-
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.
D
Oh I see. Yes I did make that statement. Perhaps i shud say this is the authors position, that he incorporated her words into the bible with no annotation so the reader has no clue what is scripture or the teachings of White. Then I also added that:
It is also sold in SDA book stores. So you may claim I am in error by saying her words are considered on par with scripture but it would seem that some do. I have looked at the clear word bible and if I was marooned on a desert isle and it washed up on the beach, I would have no idea what the difference is between White's teachings and the bible are.
This is what Amazon has said of this book:
So I agree that my words in red are not strictly true but still it remains that the clear word bible makes no difference between the teachings of White and the bible.
So the clear word bible does seem to put her words on par with the bible.
It is also sold in SDA book stores. So you may claim I am in error by saying her words are considered on par with scripture but it would seem that some do. I have looked at the clear word bible and if I was marooned on a desert isle and it washed up on the beach, I would have no idea what the difference is between White's teachings and the bible are.
This is what Amazon has said of this book:
So I agree that my words in red are not strictly true but still it remains that the clear word bible makes no difference between the teachings of White and the bible.
So the clear word bible does seem to put her words on par with the bible.
P
I am not here attempting to get anyone to join my church lol And if I were, I wouldn`t have to put down another congregation of God`s people to do it obviously. Funny how you people claim to know my tone in typed words. You put the tone you want to it so you can keep up with the slander. And yes slandering God`s people because they interpret things differently than you is sickening and self righteous. Number one, I am defending my brothers and sisters who this slander is directed at and number 2, being direct isn`t anger lol and even if it was, God says to be angry and sin not
If I saw a fellow adventist make a topic slandering penecostals, I wouldn`t jump on the bandwagon because I`m not biased. I don`t remember Jesus ever slandering people who loved God and I would imagine that it would make Him sick as well. If you don`t like adventists teachings, pray for them instead of tearing them down. You will know them by their fruit. Furthermore, your opinion of thinking I have fradulent intent is far from the truth and bearing false witness. God knows my intent and you people can argue with yourselves. I`m in a cult according to you and have been condemned to the flames by many. plus I have posted a study that we all know you won`t read so I have nothing more to say. Study up on judging righteously with the love of Christ. *dusts feet*
A
SDA is a cult that teaches a great deal of heresy. Don't forget to visit John Ankerberg's website as he has good info: https://www.jashow.org/wiki/index.php/Seventh-day_Adventism
Bringing the heretical teachings of a cult to the light and refuting them is not slander. It's not slander if it's true. It's not libel if it's true.
And danschance, you'll want to see some of those Ankerberg television clips on the SDA and how difficult it was for Dr. Walter Martin to drag information out of them. The SDA cult is deliberately obtuse from the top (e.g. general conference) down.
Bringing the heretical teachings of a cult to the light and refuting them is not slander. It's not slander if it's true. It's not libel if it's true.
And danschance, you'll want to see some of those Ankerberg television clips on the SDA and how difficult it was for Dr. Walter Martin to drag information out of them. The SDA cult is deliberately obtuse from the top (e.g. general conference) down.
This is not my conversation, but just wanting to make a point: Those who are condemned to hell eventually end up with the devil and his angels being tossed into the lake of fire, which is the second death. So in that context, would we really consider someone condemned to suffer a second death to actually be "alive"? Eternal torture after a second death does not sound at all like "life". Just saying.
IMHO.
IMHO.
U
As usual, people here talking about the Seventh Day Adventist Church when they really know nothing about it. You have NO IDEA what went on between that man Walter Martin and the Seventh Day Adventist Church during that time. NO IDEA. Therefore you should keep silent.
Proverbs 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
The biggest issue during that time was what we believe about the Nature of Christ. That was what "inspired" Walter Martin to accuse us of being a "Cult". Then afterwards he changed his mind, which is laughable. After trying to manipulate our Church Leaders to force them to state things in a certain way, or else as he threatened, he would label us a "Cult".
Romans 8
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Walter Martin had claimed that the Seventh Day Adventist Church was a "Cult" because we believe just as the Bible says, that Jesus came as a MAN with sinful human flesh, just as it says in Romans 8. This meant that because He, as a man, overcame sin BU FAITH... with sinful human flesh, then so can WE. Just as the Bible says. Well he didn't like that, they wish to remain IN SIN, yet claim they are Christians. THAT was why they labelled us as a "Cult". It was a complete and total LIE then, and it still is NOW.
Hebrews 2:16
For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Romans 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh
Now then, it is TRUE that our Church Leaders, because of the pressure they were under at the time, did waffle somewhat on their position and then they wrote the book Questions on Doctrine. They did it so that they would not appear to be a "Cult", as Walter Martin accused our Church of being. THEN Walter Martin pulled all of this on them.
The TRUTH is that Walter Martin was a very DEVIOUS conniving man.
And the TRUTH is that our Church Leaders, though they may have done wrong in not standing firm on the Truth, still-- they are NOT what constitutes the Seventh Day Adventist Church. The HISTORIC ADVENTISTS are the true genuine Seventh Day Adventists. We do NOT deviate from what is in the Scriptures. I believe that most of the Church LEADERS will leave the Church when the true persecution comes. Our Church prophet Ellen White already told us that according to the visions God gave her, that many of those who we thought were "brilliant stars" will go out into darkness and that very few of the people in our Church would stay with the Pillars of our Foundational Beliefs. While at the same time, Company upon Company of Christians from the other denominations will join our Church and that God would raise up new genuine Leaders in the end. Our Church is the End Time MOVEMENT... raised up by God. People will be coming and going as God tests and proves His people, so that only those who are pure in heart will remain. In the end, whatever our Church Leaders do, really makes no difference in the big picture of things. IN FACT, Because the Roman Catholic Church KNOWS that our Church is the true Remnant Church, as described in Bible Prophecy, they have launched an attack on our Church more than any other, thus all the lies, etc against our Church, and you are helping them.
[video=youtube;jdWUrWcpmAk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdWUrWcpmAk[/video]
At any rate, you have not got a CLUE what you are talking about. So, whatever you say in reply I am just going to ignore because its of no use talking with someone who is mouthing off about things they know nothing about. I haven't got the time for it, nor do I care to bother with such a person who is just out to discredit something that he knows nothing about.
Proverbs 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.
The biggest issue during that time was what we believe about the Nature of Christ. That was what "inspired" Walter Martin to accuse us of being a "Cult". Then afterwards he changed his mind, which is laughable. After trying to manipulate our Church Leaders to force them to state things in a certain way, or else as he threatened, he would label us a "Cult".
Romans 8
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Walter Martin had claimed that the Seventh Day Adventist Church was a "Cult" because we believe just as the Bible says, that Jesus came as a MAN with sinful human flesh, just as it says in Romans 8. This meant that because He, as a man, overcame sin BU FAITH... with sinful human flesh, then so can WE. Just as the Bible says. Well he didn't like that, they wish to remain IN SIN, yet claim they are Christians. THAT was why they labelled us as a "Cult". It was a complete and total LIE then, and it still is NOW.
Hebrews 2:16
For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Romans 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh
Now then, it is TRUE that our Church Leaders, because of the pressure they were under at the time, did waffle somewhat on their position and then they wrote the book Questions on Doctrine. They did it so that they would not appear to be a "Cult", as Walter Martin accused our Church of being. THEN Walter Martin pulled all of this on them.
The TRUTH is that Walter Martin was a very DEVIOUS conniving man.
And the TRUTH is that our Church Leaders, though they may have done wrong in not standing firm on the Truth, still-- they are NOT what constitutes the Seventh Day Adventist Church. The HISTORIC ADVENTISTS are the true genuine Seventh Day Adventists. We do NOT deviate from what is in the Scriptures. I believe that most of the Church LEADERS will leave the Church when the true persecution comes. Our Church prophet Ellen White already told us that according to the visions God gave her, that many of those who we thought were "brilliant stars" will go out into darkness and that very few of the people in our Church would stay with the Pillars of our Foundational Beliefs. While at the same time, Company upon Company of Christians from the other denominations will join our Church and that God would raise up new genuine Leaders in the end. Our Church is the End Time MOVEMENT... raised up by God. People will be coming and going as God tests and proves His people, so that only those who are pure in heart will remain. In the end, whatever our Church Leaders do, really makes no difference in the big picture of things. IN FACT, Because the Roman Catholic Church KNOWS that our Church is the true Remnant Church, as described in Bible Prophecy, they have launched an attack on our Church more than any other, thus all the lies, etc against our Church, and you are helping them.
[video=youtube;jdWUrWcpmAk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdWUrWcpmAk[/video]
At any rate, you have not got a CLUE what you are talking about. So, whatever you say in reply I am just going to ignore because its of no use talking with someone who is mouthing off about things they know nothing about. I haven't got the time for it, nor do I care to bother with such a person who is just out to discredit something that he knows nothing about.
U
By the way, IF you are going to accuse the Seventh Day Adventist Church of being A "CULT" then at least have the INTEGRITY to PROVE our Doctrines wrong from the BIBLE, instead of resorting to using all of these underhanded methods to try to discredit our Church. It CANNOT BE DONE, and that is WHY you have to use these underhanded methods. Our Church can have Revelation Seminars and the Preachers stand there in front of everyone, explaining our Doctrines straight from the BIBLE. And no one can disprove what we say.
A
I live in a large Seventh Day Adventist area - though I am not a part of it. There are at least 5 (maybe more) SDA churches within a 10 minute driving area of my house. I believe there's a museum in a house that was once lived in by Ellen White nearby. A few years back, I went to the SDA college (to study nursing). I found this to be a strange experience. During the orientation week, they had different activities that were offered, but I found that as an outsider (though equally a student there) I wasn't welcome. I also found it strange that the library there, had so many Ellen White books. Once a week, during class, our teacher would do a devotional. I remember one time, he was talking about how Jesus turned the water into wine. But, he said, we're to remember that the wine they had back then, was not like the wine we have today, as there was no alcoholic content in it - just grape juice. I questioned him afterwards and asked how it was that Noah managed to get drunk, if there wasn't even alcohol in Jesus' time. He stumbled over an answer, but didn't really answer me.
I have to say, as someone who hasn't been to church in a while, I'm glad!
I have to say, as someone who hasn't been to church in a while, I'm glad!
But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. Romans 7:6 (from Danschance)
So are the SDA's saying that Paul is misinterpreted? And I have a question for everyone: Col 1: 9-20[SUP]"9 [/SUP]For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;
[SUP]10 [/SUP]That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God;
[SUP]11 [/SUP]Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;
[SUP]12 [/SUP]Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
[SUP]13 [/SUP]Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
[SUP]14 [/SUP]In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
[SUP]15 [/SUP]Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
[SUP]16 [/SUP]For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
[SUP]17 [/SUP]And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
[SUP]18 [/SUP]And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
[SUP]19 [/SUP]For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
[SUP]20 [/SUP]And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven."
What "things" in heaven needed reconciliation to God?
So are the SDA's saying that Paul is misinterpreted? And I have a question for everyone: Col 1: 9-20[SUP]"9 [/SUP]For this cause we also, since the day we heard it, do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;
[SUP]10 [/SUP]That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God;
[SUP]11 [/SUP]Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;
[SUP]12 [/SUP]Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
[SUP]13 [/SUP]Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
[SUP]14 [/SUP]In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
[SUP]15 [/SUP]Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
[SUP]16 [/SUP]For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
[SUP]17 [/SUP]And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
[SUP]18 [/SUP]And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
[SUP]19 [/SUP]For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
[SUP]20 [/SUP]And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven."
What "things" in heaven needed reconciliation to God?
A
1 Peter 4:8 says "Above all, keep fervent in your love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins." Peter, of course, was talking to those who are genuinely saved.
If I watch someone walking into a fire in which they can get serious burned and don't warn them away from it, that's not loving them. If I warn them away, that's love. If the person walking into the fire argues with me about it, then I need to correct them and refute their false arguments so they don't injure or kill themselves and others they are urging to walk into the fire with them.
I see SDA cultists do this all the time. The only problem is they are leading people into the heresy that has deceived them.
Restoration is the goal. If a genuine Christian becomes deceived by the heresy of a cult, someone should bring them back if possible. The very picture of turning a person from a wandering way suggests that it is the error that is putting the individual in danger. The rescuer is presumably safe although potentially in error, if he or she fails to warn the erring person.
Schismatic or heretical teaching poses a big problem for any church. People begin to listen to the deceptive teaching of cults like the SDA and may soon end up slipping away to join the sectarian group.
2 John 10 and other scriptures must be normalized with verses like 1 Peter 4:8. "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house." -2 John 10.
It is clear that 2 John is dealing with a serious problem in the church, not simply minor doctrinal differences or even significant differences over noncentral issues. Heretics were in their midst.
If, in fact, a visitor was carrying serious heresy, the person was not to be greeted as a brother or sister in Christ nor should the person be received into the local church and allowed to spread false teaching there. Otherwise the distorted ideas might spread infecting the body and forming heretical splits the sort of which has occurred many times in history including with respect to the SDA cult which began with disappointed people following a false prophecy (e.g. Jesus would return between 1843 and 1844) who grasped onto Edson's fabrication and built a cult around false prophecy, legalism, and heretical teachings.
Seventh-day Adventism's doctrines span the range from orthodox through aberrant, heterodox, sub-orthodox, and outright heresy. No church or denomination is perfect, but while Seventh-day Adventism does include much that is Biblically orthodox, it includes too much serious error to be accepted within the boundaries of the Christian faith.
Even if the Seventh-day Adventist Church would squarely stand behind Christianity's essential doctrines, and there is enough evidence that this is not so, it mixes in so much poison as to spoil the whole dish. Like many other cults of Christianity, the SDA pays lip-service to orothodox doctrine but redefines it as non-orthdox in a clever bait and switch game that deceives unknowledgabe people.
You love the SDA cultist by confronting them with the truth and urging them to come out of the heresy into orthdoxy not making them feel comfortable in their lies.
[video=youtube_share;SQAI3ej439Y]http://youtu.be/SQAI3ej439Y[/video]
If I watch someone walking into a fire in which they can get serious burned and don't warn them away from it, that's not loving them. If I warn them away, that's love. If the person walking into the fire argues with me about it, then I need to correct them and refute their false arguments so they don't injure or kill themselves and others they are urging to walk into the fire with them.
I see SDA cultists do this all the time. The only problem is they are leading people into the heresy that has deceived them.
Restoration is the goal. If a genuine Christian becomes deceived by the heresy of a cult, someone should bring them back if possible. The very picture of turning a person from a wandering way suggests that it is the error that is putting the individual in danger. The rescuer is presumably safe although potentially in error, if he or she fails to warn the erring person.
Schismatic or heretical teaching poses a big problem for any church. People begin to listen to the deceptive teaching of cults like the SDA and may soon end up slipping away to join the sectarian group.
2 John 10 and other scriptures must be normalized with verses like 1 Peter 4:8. "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house." -2 John 10.
It is clear that 2 John is dealing with a serious problem in the church, not simply minor doctrinal differences or even significant differences over noncentral issues. Heretics were in their midst.
If, in fact, a visitor was carrying serious heresy, the person was not to be greeted as a brother or sister in Christ nor should the person be received into the local church and allowed to spread false teaching there. Otherwise the distorted ideas might spread infecting the body and forming heretical splits the sort of which has occurred many times in history including with respect to the SDA cult which began with disappointed people following a false prophecy (e.g. Jesus would return between 1843 and 1844) who grasped onto Edson's fabrication and built a cult around false prophecy, legalism, and heretical teachings.
Seventh-day Adventism's doctrines span the range from orthodox through aberrant, heterodox, sub-orthodox, and outright heresy. No church or denomination is perfect, but while Seventh-day Adventism does include much that is Biblically orthodox, it includes too much serious error to be accepted within the boundaries of the Christian faith.
Even if the Seventh-day Adventist Church would squarely stand behind Christianity's essential doctrines, and there is enough evidence that this is not so, it mixes in so much poison as to spoil the whole dish. Like many other cults of Christianity, the SDA pays lip-service to orothodox doctrine but redefines it as non-orthdox in a clever bait and switch game that deceives unknowledgabe people.
You love the SDA cultist by confronting them with the truth and urging them to come out of the heresy into orthdoxy not making them feel comfortable in their lies.
[video=youtube_share;SQAI3ej439Y]http://youtu.be/SQAI3ej439Y[/video]
A
For more information: Seventh-day Adventist Church | Apologetics Index
And danschance, SDA leaders lied to Dr. Walter Martin. Desperately wanting to hide their heresy, the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist church lied to Christian apologist Walter Martin and his evangelical colleagues, including Donald Grey Barnhouse, in a series of meetings that took place in 1955 and 1956.
The SDA Church published Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine: An Explanation of Certain Major Aspects of Seventh-day Adventist Belief. The book, often referred to simply as QOD, was the church's official answer to Martin and his colleagues.
Walter Martin stated the facts himself on the John Ankerberg Show in 1985. But as Stephen Pitcher stated, "It's now time to admit that the Adventists did not tell Martin, Barnhouse, and their evangelical colleagues the truth. It's time to set the record straight."
The definition of "lie" is to tell an untruth with the intent to deceive. Included in the definition is the act of not telling the whole truth, or telling partial truths with the intent to mislead. Given this definition of "lie," the simple answer to the question must be a clear "Yes, Adventist leadership lied to Walter Martin."
Read this: Did Adventist leaders lie to Walter Martin
The Seventh-day Adventist Church had the chance to come clean about their anti-trinitarianism, multi-phase atonement, identification of "Sunday worship" with the mark of the beast, Sabbath requirement, prophetess Ellen White, and many many other unbiblical beliefs. They instead chose to rework the wording of their positions to appear acceptable to evangelical Christians.
Skip to "Wordsmiths-Why did the Adventists change their language?"
The crafting of phraseology that sounded orthodox to evangelicals while not renouncing historic Adventist positions intentionally obscured the true nature of Adventist beliefs. Martin and Barnhouse were convinced that the Adventist church had changed some of its cultic doctrines to conform to the evangelical understanding. In reality, the QOD:
"represents a total rejection of Barnhouse and Martin's dispensational understanding of the Second Advent and the covenant, while it is a courageous statement of the Adventist position on such controverted topics as the Sabbath, the mark of the beast, Daniel 8, the investigative judgment, the state of the dead, hell, Babylon, the remnant, and other topics that were offensive to the evangelical community." -Knight, George R., Questions on Doctrine.
Liars!
Seventh-day Adventism has been able to infiltrate the evangelical community because key leaders deceived Walter Martin into believing they were evangelical Christians (albeit with a number of heterodox teachings and practices). Under this facade, however, the church has never renounced or stopped teaching its founding doctrines, and now, with the election of Ted Wilson as General Conference president, there is renewed emphasis on proclaiming and embracing "true Adventism!"
Regardless of the church's corporate stance, however, individual Seventh-day Adventists always have the opportunity to admit the truth. Jesus is calling, "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your soul" (Mt. 11:28–29).
The voice from heaven in Revelation 18 calls all those caught in false religion:
"Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities" (Rev. 18:4–5, ESV).
Listen to this: An Evangelical Adventist? The Dark Side of Seventh-day Adventism
[contra] [part 2
] [part 3
] by former SDA pastor J. Mark Martin
And danschance, SDA leaders lied to Dr. Walter Martin. Desperately wanting to hide their heresy, the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist church lied to Christian apologist Walter Martin and his evangelical colleagues, including Donald Grey Barnhouse, in a series of meetings that took place in 1955 and 1956.
The SDA Church published Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine: An Explanation of Certain Major Aspects of Seventh-day Adventist Belief. The book, often referred to simply as QOD, was the church's official answer to Martin and his colleagues.
Walter Martin stated the facts himself on the John Ankerberg Show in 1985. But as Stephen Pitcher stated, "It's now time to admit that the Adventists did not tell Martin, Barnhouse, and their evangelical colleagues the truth. It's time to set the record straight."
The definition of "lie" is to tell an untruth with the intent to deceive. Included in the definition is the act of not telling the whole truth, or telling partial truths with the intent to mislead. Given this definition of "lie," the simple answer to the question must be a clear "Yes, Adventist leadership lied to Walter Martin."
Read this: Did Adventist leaders lie to Walter Martin
The Seventh-day Adventist Church had the chance to come clean about their anti-trinitarianism, multi-phase atonement, identification of "Sunday worship" with the mark of the beast, Sabbath requirement, prophetess Ellen White, and many many other unbiblical beliefs. They instead chose to rework the wording of their positions to appear acceptable to evangelical Christians.
Skip to "Wordsmiths-Why did the Adventists change their language?"
The crafting of phraseology that sounded orthodox to evangelicals while not renouncing historic Adventist positions intentionally obscured the true nature of Adventist beliefs. Martin and Barnhouse were convinced that the Adventist church had changed some of its cultic doctrines to conform to the evangelical understanding. In reality, the QOD:
"represents a total rejection of Barnhouse and Martin's dispensational understanding of the Second Advent and the covenant, while it is a courageous statement of the Adventist position on such controverted topics as the Sabbath, the mark of the beast, Daniel 8, the investigative judgment, the state of the dead, hell, Babylon, the remnant, and other topics that were offensive to the evangelical community." -Knight, George R., Questions on Doctrine.
Liars!
Seventh-day Adventism has been able to infiltrate the evangelical community because key leaders deceived Walter Martin into believing they were evangelical Christians (albeit with a number of heterodox teachings and practices). Under this facade, however, the church has never renounced or stopped teaching its founding doctrines, and now, with the election of Ted Wilson as General Conference president, there is renewed emphasis on proclaiming and embracing "true Adventism!"
Regardless of the church's corporate stance, however, individual Seventh-day Adventists always have the opportunity to admit the truth. Jesus is calling, "Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your soul" (Mt. 11:28–29).
The voice from heaven in Revelation 18 calls all those caught in false religion:
"Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues; for her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities" (Rev. 18:4–5, ESV).
Listen to this: An Evangelical Adventist? The Dark Side of Seventh-day Adventism
B
Here is a link showing the difference between 7 Day Adventist & Christianity:
http://lifeassuranceministries.org/studies/comparison.pdf
http://lifeassuranceministries.org/studies/comparison.pdf
A
The SDA cult has great heresy and they engage in deliberate deception to try and hide their heresy. SDA, Mormonism, Jehovah Witness, etc... are all heretical cults whose heresy, lies, and deceitfulness NEED to be drug into the light. I realize you find this painful but it's best to leave the cults not enable them as a codependent.
D
Error begets more error. This is always the case with cults and false teachings. They state something false as dogma then twist the scriptures to back it up.
Of course the wine Jesus made had alchohol in it. The master of the feast tasted the wine and said (and I paraphrase) "Wow this is really good stuff! Speaking the Groom he said "You have served the best wine last which is a mistake because one people have had some wine they wont care if it is a lesser quality". This proves there was some alcohol in that wine and you were right in calling the teacher on that. Good for you.
Ellen White, the brain damaged lady with a 3rd grade education could not keep the vegetarian diet she laid on her followers for ten full years. She had been caught eating a plate of oysters (unclean food) in a restaurant behind a screen. She ate duck and other game. The pharisees often heap rules on others they themselves can not bear.
Of course the wine Jesus made had alchohol in it. The master of the feast tasted the wine and said (and I paraphrase) "Wow this is really good stuff! Speaking the Groom he said "You have served the best wine last which is a mistake because one people have had some wine they wont care if it is a lesser quality". This proves there was some alcohol in that wine and you were right in calling the teacher on that. Good for you.
Ellen White, the brain damaged lady with a 3rd grade education could not keep the vegetarian diet she laid on her followers for ten full years. She had been caught eating a plate of oysters (unclean food) in a restaurant behind a screen. She ate duck and other game. The pharisees often heap rules on others they themselves can not bear.
And you may say that your church and doctrine has the truth and state it, and another will say that you are wrong. It is an endless pattern for the sake of gainsaying. If you are judging on what not to do, do you do the same things? To be guilty in one part is to be as such in all of it. Therefore again it is love that covers sin. This has no law against it and is about the heart of a man.
A
Cults are outside of orthodoxy and therefore Christendom. They are groups of deceived people seeking to deceive even the elect if they can. They deceitfully attempt to poison the body of Christ and the scriptures clearly instruct us not to allow that to happen. The infection must be removed before it damages the body.
Obviously if a parent makes a mistake, that does not mean they lose their authority to discipline their children. Obviously if someone within Christendom has a few-non essential theological issues they need to correct, that does not mean they are supposed to stand idly by and watch cults poison the body of Christ with deceitful heresies (2 Tim 4:2) as you mistakenly advocate.
The church has struggled long and hard with understanding God's revelations to us, and as a result the historic orthodox expressions of Christian truth have stood the test of time.
To summarize, an adequate evangelical theology must be molded in the context of the ecumenical truth of the historic orthodox Christian church (the history of which every cult naturally challenges).
The tests for orthodoxy can be summarized as follows: (1) What is contrary to ecumenical creeds, councils, and confessions is certainly unorthodox; (2) What is not addressed in the ecumenical creeds, councils, and confessions but is contrary to the universal consent of the Jesus/Apostles/Fathers is almost certainly unorthodox; and (3) What is contrary to the general consent of the Jesus/Apostles/Fathers is highly suspect.
It is within these parameters that we employ the use of the teachings of the great theologians of the historic Christian church.
Furthermore, the deceitful masking of heresy within the context of orthodox language, twisting translations (the JV and SDA both produce twisted counterfeit bibles in which they've twisted scripture to fit their heresy); hooking in which scripture is used for authority of a nonbiblical teaching (every cult does this one), ignoring context, collapsing contexts, word play, fallacies, speculation, placing false prophets and prophetesses on equal footing with scripture whether or not they lie about it afterwards, deliberately inserting confusion to reframe, etc... must all be rejected and rebuked. There's a thousand methods cults use to mislead.
Why even if an angel from heaven should preach a contrary gospel masking it in the same language as the genuine article in order to deceive, let them be accursed (Gal 1:8). And for Judaizers, "for all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.'” (Gal 3:10). Such things are already judged and it was Jesus and the Apostles that judged them.
And your appeal to 1 Peter 4:8 doesn't apply here as Peter has in mind the community of genuine Christians within orthodox Christendom who are to be “good stewards of the manifold grace of God, serving one another.” It is not a cop out for refusing to refute and rebuke the deceit and heresy of cults and attempts of Judaizers to drag people back under the Old Covenant. Read a few of the very strong verses in which such people are condemned thoroughly by the Apostles including Paul.
Whatever endocrinal feelings you may be experiencing by positioning yourself as the great lover of all, in reality, you're not loving nor helping anyone or God by misusing scripture to try and stop educated Christians who care enough to spend the time to reprove cults and those they are deceitfully misleading into their error.
Obviously if a parent makes a mistake, that does not mean they lose their authority to discipline their children. Obviously if someone within Christendom has a few-non essential theological issues they need to correct, that does not mean they are supposed to stand idly by and watch cults poison the body of Christ with deceitful heresies (2 Tim 4:2) as you mistakenly advocate.
The church has struggled long and hard with understanding God's revelations to us, and as a result the historic orthodox expressions of Christian truth have stood the test of time.
To summarize, an adequate evangelical theology must be molded in the context of the ecumenical truth of the historic orthodox Christian church (the history of which every cult naturally challenges).
The tests for orthodoxy can be summarized as follows: (1) What is contrary to ecumenical creeds, councils, and confessions is certainly unorthodox; (2) What is not addressed in the ecumenical creeds, councils, and confessions but is contrary to the universal consent of the Jesus/Apostles/Fathers is almost certainly unorthodox; and (3) What is contrary to the general consent of the Jesus/Apostles/Fathers is highly suspect.
It is within these parameters that we employ the use of the teachings of the great theologians of the historic Christian church.
Furthermore, the deceitful masking of heresy within the context of orthodox language, twisting translations (the JV and SDA both produce twisted counterfeit bibles in which they've twisted scripture to fit their heresy); hooking in which scripture is used for authority of a nonbiblical teaching (every cult does this one), ignoring context, collapsing contexts, word play, fallacies, speculation, placing false prophets and prophetesses on equal footing with scripture whether or not they lie about it afterwards, deliberately inserting confusion to reframe, etc... must all be rejected and rebuked. There's a thousand methods cults use to mislead.
Why even if an angel from heaven should preach a contrary gospel masking it in the same language as the genuine article in order to deceive, let them be accursed (Gal 1:8). And for Judaizers, "for all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.'” (Gal 3:10). Such things are already judged and it was Jesus and the Apostles that judged them.
And your appeal to 1 Peter 4:8 doesn't apply here as Peter has in mind the community of genuine Christians within orthodox Christendom who are to be “good stewards of the manifold grace of God, serving one another.” It is not a cop out for refusing to refute and rebuke the deceit and heresy of cults and attempts of Judaizers to drag people back under the Old Covenant. Read a few of the very strong verses in which such people are condemned thoroughly by the Apostles including Paul.
Whatever endocrinal feelings you may be experiencing by positioning yourself as the great lover of all, in reality, you're not loving nor helping anyone or God by misusing scripture to try and stop educated Christians who care enough to spend the time to reprove cults and those they are deceitfully misleading into their error.