How it felt when I changed Day of Worship ....

[Bethelassoc]

There is a thread on this board arguing for the truth of scripture regarding the "FIRST resurrection" Rev 20:4-5 and the fact that the "DEAD IN CHRIST rise FIRST" (1Thess 4) that basically makes the case sola scriptura as one might expect.

IF SOMEONE were actually ABLE to show this to be in error from the ACTUAL Bible they would be doing it on that thread!

Simply quoting a doctrinal statement here and saying "I find that unpopular so I say the word cult when I read it" is good propaganda tactic - but has no "substance".

If someone actually "had" a point to make on th subject they would be making it on the "FIRST Resurrection" thread.

But far be it from me to object to this kind of tactic here -- I am just pointing out the obvious -- again.

After viewing your profile, I now get the chip on the shoulder. Ouch! Didn't know you were SDA....

Anyway, you assume alot. I didn't refer to SDA as a cult. I did say cults one time, though. I stated in my second post that, "As to what constitutes truth, if we allow truth to be whatever we want to make it, then cults do not exist."

But my first post doesn't refer to the resurrection part of the faith statement, so I don't HAVE a point to make on the thread you started. I was referring to the last portion of the statement -- The unrighteous dead will then be resurrected, and with Satan and his angels will surround the city; but fire from God will consume them and cleanse the earth. The universe will thus be freed of sin and sinners forever.

This is the point of contention. Unless they used poor wording, it reads that God destroys or annihilates Satan, his angels and the unrighteous dead rather than eternal damnation. There's no tactic here, just pointing out the obvious.

David

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Author Robert M. Bowman Jr. defines cult as
"A religious group originating as a heretical sect and maintaining fervent commitment to heresy. Source wikipedia

GE:

This RM Bowman Jr. -- or was it his father? -- whoever, I believe he has seen my animadversion on his views on Calvin and the Sabbath. Never received a word in reply. Perhaps he hasn't read. Perhaps he had no answer. Will never know.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

BR:

"Finally - SDAs argue that ALL prophets are subject to the TEST of a prophet sola-scriptura which means that we do NOT expect anyone with a doctrinal foundation OTHER than the one held by SDAS to view Ellen White as anything other than a false prophet."

GE:

Al right, BobRyan, let us assume Mrs White was a preacher of truth. Did she, or did she not, 'predict' or 'prophecy', that the SDA Church would (in future from her time) receive more, greater, further, 'light', on the Sabbath?

Here she failed to prove herself a teacher of truth if one has to believe you or your SDA Church! How does it feel to deny your own 'Spirit of Prophecy', Bob Ryan, right on the subject of the Sabbath?

 

[DHK]

Author Robert M. Bowman Jr. defines cult as
"A religious group originating as a heretical sect and maintaining fervent commitment to heresy. Source wikipedia

GE:

This RM Bowman Jr. -- or was it his father? -- whoever, I believe he has seen my animadversion on his views on Calvin and the Sabbath. Never received a word in reply. Perhaps he hasn't read. Perhaps he had no answer. Will never know.

Christians have had various theological views on the different shades of what is termed "Calvinism" and what is termed "Arminianism" (both wrongly defined on this board), from the time of the Apostles onward.
The SDA's had a definite origin in the mid-19th century which makes them fit into the above definition of a cult.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Am Blessed 17
Whatever day they choose to worship, SDA is still a cult.

A flowery vocabulary won't change the fact that she's right. The plain truth plainly spoken is most effective.

Many people use overly wordy responses to illustrate their own familiarity with the English language (boasting) and to obscure the truth rather than illuminate it.

GE:

Have you anything to say on the topic of this thread, then say it. But keep your denominational likes and dislikes for yourself.

Do you know what the black hole in the Seventh Day Adventist doctrine of the Sabbath is? I do. It is the very black hole in the dogma of Sunday-worship reversed. (You cannot imagine how I felt when I discovered the phenomenon!)

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Christians have had various theological views on the different shades of what is termed "Calvinism" and what is termed "Arminianism" (both wrongly defined on this board), from the time of the Apostles onward.
The SDA's had a definite origin in the mid-19th century which makes them fit into the above definition of a cult.

GE:

Alright; but cannot one's definition of what a cult is be adapted or bettered? In the mid-19th century the SDAs used to be unitarians - they denied Christ's divinity. Then 'cult' should properly have applied to them ... as today still the name must be applied to Churches of God that still hold unitarian views.
But in the name of Christ, how can a Christian call a fellow Christian a cult, if that 'cult' worship the very same Lord?

It hasn't been the idea to find out if the SDAs are 'cult' or not! DHK, I think you take them for cult because they keep the Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD? Is that a legitimate reason?

 

[DHK]

It hasn't been the idea to find out if the SDAs are 'cult' or not! DHK, I think you take them for cult because they keep the Seventh Day Sabbath of the LORD? Is that a legitimate reason?

When keeping the Sabbath becomes so important that if you don't keep the Sabbath then you are not saved, yes, it is but one factor that makes them a cult. That was Ellen G. White's teaching. It may not be Bob's belief, but it was White's belief. She believed that all others had the mark of the beast. Those beliefs put it into the classification of a cult.

The doctrine of investigative judgment implies that Christ is still atoning for our sins. That also implies that the atonement of Christ was not sufficienton at the cross, else why would he still be atoning for our sins. This particular doctrine is quite heretical and completely man-made. It was never heard of before 1844. It cannot be defended by the Scripture. It is an SDA-only doctrine. It is the mark of a cult. I have listed many others in another thread.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Again I must admit, ja sure!
Notwithstanding, if you had a father and a mother and a sister, Seventh Day Adventists, but who, you know as sure as your own faith in Jesus, are Jesus' own, and kneel down and pray together, would you think for one second, Cults!? Never!

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

As little as I shall kneel down with a Muslim to pray, as little shall I bow my head to pray with a Unitarian, or before the pope, so help me God! These are cultsand idolaters. One cannot and one may not, say the same concerning SDAs. ONLY because of WHOM we worship.

 

[Eliyahu]

I hope this thread is not about whether SDA is a cult.

But I feel we have to be careful in judging some group of people as the cults as a whole, because the salvation belongs to individual faith.

IMO, almost all the denominations have the problems and errors in their doctrines. Which denominations are accurate in their eschatology? I can argue against anyone immediately. I am very sure that no one can be free from errors or flaws in their Eschatology

In my childhood, I was brainwashed so many times by the "Truth" that JW, Moonies, SDA, are cults. But I have carefully observed the lives of the SDA people and their beliefs and found them different from the others.
Certainly they are legalistic, but I would reckon it as the case of Romans 14:5-6. If anyone can keep the commandments of the Law even after being born again, it is good.

1) Are they cults because they keep the Law?
2) Are they cults because they don't commit the adultery?
( Many orthodox or mainstream church leaders commit that and excuse their misconducts in cunning ways and their congregations condone them!)
3) Are they cults because they don't eat the pork meat?
My messianic Jewish friends all must be cults then!

How much are we fair in this judgment? Do we use the same balance and weight to judge between Presbyterians, Church of Christ, Lutheran, RCC?
Let's look at Calvin: he claimed the Baptismal Regeneration, Infant Baptism, Clergy System, No Salvation outside the Holy Catholic Church.
If you don't know this, please read his book, Insititutes of Christian Religion.
Baptismal Regeneration and Infant Baptism is a serious matter, then do you call Calvin as the Cult Leader?
The biggest cult may be Roman Catholic which is full of heresies like Purgatory, all the excuses for the Idolatry, Prayer to Mary, Prayer to the Dead, Papacy, etc. Do you know how much Martin Luther insitigated the people to kill the Jews?
Do you call RCC, Lutheran and Presbyterian the cults? If you do so, then you may start to argue about SDA. But when I was a child, I was never told that RCC and Presbyterians are the cults, but that SDA is a cult.

God hates 2 different balances

Deut 25:13

13 Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small.
14 Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small. 15 But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

Prov 20:
23 Divers weights are an abomination unto the LORD; and a false balance is not good.

The merchants often had 2 balances, a light one for the sales, the other heavy one for the purchase, which was a very tricky way of business.

When people criticise the others, they use the heavy criteria, while they use the very mild and soft criteria when they advocate their own misconducts.

God hates double standards.

But if Ellen White said " No Sabbath keeping, No Salvation" then it is a serious problem with Soteriology. But I don't know whether she said so in such meaning indeed or not.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Eliyahu: But I feel we have to be careful in judging some group of people as the cults as a whole, because the salvation belongs to individual faith………………. But if Ellen White said " No Sabbath keeping, No Salvation" then it is a serious problem with Soteriology. But I don't know whether she said so in such meaning indeed or not.

HP: I cannot think of a post more right on than yours.:thumbs: You hit the nail on the head with salvation being an individual faith issue. I believe you are correct in your thoughts concerning the RC Church, Calvin, and Luther just to name a few. If we used the same weights to scales to measure much of the church with, we might end up calling them cults or at least wickedly misguided at times to say the least. I think I hear Servetus, for one, and multitudes of others, saying Yea and Amen!

If we are going to have meaningful discussion, I for one believe that such blanket and personal remarks of being a cult, or telling another that they are lost and outside the faith, needs to be left as a job to be fulfilled by the Holy Spirit. I believe that open and fair debate demands such, to say nothing about Christian charity. As far a BR or the SDA’.s in general go, how many have they burnt at the stake for disagreeing with them? That should say something about their character.

I live in a community where the SDA’s have a large presence. I find them to be God-fearing people, separated in large part from the worldly habits. etc., a compliment and asset to the community as a whole, and great neighbors to have. I do not hear them denying the Diety of our Lord and Savior, which I strongly feel is one of the marks that must be present to be considered as a cult. I would be far more inclined to believe that multitudes of luke warm Christians, holding their hand on a Bible swearing to the denominational handbooks of their corresponding churches that we find filling the pews of the many local denominations most on this list would consider as ‘orthodox,’ will find themselves outside of the kingdom in the end, rather than to believe that all those in the SDA church are cults or outside of the faith.

I wonder why I have yet to speak to a SDA that counts me or any others out of the kingdom for worshiping on Sunday as opposed to the Saturday?

I have met a few Baptist’s that would not even accept me in as part of their fellowship unless I was willing to get re-baptized in their tank by one of their ministers. If that isn’t a bit ‘cultish’ it certainly at best is not biblical,.......or is it?

 

[BobRyan]

When keeping the Sabbath becomes so important that if you don't keep the Sabbath then you are not saved, yes, it is but one factor that makes them a cult.
.

Here again "as usual" we have DHK quoting DHK!!

As has already been pointed out here - Walter Martin's book on "Kingdom of the Cults" defends the SDA church as solidly Christian and totally slams Hoekema for using the lowbrow tactics of NOT actually qouting the SDA doctrinal statements to "INVENT Positions" for the SDAs upon which to crucify them.

Martin was correct to point out Hoekema's error in that regard.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

After viewing your profile, I now get the chip on the shoulder. Ouch! Didn't know you were SDA....

No problem. I actually enjoy a frank discussion even if my views are not exactly popular.

Anyway, you assume alot. I didn't refer to SDA as a cult.

Sorry for my assumption. I retract it sir.

I did say cults one time, though. I stated in my second post that, "As to what constitutes truth, if we allow truth to be whatever we want to make it, then cults do not exist."

But my first post doesn't refer to the resurrection part of the faith statement, so I don't HAVE a point to make on the thread you started. I was referring to the last portion of the statement -- The unrighteous dead will then be resurrected, and with Satan and his angels will surround the city; but fire from God will consume them and cleanse the earth. The universe will thus be freed of sin and sinners forever.

This is the point of contention.

Good point sir. There is a thread here on MAtt 10:28 "Those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul" and then the section that goes on about "HE who DESTROYS BOTH body AND soul in fiery hell".

You might find that to be a pretty interesting thread - I certainly did.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

BR:

"Finally - SDAs argue that ALL prophets are subject to the TEST of a prophet sola-scriptura which means that we do NOT expect anyone with a doctrinal foundation OTHER than the one held by SDAS to view Ellen White as anything other than a false prophet."

GE:

Al right, BobRyan, let us assume Mrs White was a preacher of truth. Did she, or did she not, 'predict' or 'prophecy', that the SDA Church would (in future from her time) receive more, greater, further, 'light', on the Sabbath?

Here she failed to prove herself a teacher of truth if one has to believe you or your SDA Church! How does it feel to deny your own 'Spirit of Prophecy', Bob Ryan, right on the subject of the Sabbath?

IF the SDA church ended yesterday then we are in a good position to rule on any predictions made about what SDA would learn in the future.

Since that did not happen I have no clue as to how to evaluate the question you are asking sir.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

Here again "as usual" we have DHK quoting DHK!!

As has already been pointed out here - Walter Martin's book on "Kingdom of the Cults" defends the SDA church as solidly Christian and totally slams Hoekema for using the lowbrow tactics of NOT actually qouting the SDA doctrinal statements to "INVENT Positions" for the SDAs upon which to crucify them.

Martin was correct to point out Hoekema's error in that regard.

in Christ,

Bob

During the seventy years between 1844 and 1915, it is claimed that Mrs. White received approximately 2,000 visions and dreams. She said she was commanded to write her visions for preservation, and in fulfilling this charge she produced over 100,000 handwritten manuscript pages from which were published fifty-four books.
Throughout her life, Ellen White and her denomination were guided by these profuse visions, which she received usually at night. Through these she was instructed concerning (1) the supposed divine origin of the Adventist movement, (2) the Investigative Judgment, (3) the importance of Sabbath-worship, (4) the SDA health movement, (5) worldwide Adventist literature outreach, (6) the worldwide Adventist school system, (7) even the financial systems and ecclesiastical organization of the SDA church.
Thus we see that the major guiding influence of the SDA Church has been, from its inception, the visions and interpretations of Ellen G. White. While Adventist leaders claim that the Bible is their sole rule for faith and conduct, the fact is that without Ellen White there would be no Seventh-day Adventism. Since there are many Bible reasons for believing Mrs. White’s prophetic ministry was not of God, it follows that the denomination founded upon this ministry was also not of God.

file:///C:/FundamentalBaptistLibrary2000/WWW/Ency/ency0068.htm

These are convenient facts that the SDA (and especially Bob) do not want to own up to.

 

[Eliyahu]

file:///C:/FundamentalBaptistLibrary2000/WWW/Ency/ency0068.htm

These are convenient facts that the SDA (and especially Bob) do not want to own up to.

Sorry, I may be poor in comp skills.
Would you confirm the site address as I cannot access it?

 

[DHK]

Sorry, I may be poor in comp skills.
Would you confirm the site address as I cannot access it?

It is not a site address that can be accessed. It is from a cd full of information that I have. I only give that particular URL to give credit from where I get the information.
However you can get much of the same information here:

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/seventhday.htm

 

[BobRyan]

file:///C:/FundamentalBaptistLibrary2000/WWW/Ency/ency0068.htm

These are convenient facts that the SDA (and especially Bob) do not want to own up to.

The "inconvenient" fact is that the SDA 27 (now 28) "fundamental beliefs" are not only PUBLISHED for all to read in print - they are ALSO on the internet. Google "Adventist fundamental beliefs" IF what they actually SAY has any significance at all to what you want to think of them.

If you prefer DHKs methods -- then don't look at what they teach -- just make stuff up and rely on the reader not knowing the difference.

IF DHK has an example of ME finding that ANY of my positions NEED Ellen White for "proof" then again - he can always show some integrity for such a claim and SHOW it to be true.

IF DHK claims that the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of SDAs NEED Ellen White to "prove" or "sustain them" then AGAIN it turns out that ALL of those doctrinal statements are available to ALL -- he SHOULD be able to show at least ONE of his wild empty claims have actual substance --

But so far ... nothing.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Since DHK seems to be casting about him trying to remember what he falsely accused SDAs of doing/saying/believing - I will offer to assist him.

#1. DHK claims that Ellen White (or Ellen Harmon if during her teens) had a vision predicting that Christ would come in 1844. (He is still casting about him for some actual proof of that).

#2. DHK claims that SDA doctrine relies on Ellen White for it's proof instead of being based on a solid "sola scriptura" foundation. (He has yet to NAME an actual doctrine that does such a thing).

------

What do SDAs actually do?

They claim to ACCEPT the 1Cor 12, 1Cor 14 spiritual gifts as VALID and claim that Ellen White had the gift of prophecy as listed there.

AND they claim that this means - real visions not just "talking a lot".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[DHK]

The "inconvenient" fact is that the SDA 27 (now 28) "fundamental beliefs" are not only PUBLISHED for all to read in print - they are ALSO on the internet. Google "Adventist fundamental beliefs" IF what they actually SAY has any significance at all to what you want to think of them.

If you prefer DHKs methods -- then don't look at what they teach -- just make stuff up and rely on the reader not knowing the difference.

IF DHK has an example of ME finding that ANY of my positions NEED Ellen White for "proof" then again - he can always show some integrity for such a claim and SHOW it to be true.

IF DHK claims that the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of SDAs NEED Ellen White to "prove" or "sustain them" then AGAIN it turns out that ALL of those doctrinal statements are available to ALL -- he SHOULD be able to show at least ONE of his wild empty claims have actual substance --

But so far ... nothing.

in Christ,

Bob

In another thread I posted a number of heresies of the SDA church (from the same source), but all of them were documented from White's own writings.
You may and have for the most part avoided referring to Ellen G. White in your discussions on the board, and I commend you for that. But in our discussion of the SDA movement as a cult, one cannot avoid the necessary history of the cult, the origin of it, the people involved in its origin, its basic doctrines and what they originally taught. God's Word doesn't change. Either you believe what the SDA's beleive or you don't. If you don't believe the doctrines of the SDA, then why do you stay in it? I am not fising around for what you have said on this board, or have not said. The simple fact is this: You claim to be SDA. What does the SDA teach according to credible sources? If that is what they teach and you don't like then why are you SDA? BTW, you use the same tactics when debating Catholics.

As far as the gift of prophecy is concerned:
#1. It ceased by the end of the first century, and thus White could not have possessed. What she possessed was a demonic imitation of it.
#2. The prophetic gift was not given to women.
#3. The women were told to keep quiet in the church, and not to speak at all.
#4. No women was to have any authority over any man.

Now that is what the Scripture teaches. You have all of these four truths that you must reconcile and deal with. Ellen G. White went against each one. Her prophecies failed demonstrating she was a false prophet. She taught contrary to the Word of God demonstrating that she was a false teacher. And yet she remains the revered leader of the movement that you are still a follower of. Amazing!