-
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!
Aren't Armstrong WW Church of God about same as the SDA?
- Thread starter Yeshua1
- Start date
They are comparable in many ways... sabbath keeping [setting aside the first day of the week as a day of worship is the "mark of the beast"], clean and unclean [food] regulations, "soul sleep" and no damnation of unbelievers [rather annihilation of the soul or eternal death].
One thing to make clear, though, is that the Worldwide Church of God is no longer the cult Armstrong originally developed as the Radio Church of God. That church went mainline, per se, not many years after Armstrong's death, and then those still loyal to Armstrong's peculiar teachings left it and began the "United Church of God."
Where the present UGA and SDA differ likely (AFAIK) would be in Armstrong's belief in "British Israelism" and in his tenet that there are pluralities of Gods and universities [in that like LDS, but I don't think he taught man can become a God]. The UGA "Fundamental Beliefs" does not state British Israelism, but it is emphatic that Abraham was the father of many nations, which leads some to conclude that the empire that controls the ways and "gates" over the world [some scripture somewhere actually says something like that] is blessed of God-- thus, as the British Empire was the most worldwide and went around Cape Horn to the far east, controlled Egypt and the Suez Canal, et al, the British/English must be Abe's blood descendants.
Actually, I'm not certain of SDA's position on the Trinity-- they don't say much about it regardless of position. But UGA continues Armstrong's denial of the Trinity; that the Holy Spirit is "the power" of God the Father and His Son, likening it to electricity where God flips the switch.
Maybe it all essentially comes down to their acknowledged source of 'revelation'-- White or Armstrong-- with not a great deal of difference. One marked difference, however, is that Armstrong originally began teaching in 1928, with radio still new, that there would be 2 19-year periods of teaching and reaching the world before the present age ends, which made it 1968. When it did not happen, Armstrong actually disqualified himself as a prophet. He was still an apostle with THE right message, but he did not get into predicting dates or years after that. With White, about 8 decades earlier, her dates were failed prophecies in the recent past-- that is, that the end of the age was supposed to have been when the Adventists claimed [184?], but that God changed his mind because of the Christian world's failure to observe the right day of worship. If SDA's say they "do not, and have never," predicted the date of the end, this is what they mean...the Adventists did, but the remaining ones who became the Seventh Day Adventists, did not in the time they have been known as such.
One thing to make clear, though, is that the Worldwide Church of God is no longer the cult Armstrong originally developed as the Radio Church of God. That church went mainline, per se, not many years after Armstrong's death, and then those still loyal to Armstrong's peculiar teachings left it and began the "United Church of God."
Where the present UGA and SDA differ likely (AFAIK) would be in Armstrong's belief in "British Israelism" and in his tenet that there are pluralities of Gods and universities [in that like LDS, but I don't think he taught man can become a God]. The UGA "Fundamental Beliefs" does not state British Israelism, but it is emphatic that Abraham was the father of many nations, which leads some to conclude that the empire that controls the ways and "gates" over the world [some scripture somewhere actually says something like that] is blessed of God-- thus, as the British Empire was the most worldwide and went around Cape Horn to the far east, controlled Egypt and the Suez Canal, et al, the British/English must be Abe's blood descendants.
Actually, I'm not certain of SDA's position on the Trinity-- they don't say much about it regardless of position. But UGA continues Armstrong's denial of the Trinity; that the Holy Spirit is "the power" of God the Father and His Son, likening it to electricity where God flips the switch.
Maybe it all essentially comes down to their acknowledged source of 'revelation'-- White or Armstrong-- with not a great deal of difference. One marked difference, however, is that Armstrong originally began teaching in 1928, with radio still new, that there would be 2 19-year periods of teaching and reaching the world before the present age ends, which made it 1968. When it did not happen, Armstrong actually disqualified himself as a prophet. He was still an apostle with THE right message, but he did not get into predicting dates or years after that. With White, about 8 decades earlier, her dates were failed prophecies in the recent past-- that is, that the end of the age was supposed to have been when the Adventists claimed [184?], but that God changed his mind because of the Christian world's failure to observe the right day of worship. If SDA's say they "do not, and have never," predicted the date of the end, this is what they mean...the Adventists did, but the remaining ones who became the Seventh Day Adventists, did not in the time they have been known as such.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Let me guess... you are starting another Sabbath thread - where it is left to me to be the first to defend the Bible.
hmm - what do the "Seventh-day Baptists" think of that idea?
Oh no wait! What did "D.L. Moody" say ?
Let's let him speak for himself.
==================
[FONT="]DWIGHT L. MOODY[/FONT]
[FONT="]The Ten Commandments:[/FONT][FONT="]
Exodus 20:2-17 [/FONT]
Exodus 20:2-17 [/FONT]
.
The Fourth Commandment
Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.
The Fourth Commandment
Remember the Sabbath Day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:for in six days the LORD made heaven and Earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath Day, and hallowed it.
I honestly believe that this commandment is just as binding today as it ever was.I have talked with men who have said that it has been abrogated, but they have never been able to point to any place in the Bible where God repealed it. When Christ was on earth, He did nothing to set it aside; He freed it from the traces under which the scribes and Pharisees had put it, and gave it its true place.
"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." (Mark 2:27)
It isjust as practicable and as necessary for men today as it ever was- in fact, more than ever, because we live in such an intense age.
The Sabbath was binding in Eden, and it has been in force ever since. The fourth commandment begins withthe word remember, showing that the Sabbath already existed when God wrote this law on the tables of stoneat Sinai.How can men claim that this one commandment has been done away with when they will admit that the other nine are still binding?
I believe that the Sabbath question today is a vital one for the whole country. It is the burning question of the present time. If you give up the Sabbath the church goes; if you give up the church the home goes; and if the home goes the nation goes. That is the direction in which we are traveling.
[FONT="]
===========================
Reading test.
1. What did Moody think of "Sabbath breakers" -- according to the actual text - not your preference.
2. Was Moody right to try and bend the 4th commandment to make it point to week day 1 - instead of "the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God" Ex 20:8-11?
3. D.L. Moody (the arminian) appears to be in 100% agreement with the "Baptist Confession of Faith" in his promotion of the 4th commandment. How can that be if the Baptist Confession of Faith is just for Calvinists?
in Christ,
Bob[/FONT]
Last edited by a moderator:
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
We believe in the triune Godhead. ONE God in THREE persons.
It is one of our 28 Fundamental beliefs and is one of the first topics covered in all of our evangelistic meetings.
So...err...umm.. "other than that", yeah I guess you could call it "not much to say".:laugh::godisgood:
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
The Millerites that predicted the end of the world in 1844
1. Ate pork, drank coffee, smoked (some of them)
2. Worshiped on Sundays
3. Did not know anything about Ellen White.
4. Did not have our view of the state of the dead.
5. Did not teach anything about the heavenly Sanctuary of Heb 8 and 9.
6. looked just like the average Baptist in the way they worshiped and in everything they did other than their view of the 2300 year timeline.
They were called "Adventists" for daring to teach that the 2nd coming was going to be before the 1000 year millennium. That is a "big deal" in their day - even by Walter Martin's standards.
So that's my "fast half dozen" differences.
in Christ,
Bob
Yue are the SAME as the RCC, you have the trinity right, that is about it!
Extra biblical revelations
false/another Gospel
Ironic that you keep insisting on the Sabbath as a vakid Commandment today, yet you keep breaking all the time the Commandment about "bearing false witness", as NONE of those persons you keep quoting meant Sabbath as SDA defines it!
Alright... something goes wrong-- such as predicting a date for the end of the age [world] which does not take place-- what do you do? If it was just fraudulent anyway, the perpetrator takes what money or other benefits he can reap, or has reaped, and goes on to other things, better or worse, but perhaps with a eye over his shoulder. But I am not inclined to think the Adventist movement was fraudulent. So thousands of followers just dispersed, perhaps going back to their 'old' ways of living and believing, perhaps abandoning belief altogether, or...well, a lot things they could have done. But a small remnant chose to ignore the possibility they had been completely wrong, so somebody had to come up with an explanation. In those cases, it's going to be the many possible variations of covering it with religious topping. Ellen White, who loved to write, was the principal of this salvage & grow movement. She had been hit in the head with a rock, or something, in childhood, and she had various ailments, as well as ecstatic experiences, but she was one who could come up with explanations, methods of prevention, and such. So she combined the religious explanation for what went wrong-- that Christians have historically failed to obey the commandment about the seventh day, instead of the end, it was the beginning of the end-- with her ideas of health and living-- vegetarianism, masturbation makes one crazy and hunched, abolish slavery but conflicting ideas about race-- and put them all together, and voila-- a new church; the right church.
There are still similarities with Herbert Armstrong... the beginning of the end, the curse from not remembering the right day, the new church-- his, of course, was based on new technologies.
And there was Joseph Smith [Mormon Church], Charles T. Russell [Jehovah's Witnesses], Victor Paul Weirwille [The Way International], Jim Jones [The Peoples' Temple], and others. They all claimed to be the only channel by which God makes his will known today, either by new revelations or by the correct interpretation of the old revelations [The Bible]. The have to have some peculiar doctrines to differentiate them and their groups from 'mainstream' theology. Some are sabbatarians, some aren't; some eat meat, some don't; some reintroduce long past practices like polygamy or complete surrender of all decisions, worldly or 'spiritual' some don't...but almost all attack the Trinity, SDA's evidently do not... and all deny eternal damnation of the wicked or nonbeliever.
About 25-30 years ago I did a lot of research into cults, and these are the basic points that stick without having to start looking for more books and refs.
SDA's do not believe in the Trinity.
They are tritheistic.
Completely different beliefs concerning the nature of God.
They even changed their "bible" to make it fit their false beliefs.
Is there anyone here who doesn't know that the SDA's have their own radically different "bible"?
That probably would be a good topic of discussion in itself.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
The first step is to "notice" that Ellen White did not make a prediction setting the date for the end of the world. Nor did she claim that God gave her a vision setting the date for the end of the world in 1844. Nor did she specify any date after 1844.
Just so many "inconvenient details" for those wanting to tell a story - but even so it is fact.
Fact: Ellen Harmon was a teen of 17 years who had no visions at the time of the 1844 deadline set by the Millerite movement.
Again - just so many "inconvenient details" for those wanting to tell a story - and not content to let facts get in the way of a good "story".
Fact: Ellen White was not the one that told the Millerites that Jesus had gone into the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary in Oct 22 of 1844. Rather it was Hiram Edson on Oct 23, 1844.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Edson
The Millerites were using the same day for year principle for the 2300 years of Dan 8 as for the 490 years of Dan 9 and the 1260 used by all Christians, and the 1260 years for Dan 7 that even the Protestant reformers were using.
Again - just so many "inconvenient details" for those wanting to tell a story - and not content to let facts get in the way of a good "story".
Ellen White was not the one that introduced the Sabbath subject to the Seventh-day Adventists - rather it was Rachel Oaks - a Seventh-day Baptist. And a sea captain by the name of Joseph Bates brought the subject up to Ellen and James White who at the time also did not embrace the 4th commandment as being unchanged by the traditions of man. But over time more and more Adventists began to see the point clearly.
Again - just so many "inconvenient details" for those wanting to tell a story - and not content to let facts get in the way of a good "story".
Fact: Walter Martin did an actual study on the subject in the book "Kingdom of the Cults" and also concluded that Seventh-day Adventists are not a cult no matter how determined non-SDAs might be to oppose the 4th commandment or the continuation of 1Cor 12 spiritual gifts.
In fact as Martin notes in his book - the main gripe against Seventh-day Adventists and Millerites at the time was that they were premillennial and the general - popular view of their day was dead set against it.
Again - just so many "inconvenient details" for those wanting to tell a story - and not content to let facts get in the way of a good "story".
Well not according to actual theologians that have actually studied the teaching of this denomination.
"One God in three Persons" is exactly what we find in the Bible and in the teaching of the Adventist Church.
Again - just so many "inconvenient details" for those wanting to tell a story - and not content to let facts get in the way of a good "story".
in Christ,
Bob
Last edited by a moderator:
False prophets(esses) have been around since Satan convinced Eve she would not surely die eating the fruit forbidden. Eve was beguiled. Adam sinned willfully.
The world is filled with false religion--the religions of man are everywhere--all false. Christendom is filled with latter day prophets with many false gospels. Memorize the Letter to the Galatians.
Jesus said all who came before Him were thieves and robbers; and many would come after Him saying He is Christ. "Do not believe them!!!!!"
If your religion is founded by a man or woman, you have a problem. God is not the author of confusion. The basic paradigm is: salvation by works. If you have to keep something law-like you are worshipping in vain. See: Galatians and Ephesians.
See the last verses of Revelation. There are no more prophets. The Word of God is the witness, with The Holy Spirit convicting of sin, righteousness and judgement to come.
Where will we be in 100 years? Are we sure? Will our anchor hold?
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
The world is filled with false religion--the religions of man are everywhere--all false. Christendom is filled with latter day prophets with many false gospels. Memorize the Letter to the Galatians.
Jesus said all who came before Him were thieves and robbers; and many would come after Him saying He is Christ. "Do not believe them!!!!!"
If your religion is founded by a man or woman, you have a problem. God is not the author of confusion. The basic paradigm is: salvation by works. If you have to keep something law-like you are worshipping in vain. See: Galatians and Ephesians.
See the last verses of Revelation. There are no more prophets. The Word of God is the witness, with The Holy Spirit convicting of sin, righteousness and judgement to come.
Where will we be in 100 years? Are we sure? Will our anchor hold?
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
BobRyan: where will you be in 100 years?
Salvation is of the Lord.
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
Salvation is of the Lord.
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Bro. James
SovereignMercy
Member
Unless the Lord opens BR's eyes, he'll get his wish eventually. He'll be judged by the law and be found out to be a lawbreaker like everyone else and will receive the just punishment of one. BR would rather brag about his "righteousness" than rest in the righteousness of Jesus who fulfilled the law for us.
SovereignMercy
Member
Unfortunately, it's already sound asleep.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
In Is 30:8-11 God helps us understand the problem of rejecting the teaching He sends to us. In the case of this thread - the idea seems to be - how to insult another Christian denomination without actually studying the Bible.
Turns out - that is pretty easy to do.
But I am not clear on who ever doubted it.
in Christ,
Bob
BOB, what we have is that we here view the bible ALONE as the revealtion to us from God to us, as the ONLY inspired source for all faith/doctrines/practices, while you had a false prophetess, who your church views as being on par witht he real Prophets/Apostles of the lord!
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
Were that true then you would accept - and not reject Isaiah 30:8-11.
Were that true then you would accept - and not reject Is 66:23.
Were that true then you would accept and not reject 1Cor 14:1.
Were that true then you would accept and not reject 1Thess 5:19-20.
the list keeps going from here....
in Christ,
Bob