Welcome to Law-Forums.org!   


Sponsor Links:

Discount Legal Forms
Discounted Legal Texts

Tom Norris' Ij Comments

Defamation Law Discussion Forum

Tom Norris' Ij Comments

Postby Kaarle » Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:21 am

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.  It also carried what I thought was an unkind spirit.  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. Daniel 8:14 portrays a pre-advent judgment of the righteous that sits on the platform of justification by faith #not Hanukah#.  This is why your questioner referred to my work harmonising gospel with IJ.  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.  #Relevant papers supporting my conclusion can be posted on this site if you approve#. In our dialogue, let us both demonstrate the effect of the gospel we both love.
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 5:51 am

Tom Norris' Ij Comments

Postby Aramis » Mon Nov 28, 2016 11:43 pm

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.  It also carried what I thought was an unkind spirit.  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. Daniel 8:14 portrays a pre-advent judgment of the righteous that sits on the platform of justification by faith #not Hanukah#.  This is why your questioner referred to my work harmonising gospel with IJ.  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.  #Relevant papers supporting my conclusion can be posted on this site if you approve#. In our dialogue, let us both demonstrate the effect of the gospel we both love.
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 4:55 pm

Tom Norris' Ij Comments

Postby Winthorp » Tue Nov 29, 2016 12:57 am

Subject:  Tom Norris’ Comments About the IJ

To:  Tom Norris, of Adventist Reform in America

From: Herb Kersten, SDA Evangelist, Victoria, Australiahttp://www.hkea.org.au/index.htmhttp://www.hkea.org.au/index_files/daniel.htm

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-Adventists-2318/2012/10/investigative-jud

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/messages/14372/14403.html?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 Documentshttp://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/Hidden-Documents.htm

The Ellen G. White 1888 Materialshttp://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2012/2/ellen-g-white-1888

White Estate 1888 Collectionhttp://egwtext.whiteestate.org/publication.php?pubtype=Book&bookCode=1888&lang=e

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 Judgmenthttp://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2008/8/First-Angel-Messag

Understanding the Pre- Advent Judgmenthttp://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/8/9651.html?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 Kerstenhttp://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?pid=11573#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-2002http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/295.html?1013659183

1844 Made Simple-  2006http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/8/10902.html?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 form 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.


The IJ & Herb Kerstenhttp://en.allexperts.com/q/SeventhDayAdventists2318/2012/10/investigative-judgem

Reflections On Adventism; an interview with DR. DESMOND FORDhttp://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/library/atodayinterview/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 8:14http://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 Reviewhttp://thinking-christian.blogspot.com/2006/12/book-review-clear-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. Fordhttp://www.goodnewsunlimited.org/library/exegesisofdaniel/22part4.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 Committeehttp://spectrummagazine.org/node/1643

Meaning of Nisdaqhttp://www.andrews.edu/~davidson/Publications/Sanctuary/meaning_of_nisdaq_dan8.p

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-Adventists-2318/2008/8/First-Angel-Messaghttp://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2012/7/investigative-judg

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
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 7:38 pm

Return to Defamation Law


  • Related topics
    Last post