Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Facts Seventh Day Adventists won't tell you
MacGregor Ministries ^ | 2001 | MacGregor

Posted on 03/02/2011 10:22:55 AM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last
The Adventists are a cult that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons
1 posted on 03/02/2011 10:22:57 AM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
The Adventists are a cult that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons

Don't forget the Amish. I've been reading some incredible things about them here.

2 posted on 03/02/2011 10:31:00 AM PST by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

Charles Taze Russell, the founder of The Watchtower Bible And Tract Society (JW’s) came out of the Millerite Adventists (SDA - Russell tweaked SDA and came out with the JW’s). And that’s an interesting read.


3 posted on 03/02/2011 10:43:06 AM PST by ReverendJames (Only A Painter Or A Liberal Can Change Black To White.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
Actually,
Adventists and JH’s are all “Millerites” who thought the world would end, tomorrow, or the next day, or the next day, Miller became a joke.
These idiots spun off on their own, under different names.
4 posted on 03/02/2011 10:51:59 AM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: None
SDA doctrine allows for abortion; SDA Hospitals perform abortions as a matter of practice. I dont think its a cult however, they have modernized in the last 30 years to being predominantly just another Protestant Church. Further in doing so, they have alienated another segment of their membership whom you would associate more fully with doctrine and beliefs of the 'cult'.Dr Walter Martin in his 1965 classic book "Kingdom of the Cults" couldnt quite classify them as a cult then, and it is very much less so now.

A favorite of mine is the SDA belief through their prophetess who stated that the day would come when 'Sunday Church Worship' would be legislated through the Pope in the U.S. and that the Catholics would pick up clubs and club all the SDA's they could find to death. Well mandatory Sunday worship is not coming to Western Civilization any time soon as we are all very aware. But I still have my RCIA club , just in case...snicker!
5 posted on 03/02/2011 10:52:16 AM PST by RBIEL2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
Actually,
Adventists and JH’s are all “Millerites” who thought the world would end, tomorrow, or the next day, or the next day, Miller became a joke.
These idiots spun off on their own, under different names.
6 posted on 03/02/2011 10:52:16 AM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian; T Minus Four

When I was overseas in the Marshall Islands, our chapel sponsored most of the missionaries on outlying islands, including the SDA. They seem so bright and shiny clean and they really do want to be perceived and evangelicals. After I studied them (read their Statement of Faith), it was obvious to me they are heretical. I had to quit the missionary council because the council wouldn’t acknowledge them as heretics. I joined a smaller baptist fellowship.


7 posted on 03/02/2011 10:56:25 AM PST by 4mer Liberal (Please support the SFTSOTWDIABMTTPBTTASIFTF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

Seventh Day Adventists, comprised of at least six different sects of American protestantism, are Christian and not a cult.


8 posted on 03/02/2011 11:01:21 AM PST by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millerism

They are a cult.


9 posted on 03/02/2011 11:02:29 AM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

By virtue of their valid baptism, and their belief in Christ’s divinity and in the doctrine of the Trinity, Seventh-Day Adventists are both ontologically and theologically Christians. But Christians, once separated from the Church our Lord founded, are susceptible to being “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine” (Eph. 4:14).

http://www.catholic.com/library/Seventh_Day_Adventism.asp


10 posted on 03/02/2011 11:10:37 AM PST by jacknhoo (Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

I’ve known a few extremist members of the Church of Christ that thought other Christian churches were apostste, but that doen not mean the entire COC is a cult. The extremist were members of small rural COCs. The larger ones I know of are good Bible churches.


11 posted on 03/02/2011 11:11:19 AM PST by MikeSteelBe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

This is 100 percent nonsense.


12 posted on 03/02/2011 11:12:24 AM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nobody
touche with Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh-day_Adventist_Church

Doctrines

Several distinctive Adventist doctrines have been claimed as heterodox by evangelical critics such as Anthony Hoekema. Teachings which have come under scrutiny are the annihilationist view of hell, the investigative judgment (and a related view of the atonement), and the Sabbath; in addition, it has been alleged that Adventist doctrine suffers from legalism.[75]

While critics such as Hoekema have classified Adventism as a sectarian group on the basis of its atypical doctrines,[15][16] it has been considered more mainstream by Protestant evangelicals since its meetings and discussion with evangelicals in the 1950s.[76] Notably, Billy Graham invited Adventists to be part of his crusades after Eternity, a conservative Christian magazine edited by Donald Barnhouse, asserted in 1956 that Adventists are Christians. Walter Martin, who is considered by many to be the father of the counter-cult apologetics movement within evangelicalism, authored The Truth About Seventh-day Adventists (1960) which marked a turning point in the way Adventism was viewed.[77][78]

"...it is perfectly possible to be a Seventh-day Adventist and be a true follower of Jesus Christ despite heterodox concepts..."

– Walter Martin, Kingdom of the Cults[79]

Later on Martin planned to write a new book on Seventh-day Adventism, with the assistance of Kenneth R. Samples.[80] Samples subsequently authored "From Controversy to Crisis: An Updated Assessment of Seventh-day Adventism", which upholds Martin's view "for that segment of Adventism which holds to the position stated in QOD, and further expressed in the Evangelical Adventist movement of the last few decades." However, Samples also claimed that "Traditional Adventism" appeared "to be moving further away from a number of positions taken in QOD," and at least at Glacier View seemed to have "gained the support of many administrators and leaders".[81]


13 posted on 03/02/2011 11:13:42 AM PST by RBIEL2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
It is rather easy to box an Adventists into a conundrum.

1) Ask them if they believe the New Testament is the word of God as revealed through the apostles
2) Then ask them how they reconcile the scriptures (1 Corinthians 14:34) with a woman keeping silent and their prophetess I have to admit, it is kind of fun to watch the leaps of logic, conjecture and backtracking at that point. And if you really want get them to do dances of logic and back tracking, ask them about Ellen White's FAILED prophecy.

Embarrassing Failed Prophecies

In her early career Mrs. White made a number of predictions about Christ's imminent return. The most notable of those was a specific prediction made at a conference of believers in 1856. This statement was later published in the book Testimonies and received widespread attention within the SDA Church. Mrs. White claimed she was shown in vision that some of those present at the 1856 conference would be translated:

I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel: "Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus." Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 131

A Failed Prophecy?

Mrs. White was given a vision showing the fate of those people attending the conference. She specifically states that some of them will suffer the seven last plagues, and some will be alive when Jesus returns. The Whites had such confidence in this "vision" that it was published in Mrs. White's Testimonies to the Church and received widespread distribution. However, by the early 1900s all those who attended the conference had passed away, leaving the Church with the dilemma of trying to figure out how to explain away such a prominent prophetic failure.

The Bible leaves no doubt that when a prophet makes a prediction that does not come to pass, that prophet is not speaking for the Lord:

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. Deut. 18:22

14 posted on 03/02/2011 11:17:29 AM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

Re: “The Adventists are a cult that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons”

******************

The only Adventists I’ve ever known were lovely, caring people — well liked physicians and their families here in the cesspool of L.A. And no, I’m not an Adventist myself...


15 posted on 03/02/2011 11:20:43 AM PST by CaliforniaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

At least they don’t worship a dude in Italy wearing a funny hat. Or I should say a dude that changes after the old dude dies. Pot calling Kettle black, is all it is. Everyone thinks their faith is the WAY, or else it wouldn’t be their faith.


16 posted on 03/02/2011 11:37:32 AM PST by runninglips (government debt = slavery of the masses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

You said:

1) Ask them if they believe the New Testament is the word of God as revealed through the apostles
2) Then ask them how they reconcile the scriptures (1 Corinthians 14:34) with a woman keeping silent

Ahh, so by exploiting people’s goodwill, using slightly clever intellectual misdirection and getting them to agree with an overly broad definition, you then reverse course and attack them for lack of specificity... And then criticize them corporately for intellectual deficiency...

I am so underwhelmed at your dishonesty. Anyone can play that stupid word game with anyone. Only dishonest people do, but then, that was obvious from the start.


17 posted on 03/02/2011 11:41:23 AM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

If anyone wants to know what this is actually about...

The letter to the church addresses a cultural clash of the day... One faction culturally, did not allow women to speak in public, and one did. The people who did not allow it were offended greatly at the impudence of the women who spoke up publicly and violated very strict cultural mores.

The apostle (believed to be Paul) was of the opinion that in this clash, one of the sides had to compromise, and for reasons we don’t know, chose the side he did. Perhaps he thought it unwise to try to undo a societal stricture by force, or maybe it was just about who the majority was, we don’t know. Whatever the case, we don’t know if the church followed the advice or not. what we do know is that from reading the account, the instruction given is not a doctrine from Christ, but is, as is much of the the new testament, precisely that... The accounts of the disciples and apostles, concerning the life of Christ and the events shortly following his death.

There is no reason to think that this is anything other than the account of a cultural clash. Certainly, there is no reason to think this is a doctrine.


18 posted on 03/02/2011 11:54:25 AM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bkepley

“Don’t forget the Amish. I’ve been reading some incredible things about them here. “

LOL!


19 posted on 03/02/2011 12:13:32 PM PST by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Made from the right stuff!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher

Wow, it is obvious you do not understand the definition of dishonest (a disposition to lie, cheat, or steal). Please explain how asking two very simple questions is dishonest.


20 posted on 03/02/2011 1:06:57 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

I understand it perfectly. And you, too. And so does anyone who reads through this.


21 posted on 03/02/2011 1:10:19 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

dishonesty is NOT an inclination to lie, cheat, or steal.

It is many things, including your fake “entrapment” maneuver.

I know the script, I know how it goes...

“Do you believe the new testament is inspired of God?”

“yes”

“Well, here’s a text that tells women to be silent, and then you claim to have female prophet. So, you’re violating the bible’s instructions.”

yeah, I know where all these dishonest arguments go, seen them before, recognize them a mile off. Your own flourishing dishonest telegraphs itself in your posting.


22 posted on 03/02/2011 1:14:10 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
Seventh-day Adventists won't tell you they are behind the "Revelation Seminars" they sponsor. They act all" interdenominational" if questioned.

There have been mailing locally for this. It takes quite a bit of digging from what they give you to find out who's behind it.

23 posted on 03/02/2011 1:43:25 PM PST by Lee N. Field (Mr. Darby's bad laudanum dream affects us still. Bad Eschatology Has Consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo

There is such a thing as a “Christian Cult”
You may disagree.
That is fine.


24 posted on 03/02/2011 2:09:46 PM PST by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
that is as dangerous as the Jehovahs Witnesses or the Mormons

So since neither one of those is dangerous, I won't worry about the SDA's.

(A bit peculiar, perhaps, but not dangerous).

25 posted on 03/02/2011 2:12:37 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bkepley

A Mormon bit my sister.

A Jehovah witnessed it.


26 posted on 03/02/2011 2:13:57 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
who thought the world would end, tomorrow, or the next day, or the next day

FR has an entire "Rapture imminent any day now" caucus that believes exactly that.

27 posted on 03/02/2011 2:16:05 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher
Now who is being dishonest - I postulated no such "entrapment". I only asked how one can reconcile two beliefs that are opposite of each other. This allows the individual the opportunity to present their side and gives room for them to come up with an explanation. If they can provide a logical explanation, then we are able to proceed with reasoned discourse.

However, if they cant provide a logical explanation, then it has been made apparent that there are conflicting beliefs. The uncomfortable feeling that is associated with holding two conflicting beliefs is call cognitive dissonance. People often become very angry and frustrated when confronted with with such a situation. They will often not even attempt to resolve the conflict but resort to other expressions of their anger.

As for your assertion that dishonesty is not an inclination to lie, cheat or steal.... you really should consult a dictionary as it is certainly included in the definition.

dis·hon·es·ty
   /dɪsˈɒnəsti/ Show Spelled[dis-on-uh-stee]
–noun, plural -ties.
1. lack of honesty; a disposition to lie, cheat, or steal.
2. a dishonest act; fraud.

28 posted on 03/02/2011 2:34:15 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher
what we do know is that from reading the account, the instruction given is not a doctrine from Christ, but is, as is much of the the new testament, precisely that... The accounts of the disciples and apostles, concerning the life of Christ and the events shortly following his death.

So the other books are basically like short stories that someone thought was interesting enough to include.

And here I thought it was Jesus speaking through the apostles via the Holy Spirit.

29 posted on 03/02/2011 2:46:15 PM PST by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher

These guys have a point; Women cannot be priests/ministers nor have leadership roles in the church, yet the distinguishing SDA belief set is built around one charismatic lady. They have a point and they are not playing unfair.
However, SDA’s are christian and not a ‘cult’ in its present form.


30 posted on 03/02/2011 3:23:32 PM PST by RBIEL2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

As long as they aren’t strapping bombs onto themselves and blowing up people I don’t care what they choose to believe.

Read the U.S. Constituion and the First Amendment.


31 posted on 03/02/2011 3:28:16 PM PST by Fledermaus (RINO'S no more! Defeat socialist in every party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain

Fortunately, not everyone has your binary, blinkered view of Scripture, and isn’t handicapped like you are.


32 posted on 03/02/2011 5:40:05 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

You said: “As for your assertion that dishonesty is not an inclination to lie, cheat or steal.... you really should consult a dictionary as it is certainly included in the definition.”

It is not the ONLY definition.

My statement is absolutely correct.


33 posted on 03/02/2011 5:41:36 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RBIEL2

You said: “These guys have a point; Women cannot be priests/ministers nor have leadership roles in the church, yet the distinguishing SDA belief set is built around one charismatic lady. They have a point and they are not playing unfair.”

This is absolutely false.


34 posted on 03/02/2011 5:42:26 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher

That was enlightening. Ever done any comparitive studies within Christianity? I hope your older than 18 to boot!


35 posted on 03/02/2011 6:12:34 PM PST by RBIEL2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RBIEL2

It is absolutely false that women cannot be in leadership positions in the SDA church. I don’t know how you can argue with that. It’s reality.


36 posted on 03/02/2011 7:56:18 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

I don’t see the contradiction. There were female prophets in the Bible. Some translations of that passage say “wives” instead of “women.”


37 posted on 03/02/2011 9:07:30 PM PST by TheDingoAteMyBaby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TheDingoAteMyBaby
The issue raised is not the issue of prophesy coming from a woman. Rather the area that needs reconciliation is the reverence placed by Adventists on Ellen and specifically positioning her to be the head of their church. This seems to be at odds with scripture and I invite an Adventist apologist to provide an explanation.
38 posted on 03/02/2011 9:21:11 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: bkepley

Why joke? This is serious. There are a number of churchs out there who are leading their members to hell. In fact most are doing this as they do not stick to the Bible alone but add to it.


39 posted on 03/02/2011 10:01:17 PM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jacknhoo

Read the article, it gives adequate proof that the Adventists are a cult. I am sorry if this is where you go, but you should know the truth.


40 posted on 03/02/2011 10:02:40 PM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher

Why is it nonsense? Adventists are brainwashed with these false messages over and over again. Go and ask and you will see that these are true.


41 posted on 03/02/2011 10:03:59 PM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher; taxcontrol
'Certainly, there is no reason to think this is a doctrine.'

You cannot add or remove from the Bible. You cannot say you like this or do not like that and pick and choose. You have to take the Bible as a whole, accept it as without error or you become like the Adventists and other cults

42 posted on 03/02/2011 10:07:32 PM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

I just went here:

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html

The fundamental doctrines... No mention of Ellen White, actually. All from the Bible.

Care to explain why you lied about this?


43 posted on 03/02/2011 10:24:54 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

Adventism is not a cult. That’s nonsense, made up crap.


44 posted on 03/02/2011 10:26:32 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

You said “You cannot add or remove from the Bible. You cannot say you like this or do not like that and pick and choose. You have to take the Bible as a whole, accept it as without error or you become like the Adventists and other cults”

fortunately, I’m not blind and blinkered like your closed mind, and so have no need of arguing silly nonsense.


45 posted on 03/02/2011 10:27:54 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian

As far as I’m concerned, it is catholics who are brainwashed, as well as almost all “protestant” churches, because they cede biblical authority to the claims of power by the Orthodox church (Catholic).


46 posted on 03/02/2011 10:45:55 PM PST by The Watcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher
Fortunately, not everyone has your binary, blinkered view of Scripture, and isn’t handicapped like you are.

What's funny is I was considering checking out an SDA church, but your attitude and nonsensical responses have changed my mind. Congrats.

47 posted on 03/03/2011 8:32:00 AM PST by Sir Gawain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher

Yes, you are all brainwashed. Which are these ‘protestant’ Churches you refer to? The SDA are not protestant — they are a cult


48 posted on 03/03/2011 9:10:38 AM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher

’ I’m not blind and blinkered like your closed mind, and ‘ — oh, so if you’re not blind and blinkered, why do you follow a cult that has as it’s founder the prophetess Ellen G White. Was she a prophet or a scoundrel?


49 posted on 03/03/2011 9:11:51 AM PST by OrthodoxKirkPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: The Watcher
Allow me to correct you once again.

Your exact words in post 22 were:
dishonesty is NOT an inclination to lie, cheat, or steal

This statement is provably false. The dictionary states that the definition #1 for the word dishonesty is "an inclination to lie, cheat or steal". You can verify this at www.dictionary.com

You then later assert that it is not the ONLY definition. BTW, I never said it was the ONLY definition. This is known as the attempt to move the starting point in debating. You are attempting to have others look past your initial incorrect statement by making a slightly modified statement.

So in summary

Your first statement that the definition of dishonesty is NOT an inclination to lie, cheat or steal is in fact, in error. You second statement in the attempt to cover for the first where you assert that it is not the ONLY definition, while true, is a very weak attempt to cover for your first mistake.

50 posted on 03/03/2011 4:42:31 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-76 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson