| Author | Message | ||
| Mwh Registered user Username: Mwh Post Number: 131 Registered: 4-2006  |
Hello everybody! I was wondering what SDA teaches about other cults, like JW, Mormons, Christian Science etc.? Do they teach that they too are part of the apostate christian church or do they teach that they are cults. One of the reasons I'm asking is that my SDA friend frequently are talking to JW to convince them that SDA is the truth, and she does see them as Christians or in the same place like evangelicals. | ||
| Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2 Post Number: 591 Registered: 8-2004  |
I don't know if there's a 'unified' or 'official' teaching. I do know that as an SDA I was pointed to Walter Martin's 'Kindom of the Cults' as a reference book on who was who and what the different groups believed. I did understand them to be abberent. But then in the SDA mindset all of Christendom except for them is abberant. In my mind JWs and Mormons were simply a little MORE abberant than the rest of apostate protestantism. Christian Science was just plain 'wierd', with it's pretend prophetess and it's denial of physical reality. (Message edited by helovesme2 on August 07, 2006) | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 525 Registered: 7-2004  |
I'm not sure if there is a general consensus among SDA's about those groups. In my background, we always considered those groups as being deceived by a false prophet (little did I know it was the pot calling the kettle black!). Yes, I think SDA's consider any other group who calls themselves Christian to be apostate, but I think they still recognize these groups are in a slightly different category. Also, if I recall correctly, it seems SDA's almost felt like it was a validation of EGW's ministry, because she was the lone "modern-day" true prophet amid the other false prophets of the same time period. I guess because there is always supposed to be more false than true to confuse the masses, there you have the several false ones surrounding the one true--in their eyes. | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 111 Registered: 6-2006  |
I can't speak for my husband, but once when I mentioned to a close SDA friend that the SDA church had an awful lot in common with the JW's he freaked out! His reaction was "How dare you!" which, I still think is funny, because the more I've learned about SDAism, the more I'm finding that they really do have a lot in common. Helovesme2, it's interesting that you were pointed in the direction of Walter Martin. Wasn't he kind of a thorn in the side of the SDA church? My in-laws didn't like it very much when I played some of his audio sermons in the car one day! | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4428 Registered: 12-2003  |
I agree, Raven, about the SDA attitude about the "really, truly false prophets" validating Ellen White. I remember specifically learning in school why Ellen was true compared with Joseph Smith. I'm not sure if Adventists would call Mormons and Jws "cults"óI don't remember that label being used. I do remember the internal feeling of condescending smugness that they were false and deceived, pretending to be what we really were: the one true church with God's one true last-day prophet. Oh, my... Leigh Anne, Walter Martin was a thorn in the side of a great deal of Adventistsóat least he caused a great deal of trouble. Because of his research into Adventism, the church published a book, "Questions on Doctrine", that re-stated Adventist beliefs in language that would sound evangelical without completely compromising the bottom line of Adventism. Much of the church believed the book "sold them down the river" by denying true Adventismówhich it actually did, in a wayóbut at the same time it "saved" Adventism from being listed as a cult in Martin's book. The book subsequently fell out of print. Before he died, Walter Martin was re-visiting his questions about Adventism because he could see that they were not teaching the doctrines of salvation and judgment the way Q on D had suggested they taught them. He had an fascinating Q & A on the Jon Ankerberg show with William Johnnson, editor of the Adventist Review, in which he asked him straight questions, but Johnnson couldn't give him straight answers. Martin kept asking, also, why the church didn't republish Q on D. He said if they did republish it, much of his concern would be alleviated. They did not republish. About two years ago an heirloom edition of the book was republished by Andrews University pressónot an official SDA publishing houseóand it had notes by church historian George Knight. But it is not an "official" denominational bookóit is part of an "heirloom" series Andrews has produced. Martin died before he could complete his re-opened research. He was seriously thinking he might have to recategorize Adventism as a cult unless they could absolutely prove to him that they believed the atonement was complete at the cross, they did not use EGW to interpret the Bible, etc. There is an excellent reveiw of the republished Q on D which includes George Knight's comments about answering Martin's questions with the book. This review is in the March/April, 2004 issue of Proclamation, and it's available here: http://formeradvent.temp.powweb.com/Proclamation2004_MarApr.pdf. Colleen | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 113 Registered: 6-2006 |
Thanks Colleen! I didn't know that Q on D wasn't rebublished. What a lousy trick. I know that my Fil has a copy of it at his house, as I've seen it in his extensive EGW library. How do most SDA's view Q on D? Was this reply to Walter Martin a well known fact to church members? Or did it just magically appear? Since it "looked" evangelical do you think it confused a lot of SDA members? Curious, Leigh Anne | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2275 Registered: 11-2002 |
I guess regarding this discussion we sure all have different experiences. Most SDA's I am close to really think the LDS are way farout but at the same time think the JW are much closer to truth than regular, mainstream Christianity. The JW is somewhere between truth (SDA) and false (the rest of Christianity). This I was told by several SDA's is because the JW's at least don't teach that dead people go to heaven. They don't have it quite right about the state of the dead but they are more closer to right than mainstream traditional Christianity. Also, SDA's like it that one cannot become a bapitized JW is he/she still smokes cigerettes. The SDA's are very impressed with all the rules the JW's must abide by even though the Adventists think the JW rules are wrong rules and that the Adventists have the right rules. The very fact that the JW religion has a lot of rules impresses the Adventists. I would incourage you all to go to www.watchthetower.org and go to where it says Watchtower Steals Artwork. Apparently the JW children book has stolen the artwork from the SDA Bible Stories and other Uncle Arthurs books. I saw that and thought, "Oh well, why would anyone care? After all EGW sure did steal a lot of what was in her books." At the same time the Adventists are impressed with the LDS's dietary rules and the organizations welfare system in taking care of their own. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4432 Registered: 12-2003 |
I don't really know, Leigh Anne. It's been out of print for many years; I remember seeing it in my parents' bookshelves when I was a pre-teen. The book was published in 1957, I believe; I don't know how many years it remained available. It's been out of print for a long time, so most people I know don't really remember the book that well. A few years ago Richard worked with a man who grew up in Holland. He was a dyed-in-the-wool historic Adventist, and when my husband knew him in the mid-90's, the man was around 60. He remembered Q on D very well, and he was STILL upset about it. He told Richard one day that Q on D "sold the church down the river". I really don't have a sense about percentagesówho approved, who didn't. I do know that Q on D was put together by some church leaders who believed SDA doctrine should be more evangelical. I suspect they may have hoped Q on D would inaugurate a new, more Christian flavor into Adventism. George Knight points out in his comments in the new heirloom edition that the book actually introduced tension into the church that has never been resolved. Steve Pitcher's review at the link above is comprehensive. I think you'd actually find quite a few questions answered there. Colleen | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 115 Registered: 6-2006 |
Thanks Colleen. That's interesting. I remember having sort of a conversation with my Fil about Walter Martin several years ago. He told me that Martin raised suspicions about the church but that the church actually proved that it was legitimate and not a cult. This conversation we had wasn't too long after the "scandal" of Pastor Mark Martin forcing his congregation to wear wedding rings and getting kicked out of the church. In hindsight, I'm amazed at how some of these stories have been presented to me. At the time I was a teenager and was in love and wanted to believe! Now that I can see the big picture I don't know whether to laugh or to panic. Thank you for your insight and the link! Susan, thanks for the info. All those rules are giving me a headache. It makes me wonder - how does a person react if all their lives their faith was dogged with the term "cult". Also, why would anyone want to steal that crazy artwork??? Regarding the JW's, I took an extensive bible study years ago from a former JW (30 years!) who went on to leave the organization and became a minister in the Baptist church. His studies were so interesting and I learned so much from him. Here's a link to his counter-cult ministry - www.challengemin.org Leigh Anne | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 289 Registered: 7-2005  |
Leigh Anne, What I believe about QOD is that this book is part of the work of adventism deception, of double talk. I believe that George Knight's evaluation is partially correct: QOD is a restatement of old adventists beliefs. But the other part of knight's evaluation is incorrect: "a restatement in a language that the evangelicals can understand". In fact is a language that deceived evangelicals about the SDA true beliefs. Evangelicals believed that the SDA had changed, but in reality it was not. Evangelicals removed the label cult because they thinked the SDA official position is different than of the pioneers position, that SDA abandoned the unfinished atonement, and because of this, the SDA church is now evangelical. Knight rightly points that the unfinished atonement was not abandoned, the book stated that only the sacrifice was finished, only the sacrificial phase of atonement was finished. The atonement still needs the final phase, started in 1844, to be finished. The believers' sins are still on the record, they are not blotted. QOD also served a second purpose: because the language of it permitted an evangelical, it encourages a sort of hypocrisy in the members of SDA. Because the book spoked about a finished atonement on the cross, this was a language that many adventists who rejected the Investigative Judgment and the unfinished atonement could use for stating their beliefs, at the same time appearing as loyal adventists. I'm remembering what Dale Ratzlaff said about an advice he received from someone who was a respected professor in adventism, when Dale said that he can no longer support the Investigative Judgment and was called to talk with the president of the conference.
QOD was a helpful tool for many evangelical adventists to communicate their loyalty to church at the same time beying disloyal, having their private interpretation, rejecting IJ and the incomplete atonement. Sadly, many evangelical adventists are involved in this kind of deception, and others are still hoping that adventism will reject the IJ and the unfinished atonement. They need our prayers. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4436 Registered: 12-2003 |
Exactly, Jacob. You are so right. Colleen | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 116 Registered: 6-2006 |
Thanks Jackob, In reading your post, I was reminded of that earlier post of "Why the secrecy?" There's an awful lot of deception isn't there? Do you think that if there wasn't so much bondage in works that there would be less deception? Leigh Anne | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 292 Registered: 7-2005 |
The deception is only because of the identity of the SDA church. The Investigative Judgment and the Sabbath are the true identity of the church. To be an adventist and believe the gospel at the same time, you must pose as loyal to these two doctrines. Without them, you will no longer be a SDA, you will have no longer the SDA church. My belief is that at the root of the deception is this problem, and the fact that many discovered the gospel but are unwilling to renounce their adventist identity. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4442 Registered: 12-2003 |
Absolutely. The deception is not so much the "works" as the identity and lack of integrity. To be true to Adventism, one must believe deception. To become aware of the deception but to love Adventism more than the truth is to perpetuate the deception furtheróonly now the deception is even more dangerous because it involves ignoring reality. This ignoring tears down a person's own integrity. A true-blue, sincere Adventist who believes he's embracing truth has more integrity than an Adventist who doesn't believe "all that stuff" but stays anyway because of love for the community or lifestyle or comfort zone or identity. Again, this self-deception is powerful and is rooted, as 2 Cor. 3 explains, in a spiritual power that dulls the mind. There truly is a spiritual battle being fought for the souls of all people caught in false gospels. Colleen | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 107 Registered: 7-2005  |
Grace-Alone, you said, "Mark Martin 'forced' his congregation to wear wedding rings..." Are you sure of the 'forcing' part? My husband was attending the Glendale SDA Church at the time of the Mark Martin scandal. He has told me some of the events, but he never mentioned anyone being 'forced' to wear wedding rings. Honestwitness | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 117 Registered: 6-2006 |
Hi Honestwitness! I wasn't serious. Actually, I was just relaying the story in the way that it was related to me some 20+ years ago. My husband was a teenager at the time and a very conservative SDA. When it happened I remember him telling me that Pastor Mark had rebelled and told people they could wear wedding rings. Of course, he didn't know what really happened, but was shocked at the story. He probably heard if from his parents who were appalled at the rebelious minister. Recently, thanks to Pastor Mark's web site, I was fortunate to hear the story straight from the horse's mouth (from the audio section). It made me laugh to hear it, because it was such a scandal in the eyes of my hardcore SDA in-laws. All these years I've had this negative picture in my head of this man who turned out to be a real crusader for Christ! So, in other words, I was being sarcastic... sorry... Leigh anne | ||
| Grace_alone Registered user Username: Grace_alone Post Number: 118 Registered: 6-2006 |
Colleen and Jackob, in reading your posts, I'm reminded of... The Truth shall set you free! Freedom in Christ. Truly trusting in Jesus and embracing the gospel of salvation will only make you more of who God has created you to be! And that is where true happiness is. You're absolutely right about deception and tearing down a person's integrity. That's true in all situations. Thank you for that insight. | ||
| Dd Registered user Username: Dd Post Number: 694 Registered: 7-2004 |
Speaking of deceptions...don't you think the "top heads of power" (GC leadership and leadership on down the ladder) have a lot to do with the average SDA member's misunderstanding or confusion? I remember watching the DVD on the historical doctrinal changes of the Seventh Day Church of God and thinking there has to be many in Adventist leadership who know the truth of SDA "truths" but keep the cover-up going. Unlike those COG leaders who exposed their church's errors (which ultimately cost them personally), the SDA leadership continues to cover up and change historical facts. This is deception at its very worst. Greedy, power-hungry leaders determined to keep their power in tact. Just another sign of a cultish organization. Leigh Anne said it..."The truth shall set you free"! Give me Jesus! Denise | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4446 Registered: 12-2003 |
Denise, it's so good to see you back here! Yes, I agree with you. I am convinced that deception is the hallmark of the spirit of Adventism. The church was founded in deception, and deception is how it continues to "thrive". I believe the "heads of power" hold much responsibility for the fraud (let's call it what it really is). Colleen | ||
| 91steps Registered user Username: 91steps Post Number: 77 Registered: 8-2005  |
"Speaking of deceptions...don't you think the "top heads of power" (GC leadership and leadership on down the ladder) have a lot to do with the average SDA member's misunderstanding or confusion? I remember watching the DVD on the historical doctrinal changes of the Seventh Day Church of God and thinking there has to be many in Adventist leadership who know the truth of SDA "truths" but keep the cover-up going. Unlike those COG leaders who exposed their church's errors (which ultimately cost them personally), the SDA leadership continues to cover up and change historical facts. This is deception at its very worst. Greedy, power-hungry leaders determined to keep their power in tact. Just another sign of a cultish organization." Dd, are you sure you have never worked at the GC??? Because you hit the nail on the head. I worked in the Security Dept at the GC for over 6 years and witnessed so much corruption it isn't funny. The "elected" officials of the church are no better then our elected Officials in Washington. As the late father of my best friend used to say, "they are so crooked that when they die they can screw them into the ground". Most of the "elected" officials, (who are NOT elected by the members but a good old boy network) are only interested in their own interests and how they can keep their offices. I have to write a book on what I experienced there, but I imagine I would get sued big time. |
