|  |
| Customer Reviews: | | Average Customer Review: ( 45 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
68 of 79 found the following review helpful:
 The untold story also being untrue! Feb 12, 2011
By Stephen Dexter
2/11/11
My Dear Tesa and Author,
I usually do not spend time reading Adventist anti-apologetic books, but because you both are my friends, and I was concerned about the effect your views might have on yourself and others, I have read your book. It seems to me that the work you set out to do was already so elegantly done in the terrific book by Walter Martin entitled "Kingdom of the Cults" The main difference being that he is an actual biblical scholar and theologian and he tried not to have any particular obvious bias against the SDA church which is markedly different then the tone of your book. I guess you thought it was necessary to reprint much of the inaccurate, much of it out of context, anti-SDA rhetoric that has been going around for many years and pile it all up in one place for others to read; that's quite an accomplishment. I have listed a few of the things that I am concerned about for your thought not because I think you will listen to me, but because you have been my friends, your influence has touched me in a personal way, and most specifically affected my children as they respected you and loved you. Time will tell whether your book is doing more good then harm. I fear for the later and the tone within your current websites suggest a defensive and even hateful spirit at times. I would have to write an entire book myself if I were to try and address all of the issues that I have with your book, but I will only go over some important topics to me personally. And to be fair, I recognize at the onset, that your book was in your own words "not written for me". You mention this over and over, I assume because you realize that so many Adventist will think themselves unfairly represented in the book. This however does not relinquish your responsibility to be accurate, fair and kind in your book as you present the book as being accurate and reliable which it is not, as I will go into below. I believe that what you should have done is leave the church and go about business, rejoicing in your re-discovered freedom in Christ (something you always had access to inside the church but did not realize it I guess). Why accuse the brethren like this in such a accusatory negative spirit? Your work regarding the doctrines has already been done as mentioned before, and much better at that as Walter Martin really attempted to be non-biased, accurate and truthful. It is truly amazing to me that you can interpret our 28 fundamental beliefs in such a legalistic way, never finding Jesus Christ freedom to think and to do in them. I would tell you, God's grace and freedom to do as you believe is there in our beliefs. But as you say, God led you out of the SDA church in order for you to enjoy His blessings that I say He meant for you all along. It is OK not to be a Seventh Day Adventist, this has always been the case. You need to worship with like minded people, something that you would never find with your current philosophy towards the SDA denomination. I am sorry you felt duped all those years. Tragic.
1. I will start by quoting your own book, using just one of your so called true statements regarding Adventist to help anyone who might be considering purchasing your book as a possible helpful, insightful, honest account of what SDA Christians are like. Your book consistently offended me throughout its pages, but the following quotation is an excellent representative of your attitude, spirit, and tone of your book. Your words are so unkind, yet so personally untrue, and you present it as a clear obvious fact that is without question. I present it here so that anyone considering reading your book will understand your position as given in your own words. Your book says on page 238, paragraph 2 "Adventist have withdrawn from and abandoned mankind. - Elitism and separateness have made Adventist become the antithesis of Christ (emphasis supplied). It has made them hardhearted and judgmental- afraid of the porn addict, the AID's patient, the alcoholic, and the homosexual." Do you believe that is a fair statement about me personally and Adventist in general. It is like you have never met me. Tesa, how could you write such a thing? If any reader is to believe your book, then I am like that because I am an SDA Christian. There is no other interpretation as you do not state that this is your opinion only and may represent a few of the Adventist that you know. The fact is that I am a physician who personally treats AID's patients and alcoholics every day, and I treat them with loving kindness and understanding and to say that I am afraid of them is ridiculous. Maybe you think I am the exception, but Tesa, your book is filled with so many similar untrue judgmental statements that it cannot be trusted as reliable in any sense of the word. Your critics I see have also been hard on you and rightfully so literarily speaking. But I just wanted to point out to anyone who might read this, that your book is filled with inaccurate statements and judgments that are simply not true even in the general sense, this being just one example. I gathered from your book that you have been personally severely injured by judgmental un-Christ like SDA people, which of course are out there and are in all denominations. I bet there are a few in the congregation you now attend which is Catholic to my understanding. The fact that you consider your statements as wise, truthful, honest and insightful is beyond reasoning for me. I think I deserve an apology for the hundreds of untrue statements about me because I am a Seventh day- Adventist, you know me personally, and you know that I am not like the people you describe in your book as true SDA Christians. You are such a good writer, and you could have written and very good novel using this subject matter. But what you have done is shameful Tesa, and you need to apologize for your book and the untold damage that you are causing with the inaccurate untrue things you have said, this being just one of hundreds of things that are simply untrue. Authors name is on the book as well, and if he is reading this, he owes me an apology too. We were good friends not long ago. Did we treat you like your book says we do?
2. I don't think it is fair to attack the SDA Church in general regarding righteousness by faith. Fundamental belief number 10 "This faith which receives salvation comes through the divine power of the Word and is the gift of God's grace." It is clearly in the official teachings of the church that we are saved by grace alone and you consistently attack the church for not teaching this and claim that we are primarily based on righteousness by works. You might be getting confused because the bible also teaches that faith without works is dead. There is lots of room for discussion on this topic.
3. I do not believe you are being fair regarding the use of what "Adventist believe" or "Adventist teach". In fact, your book consistently offended me personally whenever you claim some thing that "they" teach when in fact, I am part of "they", and you never asked me. But the worst of it is, that you do not make the distinction between your opinion of something the church believes in and what the church officially teaches.
4. You appear to have misnamed the book. It seems clear to me that your book is about why Tesa and Author Beem left the SDA church and your book appears to relate an exhaustive outpouring of your rationalizing your way out of the denomination. A better title would have been "Its NOT OK to be a Seventh day Adventist". Your attempt to get people who have left the church to read your book by your title seems misleading as I would guess that most people who leave the SDA church, or any other church for that matter, is that they have drifted away from spending time with God personally. God can find people anywhere they are if that person is seeking Him. No where does the SDA Church teach that it is not OK to be an SDA, and your title implies in a negative way that the church teaches this.
5. You appear to have missed out on what I consider to be a fundamental spiritual truth regarding laws and/or commandments. It is my opinion that all "law" is an attempt by God to improve our situation and give us a happy life, not God trying to make us worthy or good enough to save eternally. People in general seem to really like salvation by works because then you can feel like you deserve eternal life and the blessings surrounding this. Its the American way after all to work hard for what you get. The confusing, seemingly irrational, ceremonial laws such as "don't boil a calf in its mother milk", for instance, still would have had at its root, some element of improving the law abiding persons life, though certainly I would not know what that is. But I believe as a Seventh-day Adventist that all laws or commands of any kind given by God were and are given for the benefit of mankind, not to make us worthy of heaven. Jesus did obey all of these laws however, and in doing so, believing in him give us the right to be called sons of God and God views us as if we actually did keep them, and as such we are righteous if we trust in Him. But lets not get confused about the purpose of the law. They are for our benefit. They cannot save us.
6. You forgot to mention a few paramount things about the Sabbath. It was not first given on Mount Sinai as your book implies. It was given by God on day 7 of the earths creative existence and both Adam and God celebrated it on that day before sin or transgression of the law was ever experienced. God kept it in heaven, Adam in the garden, Jesus did while on earth and I believe God is still keeping it today. Not for some legal requirement. It made God happy and it was helpful to rest from His work in creation and it should make us happy to rest from our busy lives one day out of seven. It was set up as a memorial to the creator of the universe, a time set apart, or Holy and God specifically told us to remember it. Your chosen path to try and forget it and minimalize its significance appears unbiblical. Jesus clearly points out that the Sabbath was made for man and not the other way around. I am so sorry that you were never able to enjoy the Sabbath for what it is; a blessing to the world, not a legal ceremonial commandment that is entrenched in salvation by works. I would love to see you treat the commandment about worshipping God only, or Murder, or adultery, through the rigorous rough treatment that you have chosen to give the Sabbath which is found in the same list of commandments. You are missing out on meeting with God Himself on a day that He has set aside to meet with you at the beginning of the worlds existence. It is your loss, and unfortunately, Gods loss as well because He loves you and He has set that time apart to be with you in a special way. The legalistic rituals and inconsistencies (your "Dennys" restaurant rule example about going out to eat is an excellent example) that some SDA people come up with to try and improve the Sabbath rest is unfortunate, but these are not in our doctrines and should be changed in my opinion. These are matters or personal preference and room for improvement exists.
7. I am also concerned about your presumption and declaration that you are definitely right in your current understandings, and this appears to have made it difficult on yourselves should you find out that the so called "retarded, delusional, impaired" Ellen White is correct on her end time visions. Only time will tell if she was right as Walter Martin stated. Regarding doctrine, the SDA officially state that "Revision of these statements (28 fundamental beliefs) may be expected at a General Conference session when the church is led by the Holy Spirit to a fuller understanding of Bible truth or finds better language in which to express the teachings of God's Holy Word" thus allowing for new growth and changing of current opinions and new truths. I don't see that you have given yourself this option. Do you ever stay up at night and wonder if you are wrong? That maybe you are angry with the SDA church regarding some particular subject, say the abortion issue, and this is your way of dealing with it? I do.
8. Have you ever noticed that Jesus spent little time trying to defend or sort out peoples doctrine? He would usually just meet them where they are and then tell them some truth and live it by example. In the large scheme of things, I don't think that having the right set of denominational doctrines is all that important. The thief on the cross was saved and his current doctrinal views at the time no doubt will have to be corrected much in heaven. Jesus is trying to save as many people as He can, and I believe that is why He allows for so many different denominations. I believe anyone can be saved regardless of there current set of doctrines, if they believe and confess that Jesus is Lord and Savior. In addition to this, people who have never heard the name of Christ could be saved if God knows their heart to be right, which He is the only one who does know this, maybe even a scientologist like Tom Cruise can make it. After that, Jesus will help each person to find a fellowship of like minded believers to grow and love with. I personally choose to stay in my local church and from there work on improving our doctrines to better reflect God as presented in the New Testament through Jesus Christ. I see room for improvement in our 28 fundamental beliefs wording and our church allows for this as the Holy Spirit leads.
9. It is my understanding that you have chosen to be a Catholic. It is amazing to me that you can overlook the protestant reformation given your knowledge of these matters. Why did those reformers have to die? Why did they leave the Catholic church and have Martin Luther's 95 thesis been corrected in the church of today? Who killed and tortured those reformers of old and for what reasons? Will you unite in the future with your people to silence the reformers of the future when or if the time comes? Where is your book regarding why it is OK to be a Catholic with apologies to Martin Luther and the many others that were silenced for their new truths? And your book seems strangely silent on the state of the dead. How is your Catholic teaching of God keeping sinners alive for eternity in the agony of fiery brimstone sitting with your spirit? How are you fitting this truth into your view of a God who is loving, kind and forgiving? There are several key text to support such a doctrine after all. As I mentioned before, I meet with like minded believers on Sabbath. I don't know how you are fitting this into your philosophy. I guess justice takes precedence over mercy, Dante's Inferno was eye opening to me on this topic. I like mercy better.
10. On page page 233, paragraph 7, you make a statement that helps to exemplify the unsound and frightening results of your thoughts and beliefs, and I would say, makes a case as to why I am a Seventh day Adventist. You state that "the gospel of Jesus Christ is simple. He said you would be saved if you believe in him. Period." Really? Then you go on to say it has to be "saving belief" which is not a period after all. Question? Did Satan belief in Jesus Christ and in his mission? Yes, he did. He was afraid of Him and he tried to stop Him. Did this save him? No. If you spend some time working this out, you find that it is important what you think about God. Here is where doctrine can be important. It is my opinion that the final question will be whether you agree with God and how He does things, or whether you agree with Satan and his charges against God as being unfair, arbitrary, vengeful and severe. The often slandered in your book idea of a great controversy. Satan won a large number of the angels to his side? How? I think that the answer to these questions will decide on whether God is able to save a person eternally, which only He knows because He reads the heart. It is not enough to just believe in Jesus Christ, or Satan would be saved. You need to work on this point and clarify what you meant. Your period was not in the right place. Period.
All this said, my longtime friends Tesa and Author, I will continue to pray for you and your family. I hope and pray the trail of carnage that you appear to have caused and continue to cause for your family and others is healed in time, especially regarding your wonderful parents who I see reaching out to you on your website. I would also like to apologize for any SDA cruelty or misunderstandings that you have obviously endured at the poor behavior of some legalistic SDA people. May God give you peace and clarity of thought as you move forward, and may I find you in heaven when the times comes as I will be searching for you. Maybe a few legalistic Catholics will help you to see your way more clearly, I am sure there are some there. We shall have some good conversation in heaven as the real truth will be known and all doctrines unified. Again, unless the doctrine is specifically addressing the charges of Satan against God, then I don't think God finds them terribly important here on earth. That's my view anyway, for what it is worth. I am free to attend any church in the world. I go where I can find like minded believers. And for me at this time, that still resides in the Seventh day Adventist denomination. How is it going being Catholic by the way? Another book maybe? Take my advice and write a novel next time. It would sit much better with all concerned and you do have a writing talent and an imagination that would serve well in a novel. You should also consider re-tracting this book (something I would recommend as your friend and as a fellow Christian) and re-writing it as a novel that relates a couples search for truth and how the SDA denomination was keeping the couple from experiencing Gods grace. You would be able to cover the same material, and you have an excellent 1st draft. I would read that and it would be very interesting, probably well received, and maybe even helpful to both SDA people and former SDA people. It might even cause a doctrinal evaluation at our next General Conference! But your book as written is not a reliable source of accurate statements about SDA people and the doctrines we hold as true today, and because of that it is regrettable that you present it as present truth. It has some good points, some truth mixed with lots of errors, only some of which I mention above. Final grade as written is F for falsehood. Come on Tesa, you can do better. Give us a novel. That might even make a good movie. Tom Cruise can play Author, he has the looks, though Tom is a little short. And to close, yes, it is OK to not be a seventh day Adventist. It always has been. But I love it and am constantly trying to improve this small section of Christendom as Jesus Christ works on me daily.
Your friend in Christ,
Stephen Dexter, MD
159 of 207 found the following review helpful:
 I feel sad for this author and the people they are misleading... Oct 29, 2008
By Shawna
I must start by saying that I have only read about half the book so far but really felt like I needed to speak up. Many of the facts in this book are taken way out of context. Some of the really important quotes that seem controversial aren't even referenced so you can't tell where they came from.
I am not saying that the Adventists have it ALL right by any means but I think you have to be careful not to judge an entire religion by SOME of the people in it. Everyone is human.
I, like the authors, was raised Adventist but fell away from the church many times. I bought this book hoping to find some proof that the end times wouldn't be as bad as Adventists say. What I found in this book is much history but many things out of context, sometimes the authors are grasping at straws to make a point. Example: Book states Ellen White wrote in Spiritual Gifts that Satan repented and that God would not forgive him. The authors then state that to Ellen white..."Satan was in reality a repentant victim and God's mercy was not big enough to cover his sin" WHOA! No where did Ellen White say that. Yes, she did say his sin had been so great that God could not blot it out (this is what they took out of context) but a few paragraphs later it explains itself, God knew Satan's heart. She didn't say God's mercy was not big enough.
I am not saying Ellen White never made any mistakes, on the contrary she has written some questionable passages. This review isn't about Ellen White it is merely about the fact that the authors material needs to be very carefully reviewed and researched for yourself.
They also rag on the Adventists about perfectionism and salvation by works. Let's go to the Bible for a couple verses:
1Jn 3:9: "whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin
James 2:17, 20: "even so faith, it if hath not works, is dead, being alone", "...faith without works is dead"
Romans and the whole idea of faith, works, salvation can be very confusing because some verses seem to work against each other because it does say that faith is what saves you through Jesus. Adventists do not believe you have to be an Adventist to be saved but you do have to follow the truth.
PLEASE DO NOT JUST TAKE THE AUTHORS WORD FOR THE MATERIAL AS IT IS NOT ALL ACCURATE, RESEARCH FOR YOURSELF!
14 of 16 found the following review helpful:
Disappointing Oct 06, 2011
By HoustonReviewer
The Beems are very sloppy with historical details. They fail to footnote in such a way that people can evaluate sources for themselves. They fail to use credible sources.
They make major historical errors, such as the claim that
"Most SDA's are completely unaware that the Church of God Seventh-day, Advent Christian Church, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Worldwide Church of God, 7th day Sabbath Creationists, the First day Adventists and the Second Adventists are all children of the same movement."
Most Adventists know well that Miller's movement gave birth to the Advent Christian Church. This point is made in every history of the subject. But the rest is mistaken. The Jehovah's Witnesses were not part of the same movement; their founder, Charles Taze Russell, wasn't even born until 1852. The Worldwide Church of God wasn't part of the Millerite movement; it was founded in 1933 by Herbert W. Armstrong, who was born in 1892. The Church of God (Seventh-Day) was an offshoot from Sabbatarian Adventism that rejected the leadership of James and Ellen White; that history is covered in SDA courses on church history and Ellen White. As to 7th Day Sabbath Creationists, maybe she means the Creation 7th Day Adventists, who left the Seventh-day Adventist Church in 1988.
Lots of books have been written on Millerism by fair and reliable historians, including, most recently, David Rowe, God's Strange Work: William Miller and the End of the World. That's a better place for the interested non-Adventist to start.
Who is the intended audience of the book? This is really confusing. Teresa has said elsewhere it was former Adventists who didn't get "the real truth." And yet the preface begins, "Have you ever wondered about this nice but unusual, vegetarian, Saturday-churchgoing people? You may have met an Adventist" in various ways (xi). Is that how you begin a book for former Adventists?
Elsewhere, the Beems speak of a missionary mandate:
"No one is doing the Adventists a favor by allowing them to believe lies. We must bring them the truth of the gospel." (xvi)
The material is organized around a debunking of what the Beems regard as the "pillars" of Adventism: "Ellen White as prophetess, The Three Angels' Message and Sanctuary Doctrine and lastly the Sabbath Doctrine" (64). But Ellen White is not one of the "pillar doctrines" of Adventism. Here's how Ellen herself spoke of the "pillars" or "landmarks":
"The passing of the time in 1844 was a period of great events, opening to our astonished eyes the cleansing of the sanctuary transpiring in heaven, and having decided relation to God's people upon the earth, [also] the first and second angels' messages and the third, unfurling the banner on which was inscribed, `The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.' One of the landmarks under this message was the temple of God, seen by His truth-loving people in heaven, and the ark containing the law of God. The light of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment flashed its strong rays in the pathway of the transgressors of God's law. The nonimmortality of the wicked is an old landmark. I can call to mind nothing more that can come under the head of the old landmarks. All this cry about changing the old landmarks is all imaginary" (CW 30).
I find it interesting that they devoted so much time to Ellen White an important figure, one whom Adventists do believe to have had the gift of prophecy, but not a pillar or landmark doctrine) and yet say nothing about the Adventist teaching on the nature of man and conditional immortality.
I also find it interesting that the authors, who say, "We must bring them the truth of the gospel" (xvi), say nothing about Adventist discussions about the gospel. There is no mention of 1888, of E. J. Waggoner, of A. T. Jones, of Desmond Ford or Robert Brinsmead, of righteousness by faith or justification by faith-subjects that have been the focus of so much debate within Adventism! Yet they cavalierly say Adventists know nothing about the gospel, and are living in despair, burdened by legalism.
Their depiction of Adventism is very dated. Adventist schools do not shun competition (235); most have intramural sports and many, if not most, also have teams that play non-Adventist schools. Contrary to the list on pp. 250-251, Adventists have no problem voting their conscience at the polls (Adventist conference presidents don't issue voter's guides). Lots of Adventists wear jewelry these days (for good or ill). Most Adventists don't send their kids to church schools (ditto). Adventists watch Christian (and non-Christian) TV. Many Adventists love Billy Graham and C. S. Lewis. Most Adventists don't fret or worry about the end times-they believe the return of Jesus is "the blessed hope." Adventists use their imaginations (just look at those prophecy seminar brochures).
For a book that's supposed to be about helping former Adventists adjust, there's no guidance for where they might go. The authors thank a Baptist pastor and an Assemblies of God pastor at the beginning. Those churches have very different views on spiritual gifts. The Beems don't give their former Adventist readers any guidance on this. Or on the subject of other churches' views on death (a major difference). Or on interpretation of prophecy (is Dispensationalism taught in Scripture?).
And what about the Catholic church? After several years of checking out the evangelical world, the Beems became Catholic--around the same time their book was being published, it would seem. So which gospel do they want former Adventists to embrace-the Baptist gospel or the teachings of the Council of Trent? What do they say about Catholic visionaries like Anne Catherine Emmerich? Or Medjugorje? Or Catholic legalism? Or purgatory, or works of satisfaction, or indulgences? Or Catholic schools (that could perhaps also be described as a "lockdown system to keep families in the organization" (235))?
I think after reading this book a former Adventist may well pat him or herself on the back and say, "See, I was right!" But will they have any sense of where to go next? I don't think so.
But that's not really the point, I think. This book isn't about former Adventists. It isn't about current Adventists. It isn't about non-Adventists. It is about Teresa and Arthur. It is really about their need to get off their chest some frustrations and to come to some sort of closure about their Adventist experience. Some people need to do that.
3 of 4 found the following review helpful:
 Well Researched Book Sep 04, 2011
By S. LLOYD
"Glastarguy"
As one who is a 3rd generation SDA, gone through the entire educational system (to MBA level), worked for the church's educational system, been on Conference and Union boards, and have since worked in affiliation with the church, I have a deep appreciation for the SDA culture and values. I have met wonderful caring Christians both within and without the SDA church as part of the greater "Body of Christ."
I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book and have read it through twice, the first time aloud with my wife. We have made it a practice for years to read spiritual books to each other aloud and then discuss what we read. We have found that this allows us to mature together in our spiritual walk and not to grow apart spiritually.
I found the book to be well researched and congruent with other personal research I have done regarding SDA doctrine, history, and perspective on Ellen G. White. Like the authors, I have come to believe that it is indeed "OK" not to be an SDA as I believe that our salvation is found in Christ, not in any creed. Indeed I believe that the church founders would be appalled that a "28 fundamental beliefs" ever came into existance. As a student of organizational design and history, I fully understand how this happens and it is to be expected, though it is too bad.
On the other hand, I also believe that it is OK TO BE an SDA, as our salvation is found in a personal relationship with Christ, not in adherence to any creed. Some have found that some aspects of SDA belief to be personally damaging and this is probably true of just about any religious creed. The authors clearly experienced much personal hurt, and I have known others who have shared their experience. This hurt comes through clearly in their prose. However, I didn't interpret their hurt as bitterness as some reviewers have.
I must say that I have not personally experienced their pain in the SDA church, though I found much of their critique of SDA exclusionism to be valid. Overall, I have found the vast majority of SDAs to be caring, loving Christians. Regarding doctrine, one of the most beneficial books that my wife and I read that helped put our spiritual walk in context was the book "Gracewalk." This helped us deal with the perceived legalism inherent in SDA theology, righteousness by faith statement in the "28 fundamentals" to the contrary.
I respect the personal honesty that led the authors on their difficult spiritual journey and I'm sure that journey still continues. Knowing the depth of their honesty and search for truth, I fully expect that in another ten years or so I will be able to read the sequel, "It's OK Not to be a Catholic."
This book is worth reading for any honest seeker of truth. Compare what it says to scripture and make up your own mind. Thinking and studying for oneself can be threatening to one's status quo, world view, and view of a loving God. Continue to earnestly seek God's will in your study.
6 of 9 found the following review helpful:
eye opening Mar 22, 2011
By Ann Bronte
This is a well written book incorporating research and the authors 40 years lived experience in the SDA tradition. It is helpful in understanding where SDA's are coming from theologically and eschatologically speaking. The authors display some critical thinking skills and a good knowledge of scripture. Worth the read!
See all 45 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
| | |
|
|
