Solo said:
Facts Seventh-day Adventists
Won’t Tell You at Their Seminars
“SDA’s won’t always tell you that it is the SDA church that is sponsoring the seminars.
Nonsense. If you actually look for directions, it usually tells you that it is at the 'so and so Seventh Day Adventist church.' Even if it isn't, it is not some sort of secret conspiracy of silence to draw unsuspecting members into our 'cult'.
I have heard this nonsense spouted in this way many times and it is laughable
[quote:adb61]SDA’s consider themselves to be the only true, remnant church. All others will be condemned in time.
Though there maybe some of the fringe that believe this, we believe in a 'remnant people with a remnant message' from from many, many faiths. I haven't met too many Adventists that believe that that it is only the SDA church that will make its way to glory.
More nonsense.
SDA’s will make your salvation dependent on observing the Saturday Sabbath, worshipping with them
This is misleading. The church's stance with the mark of the beast is the ultimate battle of obedience between observing Sunday or remaining true to Sabbath. Hence, according to Revelation 13, one's fate will hang in the balance once a Sunday law is enacted and people are forced to worship. No one has the mark of the beast now, nor does worshipping on Sunday mean that you aren't saved.
This may sound crazy to some of you but it is not any crazier then some of the other crack-pot apocalyptic views on Revelation that are out there.
If you receive Christ as your Savior through SDA’s, only your past sins are forgiven by grace up to that point.
'Through SDAs'? That sounds ludicrous. Anyway, all our sins are forgiven but do you not think that confession and repentance is necessary for sins and backsliding in the future? What denomination (other than OSAS) doesn't teach that we will sin in the future and 'need a savior'?
As an SDA you now enter a period of “investigative judgment†where every deed you do or don’t do is recorded for judgment day.
I don't care for his premises like 'through SDAs' and 'as an SDA'. They are not necessary and make things sound 'ominous' or 'elitist'. This is not the case.
Anyway, the bible makes it clear that what we do can be used against us and that what we say is being recorded. However, this doesn't mean that it is not forgiven or will be used against us. 'There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus'
As an SDA you will be judged even for “idle moments†where you could have been more obedient
Well, I guess that it doesn't matter to everyone else as these comments seem to only apply if you 'are an SDA' :roll:
We should always make good use of our time. However, to say that this will be held against us in judgement if quite rigid. I believe that many of the conservative folk of many churches would say the same thing but the mainstream don't really believe this.
As an SDA you will be encouraged to become a vegetarian.
Not always the case though vegetarianism is promoted in our church. I fail to see how there is anything wrong with this as the world seems to have caught up with the SDA church on the strong health benefits of being a vegetarian. I haven't been under any pressure.
The reasons people try and use against us to call us 'cultic' is getting more and more foolish as time goes on.
SDA’s will gloss over the scripture that says “...he who is weak in faith eats vegetables only...†(Romans 14:2)
No. We look at the verse in context. The issue wasn't meat eating or vegetarianism but those who refused to eat meat for ceremonial uncleanliness or food sacrificed to idols. The 'weak in faith' has nothing to do with eating meat or veggies but those who can't distinguish between what is real and what is fake (wooden idols) that they make a big deal out of eating the meat.
SDA’s will expect you to revere their founding prophetess, Ellen G. White, viewing her as having the “spirit of prophecy†referred to in the Bible book of Revelation.
She has great insight and counsel. 'revere'? Sounds like worship and though there are some in our church who may, that is not even her counsel for us to do so.
In spite of revering Ellen G. White, SDA’s won’t ordain women.
So won't many other churches. EGW wasn't a pastor or ordained and even in the Bible you had prophetesses and women who held high positions who still followed the rules of not being ordained or entering the priesthood.
SDA’s won’t tell you that EGW is a proven false prophetess. Her embarrassing early writings have been altered to cover this up
There is no coverup. This is nonsense. There is much that people use to promote this claim from her regular writings nevermind some sort of 'cover-up'. What you see is what you get. Take it for what it is. How one views a 'prophet' can determine whether or not someone is 'false' or not.
SDA’s won’t tell you that they once denied the Trinity. Left over from that time period is the heresy that Jesus Christ is Michael.
No hidden agenda. Some of the early Adventist leaders (before there was an Adventist church) were semi-arianism. Considering the anti-trinitarians on this forum, I fail to see how the SDA church in its early history should be considered 'cultic' or have this used against them when we believe in the trinity today. There is strong scriptural evidence based on titles that show that Michael could very well be Christ's heavenly name. Was He always called Jesus Christ? This was His earthly name given for an earthly purpose.
SDA’s won’t tell you that an early Adventist (Nelson H. Barbour) co-published with the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Both proved to be false prophets. False date-setting caused them to part company.
In all of my studies, I haven't come across this name. Don't get the SDA church confused with early Adventist preachers. The church wasn't formed until the 1860s. Much doctrine was formulated, rehashed, changed, thrown out and discovered for the previous 20+years.
SDA’s won’t tell you that early Adventists expected the literal second coming of Christ in 1843 and 1844 only to be disappointed.
–SDA’s won’t tell you that their 1844 “investigative judgment†teaching was born out of an attempt to cover over this false prophecy. Instead of repenting over this false date, the claim was made that Christ really came, but INVISIBLY in heaven.
–Their founder, Ellen G. White, prior to the failed prophecy, taught that the door to salvation was shut. This had to be reinterpreted and altered after the failure of 1844.
Crap, crap crap....The record is all there to see and Millerism is not SDAism.
As I said before, the church (yes even EGW 'gasp'!!!) were changing their minds about doctrine as they studied further. This is part of the problem. So many (both SDA and non-SDA alike) try to make EGW infallible in all theology and interepretation. This wasn't her role. Her role was to uplift and edify the body of Christ and give special insight. She admitted her short comings and told people not to elevate her to the status of the bible.
The fault is not with EGW.
A former SDA pastor, Walter Rea, examining the prolific writings of EGW, found that she had plagiarized most of what she had written, including drawings of her “visions†from other authors.
The plagarism aspect has been admitted to by EGW and dealt with many times over and over and over again.
–One former SDA Pastor reported that he was given a choice between the Bible or the writings of EGW. When he chose the Bible, he was excommunicated from the SDA church.
HAHAHAH!!!! I sure would like to know what group he belonged to. Nowhere in the history of any 'excommunication' have I heard such a preposterous thing.
I highly doubt it...
Ellen G. White’s main emphasis was on diet. She taught “...if we subsist largely upon the flesh of dead animals, we shall partake of their natureâ€Â. (Counsels on Diet & Foods. p. 390 in some editions).
And....?? Science is showing us that our animal meat is horribly polluted and we'd be better off not eating it. Even medical doctors will tell us the same thing. What's the big deal?
Again, the great, ridiculous lengths people will go to...
Most of Ellen G. White’s concerns over diet were in an effort to control what she considered to be an excessive sex drive in the male.
Umm...no. However, what we eat will effect those areas.
She devoted endless pages to discussing “secret vice†(masturbation) and blamed the practice for a wide range of diseases.
I have read maybe three pages of such counsel. So what's the big deal? Many of our other Christian writers do the same. I admit the disease part does sound strange but isn't she entitled to her opinion. Do you make her infallible? Is she saying that this is straight from a vision or that we must believe it to be saved?
The SDA’s continue to cling to views similar to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, such as “soul sleep†and denying the reality of Hell. Jesus, however, taught more about hellfire than He taught about heaven.
No only are these views even more biblical then the mainstream alternative, but many scholars have come to the same conclusion upon studying these doctrines. Great and respected theologians such as Oscar Cullman, John Stott, Edward Fudge and Clark Pinnock readily admit to these truths and abandoned the traditional view.
SDA's won't tell you that their new "Clear Word Bible" is really the teachings of Ellen G. White inserted right into the Bible text, so her heresies appear to be the word of God to the unwary.
Oh please. It is a paraphrase from an Adventist perspective but it is not twisted around or skewed anymore than other paraphrase editions. These are not the 'teachings of EGW'. Such paranoid conspiracy nonsense only makes these claims more laughable.
SDA's won't tell you that you will be required to lead a life of incredible legalism, attempting to keep the Old Law Covenant with all its restrictions.
We say nothing of the sort. I think many of you who have debated with us on this forum know where our church stands on the issue. Such clap-trap isn't even worth responding to.
SDA's won't tell you that they need to rely heavily on the Old Testament since the New Testament teaches the fulfillment of the Law in Jesus Christ. We are now under grace, not the Law
Excrement. We are all saved by grace just like everybody else. More claptrap.
SDA's teach that Christ did not completely atone for our sins on the cross of Calvary, in spite of the fact that He cried out "It is finished!". ( John 19:30 )
Nonsense.
SDA's teach that we will have to stand in the presence of the living God for judgment without a mediator. (The Great Controversy).
If we have abandoned Christ, we have no mediator. The saved do. This sounds like taking it out of context.
SDA's gloss over 1 John 21, which states "...And if any man sin, we have an advocate (mediator) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous."
Feces. This is complete nonsense and a total falsehood.
To try to make their false prophecies on the 2300 days in Daniel work, SDA's misinterpret the Hebrew words "ereb boqer", for "days" into "years". However. these words literally mean "evenings-mornings". Obviously 2300 actual solar days of 24 hours each, not years as SDA's claim. This spoils 1844 and the “investigative judgment†theories
I have my personal misgivings about this doctrine but what church DOES have the truth on apocalyptic theology? As a sola scriptura church, we should look at what jives and what doesn't. Many of our scholars are coming to the same conclusions.
All these facts can be documented.
[/quote:adb61]
I doubt that. At best, they are misconstrued, taken out of context and falsely applied to every SDA.
This is mostly claptrap and I hope that you don't take everything spoken against SDAs hook line and sinker like this garbage.
: 