• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The SDA Cult

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
These two statements contradict one another.

If Wilkinson's work is not original with him, then we cannot trace it to him; he simply repeated it. The "foundation stone" was, in fact, the authors that Wilkinson paraphrased and subsequently published.
The basic truth though still comes back to the Kjvo cannot be supported by either scriptures or by any other source....
 

Pastor_Bob

Well-Known Member
The basic truth though still comes back to the Kjvo cannot be supported by either scriptures or by any other source....
That's not the issue here. The issue is whether or not KJVOs are basing their position on the works of a SDA author. Did they use him as a reference? Yes. Perhaps ill-advisably. But, he certainly is not the cornerstone of the KJVO position. Roby's comments above indicate that Wilkinson merely repeated what others had already written. So, Fuller et al, is repeating what Wilkinson repeated, etc.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That's not the issue here. The issue is whether or not KJVOs are basing their position on the works of a SDA author. Did they use him as a reference? Yes. Perhaps ill-advisably. But, he certainly is not the cornerstone of the KJVO position. Roby's comments above indicate that Wilkinson merely repeated what others had already written. So, Fuller et al, is repeating what Wilkinson repeated, etc.
They are citing him as their main source though!
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That's not the issue here. The issue is whether or not KJVOs are basing their position on the works of a SDA author. Did they use him as a reference? Yes. Perhaps ill-advisably. But, he certainly is not the cornerstone of the KJVO position. Roby's comments above indicate that Wilkinson merely repeated what others had already written. So, Fuller et al, is repeating what Wilkinson repeated, etc.


But, all the KJVO hooey wasn't in one book til Dr. W published his collection, and later KJVO authors, seeing a cash cow, copied it. And today, most KJVO authors publish the same garbage in new dumpsters. This shows the current KJVO myth has a cultic, dishonest beginning.

To this day, the SDA has not distanced itself from Dr. W's stuff. He remains in high esteem among them.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No one has said what is cultic about the SDA. I do not see that they have any essential beliefs that are not the same as any other Christian denomination.

https://www.adventist.org/fileadmin...rticles/official-statements/28Beliefs-Web.pdf

They are a QUASI/PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN CULT, "having a form of godliness dut denying its POWER."

They believe that on Oct. 22, 1844, Jesus entered the temple in heaven to both complete His atonement(Never mind the cross!) & to begin His "investigative judgment", a doctrine not found whatsoever in Scripture, an invention of Ellen G. White's.

They believe Ellen G. White was a great prophetess, altho she missed on quite a few prophecies. (A prophet of GOD'S was always 100% right!)

They believe the soul sleeps upon death. Jesus' telling the repentant thief on the cross, "Today, you shall be with Me in paradise" & His parable about the rich man & the beggar Lazarus prove this wrong.

EGW wrote,"Christ took upon His sinless nature our sinful nature. Christ took our nature and it's deteriorating condition." (Questions On Doctrine, PP. 654-656)

They believe God is finished with Israel, despite Scripture's saying differently, and God's miraculous restoration of the jewish nation.

They believe that Sunday worship is the mark of the beast, a false doctrine not even hinted at in Scripture.

While salvation is a "private" matter between Jesus and each individual, the SDA denomination is, at best, extremely heterodox, with much material ADDED to the commands & precepts God has given us thru His word.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That's not the issue here. The issue is whether or not KJVOs are basing their position on the works of a SDA author. Did they use him as a reference? Yes. Perhaps ill-advisably. But, he certainly is not the cornerstone of the KJVO position. Roby's comments above indicate that Wilkinson merely repeated what others had already written. So, Fuller et al, is repeating what Wilkinson repeated, etc.

BUT......

Authors who copied Dr. W's work used modern media to hawk their wares, & enough people bought read, & believed them to have started the current KJVO myth. I doubt that KJVO would've come outta the woodwork had not Wilkinson not given those later authors an easy-to-reference pool of material.

And, at any rate, the whole KJVO myth, both its older versions, & the current one, are FALSE.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
They are a QUASI/PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN CULT, "having a form of godliness dut denying its POWER."

They believe that on Oct. 22, 1844, Jesus entered the temple in heaven to both complete His atonement(Never mind the cross!) & to begin His "investigative judgment", a doctrine not found whatsoever in Scripture, an invention of Ellen G. White's.

They believe Ellen G. White was a great prophetess, altho she missed on quite a few prophecies. (A prophet of GOD'S was always 100% right!)

They believe the soul sleeps upon death. Jesus' telling the repentant thief on the cross, "Today, you shall be with Me in paradise" & His parable about the rich man & the beggar Lazarus prove this wrong.

EGW wrote,"Christ took upon His sinless nature our sinful nature. Christ took our nature and it's deteriorating condition." (Questions On Doctrine, PP. 654-656)

They believe God is finished with Israel, despite Scripture's saying differently, and God's miraculous restoration of the jewish nation.

They believe that Sunday worship is the mark of the beast, a false doctrine not even hinted at in Scripture.

While salvation is a "private" matter between Jesus and each individual, the SDA denomination is, at best, extremely heterodox, with much material ADDED to the commands & precepts God has given us thru His word.

I agree with you that they are heterodox in some of their opinions on peripheral issues but I read their doctrinal statement and find that it is orthodox on the essential doctrines of a Christian. They recognize the authority of Scripture, believe in the Trinity, etc.
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You have not proven your case about the SDA and you have omitted Christian Science from the list of major 19th century cults.
The Sda hold that Ellen White was a modern Prophetess, as inspired as one of the Apostles themselves, that her commentary on scripture is to be THE way to view it, that they are the true remnant church God called out of the wilderness, that one must keep the Sabbath Day in order to be really saved, and need to mix the Grace of the Gospel with the law and commandment of Ellen White herself. IF one has not been faithful to those teachings, one will have the Investigative Judgment to see if merited keeping eternal life, if not, will go to hell and cease to exist. They also seem to equate Jesus with Michael the archangel in some fashion!
 

RighteousnessTemperance&

Well-Known Member
The NAMB does not consider SDA an outright cult, but does label it a sect. Seventh-day Adventism

Introduction

Seventh-day Adventists (SDA) affirm the Christian doctrine of the inspiration and authority of the Bible. They also affirm the trinitarian nature of the Godhead: the fatherhood of God, deity of Jesus Christ, and the Person and deity of the Holy Spirit. They teach that man was created in the image of God, but is in a fallen state of sin and in need of redemption. They affirm that Jesus was virgin-born; lived a sinless life; was crucified, dead, and buried; and rose again bodily from the grave.

These SDA beliefs are in basic agreement with historic, biblical Christianity. Thus, the SDA is not a cult by definition . However, the SDA can be correctly regarded as a Christian sect because it has a number of distinctive doctrines not in accord with the mainstream of historic Christian faith. This article highlights those doctrines and provides biblical responses.
Under witnessing to a Seventh Day Adventist,

9. If you determine that the SDA possesses a saving knowledge of Christ, you may want to engage in a respectful dialogue of differences in doctrinal beliefs.​
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I agree with you that they are heterodox in some of their opinions on peripheral issues but I read their doctrinal statement and find that it is orthodox on the essential doctrines of a Christian. They recognize the authority of Scripture, believe in the Trinity, etc.

That's why I posted "having a FORM of godliness", etc.
They have their recruiting spiel down pat.They conceal much of their heterodoxy & false doctrines til they have someone "hooked", then they start inundating that person with their EGW stuff. I've spoken with several former SDAs who've told that same story, but wisely left the cult before their hooey became dogma with them.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That's why I posted "having a FORM of godliness", etc.
They have their recruiting spiel down pat.They conceal much of their heterodoxy & false doctrines til they have someone "hooked", then they start inundating that person with their EGW stuff. I've spoken with several former SDAs who've told that same story, but wisely left the cult before their hooey became dogma with them.

There are a lot of SDA in Indy so I have met them over the years. Some of them are very nice. I never met her but Dr Cory SerVaas (MD) was the editor of "The Saturday Evening Post," which her husband owned. She is interested in good health and good nutrition. Her late husband Beurt SerVaas was very prominent in Indianapolis.

I am SBC so SDA is not my cup of tea.
 

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I agree with you that they are heterodox in some of their opinions on peripheral issues but I read their doctrinal statement and find that it is orthodox on the essential doctrines of a Christian. They recognize the authority of Scripture, believe in the Trinity, etc.


How about the FACT the SDA is pro-abortion! How about they have no objection to their Adventist hospitals butchering babies daily? Oh, but don't you try and order a ham sandwich in the same hospitals worshipping Molach! A stench in the Lord's nostrils!
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I have read dozens of quotes in the books I've read on textual criticism. Very rarely will they mention the religious affiliation of the one being quoted.

You are making an invalid comparison. David Otis Fuller was not merely quoting from Benjamin Wilkinson.

Before he included over 100 pages from Wilkinson's book, Fuller included two pages entitled "about the author of Our Authorized Bible Vindicated." If you were going to provide two pages of biographical information about a religious author, would not his religious affiliation be considered important enough to include? Fuller stated that "Dr. Wilkinson taught for many years in a small and obscure Eastern college" (fifth edition, p. 174). Did he avoid giving the name of the college in case some readers might recognize it as being a Seventh-Day Adventist school?

Did you avoid or ignore the clear evidence that David Otis Fuller attempted to keep his readers from knowing that the author was a Seventh-day Adventist by deleting a footnote that showed that one of his sources was Ellen G. White?

Fuller deleted a footnote where Wilkinson quoted Ellen G. White favorably likely in order to conceal Wilkinson's identity as a cultist (Baptist Biblical Heritage, Summer, 1990, p. 1).

Many KJV-only claims about Waldensian Bibles come directly or indirectly from Wilkinson's claims about them with Wilkinson likely repeating Ellen G. White's claims.
 

church mouse guy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
How about the FACT the SDA is pro-abortion! How about they have no objection to their Adventist hospitals butchering babies daily? Oh, but don't you try and order a ham sandwich in the same hospitals worshipping Molach! A stench in the Lord's nostrils!

Do you think that there is any salvation outside the walls of the Catholic Church?

SDA says that they do not condone abortion on their North American website.
 

robycop3

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
There are a lot of SDA in Indy so I have met them over the years. Some of them are very nice. I never met her but Dr Cory SerVaas (MD) was the editor of "The Saturday Evening Post," which her husband owned. She is interested in good health and good nutrition. Her late husband Beurt SerVaas was very prominent in Indianapolis.

I am SBC so SDA is not my cup of tea.

I've met very nice people of virtually every religion there is, but that doesn't help their standing with GOD.
 

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
SDA says that they do not condone abortion on their North American website.
SDA says that they do not condone abortion on their North American website.

WRONG!

Abortion


'The final decision whether to terminate the pregnancy or not should be made by the pregnant woman after appropriate consultation.'

SDA says that they do not condone abortion on their North American website.[/QUOTE]

Let's listen to an SDA (100%) explain the reasons why he believes the SDA is ABSOLUTELY Pro--Choice and why it must repent.

Prolife Andrew
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top