You are here:

Seventh-Day Adventists/7 Points that disprove the Investigative Judgment

Advertisement


Question
Hi Tom,
Hope you are doing well. I have been reading your 7 Points that prove the Investigative Judgment doctrine false. As you already know I fully believe with all my heart that this doctrine is true and a foundational pillar of truth.

While I am not going to go through your 7 points, etc... I would like to key in on a sentence found in point #2:

"Only the NT can define Gospel doctrine for the church, not the OT.

This one sentence should tell everyone on this board that you are completely baseless and should not be trusted as an "expert".

What does the Bible say (and it's in the New Testament):
2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine , for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,"

Does it get any plainer then that? ALL means all.

Didn't Jesus says "You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me." (John 5:39)

When Jesus made such a statement only the Old Testament was written.

How can you make such a claim? Des Ford's claims (and others like him), while they sound convincing to the average SDA who just doesn't hear our distinctive message from the pulpit in years and doesn't study intensely, when they hear his "arguments", they fall for it because it is presented in an eloquent way. I mean, come on, Mr. Ford believes in evolution. Why would I believe anything this man says?

How can you keep defending these ideas?

I hope you won't delay in answering this for weeks and weeks (like you have done in the past). Let the people see what is going on.

God Bless,
David R.

Answer
Subject: 7 Points that disprove the Investigative Judgment.

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

Hi Tom,

Hope you are doing well. I have been reading your 7 Points that prove the Investigative Judgment doctrine false. As you already know I fully believe with all my heart that this doctrine is true and a foundational pillar of truth.

Tom replied:  Now that you have read them, do you think you can refute any point?  Everyone who has tried over the last 10 years has never been able to get past the 1st points, much less the other 6 Points.  

Do you think you can do better?

If not, you are very foolish to think the IJ is true Gospel doctrine.  If Jesus does not teach this doctrine; then it cannot be taught in the church.

Furthermore, I note that the Jews also “believed with all their heart” that the OC Law had to be defended and protected.  They thought it was greater than Jesus.  But we know they were wrong.  Regardless of their “sincerity.”

Wrong is wrong.  Sincerity has nothing to do with it.

Many people sincerely “believe” all manner of myth and religious error, the Sunday Sabbath being but one obvious example.  But just because most all embrace a 1st day Lord’s day, this does not make it true.  

Those who “believed” that the Sun went around the Earth were certain they were correct, and so too the Flat Earth crowd.  Whoops!  So much for “sincerity.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society

http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/galileo/

All such uninformed “belief,” about the IJ, Sunday, or anything, is worthless if it goes against the facts.   No amount of “believing” will make false doctrine true, or true doctrine false.  

Facts trump sincerity.  The IJ is false no matter what you think or believe, and so too most of the doctrines associated with it.  Sorry.

You may be as sincere as possible, but it does not matter.  The IJ is false doctrine regardless what you believe, even as the Gospel is what it is, without needing anyone’s approval.

So let’s be clear; you are a die-hard “believer” in the IJ, and no doubt of many other false SDA doctrines, like tithe and food laws, and OC Sabbath keeping.  

None who “believe” in the IJ does so in a vacuum.  There are a number of other false doctrines associated with the IJ, as Point # 7 states, and thus you have embraced a chain of false doctrine for which you must repent.

Here is what I don’t understand?  How can anyone “believe” in the IJ after seeing how the latest IJ Evangelist could not even address the first Point, much less all 7.

Do you think you can do better than the slick Herb Kersten?  If so, why did you ignore these specific points?  Why don’t you try to refute them?  

Answer:  Because they are IRREFUTABLE.  You can’t do any better than the IJ expert Herb Kersten, who ran away in disgrace, because the facts are clearly and forever against the IJ.

So unless you can refute these 7 Points, why do you still “believe” in what has been proven false?  On what basis?  

The IJ is easily disproven for all to see regardless what your confused and stubborn heart tells you.  

Moreover, Gospel Doctrine is not based on our opinions or feelings, but only on the NT.  So don’t trust your heart my friend, it will not lead to truth.  Nor should anyone trust the SDA’s to teach Gospel doctrine.

So I say again; if the IJ is true, as you claim, then you should be able to easily refute all these points?  

But you failed to even try.  Why is that?  If it’s true, like you believe, then why can’t your refute the points that prove it wrong?

Answer:  The IJ is not true.

David said:  While I am not going to go through your 7 points, etc. I would like to key in on a sentence found in point #2:

"Only the NT can define Gospel doctrine for the church, not the OT."

Tom said:  Let me get this straight?  You refuse to address the 7 points, but yet, you think you have found some hermeneutical issue that can save the IJ?  

This makes no sense.  Why are you playing games?

If you can’t stand up like a man and refute the 7 Points, one at a time, starting with the first, -then you lose the discussion, just like the last person who claimed the IJ to be Gospel truth.  It’s a pretty simple concept.  

Guess what?  

You have lost!  

David stated:  This one sentence should tell everyone on this board that you are completely baseless and should not be trusted as an "expert".

Tom replied:  Ha!  This is comical, and sad.  

First, you have been unable to refute any of the 7 points, so you lose.  Your position is “baseless” and easily refuted 7 times.  Everyone on this board knows this.

So why do you act as if your side is winning this discussion?

Pay attention:  My 7 points against the IJ are much greater than your one minor point for it, which point is easily refuted.  So you lose 7 to zero.  Game over.

Score: Pro IJ = 0  

Anti-IJ = 7  

Furthermore, do you really think Moses is equal to Christ?  Do you really think the OC is the same as the NC, or even better?

Such an idea is absurd and outrageous.  Those, like the SDA’s, who love the law as if it were the Gospel, are not only confused, they are acting like the Judaizers in the early church.  They are anti-Christ, even as they claim to be on the side of God and Christ.

David said:  What does the Bible say (and it's in the New Testament):

2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,"

Tom replied:  First, the Gentiles had no scripture, much less the OT.  So you need to understand that a Gentile could only become a Christian if they supported the Words of Christ by faith.  They were not to embrace the words of Moses.

Thus Jesus words became “scripture” for those interested in Eternal Life.  Not the words of Moses.

Rom. 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

Second, while the Jews thought they understood the OT and thus had salvation, Jesus refuted them by claiming that they did not understand the OT correctly, or God or the Messiah.  Nor did they want to embrace the Gospel or the NC Sabbath.  They were not saved.

John 5:37 “And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.

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

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

John 5:40 and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
 
Third, the OT is only “profitable” by those who are honest with the Gospel.  Many Jews refused to let go of the OC, even as some in the church tried to force OC doctrines to become part of the Gospel.  This is all wrong.

Gal. 2:14 But when I saw that they were not 1straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

The OT can only be of benefit if it leads people to the NC Gospel.  Those who claim the OC is equal to the NT have fallen from grace.  They are like the Judaizers in Galatians that refused to let go of the OC law.

Fourth, the Words of Jesus in the Gospels are the highest communication from God to man.  While the OT did not clearly articulate the Gospel, the NT did exactly that.  Thus the NT is far superior to the OT.

Heb. 1:1   God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,

Heb. 1:2  in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.

While the OT contains the context for the NC, and is “profitable for doctrine, reproof, etc.” that does not mean it is equal or superior to the NT or the NC.  Such an assumption is absurd and false.

Is the word of Moses equal to the Word of Christ?  If you think so, you are a Judaizer.

David said:  Does it get any plainer then that? ALL means all.

Tom said:  It should be plain that the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels are the highest and most authoritative in the church.  The fact that you do not agree explains why you are full of OC doctrines and a worthless religion.  You and the SDA’s are Judaizers.  This is the problem.  You need to repent.

Paul is not saying that what is written in the OC is equal to whatever Jesus teaches.  If that were true, circumcision in the church would be normative, and so too many other things.  

In fact, Paul never embraced the IJ, and neither did Moses or Daniel, much less Jesus.  So why do you quote Paul, as if he supports the IJ, Tithe and the OC Sabbath?  He supports NONE of these legalistic and false doctrines in the church.

David, you have allowed the OC minded SDA’s to confuse and control you.   They have taught you to misunderstand the Bible, doubt the Words of Christ, and embrace one false doctrine after another.  Sad.

Moreover, why on earth do you think this passage proves the IJ?  This is absurd.  Those who believe in the IJ do not know how to read the Bible honestly or correctly.  Sad.

David asked:  Didn't Jesus say "You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me." (John 5:39)

When Jesus made such a statement only the Old Testament was written.

Tom replied:  The context of this statement is a Sabbath debate between Jesus and the Jews.  The Jews would not listen to the living Word of Christ, which was greater than the written words of Moses.  

You are like the Jews and so too the SDA’s; which is why you don’t understand the Gospel of Christ.

David said:  Des Ford's claims (and others like him), while they sound convincing to the average SDA who just doesn't hear our distinctive message from the pulpit in years and doesn't study intensely, when they hear his "arguments", they fall for it because it is presented in an eloquent way.

Tom replied:  First off, Dr. Ford’s claims did not sound convincing at first.  In fact, they sounded impossible and heretical, against the Bible and SDA eschatology.  The very idea back in the 1970’s that the IJ could be false doctrine was a stunning concept to every SDA.  

Dr. Ford stood alone at Glacier View.  Few had even read his large book on the topic and fewer still could comprehend it.  So stop with the false commentary about history.  

However, over time, those that were honest, and took the time to read the material, came around to understand the truth.   The evidence from both the Bible and history proved Dr. Ford correct.  Thus, even Dr. Cottrell, had to admit that Dr. Ford was 100% correct.  The IJ is false doctrine.  It is not the PAJ of the church.

So unless you have some concrete facts to prove Dr. Ford wrong, stop pretending he is wrong.  You, and Herb Kersten, and all the SDA’s are wrong, wrong, wrong, as the 7 simple Points prove to all.  Forget 7, the first point alone crushes the IJ into dust.

David said:  I mean, come on, Mr. Ford believes in evolution. Why would I believe anything this man says?

Tom replied:  First, there is much more evidence to support “evolution” than there is the IJ.  In fact, while there are thousands of scientists around the world that embrace some form of evolution, NONE of them think the IJ is valid or true doctrine.  Neither do any theologians.

So come on, I mean, no one in the world believes the IJ except the cultic and dishonest SDA’s.  And most of them have long since given it up and repented of this and many other false SDA doctrines.

Second, you need to understand what Dr. Ford is saying about the age of the earth and the Creation Story.  Those who think they can prove a young earth are being very foolish.  The age of the earth is not a Gospel doctrine, nor does anyone understand how the earth was created so as to make it doctrine.

The Genesis Debate
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=1134

David asked:  How can you keep defending these ideas?

Tom said:  How can you still think the IJ is a valid Gospel doctrine?  How can you think that tithe and Jewish food laws, and OC Sabbath keeping are part of the Gospel?  

Answer:  Because you have let the cultic SDA’s brainwash you.  Sad.

David said:  I hope you won't delay in answering this for weeks and weeks (like you have done in the past). Let the people see what is going on.

Tom replied:  David, I can’t keep up the many questions about Adventist Reform, so don’t think I am “delaying” answering your question in order to hide some secret truth about the IJ.  

You, and Herb Kersten have only made the IJ look more silly and false for all to see.  Neither of you have been able to defend such false and impossible doctrine, nor neither can anyone else.  It is impossible.

Moreover, your continued attacks against Dr. Ford, a great Protestant and Adventist scholar, only shows that you do not understand the Gospel or church history.  You and those like Herb Kersten, are proving that the IJ is foolish and impossible doctrine.  

Those who embrace the IJ, tithe, Jewish food laws and OC Sabbath keeping don’t know what they are talking about any more than those Galatians that embraced circumcision.

In conclusion, you need to read the 7 Points again and admit the IJ is false and impossible doctrine.  

Stop trying to defend what is indefensible and against the Gospel.  There is no point in promoting this false and useless SDA doctrine that Jesus NEVER taught.  The IJ is not part of the “Word” of Christ.  Those who think otherwise, do not know Christ.

Col. 3:16 Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God.

Repent of the IJ, tithe, Jewish Food Laws and OC Sabbath keeping.  Embrace the NC and move away from those who are anti-Christ.

Tom Norris, for New Covenant Adventism & All Experts.com

Seventh-Day Adventists

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Tom Norris

Expertise

I can answer most any question about church history and theology, starting from 1818 when William Miller articulated the 1st Angels Message that became the foundation of the Adventist Movement. While this first prophetic message terminated in the spring of 1844, it was followed by what Adventists refer to as the 2nd Angels Message, which dates from the spring of 1844 until the great disappointment of October 22, 1844. By 1847, the 3rd Angels Message had been developed and this Sabbatarian theology represents the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Moreover, I can explain the historical and theological development of the SDA denomination from its beginning and on through the great Battle Creek schism that forced the SDA's to retreat to Takoma Park. Here the 20th century church recovered from their internal battles that had erupted at the 1888 General Conference in Minneapolis over the definition of the law and the Gospel. Fearing another repeat of this disaster, President Daniels, determined to hide this debate. However, this policy led to more conflict, especially over the role and authority of Ellen White, a unique and accomplished religious writer that had remarkable spiritual gifts. However, by the decade of the 1970`s, the church once again erupted into debate. The hierarchy settled the turmoil in 1980 with the trial of Dr. Desmond Ford at Glacier View. Here Dr. Ford was exiled because he supposedly disagreed with Ellen White over the Fundamentals. But this controversial action resulted in another major schism that is still in progress today.

Experience

Tom Norris was raised as a Seventh-day Adventist in Takoma Park, Md. He attended SDA grade and High schools, moving on to study Adventist theology at Columbia Union College. He also spent significant time conducting independent research in the General Conference Archives and the Ellen G. White Estate. Over the years he has also interviewed a number of prominent Adventist scholars, theologians, and Pastors ranging from the late Arthur White to the exiled Dr. Desmond Ford. In addition, he has amassed a large private library, which includes numerous rare books and manuscripts about Adventist theology and history. He is presently the online editor of Adventist Reform, and can be found at Adventist for Tomorrow answering questions online about SDA theology and history as well as promoting Adventist Reform. http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/

Education/Credentials
Tom Norris attended SDA grade and High schools, moving on to study Adventist theology at Columbia Union College. He also spent significant time conducting independent research in the General Conference Archives and the Ellen G. White Estate.

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.