Forum folk,

My brother brought these Spectrum articles to my attention and I thought that many here would find them informative as I did. I spent the greater part of the evening reading them.

Enjoy!

guibox

1) http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive06-10/10-4utt.pdf

The first is an article that seems to have been written before Glacier View and talks about Ford’s initial presentation at PUC in October of ‘79 and the issues raised.

2) http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive11-15/11-2cottrell.pdf

The second one was written by Cottrell where he shows the structure of GV and some of the dialogue that occurred in a few of the committees. I found this one (though the most lengthy) to be the most intriguing and informative.

3) http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive11-15/11-2documents1.pdf

The third link consists of many documents. The first section is a reiteration and confirmation of what the church believes. The second part is the 10 points that GV committee came up with. The third are Parmenter and Ford’s correspondance shortly after GV and the letter terminating Ford’s relationship with the church ministry.

4) http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive11-15/11-2dismissal.pdf

The fourth are letters of reaction to Ford’s dismissal.

5) http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive11-15/11-2zytkoskee.pdf

The fifth is an interview with Ford shortly after the revoking of his credentials

Thanks Guibox for posting these articles. I had time to briefly look at some of them. When I was processing out of Adventism, I think I read all those articles.

What is your reaction to these articles?

When I read these articles over 20 years ago, they really had an impact on me. There is no way I could support a church that treated Ford and other honest scholars in the way they were treated. It was clear then and is even clearer now that Ellen White does still have the last word on doctrine. She forced Ballenger out of the church back in 1906, and the same spirit of Ellen White and Adventism forced Ford out of the ministry, and he has now left the church.

Here is Ford’s latest critique of the recent Sabbath School lesson on this same topic, as Clifford Goldstein continues to try to keep the myth of 1844 alive:

http://ellenwhite.org/DFordSS.htm

This is the one unique doctrine which separates Adventists from other Christians. State of the dead, Sabbatarianism are not unique to Adventism.

The church administrators know this, and they will continue to hold on to this idol of the sanctuary doctrine. They know that the SDA church would not have a reason to exist if they admitted they were wrong on this doctrine.

Stan

The first Spectrum article, after citing material from the Adventist Review, says that “A century earlier, Adventist doctrine and polity had been hammered out in vigorous debate and Ellen White had confirmed the conclusions.”

I’d be interested in knowing and reading the minutes of the various meetings where these doctrines were “hammered out in vigorous debate”. What contrary evidence was introduced, thoroughly examined, and analyzed in comparison with any supporting evidence? Who were the participants and over how long a time frame did this “vigorous debate” occur before the tool of inspiration was reached for and used to cement it for present and future generations?

I suspect that statements alluding to previous “vigorous debates” are meant to pre-empt further debate and the consideration of additional evidence.  Now, at a certain level, this may make sense, in that a church after having reached agreement on some point of doctrine, and believing it has considered all the relevant evidence, does not wish to have to continually revisit these points so that it may move on to other issues.

The problem, it seems to me, is that in many cases, it may be that this supposed prior “vigorous debate” never really occured in any meaningful sense, and even if it did, it wouldn’t necessarily preclude the need to revisit church doctrines as new challenges, sources and interpretations are raised. 

I further suspect that the problem our church continues to have over the Sanctuary doctrine and Ellen White is that these matters were not established by means of “vigorous debate”, and issues, views, or people that were unknown or ignored at the time, have found other avenues from which to arise.

I also don’t believe this is strictly an SDA problem. I hold it pertains to much of what constitutes Christianity today, where it is believed that the old ideas were best, all debate surrounding them are believed to be already “hammered out” and that believers should clam up or quietly and submissively accept what our forefathers, as great and devout as many of them were, have already staked out.

What I think was admirable, although in some ways naive and arrogant as well, in the very early Adventist movement and its restorationist origins, was the idea that in fact with the Bible in hand, we did so possess all the material and resources needed for our understanding and salvation and that previous creeds should be subjected to thorough Biblical analysis.

The unfortunate upshot, however, was that in rejecting previous sets of creeds the church ultimately went on to establish new creeds.  This is probably inevitable as churches move from their initial foundings to become more entrenched and established.

[quote author="Stan Ermshar"]and he has now left the church.

This is news to me. I would like to see the sources for this claim as it is the first time I have heard of this. Last I heard, Ford only requested his membership be dropped from P.U.C.’s roll. He is still very much an Adventist. 

guibox, Desmond Ford has indeed left the Adventist church membership according to Ron Allen, the Pastoral Director of “Good News Unlimited”:

Q. Dear Ron, First, thanks again for your encouraging spring seminar. Those of us well aware of our own inadequacy were greatly encouraged by the story of devious Jacob and his dysfunctional family. If God could use him then there is hope for the rest of us! Could you do me a favor and ask Des what his current situation is regarding the SDA denomination. I was told by an SDA that the church had apologized to Des and had reinstated his ministerial credentials. I thought it seemed unusual that I would not have heard if the church had made such a gesture, but I want to be very sure that I have my facts straight before I discuss it further with the person, who is in a position of leadership.Thanks so much for taking care of this for me, and I look forward to hearing from you. We will certainly continue to remember your ministry in our prayers. Sincerely, Marilyn T

A. Dear Marylin, Desmond Ford is not a member of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. He resigned his membership soon after he retired because he was trying to get a part time position at a Baptist Seminary in Australia, and he resigned to smooth his way through Baptist political processes. I can tell you that there is no offer on the table from the denominations leaders, to reinstate Des. There have been some approaches made to the brethren by his friends (not at his request) but with no result. God Bless, and thanks for your encouragement. Ron J. Allen.

Original reference here.

If you look at the response to the question on 1/8/07, it appears Ford never made it into the Baptist seminary, but presumably he is still no longer a member of the Adventist church.

Here is another clue:

“I have just come from a service at the Brisbane City Baptist Church where I listened to the most outstanding preacher I have ever heard. His name is Dr. Desmond Ford.

The Baptist Church here in Brisbane has adopted Dr. Ford, and tonight’s talk was the culmination of a weekend seminar. Next week a group of Baptist officials and a finance trader have arranged a meeting to plan the establishment of a million dollar trust to be used for the promotion of Dr. Ford at future public meetings.

How my heart burned as I thought of how our church rejected one of the most valuable assets we ever had. How can we forgive ourselves?”

Adventist Today, July-August 2000

Greg

Also, in regard to what Greg said, it is interesting that Desmond Ford gave personal permission to Dale Ratzlaff to post Ford’s critique of the SS lesson on http://www.ellenwhite.org
This may have not happened when ford was still an SDA.

Thanks Greg for clarifying the Ford issue.

Stan

Thanks for the information.

I should come clean here. I am not Guibox, I am his brother. He was visiting my place over the last couple of days and he used my computer to post the articles. Apparently I am now able to post under his registered name for some reason! Hehehehe…

It would have been fun to post some outrageous statements and have him take the heat, but I resisted the urge. We are family after all…

You owe me one bro.

I hope everyone enjoys the Glacierview links.

God bless,

Brother Of Guibox.

Posted anonymously by: Phen

It is amazing how some SDA people in other parts of the world view the issues surrounding the Ford situation. To this day, many do not know what transpired.The majority just think of him as a disgruntled Minister who wanted to tear the SDA church apart. This is because the information has been surpressed, and the members hear only the parts that the administration want them to hear. This is so unfortunate.When some do hear now, they figure it was a long time ago so the issue is dead.
The bigger tragedy is when people come to the internet and realize that they were kept in the dark for so long. This is why there is such a drastic reaction in some cases. 

Welcome to 4TG, Brother of Guibox.

We would be happy to have your Pastoral voice join in any of the discussions. If you have checked out the forum, you will recognize that we have been able to maintain a good decorum, and would welcome your voice.

So if you are looking for a safe place to anchor, you are welcome to row your boat a shore here, at forthegospel.

As for creating trouble for your brother Guibox, you make me laugh. I think he creats enough for himself, don’t you?(GRIN)

Randy

Hi Randy.

Yes, he does indeed! I like to call him the ‘chatroom drifter’. At last count he had left his mark at about about 5 different discussion forums. Looks like he might set up camp here for a while though.

In regards to Desmond Ford, our denomination lost a good man. It is to our loss and I weep at how he was treated. If I could apologize to him on behalf of our church and make things right again, I would. We had a champion of the Reformation Gospel in our ranks, and the reckless, ham-handed treatment of the administration exiled a voice of sanity in all of the perfectionist miasma which polluted the church at that time (and still does.) I hang my head in shame for this black spot in our history, even though I was only a young teenager at the time.

It is all the more tragic when you consider that many commited Adventists today, while not going so far as repudiating the IJ, have adopted some of the same beliefs and principals Ford espoused back then (you would be hard-pressed to find any mainline Adventist in this day and age who believes Christ was confined to a literal room literally applying His blood or that the IJ is some cross-examination to ascertain the ‘fitness’ of the individual for Heaven.)

Ford was a man ahead of his time, no doubt. The church was not ready for his radical ideas at all and he suffered for it.

I will leave it to the church administration to search thier souls and ask themselves how they can justify crucifying this man for one doctrinal indiscretion while so many Adventist leaders and members in Southern California are able to flaunt thier disdain and outright abandonment of the blood atonement with impunity, not to mention thier abandonment of many of our eschatological beliefs (foremost under attack are God’s justice and the destruction of the wicked by fire.) What a double standard! Where is the ‘Glacierview’ for Graham Maxwell? I have yet to see any action taken against this man’s heresy. Positively outrageous!

Glacierview was a kangaroo court, a fraud of the highest order. It was all beauracratic backroom politics and a vehicle used to save the presidency of a compromised man, nothing more. It had not one thing to do with theology and an honest search for the truth. Keith Parmenter and Neal Wilson engaged in behaviour unbecoming of a Christian and a ‘friend’. Des was charitable and forgiving through the whole nightmare. I wish I could say I would have reacted the same way. Alas, I cannot. It speaks volumes about the man’s character and it is to his credit.

The right-wing fundamentalist Adventists won the battle that day, but they have yet to win the war. We shall see what the future holds for this denomination I suppose.

I cannot promise I will take part in the discussions here very often, as I am a busy man with two churches. But I do want to commend those who have originated this site. Many Adventists tend to treat formers as pariahs or Gentiles. I am not one of those Adventists. Much can be learned by keeping the channels of communication open IMO, and sensible dialogue free from heated, judgmental exchanges is always appreciated.

Thank-you for sharing your thoughts, brother of Guibox.

Looking at the historical record, the conclusions you have drawn regarding the treatment of Des Ford are right on.

Like I said earlier, you are welcome to join in here anytime. In fact sign up, so Guibox doesn’t feel like someone is using his name loosely and without due care and attention.

If you feel you can speak more freely using a different handle than what your mother called you, we welcome that as well. Everybody here understands the constaints put on those in the employ of the denomination when it comes to theological discussion and exploration.

Blessings to you, and I hope we hear your voice,

Randy

[quote author="Brother of guibox"]
It is all the more tragic when you consider that many commited Adventists today, while not going so far as repudiating the IJ, have adopted some of the same beliefs and principals Ford espoused back then (you would be hard-pressed to find any mainline Adventist in this day and age who believes Christ was confined to a literal room literally applying His blood or that the IJ is some cross-examination to ascertain the ‘fitness’ of the individual for Heaven.)

Ford was a man ahead of his time, no doubt. The church was not ready for his radical ideas at all and he suffered for it.

I will leave it to the church administration to search thier souls and ask themselves how they can justify crucifying this man for one doctrinal indiscretion while so many Adventist leaders and members in Southern California are able to flaunt thier disdain and outright abandonment of the blood atonement with impunity, not to mention thier abandonment of many of our eschatological beliefs (foremost under attack are God’s justice and the destruction of the wicked by fire.) What a double standard! Where is the ‘Glacierview’ for Graham Maxwell? I have yet to see any action taken against this man’s heresy. Positively outrageous!

Brother of guibox, thanks very much for sharing your cogent thoughts with us.  I think you hit the nail on the head by contrasting the treatment of Ford with the tacit permission Graham Maxwell and others have been given to deny the blood atonement, which is the very center of the gospel message.

It’s perhaps not so puzzling that Ford’s teaching is anathema in Adventism while those who deny the trinity, a literal hell, the judgment and the substitutionary atonement are allowed to proceed unchecked.  In the case of Ford, his arguments struck right at the foundation of Adventism and the prophetic gift of Ellen White.  By showing from Scripture that Jesus could not have been confined to the Holy Place until October 22, 1844, he simultaneously dismantled the foundational planks of Adventism and called Ellen White’s prophetic gift into question.  Those who teach all manner of unbiblical doctrines mentioned above are content to leave the Adventist doctrinal foundation untouched, so they themselves are left untouched by the church administrators.

There may be hints that some segments of Adventism are changing over time.  I’ve heard of Adventist churches that reduce the number of fundamental beliefs to a subset of the official 28.  But perhaps the leaders of these churches will also remain untouched because they don’t explicitly deny the sanctuary/IJ and, by association, Ellen White’s prophecies endorsing these doctrines.

I am encouraged that there is at least one Adventist pastor who is zealous for the Reformation doctrines underlying the gospel and who is not afraid to speak his mind about them.  Brother of guibox, you are welcome here anytime.  As Randy pointed out, it would be good to register under a different name so we can tell who is doing the talking.

Greg

Yes indeed,

We are happy to have Guibox, and his other brother guibox.

Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts with us.

Stan

I feel possessed! But I am back in charge of my faculties! I have fully exorcised my brother out!

I guess I better clear the cookies and erase the history lest my brother slip into my persona again!

Stan asked for my reactions on the matter. I feel the same way as my brother. Right or wrong, Ford should not have been treated the way he did and had he come out now, there would barely be a blip in the system considering the many scholars that are espousing what Ford was back then.

The wrong place at the wrong time...but with the right spirit. As my brother said and what is apparent in his interview, Ford was a gracious Christian man who handled this injustice in a mature, Christian manner.

BTW, did any of you notice the one article that was a bit unrelated to the matter written by Dr.Warren Trenchard? He was one of the professors at my school while I was there (Canadian Union College). His son and I became good friends in the early 90s.

Not as much a claim to fame as our dear Stan hobnobbing and doctoring Walter Martin that’s for sure..but a smidgen nonetheless.

Guibox, are you the little “box” and your brother the
big “box” or is it reversed?  (Chuckles)

I’d like to commend him for his honesty, courage of personal convictions.  I’d like to also praise God for
the miracle of grace, that he has been able to see, and embrace Biblical truths which come with the dusty cloak of
the Reformation days covering them; and to be able to
recognize truth that IS TRUTH, no matter from whence it comes.

While I did not discover the “authentic Gospel” from Des Ford, we became friends largely over the Gospel.  I have ate at his table, tried to keep up with his lanky Aussie legs as we took a walk together, and he was instrumental in
helping me find some employment in Bakersfield after my being ostracized from Adventist minstry.

I would like to know his present day convictions regarding the binding claims of Saturday Sabbath, since he seemed to maintain his belief in Sabbath observance being binding upon Christians under the New Covenant, something I could never understand.

Truly a good and godly man, whom I shall always admire and love.

Jess

Jess wrote:

“While I did not discover the “authentic Gospel” from Des Ford, we became friends largely over the Gospel. I have ate at his table, tried to keep up with his lanky Aussie legs as we took a walk together, and he was instrumental in
helping me find some employment in Bakersfield after my being ostracized from Adventist minstry.

I would like to know his present day convictions regarding the binding claims of Saturday Sabbath, since he seemed to maintain his belief in Sabbath observance being binding upon Christians under the New Covenant, something I could never understand.

Truly a good and godly man, whom I shall always admire and love.”
---------------------------------------------------------

Des Ford was probably the most important mentor I had in my early days of processing out of Adventism in the early 80’s.
I also was puzzled by his still high regard for Ellen White, and the Sabbath, as well as the health message.

I believe he still holds to Sabbatarianism for Saturday in the same way that some of my Presbyterian friends also honor Sunday. In a way, Ford is just being more consistent. I strongly disagree with any form of Sabbatarianism, but, I don’t see even Saturday keeping as a barrier to good Christian fellowship.

Stan