JoyBaker wrote: When it comes to denominations, it's just if way better if we stay away from it.

JoyBaker wrote: You are? Oh, I thought you were an SDA...well, ok, nothing wrong with that.

pathfinder4ever wrote: I don’t really understand. Why I would visit other churches? Or why I am non-denominational?

I do go on guide on Saturdays sometimes but we come home from church after 1 or 2. We usually go to the park after lunch so I don’t spend much time here.

pathfinder4ever wrote: cause of reasons.

JoyBaker wrote: As to why you’re nondenominational? I’m interested to hear:)

sci_geeek wrote: Your presence on Guide alone implies the fact that you're SDA. Which is not necessarily true.

jodiaz wrote: Duh

pathfinder4ever wrote: It's more than just interest, isn't it.

pathfinder4ever wrote: Ok. So… I have a few reasons. But, it’s kinda hard to explain.
With denominations, there is a lot of division. People always argue because everyone believes something else. I want to be able to fellowship with others without arguing. We should not bring up our prophet or teacher as the Bible.
Did you know that the word denomination is equal to = demon+nation+i? I am not going to be rude to someone because they believe something else. I would go to other churches and hear what they have to say. Every church has its faults and achievements.

Khriz Kool Katz wrote: Maybe...

JoyBaker wrote: Alright, I kind of understand. I don’t believe denominations are a directly biblical idea.
There shouldn’t be different sects in christianity for example.
But…. If you truly understand, believe and know that what Adventism teaches, would the actions of those within the church hinder you from being an SDA?

m.egwwritings.org/en/book/39.238#247 I suggest you read this before further discussion, it does have some good points

sci_geeek wrote: Well… yes. I was born and baptized SDA

pathfinder4ever wrote: Again, I don’t understand. Sorry. I don’t like that when people are discussing Bible, they always quote their prophet or teacher.

pathfinder4ever wrote: Wow! That’s long. I’ll see if I can read that soon.

pathfinder4ever wrote: Huh. Jus' getting to the point, I see.

JoyBaker wrote: Really. That last point is just sooooooo facepalm-worthy. I can't believe you just said that. Come on, that's a very illegitimate point. People will find even the weakest piece of evidence to attempt to prove their point.

pathfinder4ever wrote: It depends on what you call a good point. :/

Khriz Kool Katz wrote: Hey! Let’s not be degrading.

JoyBaker wrote: I understand. Personally I don’t quote EGW very much because I don’t have those types of conversations too much with SDA’s. It’s a learning process, but there’s always a time and place. And let’s also remember the people who write the bible were also prophets inspired by God:)

Khriz Kool Katz wrote: Ok.

pathfinder4ever wrote: Ok. Yes

Khriz Kool Katz wrote: I know. It was actually my sister who told me that one. That’s not one of my reasons.

pathfinder4ever wrote: That was meant to be general. But-- misconceptions always arise, unfortunately. Things have a way of getting misunderstood or exaggerated.
Honestly, there really needs to be a fine line drawn to determine what's solid, factual evidence....and what's far from it.
JoyBaker, sorry if I was harsh, but I'll give you a tip to help you prove your point better. Call it a peace offering, if you wish.
When listing evidence to prove a point, it's best to put your strongest point last. If that is not the case, your argument will not be legit, and can easily be countered. Order your list so that your weakest point is first and your strongest point is last.
I hope that smooths things out.

JoyBaker wrote: Wait I think I understand what your saying now.
You’re seventh day adventist, but you don’t like the way many adventists go about their beliefs. So you prefer to identify as nondenominational to prevent confusion or misconceptions?