Experience of Formers Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 5 » Experience of Formers « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through April 30, 2006Jackob20 4-30-06  7:30 am
Archive through May 03, 2006Riverfonz20 5-03-06  4:01 pm
Archive through May 04, 2006Seekr77720 5-04-06  4:13 pm
Archive through May 05, 2006Jeremy20 5-05-06  3:12 pm
Archive through May 07, 2006Jackob20 5-07-06  7:40 am
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
Ric_b
Registered user
Username: Ric_b

Post Number: 498
Registered: 7-2004


Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 9:34 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Part of what is at stake is the credibility of our own criticism of SDA doctrine and the SDA church. When we make statements that are not reasonable and credible such as no SDA pastor understands or teaches the Gospel or that all SDA pastors are dishonest it becomes easy to dismiss all of what we have to say as being unreasonable and uninformed. When we rely on inflammatory rhetoric like stating that SDAism is a "satanic cult" we are only making it easier for SDAs to dismiss what we have to say.

If we hope to reach those who are still trapped in the false teachings of SDAism, then we must be firm, clear, AND ACCURATE in our attacks on these falsehoods.

I think it is more important for us to expose these falsehood for what they are than to become hung up on the label that should be applied to the SDA church.

The vast majority of those who contend that SDAism must be labeled a cult are those who have left SDAism. We need to examine why that is. Do we understand the issues and false teachings better than "outsiders" who have studied the issue? If so, then we can contribute greatly to the Christian community as a whole by explaining these issues clearly and accurately. But just as we can lose credibility with SDAs when we make statements that are not reasonable and credible, we also lose that credibility with the larger Christian community.

But when "outsiders" who have studied SDAism frequently come to the conclusion that they are not a cult, it should cause us to examine why they have made that conclusion. They don't have an emotional stake in that determination and each of us does, so perhaps they have a level of objectivity that we do not and can not have. So while they may have an opportunity to learn from us we may also have something to learn from them.
Seekr777
Registered user
Username: Seekr777

Post Number: 501
Registered: 1-2003


Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 10:16 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ric thanks for your comments here.

I'll be honest and say God has not revealed to me all the untruths that others seem to find within the SDA church but He is revealing much to me.

If I felt there was not truth in much of what was said on this forum I'd walk away and let some self destruct as far as their influence on others. I do care that God's truth be revealed to His children which is why I've tried to say. Don't discredit yourself with inflammatory rhetoric.

You can be right but you can also be "dead right" and lose your influence on others who are searching. None of you have any thing you need to prove to me or anyone else who is searching.

It is the Holy Spirit that leads each person into truth. Please don't anyone here feel they have a thing to prove or even need to label. Open scripture to those searching and let the Holy Spirit do it's work. I hate to tell you this but some need to GET OUT OF THE WAY of the Holy Spirit and let God's truth in the Bible do it's work with the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.

Please believe me when I say this is not aimed at any individual, except possible ME. I know last night in our prayer time after the meeting we all realized that the work of God was MUCH bigger than any person and we needed to listen with discernment and not get out in front of where God wanted us to be.

Please understand that I want to see falsehood revealed and the pure gospel opened up before the people of God. His people are in many churches and outside of churches, they are all precious to Him. Let's stop trying to prove OUR point and instead point them to Christ as He is revealed in Scripture through the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.

With love to each of you,

richard

rtruitt@mac.com


Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 1618
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 10:31 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

And to add to Ric's point, I personally know of very credible cult researchers who know that the core doctrines of SDA are cultic, and they don't like the exclusive spirit of SDAs, and would love to blanket condemn them, but their scholarly objectivity won't allow it. John MacArthur is a brilliant man who does not like SDA doctrine, and is very sympathetic with Dr. Geoff Drew. As long as Adventism has as many true christians in it, who do preach the true doctrine of justification by faith, and it is clear the Holy Spirit is working, then to pronounce the ANATHEMA of Galatians 1:8,9 on the whole group, and comparing it to JW, is not only extremely dangerous, but it borders on breaking a commandment that has never been done away, and that is "bearing false witness against a neighbor". In fact, I do consider the LLU chuch my neighbor, and if I were to accuse Randy Roberts of Satanic Cult preaching, then I would be bearing false witness against him. I have personally listened to his sermons, and they are within the pale of Christian orthodoxy. So as long as that is true, I am not going to disparage him or Smuts Van Rooyen in any way.

Having said all that above, I still am saying that historic SDA as represented by R/S is a cult. That is how I got started down this road that I have now modified, that SDA is a cult, because of the spirit I felt while posting extensively over there. That is the same spirit I have encountered speaking to JW's at my door. So, let us state plainly what is true. One part of Adventism is a cult, but a significant part is not a cult. Walter Martin, one month before he died would answer my question as to SDAs cult status as saying, well it depends, "I know some SDA cultists, and I know born again Christians." That is why SDA is unique from the other three major cults--it is still possible to be a Christian, and believe bad doctrine. The Bible is very clear Romans 10:9,10 says..If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Acts says "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." I don't feel like making people pass a theology exam to make certain they have all the fine points of doctrine correct--SDAs who are Christians, most of them are living in spiritual bondage. That is why I feel so good about trying to help my SDA friends and family come to walking in the light of freedom, and as Chris Lee's parable said so well, 'you might be on the ship, but do you want to be travelling in chains? Get up on the deck and walk in the freedom of the gospel with the Captain.

Stan
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 1621
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 11:48 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Here is another excellent link on what John MacArthur thinks of SDAs and Ellen White

www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/1301-J-16.htm

On this link he says his kids were born at Glendale Adventist, and how he and his kids grew up around SDAs. He realized many of these people were truly born again, and he respected the fine Christian physicians. This is why it is impossible for John MacArthur to label Adventism as a cult. MacArthur also was invited to speak at some SDA meeting, but it was the hard-liners who rescinded the invitation. So, yes, there are true cultists in Adventism and many true Christians. There could never be as many true Christians in JW, LDS, or CS So I think the fact that MacArthur actually knows many SDAs makes him qualified for us to respect his opinion. Also, MacArthur, is very difficult to fool. It is unlikely that he is deceived.

Stan
Dennis
Registered user
Username: Dennis

Post Number: 695
Registered: 4-2000


Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 9:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Stan,

John MacArthur's stance reveals how Adventism continues to deceive the Evangelical world big time. Elder Jan Paulsen, the current GC president, has fully assured us that nothing in Adventism has changed. However, he still claims the SDA Church is a "mainline Protestant church." (deception #2) Where is another Ellen when they need her?

Dennis Fischer
Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa

Post Number: 1380
Registered: 7-2003
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 9:11 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Stan, do you think he's right in his assessment that there will some day be a split? Besides these remarks, are there others within the organization itself that sense such an action? I was in the SB church in the days when there were some pretty hefty discussions going on, and some wondered if they'd split, but I don't hear anything similiar coming from SDA meetings (at least not reported here..and you all are so well connected, I'm sure someone one would hear). I'm just curious.
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 1624
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 10:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Melissa,
I have not heard talk of a split recently. I haven't been around a lot of SDA circles recently, but this recent discussion does pique my curiosity, so I might do more research.

Notice, Melissa and Dennis what MacArthur really is saying if you read that link carefully. I don't think he is saying most of SDA is mainstream. If someone reads very carefully what he said, he is really saying that there is only a small remnant of the "remnant" that are true Christians within Adventism.

I think we are all being misunderstood. I have been saying before MacArthur's article was known about by me, that historical Adventism., which is probably represented by Jan Paulsen is a false gospel. But look what MacArthur is saying. There is enough of a small remnant of true Christians not to call it a cult. In case you think MacArthur's response might be somewhat dated, it should be pointed out that MacArthur still holds the same view of Adventism, as related to me by Geoff Drew--former SDA who gave a testimonial at FAF reunion.

Jan Paulsen probably would not represent MacArthur's view of Adventism. But, at the same time, I respect MacArthur as a man of integrity. He has no fear in attacking false movements, as those who have listened to his tape on RCC will testify. He has been merciless at times to the seeker movement, but why does he appear soft on SDA? He knows a lot of Adventists personally--he knows many of them aren't Satanists (smiley)
I don't know how anyone could deceive John MacArthur. He is very discerning. But, in that link he did say most of the movement was false, did he not?

Why do we have to take an all or none view? All JWs are the same. The organization is monolithic, there is no one preaching the true gospel in a Kingdom hall. For the theological purists, you could take the argument to its logical conclusion, that because historical SDA is at the core of SDA, then SDA must be a cult. But, MacArthur is a theological purist, but he does recognize the diversity in Adventism, and when your kids are born in an SDA hospital, and his kids played with SDA kids, and John discussed SDA theology with many of them, then, how could he be deceived about Southern Calif Adventism?

That may be the point. SoCal is either liberal or evangelical, with a few scattered historical cultic churches. But as long as there are a significant number of true Christians in SDA, why is it necessary to anathematize the whole thing?
I guess I am concerned about the driving need to call everything SDA evil. But we need to point out the errors, but I believe by keeping the rhetoric at a civil level, then, as Ric said, more current SDAs may be interested in what we have to say.

Stan
Snowboardingmom
Registered user
Username: Snowboardingmom

Post Number: 85
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 11:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Richard put it so well when he said "It is the Holy Spirit that leads each person into truth." God doesn't need the help of a label, whatever it is. The Holy Spirit will guide people out of the false gospel (we can all agree on that) as God calls them, despite our PERSONAL opinion of what a false gospel really entails (spiritual influence vs. confused theology vs. partially correct theology, etc...)

There will never be a consensus on whether we should label the Adventist church as a cult or not because the very definition of a cult is an opinion (it's like trying to define what a good parent is). If you think the term cult is broadly defined or narrowly defined (as far as usage) then your opinion will be influenced by that.

God uses us (and our individual views and opinions) to minister to other people with individual needs and opinions. Ultimately, His will will be accomplished no matter how we choose to view Adventism. People will hear what they need to hear, when they need to hear it. Although it may be fun (?) to try and define Adventism as a cult or not, I don't really see it as necessary. In the end, it doesn't matter. God will use what He needs to use of us (including our opinions) to accomplish His will.

Just my two cents...
Lynne
Registered user
Username: Lynne

Post Number: 381
Registered: 10-2005
Posted on Sunday, May 07, 2006 - 11:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dennis - I agree with you. And it has everything to do with spiritual warfare. The bible says in 2 Corintians 2 about Satan that "For we are not unaware of his schemes".

I honestly find it a bit peculiar that John MacArthur so strongly and openly speaks against the Catholics, yet doesn't do that with the Adventists. Could that be because the Catholics don't try to hide what they teach? Because they are open about it? How do you think many evangelical Christians would feel about Adventism if the Seventh-day Adventist Church openly talked about their doctrine like the Catholic Church does?

My experience as an Adventist tells me that yes there are true evangelical adventist Christians. But over time, the doctrine proved itself wrong for me. I most certainly was in bondage and have suffered a great deal over the years as a result. And only because He (Jesus) is greater than that (Satan), the chains were broken.

Melissa - I have been to many Adventist churches over the years and personally never heard of any possible split. Of course, I didn't know everybody, but I never heard of a split. I only have always heard that the churches were being shaked by Satan. There were always so many problems in every Adventist church I attended.







Melissa
Registered user
Username: Melissa

Post Number: 1381
Registered: 7-2003
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 9:08 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes, Stan. I understood his comments about a "remnant" in the SDA church. I actually liked his wording on that point.
Riverfonz
Registered user
Username: Riverfonz

Post Number: 1626
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 11:32 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Grace,
I agree with a lot of your last post. However, there are very objective ways to determine whether a teacher is orthodox or not, and whether or not a false gospel is being preached.

SDA has in common with historical Christianity the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, and the belief in Christ's bodily resurrection from the dead. CS, LDS, and JW all deny these essentials.

However, as we talked about on the justification and sanctification issue, I really like what John MacArthur points out in his book "Ashamed of the Gospel" when he was talking about RCC and the denial of Justification by faith alone, and in fact to be an RCC priest, you have to affirm that Luther is damned forever because he taught the imputed righteousness of Christ.

So, MacArthur's point is: It is not enough to affirm the basic truths of the faith that both RCC and SDA affirm. The great DIVIDE in what is the Christian gospel, and what is a pagan gospel, is 'how are we justified before a Holy God?'

If preachers affirm the basic doctrines of Christianity as stated above, and they preach the Pauline/Reformation gospel of justification by faith alone by grace alone on the account of Christ alone, then they are preaching true Christian doctrine--and it doesn't matter even if they have the SDA label, as I think you pointed out so well on your post. However, the other side of the coin is that even if they have a Methodist label, this does not mean they are preaching the true gospel of justification by faith alone.

This objective criteria to me seems to make sense. This is the Biblical way of labeling. Gal. 1:8,9 clearly says that all who preach a different gospel than Paul preached is to be eternally condemned. That is why, RCC and historical SDA is to be condemned in no uncertain terms, but we are seeing a large movement today in so-called evangelicalism who are also denying the Pauline gospel.

Melissa,
Yes, I think MacArthur holds what is a reasonable view of Adventism--condemning legalism in no uncertain terms, but not condemning the whole organization. I have come to love MacArthur as a radio preacher, and from reading his books, I feel his perspective is right on. Since I am not an expert on the cults and Christian religions, I do consider MacArthur as another pastoral authority. I also applaud him for endorsing Ratzlaff's book "Sabbath in Christ", so this is further proof that he understands SDA doctrine thoroughly, and that Sabbatarianism is to be opposed. But if MacArthur does not regard all of SDA as a cult, then I am not going to use that label either, as using labels like this without the support of the bulk of the experts on cults, is very dangerous, and is not worth the risk in my own view.

Stan
Randyg
Registered user
Username: Randyg

Post Number: 169
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 6:19 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dear friends,
I would like to thank each one of you who have contributed to this discussion. It has been challenging to read, and yet the diversity of understanding and opinions presented has been on the whole, balanced and congenial. I applaud you all for speaking your minds, even though I have winced a few times, and sought shelter after reading a couple of posts. Even the Posters that spoke in stronger terms than I am comfortable with, presented valid and necessary commentary.

We all understand that this discussion could not be as forthright and open within the confines of Adventism. We are indeed privileged to share heartfelt comment without the fear of denominational retribution. Most Adventists recognize that divergent opinions and discussion are not, and will not be tolerated, particularily among those within denoninational employ.

I am not going to address whether the SDA church is a Cult, or Cultish. Each person here can review the standard definitions of a Christian Cult, and then the Adventism they know, and draw their own conclusions. I would invite all the lurkers to do the same. It is an interesting and thought-provoking exercise.

I have observed many fine Christian believers among my Adventist friends and family. For most, the Adventist brand of Christianity is the only understanding they have. I have come to admire their willingness to, through me, maybe gain a broader perspective on what might be acceptable to God. For many this has been a challenge, and yet most recognize that beliefs must be supported by Scripture, and just maybe it is okay to challenge the status quo.

Again, I appreciate all of you, your thoughts, and your willingness to share on what is a very sensitive topic.

May God continue to bless your journey,

Randy Gerber



Patriar
Registered user
Username: Patriar

Post Number: 282
Registered: 3-2005
Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 12:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Dear Friends,

I need to post a public apology tonight for deeply wounding my Ohio friend who happened to see my earlier post regarding the adoption we were rejected for.

Apparently, I misunderstood her response to our rejection on basis of not being SDA. As a result, have caused her and her family pain. I am deeply sorry.

In Christ,
Patria
Colleentinker
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 3925
Registered: 12-2003


Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 11:20 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Patria, I'm praying for you and your friend.

Colleen

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration