Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

7th Day Adventist

door.jpg
When Christ failed to return in 1844 there was great confusion among the followers of William Miller. Most of the Millerites returned to their churches, but others were too ashamed to admit their error or felt too humiliated to return. It was among these people that the "shut door" teaching developed. The teaching is based upon the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25. These people firmly believed that they had given the "midnight cry" (Matt. 25:6) and that Jesus, the Bridegroom, came to the "marriage supper" on October 22, 1844:
And while they [foolish virgins] went to buy, the Bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with Him to the marriage; and the door was shut. (Matt. 25:10)​
They taught that on October 22, 1844, Christ got up and moved from the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place. In so doing, Christ shut the door of salvation to all except those Advent believers who had joined Miller's 1844 movement. They believed that Jesus was "shut in" with His special people, preparing them to receive His kingdom. They believed that since October 22, 1844, Christ was ministering only to the "little flock" or "Israel" (the Advent believers). They taught that Christ was testing His children on certain points of truth, such as the Sabbath, and that their work for the salvation of others was finished.

Ellen White had visions supporting this "shut door" doctrine, and James White's paper--Present Truth--trumpeted the shut door teaching up until late 1850. Most Adventists, including William Miller and most of the leaders in the Millerite movement, rejected the doctrine. It was accepted by only a small number of followers of Joseph Bates and the Whites. In early 1850 the "shut door" began to slip open. Those who were Christians in 1844, but had not had opportunity to hear Miller's time-setting message were allowed to enter the church. Near the end of 1850 the "shut door" opened a little further. The Adventists were shocked when a man who was a non-believer in 1844 accepted the Adventist message in August, 1850, and started attending their meetings. It was their first conversion of an unconverted man since 1844!
By 1851 the teaching had fallen out of favor and so the Whites modified their teaching on the "shut door." James White abandoned the Present Truth magazine and started a new magazine, the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald. He reprinted his wife's visions in 1851, but was careful to remove those parts referencing the erroneous "shut door" doctrine. The doctrine disappeared from the writings of the leaders and most of the new converts into the church never heard of it nor had any idea that their prophet had seen a "shut door" of salvation in her visions.
In the period of 1844-1850, a time when Mrs. White was receiving frequent public visions, she claimed on a number of occasions to have seen in vision the door of salvation shut and that Adventists no longer needed to work for the salvation of the world. Otis Nichols, a fervent believer in Ellen White, wrote thus to William Miller:
"Her message was...that our work was done for the nominal church and the world, and what remained to be done was for the household of faith." --DF 105, Otis Nichols to William Miller, April 20, 1846.
Adventist minister Isaac Wellcome testifies:
"I was often in meeting with Ellen G. Harmon and James White in 1844 and '45. I several times caught her while falling to the floor, --at times when she swooned away for a vision. I have heard her relate her visions of these dates. Several were published on sheets, to the effect that all were lost who did not endorse the '44 move, that Christ had left the throne of mercy, and all were sealed that ever would be, and no others could repent." (An Examination of Mrs. Ellen White's Visions, Miles Grant, Boston: Published by the Advent Christian Publication Society, 1877)
Although she later denied having visions supporting a shut door of salvation, there is ample evidence from eyewitnesses and from her own pen that she taught a shut door on the basis of her visions. In one of her earliest visions she describes how impossible it is for the rejected world to get onto the path leading to heaven:
"Others rashly denied the light behind them, and said that it was not God that had led them out so far. The light behind them went out leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and got their eyes off the mark and lost sight of Jesus, and fell off the path down in the dark and wicked world below. It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected." (A Word to the Little Flock, 1847)​
In 1849 she wrote about the condition of those in other chuches:
"My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners as used to be. I looked, but could not see it; for the time for their salvation is past." (Present Truth, August, 1849)​
To illustrate how Mrs. White's visions about the "shut door" of salvation led people to err, consider her vision in Exeter, Maine. Here is a specific example of how Ellen White saw a falsehood in vision (the shut door of salvation), and then related that vision to other people who then accepted the false teaching:
"While in Exeter, Maine, in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others, many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand. There was one sister there that was called very spiritual. She had traveled and been a powerful preacher the most of the time for twenty years. She had been truly a mother in Israel. But a division had risen in the band on the shut door. She had great sympathy, and could not believe the door was shut. (I had known nothing of their differences.) Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad. At length my soul seemed to be in an agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the Holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom. They were all deeply interested in the view. They all said it was entirely new to them. The Lord worked in mighty power setting the truth home to their hearts. ... When I came out of vision, my ears were saluted with Sister Durben's singing and shouting with a loud voice. Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door." Manuscript Releases Vol. 5, p. 97​
 
Regarding other doctrines of eating, keeping days, etc. I believe are considered in the following scripture. Romans 14:3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Romans 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. My thoughts.

Indeed, these Scriptures are appropriate to the discussion. However, I suspect that you have not dialoged with a SDA person, or been a SDA forum. I say that because it is standard practice to dismiss and deride those who do not follow the dictates of Ellen in the SDA church.

"creedal Christians"
"Sunday worshipers"

These are two of the many epithets by which they degenerate and dismiss EVERY other church member and church, excepting their own. If they were not so "proud of their obedience" and scornful of those who refuse to be enslaved by Ellen's stupid rules, the Scripture would more appropriate because it is a peace-making section of Scripture.

If you doubt what I am saying is true of them, please do a web search on Seventh Day Adventist blogs. CARM calls them "hetrodox" and they have an entire section dedicated to the SDA theology. You man need to sign in as a member to view the topics.
 
If you doubt what I am saying is true of them, please do a web search on Seventh Day Adventist blogs. CARM calls them "hetrodox" and they have an entire section dedicated to the SDA theology. You man need to sign in as a member to view the topics.
I certainly agree with you By Grace, and I've been there and done that. Someone being ignorant and judging me does not give me leave to do the same to them. I sincerely believe most of them have received Jesus as their Savior and in that light, by grace are they saved. I see little difference in a great amount of mainstream Christianity that believe we can be lost according to our works, or that Jesus isn't capable of keeping us. I love em anyhow. :)
 
Here's a funny tidbit concerning the SDA Church and their beliefs and practices compared with other denominations; THEY REGARD AND ATTEMPT TO KNOW AND FOLLOW THE BIBLE MORE SCRICTLY THAN ALMOST ALL OTHERS! The SDAs and the Cambellites (Church of Christ), take Bible study and knowledge more seriously by constantly emphasizing it more than pretty all other denominations.
 
Here's a funny tidbit concerning the SDA Church and their beliefs and practices compared with other denominations; THEY REGARD AND ATTEMPT TO KNOW AND FOLLOW THE BIBLE MORE SCRICTLY THAN ALMOST ALL OTHERS! The SDAs and the Cambellites (Church of Christ), take Bible study and knowledge more seriously by constantly emphasizing it more than pretty all other denominations.
Not to be short or rude but you could make the same statement for the pharisee and scribe. If one studies to prove false doctrine and to pervert the gospel, what is that to be admired? And what spirit would drive a person to look to defeat the grace
of the Lord Jesus?
Ga 1:6 ¶ I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
 
I certainly agree with you By Grace, and I've been there and done that. Someone being ignorant and judging me does not give me leave to do the same to them. I sincerely believe most of them have received Jesus as their Savior and in that light, by grace are they saved. I see little difference in a great amount of mainstream Christianity that believe we can be lost according to our works, or that Jesus isn't capable of keeping us. I love em anyhow.





I believe their teachings to be false & it's not a judgment to expose this. The devil has this world believing a lie that, to agree with God's Word, is being judgmental. It is not. Judgment is the assumption of one's motives & understanding.

That said, Philippians 1:18 comes to mind. I've met my share of SDA's who have passed judgment of hell fire onto me. And therefore, I agree with you. If I judge their salvation, then I don't leave them with much hope of seeing a different path of grace & freedom in Christ.
 
I certainly agree with you By Grace, and I've been there and done that. Someone being ignorant and judging me does not give me leave to do the same to them. I sincerely believe most of them have received Jesus as their Savior and in that light, by grace are they saved. I see little difference in a great amount of mainstream Christianity that believe we can be lost according to our works, or that Jesus isn't capable of keeping us. I love em anyhow.



It is not about you, Eugene; rather it is about their aberrant and heretical theology.

The reason I do that is to expose some of their teachings, which have no basis in the Bible. In fact if you will look carefully at all 28 of their Fundamental Beliefs, you will be able to see how the mucky mucks who drew them up were very evasive, and how slick they were to not make anything like an Evangelical statement of faith. Therefore, theirs is a deliberate deception of the people they shepherd. The Lord shall deal with them, not me. Nevertheless I see my job as an apologist for the Christian faith to expose the heretical and works based non-salvation in which they trust as a way of meriting the mercy of God.

As to some SDAs being saved, that is not my call,and I never claimed that; God has a faithful remnant everywhere, but that remnant faithfulness is not because they worship on Saturday, abstain from pork and warm bread, etc. It is because of God's great mercy.
 
Here's a funny tidbit concerning the SDA Church and their beliefs and practices compared with other denominations; THEY REGARD AND ATTEMPT TO KNOW AND FOLLOW THE BIBLE MORE SCRICTLY THAN ALMOST ALL OTHERS! The SDAs and the Cambellites (Church of Christ), take Bible study and knowledge more seriously by constantly emphasizing it more than pretty all other denominations.

If they were REALLY serious about studying and learning the Bible, they would use exegesis of the original languages, and keep their "bibical supports" for their aberrant doctrines in context.

BTW, and not to be argumentative, that same prideful bragging was done by a Mormon on this site about the Bible who claimed to know "more about the Bible than many Evangelical denominations".
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by proveallthings
This is a very interesting group of statements. Speaking from my perspective as a Mormon, we Mormons actually perceive that we believe in the accuracy of the Bible as much or more than most Evangelicals.

Strange coincidence, don't you think?
 
Here's a funny tidbit concerning the SDA Church and their beliefs and practices compared with other denominations; THEY REGARD AND ATTEMPT TO KNOW AND FOLLOW THE BIBLE MORE SCRICTLY THAN ALMOST ALL OTHERS! The SDAs and the Cambellites (Church of Christ), take Bible study and knowledge more seriously by constantly emphasizing it more than pretty all other denominations.

If they were REALLY serious about studying and learning the Bible, they would use exegesis of the original languages, and keep their "bibical supports" for their aberrant doctrines in context.

BTW, and not to be argumentative, that same prideful bragging was done by a Mormon on this site about the Bible who claimed to know "more about the Bible than many Evangelical denominations".
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by proveallthings
This is a very interesting group of statements. Speaking from my perspective as a Mormon, we Mormons actually perceive that we believe in the accuracy of the Bible as much or more than most Evangelicals.

Strange coincidence, don't you think?
Not when one understands that the Mormon group started from the core of that which is called SDA. look it up!
 
Not when one understands that the Mormon group started from the core of that which is called SDA. look it up!


I have, and I know of no connection.

White was part of the group of original millerites. Here is stuff from Wikipedia
The Great Disappointment was a major event in the history of the Millerite movement, a 19th-century American Christian sect that formed out of the Second Great Awakening. Based on his interpretations of the prophecies in the book of Daniel (Chapters 8 and 9, especially Dan. 8:14 "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed"), William Miller, a Baptist preacher, proposed that Jesus Christ would return to the earth during the year 1844. The more specific date of October 22, 1844, was preached by Samuel S. Snow. Thousands of followers, some of whom had given away all of their possessions, waited expectantly. When Jesus did not appear, October 22, 1844, became known as the Great Disappointment.
Ellen White was prone to catalepsy, and she had visions, through which she had visions declared her medical quackery and "salvation-through-diet gospel" and was not like Smith in his vices of pedophilia, swindler, serial adulterer and other unsavory things.



Prior to that date, c. 1825 Smith began what was to become Mormons. they were a bunch of wife-stealing, polyandrous and polygamous "swingers" He first published the Book of Mormon.


the differences between the two could not be much greater than it actually is.
 
"You won't be told at the SDA Seminars about the things they have in common with the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons.SDA's share their early history with the Jehovah's Witnesses. An early Adventist, N. H. Barbour co-published with Charles Taze Russell. They had a falling out over (what else?) dates for the end of the world! (1844 and 1874), and parted company.
Both, however, kept heretical doctrines to this day like Jesus being Michael the Archangel, the denial of Hell, and both still advocate soul sleep. Both invented invisible occurrences in heaven for their failed dates for Christ's visible return, investigative judgment for the SDA's and Christ's invisible "presence" for Jehovah's Witnesses.
russell.jpg


Charles Taze RussellThere is Mormon link also for the SDA's. It is a proven fact that Ellen G. White plagiarized most of her writings. The Church has been challenged by Walter Rea, author of the White Lie to prove that even 20% of her writings are original. They can't. Their weak defense was that there were no copyright laws in Ellen's day, so what she did was legal. You will never be told of her plagiarism by the SDA's.
As Ellen was rising to prominence, Joseph Smith had just died. Her writings contain many phrases used by Joseph Smith. Mind you, he has also been accused of plagiarism. You will definitely not be told of her similarities to Joseph Smith at the Seminars!" http://www.macgregorministries.org/seventh_day_adventists/sda_facts.html
 
From where do you get your data?

There is Mormon link also for the SDA's. It is a proven fact that Ellen G. White plagiarized most of her writings. The Church has been challenged by Walter Rea, author of the White Lie to prove that even 20% of her writings are original. They can't. Their weak defense was that there were no copyright laws in Ellen's day, so what she did was legal. You will never be told of her plagiarism by the SDA's. As Ellen was rising to prominence, Joseph Smith had just died. Her writings contain many phrases used by Joseph Smith. Mind you, he has also been accused of plagiarism. You will definitely not be told of her similarities to Joseph Smith at the Seminars!"

Russell was born in 1852, therefore he had no connection with the 1844 nonsense.

As to the charge of plagiarism, that is an anachronistic usage of the word, so she skates on that technicality. Surely she copied others, of that there is no doubt. And the standard SDA apologetic on that is to play word games, and to attack Walter Rea as an "anti-SDA" I am not quibbling, not trying to have a dust up, OK?
 
From where do you get your data?

There is Mormon link also for the SDA's. It is a proven fact that Ellen G. White plagiarized most of her writings. The Church has been challenged by Walter Rea, author of the White Lie to prove that even 20% of her writings are original. They can't. Their weak defense was that there were no copyright laws in Ellen's day, so what she did was legal. You will never be told of her plagiarism by the SDA's. As Ellen was rising to prominence, Joseph Smith had just died. Her writings contain many phrases used by Joseph Smith. Mind you, he has also been accused of plagiarism. You will definitely not be told of her similarities to Joseph Smith at the Seminars!"

Russell was born in 1852, therefore he had no connection with the 1844 nonsense.

As to the charge of plagiarism, that is an anachronistic usage of the word, so she skates on that technicality. Surely she copied others, of that there is no doubt. And the standard SDA apologetic on that is to play word games, and to attack Walter Rea as an "anti-SDA" I am not quibbling, not trying to have a dust up, OK?
Well, I found some very interesting links between these two groups, I will try to gather some of it up so you can judge it for yourself. There is so much more that shows the errors of these groups it seems like a small issue in the big picture of things? Also these issues are not limited to 1844? No dust up, it is interesting to see the connection and I will try to post the info when I find it again.
 
Well, I found some very interesting links between these two groups, I will try to gather some of it up so you can judge it for yourself. There is so much more that shows the errors of these groups it seems like a small issue in the big picture of things? Also these issues are not limited to 1844? No dust up, it is interesting to see the connection and I will try to post the info when I find it again.
Have you found anything, yet?
This seems as good a time as any to bump up a 6 months-old thread.
 
I am trying to find something bad about SDA's but I seem to be falling short here.

I don't see anything more worse than the gifts vanishing in the Baptist church, the Gifts vanishing and allowance of a Homosexual vote in the Methodist church. I don't see any more clear understanding of a Trinity type doctrine most people are clueless on what Trinity Doctrine is in it's original form. Who has that figured out anyway?

What is so bad about them?

I see they keep some sabbath on Saturday, they base a lot of things on works but is works so bad? We all have to put the flesh under and obey God right? I think it would hinder many who fell short since the faith in the saving grace was never taught properly.

It's not like they follow way out stuff like the Mormons or JW's. Ellen G White had some pretty far out stuff, but we are suppose to take all prophecy with two or 3 witnesses anyway and a person can be wrong.

I don't see any short comings in what SDA believe that are not present in most other Churches.

Mike.
 
Having had surgery October 17, 1989 the day of the quake... I could not go home that night..the hospital is about 50 miles less as the crow flies from San Francisco... Needless to say it was scary . What a calm and heavenly peace filled the room when the nurse ( SDA hospital) came in and asked if she could pray with me... Some of us may think they are kookie but i bet some of them think we are kookie....
 
shh, I think futurism is cult but don't tell the futurists churches that. that is why im not going to attend the prophecy class. I would have to be really quiet in that class and me not voicing my opinion on that is kinda hard.
 
what bothers me is that I get that look when I say im amil. its like some disease to them.i know they are futurists and I really think its whacky but I can live with that. god forbid we should use grammar in reading and actually expect it to be literally used in sentences. god forbid that He made the rules of the languages that all men use and has logical rules for expressing thought.
 
I am trying to find something bad about SDA's but I seem to be falling short here.

Would posting some of the major things make a difference? I ask in advance because I am not sure about the things that they hold dear, such as the
veneration of Ellen White and ALL of her writings (through which they make the Bible secondary),
the Investigative Judgment,
The Remnant church
the Sanctuary,
1844 and the 2300 Days
Sabbath observance as the "proof of salvation"
there are others...


I ask because you seem to be unaware of those, and ALL of them are heretical positions, not supported by the Bible

I don't see anything more worse than the gifts vanishing in the Baptist church, the Gifts vanishing and allowance of a Homosexual vote in the Methodist church. I don't see any more clear understanding of a Trinity type doctrine most people are clueless on what Trinity Doctrine is in it's original form. Who has that figured out anyway?
Dispensationalism is not the issue in this thread; but there are many SDAs who believe that Michael the Archangel is Jesus Christ.

What is so bad about them?
Their beliefs trash the Atonement of Jesus Christ, making it unimportant.

I see they keep some sabbath on Saturday, they base a lot of things on works but is works so bad? We all have to put the flesh under and obey God right? I think it would hinder many who fell short since the faith in the saving grace was never taught properly.
Do you know WHY they do these things? The day that we worship on is really unimportant, but if you do a study on the feast days of the Jews, you will see that from the beginning that God planned Christian worship to be on Sunday.

It's not like they follow way out stuff like the Mormons or JW's. Ellen G White had some pretty far out stuff, but we are suppose to take all prophecy with two or 3 witnesses anyway and a person can be wrong.
Indeed, their stuff is "way out" but you have not dug behind their smoke and mirrors sufficiently. As far as prophecy is concerned, according to the Bible she should have been stoned. She said unequivocally that "England [an anachronism] would enter the US civil war, and would support the South.

I don't see any short comings in what SDA believe that are not present in most other Churches. Mike.
Do you know that they will find it very difficult to say that a Christian who dies not attend a SDA church will go to heaven. In short the reason for that is because the others do not follow the "salvation-by-diet" pseudo health medical quackery message of Ellen.

Quite a way back on CARM there were posters who took the many stupid things that Ellen said on various subjects, including masturbation and attempted to use the absurdity of things as a sledge hammer to "knock sense into the SDA people". The poor people were so blinded by their allegiance that they were unable to state that EGW was wrong in anything. One poster took her prohibition to eat warm bread (really) and then asked in a snarky way if their youth group was permitted to eat a pizza.

If you dig hard enough, you can see a connection between Ellen White, and Dr. John Harvey Kellogg was an American medical doctor in Battle Creek, Michigan [correct guess, he was the guy behind Kellogg's cereals] who was also an eugenicist and Margret Sanger the founder of Planned Parenthood, and also an eugenicist.


According to wikipedia John Harvey Kellogg was an American medical doctor in Battle Creek, Michigan, who ran a sanitarium using holistic methods, with a particular focus on nutrition, enemas and exercise. But if you read his works, and what he did, you see that he was also attempting to rid the world of slaves and their descendants.

Therefore without any hint of anger or pique, I submit that you really do not know enough about the SDAs to make that sort of statement as you did in your post


 
Back
Top