The Truth About Dr. Walter Martin and The Seventh-Day Adventist Church

Your OP posted this

​

Your OP was debunked here

Exposing the falsehoods in your OP is not the definition of "off topic" as we all know -- and as we all know the first rule among Calvinists is... "redefine terms"

 

But Bob, you know yourself that what a sect actually teaches and believes is found in it's congregations attitudes and practices. You yourself know this just from dealing with RCC Christians, look at Utilyan for example, he believes a person can reject Jesus Christ and still be saved by their good works, and there is not one Catholic here on this board that stepped in to correct him, even though the RCC "official" statements declare to be directly from the bible.

Take yourself for example, why don't you eat pork? You will say because God said not to eat it and quote scripture. Ok. Now tell us what would happen to YOU, not others, but YOU if YOU should decide to go ahead and eat pork from now forward? Would YOU be damned? If your answer is No, then you agree it does not matter if you eat pork or not as far as salvation goes. If you say Yes, then you believe you are saved by your ability to keep certain commandments.

 

I never use anecdotal story telling as it were "proof" for exposing an error in Baptist doctrine or Methodist doctrine or Lutheran and Catholic Doctrine.

I use the actual statements of the denomination itself.

"story telling" is worthless.

 

Yes but I would not say that the Adventist denomination teaches against eating unclean meat - because Bob does not want to eat it.

And we both know this is true.

If I want to make a statement about the Denomination itself I point to its own voted on statements of doctrine. I never argue "they believe this because Bob does" - and we both agree on that.

If you start taking God's name in vain every day from now on - does your salvation stay rock solid because taking God's name in vain is "ok for Christians" now that you are under the New Covenant?

What we are talking about here is the false doctrine of OSAS in that case.

 

I would NEVER argue that the Catholic church doctrine has "some flaw" in it -- "Because Utilyan has this or that view on a given doctrine" there is NO "because Utilyan" in any of my arguments about what the Catholic church teaches. We have loads of ex-Baptists and ex-Catholics in the SDA church but I don't ever come here saying that "This or that denomination has doctrinal error because I now person-x or person-y as ex-members and they have all these bad things to say".

You have never seen me do anything like that on this board in all these years - and we both know it.

The rant vitriol and emotionalism some common for some posters - is never used by me. Good example of this ... you and I have both posted extensively on Arminian-vs-Calvinism topics and we both know that I never say "Calvinist doctrine is in error because so-and-so as an individual has some doctrinal error"

 

5 YEAR OLD: Does God love me?
SDA PASTOR: YES he loves you!


5 Year OLD: Does God love me?
CALVINIST PASTOR: :::SHRUG::: I don't know, but I do know you deserve to burn in hell.



what a tough choice for bob.

 

Here is another one you might like .. in the "future" scenario of Calvinist vs Arminian

Calvinist parent looking over the ramparts of heaven sees their precious daughter writhing in agony and so crying out to God the girl's father says "O Lord my God - my daughter my precious daughter... couldn't you have done SOMETHING to save her?" -- to which the Calvinist hears the much-loved and much-anticipated answer "Why of course I COULD -- if I had CARED to.. now run along and zaaaaap be happy"

==============================================

Arminian future scenario

Arminian parent looking over the ramparts of heaven sees their precious daughter writhing in agony and so crying out to God the girl's father says "O Lord my God - my daughter my precious daughter... couldn't you have done SOMETHING to save her?" -- to which the Arminian hears the much-anticipated Arminian answer "Why of course I COULD -- and I DID! ..I died for her.. I sent my Holy Spirit to convict her daily of sin and righteousness and judgment... I DREW ALL mankind unto Me.. but in the end I had to let her go because I refused to turn her into a ROBOT, I gave her free will to choose what she wanted"

2 Cor 5 "We BEG you on behalf of Christ - be reconciled to God"

 

emotional arguments brought to you one burger at a time by thatbrian

 

Except I said nothing about "story telling". Here it is again.....

But Bob, you know yourself that what a sect actually teaches and believes is found in it's congregations attitudes and practices. .

 

Your answer here proves my point. YOU believe if YOU eat pork you will be damned. Even though millions of Christians may eat all the pork they wish and they will not be damned. Does Jesus have a double standard? He holds pork eating as a damnable sin for a few (the ones you say have been given light) while letting the masses of His children eat all the pork they want and still be saved? Does that really make sense to you?

 

Do you think the official Baptist or Catholic doctrinal statements are lacking in teaching on ANY biblical requirements for salvation?

 

I think there is some portion that is not correct in their doctrine but that does not mean I think that they do not have saved saints in their communions.

And that is not "just me" -- it is the position of the SDA denomination

 

BobRyan said: ↑
If you start taking God's name in vain every day from now on - does your salvation stay rock solid

You did not answer my question.

As Christ said to the Jews - "Answer my question and I will answer yours"

 

And as I said - it is nonsense to go after one disgruntled Baptist or even zealous baptist and paint the entire denomination their ad hoc views. As someone here noted - going to Westboro Baptist church and picking out one member as an "example" does not lead to "accuracy" in knowing what Baptists really believe as a group

 

Ok, then you are telling me that the largest portion of SDA members don't believe there is any reflection on one's salvation with their eating pork or not. It's just your own belief and it is not advocated one way or the other in SDA preaching.

 

Yes, I am saved by grace through faith and this not of myself it is the gift of God. I believe you already knew my position on this.

 

That begs the question then......what portion is not correct on salvation? Wouldn't this be crucial? And how would a Catholic be saved in spite of this incorrect doctrine on salvation if they are practicing the very doctrines of the RCC which you believe are incorrect?