I saw that Mike Manea responded to me over on BTWN and I have gotten a little free time to respond.
“The issue is that her writings are at the center of these controversies. So, if she is authoritative in your eyes, then she must be a part of the conversation.”
EGW has no authority when it comes to SDA theology and doctrine. Our epistemology is nothing like that of Mormons or JWs. We are firm promoters of Sola Scriptura, even more so than any other protestant group because we reject ALL external authorities and hermeneutical keys (Protestant tradition, Christian tradition, church fathers, philosophy, etc.) and build our theology on the Bible alone. Is there a reason why you trust Questions on Doctrine on the issue of the scapegoat but not on what it has to say about Biblical authority and EGW?
Often is the case when you are apart of people claiming that you only use the Bible is that you often either end up appealing to something else anyways or you end up misinterpreting the Bible. The issue is SDA are all of different stripes. We use to deal with an SDA named Justin Wilson that believes that EGW was infallible prophetess for God.’Questions on Doctrine’ was put together by SDA as a consensus document to tell others what they believe. It is as useful as much as that particular SDA follows it.
“The difference is the fact 7th day Adventism doesn’t have a perfect Savior.”
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. We have the same savior as any other non-OSAS Arminian. There is no difference in soteriology between us. The only difference is that most other Arminians believe that people get their rewards at death. God differentiates between believers that persevered and those who didn’t immediately after death since they are then taken to heaven or hell. Their version of the ‘Investigative Judgment (IJ)’ happens when people die. Since we believe in soul sleep and no one gets their rewards until the second coming, we don’t need to force-fit a bunch of individualized judgments right after death but have one communal judgment right before people are given their rewards at Christ’s coming. The minute you reject Calvinism and OSAS Arminianism you automatically have to have some sort of IJ because you now have genuine, born-again believers who turn away and end up lost. The only thing that changes is WHEN this judgment takes place and, moving the timing of the judgment from ‘at death’ to ‘before the second coming,’ has no impact on one’s soteriology. I understand that there might be other non-soteriological aspects of the IJ that you disagree with but, if honest, you cannot single out the IJ for reasons that would apply to all non-OSAS Arminians.
I don’t think that is true as most Arminians that maintain that you lose your salvation if you relinquish faith in the savior and those are the only conditions in which one loses their salvation. That isn’t equivalent to the investigative judgment. My friends Tyler Vela also wrote a paper on the issue of Leviticus 16:
As far as the rest, I am wondering. Even though you think the Bible teaches predestination, do you think God at least could have created free-will if He had wanted to?
I believe man has ‘Freewill’. Determinist don’t deny that man has a freewill. The debate is about whether that is possible on determinism. I reject Libertarian freedom as a philosophical surd and it is impossible.