| Author | Message | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1168 Registered: 10-2004  |
The SDAs deny number 6 on that list. Stan, you're so upset about Chuck Smith (maybe) teaching a heretical re-definition of the Resurrection of Christ, but what about the SDAs who teach that JESUS CHRIST totally ceased to exist when He died?! Isn't that much worse? That is a denial of His deity! And that is a denial of His resurrection! They SDAs also teach that Jesus had no human spirit or soul. This is anti-Christ. Adventism teaches a different Jesus. By the way, Stan, have you read the new book by (never SDA) Elmer Wiebe entitled Who is the Adventist Jesus?? I have not read the book, but I have seen an excerpt from it. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 11, 2006) | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1169 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, I want to make it clear that it is not my intention to offend, which I'm afraid I may be doing. I am just very passionate about this subject (as I'm sure you can tell!  ). But I certainly don't want you to feel like we're ganging up on you. I just see this issue a little bit differently than you do, it seems. Jeremy | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1527 Registered: 3-2005 |
OK OK--(smiley) Jeremy, it looks like you win on Ford calling the Sabbath a test. But I know at other times in public, like, when he was with Walter Martin, he did not call it a test. I still don't think he means it exactly like Ellen White, but I concede, Jeremy, you have incredible resources at your fingertips, and I really appreciate you being here. I enjoy the dialogue! Lynne, How well I know about the aspects of the cult-like aspects of SDA. I feel like a heretic right now, because, yes I was brought up in the strictest form of cultic SDA. It is ironic that my Dad thinks I am too soft on SDA, just like you and Jeremy (smiley)--Sorry Dad! I don't want to minimize Jeremy, Lynne, or anyone else's estimation of the true nature of cultic Adventism. In some ways, it is worse than other true cults, because of the greater deception, because it is closer to the truth of Christianity. Maybe part of the problem is that I am 24 years out from SDA--but, please, I had the same exact sentiments many of you are expressing, and I am glad this forum exists to express the anger, and the deceit, and the betrayal, and the ostracizing from loved ones. All that is real. I wish I had a forum when I was processing out of Adventism. I enjoy being on here and interacting. In fact, it was because of the stories posted on this site about the very deceptive spirit of Adventism, that I thought I would like to get involved with the FAF Bible study and forum. It is a huge blessing to me. However, after Dennis posted this thread, and I had a chance to think of the many interesting similarities of SDA to CS, then, somehow I was convicted in my spirit that there are also huge differences. I then read the 28 fundamentals, and clicked on to the link Lynne provided to CS. I was then convicted, after prayer and soul searching, that after posting large numbers of statements that SDA was equal to mormonism, CS, and JW, I was led to reconsider. I re-read Dale Ratzlaf's book, and realized he had also seen the worst part of SDA, yet on an intellectual level had to acknowledge that even though Adventism was cultic, it didn't rise to the level of other cults. I was convicted that Dale was right on this, and I thought over my past life in Adventism, and realized, that even though I was raised with EGW as the final word, yet still campmeetings, and summer camps, I clearly heard the true gospel of salvation, and it planted a seed. I had to honestly admit that this would not likely occur at a Mormon campmeeting. Also, I know my saved mother is not part of a cult as bad as CS. This is my conviction. This doesn't mean anybody else has to believe like I do. I am just stating what I must say at this point. Stan | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 654 Registered: 4-2000  |
Jeremy, The "Adventist Jesus" is a very unfair god. For example, SDA apologists insist that the Mark of the Beast will be imposed upon all those who worship on Sunday when the National Sunday Law is enforced and the death decree is subsequently issued against Sabbatarians. However, if I worship on Fridays in a mosque I would not receive the Mark of the Beast. Obviously, the "Adventist Jesus" is not objective about his treatment of non-sabbatarians. Indeed, their god severely punishes those who honor Christ's resurrection (affectionately referred to as "the Lord's day"). Truly, those who worship on Sunday celebrate a weekly Easter. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Cathy2 Registered user Username: Cathy2 Post Number: 121 Registered: 2-2006 |
I would like to point out that for many, Adventism can be more dangerous than other outright looking and acting Cults, such as CS and Scientology, for just 2 examples, because it is closer sounding to Biblical truth. It is like having a spoonful of sugar with a drop of cyanide in it. Looks good, smells good, tastes good, but it kills you just as good. Other groups are more weird and draw in different kinds and not as many; although, Cult experts say that anyone can be vulnerable to them. With the coming of the Internet, the really wierdness of many Cults is even more known about, now. But few Google Adventism. Adventism useses a lot of intellect and logic and they are, genrally nice, normal people. Also, vegetarianism is popular in society as a whole, right now. SDA's fit in. So are they, apparently, with the law, more and more; even with some New Agers, such as Matthew Fox with his 'Creation Spirituality'. He promotes a global Sabbath on the 7th day. The philosophy of 'Love them into the church' has been acted on for a decade, at least. Some of my own family believe in this method (they routinely try it with me and my children. We are so sweetly loved, my ears ahave Diabetes). I know of people, who came into Adventism through that. In Cult techniche, this is called 'Love-bombing'. It is very, very effective. Many do not even know of the deeper doctrines and are not taught of them, even EGW, until later, after they are members. Even after that, they do not always care; they just keep the Sabbath, don't smoke and eat right, not realizing it is another god. Just a few thoughts. Cathy | ||
| Lynne Registered user Username: Lynne Post Number: 337 Registered: 10-2005 |
Stan - I don't at all want to seem argumentative with you. Perhaps since you were raised an Adventist, you are more comfortable with the culture and it may still be a big part of who you are. You could see the Holy Spirit working throughout your life. And you attribute that to what you were taught in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. However, keep in mind that the same is likely true for people raised in other religions and cults. They have bibles also. I do believe the Seventh-day Adventist church is worse. As I have said before, I would not have become a Mormon or JW because I knew they were cults. I believe Christians should warn people about the Seventh-day Adventist church as being just as dangerous as CS, JW and Mormons, because after all, the doctrine is what it is. I have no problem with being soft on the people within the church and some of the culture it has created and the sincere hearts in the group. But that is all the more reason that people should be warned against the Church. I believe the teachings and the practices in the church make it a cult. Maybe it isn't a cult in the same sense as JW, CS or Mormonism. They are all culturally different. Nor are any of these groups cults in a shaved head sort of way. But it just is what it is. I gratefully have my mind back almost completely. I am not a foolish person nor was I foolish even as an Adventist. I've known some very intelligent Mormons. The spiritual battle is not about intelligence. | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 655 Registered: 4-2000 |
Interestingly, in reviewing dozens of Dr. Desmond Ford's "Good News Unlimited" magazines, I have not noticed quotations from Ellen White. It is possible that I may have missed some--perhaps when the investigative judgment was addressed. I did see an advertisement for a free booklet, that I ordered and read, that put Ellen White in a somewhat negative light (e.g., "Ellen White is the apple of the Adventist eye."). Several non-Adventists have attended the weekly Good News Unlimited Fellowship for many years in Auburn, California that meets on Saturdays. However, these non-Adventists were generally Christians (some were employees or service providers of GNU) who worshipped in their respective churches on Sunday as well. The GNU Fellowship featured a celebratory style of worship. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Cathy2 Registered user Username: Cathy2 Post Number: 122 Registered: 2-2006 |
Lynne (and everyone, too), I understand where you are coming from, just as I do Stan. I think personal perspectives and experiences have much to do with this debate. I was raised in a rather cultic Adventism/closed society and SDA controlling home, yet, I was around out and out Cults, later in life. I see the stark differences and the similarities of a Cult. To me, there are both. I really like what you said, Lynne: "I gratefully have my mind back almost completely" Whatever terminology we choose to use about Adventism vs. other groups, there are a few common denominators among them all. One of them is that our minds become not our own. For example, any of us who keep discovering, yet, another EGW mental filter instead of actual scripture, while we are studying or conversing with other Christians, knows what I mean. Jackob, I agree with Colleen about the Galatians church. Plus, Paul, as their authority, was correcting and protecting them against spiritually dangerous and deadly false teachers. If they had continued in the false teachings, themselves clinging to the false teachers, Paul would have had no choice but to declare that church Anathema, as well, because they would no longer have been in Christ, but in another Gospel. This is what I understand. I want to add another thought to this thread. After reading everyone, it seems to me, imho, we all are in scriptural agreement that Adventism, especially, EGW, is another Gospel, another Jesus, another Spriit and teaches some doctrines of demons--such as Satan bearing our sins instead of Christ. Paul calls all of this and its teachers "Anathema", cursed. Whether or not we use the word "Cult", if we present the foundation of Galations (then Hebrews, I think) and the concepts of the 'Anothers' from scripture, the SDA's, who are readied by God's grace will see it, in God's timing. The non-SDA Christians, who already have a theologically correct Gospel will understand where Adventism goes off the rails. And, hopefully, stop thinking that they are just like other Christans. (I am not saying this is the only way to witness; just a possible scriptural means. The Holy Spirit always leads indvidually, for what is right, at the time) It is interesting (and very sad) to me, that the first place, where I saw and easily understood the SDA doctrine of Satan bearing our sins, was not from a Christian theologian. It was from Dr. Harold Bloom, a Comparitive Religions scholar, who is a Gnostic in real life. Later, I wondered why Christians didn't point this out about Adventism? He had a book about uniquely American-created religions, Adventism among them. Another thing he pointed out and it is very true among generational Adventists: "Adventists have a genius for achieving the American Dream." Of course, SDA's take their material blessings as proof that God approves of them, their doctrine and their obedience, whereas it is only a case of a strong work/educational ethic and an excellect education. If I recall correctly, other groups (even some Christian churches) point to their wealth as proof of God's blessing. It's hogwash. Money is The system of the World and the love of money is the root of all evil. Money proves nothing. Neither do numbers, which is another thing false groups use to prove things. Just observations. Cathy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3733 Registered: 12-2003  |
Very interestng observations, Cathy. How fascinating that you first understood the Adventist teaching of Satan bearing our sins from a Gnostic scholar. Frankly, that's a doctrine that a lot of Adventists don't understandóand those that know it, explain it away. (Yet it shapes them in a deep way.) Lynne, also very interesting insights into the brainwashing techniques of cults. They do sound familiar, don't they? Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1171 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, according to Ford, what do you think happens to those who fail the test? What happens to those who keep Sunday and receive the mark of the beast? I don't see it as being any different than the traditional SDA end-time scenario--salvation by works. He even says that even right now, commandment-keeping reveals who is right with God. When he says, "Those who in all honesty have observed Sunday, believing it to be the Sabbath of Scripture, are, of course, the children of God."--he is implying that those who are not doing it "in honesty" are not children of God. Stan, when I say that I am very passionate about this, that does not mean it is just emotional. I have a deep-rooted conviction about this. We are not just reacting emotionally, but objectively and spiritually. As Colleen said, the longer I am out the more and more I am convinced (and discover) about how bad SDAism is. How bad SDAism seems only increases with time, rather than decreasing. I always think that it can't possibly get worse--and then I see/discover even more! At this rate, you probably won't want to see my thoughts on Adventism 10 years from now! But seriously, as Colleen said, it only seems worse and worse to me. Again, I have to say that I don't think reading the 28 Fundamentals is an accurate evaluation of Adventism. And their most satanic doctrine (Satan atoning for our sins as scapegoat) is, conveniently, not even listed in that public statement (although it is included in their official book explaining their fundamental beliefs). Even if you think SDA is "not as bad" as the other cults in some areas, they are worse in other areas! All the cults are different--but they're still all cults. And since Adventism fits the marks of a cult, I can't say it is not one. And it is important to properly warn people about Adventism. Those who get their information about Adventism from the likes of Walter Martin are just as deceived as he was and think that Adventism is just another Christian church with some unique doctrines. But I remember reading on here before that Martin admitted before he died that if he had not been deceived by the SDAs, they would have never been removed from the category of "cult." Also, here is a quote from MacGregor Ministries' website which quotes Walter Martin before he died:
So, Stan, according to Dr. Walter Martin, SDAism is a cult. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 11, 2006) | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 462 Registered: 7-2004  |
Does it matter whether SDAism is a cult or a dangerous set of heresies? Think seriously, does the label really matter? My frustration isn't with whether SDAism is labelled cultic or not. Instead it is with Evangelicals who are so anxious to be ecumenical and non-judgmental that they refuse to look behind the curtain of SDAism and instead proclaim it "Evangelical but perhaps a little legalistic." It does not require substantial effort to uncover what SDAism teaches behind the masquerade of evangelical sounding statements. But too many Evangelicals have become afraid of being seen as divisive and choose not to look. I don't believe that the problem is whether SDAism is labelled a cult. The problem I see is an unwillingness to call out heresy, even dangerous heresy, in the name of being ecumenical. | ||
| Lynne Registered user Username: Lynne Post Number: 338 Registered: 10-2005 |
Colleen - Cult similarities do sound familiar. One of the first things I remember being taught was about Satan bearing our sins. I trusted the Adventists enough to believe that what I was learning was in the bible. Ric_b - I do think an accurate label of cult reveals the deception. I don't like using the word cult, not even with Mormons, because all of these groups - CS, Adventists, JW, Mormons, etc. are made up of people, real people, sensitive people. So again, this is not a word I like to use on a personal basis. But the definition just is what it is. If Walter Martin were alive now, would he call the Seventh-day Adventists a cult? I really do think he would. I think most Evangelicals don't know any better because experts won't, or haven't called the Seventh-day Adventist church a cult. | ||
| Cathy2 Registered user Username: Cathy2 Post Number: 124 Registered: 2-2006 |
Ric_b, Perhaps, too many Evangelicals are becoming too much like Adventists and vice versa...little by little each decade; 'Christian' fad by fad, 10 C by 10 C, a few works by works, a little bit of leaven by leaven... Are they afraid anymore as much as do they even care or care to know? Many seem pretty complacent to me. It is frustrating and tragic. Food for thought. Cathy | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 656 Registered: 4-2000 |
THE LATEST GNU STANCE ON ELLEN WHITE In the April, 2006 issue of Good News Unlimited magazine, the editor, Ron Allen, gives the following reply to a question from a reader about Ellen White: "I have no personal interest in Ellen G. White. I do not study her books; nor do I quote her. I mention her only when my opinion about her is sought." (TO and FRO with Editor, page 9) This editorial comment by Pastor Ron Allen confirms my research that I posted previously on this thread that EGW is not quoted or promoted by Dr. Desmond Ford and his associates. Praise God! Furthermore, several months ago when I talked with Ron Allen by phone, he was delighted to hear that I was an active member of an Evangelical Free church. He and his family suffered immensely at the hands of the SDA hierarchy in Australia after the defrocking of Dr. Ford took place. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 463 Registered: 7-2004 |
Lynne, Do you think that the only way in which SDAism could be exposed by Evangelicals is to call it a cult? I am convinced that if they would stand up and say SDAism teaches a false gospel and follows the teachings of a false prophet that would get people's attention just fine. And if they would take the time to expose and explain what is false about it to people it would help protect them from deception. Cathy, I fully concur. We visited a number of Evangelical churches that would have been hard to distinguish from SDAism. Churches that spend more time preaching and teaching from the books of men than from the Word of God. Churches that are focused on law just as clearly as SDAism. Churches that cast doubt on our assurance of salvation just as plainly as SDAism. Pointing out the false gospel of SDAism would point a number of fingers within the evangelical movement as well. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1528 Registered: 3-2005 |
Thank you Ric, Cathy, and Dennis for bringing civility back to this discussion. Dennis, thanks for standing up for Dr. Ford. Jeremy, I am deeply offended by your attacks on a true good brother in the Lord, Des Ford. This man was my rock who led me to the true Rock who is Christ. I find it unbelievable that this is an appropriate forum to attack Des Ford. Jeremy, all Reformed Christians believe that obedience to God is evidence that you are saved. I disagree with Those who teach Sabbath transference to Sunday, but, Ford is following their logic, but sticking to Saturday. But Desmond Ford is a genuine Christian, despite being an SDA, and that could not be said if he stayed in teh Christian Science church. Ric and Cathy are right about the ecumenical spirit. TD Jakes doesn't get anybody upset, even though he denies the Trinity. Stan | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 1172 Registered: 10-2004 |
Stan, I am not trying to "attack" Des Ford. I don't doubt that he is a genuine Christian, and has done a wonderful work for the Lord. It was my understanding (especially from reading his Proclamation article) that he believes a person can lose their salvation. If that is his stance, then his comments about the final test and the mark of the beast are basically the same as the SDA scenario, since Sabbath/Commandments/no Sunday worship would be necessary to maintain salvation. I thought that perhaps he has some lingering influence from Adventism which he has not yet seen that it does not square with the gospel. But perhaps I am mistaken. If Ford is Reformed and does not believe that a person can lose their salvation, then I take back my comments, and I can see how his statements could possibly fit with the Reformation gospel. But to be honest, I am offended by Ford's statement above that those of us who don't believe in the Sabbath are "dishonest." But I am not going to presume that Ford is dishonest. He has done a great work for the cause of truth, and I do respect him. But just as with Chuck Smith, we can't think that he can do no wrong or that he can't be in error. I must speak the truth as I see it. Jeremy | ||
| Lynne Registered user Username: Lynne Post Number: 340 Registered: 10-2005 |
Ric - No, I never said the only way to expose the Seventh-day Adventists to Evangelicals is to call them a cult. I'm just saying that if people do not call the Seventh-day Adventist church a cult, I don't believe they are giving an accurate definition. Because under all the deception, realistically by definition, I believe the Seventh-day Adventist church is a cult. The same is true for Mormons and JWs. I don't think the Seventh-day Adventist church is in a class of its own. I don't think that most Evangelicals care have long theological discussions over whether a religion is false. It is either a denomination or not - What would you tell them. It is protestant and false? Cathy and Ric. Keep in mind that the Seventh-day Adventist church is a counterfiet. Of course other churches are going to have the same look and feel, it is the Adventist church that is trying to make itself look like them - not vice versa! I don't want to frequently compare other churches to the Adventist Church because I don't think that would be fair. No church is perfect. Sure, many churches have some legalism and their own cultures. However, I realize now it was the Adventist church that was wrong. Perhaps frequently comparing the Adventist church to my new church could be likened to me comparing my non abusive husband to an abusive ex boyfriend. Comparing a good (yet not perfect) husband to an old abusive boyfriend because they might look alike or something wouldn't be fair to my husband. It would not be fair for me to scrutinize and compare all men to that one abusive man. He is not the same person. Fads are common. Americans, and most people in all cultures by nature, are always seeking something new and different and sometimes fads bring the curious into the churches. Evangelicals aren't baiting and switching like the cults. Stan, I agree with you in that I don't think you can be saved with the CS doctrine, but I don't think comparing Adventism to CS is unreasonable. After all, the Spirit of Ellen White, though more deceptive, comes from the same source as Mary Baker Eddy. Because I believe nobody could be saved if they believe what CS teaches, doesn't make Adventism teachings more accurate. Can we believe IJ (future salvation) and Sabbath over Christ and still be saved? Some Evangelical Christians might argue that. So if there are saved Mormons does that mean they are not a cult by definition? | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3738 Registered: 12-2003 |
Rick, I agree with you that the label is intrinsically immaterial. A false Christ, false prophet and false gospel should be sufficient to make the Christian community become alarmed. Like you, my desire is that the Christian community recognzie what's wrong and take a stand against it. Not only do I wish they would take a stand against it, I wish they would educate themselves enough about it that they can offer Biblical support to those who question or exit Adventism and find their ways into "Sunday" churches. Most of those churches are ill-equipped to recognize let alone help the confusion and trauma those transitioning Adventists bring with them. The religious climate being what it is in North America today, it seems the only way the evangelical community will really pay attention to these problems is if a group is identified as a cult. If it's not a cult, then "we can all just get along", bearing in mind that any Adventist, for example, that we meet might need a little coaching to revise his Biblical views on a few things. We all know that "a little coaching" does not solve the problem. In reality, it takes several months to years of study and immersion in a Christian community with much Bible study to bring an Adventist into a place where he/she can look at life from a Biblical (instead of from a remnant, Ellenesque) worldview. The length of time it takes for a person to process out of Adventism emotionally, spiritually, psychologically, and Biblcially is generally from two to five years. Interestingly, this fact is also true of members of recognzied mind-control cults. The fact is that I am sometimes asked point-blank if Adventism is a cult. Now, I'm not trying to MAKE it a cult. It certainly bears the characteristics, from a dictionary's perspective, of a cult. It also bears the "thumb-print" of a cult on the experiences of those who wake up and actually leave. People who fully leave Adventism and embrace Jesus alone have experiences similar to those of Muslims who embrace Jesus and leave their communities, of Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientists, etc. I'm not aware of people leaving "cultic" churches such as some of the branches of the Brethren and legalistic "mainstream" churches experiencing the same depth of trauma, fear, loss, guilt, etc. While I know that people leaving the Brethren often do experience certain amounts of shunning or anger by those who are close, still the resistance to Bible study and the lack of clarity on salvation and on who Jesus is is not as warped as in those leaving Adventism. (The absence of a false prophet makes a huge difference.) So, when I am askedóas I was unexpectedly when I was interviewed on the St Louis radio station during General Conference this yearóif I believe Adventism is a cult, I say "Yes, I personally believe it is." If I were to say, "Noóit's cultic, but it's not truly a cult like Mormonism is," I KNOW what people's responses would be. Christians in general would feel less urgency about reaching, teaching, evangelizing, and restoring people struggling with Adventism. I'm not saying it's a cult because I believe that somehow the label is important. It's really not. But since the real teachings of the church (which Paulsen is actively supporting) have not changed, since people inside have so much trouble actually looking at what the Bible says, since there is a continuing upholding of a false prophet, since it is founded not on the gospel but on deception, I call it a cult because the Christian community in general will take the problems seriously only if they understand how destructive and controlling the religion really is. Again, it's not the people nor the public statements of the church that make it a cult or not. It's the actual beliefs, practices, teachings, authority, and internal understandings that make it so. Please understand: I have no need for it to be a cult. I just have to talk about it in terms that accurately describe it to people who don't know what it really is. By the by, if the label weren't significant, this thread would yield little passion! It's probably safe to deduce that the emotion the word "cult" generates among us who share a background is a fair indication of the difference the label would make to Christians in general. Colleen | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 172 Registered: 7-2005  |
After reviewing what was said on this topic, I came to believe that we may safely use the label cult in conversations with other christians. Stan, you were not wrong when you presented SDA as a cult, you just need to enlarge your vision about SDA church. In everyday life we operate with three categories of churches: 1. Orthodox christian churches 2. Christian churches with some heterodox beliefs 3. Cults . Now, the evangelicals want to know if the SDA is no. 2 or 3, because itís clear not a orthodox church. It can be a church with heterodox beliefs (like state of dead, sabbath), or it's not a christian church at all, with other words a cult. We all use the label cult with JW and Mormon church, or Christian Science to delimitate these denominations from christian churches. I think that nobody will agree that SDA is a christian church with some heterodox beliefs, we know that this is not the situation. Because SDA is not a christian church, we can safely say that itís a cult. It was build on deception, on anti-gospel message, the IJ, and not only the foundation of the church is opposed to the gospel (another gospel), but the way IJ was and is still promoted is totally dishonest. Reading Ratzlaffís book ìCultic Doctrineî opened my eyes to the fact that the Spirit of Truth, the Holy Spirit has nothing to do with the orchestrated chain of lies the spirit behind Ellen White fabricated. The spirit behind SDA church is another spirit, and because of this spiritual reality we may safely say that the church is a cult. But, and this is why I recognize that Stan maked a good point, when we used the word cult, and stop at this point, we can misled other christians in thinking that, because SDA is a cult, itís not possible for genuine christians to stay for a long time in adventism without jeopardizing their salvation. They will rightfully say that a mormon cannot be a genuine christian remaining a member of his church. After they will come to the conclusion that SDA is a cult like the Mormon church, they will believe that people like Des Ford are nothing than fake christians, because they stayed in the church for a long time. In this way they will only be consistent with the using of the label cult. Believing that Des Ford and others evangelical adventists are nothing than false christians will create divisions in the spiritual body of Christ. I remember that this was the goal of Walter Martin, to promote the real spiritual unity existing in the spiritual body of Christ, the universal church. And if we say that the SDA is a cult and stop at this point, we made a deservice to the invisible and real church of Christ, the body of Christ, the body of genuine believers, leading others to exclude from the fellowship the true christians which exists in the ranks of SDA church. We cannot stop at this point, but we must present the whole picture. After we make clear that SDA is a cult, we must proceed to explain that this church has a special attitude toward the gospel and the genuine christians in itís ranks, adopting the language of the gospel, and encouraging the genuine believers to stay in itís ranks for the only purpose of presenting itself as a christian church. We will explain that the SDA church wanst desperately to be recognized as a christian church, and for this purpose it adopted doctrines like justification by faith alone, through Christ alone. So a genuine believer who really believe true gospel, is in harmony with the teachings of the SDA church. But, and this is a crucial point, we must emphasize that even this harmony is not in substance, but only on the surface. The genuine adventist believer is in harmony with the gospel, but the church is not, itís only semantics. What the genuine believer has in common with his church is only semantics, words. Nothing more than this. Letís take Des Ford. He rejected the Investigative Judgment, promoting justification by faith alone. But now comes the SDA church, professing to believe like him in justification by faith alone, through Christ alone. This is only a deceptuon, because the SDA church had not rejected the Investigative Judgment, like Des. The church has only appear to sustain his position, but not in substance, this is just the surface. Des Ford really believes what the church only profess to believe. For one the foundation is the gospel, for the other is the IJ doctrine, it gives only lip service to the gospel. Only after we presented the complete view of adventism, at the same time classifying the church as a cult, but a more clever and deceptive cult who presents his christian members as proofs of itís supposed christianity, we may rightfully say to the evangelicals: ìStay away from this church, but not from the genuine believers. They need your helpî We can promote at the same time the spiritual unity of the body of Christ and also warning others about the demonic spirit which controls the SDA denomination. Whatís your opinion? |
