SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISM

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A

ABMF

Guest
#1
"The Seventh day Adventist constitutes an unscriptural religious movement that developed as an outgrowth of the renewed interest which had arisen in the 19[SUP]th[/SUP] century concerning the immanency of the Second Advent of Christ. The Adventist derived their name from the erroneous Second Advent prophecies of William Miller and from their emphasis upon observance of the Jewish Sabbath Saturday as a memorial of God’s creation. Miller, a farmer, was born in Pittsfield, Massachusetts in 1782. He had predicted (on the basis of erroneous interpretations of certain passages in Daniel) that Christ would return by March 21, 1843 in spite of Jesus’ declaration that no man could know the time of His return (Matt 24:36). On the basis of his predictions many Millerites (as his followers were called) gave up their occupations, farmers left their crops in the field, while others fled the cities to await the judgment day. When the great day passed uneventfully, many were disillusioned. However, at Exeter New Hampshire during a camp meeting it was again predicted by another Adventist that Christ would return on October 22, 1844. After the second disappointment, Miller admitted that he himself had been in error, nevertheless some of his followers remained undaunted in spite of the prophesies. A solution was soon found to their disappointment. Hiram Adson, an Adventist, claim to have received a vision of Christ entering the Heavenly sanctuary (cf. Heb.8-9). This was interpreted as signifying that the Millerite prophesies had not been wrong, but simply misunderstood. Christ did not return to earth in 1844 but had entered into the Heavenly sanctuary to complete His atoning work in preparation for the Second Advent on earth. Thus the Adventists solved their dilemma by stating that Miller had been right as to the time but wrong as to the place of Christ’s appearance. At this juncture, Mrs. Ellen G White who claimed to have received special visions and revelations from God became the new leader of the Millerites. Her counsels lead to the organization of the Seventh Day Adventist church in 1863 at Battle Creek Michigan. She wrote some 45 books, one becoming the standard work for all Adventists, entitled, “The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan”. Adventists carry on their work in a 185 countries and territories, have built numerous schools and colleges, and reported membership in excess of 2 million. The Seventh Day Adventist movement, which was built upon the false properties of William Miller and others (Miller later admitted his prophesies were erroneous), and upon the unscriptural teachings and alleged revelations of Ellen G White, is clearly unbiblical in many of its teachings and beliefs. Attempts have been made by later Adventists to gloss over some of the grocer unscriptural statements made by earlier Adventist, but the fact remains that the basic positions and beliefs have not changed in Adventisism. Several of the most obvious errors of the Seventh Day Adventists are:
1. The atonement of Christ is said to be unfinished.
Adventists claim that the atonement of Christ was not finished at Calvary for two reasons. First, although believers received “pardon” by Jesus’ blood, yet their sins remained upon the so-called “Books of Record”. In 1844 Christ is said to have entered into the heavenly sanctuary to complete His atoning work through the process of the removal of our sins from the heavenly sanctuary. This means, according to Ellen G White, that the sins of believers had been transferred to the heavenly sanctuary which is now being cleansed by Christ. He is at present investigating the Books of Record to determine who true believers are whose sins are to be blotted out.
In contradiction to this false doctrine which alleges that Christ’s atoning ministry is not finished, the scriptures clearly teach that His atoning work was completed once for all on the Cross when he cried,” It is finished” (John19:30). In refutation see: Heb10:11-18; 1Peter2:24; Col1:20; 1John1:7. Adventists claim that Christ’s atoning work is unfinished in the second place because Satan is sent to be the final sin bearer. Adventists teach that justice demands that while Christ suffered for our guilt, Satan must also be punished as the instigator for our sin. The scapegoat in the Old Testament had the sins of Israel confessed over it by the High priest, and was then sent away into the wilderness bearing away the sins of the people. Another goat had previously been slain as a sin-offering. Adventists teach that these two goats typify Christ and Satan. The first animal typified Christ who died for the sins of the people. These sins are ultimately to be placed upon Satan (the scapegoat) who will bear them away and He will then be destroyed. This erroneous doctrine of the Adventists ignores the fact that unlike Satan (1) both animals in the Old Testament were pure and spotless, and (2) they both typified Christ’s work of atonement. His sacrificial death was typified by the sacrificed goat, in His bearing away of our sins was signified by the second goat over whom Israel’s sins were confessed before it was sent into the wilderness bearing them away. It required two animals under OldTtestament ritual, not because they were to represent two different individuals, but because it would be impossible to portray what Christ was to accomplish with just one animal (1. His sacrificial death. 2. His bearing away of sin). Moreover, to say that Satan represents the sinbearer is blasphemy, for the scriptures declare that Jesus “ His own self bare our sins in His own body on a tree: (1 Pet.2:24). John the baptist pointed to Jesus, not to Satan, when he exclaimed, “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John1:29).
2. Adventist are legalistic in their attitude toward Old Testament Law and observance of the Jewish Sabbath.
Adventists teachings imply that Christians are still “under the Law,” in the sense that the so-called Moral LAW and some aspects of the Jewish ceremonial restrictions are still legally binding, in spite of the clear teachings of the Scriptures to the contrary (see: Gal. 2-3; Rom. 6: 15; 2 Cor. 3:6-11). Vegetarianism is encouraged by Adventists, and so-called unclean foods (by O.T. standards), including meats, especially pork, are to be avoided, in spite of the clear teaching of Mark 7:14-19 and 1 Timothy 4:1-5. If the precepts of the Law are to be kept one wonders why Adventists fail to obey such commandments as the one concerning circumcision, for example; or, for that matter, why they insist upon observing the Sabbath commandment, but ignore the Sabbath restrictions which were inseparable from the Fourth Commandment (e.g., no burden was to be carried, Jer 17:21; no fire could be kindled, Exod. 35:3; or cooking done, Exod. 16:23). Violations were punishable by death!
Seventh Day Adventists thus insist that the seventh day or Sabbath (Saturday) is to be observed, and that the churches are merely following the later tradition of the Roman Catholics in observing the first day of the week (Sunday). They believe that Sunday observers will be those who take “the mark of the beast.” Some Jewish Christians in the earl days continued to respect the Sabbath, as well as the first day of the week, but the Gentile Church never did. Moreover, the New Testament itself gives evidence that during the first century the first day of the week (Sunday) replaced the Jewish Sabbath among Christian Jews in commemoration of Christ’s resurrection, and was designated as “the Lord’s Day” or “the first day of the week.: See Acts 20:7; Revelations 1:10; 1 Corinthians 16:2, for example. As the Sabbath meant something distinctive to Israel, so also the first day of the week has always had special significance to Christians. Furthermore, all the early Church Fathers spoke of the commemoration of the Lord’s Day (Sunday) by the churches long before the Roman Catholics sanctioned Sunday observance in the 4[SUP]th[/SUP] century A.D. Rome merely sanctioned for its members what the churches had been already observing for centuries. Moreover, the Sabbath Commandment, which was a covenant made only to Israel (as a sign between God and Israel, Exod. 31:12-17), was abolished with the rest of the Law at Calvary. This Fact is clearly taught in such passages as Colossians 2;13-17; Romans 2-8; Acts 15, and Galatians 2-3. The so-called “moral law” which contains the Fourth or Sabbath Commandment was an inseparable part of the one Law given to Israel which was annulled by the Cross. Adventists contend that the “moral law” is still binding on Christians, although most civil and ceremonial laws peculiar to Israel are done away with. However, such teaching reveals a lack of understanding of the nature of Old Testament Law. The Law was not divided into three laws as the Adventists Contend (moral, civil, ceremonial); there was but one Law with 3 aspects: Moral, civil, and ceremonial. The Scriptures show that if we are bound to keep one part of the Law, then we must keep it all, “for it is written, Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them” (Gal. 3:10). The same verse states in no unmistakable terms, “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse” (cf. vs. 21). Since the Adventists cannot keep the Law (anymore than could Israel before them, then to place oneself under Law in any sense is to be under its condemnation and curse (Gal. 2-3). This does not imply, however that the moral “principles” of the Law are invalid, but that the Christian is in no sense “under the law, but under grace.” (Rom. 6:14) Its is still a sin to steal, lie, kill, or to commit adultery; the abolition of the dispensation of the Law did not abolish God’s requirement of righteous conduct on the part of His Children (Rom. 3:28, 31; 6:1-2). Some Adventists contend, of course that salvation is by faith and not by the works of the Law; but this does not alter the fact that they insist that the “moral law” is legally binding upon the Christians, that Christians are obligated to keep the Jewish Sabbath commandment, and that they should observe certain Old Testament dietary restrictions contained in the ceremonial laws. The net result is that Adventists subject themselves to the bondage of the Law although it was abolished at Calvary.

3. Adventists teach the error of “soul sleep”
The soul is said to be unconscious or “asleep” between death and the resurrection. Adventists take literally Biblical references to the dead being “asleep” and such passages as Acts 7:59-60 (when Stephen died it is said that “he fell asleep”) and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. The Scriptures, however, declare that the soul or person is conscious after the death of the body and that to speak of the dead as “asleep” is simply a figure of speech (indicative of the appearance of the body upon death). See in refutation: Matthew 17:1-3, Luke 16:19-31; 23:40-43; Phillippians 1:21-23; 2 Corinthians 5:1-9; Psalm 73:24; Revelation 6:9-11; Ecclesiastes 12:7. These passages clearly prove that the dead saints (and sinners) are conscious and active, and that the saved are present with the Lord immediately. Moreover, the saints who “sleep in Jesus” will come back with Him at the Second Advent, indicating that they had been consciously present with Him all along, not asleep in some grave (1 Thess.3:13;4:14).

4.Eternal punishment is denied.
Adventists erroneously contend that according to such passages as Malachi 4:3, Psalm 52:1-5, and Job 21:30 the wicked, together with Satan, will be ultimately annihilated. See in refutation: Isaiah 66:24; Matthew 25:46; Mark 9:43-48; Luke 16:19-31; John 3:36; Revelation 14:9-11; 20:10. These texts clearly refute the erroneous Adventist’s teaching that “eternal punishment” is not to be taken to mean “an endless process of punishment”, but that it implies a final, once-for-all punishment-by annihilation of the wicked forever.
It is interesting that both Charles T. Russel, founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Herbert W. Armstrong, founder of the Worldwide Church of God, both of whom deny the eternal punishment of the wicked, came under the influence of Seventh Day Adventist’s teachings before their own cults." : Quoted from a non-copyrighted book: ​ ​Every Wind of Doctrine Pages 127-133 By Th. D. Hobart E Freeman
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#2
You don't have to convince me.....a study of their doctrinal statement proves the fallacy of their theology.
 
C

chips1024

Guest
#3
I don’t know all of the Adventist beliefs, but would like to raise some points regarding some of your statements so that I might have a clearer understanding. I believe that Christ has sheep in all folds, and so I don’t like the thought of condemning a whole group of believers. All the truth might not be there, but let’s not throw the baby out (and all those people) with the bathwater…

1. I am not sure about the “Books of record”, but Revelation 20:12 does speak of “books” being opened that are separate from the book of life. From my understanding, there is a heavenly sanctuary and Christ is our High Priest for us for that sanctuary (Heb 8:1-2). Looking at the duties of the High Priest back in the OT, they were to offer the sacrifices and then sprinkle the blood on the ark. They had to lay their hands on the animal and then confess the sins. The result would be that the sins would be transferred over to the animal, and then the animal would be killed. This blood had to then be sprinkled on the mercy seat (Lev 16) and remained there till the Day of Atonement where the blood was cleaned out of the Most Holy Place.
Heb 10:1 – “For the law having a shadow of the good things to come…” tells me that all that was done in the OT was a representative of the good things to come – which would be Christ. We know that Christ is the substitute – as sacrifices were pointing to Him being the ultimate sacrifice – and so the sins were passed from us to Christ (He who knew no sin became sin…) as what happened to the sacrifice. Now if Christ is our High Priest, does it not make sense that He too would enter into the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary in heaven to do the exact same thing that the earthly priest did of sprinkling the blood? This is supported in Hebrews 9:12 – “Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all…” (and also Heb 9:24 “…For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands…”) So I can agree with the Adventist teaching that Christs work did not end at the cross (NOTE: within His Priestly role).
If then He is our High Priest, then should He not also be participating in the Day of Atonement? I am not sure when this would happen or if it happened once he returned to The Father (John 20:17) or how it would happen? So that is probably where I get lost a bit, but the point about the Priestly duties does make sense to me…
Regarding the goats and such, Satan will be punished for his part in sin. Hellfire is prepared for “the devil and his angels” (Mat 25:41). But I cannot find the connection between Christ and the second goat… The first goat was killed and the blood was used for atonement, so I see the connection to Christ there. But the second goat was not killed and its blood played no part in salvation, so how can that be Christ? The blood is what “makes atonement for the soul” (Lev 17:11), and if no blood has been shed, how can that symbolize Christ – because it is His blood that “bears our sins” and “taketh away our sin”, not a living Christ in the wilderness who shed no blood. So, you lost me there…
I also can’t quite see the connection between satan and the second goat… the only possibility I found while reading around a bit is that the scapegoat is taken “by the hand of a man who is in readiness. The goat shall bear all their iniquities upon him to a solitary land; and he shall let the goat go in the wilderness.” (Lev 16:20-22) and the reference regarding satan being bound and taken by an angel to an abyss in Revelation 20 (could be stretched to the wilderness/land of solidarity – absence of people – I guess…). But I have found nothing further to support both options…
Also, you have an incorrect point regarding the spotless part. Ezek 28 tells us a bit of satan I think and says in verse 15 “You were perfect in all you ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you.” – so satan was perfect when He was created, at least according to this verse he was…

2. The legalistic part… I think all of us are legalistic to some degree honestly. We all hold onto fundamental beliefs that we have, some to the law and others to faith, while others are works and yet others are faith by works. Some say full immersion baptism is the way, others require you to speak in tongues as a sign of the Holy Spirit, so calling them legalistic is quite fruitless really…
But to address some things I see in your passage:
If vegetarianism was one of the marks of an Adventist, then a whole lot of people would be called Adventist because a whole lot of people are vegetarian. Not for religious reasons, but purely for health reasons. It has been proven many times that a correct mostly vegetarian diet is healthier than a carnivorous one. If Adventists promote and ‘encourage’ (as you say) a healthy lifestyle, why would you condemn them? I would applaud a religion that encourages a healthy life. And just as you would be quick to quote the passage of not judging what others eat, I would like to use the same passage to not judge what they don’t eat (ie. OT unclean foods).
Next you make some very dangerous statements regarding the New Testament stating evidence that the first day replaced the 7[SUP]th[/SUP]… There is no evidence or any person once stating that the Sabbath day was replaced and called the “Lords Day”. Using the scripture you used:
Acts 20:7 – speaks of them gathering to eat and Paul spoke to them. No mention of Sabbath at all
Rev 1:10 – There is mention of the Lords Day, but no mention that it replaced the Sabbath
1 Cor 16:2 –He is speaking about putting aside money for the saints that he will collect when he comes. Again, no mention of Sabbath day being changed.
Throughout the NT I have not found one mention of the Sabbath day being changed/replaced by any other day. Please do not assume because people met on the first day and John saw things on the Lords day and that people saved up money on the first day that this counts as the Sabbath being changed.
We do know from the OT that we shall be celebrating Sabbath in the new heavens and new earth (Isaiah 16:22-23).
We know that Jesus visited the synagogue on the Sabbath “as was his custom” (Luke 4:16).
We do know that Paul went into the synagogue on 3 Sabbath days “as was his custom” (Acts 17:2).
We know that Paul reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath (Acts 18:1-4)
This is what we know and have evidence of. Nowhere does it say that the Sabbath day was changed, the verses only speak of things done on the Sabbath day and things done on the first day of the week and on the Lords day. Nothing to suggest a change or that they are referring to the same day my friend.
The Sabbath day was created by God. Do not add conclusions to The Word of God where there is none. And if I have missed the verse saying that the Sabbath was replaced/changed/removed/etc, please do enlighten me. But the verses you gave show a lot of assumption there bud…

Then you really confuse me and I get seriously lost…
You begin by saying that the law is all one (not split as the Adventists do), and I can follow you there. Who is to say what was nailed and what was not (though I can certainly say that the sacrificial system was done away with)? So you say that we are under grace and no longer under the law (Romans affirms this). Now if the whole law has been done away with, why then do you continue later on to say “This does not imply, however that the moral “principles” of the Law are invalid”. Does this mean that we should be keeping the law or not?
You go on to say:” Its is still a sin to steal, lie, kill, or to commit adultery; the abolition of the dispensation of the Law did not abolish God’s requirement of righteous conduct on the part of His Children (Rom. 3:28, 31; 6:1-2)”
That is where you lost me!! First you say that we do not need to keep the law… now you say that it is still a sin to lie, steal, etc!! all of which come from the law!! What about having idols? What about not taking the name in vain? Is that not part of the “requirement of righteous conduct”? If we have an obligation to not lie/steal/kill, why do we not have the same obligation to the rest of the laws principles? The question I have is, is it a sin to worship idols? Is it a sin to steal? Is it a sin to commit adultery? And if so, why then is it not a sin to not keep the Sabbath holy? (note: I am not saying that we should all go to church on that day, I am saying “keep it holy” as per the commandment). You totally lost me during this section bud... Either the law is nailed to the cross, or all of it still remains… (James 2 - if we stumble at one, we have broken all)

3. The soul sleep…
This can be a back and forth argument really, as there are verses for and against.
Acts 7:59-60: The word “asleep” used is actually the word asleep as translated in other parts of the Bible, so yes, sleep =died (use something like Strong’s concordance to check it out if you want)
This same word is also used by Christ himself when speaking of Lazarus
John 11:11 “These things He said, and after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up.”” And then 4 verses down Christ himself says plainly “Then Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead.” Which can be taken that Jesus equates death to a sleep.
Matthew 27:52 also speaks of those “bodies of the saints which slept arose” – again, same word sleep is used as in Acts.
1 Cor 15:18 refers to those which are “fallen asleep in Christ”, and then verse 20 speaks of Christ Himself being “the first fruits of those that slept”.
1 Thess 4:13-15 speaks repeatedly regarding those which “are asleep” and the promise of their resurrection.
Acts 13:36 speaks of David “fell on sleep and was laid unto his fathers…” again same word used.
Another verse that can be used is Eccl 9:5 which states quite plainly the mind-set of the ‘dead’ “For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing…”

I will not go into all the verses to support the opposite as you have them already. The point is that there is evidence to support both sides. Just because you are on one side, do not judge them that are on the other, as some of those verses you gave as support can be explained to some degree and create complications of their own.

4. I am not following you here and do not understand what you are saying (too many big words). Do Adventists say that satan and his followers will be destroyed forever (as in no longer exist)? Or are they saying that satan and his followers will be alive forever but will burn forever?
John 3:16 states that God loved the world so much that He gave His Son. So that anyone who believes in Him shall not perish, but be saved and have eternal life. If satan and his followers are burning forever, then does that not mean that they have eternal life too? Remember, only those that believe and are saved gain eternal life, not the devil nor his followers. Just a question as I am not sure what side they are on…

Sorry for the long post… Stay Blessed bud…
 
U

UriahSmith1844

Guest
#4
Honestly, I am not even going to bother with this. Because first you have to fight through all the misconceptions, and then once you do, and I start proving we are actually right about something, then they begin to use "imaginative" ways to try to discredit us anyway, and then you have to go trying to clear up a second whole set of misunderstandings, distortions of what we believe and many times outright lies.

So the way that I feel about it is that people want to believe the lies, go right on ahead, it isn't my problem or my fault. The problem is that instead of simply asking Seventh Day Adventists what they believe and why they believe it, many 'Christians' instead just go online and swallow whatever they are told about us. Most them do it because they simply do not WANT to have to face the truth about things and so its easier to try to discredit us instead. And they do not care how many falsehoods they have to tell or how underhanded they have to be to accomplish their purposes. Its unreal, actually. Yet, to be expected. The Devil HATES our Church.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The problem, as I have stated before, is that the Catholic Church hates us, they know who the TRUE Protestants are.


...and the Protestants hate us because we make it evident that they are NOT true Protestants. So we get the hatred from both ends.


But you see, the Seventh Day Adventist Church is simply upholding the ORIGINAL Protestant Doctrines. The Other Protestants have gotten so far from the original Doctrines however, that they do not even recognize the Bible Truth when they hear it. The Doctrines we hold to about the State of the Dead, Hellfire, the 7th Day Sabbath etc are all the ORIGINAL doctrines of the Protestant Church. Today's Protestants have unwittingly adopted their Doctrines from the Roman Catholic Church and are unaware of the fact.

Good luck with this Monkey Trial/Kangaroo Court that is sure to take place here.


Pope Pius XI
Rome, Italy

Dear Sir,
Is the accusation true, that Protestants accuse you of? They say you changed the Seventh Day Sabbath to the, so-called, Christian Sunday: identical with the First-Day of the Week. If so when did you make the change, and by what authority.
Yours very truly,
(Signed)
J.L. Day

REPLY:
Extension Magazine
Published by
The Catholic Church Extension Society
of the United States of America
180 North Wabash Avenue
Chicago

Dear Sir:
Regarding the change from the observance of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday, I wish to draw your attention to the facts:

(1) The Protestants, who accept the Bible as the only rule of faith and religion, should by all means go back to the observance of the Sabbath. The fact that they do not, but on the contrary observe the Sunday, stultifies them in the eyes of every thinking man.

(2) We Catholics do not accept the Bible as the only authority of the Church, as a rule to guide us. We say, this Church instituted by Christ, to teach and guide man through life, has the right to change the Ceremonial laws of the Old Testament and hence, we accept the change of the Sabbath to the Sunday. We frankly say, "Yes the Church made this change, made this law, as she made many other laws, for instance, the Friday Abstinence, the unmarried priesthood, the laws concerning mixed marriages, the regulation of Catholic marriages, and a thousand other laws."

(3) We also say that of all Protestants, the Seventh-day Adventists are the only group that reason correctly and are consistent with their teachings. It is always somewhat laughable to see the Protestant Churches, in pulpit and legislature, demand the observance of Sunday, of which there is nothing in the Bible.

With best wishes,
Peter R. Tramer, Editor


“The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her Founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant, claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh Day Adventist is the only consistent Protestant. The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942.

"Perhaps the boldest thing... the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The day of the Lord" was chosen, not from any direction noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power.... People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become Seventh-day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy." (Saint Catherine Church Sentinel, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995.)
_____________


As I said before, at least the Pope knows who their REAL enemy is. Its the Seventh Day Adventist Church.
 
D

danschance

Guest
#5
The problem, as I have stated before, is that the Catholic Church hates us, they know who the TRUE Protestants are.

...and the Protestants hate us because we make it evident that they are NOT true Protestants. So we get the hatred from both ends.
Sorry but protestants do not hate any Christian cult. We simply hope they find the truth.


UriahSmith1844;1426274 “The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine said:
Propaganda that is laughably false.
 
D

danschance

Guest
#6
The main reason why I reject the SDA cult is not just their theology but it is founded by a woman who made many false predictions about the return of Christ and other topics, which has not happened 100 years after she claimed it would.

Anyone who follows a false prophet is not of God.
 
Jul 27, 2011
1,622
89
0
#7
The SDA as most groups may not have it all right, but i think they are alright. would much rather have a group telling me to Honor the Almighty in His day of rest, than tell me that the Almighty threw His day aside.
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,363
185
63
#8
The main reason why I reject the SDA cult is not just their theology but it is founded by a woman who made many false predictions about the return of Christ and other topics, which has not happened 100 years after she claimed it would.

Anyone who follows a false prophet is not of God.
The main reason I am not an SDA is some of their doctrines are incorrect. "The Great Controversy" most notably. (By the way, most protestants have bought into it.)
 

john832

Senior Member
May 31, 2013
11,363
185
63
#9
The SDA as most groups may not have it all right, but i think they are alright. would much rather have a group telling me to Honor the Almighty in His day of rest, than tell me that the Almighty threw His day aside.
Isn't it odd that there are over 500 different Sabbath keeping organizations or churches, if you will, yet anyone who keeps the Sabbath is automatically classified as an SDA?
 
U

UriahSmith1844

Guest
#10
Isn't it odd that there are over 500 different Sabbath keeping organizations or churches, if you will, yet anyone who keeps the Sabbath is automatically classified as an SDA?
No, not any more odd then the fact that they try to lump the SDAs in with the Jehovah's Witnesses to try to discredit our Church, even though we have nothing to do with the Jehovah's Witnesses. The Devil is very adept at getting people who hate the Sabbath to use whatever means necessary to bring us into disrepute. For instance, Satan brought about many different Religious and non-Religious Movements in the year 1844, like Charles Darwin to try to teach Evolution which is the exact opposite of the Creation Sabbath. You see, the year 1844 is the exact end of the 2300 day prophecy of the book of Daniel. That was when the Advent Movement was to come into being, which it did. So Satan, being that he was and is trying to discredit that Movement, wanted to bring about many false movements to confuse people. Where there is a genuine, he has a counterfeit. Spiritualism and the rapping of the Fox Sisters came about then also. The Jehovah's Witnesses took a couple of our SDA beliefs and twisted them around, so that people would confuse us with them. Then the Jehovah's Witnesses did not accept the 7th Day Sabbath and instead they made a counterfeit, telling people that having the proper name of God which they say is "Jehovah" is what matters. Anyway, once the Devil succeeded in confusing people with these other movements, to try to discredit the Seventh Day Adventist Church, he then commenced to try lump all Seventh Day Sabbath keeping Churches with the SDA Church. And most people are so completely ignorant about all of this that they just believe whatever they are told about it all.
 
U

UriahSmith1844

Guest
#11
Isn't it odd that there are over 500 different Sabbath keeping organizations or churches, if you will, yet anyone who keeps the Sabbath is automatically classified as an SDA?
I suggest you watch this video, and it may help you to understand what I meant in my previous post to you, about the year 1844 and how the Devil operated during that time to bring in false movements to confuse people:

232 - 1844 &Amp; The Final Onslaught - Amazing Discoveries TV
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
#12
No, not any more odd then the fact that they try to lump the SDAs in with the Jehovah's Witnesses to try to discredit our Church, even though we have nothing to do with the Jehovah's Witnesses. The Devil is very adept at getting people who hate the Sabbath to use whatever means necessary to bring us into disrepute. For instance, Satan brought about many different Religious and non-Religious Movements in the year 1844, like Charles Darwin to try to teach Evolution which is the exact opposite of the Creation Sabbath. You see, the year 1844 is the exact end of the 2300 day prophecy of the book of Daniel. That was when the Advent Movement was to come into being, which it did. So Satan, being that he was and is trying to discredit that Movement, wanted to bring about many false movements to confuse people. Where there is a genuine, he has a counterfeit. Spiritualism and the rapping of the Fox Sisters came about then also. The Jehovah's Witnesses took a couple of our SDA beliefs and twisted them around, so that people would confuse us with them. Then the Jehovah's Witnesses did not accept the 7th Day Sabbath and instead they made a counterfeit, telling people that having the proper name of God which they say is "Jehovah" is what matters. Anyway, once the Devil succeeded in confusing people with these other movements, to try to discredit the Seventh Day Adventist Church, he then commenced to try lump all Seventh Day Sabbath keeping Churches with the SDA Church. And most people are so completely ignorant about all of this that they just believe whatever they are told about it all.
Daniel 8:14 KJV
(14) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

2300days2.jpg
 
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#13
The main reason why I reject the SDA cult is not just their theology but it is founded by a woman who made many false predictions about the return of Christ and other topics, which has not happened 100 years after she claimed it would.

Anyone who follows a false prophet is not of God.
Bingo and give that man a cigar!
 
A

ABMF

Guest
#14
I don’t know all of the Adventist beliefs, but would like to raise some points regarding some of your statements so that I might have a clearer understanding. I believe that Christ has sheep in all folds, and so I don’t like the thought of condemning a whole group of believers. All the truth might not be there, but let’s not throw the baby out (and all those people) with the bathwater…
​I can agree with that statement. Some are deceived and God will save some out of the Adventist system.
1. I am not sure about the “Books of record”, but Revelation 20:12 does speak of “books” being opened that are separate from the book of life. From my understanding, there is a heavenly sanctuary and Christ is our High Priest for us for that sanctuary (Heb 8:1-2). Looking at the duties of the High Priest back in the OT, they were to offer the sacrifices and then sprinkle the blood on the ark. They had to lay their hands on the animal and then confess the sins. The result would be that the sins would be transferred over to the animal, and then the animal would be killed. This blood had to then be sprinkled on the mercy seat (Lev 16) and remained there till the Day of Atonement where the blood was cleaned out of the Most Holy Place.
Heb 10:1 – “For the law having a shadow of the good things to come…” tells me that all that was done in the OT was a representative of the good things to come – which would be Christ. We know that Christ is the substitute – as sacrifices were pointing to Him being the ultimate sacrifice – and so the sins were passed from us to Christ (He who knew no sin became sin…) as what happened to the sacrifice. Now if Christ is our High Priest, does it not make sense that He too would enter into the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary in heaven to do the exact same thing that the earthly priest did of sprinkling the blood? This is supported in Hebrews 9:12 – “Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all…” (and also Heb 9:24 “…For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands…”) So I can agree with the Adventist teaching that Christs work did not end at the cross (NOTE: within His Priestly role).
If then He is our High Priest, then should He not also be participating in the Day of Atonement? I am not sure when this would happen or if it happened once he returned to The Father (John 20:17) or how it would happen? So that is probably where I get lost a bit, but the point about the Priestly duties does make sense to me…
Regarding the goats and such, Satan will be punished for his part in sin. Hellfire is prepared for “the devil and his angels” (Mat 25:41). But I cannot find the connection between Christ and the second goat… The first goat was killed and the blood was used for atonement, so I see the connection to Christ there. But the second goat was not killed and its blood played no part in salvation, so how can that be Christ? The blood is what “makes atonement for the soul” (Lev 17:11), and if no blood has been shed, how can that symbolize Christ – because it is His blood that “bears our sins” and “taketh away our sin”, not a living Christ in the wilderness who shed no blood. So, you lost me there…
I also can’t quite see the connection between satan and the second goat… the only possibility I found while reading around a bit is that the scapegoat is taken “by the hand of a man who is in readiness. The goat shall bear all their iniquities upon him to a solitary land; and he shall let the goat go in the wilderness.” (Lev 16:20-22) and the reference regarding satan being bound and taken by an angel to an abyss in Revelation 20 (could be stretched to the wilderness/land of solidarity – absence of people – I guess…). But I have found nothing further to support both options…
Also, you have an incorrect point regarding the spotless part. Ezek 28 tells us a bit of satan I think and says in verse 15 “You were perfect in all you ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in you.” – so satan was perfect when He was created, at least according to this verse he was…
Lets stick with the word of its finsihed that Jesus Christ said before He died. I really seriously doubt that the vision that Stephen saw of where Jesus Christ is, seated at the right hand of God is a lie verses some one thousands of years later saying that Christ has enter the holiest of holies to cleans the temple. They lied. Why?
King James Bible
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;." See where Jesus Christ is now? It was already done LONG before a liar invisioned lies to help the liars who had already said that they had lied and repented of their lies. They claim that Christ entered the Holy of Holies on the DATE of their FALSE prediction saying He went to the Holy of Holies insted of coming to earth as they predicted He would. Do you see the lie now? The cleansing work is finished and God already knows who is in and who is out. He don't have review or read books. Why? Because of
ACTS 15:18?


2. The legalistic part… I think all of us are legalistic to some degree honestly. We all hold onto fundamental beliefs that we have, some to the law and others to faith, while others are works and yet others are faith by works. Some say full immersion baptism is the way, others require you to speak in tongues as a sign of the Holy Spirit, so calling them legalistic is quite fruitless(cut) Really? Even the new testament Jews Knew that the Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit Just like they because they spoke with tongues. Acts 10 and see Acts 19.
But to address some things I see in your passage:
If vegetarianism was one of the marks of an Adventist, then a whole lot of people would be called Adventist because a whole lot of people are vegetarian. Not for religious reasons, but purely for health reasons. It has been proven many times that a correct mostly vegetarian diet is healthier than a carnivorous one. If Adventists promote and ‘encourage’ (as you say) a healthy lifestyle, why would you condemn them? I would applaud a religion that encourages a healthy life. And just as you would be quick to quote the passage of not judging what others eat, I would like to use the same passage to not judge what they don’t eat (ie. OT unclean foods(cut)Paul called them weak in faith " Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. 2 For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables" Romans 14
Next you make some very dangerous statements regarding the New Testament stating evidence that the first day replaced the 7[SUP]th[/SUP]… There is no evidence or any person once stating that the Sabbath day was replaced and called the “Lords Day”. Using the scripture you used:
Acts 20:7 – speaks of them gathering to eat and Paul spoke to them. No mention of Sabbath at all
Rev 1:10 – There is mention of the Lords Day, but no mention that it replaced the Sabbath
1 Cor 16:2 –He is speaking about putting aside money for the saints that he will collect when he comes. Again, no mention of Sabbath day being changed.
Throughout the NT I have not found one mention of the Sabbath day being changed/replaced by any other day. Please do not assume because people met on the first day and John saw things on the Lords day and that people saved up money on the first day that this counts as the Sabbath being changed.
We do know from the OT that we shall be celebrating Sabbath in the new heavens and new earth (Isaiah 16:22-23).
We know that Jesus visited the synagogue on the Sabbath “as was his custom” (Luke 4:16).
We do know that Paul went into the synagogue on 3 Sabbath days “as was his custom” (Acts 17:2).
We know that Paul reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath (Acts 18:1-4)
This is what we know and have evidence of. Nowhere does it say that the Sabbath day was changed, the verses only speak of things done on the Sabbath day and things done on the first day of the week and on the Lords day. Nothing to suggest a change or that they are referring to the same day my friend.
The Sabbath day was created by God. Do not add conclusions to The Word of God where there is none. And if I have missed the verse saying that the Sabbath was replaced/changed/removed/etc, please do enlighten me. But the verses you gave show a lot of assumption there bud… Study early Church History for that is what it is spekaing of. Alos lets look at the things the Jews wanted to lay on the gentiles as laws, and what the eairly Church founders did set as rules on them concerning keeping of the law. "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell"

Then you really confuse me and I get seriously lost…
You begin by saying that the law is all one (not split as the Adventists do), and I can follow you there. Who is to say what was nailed and what was not (though I can certainly say that the sacrificial system was done away with)? So you say that we are under grace and no longer under the law (Romans affirms this). Now if the whole law has been done away with, why then do you continue later on to say “This does not imply, however that the moral “principles” of the Law are invalid”. Does this mean that we should be keeping the law or not?Do you understand Moral "principles"? A principle v. a law? And you can list the moral conduct principles of the law as a whole if you wish, it does include more then what was listed.
You go on to say:” Its is still a sin to steal, lie, kill, or to commit adultery; the abolition of the dispensation of the Law did not abolish God’s requirement of righteous conduct on the part of His Children (Rom. 3:28, 31; 6:1-2)”
That is where you lost me!! First you say that we do not need to keep the law… now you say that it is still a sin to lie, steal, etc!! all of which come from the law!! What about having idols? What about not taking the name in vain? Is that not part of the “requirement of righteous conduct”? If we have an obligation to not lie/steal/kill, why do we not have the same obligation to the rest of the laws principles? The question I have is, is it a sin to worship idols? Is it a sin to steal? Is it a sin to commit adultery? And if so, why then is it not a sin to not keep the Sabbath holy? (note: I am not saying that we should all go to church on that day, I am saying “keep it holy” as per the commandment). You totally lost me during this section bud... Either the law is nailed to the cross, or all of it still remains… (James 2 - if we stumble at one, we have broken all)

3. The soul sleep…
This can be a back and forth argument really, as there are verses for and against.
Acts 7:59-60: The word “asleep” used is actually the word asleep as translated in other parts of the Bible, so yes, sleep =died (use something like Strong’s concordance to check it out if you want)
This same word is also used by Christ himself when speaking of Lazarus
John 11:11 “These things He said, and after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up.”” And then 4 verses down Christ himself says plainly “Then Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead.” Which can be taken that Jesus equates death to a sleep.
Matthew 27:52 also speaks of those “bodies of the saints which slept arose” – again, same word sleep is used as in Acts.
1 Cor 15:18 refers to those which are “fallen asleep in Christ”, and then verse 20 speaks of Christ Himself being “the first fruits of those that slept”.
1 Thess 4:13-15 speaks repeatedly regarding those which “are asleep” and the promise of their resurrection.
Acts 13:36 speaks of David “fell on sleep and was laid unto his fathers…” again same word used.
Another verse that can be used is Eccl 9:5 which states quite plainly the mind-set of the ‘dead’ “For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing(cut) The dead know nothing regarding this earths knowledge as the people of this earth know it and have knowledge of it.

I will not go into all the verses to support the opposite as you have them already. The point is that there is evidence to support both sides. Just because you are on one side, do not judge them that are on the other, as some of those verses you gave as support can be explained to some degree and create complications of their own.

4. I am not following you here and do not understand what you are saying (too many big words). Do Adventists say that satan and his followers will be destroyed forever (as in no longer exist)?​YES Or are they saying that satan and his followers will be alive forever but will burn forever?
John 3:16 states that God loved the world so much that He gave His Son. So that anyone who believes in Him shall not perish, but be saved and have eternal life. If satan and his followers are burning forever, then does that not mean that they have eternal life too? Remember, only those that believe and are saved gain eternal life, not the devil nor his followers. Just a question as I am not sure what side they are on…

Sorry for the long post… Stay Blessed bud…
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

ABMF

Guest
#15
Daniel 8:14 KJV
(14) And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.
:) Thats not what it meant :) see Hebrews 1. Its proves you, are lying!
 
A

ABMF

Guest
#16
I suggest you watch this video, and it may help you to understand what I meant in my previous post to you, about the year 1844 and how the Devil operated during that time to bring in false movements to confuse people:
I suggest you repent just as William Miller is said to have. :) Maybe you should learn from your ex-cult leaders example.
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
#17
:) Thats not what it meant :) see Hebrews 1. Its proves you, are lying!
What has Hebrews 1 got to do with the 2300 day prophecy of Daniel 8:14
 
L

Laodicea

Guest
#19
You should read it and find out. :)
I know Hebrews 1 and you are clutching at straws trying to find something.

You must be reform theologist?
 
A

ABMF

Guest
#20
I know Hebrews 1 and you are clutching at straws trying to find something.

You must be reform theologist?
If you know it then you know what it has to do with Daniel. So why did you ask?