|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Seventh-Day Adventist Church please help - 7/23/2008 9:51:46 AM
|
|
|
landabee
Posts: 2852
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Central Florida
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: earthless
quote:
ORIGINAL: mbeshirs
Talk to one of the pastors or one of the elders. THey would be glad to hold some bible studies with you.
Sorry, but this immediately brought the Jehovah Witnesses to my mind...
Or Mormons.
_____________________________
"Sound theology discourages ignorance instead of promoting it." ~ CourdeLeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Seventh-Day Adventist Church please help - 7/23/2008 9:59:41 AM
|
|
|
WesP
Posts: 2451
Joined: 11/28/2005
From: Where God needs me to be
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DaveW
quote:
ORIGINAL: WesP
Dave,
Do you think they are correct in their base doctrine? Is it OK to assume the "asides" that they do? I am perhaps the wrong person to be asked that question. As a messianic, I also hold to a Saturday sabbath (as being more scripturally defensable than Sunday) and am not opposed to following much of the "laws" pertaining to the Mosaic covenant.
That said, they have replacement theology at the heart of their doctrine (as does most of evangelicalism) which is (IMO) totally wrong. That leads them to believe the Sabbath and other requirements of the law are their requirements also, in opposition to Acts 15.
In classical SDA, these requrements are considered salvic. The evangelical branch is moving away from that extreme stance.
As to the "soul sleep" theory, it can only be a theory and has no impact on either salvation or day to day christian living. As to their post-trib stance, most Messianics are post-trib as well. Pre-trib is a relativly recent doctrine, coming from the 1800s.
Their dietary restrictions are way beyond even the rabbinic extensions to the Mosaic dietary laws. I do not know where the evangelicals are at on this topic. The old guard considered eating any meat to be evil.
I am quite in agreement with what you have posted above. I guess what I am referring to is the doctrines spawned since 1844. What is your take on that? I do not see how that can be separated from SDA.
_____________________________
Peace,
Wes
___________________________________
<--- BTW, this is the true function of corn! It is to help the oil industry and its functionaries, not detract from them! 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Seventh-Day Adventist Church please help - 7/23/2008 4:05:41 PM
|
|
|
hjemerson
Posts: 240
Joined: 3/4/2008
Status: offline
|
Well all well said if you feel this is not where you should be RUN do not walk away. Why let some one talk you in to staying, Seek other s that can give you alocal base to seek the Lord in Using THE BIBLE not others men words to live by, Men and wonen can write all the book they want but again If it not inline with the WHOLE BIBLE forget it!!! No matter who it is . Just my .02
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Seventh-Day Adventist Church please help - 7/27/2008 10:26:30 AM
|
|
|
lw9
Posts: 1126
Joined: 7/22/2005
Status: offline
|
Sorry I wasn't able to post this sooner. Here's a rundown on the SDA.
1. It's important to understand that the SDA STILL accepts Ellen G White as a prophet and her writings to be inspired and equal to scripture. The following was taken directly from the official SDA webite [the links might have changed and I haven't been able to get on their site today to confirm]:
"One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.”
http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/church_manual/chapter3.html
SDA Bible study: presuppositions, principles, and methods
Seventh-day Adventists believe that God inspired Ellen G. White. Therefore, her expositions on any given Bible passage offer an inspired guide to the meaning of texts without exhausting their meaning or preempting the task of exegesis (for example, see Evangelism, 256; The Great Controversy, 193, 595; Testimonies, vol. 5, pp. 665, 682, 707-708; Counsels to Writers and Editors, 33-35).
http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/other_documents/other_doc4.html
Jan Paulsen, President SDA, 2002:
“The historic sanctuary message, based on Scripture and supported by the writings of Ellen White, continues to be held to unequivocally. And the inspired authorities on which these and other doctrines are based, namely the Bible supported by the writings of Ellen White, continue to be the hermeneutical foundation on which we as a church place all matters of faith and conduct. Let no one think that there has been a change of position in regard to this.”
http://www.adventistreview.org/2002-1524/story3.html
2. Ellen G White claimed the blood of Christ did not atone for sin on the cross:
Spirit of Prophecy, chap 18, pg 265-266
“Important truths concerning the atonement may be learned from the typical service. A substitute was accepted in the sinner's stead; but the sin was not canceled by the blood of the victim. A means was thus provided by which it was transferred to the sanctuary. By the offering of blood, the sinner acknowledged the authority of the law, confessed his guilt in transgression, and expressed his desire for pardon through faith in a Redeemer to come; but he was not yet entirely released from the condemnation of the law.
Patriarchs and prophets, page 357
“The blood of Christ, while it was to release the repentant sinner from the condemnation of the law, was not to cancel the sin; it would stand on record in the sanctuary until the final atonement; so in the type the blood of the sin offering removed the sin from the penitent, but it rested in the sanctuary until the Day of Atonement.
3. Instead, she claimed the blood of Christ transferred sin into heaven until the 1844 Day of Atonement:
Spirit of Prophecy, chap 18, pg 265-266
“As the sins of the people were anciently transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary by the blood of the sin-offering, so our sins are, in fact, transferred to the heavenly sanctuary by the blood of Christ. ”
Patriarchs and prophets, page 357
“The blood of Christ, while it was to release the repentant sinner from the condemnation of the law, was not to cancel the sin; it would stand on record in the sanctuary until the final atonement; so in the type the blood of the sin offering removed the sin from the penitent, but it rested in the sanctuary until the Day of Atonement.
Spirit of Prophecy, chap 18, pg 265-266
“After his ascension, our Saviour began his work as our high priest. Says Paul, "Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into Heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." [HEB. 9:24.] In harmony with the typical service, he began his ministration in the holy place, and at the termination of the prophetic days in 1844, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, he entered the most holy to perform the last division of his solemn work,--to cleanse the sanctuary.
Spirit of Prophecy, chap 18, pg 265-266
“And as the typical cleansing of the earthly was accomplished by the removal of the sins by which it had been polluted, so the actual cleansing of the heavenly is to be accomplished by the removal, or blotting out, of the sins which are there recorded. This necessitates an examination of the books of record to determine who, through repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the benefits of his atonement. The cleansing of the sanctuary therefore involves a work of investigative Judgment.”
Maranatha, chap 24
“The work of the investigative judgment and the blotting out of sins is to be accomplished before the second advent of the Lord. Since the dead are to be judged out of the things written in the books, it is impossible that the sins of men should be blotted out until after the judgment at which their cases are to be investigated. . . . When the investigative judgment closes, Christ will come, and His reward will be with Him to give to every man as his work shall be.”
The Great Controversy [1888], chap 23, pg 422
Thus those who followed in the light of the prophetic word saw that, instead of coming to the earth at the termination of the 2300 days in 1844, Christ then entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary to perform the closing work of atonement preparatory to His coming.
That's not Biblical, and it's not the Jesus Christ of the Holy Bible. There are other serious issues in the SDA, such as the other blatantly false prophecies of Ellen White, SDA belief in annihilationism and works salvation [investigative judgment], etc, but denying the full atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross should be enough to settle any argument about this church. When a church proclaims someone to be their inspired prophet and that prophet denies the atonement and presents a false christ, the only conclusion to be made is that the church itself is following a false prophet and a false christ no matter how 'shiny' they appear to be from the outside.
The SDA has every opportunity to reject their 'prophet' Ellen G White and turn to the Bible, and I hope and pray they do someday. For now, though, I have to classify it as a cult.
_____________________________
Aperture Science. We do what we must because we can.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
