• 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!

Cults, Christian Faith and Practice

Eliyahu: What are the definitions for the cults and for the orthodox?

HP: I for one believe that I Am Blessed 17, our moderator, owes the list a response to your question after claiming that the SDA group is a cult. I would also like to know if she believes one can be born again and be part of what she terms as a ‘cult.’
 
HP: I have read books in the past on the Trinity. After reading them, I came away with more questions than answers. Am I the only one that does not understand the makeup of God and His relation to the Son or the Sons relationship to the Father, or the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Father and Son? What must we agree about this mysterious relationship in order to be saved or to keep others from believing we are part of some cult?

It appears to me quite possible that ‘SBC Preacher’ must believe that one has to believe in the Trinity in the way he views it as in accordance to truth in order to be saved. Again, what is this essential element of belief concerning the Trinity that I must accept to be part of the true body of Christ as a born again believer? Do I have to understand it antecedent to gaining salvation or can my understanding of it come subesquent to my entrance into God's family?
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
HP: I for one believe that I Am Blessed 17, our moderator, owes the list a response to your question after claiming that the SDA group is a cult. I would also like to know if she believes one can be born again and be part of what she terms as a ‘cult.’

I believe that if one can be hardly born again in a certain group of churches, that group should be defined as a cult.
Even in case of JW, if the Deity of JC is the only matter and problem, I can think about the possibility of the Salvation there.( Jesus didn't ask the Robber at the Cross if he knows the Trinitiy). But JW has many more problems than the Deity of JC alone. I don't see any salvation in Mormons.

I don't rule out the Salvation in the SDA as I know some people there having the testimony of the salvation. Remember Paul didn't say the Galatians were not born again from the beginning though they were obssessed with the Legalism.

The people condemning SDA as cults do not condemn the much bigger cults like Roman Catholicism full of idolatry, which is quite curious.
 
Last edited:
Here is a quote from “The Kingdom of the Cults “ by Walter Martin. “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.”

He classified them as a 'Christian denomination.' It appears as the late Donald Grey Barnhouse, E. Schuyler English and many others have concluded that the SDA’s do not deserve the ‘cult’ label as well. There appears to be no consensus of opinion as to SDA as being a cult, even among those that are studied in the field of cults.
 

SBCPreacher

Active Member
Site Supporter
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
It appears to me quite possible that ‘SBC Preacher’ must believe that one has to believe in the Trinity in the way he views it as in accordance to truth in order to be saved. Again, what is this essential element of belief concerning the Trinity that I must accept to be part of the true body of Christ as a born again believer? Do I have to understand it antecedent to gaining salvation or can my understanding of it come subesquent to my entrance into God's family?
Faith in "a god" is not enough for salvation. It must be faith in the God of the Bible. The Bible defines our God as a Trinity: God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit. If someone places their faith in a god who is not the God of the Bible - not a Trinitarian God - then he is not saved. That's what the Mormons and JWs do. That's why they're cults. That's all I'm trying to say.

As for John the Baptist or any other Old Testament Saint, James 2:23 says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." (NKJV) I believe the same would be true for John the Baptist. Since he did not have the full revelation of God that we have in the Bible, then it was enough that He, too, "believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
 

Eliyahu

Active Member
Site Supporter
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
Here is a quote from “The Kingdom of the Cults “ by Walter Martin. “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.”

He classified them as a 'Christian denomination.' It appears as the late Donald Grey Barnhouse, E. Schuyler English and many others have concluded that the SDA’s do not deserve the ‘cult’ label as well. There appears to be no consensus of opinion as to SDA as being a cult, even among those that are studied in the field of cults.

I understand there are many sub-groups among SDA's such as David... etc. which I don't know in detail.
SDA do not deserve to be called Cults just because of their Legalism or Eschatology. In my view there are so many denominations disagreeing about the Eschatology each other. Even I myself disagree with my own church's belief on that issue.

I have many Messianic Jewish Friends who confess Jesus as their Messiah, but keep the Sabbath and diet according to the teachings in Leviticus 11. They have the faith in Jesus but they are rather legalistic. I don't think they deserve to be called Cults. SDA has the similarity to the Messianic Jews.
 
SBC Preacher: Faith in "a god" is not enough for salvation.

HP: That is a given. That is NOT what is being discussed here. What I see is that some, such as yourself, have a presupposition dealing with your particular views of the Trinity that define “God” at least to you. Tell us what those particular beliefs as to what constitutes the Trinity, and where you see the focus of the digression from that core belief.

Let me ask you a question. Do you have to come to know the Trinity as you see it before you come to salvation? Is that belief, as you now see it, a necessary condition for salvation?

What ever happened to 'faith plus nothing?' What ever happened to “you have nothing to do with your salvation, and you have nothing to do in keeping it or loosing it????” Now we have a SB Preacher telling us that indeed you have to formulate certain beliefs concerning the Trinity, in particular, in order to be saved. Is this 'salvation' by the forming of intents to believe some particular way consistent with the ‘orthodox’ (whatever that is) view or what? What ever happened to being predestined by God? Are you telling me that man has to do something in order to be saved, i.e., form intents to believe in the Trinity as you see it?

Possibly we are back to the old “either God chose you to salvation and a particular belief system or He did not scenario.” If that is true all is nothing more than some necessitated to salvation and others are simply necessitated to believe in some other god. Plain old double predestination as Calvin believed.

Which is it Pastor? Are we active or passive in the acceptance of God as you say we must 'understand and believe in a particular way' to be saved and part of the kingdom? Do we formulate these beliefs as a product of our wills or is it just part of being one of the lucky predestined ones?
 
Eliyahu: SDA do not deserve to be called Cults just because of their Legalism or Eschatology.

HP: That is my opinion as well at this time. I see MANY reasons why I could never be one of them, and Many doctrines and practices that I do not agree with, but I cannot accept the cult label for them again at this time. My feelings are not chiseled in stone.

I appreciate the emails to me concerning their beliefs and practices, and I readily admit there is much that concerns me. I certainly have my reservations about the beliefs of a lot of others as well but I do not count them out of the kingdom necessarily for differing with my beliefs. I may not be able to fellowship with many believers, from numerous denominations due to their feelings towards me, but I can still love them as Christian brothers and sisters, regardless of what they do or say to me, even if in fact they count me out of the kingdom or feel that I belong to some cult and express their desires fro me to worship elsewhere.

I might add that if the Baptist's were to be called a cult, I would take up for them as well.:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
HP: I for one believe that I Am Blessed 17, our moderator, owes the list a response to your question after claiming that the SDA group is a cult. I would also like to know if she believes one can be born again and be part of what she terms as a ‘cult.’
Here is a summation of the beliefs of the SDA's which make them a cult.
Heresy #1--Redefining the grace of salvation to include the works of the law

Seventh-day Adventism plays the same game in salvation as every other false movement of Christendom. They profess to teach salvation by grace through faith, but they redefine this in a way that is contrary to New Testament doctrine.
Though they often deny this, the Adventist denomination teaches that salvation is by grace plus law, faith plus works. Grace, according to Adventist theology, is the power and forgiveness God gives to enable a sinner to keep the law and to thereby build a holy character fit for Heaven. He who fails to build the right character by God’s grace will never see Heaven. Faith and works are the two oars by which the believer is propelled to glory.

Heresy #2--Sabbath-Keeping
Let us investigate exactly what Seventh-day Adventism teaches about the Sabbath. Following is a breakdown of these teachings from their own publications.
WHAT ADVENTISM TEACHES: The Sabbath is eternally binding upon men from creation. Seventh-day Adventism says the Sabbath was made for mankind in general and was given to Adam in the Garden of Eden. Sabbath-keeping, therefore, is a sign of loyalty to God, the Creator.

Heresy #3--Soul Sleep
A general statement of the Seventh-day Adventist doctrine of death is as follows:
"So when a man dies he does not live somewhere else. He is not in heaven, not in hell, not in purgatory. He is not alive at all, anywhere, in any condition whatsoever. He is dead. And to be dead does not mean to be alive. To be dead does not mean to go to heaven; it does not mean to go to hell; it does not mean to go to purgatory. Indeed, it does not mean to go anywhere at all. It means simply an end of life. ... Death is cessation of life, an absence of life, the exact opposite of life. So in death there is no life. The man does not live; the body does not live; the soul does not live; the spirit does not live; the mind does not live. Intelligence ends, consciousness ends, memory ends, knowledge ends, thought ends. All that has comprised the man ends" (When A Man Dies, p. 20).
The idea that man has conscious existence after death is said to be "the devil’s first lie."

Heresy #4--Annihilation of the Wicked
In the following excerpts, Adventist teachers define their doctrine of the final destiny of the lost. Ellen White speaks first.
"The theory of eternal torment is one of the false doctrines that constitute the wine of the abomination of Babylon. ... But those who have not, through repentance and faith, secured pardon, must receive the penalty of transgression ... covered with infamy, they sink into hopeless, eternal oblivion. ... There will then be no lost souls to blaspheme God as they writhe in never-ending torment; no wretched beings in hell will mingle their shrieks with the songs of the saved" (The Great Controversy, pp. 470,477).
"...sinners will not live forever. The plain doctrine of the Bible is that the devil and all his works will be destroyed, utterly destroyed" (When A Man Dies, p. 58).

Heresy #5--Ellen White as a Prophetess and Inspired Commentator
WHAT DOES SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM BELIEVE ABOUT ELLEN WHITE?

1. Adventism believes Ellen White exercised the divine gift of prophecy and that she was raised up by God to guide the development of the SDA Movement. "...the church leaders from the first have accepted this heavenly light that God has caused to shine upon their pathway. One reason we have prospered is that we have had this divine guidance, which we have tried to follow faithfully. ... Seventh-day Adventists believe that Mrs. Ellen G. White exercised the true prophetic gift. They believe that God graciously spoke to her in divine revelations, and that through her He sent inspired messages to His church" (Ellen G. White and the S.D.A. Church, p. 2).

Heresy #6--Investigative Judgment
The major tenets of the Adventist doctrine of Investigative Judgment are as follows:
1. In October 1844, Jesus Christ entered the heavenly holy of holies to begin investigative judgment of the records (deeds, thoughts, attitudes, etc.) of those who have professed salvation. "Attended by heavenly angels, our great High Priest enters the holy of holies and there appears in the presence of God to engage in the last acts of His ministration in behalf of man—to perform the work of investigative judgment and to make an atonement for all who are shown to be entitled to its benefits ... in the great day of final atonement and investigative judgment the only cases considered are those of the professed people of God. The judgment of the wicked is a distinct and separate work. ... The books of record in heaven, in which the names and the deeds of men are registered, are to determine the decisions of the judgment. ... The subject of the sanctuary and the investigative judgment should be clearly understood by the people of God ... every individual has a soul to save or to loose. Each has a case pending at the bar of God ... The intercession of Christ in man’s behalf in the sanctuary above is as essential to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the cross" (Ellen White, The Great Controversy, pp. 422-423).

Heresy #7--Misuse of the Mosaic Law
According to Adventist doctrine, the law works together with grace to justify the believer. Adventism teaches that God, through Jesus, gives a sinner grace to build a holy life after the model of the law. Salvation will be determined by how successful this life is built. While Adventists profess to believe in salvation by grace alone, theirs is a redefinition of biblical grace.

I do not believe you can believe such doctrines and be saved at the same time. Salvation is be grace through faith and faith alone. It is not by faith plus works, which is what the SDA's believe. The investigative judgement is particularly heretical implying that Christ is still making an atonement for our sins. The full atonement was not made at the cross. These types of doctrines place the SDA's in the realm of a cult.

The above information was gleaned from:
file:///C:/FundamentalBaptistLibrary2000/WWW/Ency/ency0068.htm#0068_10A5
 

Lacy Evans

New Member
DHK said:
I do not believe you can believe such doctrines and be saved at the same time. Salvation is be grace through faith and faith alone. It is not by faith plus works, which is what the SDA's believe. The investigative judgement is particularly heretical implying that Christ is still making an atonement for our sins. The full atonement was not made at the cross. These types of doctrines place the SDA's in the realm of a cult.

I think it would be more accurate to say that believing these doctrines will get no-one saved.

A person might already be saved and then afterwards get tangled up in some of these beliefs. (They wouldn't lose their salvation.)

Lacy
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Eliyahu said:
But my son was asked about the denomination where we belong to, by a pastor, then he asked the question about whether we are taught by a pastor graduated from the College of Theology, then he told my son " your church is a cult" But later on we realized that he was reading and referring to the Commentary on Pentateuch written by CH McIntosh who was a member of so-called Plymouth Brethren where our churches belong to.
Sometimes we notice many churches are using our church people drafted tracts for their church advertizements.

What are the definitions for the cults and for the orthodox?

The Jews were pretty much free to insult the early Christian church calling them "A sect" of Judaism for having pure doctrine that differred from the man-made traditions of the Jews and for being "unpopular".

We see that thing all the time today.

When you are talking about "the methods" used to squash dissent this is a favorite one - like calling Martin Luther "a heretic".

Easy to do - hard to defend with "substance" that goes beyond "they find fault with that I believe".

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
Here is a quote from “The Kingdom of the Cults “ by Walter Martin. “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.”

He classified them as a 'Christian denomination.' It appears as the late Donald Grey Barnhouse, E. Schuyler English and many others have concluded that the SDA’s do not deserve the ‘cult’ label as well. There appears to be no consensus of opinion as to SDA as being a cult, even among those that are studied in the field of cults.

Actually Martin's book provides an entire chapter on SDA's primarily directed at attacking Hoekema's slam on SDAs. Martin was particularly insistent that "making stuff up" the way Hoekema did instead of taking the official doctrines of a given church (like SDAs in this case) is not an honest accurate or reliable method for determining the cult or non-cult status of any group -- much less SDAs.

Though one might find fault with some of Martin's doctrines - he did get that part correct.

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Heavenly Pilgrim said:
HP: I have read books in the past on the Trinity. After reading them, I came away with more questions than answers. Am I the only one that does not understand the makeup of God and His relation to the Son or the Sons relationship to the Father, or the relationship of the Holy Spirit to the Father and Son? What must we agree about this mysterious relationship in order to be saved or to keep others from believing we are part of some cult?

It appears to me quite possible that ‘SBC Preacher’ must believe that one has to believe in the Trinity in the way he views it as in accordance to truth in order to be saved. Again, what is this essential element of belief concerning the Trinity that I must accept to be part of the true body of Christ as a born again believer? Do I have to understand it antecedent to gaining salvation or can my understanding of it come subesquent to my entrance into God's family?

SBC was pretty clear on the fact that he was ADDING This as a NEW rule not applicable to Bible saints but simply being whimsically added in by him and others after the fact.

SDAs are pro-Trinitarian so this is not an issue of dividing over that doctrinal position -- but this wild idea of just slamming other groups "as it pleases you" instead of holding yourself strictly accountable to scripture is going too far -- I refuse to engage in it.

Others appear to be quite comfortable doing it as often as possible.

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
SBCPreacher said:
Faith in "a god" is not enough for salvation. It must be faith in the God of the Bible.

Cleaver -- now answer a straightforward question.

"Was faith in the God of the BIBLE" required of John the baptizer? John's parents? The family of Timothy?

To quote Steaver :"A simple yes or no will do".

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Eliyahu said:
I understand there are many sub-groups among SDA's such as David... etc. which I don't know in detail.

If you consider Methodists to be a "sub-group of Catholics" then I suppose you can say that.

SDA do not deserve to be called Cults just because of their Legalism or Eschatology.

The wild accusation of legalism against SDAs is simply "gaming" it is not fact and has not been shown to hold water sola-scriptura.

Invariably it comes down to one of two issues --

#1. A Calvinist objecting to the fact that SDAs are Arminian
#2. An Arminian objecting to the fact that SDA HOLD to the idea of FREE WILL EVEN AFTER a person is saved.
a. SDAs refuse to give up the doctrine on perseverance the way "some arminians do"
b. SDAs refuse to give up the doctrine of free will EVEN AFTER salvation the way some other Arminians do.
c. SDAs refuse to "retro delete TODAY's assurance or salvation" when someone fails to "persevere ten years from today"

And we have seen Arminians on this very board who join the SDAs in that particular regarding - holding to the pure sola-scriptura teachings of scripture on this point instead of the man-made traditions of OSAS.

Bascially once the tactics of those two groups are unmasked - the legalism charge evaporates right before the eyes of the objective reader. The charge REQUIRES a certain decree of confusion on the part of the audiance to hold water.

But sadly for those who try use those pejoratives - they are easily exposed.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
DHK said:
Here is a summation of the beliefs of the SDA's which make them a cult.


I do not believe you can believe such doctrines and be saved at the same time. Salvation is be grace through faith and faith alone. It is not by faith plus works, which is what the SDA's believe. The investigative judgement is particularly heretical implying that Christ is still making an atonement for our sins. The full atonement was not made at the cross. These types of doctrines place the SDA's in the realm of a cult.

The above information was gleaned from:
file:///C:/FundamentalBaptistLibrary2000/WWW/Ency/ency0068.htm#0068_10A5

Hmm - not a single quote from the published online - on-internet in-print available-to-all doctrinal statemetns of the SDA church DHK?

How "suprising"?:applause:

Ok - maybe not surprising at all. :laugh:

The good thing about this board is that now and then a thread subject comes up dealing with one or the other points listed in DHK's list - and each time his efforts to spin the point away from scripture have failed.

in Christ,

Bob
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
BobRyan said:
Hmm - not a single quote from the published online - on-internet in-print available-to-all doctrinal statemetns of the SDA church DHK?

How "suprising"?:applause:

Ok - maybe not surprising at all. :laugh:
Bob
The SDA's are much like the Catholic epologists in this regard Bob, and you should know this well. The Catholics will post on the internet how to refute Baptist arguments against Catholic "so-called heresies." SDA's do the same thing. However, Everything that I posted can be documented and verified by Ellen G. White's writings, and/or other writings of the SDA's. All of it can be well documented. As for internet sites they only tell you what they want they want the public to know--just like the Catholics.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Don't get me wrong DHK - I am not complaining that your methods require that you not actually quote from SDA doctrinal statements. As I have said you have had a lot of opportunity to demonstrate the substance of your claims in threads entirely dedicated to each point listed in your post.

If you could have done it - you would have done so by now

I for one am very happy to discuss each of those subject "sola-scriptura" which (if your wild accusations were to be believed) should make someone in your position very happy since you claim that in that context I would not be successful -- and yet the record shows that I have done just that sir.

As I have just recently demonstrated here regarding the failed accusation of legalism - it is pretty easy to debunk those hollow accusations.

In Christ,

Bob
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
BobRyan said:
Don't get me wrong DHK - I am not complaining that your methods require that you not actually quote from SDA doctrinal statements. As I have said you have had a lot of opportunity to demonstrate the substance of your claims in threads entirely dedicated to each point listed in your post.

If you could have done it - you would have done so by now

I for one am very happy to discuss each of those subject "sola-scriptura" which (if your wild accusations were to be believed) should make someone in your position very happy since you claim that in that context I would not be successful -- and yet the record shows that I have done just that sir.

In Christ,

Bob
Bob, I am not going to discuss those points sola scriptura. Ellen G. White was a prophet unto herself. That in itself is unbiblical and heretical. She was a false prophet, making false predictions about the coming of Christ. She was a wolf in sheep's clothing. When she had a vision stating a false doctrine then you (as other SDA's) want to defend it sola scriptura. That is as ridiculous as the Catholics trying to defend purgatory or praying to the dead using sola scriptura. I am not going to use sola scriptura to refute doctrines of a false prophet. The foundation itslef is wrong. I can use the writings of Ellen G. White to show that it is wrong. She is a false prophet. No women should have the spiritual authority over a man. The entire movement is based on a faulty foundation.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
DHK said:
Bob, I am not going to discuss those points sola scriptura. Ellen G. White was a prophet unto herself.

I on the other hand am constrained to evaluate ALL doctrine "sola scriptura" sir.

we differ in that regard - but I accept it.

in 1cor 12 we SEE God giving the gift of prophecy to the NT church and in 1Cor 14 we SEE God saying "DESIRE earnestly spiritual gifts but ESPECIALLY that you may prophesy".

I believe you would reject that teaching of scripture today.

I do not.

so -- we differ.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Top