SDA: Two Thoughts

  • Thread starter Thread starter Esdra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Catholic church was born at Pentecost. All her members since then are able to trace their apostolic successors directly back to the apostles themselves. The Holy Spirit has confirmed these with signs and wonders.

The Catholic church possessed the letters of the apostles and used them in her liturgies underground during the 400 year persecutions. Who later canonized (measured them as authentic apostolic teachings and letters) them 400 hundred years later under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit as the New Testament we have today.

If the Catholic Church has the power to bind and loose from God to canonize which books are inspired of God and which books are not and has the protection of the Holy spirit to take a revelation from God such as the Trinity and make it binding “doctrine” on all Christian believers, 400 years after the resurrection of Jesus. The list goes on on how the Catholic church defended the Apostolic teachings handed down to her from Jesus and the apostles.

Her liturgical faith dates back to biblical times unchanged today in the Catholic Rite, and is recorded in the New Testament. If you don’t believe the Catholic Church’s historical witness from the bible and Apostolic successors?

The secular powers from pagan Rome record in their court proceedings putting to death Popes, bishops and went as far as outlawing the Catholic Church for the next 400 years after Pentecost. The Jewish religion gives testimony that Jesus founded the Catholic Church upon Peter our first Pope.

Those eyewitnesses both secular and non christian are the ones who confirm the Catholic faith from biblical times to the present. In fact the Catholic Church has outlived many recorded nations and kingdoms which have come and left. Yet the Catholic Church has never forgotten them from her historical records.

You are right, The Protestant reformers introduced a “NEW TEACHING OF THE BODY OF CHRIST” as being a different body of believers, interpreting new teachings (sola theologies never heard of before) and a new “spiritual” (symbolic) gospel which gives freedom to different believers to interpret what the books of the bible teach, uniting all protestants under this freedom and new teachings that though believing differently all fall under the “Church”.

1600 years before the reformers the Christian world was Catholic, and all those since Pentecost witnessed from the scriptures to today believe the same, that the Catholic Church is the body of Christ, because of Jesus True presence in the economy of His Sacraments.

Christ never needs to reform his Body the Church, If anything, Jesus needs and has reformed the disciplines of Her members, just as reformed Peter who denied Him three times, yet Jesus never left Peter and Jesus has never left us orphans.

I disagree with you on “it comes down to whom faith is placed in and in whose interpretations are believed”. This is not about a challenge of interpretations or how it comes down to whom faith is placed. The point is God has revealed His Son to us, Jesus has revealed the Father and the Holy Spirit to our humanity. The Catholic Church preaches Christ Crucified, just walk in one and you will view a crucifix in every Catholic Church.

The Catholic church did not interpret, she was given the revelations from God, the Catholic church is commissioned by Jesus to go out in every nation and people in every age of time and “do this in memory of me”, teach, feed and baptise. This the Catholic Church has remained loyal to her commission from God in the Holy Spirit. Why? because her members were there to receive the commissioning from Jesus and handed it on to their successors down to today and will continue to fulfill her commission until Jesus returns for His bride finding her in obedience to her commission.

The New protestant teachings and new interpretation of “Church” teaches contrary to what God has already revealed through His only begotten Son Jesus. That is why Jesus named His Church Rock, so that she cannot change or invent new teachings, The Catholic Church can only give what God has given her, she does not (interpret) do this on her own.

The Catholic Church was given the power to bind and loose and protect by defending the revelations given to her by God, against those things which have come against her and continue to come against the revelations of God, given to her to reveal to every people, nation and tongue in every age.

The Catholic church does not compete to gain popularity with an interpretation. She only proclaims Christ crucified and lives by this example. The Catholic church does not protest against no one, and She does not deny God’s savings grace to no one, nor does she deny that God can save anyone He wills to. This thing the Catholic Church does know, that she was commissioned to tend, feed the sheep and lambs who are “called” into the flock of Jesus.

If your thinking the Catholic church is doing something other than this, then you are misinformed.

Peace be with you
CMatt25;7580055]Who interpreted Herself, the Catholic Church, to be Christ’s rock and only one true Church if not the Catholic Church? Who had/has interpreted She had the gospel, teaching, and succession correct and that Christ at some point did not/does not need to implement reform so no man does put asunder? Protestant reformers are the ones who interpreted the body of Christ and His Church as the body of believers and not set only within the Catholic Church. And they have interpreted Christ needed to reform His Church. In the end it still comes down to whom faith is placed in and in whose interpretations are believed. Not factual history. Indeed peace be with us all
.
 
Gabriel, I understand all you said is your Catholic faith. God bless you and peace be with you as well. Have a good night.
 
That’s not my opinion! That’s what SDAs says, well actually, the term is from the LDS.

Maybe I should’ve put it into inverted commas. Sorry for the confusion.
I thought I read you correct. thank you Esdra. Peace 🙂
 
Gabriel, I understand all you said is your Catholic faith. God bless you and peace be with you as well. Have a good night.
² Gabriel, CMatt.

We are a bit off topic here! 😉 This thread is not about “Did the Catholic Church get it right?” or so ;).

But strangely enough SDAs also don’t come here to answer my OP. :confused:
 
² Gabriel, CMatt.

We are a bit off topic here! 😉 This thread is not about “Did the Catholic Church get it right?” or so ;).

But strangely enough SDAs also don’t come here to answer my OP. :confused:
Esdra, my apologies my friend. I don’t know why more haven’t. Maybe they are tired right now of arguing. I sometime find discussing faith, like politics, ends up going in circles and doesn’t change the thinking of all that many anyway. Peace.
 
In the first place I don’t think SDA dietary disciplines are based entirely on Jewish law and follow it strictly as there are other elements as well, and some provisions they ignore. Before debating would it not be wise to ask one of their adherents or do some research into what is mandated, and what is suggested by their faith in terms of diet? Would not further be of more value to discuss dietary discipline and Saturday observance as separate apologetics issues (beginning with past threads on both topics)?

Has anyone found a link to an authorotative SDA site for their dietary laws?
 
In the first place I don’t think SDA dietary disciplines are based entirely on Jewish law and follow it strictly as there are other elements as well, and some provisions they ignore. Before debating would it not be wise to ask one of their adherents or do some research into what is mandated, and what is suggested by their faith in terms of diet? Would not further be of more value to discuss dietary discipline and Saturday observance as separate apologetics issues (beginning with past threads on both topics)?

Has anyone found a link to an authorotative SDA site for their dietary laws?
Is there already a thread dealing with the SDA diatry laws?
 
Here is the point it seems to me many Catholics miss. In matters of faith, the Catholic faith included, one only has faith. To believe the Catholic Church has always gotten it right from day one, or has never strayed, or Christ has never needed to reform his Church along the way to prevent those gates from prevailing, one must first place faith in what the Catholic Church interprets Herself to be. And if one does not hold to such a faith, her recordings do not necessarily in every case merit fact nor truth to those who do not share the faith. Another consideration might be that an institution declaring Herself as Christ’s one and only true Church obviously might not record apostacy or straying on Her part as that could defeat the purpose of Her declaration. I hope that helps some. It all boils down to one thing. Faith. And faith in what we believe the one absolute, ultimate truth to be. Perhaps yes everyone does not have it totally right. God is God and we are mere human with finite minds for complete comprehension of such a wondrous and remarkable being as God. But God bless and peace to you and all who walk by faith and not by sight.
Matt, I would say that many Catholics don’t ‘miss’ your point, but rather reject it outright as a fallacy.

Faith in Christ is Faith in his Body and Bride.

Peace
 
Is there already a thread dealing with the SDA diatry laws?
I don;t know did you search your topic before you posted? if not do you have a source for the statements you have made about SDA beliefs?
 
Here is the point it seems to me many Catholics miss. In matters of faith, the Catholic faith included, one only has faith. To believe the Catholic Church has always gotten it right from day one, or has never strayed, or Christ has never needed to reform his Church along the way to prevent those gates from prevailing, one must first place faith in what the Catholic Church interprets Herself to be. And if one does not hold to such a faith, her recordings do not necessarily in every case merit fact nor truth to those who do not share the faith. Another consideration might be that an institution declaring Herself as Christ’s one and only true Church obviously might not record apostacy or straying on Her part as that could defeat the purpose of Her declaration. I hope that helps some. It all boils down to one thing. Faith. And faith in what we believe the one absolute, ultimate truth to be. Perhaps yes everyone does not have it totally right. God is God and we are mere human with finite minds for complete comprehension of such a wondrous and remarkable being as God. But God bless and peace to you and all who walk by faith and not by sight.
Good post friend.
 
I don;t know did you search your topic before you posted? if not do you have a source for the statements you have made about SDA beliefs?
I’m pretty sure that it says on the Seventh-Day Adventist Homepage.

No,I don’t have any sources. You see, I read really a lot about this and that in the internet. And normally I don’t remember where I read what to give sources!

Some things here I’ve also read here on CAF.

You see, researching and debating about Religion is my Hobby. I can spend hours sitting in front of the computer reading and researching.

Concerning the Adventists: I’ve read their whole Austrian website through, but as it is in German, it is of less use for you here…
You see, my mothertongue is not English - thus I prefer when researching something reading in German than in English. 😉
 
In the first place I don’t think SDA dietary disciplines are based entirely on Jewish law and follow it strictly as there are other elements as well, and some provisions they ignore. Before debating would it not be wise to ask one of their adherents or do some research into what is mandated, and what is suggested by their faith in terms of diet? Would not further be of more value to discuss dietary discipline and Saturday observance as separate apologetics issues (beginning with past threads on both topics)?

Has anyone found a link to an authorotative SDA site for their dietary laws?
This is a general explanation based on thirty year old memories.

It is not a matter of dietary laws, it is a matter of a health message. It started out pretty middle of the road, no tobacco and no alcohol and at some point no caffeine. It then sequed into no meat - not that meat was forbidden but it was highly encouraged. It was considerably later that the denomination embraced the Levitical clean /vs unclean meat regulations. Kosher went far beyond the Levitical law and SDAs never adopted Kosher (seperate dishes for different foods, etc.)

Somewhere in the midst of that journey, E.G. White had an extensive vision regarding health practices which touched on many dietary practices: salt, baking soda, butter etc. and other health practices. A book may be gotten which is a compilation of all E.G. White’s counsels on health and diet. The following link may be informative.

wordoftruth.seedoftruth.net/books/counsels_on_diet_and_foods
 
Hi Marsha: I’m also a former SDA and would say you have given a very accurate picture of Adventist diet. Most SDA’s are vegetarian, although it’s not required. If they eat meat, they follow the guidelines in Leviticus, where the animal must have a split hoof, etc. I remember a teaching that if you were not a vegetarian, you would not be ‘translated’ directly into heaven when Jesus comes the second time. If you were not a vegetarian, you would die first. (If you died in Christ, you would be raised from the dead).
 
Hi Marsha: I’m also a former SDA and would say you have given a very accurate picture of Adventist diet. Most SDA’s are vegetarian, although it’s not required. If they eat meat, they follow the guidelines in Leviticus, where the animal must have a split hoof, etc. I remember a teaching that if you were not a vegetarian, you would not be ‘translated’ directly into heaven when Jesus comes the second time. If you were not a vegetarian, you would die first. (If you died in Christ, you would be raised from the dead).
Also, E.G.W. said that pastors should not be payed out of title money if they ate meat.
 
Why do SDA’s accept the doctrine of the trinity considering none of thier ilk developed the doctrine?
 
SDA doctrine comes from (1) reading the Old and New Testaments of the bible and (2) they follow Ellen White’s guidance on intrepreting the bible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top