 14 December 2009 - 09:29 PM, said:

to not having entered into a discussion on this topic.’ Even if only a

AzA, on 14 December 2009 - 09:25 PM, said:

Obviously, (and like the Epicureans), whatever you all so cherish (i.e., “form, communication, netiquette, “local dialect”) is ‘so much more important than’ Truth, Knowledge and Substance. Like Clay also admitted [and you ‘Epicureans and Stoics’ should be quite familiar with these type of statements, popularly known as a “Freudian Slip”] -  “hypocrisy” in Biblical terms - ‘you are indeed

Clay, on 14 December 2009 - 11:58 PM, said:

.’

NJKProject, on 16 December 2009 - 09:44 AM, said:

I understand why you would say this. It is not clear to me that you are teachable at the moment. And I respect where you are, and why you are there. When you are ready, there will be another opportunity.

Avonia, on 16 December 2009 - 06:24 PM, said:

Really... You all are so self-illusioned! Then by all means teach! However, unlike what you may have been conditioned to believe, “teaching” does not involve ‘the bantering exchange of ultimately mindless/vacuous, unsubstantiated personal opinions.’ If I sign up for driving lessons, I am not going to consider it “teaching” if the so-called “instructor” tells me that, despite what is written in the law and the driving manual,  and the flow of the crossing traffic, when I pull up to a traffic light that is red, that means “go through”, and all that is true because the color red makes him/her feel “oh so adventurous”! However sincere that this person may be in that (false) belief, that is all still: (1) contrary to established laws that regulate traffic, (2) not a fact, and (3) likely to result in an accident, even a deadly one. Like I stated before, if you want to “teach” me anything, then at the very least make sure that it is factual and/or science based, and not solely, entirely based upon your, and/or, other people’s, relative “opinions.”

Furthermore, as it was also mentioned before, frankly, based on especially your previous post in this thread where you claim to ‘know what is best for me,’ or ‘what, effectively “ethereal concept” I should be believing in,’ it is quite self-evident that you don’t truly, nor fully, understand, believe and/or embrace the “relativist” views that you proclaim. I have repeatedly stated to you that, based on what I have experienced in my SDA Christian life, with the Bible as my absolute Guidebook, I am perfectly satisfied by, and with, my beliefs in God and the Bible. According to your view, that should unequivocally settle it. It seems to be the deciding factor for you, so then why not for others?!? As a “relativist,” you of all people should be the last person to want to “teach” anything to anyone, especially with an underlying belief that ‘this would be better for them.’ Case in point, I was truly baffled when you said that you agreed with my (Biblical) view that ‘First world Christian have been indifferent to people in need, and that by trying to meet the self-set demands of their economic system. Are you not aware that Capitalism as it is today, exists and functions solely because it is explicitly based upon relativism. E.g., My house has no set/factual price/value. It is worth whatever buyers are willing to pay for it at the time of sale. Or, back to the point at hand, since First world Christians are not stealing money from people in the Third World, in fact, many times, they “employ” people from these countries at the local market value rate of, e.g., $0.50 per hour, they have absolutely no extra obligation to anyone in these poor countries. To claim that they should, i.e., have a “moral” obligation to actually give these needy people from their earned money goes completely against your professed view. And certainly the fact that these needy people will die from this lack of assistance cannot be a determinative factor according to your relative view. Just as in the issue of abortion, it all depends on what is best for oneself. You should really own up to your “beliefs”, and really live by them, and as your underlying philosophy goes: Live and let live. Therefore any form of “proselytizing” attempts from you should be off limits.

Your relative view is an insidiously dangerous path that, if truly exercised, can, and will, only lead to total anarchy and self-destruction, as it has absolutely not room for any morality, nor laws, starting with the Bible and God’s Ten Commandments. In your view, people should be free to do whatever they want, and in such a case only the strong will survive. Case in point: Abortion). And by the way, along the lines of your evident same-sex relationships support, what’s next in such a path of “inner feelings”, “felt relations” and non-natural sex - bestiality?!? And that is not a rhetorical question. Really..., answer that question while still staying truly “faithful” to your relative views! (And I hope your excuse/defense is not also here, the peripheral: “That lacks discipline”; because this question is [a] factual, and [b] is stated how I want to express it, so according to your view, it can only be the right way. Surely you cannot assume and claim to know me what’s best for me!!!)

Frankly speaking, and in conclusion, your previously imparted view that ‘the word of God as revealed through the Bible is not the best way for me, or, assumedly, other Bible believers, to live all sounds like what Satan suggested to Eve in the Garden of Eden, and actually the very reason why we are in this current mess. But of course you probably don’t think/believe so. Well, in such a case, using your view, as I probably have no other choice with you, then: ‘believe whatever is best for you.’ But at the very least, for your own good, truly “be-live it!” (Psa 92:6, 7) As the prophet Elijah said, you are only ‘hampering yourself by trying to limp on two irreconcilable opinions.’ (1 Kgs 18:21).

____________

"I don't believe another song could ever change the world... I don't believe that little boys grow up to be little girls...." -The Waiting

This post has been edited by NJKProject: Today, 01:30 AM

In April of 06 I said this:

Quote

After further review this thread will be closed permanently...