I listened to a Presntation/Sermon by a SAD preacher last night and I found it very interesting. ALL of these people I have known seem to be Godly People.I heard nothing that .was in conflict with the Scripture as it related to the Core Doctrines. They practice the ordinances of Baptism by Emerson and Communion. They practice "foot washing". From what I retained they believe in "Soul sleep".I would appreciate your comments,not from a critical stand point, but in the line of curing ignorance.
-
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!
Seventh Day Adventance
- Thread starter Berean
- Start date
Thousand Hills
Active Member
Have some neighbors that are SDA, so I've been curious about this too. Only scratched around a little bit, but thought this was an interesting.
Todd Friel on SDA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUO8cHCs2DQ
Todd Friel on SDA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUO8cHCs2DQ
preacher4truth
Active Member
One cannot cure ignorance of a dissident religion without critical analysis of its faults.
Perhaps google Ellen G. White and her false prophecies? You may also want to look up the Clear Word Bible and perhaps youtube some videos that show you other errors of SDAism.
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
I watch someone on deviabtART who's a 7th day Adventist. They seem to share the same core beliefs to me--though I must confess I don't know their beliefs in detail. I love this one person's art. Much of it--or rather just about all of it , reflects Jesus.
Is their view of Jesus any different from mainstream Christianity?
Is their view of Jesus any different from mainstream Christianity?
If you look at the thread Heresy of Investigative Judgment you will find these two statements by SDA's:
In 1877, Uriah Smith, an early Adventist, declared, "Christ did not make the atonement when he shed his blood upon the cross. Let this fact be fixed forever in the mind”.
Ellen White herself declared (or plagiarized) in The Great Controversy that,"before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed, there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended." (1844).
That is not the same Jesus of the Bible nor the one I worship.
In 1877, Uriah Smith, an early Adventist, declared, "Christ did not make the atonement when he shed his blood upon the cross. Let this fact be fixed forever in the mind”.
Ellen White herself declared (or plagiarized) in The Great Controversy that,"before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed, there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended." (1844).
That is not the same Jesus of the Bible nor the one I worship.
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
So do some of those in mainstream Christianity. Although I personally hold for OSAS, I hardly consider those who don't un-Christian based on that alone.
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately, it is common practice to now use the same evangelical words we do but they have a different meaning completely. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that you absolutely need to accept Jesus and He died for our sins. But their Jesus is not the Biblical Jesus so....
SDAs do not believe in a eternal hell, they constantly redefine eternal and everlasting when it comes to the hell and the lake of fire, yet they do not apply these same terms to Salvation or Heaven.
Their soul sleep doctrine draws from verses taken out of context in the poetical books, they are guilty of hyper literal ism in these instances.
They believe in a form of works based salvation, claiming once you recieve Christ you must continue being good and following Christ,therefore self effort is a part of their salvation. they are no different from Catholics when you really evaluate what they believe in regards to salvation.
also since they believe in Saturday Sabbath worshipping, if you don't worship on Sat you probably aren't saved.
SDA is a cult.
Their soul sleep doctrine draws from verses taken out of context in the poetical books, they are guilty of hyper literal ism in these instances.
They believe in a form of works based salvation, claiming once you recieve Christ you must continue being good and following Christ,therefore self effort is a part of their salvation. they are no different from Catholics when you really evaluate what they believe in regards to salvation.
also since they believe in Saturday Sabbath worshipping, if you don't worship on Sat you probably aren't saved.
SDA is a cult.
preacher4truth
Active Member
Any group that denies the full and complete atonement of Christ for all sins for all times for His people are in grave error and they do in fact preach another gospel.
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
I don't consider Catholics automstically un-Christian, either, although many on the board would disagree. Touchy subject.
Cults have some pretty specific characteristics, some of them being:
-Blind following of one human leader who is not to be questioned
-freedom of thought and questioning the leader is discouraged severely and perhaps even punished
-group has an extremely elitist, us-vs-them mentality
-shame and guilt may be used to manipulate and control members
-members may be required to cut ties with family and friends
Hardly a an exhaustive list, but are they doing that? I'd be careful throwing around the term cult, as many refer to IFB as a cult when it is not.
Unless SDAs are not allowed to have their own free thoughts and opinions as dictated by some human leader and every or nearly every aspect of their lives is controlled to the point where they are allowed little to no free will, they probably are not a cult.
Cults have some pretty specific characteristics, some of them being:
-Blind following of one human leader who is not to be questioned
-freedom of thought and questioning the leader is discouraged severely and perhaps even punished
-group has an extremely elitist, us-vs-them mentality
-shame and guilt may be used to manipulate and control members
-members may be required to cut ties with family and friends
Hardly a an exhaustive list, but are they doing that? I'd be careful throwing around the term cult, as many refer to IFB as a cult when it is not.
Unless SDAs are not allowed to have their own free thoughts and opinions as dictated by some human leader and every or nearly every aspect of their lives is controlled to the point where they are allowed little to no free will, they probably are not a cult.
Last edited by a moderator:
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
Is she anything like Jim Jones (I think that was his name), who tried to control every aspect of the lives of his followers?
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
In a debate, it's standard to present your evidence upfront. That doesn't mean I don't or can't do my own research, it just means I am asking you to clarify your position. This is unfamiliar territory to me and maybe rather than spending hours digging into novel-length articles I'd like the short version to start out with. Maybe it's not high enough on my priority list to spend a lot of time doing research on.
Anyway--skimming over the wiki article...
Okay, "truth by special and personal revelation" is one aspect of a cult. Apparently she did receive many if not most of her truths from visions. You have a point.
Although if that's the only real aspect of a cult SDA displays, I'm not sure the shoe entirely fits? IDK. The aspects of a cult are kinda general ideas, and some of the aspects listed (not all of them were in my post) could describe many denominations on one or two points. To my understanding, the general definition of a cult is a group that tries to control it's members in thought and deed in a way that doesn't allow them to just decide for themselves. But maybe I'm not entirely correct.
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a resident SDA right here on the BB and has opened many, many threads. I surely don't need to repeat what has already been posted just because you don't want to read it.
If you don't want to call it a cult, fine. But at the very least the SDA doctrines are false and not of God.
When I go door to door calling, 99 percent of the catholics I run into think they are going to get to heaven because they are a "good person".
A person who is following the teachings of Catholicism and believing the Catholic teachings is lost 99 percent of the time
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
I generally avoid threads about certain subjects for different reasons. OSAS, for example. I generally leave those threads alone because it's an area of personal struggle for me and when it's dealt with dogmatically as it tends to be here I find it's not very helpful to observe debates dealt with in that manner.
Last edited by a moderator:
preacher4truth
Active Member
You refuse to do research while refusing to call them a cult all the while defending them (with no basis of true understanding) when it is obvious you know little to nothing about that dissident group. So why continue to hold to an admitted baseless conclusion? It's ridiculous really.
evenifigoalone
Well-Known Member
Many people also call themselves Christians simply because they believe in God, but they do little else and may have a poor at best understanding of the gospel as well. You can call yourself something without really knowing much about it or just because you were raised that way and don't consider yourself as having departed from it. Seeing as catholicism is the largest denomination (albeit one I don't agree with), statistically you would see a lot of that I imagine.
But anyway that's not the topic of this thread, so I'm not going to argue.