Who are the early church fathers for SDAs?

[anodos]

However, there are beautiful, God fearing, kind Christians in that tradition as well as all other Protestant traditions. To damn them for not believing as the Catholic Church believes is, in my opinion, unfair. My parents are examples of persons living upright Godly lives, and as examples of such to my siblings and me. I will see them again in Heaven.

In my postings about SDA, in this thread and others, I have attempted to keep this view uppermost (apologies if it doesn’t seem that way at times! )
I believe the SDA denomination is in error when it comes to history and many of their doctrines. I also have great respect, approaching awe, for the SDAs that I know; they seem to have an all-pervading gentleness and graciousness, and they have more respect for health and education than most other Christians that I’m familiar with. They are a beautiful, holistic denomination.

 

[HoosMommie]

Yes, indeed, the SDA church believes that health and education are paramount. If you look around, you will see elementary schools, high schools (academies), colleges and universities around the entire globe. You will also see many, MANY hospitals around the world because the church’s belief is that if persons are sick or in pain, first minister to their physical needs and they will be more open to one ministering to their spiritual needs. For that I am grateful to the SDA church.

It was not this thread that nearly sent me into orbit.

 

[nevadairenaeus]

What about early Christian sources? I have read a few SDA essays about the historical practises of the early church, and it seems like they would have had to go back to someone in an attempt to verify this, not just to an 18th or 19th century author. The “27 Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh Day Adventists” mentions (but does not dwell on) a few ancient names, including Ignatius of Antioch, and appears to acknowledge that these were Christian authorites - even though it manipulates selected teachings to fit the editor’s views.

I don’t think Ignatius of Antioch is someone the SDA really want to rely on for quotes when he taught things like the following:

Epistle to the Magnesians

“For if we still live according to the Jewish law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace. If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death–whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Master–how shall we be able to live apart from Him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did wait for Him as their Teacher?”

“It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity, that so every tongue which believeth might be gathered together to God”

Epistle to the Philadelphians

“But if any one preach the Jewish law unto you, listen not to him. For it is better to hearken to Christian doctrine from a man who has been circumcised, than to Judaism from one uncircumcised.”

"For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of repentance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren. If any man follows him that makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If any one walks according to a strange opinion, he agrees not with the passion. Take ye heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever ye do, ye may do it according to God. "

 

[anodos]

I don’t think Ignatius of Antioch is someone the SDA really want to rely on for quotes when he taught things like the following:

Epistle to the Magnesians

“For if we still live according to the Jewish law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace. If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord’s Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death–whom some deny, by which mystery we have obtained faith, and therefore endure, that we may be found the disciples of Jesus Christ, our only Master–how shall we be able to live apart from Him, whose disciples the prophets themselves in the Spirit did wait for Him as their Teacher?”

“It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity, that so every tongue which believeth might be gathered together to God”

Epistle to the Philadelphians

“But if any one preach the Jewish law unto you, listen not to him. For it is better to hearken to Christian doctrine from a man who has been circumcised, than to Judaism from one uncircumcised.”

"For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of repentance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren. If any man follows him that makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If any one walks according to a strange opinion, he agrees not with the passion. Take ye heed, then, to have but one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup to the unity of His blood; one altar; as there is one bishop, along with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants: that so, whatsoever ye do, ye may do it according to God. "

I know, and I mentioned a few of these quotes when my SDA friend asked to know some of my reasons for accepting Catholicism over Adventism. (At the time, my reasoning was that Sunday worship etc. was not a later “Roman” invention, but something that existed from the start of Christianity; if it was wrong, it was wrong from the very beginning.)

 

[nevadairenaeus]

It will be more difficult than I thought to respond to the Adventist friend (who mails me things sometimes). I was not raised SDA and was not taught to view the ancient church as apostate; in fact, many of the churches that I was familiar with were in the process of trying to “become” the ancient church (though this didn’t seem to involve much study of the Fathers, and anyway, how do you become something that no longer exists?).
When I began to read some of the early writings, I was amazed and excited, along with feeling peeved that I had never really been told about early Christianity.

It makes sense to me to go to the early church itself if I want to know what Christianity taught and did from the beginning. It seems that I can’t do so with an Adventist. Resources welcomed, and thank you!

Although I come from a Mormon background, which differs in many important ways from the Seventh Day Adventists, both churches do seem to teach that early Christian church fell into apostasy pretty much right after the last apostle died. That belief in an immediate and universal great apostasy makes it convenient for them to dismiss any Church Father who contradicts their doctrines. If the Church was already corrupt by the second century then it doesn’t really matter what Ignatius or Justin or Irenaeus taught – they were apostate teachers. If selective quotation from the Church Fathers seems to support particular Mormon or SDA beliefs, then they can argue that some part of the truth remained despite the overall corruption. It’s a heads I win, tails you lose situation. No matter what the Fathers wrote, it can be interpreted as supporting their belief in a great apostasy.

For what it’s worth, here’s what I think is a good way to approach the subject for Mormons, and perhaps for a Seventh Day Adventist as well.

1. Stress the promises Christ made in the New Testament to sustain his Church. The continuity of the Church is not dependent on the holiness or even faithfulness of its earthly leaders. It depends on the faithfulness of Jesus to his Bride and Body. How can Christ be the Good Shepard if he abandoned his flock right when they need him most, when they were being assaulted by persecutions and false teachings? How can I have faith that Jesus will sustain me if he so readily abandoned his own Bride to corruption and death?
2. Stress the similarities between the God’s everlasting covenant with Israel and Christ’s covenant with his Church. In scripture both are portrayed in terms of a marriage. In spite of Israel’s many periods of unfaithfulness and sin, God remained true to his covenant. Even turning the Son of God over to Romans for crucifixion did not nullify the promises of God to the Jewish people. They will always belong to Him. As Paul taught in Romans, “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? Of course not … For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.” Would Jesus’ commitment to his Church, the new covenant, be any less unbreakable or everlasting? God’s commitment to Israel spans the millennia, but Christ’s to the Church lasted less than a generation or two? Frankly, that sort of thinking is blasphemous and an affront to Christ’s love.
3. With those points in mind, it can also be helpful for them to start reading the early Church Fathers. What do we observe? Continuity, love of God, and a willingness to die rather than comprise the apostolic faith? Or do we observe drastic changes in doctrine, a lack of love for God, and willingness to modify the faith to make things more convenient? Which of those alternatives is more plausible should be self-evident if someone actually reads the Fathers themselves rather than just selective quotations.

 

[Pythons]

The SDA denomination is essentially anti-Catholic; apart from this aspect of its nature, I don’t believe it would continue to exist (unlike many other Protestant denominations which - lately, at least - seem to readily accept that Catholicism is one among many possible forms of Christianity).

However, I wanted to mention that, unlike Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is not a cult. Though they reject certain Christian teachings (such as Hell and the immortality of the soul), SDAs do acknowledge the trinity of God, the necessity of baptism (though I’m not sure if they see baptism as being for the remission of sins, or something more like a symbol of obedience), the deity, humanity, death and resurrection of Christ, and the potential to lose one’s salvation, among other valid Christian doctrines.

One cannot be a Trinitarian while categorically rejecting the Council of Nicaea…
…Specifically that part of the Council which affirms that Christ was NOT “mutable”.
…Ellen White & her religious contempories both maintained He was mutable.
…Even going so far as to say what would have happened IF Christ mutated.

Examples:

Charles S Longacre
IF it were impossible for the Son of God to make a mistake or commit a sin, then His coming into this world and subjecting Himself to temptations were all a farce AND mere mockery. IF it were possible for Him to yield to temptation and fall into sin, then He MUST have risked heaven and His very existence, and EVEN all eternity. That is exactly what the Scriptures AND the Spirit of Prophecy say Christ, the Son of God did do when He came to work out for us a plan of salvation from the curse of sin.

IF Christ “risked all,”** EVEN His ETERNAL EXISTENCE in heaven, then there was a possibility of His being overcome by sin, and IF overcome by sin, He would have gone into Joseph’s tomb and neither THAT tomb nor any other tomb would EVER have been opened. All would have been lost and HE would have suffered “eternal loss,” the loss of ALL He ever possessed &; His DIVINITY AND His humanity and heaven itself would have been "lost & eternally lost**

It was possible for one of the God-head to be lost, and eternally lost - and IF that had happened, and it WAS possible to happen, “God, the Father”, would still have remained as the One and only absolute and living God, reigning supreme over all the unfallen worlds, but with all the human race blotted out of existence on this earth. The Deity of Christ’, paper presented to the Bible Research Fellowship Angwin, California January 1947, page 13 & 14)

Ellen White
Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life’s peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it,** at the risk of failure and ETERNAL loss**

The above are a tiny fraction of the actual documentation that exists in both the official publications of the SDA Church…
…And the teachings of Ellen White - the SDA material is literally saturated with this type of theology - and worse.

anodos:

(I don’t mean to tell you what you probably already know, I just wanted to point out that the Catholic Church views the Adventists as Christians; I’ve come across people who weren’t aware of that. )

Was not there a time where the Catholic Church viewed Mormon Baptism as “valid”?

Yes, SDA’s use the Trinitarian phrase Father, Son & Holy Spirit & on the surface appear to be Trinitarian…
…It doesn’t take long to establish otherwise however.

 

[anodos]

For what it’s worth, here’s what I think is a good way to approach the subject for Mormons, and perhaps for a Seventh Day Adventist as well.

1. Stress the promises Christ made in the New Testament to sustain his Church. The continuity of the Church is not dependent on the holiness or even faithfulness of its earthly leaders. It depends on the faithfulness of Jesus to his Bride and Body. How can Christ be the Good Shepard if he abandoned his flock right when they need him most, when they were being assaulted by persecutions and false teachings? How can I have faith that Jesus will sustain me if he so readily abandoned his own Bride to corruption and death?
2. Stress the similarities between the God’s everlasting covenant with Israel and Christ’s covenant with his Church. In scripture both are portrayed in terms of a marriage. In spite of Israel’s many periods of unfaithfulness and sin, God remained true to his covenant. Even turning the Son of God over to Romans for crucifixion did not nullify the promises of God to the Jewish people. They will always belong to Him. As Paul taught in Romans, “I ask, then, has God rejected his people? Of course not … For the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.” Would Jesus’ commitment to his Church, the new covenant, be any less unbreakable or everlasting? God’s commitment to Israel spans the millennia, but Christ’s to the Church lasted less than a generation or two? Frankly, that sort of thinking is blasphemous and an affront to Christ’s love.
3. With those points in mind, it can also be helpful for them to start reading the early Church Fathers. What do we observe? Continuity, love of God, and a willingness to die rather than comprise the apostolic faith? Or do we observe drastic changes in doctrine, a lack of love for God, and willingness to modify the faith to make things more convenient? Which of those alternatives is more plausible should be self-evident if someone actually reads the Fathers themselves rather than just selective quotations.

Thanks for sharing. I have been trying to respond to the objections that she makes, using scripture to show the continuity between it and Catholic doctrine (since she has used scripture as proof of the opposite conclusion).

 

[Pythons]

I’ve not met an SDA yet that can overcome the mass ( & I mean huge mass ) of Sacred Scripture that affirms…
…That Christ Jesus was “Eternally” the Christ, the Lamb of God, which was slain before the foundations of the world.

God said explicitly He “would save us” very early in the Old Testament Scriptures…
…This was repeatedly affirmed by the Prophets of Scripture.
…And affirmed by Our Lord Himself that He was indeed the one spoken of by the Prophets.

 

[Pythons]

I was raised in the SDA tradition by Christian parents who loved the Lord very much. SDAs do believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit–they are baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity to affect a new birth, which to me means the forgiveness of sins and the opportunity to begin anew. Nearly every sermon I heard in the years that I attended, referenced both the scriptures and Ellen White. EGW was given as much weight as the Holy Scriptures and that is one of the reasons I have left that tradition behind and cannot ever return to it. As far as early Christian fathers are concerned, the SDAs do not give them the veneration that the Catholic Church does but do acknowledge the Apostles, etc as the followers of Christ and as those who set the example of evangelization to the world.

However, there are beautiful, God fearing, kind Christians in that tradition as well as all other Protestant traditions. To damn them for not believing as the Catholic Church believes is, in my opinion, unfair. My parents are examples of persons living upright Godly lives, and as examples of such to my siblings and me. I will see them again in Heaven.

I know such people in the Mormon, JW & SDA denominations and would agree with you that there are indeed God fearing people in nearly every religion…
… It’s that those religions have poured a meaning into the word “God” that’s alien from the historic Church’s interpretation.

 

[catharina]

I was raised in the SDA tradition by Christian parents who loved the Lord very much. SDAs do believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit–they are baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity to affect a new birth, which to me means the forgiveness of sins and the opportunity to begin anew. Nearly every sermon I heard in the years that I attended, referenced both the scriptures and Ellen White. EGW was given as much weight as the Holy Scriptures and that is one of the reasons I have left that tradition behind and cannot ever return to it. As far as early Christian fathers are concerned, the SDAs do not give them the veneration that the Catholic Church does but do acknowledge the Apostles, etc as the followers of Christ and as those who set the example of evangelization to the world.

However, there are beautiful, God fearing, kind Christians in that tradition as well as all other Protestant traditions. To damn them for not believing as the Catholic Church believes is, in my opinion, unfair. My parents are examples of persons living upright Godly lives, and as examples of such to my siblings and me. I will see them again in Heaven.

Willing to guess you are not surprised
to hear that I have NEVER heard of Ellen White?

 

[ADZ]

QUOTE
However, I wanted to mention that, unlike Mormonism and Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is not a cult. Though they reject certain Christian teachings (such as Hell and the immortality of the soul), SDAs do acknowledge the trinity of God, the necessity of baptism (though I’m not sure if they see baptism as being for the remission of sins, or something more like a symbol of obedience), the deity, humanity, death and resurrection of Christ, and the potential to lose one’s salvation, among other valid Christian doctrines.

(I don’t mean to tell you what you probably already know, I just wanted to point out that the Catholic Church views the Adventists as Christians; I’ve come across people who weren’t aware of that. )

SDA’s Believe in God the Father Son and Holy Spirit three beings/people one God.

Baptism is a symbol of the death burial and ressurection of Jesus, and is a symbol of death to self and your old earthly ways and the start of a life in Christ. A washing away of your sins and a fresh start.

As for church fathers We were formed around 1844 but it is Bible truth the we draw knowledge from not people. All points of view are tested by the bible (2Ti_3:16 ). Yes we believe that when u die u await Christs return (1Th 4:16-17) The word Baptism means to submerge, so under the water you must go for it to be accepted as real baptism by God (Eph_4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism) and so on.
As the Church was attacked by Satan after Christs time here, errors crept into the church but some saw this and kept Gods word as per the bible, like the Sabbath for example right through history. The Waldensies kept on preaching many truths of the Bible that others had compromised. Others right through the dark ages kept the truth against the popular church teaching at the time. The SDA Christian church believes that we/they are the end time church to champion Gods truth till the end of time. The Jews were meant to be Gods chosen till the end of time to teach, but u know the story and their rejection of God.

@ Pythons
Why was Jesus tempted? Or by your reasoning, was he tempted at all if he couldnt have sinned? He came in the flesh to be one of us but to get the victory over sin. There would be no victory if there was no real battle and the possibility of sinning (as unlikely as it was)in the first place. In saying that, can someone who sinned stand in front of God? No! If Jesus failed could we still get to Heaven? No!

 

[Pythons]

Hello,

I’m talk with a SDA on religion right now. From what I have learned he does not know anything about early church fathers and really do not give them much thought when I mention them. He only quotes Ellen White. The quotes are either from one of her many books or visions. He often says that Ellen White is not a founder of the church, even though their interpretation of the bible is solely from her. He says Joseph Bates and James White (Ellen White’s husband) are the founders of the church. Since doing my own research and talking to my friend (ex-boyfriend), I have learned that a lot of info that is on their site is to make them look more in line with other Christian faiths.

The rubrics of SDA authority was simply that Ellen White claimed that the power of God would enter her body…
…And she was clearly able to determine religious truth from error.
…So other people came up with the doctrines of SDAism & Ellen White either confirmed them as true or rejected them as error.

Fab82:

I do believe they are Christian people but some teachings are strange to me. As far as SDA beliefs on the trinity, I am still a little confused on if they believe in the trinity the same way Catholics believe it to be. When I asked him if he believed in the trinity he said yes. When I asked him to explain it, he left me very confused. My confusion about SDA’s is the reason I joined this site.

They do not believe the same way Catholics do other than they indeed say Father, Son & Holy Spirit ( and even use the word Trinity )…
…However they have poured an alien meaning into the word.

Catholics believe that Jesus is “God” & that He is the same yesterday, today and forever…
…Catholics believe that when God said He was going to come & save humanity via the Prophets of the Old Testament.
…God meant every word of it.

The Old Testament Prophets said many things about ‘The Christ’…
…Such as:
…He would be born a virgin,
…He would be called out of Egypt.
…He would heal the sick, etc.
…He would die for the people and not have sin, be raised from the dead on the 3rd day etc.

Catholics believe that Jesus is the Christ because He fulfilled all these things…
…According to the Sacred Scriptures.
…Thus Jesus was driven into the wild by the Holy Spirit so that it could be shown He WOULDN’T or COULDN’T sin.

SDA’s believe that there was a “Great Controversey” between Christ & Lucifer…
…Whereas the fall of Adam caused God ( understood ONLY to be the Father ) to be severely wounded.
…The SDA’s claim Lucifer charged God that it was all His fault - His law was to difficult, etc.
…And that alien planets populated by hominids took note of the controversy and began to wonder if God was really fair.

Jesus then begged His Father to let Him come to earth and save mankind…
…And that Christ would risk His future eternal life in the controversy.
…God poured in His deity to Christ and Christ was free to keep it provided He kept God’s holy law.
…If Christ would have sinned they teach that God would have eternally annihilated Christ.
…And that Christ would have simply rotted in the tomb, earth would have been lost,etc.

As anyone knows this teaching absolutely VIOLATES the Creed which in turn systematizes Sacred Scripture…
…There was NEVER any possibility that ‘The Christ’ could have failed.
…God really did come to save us.

 

[Trebor135]

The rubrics of SDA authority was simply that Ellen White claimed that the power of God would enter her body…
…And she was clearly able to determine religious truth from error.
…So other people came up with the doctrines of SDAism & Ellen White either confirmed them as true or rejected them as error.

They do not believe the same way Catholics do other than they indeed say Father, Son & Holy Spirit ( and even use the word Trinity )…
…However they have poured an alien meaning into the word.

…

SDA’s believe that there was a “Great Controversey” between Christ & Lucifer…
…Whereas the fall of Adam caused God ( understood ONLY to be the Father ) to be severely wounded.
…The SDA’s claim Lucifer charged God that it was all His fault - His law was to difficult, etc.
…And that alien planets populated by hominids took note of the controversy and began to wonder if God was really fair.

Jesus then begged His Father to let Him come to earth and save mankind…
…And that Christ would risk His future eternal life in the controversy.
…God poured in His deity to Christ and Christ was free to keep it provided He kept God’s holy law.
…If Christ would have sinned they teach that God would have eternally annihilated Christ.
…And that Christ would have simply rotted in the tomb, earth would have been lost,etc.

As anyone knows this teaching absolutely VIOLATES the Creed which in turn systematizes Sacred Scripture…
…There was NEVER any possibility that ‘The Christ’ could have failed.
…God really did come to save us.

Can you cite official SDA sources indicating that the denomination believes these heretical notions?

(I have a Rwandan SDA friend, so this information would help in case our intra-religious differences come up.)

 

[Pythons]

Can you cite official SDA sources indicating that the denomination believes these heretical notions?

(I have a Rwandan SDA friend, so this information would help in case our intra-religious differences come up.)

Unfortunately examples can be cited.

Ellen White
Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His Deity could not be lost WHILE He stood faithful and true to His loyalty

adventistarchives.org/docs/ST/ST18990510-V25-19__C.pdf#view=fit
see page “2”

Ellen White, L5,1900 SDA BC Volume 7,page 926
He became subject to temptation, endangering as it were, HIS DIVINE attributes. Satan sought, by the constant and curious devices of his cunning, to make Christ yield to temptation

Ellen White MS 99,1903 page 3,4
He had infinite power ONLY because He was perfectly obedient to His Father’s will

Ellen White, DA 131
Then as the glories of the eternal home burst upon our enraptured senses we shall remember that Jesus left all this for us, that He not ONLY became an exile from the heavenly courts, but for us took the risk of failure AND eternal loss

Ellen White, GCB Dec 1, 1895
Remember that Christ risked all; “tempted like as we are,” he staked EVEN his own eternal existence upon the issue of the conflict. Heaven itself was imperiled for our redemption.

Ellen White, SM book 1, page 256
Could Satan in the least particular have tempted Christ to sin, he would have bruised the Saviour’s head. As it was, he could only touch His heel. Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished. Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. Christ and the church would have been without hope.”

Ellen White, SDA GBC 1 Dec 1895
Remember that Christ risked all; “tempted like as we are,” he staked even his own eternal existence upon the issue of the conflict. Heaven itself was imperiled for our redemption. At the foot of the cross, remembering that for one sinner Jesus would have yielded up his life, we may estimate the value of a soul

In their view God needed to have Christ lead the army of heaven to defeat Lucifer…
…Had God been required to eternally annihilate Christ.
…All Heaven would have been (name removed by moderator)eriled.

Ellen White Desire of Ages page 49
Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life’s peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss.”

Ellen White
The new tomb enclosed Him in its rocky chambers. **If one single sin had tainted His character **the stone would never have been rolled away from the door of His rocky chamber, and the world with its burden of guilt would have perished

Ellen White, Review and Herald, Jan 14, 1909
We are to be partakers of knowledge. As I have seen pictures representing Satan coming to Christ in the wilderness of temptation in the form of a hideous monster, I have thought, How little the artists knew of the Bible! Before his fall, Satan was, next to Christ, the highest ANGEL in heaven

Unfortunately I could fill three posts with nothing but these kinds of quotes…
…They have a totally different idea of what the Trinity is than we do.
…We believe that Jesus fulfilled every Prophecy made about Him.
…And one of the elements of the Christ was that He would be without sin.

The SDA’s believe that if it wasn’t possible for the Christ to sin and loose His own salvation…
…Then the plan of salvation was a farce, a mockery.
…Thus they teach that Christ resisted His own evil urges to participate in “sin”.

Hope these things help your friend! I’ll say a prayer for you and him.

 

[Trebor135]

Unfortunately examples can be cited.

…

Hope these things help your friend! I’ll say a prayer for you and him.

Holy smokes. Catholics really need to put the catechetical-evangelistic pedal to the metal in Central Africa–the SDA’s seem to have picked up a lot of converts from Catholicism there the past few decades.

Thanks for these quotations–I shall file away a link to this page of the thread for future reference. Please keep the rest of my friend’s family in your prayers too.

God bless,
T.

 

[Pythons]

Holy smokes. Catholics really need to put the catechetical-evangelistic pedal to the metal in Central Africa–the SDA’s seem to have picked up a lot of converts from Catholicism there the past few decades.

Thanks for these quotations–I shall file away a link to this page of the thread for future reference. Please keep the rest of my friend’s family in your prayers too.

God bless,
T.

May God Bless you and be with you Trebor…
…Unfortunately those quotes are a minute fraction of the type of stuff in their theology.
…The SDA’s are all about the razzle dazzle.

What they do is expose their members to a non-stop attack of their interpretation of Prophecy…
…It’s about all they think about and they have crafted their arguments in such a way.
…That it takes much time and study to demonstrate them to be false.
…This is how they steal Catholics away from the Church.

The average Catholic is easy pickings for them so it’s so important for Christians to know the basic things about their faith…
…And how it agrees with the Sacred Scriptures.

I will keep you & yours in my prayers.

 

[Fab82]

The rubrics of SDA authority was simply that Ellen White claimed that the power of God would enter her body…
…And she was clearly able to determine religious truth from error.
…So other people came up with the doctrines of SDAism & Ellen White either confirmed them as true or rejected them as error.

They do not believe the same way Catholics do other than they indeed say Father, Son & Holy Spirit ( and even use the word Trinity )…
…However they have poured an alien meaning into the word.

Catholics believe that Jesus is “God” & that He is the same yesterday, today and forever…
…Catholics believe that when God said He was going to come & save humanity via the Prophets of the Old Testament.
…God meant every word of it.

The Old Testament Prophets said many things about ‘The Christ’…
…Such as:
…He would be born a virgin,
…He would be called out of Egypt.
…He would heal the sick, etc.
…He would die for the people and not have sin, be raised from the dead on the 3rd day etc.

Catholics believe that Jesus is the Christ because He fulfilled all these things…
…According to the Sacred Scriptures.
…Thus Jesus was driven into the wild by the Holy Spirit so that it could be shown He WOULDN’T or COULDN’T sin.

SDA’s believe that there was a “Great Controversey” between Christ & Lucifer…
…Whereas the fall of Adam caused God ( understood ONLY to be the Father ) to be severely wounded.
…The SDA’s claim Lucifer charged God that it was all His fault - His law was to difficult, etc.
…And that alien planets populated by hominids took note of the controversy and began to wonder if God was really fair.

Jesus then begged His Father to let Him come to earth and save mankind…
…And that Christ would risk His future eternal life in the controversy.
…God poured in His deity to Christ and Christ was free to keep it provided He kept God’s holy law.
…If Christ would have sinned they teach that God would have eternally annihilated Christ.
…And that Christ would have simply rotted in the tomb, earth would have been lost,etc.

As anyone knows this teaching absolutely VIOLATES the Creed which in turn systematizes Sacred Scripture…
…There was NEVER any possibility that ‘The Christ’ could have failed.
…God really did come to save us.

WOW!!! I seem to learn something new everyday about SDA. Thanks for the info!

 

[anodos]

As for church fathers We were formed around 1844 but it is Bible truth the we draw knowledge from not people. All points of view are tested by the bible (2Ti_3:16 ). Yes we believe that when u die u await Christs return (1Th 4:16-17) The word Baptism means to submerge, so under the water you must go for it to be accepted as real baptism by God (Eph_4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism) and so on.
As the Church was attacked by Satan after Christs time here, errors crept into the church but some saw this and kept Gods word as per the bible, like the Sabbath for example right through history. The Waldensies kept on preaching many truths of the Bible that others had compromised. Others right through the dark ages kept the truth against the popular church teaching at the time. The SDA Christian church believes that we/they are the end time church to champion Gods truth till the end of time. The Jews were meant to be Gods chosen till the end of time to teach, but u know the story and their rejection of God.

Thank you for an Adventist response, ADZ.
Does your denomination cite sources for the teachings of the Waldenses, so that their message could be compared or contrasted to SDA or other “scripture alone” belief systems? It is my (feeble) understanding that very little is known of what the Waldensians actually believed.

 

[Fab82]

Thank you for an Adventist response, ADZ.
Does your denomination cite sources for the teachings of the Waldenses, so that their message could be compared or contrasted to SDA or other “scripture alone” belief systems? It is my (feeble) understanding that very little is known of what the Waldensians actually believed.

Thanks for asking ADZ this question Anodos! I wanted to ask the same question concerning the Waldenses. When I read about the Waldenses, the article didn’t go into much detail because of the lack of information about their beliefs. I don’t ask many questions on this forum because I don’t want to get into debates. So, thanks again.

 

[andrewstx]

Personally I think the SDA’s talk of the Waldensians is there form of the Baptist’s trail of blood theory.

They both claim the Waldensians as their forbearers as non-Catholic Christians, and I think neither group even cares that Waldensians were heretics.