Do SDA's consider themselves Christian?

Advanced search

[Terms Of Conduct]

Terms Of Conduct

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Jane Good]

Jane, if I may answer this question by simply saying that everyone that does good is doing the "works" whether they recognize it or not.

3Jo 1:11      Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God.

So an atheist who does good is doing good because of God in their life?

[RND]

So an atheist who does good is doing good because of God in their life?

All "good" is from God. So in that sense, yes, non-believers that "do good" are doing it as a result of God in the world.

3 Jo 1:11      Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God.

Jane, the NLT says it this way: "Dear friend, don't let this bad example influence you. Follow only what is good. Remember that those who do good prove that they are God's children, and those who do evil prove that they do not know God."

So, whether they know it or know, or even whether they admit it or not, all good works come from God for the glory of God.

[Samuelbb7]

I am not sure I can go along with the idea that an Atheist has found god and is doing good becaue of it. But that GOD influences Atheists to do good things that I can agree with.

But the question was can an atheist do good. Some athiests are humanitarians they feel that they should help humanity for we are all fellow humans. I do not know what is going on inside the mind of any person so I do not know why an Atheists does humanitarian acts. Or does good.

I do know some people only give publically and show off their giving. I am never sure of the true reason these people give.

I am going to end by saying I do not know the reason some atheists do good things.

[OneWhoSeeksGod]

Yes we are Christians.  IN the 1950's Christianity today and Walter Martin had a long discussion with our church leaders. They came to the conclusion that we are Christians.

This is true - with one caveat...

The original printing of 'Kingdom of the Cults' lists the SDA's as being among the Christian congregation. However: later editions of the book place the group into the classification of "cult."

When Dr Martin was asked why he made the change in the book, he explained as follows: When he did his research for the book he wrote to church leaders and asked them to send him material for evaluation. He then did short interviews with church leaders only if he required some piece of information to be clarified. Dr Martin is on public record as stating "they lied to me" (referring to SDA church leaders).

[RND]

Yes we are Christians.  IN the 1950's Christianity today and Walter Martin had a long discussion with our church leaders. They came to the conclusion that we are Christians.

This is true - with one caveat...

The original printing of 'Kingdom of the Cults' lists the SDA's as being among the Christian congregation. However: later editions of the book place the group into the classification of "cult."

When Dr Martin was asked why he made the change in the book, he explained as follows: When he did his research for the book he wrote to church leaders and asked them to send him material for evaluation. He then did short interviews with church leaders only if he required some piece of information to be clarified. Dr Martin is on public record as stating "they lied to me" (referring to SDA church leaders).

What I'd like to know is who on God's green earth appointed Walter Martin as sole judge of what is and what isn't a cult and why didn't he never mention Catholicism in Kingdom of the Cults?

[VG59]

I have to say I agree with you about Martin. 

It is kind of like, "who died and put you in charge of things?"

I do not like it when any group determines who is or who is not when it comes to Christianity. 

What is up with that?  It is pretty darn arrogant.

If someone says, they are a Christian, I think it is nice to just honor that this is their point of view on the matter.

[Samuelbb7]

This is true - with one caveat...

The original printing of 'Kingdom of the Cults' lists the SDA's as being among the Christian congregation. However: later editions of the book place the group into the classification of "cult."

When Dr Martin was asked why he made the change in the book, he explained as follows: When he did his research for the book he wrote to church leaders and asked them to send him material for evaluation. He then did short interviews with church leaders only if he required some piece of information to be clarified. Dr Martin is on public record as stating "they lied to me" (referring to SDA church leaders).

Interesting since I have a latter edition of his book and we SDA are listed in the back under an appendix. This book was published before Mr. Martins death.  Also I have found web sites upset still at Dr. Martin for defending us.

So give me a web site or the statement by Dr. Martin you say he made. If you are charging us with being a cult. Then bring your evidence and confront me. I will be waiting. 

[OneWhoSeeksGod]

So give me a web site or the statement by Dr. Martin you say he made.

First things first...

I goofed. I gaffed, I messed up. I made a terrible blunder. I was wrong. I made a mis-statement of the facts. It was an error. Please accept my apologies.

I was wrong on my specifics. The 'Kingdom of the Cults' does NOT currently list the Adventists as a cult. Apparently it was a previous publication that Dr Martin included as the main body of information in the original printing of the KOTC book.

In my own defence however, Dr Martin DID publicly make the statement that the Adventists had lied to him. As for proving the statement; that could prove to be a little difficult as it was in a Q&A period that took place after a public seminar back in the late 1980's... I'm not sure if the session was recorded, lots of them were, and lots of them weren't.  I'm checking around to see if anyone I know might have a copy of the lecture. Should I be able to find a copy of the lecture, I'll post it here.

In the meantime, however, before he died, he made this statement on the John Ankerberg Show. It may be possible for you to contact the John Ankerberg Show for a complete transcript. Alternatively, I think there may be a posting of this particular show on you-tube.

"I fear that if they continue to progress at this rate, then the classification of a cult can't possibly miss being reapplied to Seventh-day Adventism, because once you have an interpreter of Scripture, a final court of appeal that tells you what Scripture means, as soon as you judge Scripture by that, as soon as you have someone who has made doctrinal errors in the past, even on the deity of Christ and the doctrine of the atonement and other things, and that person is raised to that position or authority, you have polarization around that person".

Now, logically, if the "classification of a cult can't possibly miss being reapplied," then it stands to reason that at one point he did consider it a cult, and in his opinion, the Adventist position at that time, was  at best considered tenuous.


APPENDIX C—THE PUZZLE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS

(Kingdom of the Cults pp502, par 4, 1997) "It is my conviction that one cannot be a true Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, Christian Scientist, etc., and be a Christian in the biblical sense of the term; but it is perfectly possible to be a Seventh-day Adventist and be a true follower of Jesus Christ despite certain heterodox concepts, which will be discussed. "

and

(Kingdom of the Cults pp502, par 7, 1997) "This, of course, is not to be construed in any sense of the term as an endorsement of the entire theological structure of Seventh-day Adventism, a portion of which is definitely out of the mainstream of historical Christian theology and which I have taken pains to refute. But I believe it is only fair and ethical to consider both sides of an extremely difficult and provocative controversy, which shows very little sign of abating in our day."

There is a very wide scope of acceptable practices that fall within the bounds of what is called 'Christianity'. The SDA's - for the most part - fall within that bounds, albeit in many instances are on the extreme fringe. This is the primary reason that they are given special consideration in the 'Kingdom of the Cults'. Dr. Martin does defend them, but he also points out where they have crossed the line in the past, and where they could go again, if not careful.

(Kingdom of the Cults pp503, par 3,4, 1997), "Doctrinally, the church has developed a large rift between those members and leaders who are solidly within the evangelical Christian camp and those members and leaders who, because of their emphasis on works-righteousness, legalism, and the prophetic status according to founder Ellen G. White, may well move the denomination over time outside of the evangelical camp and perhaps even into actual cultism."
There is a third growing faction within Seventh-day Adventism that is much more theologically liberal than either the traditionalists or the evangelicals, and the future may even bring three Adventist groups, one aligning itself roughly with mainstream, theologically liberal Protestantism, one with sectarian or cultic groups, and one with mainstream evangelicalism."

This last quotation appears to have been added post humously by editor Hank Hanegraaff, but I think it clearly illustrates WHY a lot of people in mainstream Christianity view the SDA's with skepticism and caution. That group in the middle with leanings toward sectarianism seems to be responsible for having themselves and their brothers tarred and feathered.

BTW, once again, please accept my apologies for my error. It was not my intent to defame, insult or upset anybody.

Also I have found web sites upset still at Dr. Martin for defending us.

Oh yes, there's lots of those...

What I'd like to know is who on God's green earth appointed Walter Martin as sole judge of what is and what isn't a cult and why didn't he never mention Catholicism in Kingdom of the Cults?

I'm on the same page with you here. I was always upset that he never considered them a cult either. I did discover, though, that he did do some aplogetics lectures concerning certain RC doctrines. These are available on his website.

Catholicism isn't mentioned because it is classed as a major religion. The theological position that Dr Martin used in his work was that which is common to the Roman Catholc, Orthodox and Reformation (protestant) churches. These were not Dr Martins opinions. Dr Martin was a Professor of Biblical Studies and his job was to know the position of the church. Everything that he taught in his seminars was sustained by the various creeds of Christendom and is known collectively as traditional orthodox Christianity.

There are definitions to specific words in our language and if your group happens to fit within that definition - then so be it. What he said - he said. I make no apologies for Dr Martin. These words and definitions were developed by the church to address specific issues as they arose in the historical context and they existed long before Dr Martin was even born.  Nobody made him 'sole judge' over anything. He was simply a good apologetics teacher and has earned worldwide respect for that accomplishment.

If someone says, they are a Christian, I think it is nice to just honor that this is their point of view on the matter.

That's a very nice, sweet disposition... But is it scriptural? (1Th 5:21) Might make for a good topic posting...

[VG59]

I do not see the relavence in quoting 1 Thessalonians 5: 21.

Given that the word Christianity does not even exist in the scriptures to my recollection, how do I proove this? 

Everyone applies a different definition to the word Christian to suite their own needs and means. 

I have heard plenty of Adventists say that Catholocism is merely a religion that was at one time Christian but has apostated to such a form that it is nearly pagan in its practice!!

Do I support their ideas on this?  By all means NO.

And in turn many Catholics will mock that Adventists form of Christianity and say that NO it isn't remotedly Christian.

Then you have folks like Martin deciding they are the authority on what a cult is and define SDAs perhaps as cults.

Well THEN any non Christian religions is GASP AND TO ALL OF OUR HORRORS a CULT!!!  OMG, my Hindu neighbors belong....... to a CULT.  Get the children in the house, bar the doors, be careful.  Who knows what may happen.

The bottom line is Martins definition of a cult is in the narrow parameters that mainstream Chrsitianity is the only legitimate religion (my opinion) and that any thing that threatens these mainstream points of view must be labelled negatively in the effort to discredit it and limit its impact on the mainstream. (PROTECT OUR FOLD THROUGH FEAR) 

As far as the SDA theology, NO I don't agree with it nor do I think that it is consistent with New Covenant Christian Ideology.  I grew up Adventist and oh how I would have rathered my parents stayed Catholic and I had a more "normal" childhood. 

That being said, no I do not think the word cult should be applied to them as a group.  It is emotionally charged, negative and implies things that don't happen within the SDA church because of it's theology.

Well the garden master is calling me.  "Let's get going".  That means a couple of hours of cutting branches to sizes that fit in the truck to go to the yard waste dump. Oh JOY.

[Samuelbb7]

First Cult has more then one meaning. Christianity started as a cult inside of Judaism.

There are mind control cults which are partially Christian such as Jim Jones and those not such as Hare Krishnas used to be.

Hindus are not a cult they are a major world wide relgion. But they are not a Christian relgion and as such are mistaken in my Christian viewpoint.

Now One who seeks God. Thank you for your apology. It is accepted especially since I make my share of mistakes and misstatments.

Now is the SDA church in danger of falling back into being a cult. That depends on who you ask. Some consider us to be a cult since we do not believe in Once Saved Always saved. But to truly be a cult I believe we would have to give up our belief in the Trinity. But I sincerly believe that we will again be classified as a cult no matter what we do since we will end up being persecuted for standing for our understanding of following JESUS CHRIST.

As for Ellen G. White leading us into culthood I belive that charge is already being made and many accept it already. But when I read her writings and see how she saved us from some major theological errors it is not her that I fear. But modernism that denis the truth of what the Bible teaches.

The doctrine of the SDA church stands on sound biblical principals that cannot be refuted without departing from scripture.

Please tell me why you believe we are mistaken?

Marantha.

[gracebyfaith]

I don't know much about SDA, I've heard some of their dietary rules or doctrines, but only hearsay.  While I agree with eating healthy foods, I don't think a person's diet should be micro-managed by religious leaders.

Question:  I would like to know what the main contentions are with or against the SDA.  Why are they on the fringe of so called Christianity?  And before I forget to ask - why does not believing in the "trinity" (not a biblical word either) make you a cult?  That was almost funny.  I'm trinity and that makes me legit???


Grace

[VG59]

The doctrine of the SDA church stands on sound biblical principals that cannot be refuted without departing from scripture.

Now that is an opinion I will totally disagree with.  And plenty of well written works on line and in publication can substantiate this with scholarly scriptural backing.

[RND]

I don't know much about SDA, I've heard some of their dietary rules or doctrines, but only hearsay.  While I agree with eating healthy foods, I don't think a person's diet should be micro-managed by religious leaders.

The diet of any member of the SDA church is not "micro-managed" by the leadership of the church at any level. There are plenty of Adventists that eat meat, such as myself, but many are indeed vegetarian or even vegan. I eat meat generally one to two times a week.

Question:  I would like to know what the main contentions are with or against the SDA.  Why are they on the fringe of so called Christianity?

 

Well, it generally boils down to just a few points. 1) Saturday sabbath observance, 2) the heath message and minding the health laws of the Torah, 3) the "State of the Dead," and 4) The "historicist" position regarding Bible prophecy.

And before I forget to ask - why does not believing in the "trinity" (not a biblical word either) make you a cult? That was almost funny.  I'm trinity and that makes me legit???

Most Adventist's believe in the "Trinity" or more preferably, the "Godhead" consisting of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.

Thanks for your questions.

[VG59]

RND  there are  other doctrines that seperate the SDAs from others. SUCH AS:

The "Spirit of Prophecy" as manifested in the writings and person of EGW.

The 1844 doctrine of "the cleansing of the sanctuary"

A period of probation and an end of probation before the second coming.
 

I am certain I can come up with others if I think long enough.

[gracebyfaith]

RND,
Hate to bother you, but could you please elaborate on 2,3 and 4. 

VG59,
Thank you for the info.  Does this "Spirit of Prophecy" maintain the infallibility of the person under the spirit's influence?  Not sure what this is, but sounds interesting.

The cleansing of the sanctuary, is this referring to some sort of baptism or holiness standards?

Lastly, what probation?

I apologize for my ignorance.  At this point in my life (four kiddos, husband, homeschooling) I don't have time to study every subject of interest.  So please forgive all the questions that may seem simple to those who know this religion as well as you do.


Grace

• Children's Prayer.... unc... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 11:08:14 PM]
• Riot against Messianic Je... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:43:30 PM]
• Court Upholds Expulsion o... by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:25:51 PM]
• The Kids Are All Right. by SteveC [July 30, 2010, 09:08:19 PM]
• Honduras... here we come!... by SquirleyWurley [July 30, 2010, 06:23:50 PM]
• A thought by Betsy by kwd111 [July 29, 2010, 03:56:49 PM]
• 77'7" Kerrville Cross Rai... by SteveC [July 28, 2010, 01:54:13 PM]
• That Darling of Creationi... by SteveC [July 27, 2010, 05:51:56 PM]
• Segmentation & Evolution by SteveC [July 27, 2010, 10:56:42 AM]
• I must have overslept on ... by SteveC [July 26, 2010, 11:12:09 PM]
• 'Little Brown Balls' Tie ... by charliejohn [July 25, 2010, 07:34:39 PM]
• Whales Descended From Tin... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 07:23:50 PM]
• South Pacific Plant May B... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 07:05:31 PM]
• Transitional Species Exis... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 05:09:41 PM]
• Fundamentalist's Peppered... by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 02:32:03 PM]
• Haeckel and his Embryos by SteveC [July 25, 2010, 10:36:39 AM]
• Flagellum,"poster child" ... by SteveC [July 24, 2010, 11:10:12 PM]
• Evo's Fundamentalist Posi... by Ed.W [July 22, 2010, 10:44:19 AM]

Members

• Total Members: 558
• Latest: Messedumbessy

Stats

• Total Posts: 86510
• Total Topics: 2615
• Online Today: 19
• Online Ever: 135
• (July 09, 2010, 02:08:16 PM)

Users Online

Users: 1
Guests: 20
Total: 21

SteveC