The truth about SDA membership "growth"

[targus]

The Seventh-day Adventist Church boasts 18 million members worldwide. But leaders recently revealed the denomination has lost one in three members over the last 50 years.

Additionally, for every 100 people the Adventist church gains, it loses 43 previous members, according to research presented at the denomination's first Summit on Nurture and Retention, reports Adventist News Network (ANN).

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gl...-why-1-in-3-members-leave-sda.html?paging=off

1 in 3 leave? What does that say?

 

[BobRyan]

it means 100% growth instead of 150% growth by that measure.

It means we shot passed the Southern Baptists from early 1980 where we had about 4.5 million and they had over 14 million - to today where we have more than 18.5 million and they are somewhere in the 16's. (Not sure what that exact number is)

This is not a complaint about the SBC - I like the fact that they are not going for evolutionism.

And the ones I have met personally don't appear to go for the "name calling solves every problem" type of solution that you might find other places.

 

[targus]

So why does the SDA experience such a high rate of desertion?

 

[BobRyan]

Is that how you characterize rapid growth? For a group that shot right passed the SBC?

the Article said

The main reason for the low rate of retention: personal problems and experiences, according to Adventist researcher Monte Sahlin. People do not drop out based on the church or its doctrines, but because of personal trouble like marital conflict or unemployment, he told ANN.

www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/december/seventh-day-adventists-assess-why-1-in-3-members-leave-sda.html?paging=off

It says this is over a 50 year period.

In that 50 years the church grew by almost 1800% - having less than 1 million members in 1954.



By comparison

According to data released this week by LifeWay Research, the arm of the denomination that tracks such trends, the number of SBC-affiliated congregations grew while reported membership of those churches declined by more than 100,000. This number is down 0.7 percent from last year with primary worship attendance declining 3.1 percent to 5.97 million Sunday worshippers. Baptisms decreased by 5.5 percent over the previous year with the lowest reported number on record since 1948.
“The Christian Post” reports that this year’s is the fifth dip in a row for the denomination, the “Associated Press” says the drop represents a six-year trend, and LifeWay Research claims it spans 50 years.

http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews...thern-baptists-must-do-to-slow-their-decline/

I appreciate the interest in making sure the SDA growth is even more efficient in the future - but in the broader context -- trends do exist.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[PreachTony]

it means 100% growth instead of 150% growth by that measure.

It means we shot passed the Southern Baptists from early 1980 where we had about 4.5 million and they had over 14 million - to today where we have more than 18.5 million and they are somewhere in the 16's. (Not sure what that exact number is)

Well, there's this to consider:

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

And this:

18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:
19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)

I know you don't think it so, Bob, but the fact is that so long as the SDAs maintain that Ellen White is just as divinely inspired as the Biblical prophets, and so long as they court legalism as a requirement of salvation, they cannot be considered as anything approaching the doctrinal beliefs lined out in the scriptures.

People flock to messages that are close to scriptural truth, but just far enough off base to lead them in damnation and Hell.

 

[BobRyan]

You may not like it - but it does not matter if you are talking about Ellen White or not - the Bible has a doctrine on prophets as we see in 1Thess 5 and 1Cor 14 etc that simply cannot be ignored.

James 2 says that the issue is "He who said" ... not "what human is being used to convey the message".

If it is determined that some message is actually from God (i.e. a true prophet) then "it matters" what you do with it.

Nobody say "Moses was smarter than Isaiah so his writings matter more".

Also in the case of Agabus, Anna, Philip's daughters, the prophets in 1Cor 14 - nobody is saying "If God speaks to you we don't need to listen - because you are not writing scripture". David did not do that with Nathan - even though Nathan was not writing scripture and David was.

The reason is that this is not a matter of "feelings" or "emotions" or word gimmicks - it is a matter of "HE who said" - regardless of whether Nathan writes a word of scripture - David is obligated once he is convinced that God has spoken to Nathan.

This is all pretty obvious - but if you don't stop and study the subject - it might come as a surprise.

Simply making emotional arguments does not amount to much.

in Christ,

Bob