Thread: Seventh Day Adventism: Cult or Church?

Howdy all,

Looking for opinions here. We have close family friends who are SDA members. They have recently become more conservative within the SDA, meaning they now strongly affirm the doctrinal distinctives of the group as well as holding to the spirit inspiration of Ellen White's writings.

Walter Martin argues in Kingdom of the Cults that they are an orthodox body with some unbiblical ancillary doctrines. I personally disagree. Their linking of Sabbath observance with the end times definition of the true church coupled with the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment means that they reject Sola Fide. In addition I see their doctrine of Soul Sleep as undermining the resurrection.

What do you all think?

Thanks,
Rob

Rob,

I believe that anyone that holds additional writings along with or instead of scripture is a false gospel. They are violating Rev. 22:18. It's not that they mis-interpret some things, it's the fact that they have a wider authority than the Bible alone. This is also true of Catholics, Mormons, most Charismatics (tongues, dreams, visions) etc.

In Christ,
Scot

P.S. Being a Nutritional Consultant, I can't help but mention as a side note that they do have the best health out of any other group of people in the U.S. They have the least amount of cancer, heart disease, etc. I don't agree with the reasons that they give for the way they eat but they are healthy! :bs2:

I voted "cult."

Check out this article on our church website:

Unorthodox Teaching of Seventh-day Adventists

Phillip

I voted cult because my pastor told me to

I voted cult because all the other baptists did...

No, seriously, because holding the writings of any man or woman as inspired is enough evidence for me!

I have known some SDAs in my time - they were saved, as far as I could tell, but I could not speak for all of them.

How do you distinguish between SDAs being a cult and say the modern charismatic movement. Especially the "third wavers" who seem to deny the final authority of scripture. I voted cult, thought I would bring this up for discussion, maybe I should have started a new discussion.

Cult; Their theology denies justification by faith alone.

I mean it was started by a woman and you know paul wouldnt go for that

Anyone heard of/familiar with the Creation Seventh Day Adventists? They broke off from the SDA church but I can't remember exactly why - and im not sure what the differences between CSDA and SDA are.

This is a link to the website of the only CSDA guy I know (they are obsessed with angels and end times).

WHOA

Thanks for all the responses so far.

Officially, the SDA does not recognize Ellen White's writings as inspired in the same sense as scripture. What they claim is that Mrs. White was particularly insightful in one way or another. However, there is a very strong traditionalist/conservative wing in the SDA that believes Mrs. White was inspired of the Spirit and she claimed such inspiration herself many times (although she shunned the title 'prophet&#039.

Although the SDA officially states that salvation is through faith alone, they immediately deny this with their official doctrine of the Investigative Judgment, which states that Christ entered the Holy of Holies in 1844 A.D. to determine who were truly His by way of their commandment keeping and to make an additional/finishing atonement for these same people. Here you have the Cross destroyed and the works of man elevated to the final criteria for salvation. Also the insistence that the true Church will be marked by Saturday observance in the end times just adds onto this platform of works righteousness. These doctrines are really where the SDA departs from the orthodox faith in my estimation.

While we tend to look favorably on Adventist health practices, we must remember that these health doctrines have their origin in the writings of Mrs. White, not in any scientific research. Much of what she wrote was just a rehashing of Graham/Battlecreek/Jackson nonsense that was in vogue a the end of the 19th century although she claimed Spirit revelation for a lot of it. It is also worth noting that the meat/milk taboo began when she claimed the voice of prophesy at this time stating that all meat and milk would soon be unfit for consumption. From a non-religious nutritional perspective (an apologetic common with the group) there continue to be no conclusive studies that show the avoidance of meat, milk, caffeine or alcohol to be inherently healthful. I am also not aware of any superior health indicators for Adventists as group vs. the overall population, do you have hard data on this Scot?

The SDA is a big group with definite liberal and conservative factions (including a gay group). There was even a reformed wing that had quite a bit of publication in the 60's and 70's. That is why I base my take on their cultic status solely on official denominational statements.

Thanks,
Rob

[quote:c34d7d4a19][i:c34d7d4a19]Originally posted by dado6[/i:c34d7d4a19]
Officially, the SDA does not recognize Ellen White's writings as inspired in the same sense as scripture. [/quote:c34d7d4a19]

FYI:

"In official publications the SDA church continues to defend Ellen White legends, and maintain there was [b:c34d7d4a19]no difference in the degree of inspiration she received from that received by Bible writers[/b:c34d7d4a19] (Review & Herald, 4 October 1928, p. 11; "Source of Final Appeal," Adventist Review, 3 June 1971, pp. 4-6; G. A. Irwin, Mark of the Beast, p. 1; "The Inspiration and Authority of the Ellen G. White Writings," Adventist Review, 15 July 1982, p. 3; Ministry, October 1981, p. 8; see also, Judged by the Gospel, pp. 125-30)."

http://www.watchman.org/profile/sdapro.htm

Phillip

[quote:800d9c2df9]
While we tend to look favorably on Adventist health practices, we must remember that these health doctrines have their origin in the writings of Mrs. White, not in any scientific research. Much of what she wrote was just a rehashing of Graham/Battlecreek/Jackson nonsense that was in vogue a the end of the 19th century although she claimed Spirit revelation for a lot of it. It is also worth noting that the meat/milk taboo began when she claimed the voice of prophesy at this time stating that all meat and milk would soon be unfit for consumption. From a non-religious nutritional perspective (an apologetic common with the group) there continue to be no conclusive studies that show the avoidance of meat, milk, caffeine or alcohol to be inherently healthful. I am also not aware of any superior health indicators for Adventists as group vs. the overall population, do you have hard data on this Scot?
[/quote:800d9c2df9]

I'll try to remember to look it up at my office tomorrow. I know I've read it in at least two of my nutrition books.

Before I go any further, let me say that I don't believe consuming certain foods is sinful. I don't want anyone jumping all over me thinking that I'm saying it's sinful to drink milk and eat meat. Neither do I want this thread to turn into a discussion on health.

I can't quote you a bunch of statistics right off the bat but it is a fact that our meat and milk are full of antibiotics and hormones. Personally, I've seen people overcome difficult illnesses by eliminating these things from their diet. Over-consumption of these foods can destroy the beneficial bacteria in some people that's needed in the intestinal tract. This can lead to numerous problems. Also, the transit time (the amount of time it takes for food to pass through the digestive tract) in heavy meat eaters is about 72 hours. In people who eat meat sparingly or none at all, it's about 12-16 hours. When food sits in the gut for that long, it begins to rot. Obviously, that's not too healthy.

I have a clip of a news article in my office telling about John Wayne's autopsy. They pulled out 40 lbs. of undigested fecal matter from his intestinal tract! He died of colon cancer I believe.

Anyhow, I'm going to stop now. I personally eat meat and use milk (organic) sparingly. I don't promote seventh day adventist doctrine. Like I said though, I have witnessed people become alot healthier (even beat cancer) by eliminating these foods and cleaning out their bodies.

I certainly don't think this has anything to do with E.G. White's "prophecy."

Also, I wouldn't pay too much attention to the so-called "studies." Remember when they told us to avoid butter and use margarine? They're finally figuring out (alternative practitioners have known for years) that our bodies cannot break down transfats and it actually clogs our arteries faster. What about HRT? Now they're admitting that it causes women all kinds of problems, including breast cancer. Those kinds of "studies" are usually put out by the industry that it profits.

O.K. This time I am going to stop now. :bs2:

In Christ,
Scot

Phillip,

Thanks for the link. The SDA site is not accessible now for whatever reason. I read statements on that site some time ago that insisted the Bible is the only rule of faith for believers and that White's writings were a subordinate aid to biblical instruction. There have been SDA authors that have emphasized her alleged Spirit inspiration and many members (my friends included) view her stuff as infallible, but I have yet to an official statement from the church that states her writing is an equal authority to Scripture (without having read the references cited, I don't know if the articles would be considered official denominational pronouncements.). It seems that if this is an official position, they are loathe to broadcast it outside of their own circles and understandably so.

Thanks,
Rob