Posted: Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:44 pm Post subject: Maxwell Interview with Comments
We should all be alarmed by the bewitching power of error, and particularly that which contains subtle elements of spiritualism. Ellen White constantly warned our people about false theories that would come into the church to deceive many. She reached the point where she felt her warnings had almost no effect on God's people.
Quote:
"For many years I have carried a heavy burden for our instituions. Sometimes I have thought I would attend no more large gatherings for our people, for my messages seem to leave little impression on the minds of our leading brethren after the meetings have closed." Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 6, p. 56.
If you are familiar with church history, you may know that James White suffered a premature death brought on by the grief he suffered knowing that unconverted men had gained control of our institutions. Today, our educational institutions are overrun by false theories and even blatant heresies, taught by the very ones who should be fostering the truths that Adventists once held so dear. The standards are being lowered, and the pillars of our faith are being slowly eroded and replaced with the fanciful theories of men.
Spiritualism, velied in theories that charm the unsuspecting, are perverting some of our best minds; and more than a generation of Adventists have been exposed to the subtle errors of men like Graham Maxwell. I echo the despair of Mrs. White when she wrote:
Quote:
"My soul is so greatly distressed as I see the working out of the plans of the tempter that I cannot express the agony of my mind. Is the church of God always to be confused by the devices of the accuser, when Christ's warnings are so definite, so plain?" Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, pages 22, 23.
I invite those who are interested in finding out some of what Graham Maxwell really teaches regarding salvation to visit the following website. Maxwell has planted the seeds of deception in the minds of countless youth at Adventist educational instututions. Today his theories are accepted far and wide within the Adventist church. Even seasoned pastors, educators, and church leaders have been swept up in Maxwell's error. As you read the interview, look for subtle insinuations that cast doubts upon the cross, the blood of our Savior, and the Ten Commandments.
Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:49 am Post subject: http://www.pineknoll.org/graham/wdjhtd.html
Quote:
Gallagher: But is Jesus trying to change God the Father in any way? If you answer the question "Did Jesus have to die?" from the Father's perspective, it seems to be the answer is "No." The cross was not necessary for God.
Maxwell: If Jesus is God. . .
Gallagher: Can God die to change anything in God?
Maxwell: Doesn't need to change...
Gallagher: It doesn't make any sense...
Maxwell: It doesn't make any sense at all. Now the pagans thought that God could be--but this is basically a very pagan idea.
The meaning of this little exchange is a veiled reference to the fundamental challenge posed by the moral influence theory (m.i.th): "Why can't God just forgive?" Maxwell accepts the m.i.th but adds to it that Christ died to end fear, settle doubts and to answer questions.
Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 12:54 pm Post subject: http://www.pineknoll.org/graham/wdjhtd.html
Quote:
Gallagher: Did Jesus die a "substitutionary death"? Maxwell: In a way, yes. Either he had to die, or we would die.
Maxwell is resorting to great duplicity here. I can quote plenty of Maxwell statements where he is mocking the concept of vicarious substitutionary atonement:
Quote:
There is much friendship talk in the Bible, but there is much legal talk too, isn't there? Much servant talk. Isn't it true that sin is breaking the law? And the just penalty for breaking the law is death. See, God's minimum penalty is death. If He were running the highway patrol, and you were caught breaking the speed limit, the penalty would be death. That is His minimum penalty. You steal a cookie—death. Speak a cross word—death. Right there one begins to feel uncomfortable, but this person proceeds stoutly on and says, Didn't Jesus die to pay that penalty? So isn't the legal model of the plan of salvation correct? Justice requires this. The law requires this.
Well, what should we do about all of that talk? One suggestion. What is this death that is the penalty for sin? That is what we call the second death. And what's so terrible about that is there is no resurrection. That death is eternal. Did Jesus pay that death? Well, did He stay dead for eternity? He rose on Sunday. And He went up to heaven, and He said, Was it enough? And they said, No, you are not supposed to have done this. Get back down and we won't tell anyone we saw you out. You are supposed to stay in the grave forever. —The Serpent Speaks, p. 12.
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:08 pm Post subject: http://www.pineknoll.org/graham/wdjhtd.html
Quote:
Maxwell: You see, with so many, what's gone wrong is that we have broken the rules and we're in legal trouble. We have made a fatal mistake, and we are doomed—not just to die; we are doomed not just to be executed; we are doomed to be punished and then executed.
Maxwell has chosen his words carefully. In this instance, the word execute means, "To put to death, especially by carrying out a lawful sentence."
What Maxwell is doing here is a mere repetition of what he does frequently. He is mocking the idea of God doing an unusual thing (Isaiah 28:2) in harmony with His own righteousness. Maxwell's ceaseless effort "to strain out the divine justice from the divine benevolence" should be unmasked thoroughly and widely because souls are being separated from light and reason and forever bound to a doctrine of satanic origin. God's law is the transcript of His character. Common sense says that a doctrine of demons should not be tolerated in the Seventh-day Adventist church.
Here is an intractable question. Why is Maxwell attempting to separate and create a wedge between God's law and the holiness of God's character? It's clear to me that Maxwell is pursuing a divide and conquer strategy. Undeniably, Maxwell is hostile to God's law. Therefore, Maxwell is attacking God's character.
Quote:
Gallagher: What would you say to people who say God is the one who defines his law—that's an expression of his character—and part of his law is that sinners have to die?
Maxwell: [Obfuscation with this conclusion]: It "follows that if we choose to be disorderly, and untrustworthy, and unloving, there will be destructive consequences both in this life, and terribly to come. But not at the hands of our gracious God—all he has to do is to leave us to reap the consequences of our disorderliness."
In other words, the ultimate fallacy that Maxwell is luring the unsuspecting to is the bewitching charm of pantheism. Pseudo Adventism's Pantheism.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
