Criticism of John Thiel’s Sermon – Unquestioning Obedience

Criticism of John Thiel’s Sermon Unquestioning Obedience

By Georead

John Thiel’s sermon “Unquestioning Obedience” [1][2][3] was posted on the internet in 2010. Throughout the sermon the idea of unquestioning obedience, blind obedience, implicit obedience is repeated.

The key points in the sermon are 1) The high pressure sell, that it’s the end of the world and there’s no time left. 2) Since it’s an emergency there is no room left for discussion . 3) You need to submit to the most experienced person. 4) You need to obey and do without understanding.

1) High Pressure Sell
John Thiel – “The need of hastening the process is nearly out; it is too short a span”
John Thiel – “We are to be purified and if we haven’t made progress then it has to happen fast.”
John Thiel – “he [God] wants to get us ready fast”
John Thiel – “he[God] says I’m going to make a quick work with you”

2) No Room for Discussion

John Thiel – “There is no room for discussion; it is just instant obedience”
John Thiel – “There is no time for discussion and dialogue in an emergency.”

3) Submission to the most Experienced Person
John Thiel – “Submission must be given to the most experienced i.e. the captain of the ship without long discussion.”

4) Obey and Do Without Understanding
John Thiel – “Just do as I say . . . We haven’t got time to understand anymore.”
John Thiel – “Can’t I understand before I obey?”
John Thiel – “Don’t tell me you don’t fully understand.”
John Thiel – “don’t ask why, just do it. . . . don’t ask why . . . just do as I say . . . just do as I say.”
John Thiel – “The result of waiting to understand as I have already suggested is fatal.”
John Thiel – “Waiting till we understand is going to catch us out. If you wait for understanding and to be convinced, you are caught”
John Thiel – “We mustn’t wait to understand, we simply must do.”

In this sermon John Thiel reads concerning the seal of God and the mark of the beast, yet his teaching appears to be in more harmony with the mark of the beast. He uses a high pressure sell tactics attempting to obtain outward compliance without understanding.  Outward compliance is all that is needed to receive the mark of the beast as it can be received either in the hand (which represents some act outward compliance) or the forehead (which represents intelligent understanding). But the seal of God can only be received in the forehead. Outward compliance is not enough for God. There needs to be a willing intelligent understanding to receive the seal of God in the forehead.

We agree that faith towards God involves some blind obedience. However, as it has been repeated over and over throughout history, man often inserts himself in the place God. Men will interpret God’s words and read His words to suit their own bias. They will selectively read God’s words leaving out that which does not suit their particular bias. After doing this, they will demand blind obedience of the people saying they should follow God’s words implicitly.

In this sermon John Thiel puts himself in the place of God and speaks what he thinks God is speaking: – “Can you trust me implicitly? Don’t seek to ask the reason for the things I am going to tell you as it will slow down the process. I’m asking you to simply obey all the standards and practices that are outlined for the church of the three angels. Don’t tell me you don’t fully understand. If I say to you, you must follow the dress code as studied in the sanctuary that is it, don’t ask why, just do it. It’s the dress code. The health message as studied, vegetarianism, don’t ask why, just simply know that I’m asking you to step fast, that’s why. Don’t ask about modesty, fashion, and vanity, worldly pastimes just do as I say. Don’t worry about your friends and your unbelieving relatives just do as I say.” – John Thiel

John Thiel presents that there is no more time to investigate or question because we are almost at the end of the world. The time of preparation for the end is very short, and for this reason John Thiel claims we have to “just do it” and obey without questioning. It appears that John Thiel wants to quench all investigation especially on the subject of a dress code and health. He wants people to blindly obey on these things.

We challenge the notion of John Thiel. The Bereans were commended because they did not blindly follow but investigated the Scriptures (Acts 17:11). In Jesus day, although impending doom was looming over Jerusalem, had the people investigated the Scriptures, instead of blindly following the leaders, they might have found the truth and been saved from destruction. Jesus refers to them as the blind following the blind (Matthew 15:14). During the dark ages the Scriptures were suppressed. It was illegal for the common people to read them. Only the priests could selectively read and interpret the Scriptures for the people. This was how the papacy sought to control the people. They couldn’t let the people investigate the Scriptures because they feared they might lose control over the people’s minds.

In the past John Thiel has attacked others accusing them of using Catholic principles. But in this sermon he advocates the same principle of control used by the papacy. All the while John Thiel deceptively presents himself as strongly protestant. For example in September 2009 a sermon by John Thiel titled “Are You A Protestant?” was posted online [4].

Blind obedience is a very dangerous principle considering the fact that every cult leader in the world wants blind unquestioning obedience. Cult leaders don’t want the people to question or investigate. They fear loosing control over the minds of the people. They fear that if the people think for themselves they will end up with different opinions. This will lead them to challenge their leader and thus undermine his control over their minds.

Cult leaders will seek to isolate their followers from outsiders. They don’t want the critical thinking or the influence of outsiders to interrupt their control over their followers. A worrying phrase used by John Thiel is: – “Don’t worry about your friends and your unbelieving relatives just do as I say.” When relatives and friends see John Thiel using the tactic of blind obedience to control and establish a dress code they become concerned. E. G. White writes “He has made the most precious truth for these last days disgusting to his friends and relatives; he has proved a stumbling block to them. His evasions, his bigotry, and the extreme views he has taken have turned more souls away from the truth than his best endeavors have brought into it” {2T 388.2}.

John Thiel desires his followers to obey and do all of the minutiae without question. But it is a fearful thing to put yourself in the place of God and then require blind obedience because you think that all of your understandings of God’s words can never be mistaken. No true minister of the gospel will do this.

 References:

[1] http://sabbathsermons1.wordpress.com/2013/11/14/21-unquestioning-obedience/

[2] http://sabbathsermons.com/2010/08/17/21-unquestioning-obedience/

[3] http://souldecisions.org/study-21-unquestioning-obedience/

[4] http://sabbathsermons.com/2009/09/06/are-you-a-protestant/

This entry was posted in Religion and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Criticism of John Thiel’s Sermon – Unquestioning Obedience

  1. Pingback: Response to No Railing Accusation | Georead

  2. Astra says:

    But the early Christians began to look for defects in one another. Dwelling upon mistakes, encouraging suspicion and doubt, giving way to unkind criticism, they lost sight of the Saviour, and of the great love he had revealed for sinners. They became more strict in regard to outward ceremonies, more particular about the theory of the faith, more severe in their criticisms. In their zeal to condemn others, they themselves erred. They forgot the lessons of brotherly love that Christ had taught. And, saddest of all, they were unconscious of their loss. They did not realize that happiness and joy were going out of their lives, and that soon they would walk in darkness, having shut the love of God out of their hearts. {RH, February 25, 1904 par. 4}

    • georead says:

      Astra go and learn what if means when Jesus said to the Pharisees woe unto hypocrites.
      Rather than what you quote people are finding great joy, God and His love away from a controlling cult leader that will surely lead them to destruction.

  3. Simon O'Rourke says:

    Let men remember that they have a Ruler in the heavens, a God who will not be trifled with. He who puts his reason to the stretch in an effort to exalt himself and to delineate God, will find that he might far better have stood as a humble suppliant before God, confessing himself to be only an erring human being. {6BC 1079.10}

  4. the typist says:

    I find it interesting that my comments posted the other day haven’t been approved as yet. Am I revealing too much truth?

    • georead says:

      Sorry your comments were getting too big. Can you keep it shorter. We don’t like spam. If you have some truth to share please do but we don’t need multitudes of words. “Truth is straight, plain, clear, and stands out boldly in its own defense; but it is not so with error. It is so winding and twisting that it needs a multitude of words to explain it in its crooked form.” {EW 96.1}

    • Simon O'Rourke says:

      I would Imagine it is because nobody wants to read your voluminous copy and pasted John Theil SPAM. Why don’t you open your Bible once in a while Ariadne, instead of worshiping at John Theils feet like some slinking Cur.

      • @Simon, Not once at this blog have I quoted John Thiel in a volumous capacity or even quoted him at all. I have quoted the SOP and used my own words. The other week I didn’t quote John but the feedback I got via you was that Georead said I had when I hadn’t. For the record, I had to block Georeads [relation] over a year ago from commenting at my blog sabbathsermons.com because it was extremely frequent as almost every article I posted was hit with emails to me personally or comments at my website of a negative nature about the sermon. I do not do that here. I don’t expect this comment or my ones below to be published as this is not a free democratic open blog and Georead is no longer publishing anything I have to say.

      • georead says:

        In response to the typist or sabbath sermons – we have the right to free speech also. You have your own blogs where you have put up endless page after page of your material. Our comments were blocked there. Here we have only few pages and it seems you want to take over our few pages bombing us with your voluminous quotes and opinions. It seems that our opinions must be swamped by yours and you are trying to impinge on our democratic right to put ours up on the internet. Then you twist it around blaming us for not being democratic. We are allowing other comments that are critical to our blog – that are not voluminous efforts trying to take over our blog. You are doing the same work as your master who says “we must render blind obedience” in other words – we have no right to think for ourselves or to have alternate opinions. It seems that you want to bomb this website out of existence so that your quotes and opinions are more than ours on the few pages we post.

  5. Wandering Ambassador says:

    Does it help you sleep at night, to demean others yourself, being the epitome of what you are in fact accusing?
    I hope one day you can open your heart to the Lord, and cease being Saul, and become Paul.
    God help your soul. I know, like me, Jesus died on the cross for you.

    • georead says:

      It is demeaning to demand blind obedience of people. No true minister of the gospel would seek to obtain blind, unquestioning obedience from people. This bad doctrine is taught publicly as it is posted on the internet for all to see. Therefore it needs to be publicly challenged. We are held accountable before God if we don’t raise our voices in protest against wrong doctrine. There needs to be discussion. This is what false religion does. It seeks to quench all discussion and have the people blindly obey.

      The book “Into the Light” by S. Masood is worth a read. It’s the story of a boy brought up in a Muslim sect hated by other Muslims. He had a burning desire to find the truth. He questioned everything. He studied everything. He found many inconsistencies. He challenged the elders and the people openly. They hated him and cast him out. In the book we read: “He [an Islamic scholar] had already made it clear that there could be no real discussion about these things, only belief. ‘Sir,’ I asked, ‘are you saying I must believe blindly?’ . . . The dogmas rolled over me like a wave. I must believe, believe, he insisted. Believe in the five pillars of Islam; don’t question what has been received.'” Masood eventually became a Christian. See http://www.stevenmasood.org/Publications.html

    • Bemused says:

      And you consider yourself to be on the moral high ground and throw an accusation of Saul? Practice what you preach my friend. I pray that the Holy Spirit brings you some discernment and guidance

    • Simon O'Rourke says:

      ‘Wandering Ambassador: Your acidic comments are typical of a cultist, attacking the critic instead of the validity of the critisism is a tried and tested ruse of all those who no valid defense. If Mr Higgins has written something that you feel is incorrect, why don’t you share it with us.

  6. wildport says:

    I find it very difficult to see John practising righteousness when he, who appears to be a man of God,uses the Sabbath School lessons, and the Week of Prayer readings from another Church,as their own, and teaches and encourages his followers to do the same.I personally classified that as stealing copying other peoples writings, without their permission,and then making it your own,or can he prove that the Church whose printed materials he is stealing from gave him permisssion to do so?.Why does he not, been such a wonderful intelligent leader, a god , of a cult print his own Sabbath school Lessons?.My word again is like before stated.John Thiel is a man not to be trusted and to be very,very careful of there is at the present time, to many flaws circulating about him.I have also notice that his behaviour is in correspondence with a cult leader.He never comes to the front ,he is always hiding behind his typist.

  7. John Thiel says:

    Oh how sad to behold how an opponent can misapply the meaning of the expressions of the one he is demeaning. May God be merciful to us.

    • georead says:

      John,

      Again may I point out that your whole ministry is built upon demeaning others and that your response is only cult style spin and answers nothing. Why haven’t addressed the criticisms? You haven’t explained why you are misrepresented.

      John, isn’t asking blind obedience from the people a Catholic principle? A comment is made by another individual on this blog in defense of your sermon. They say that the preacher is to be divinely inspired. Do you say you are divinely inspired? Are you divinely inspired to ask blind obedience of the people? Can you be mistaken in the minutiae that you are asking the people do?

  8. Simon O'Rourke says:

    Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the “prophets, seers, and revelators” of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostasy…. Lucifer … wins a great victory when he can get members of the Church to speak against their leaders and to “do their own thinking.”…

    When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan—it is God’s plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy
    Brigham Young
    Church of later day saints

  9. georead says:

    Divinely inspired to speak as metaphorically as God from the pulpit? This assumes too much. Men make mistakes all the time.

    Was the John Thiel divinely inspired when he contradicted God’s word saying – “There is only one promise in the New Covenant and this is God’s promise to man that I will put my laws into their mind and write them in their hearts and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people.” – http://www.scribd.com/doc/15339387/12-The-Old-and-the-New-Covenants. The word of God says the new covenant has promises plural. Hebrews 8:6 “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” E. G. W writes about the new covenant as having plural promises, “In the word of God I find these promises, [Jeremiah 31:31-34 quoted]” {LLM 302.1}

    Do we really think everything John Thiel speaks, interprets and selectively reads is divinely inspired? An divinely inspired man that can speak as God metaphorically. Speaking what he thinks God should be speaking and he can’t be mistaken because he’s divinely inspired? The papacy also claims ongoing divine inspiration to sustain their own contradictions of the word of God.

    • georead says:

      The Bible is divinely inspired – now the preacher John Thiel is divinely inspired? He’s on a level with the Bible? What if he contradicts the Bible?

    • the typist says:

      He made a grammatical typo. Promise or promises plural what difference does it make? That’s nit pickling. You are looking for loop holes. There is nothing erroneous in his sermon on obedience is what I’m trying to say. Yes God commands unquestioning obedience.

  10. the typist says:

    My latest blog post is called dress reform atriums the world and shows how many preach the same way.

    • georead says:

      John Thiel calls for obedience to God and he impersonates God in his sermon “Unquestioning Obedience.” He speaks as God in the first person what he thinks God should be saying. Once people think a man’s ideas, interpretations, unbalanced selective readings of God’s words can’t be controverted that man assumes the place of God to the people. That man inserts himself into that place without the people noticing. He will then demand unquestioning obedience to God.

      • the typist says:

        Have you ever heard of the term metaphorically speaking? That’s all he is doing. Preachers do it all the time. He is not placing himself as God by doing that. He is giving an example of what God is trying to say based on His Word. Ellen White quotes God in her own words all the time. For example:

        Though now He is hidden from mortal sight, the ear of faith can hear His voice saying… “I have endured your sorrows, experienced your struggles, encountered your temptations. I know your tears; I also have wept. The griefs that lie too deep to be breathed into any human ear, I know. Think not that you are desolate and forsaken. Though your pain touch no responsive chord in any heart on earth, look unto Me, and live. DA 483
        Is not the preacher to be divinely inspired?

      • the typist says:

        Or I could say he is not literally speaking as God or claiming to be. God wants obedience. Abraham was asked to kill his son which seemed like an unreasonable thing yet God asked him to do it and today asks us the same today to just trust and obey.

    • the typist says:

      Oops I meant dress around the world. I’m using my iPhone and it make typo sometimes but it shows that its not just John who’s into socks http://sabbathsermons.com/2013/03/09/dress-reform-around-the-world/

    • Bemused says:

      Typist just because a few people around the world preach the same way does not make it the truth. It concerns me that dress reform is equated with perfection of character. I quote John Theil from your site:
      “Many people only keep it on the character concepts but they don’t realise we will wear that character. If we wear that character, what are you wearing now?…”
      I’m sorry but what I wear has nothing to do with my inner character – or improving it. Only faith and the holy spirit can help with that. If wearing nice smart clothing improves your character how come it didn’t work on the Nazi’s? they had lovely smart uniforms with shiny boots…….

      • Your argument is weak, misapplied and irrelevant. You don’t understand the topic of dress reform well as it’s all in Ellen White’s writings. We are to worship God in spirit and in truth not just truth. Just because a Muslim or person is covered properly, doesn’t mean they are worshiping in spirit.

  11. georead says:

    The watchman needs to warn the people against unquestioning, blind, implicit obedience to a mere man.

    • the typist says:

      That isn’t the case with John Thiel. He doesn’t call for obedience to himself but to God. I can’t see anything in his teachings that’s calling for obedience to himself.

      But I find people, and doubtless you have too, who seem to get upon the idea that the only sure way to know the truth is to raise all the objections they can and have them answered. But when I have raised and presented all the objections I know against a point and they are all answered, then am I sure what is truth? Am I sure of it? No, because there are objections I never thought of. Don’t you see? On that line can I ever be sure that it is the truth until every objection that is possible is brought against it by every mind in the universe–can I be sure of it until then? When these are all answered would that make me sure it was so? If it would, how can I live long enough to hear all the objections answered? Can we get at the truth in that way? Is there any possibility of getting at the truth by raising objections and having them answered? No sir. What is the use of starting on a road of which you will never reach the end–a wrong road of course? Better not start on it at all. {January 27, 1893 ATJ, GCDB 9.1}
      Another word. Can there be any objections against the truth? Think of that closely. Well, when something is presented, are you and I to say, “I see an objection against that?” Is that the position we are to take? No; we are to ask whether it is the truth, and if it is, there is no objection, there can be no objection against it. Our objection is a fraud. Don’t you see? The thing we are to ask is, Is it the truth? {January 27, 1893 ATJ, GCDB 9.2}
      And then another way the people have of getting at the truth is to hear both sides of it. You have heard that thing yourself. “That is one side,” they say, “but now I want to hear the other side before I decide.” What is one side of the truth? Well, here is one side of the truth, and there is the other side of the truth. Then where is the truth? You get on the either side of the truth and it is error. I have heard one side, and I want to hear another side of it! Then how can I tell what is the truth, anyhow? But suppose I have heard actual truth (and that is the need of it), and I am not satisfied until I hear the other side. What is the other side? Taking this one side to be the truth, what is the other side? Error. Then we can decide best what is truth by hearing a lot of lies, can we? “Well,” says one, “I have heard your side of it, and it looks to me as though it were true, but I want to hear the other side!” The truth is the word of God. Then he proposes by waiting to hear the other side, to know whether it is true or not by comparing it with a lot of lies and thus make a lot of lies a test of the truth. {January 27, 1893 ATJ, GCDB 9.3}
      We do not want to hear the other side. All we want is the truth. Here is one side of the truth, and there is the other side of the truth. He hears both sides according to his own plan; then how does he arrive at the truth? In his own way. He has heard this and that. Where is the truth? He must find it out some way. Does he not compare one side with the other and weigh one against the other and strike the balance and judge where the truth is? Well, when he has done that, can he know he has the truth? Is he sure that is the truth? Is my mind, my judgment, my ability to weigh arguments and decide upon the truth–is that the infallible test of truth? Is a man’s judgment, his faculties, the test of truth at all? When we want to test the truth so as to know it is the truth, the test must be an infallible one. Is not that so? It must be one that will never fail. To discern the truth and declare it, it must be one that will never miss under any circumstances amid ten thousand arguments and errors. The one by which we must test the truth must be such a one as will strike the truth among ten million diverse opinions, and strike it without fail in succession–every thought that may be raised among men. Is not that so? Man’s mind we know is not the test of truth. It is only his own idea and the truth that he settles upon. “But your thoughts are not my thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the Lord.” {January 27, 1893 ATJ, GCDB 9.4}

  12. Simon O'Rourke says:

    John Thiel was apoplectic!
    He thought he might explode!
    When he read this great apostasy
    Penned by Higgins down the road

  13. georead says:

    The point is not who else is preaching dress reform (and that justifies doing the same) – the point is who else preached and advocated blind obedience, men like David Koresh, Warren Jeffs, Jim Jones, etc. etc.

    • the typist says:

      But isn’t Ellen White like that too? Does she not do the same thing?

      . Fashion is deteriorating the intellect and eating out the spirituality of our people. Obedience to fashion is pervading our Seventh-day Adventist churches and is doing more than any other power to separate our people from God. I have been shown that our church rules are very deficient. All exhibitions of pride in dress, which is forbidden in the word of God, should be sufficient reason for church discipline. If there is a continuance, in face of warnings and appeals and entreaties, to still follow the perverse will, it may be regarded as proof that the heart is in no way assimilated to Christ. Self, and only self, is the object of adoration, and one such professed Christian will lead many away from God. {4T 647.2}

      God commands perfect obedience to the minutiae in the Spirit of Prophecy. John is simply conveying what is already written in the Spirit of Prophecy.

      • Bemused says:

        Typist you are equating the adoption of dress reform with Ellen White’s comments on fashion, which is incorrect. Ellen White was referring to the practice at that time of unnecessary adornments on clothing. As most clothing was done by hand in those days, making it expensive and labour intensive for most people with modest means Ellen White did not want church members to waste their time and money on it but devote their efforts to perfecting their character and supporting the church. Ellen White said that dress should not be made a subject of controversy. You are making it one.

      • the typist says:

        Bemused she was actually referring to women not being covered up enough.

      • Bemused says:

        Typist you are incorrect. Read the testimonies more closely & you will see she is advocating against fashion. She actually says dresses should be short enough to be practical e.g. not so long that they drag in the dirt. In 4T 628.2 it says:
        ” Jesus has noticed the care and devotion given to dress, and has cautioned, yea, commanded, us not to bestow too much thought upon it. It is important that we give careful heed to His words”
        Have a think about it – what are you focusing on? Jesus or Dress Reform?

      • @Bemused, Ellen White was not referring to fashion. She said dress reform was to be a test. She said not to enforce the particular style called the ‘reform dress’. I now quote her writings with an explanation:

        Is dress reform meant to be a test today? There was a style of dress that God gave to Ellen White that the sisters at the time didn’t like. It showed the pants under the dresses. It was called the ‘Reform Dress’. See the picture here http://www.remnantraiment.com/images/EGW-RD.jpg

        As our sisters would not generally accept the ‘reform dress’ as it should be worn, another, less objectionable style is now presented.” 4T 640.1
        This is why Ellen White has said don’t make the ‘Reform Dress’ a test. She was speaking about the style above but dress reform still stood and still does today. It is a test of salvation?

      • Simon O'Rourke says:

        Let these conscientious sisters who would enter upon the work of dress reform walk circumspectly and work in a manner that will correspond with the burden of the message for this time. The surrender of heart, soul, and mind in obedience to the commandments of God is as a thread of gold, binding up the precious things of God and revealing their value in the time of trial. SHM-apx 444.2

        Therefore I say to my sisters, Enter into no controversy in regard to outward apparel, but be sure you have the inward adorning of a meek and quiet spirit. Let all who accept the truth show their true colors. We are a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men. False prudence, mock modesty, may be shown by the outward apparel, while the heart is in great need of the inward adorning. Stand ever committed to the right. SHM-apx 445.3

    • the typist says:

      Those who engage in the solemn work of bearing the third angel’s message must move out decidedly, and in the Spirit and power of God fearlessly preach the truth and let it cut. They should elevate the standard of truth and urge the people to come up to it. It has too frequently been lowered to meet the people in their condition of darkness and sin. It is the pointed testimony that will bring them up to decide. A peaceful testimony will not do this. The people have the privilege of listening to this kind of teaching from popular pulpits; but those servants to whom God has entrusted the solemn, fearful message which is to bring out and fit up a people for the coming of Christ should bear a plain, pointed testimony. Our truth is as much more solemn than that of nominal professors, as the heavens are higher than the earth. {1T 248.2}

      The minister of Christ is not to present to the people only those truths that are the most pleasing, while he withholds others that might cause them pain. He should watch with deep solicitude the development of character. If he sees that any of his flock are cherishing sin he must as a faithful shepherd give them from God’s word the instruction that is applicable to their case. Should he permit them in their self-confidence to go on unwarned, he would be held responsible for their souls. The pastor who fulfils his high commission must give his people faithful instruction on every point of the Christian faith, showing them what they must be and do in order to stand perfect in the day of God. He only who is a faithful teacher of the truth will at the close of his work be able to say with Paul, I am pure from the blood of all men. {AA 393.4}

      Elder N was fearful of offending, fearful lest the peculiarities of our faith should appear; the standard was lowered to meet the people. It should have been urged upon them that we possess truths of vital importance, and that their eternal interest depended upon the decision they there made; that in order to be sanctified through the truth, their idols would have to be given up, their sins be confessed, and they bring forth fruit meet for repentance. {1T 248.1}

      What is a watchman for, unless it be to watch for evil and give the warning? What is a shepherd for, unless it be to watch for every danger lest the sheep be harmed and destroyed by wolves? What excuse could a shepherd plead for suffering the flock to stray from the true pasture, and be torn and scattered and devoured by wolves? How would an excuse stand made by the shepherd that the sheep led him astray? They left the true pasture, and led him out of the way? Such a plea would tell with force against that shepherd’s ability to watch over the sheep. No more confidence could be placed in him as a faithful shepherd to care for the sheep, and bring them back as they might stray from the right path. {1T 314.1}

      You profess to be a watchman on the walls of Zion, a shepherd to the flock, yet you saw the poor sheep torn and scattered, and gave no warning. Vol. 1, p. 313.

      Isaiah 58:1 Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.

      • Simon O'Rourke says:

        THE TYPIST. The ‘Nominal professors’ in the first paragraph that you quote are the group that came out of the Adventist movement and became the JW’s .http://www.isitso.org/guide/jwhist.html These are the “nominal adventists” who EGW quotes as having ” no defense against the sabbath truth”. The “standard of truth” that EGW oft refers to IS the sabbath.
        Men will take these passages ,and many others and apply them to doctrines of dress reform and health reform etc, but they simply aren’t about that, they concern the sabbath and the three angels messages, those things that distinguish us as a people.
        EGW made it clear that the sabbath is THE test. She also made it abundantly clear that those who wish to make tests , by inflating superfluous matters not essential to the saving of souls, detract from, and damage the message that God has called upon us to deliver

  14. wildport says:

    Thank you for posting this citicism against John Thiel’s sermon on “Unquestioning Obedience” All the signs of a cult leader are presented in the words of his sermon.There is alot of mind control and force present in the way he demands people to do things his way.He is a man to be very,very careful of, surely the Spirit of Christ is not shining through in his sermons, but the spirit of another.

  15. admin says:

    We are living on the brink of the time of trouble. It’s a fearful time. God wants to save us to the uttermost. He is saying, get into the ark just as I commanded Noah. It seemed strange back then to build such a big boat because it was going to rain. It had never rained before. Many thought it wasn’t necessary to worry about such a thing. But later found out it was. Some other than John have gone to great lengths to explain the how’s and why’s of the intricacies of dress reform and how far to cover up as many do not understand or think it’s all that necessary; You can such studies here http://sabbathsermons.com/category/dress-reform/ See Dwayne Lemon and Dr Phil Collins give medical and scientific reasons using the writings of Ellen White why cover up so much:
    Parents who dress their children with the extremities naked, or nearly so, are sacrificing the health and lives of their children to fashion. If these parts are not so warm as the body, the circulation is not equalized. When the extremities, which are remote from the vital organs, are not properly clad, the blood is driven to the head, causing headache or nosebleed; or there is a sense of fullness about the chest, producing cough or palpitation of the heart, on account of too much blood in that locality; or the stomach has too much blood, causing indigestion. CG 426.

    This isn’t in relation to just winter time.

    I agree sometimes we all need vitamin D on our limbs in the privacy of our backyards.

    Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to comment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s