Why are SDA so paraoid of Jesuits?

[LarryP2]

I am not Catholic and grew up SDA......

SDA is an odious, non-Christian cult, imho, that has very low self-esteem about itself. Which is the REAL basis for their anti-Jesuit diatribes. Most of the founders and early followers of SDA were so illiterate and ignorant they would have trouble writing or reading their own name. They absurdly predicted that Christ would return in 1844, and when that fell flat on its face, creating a horrendous public embarassment, they escalated the error by conjuring their bizarre "Investigative Judgment" doctrine out of thin air. The Doctrine is so ludicrous, it has been repeatedly denounced by many of their top-notch theologians over the years as being non-Biblical and completely contrary to the Gospel of Jesus. The SDA church rejects the Trinity as a hellish doctrine created by the Pope, and instead throughout their history have embraced various mutant heretical doctrines such as outright Arianism for the first 100 years. Although Adventists presently dishonestly state they believe in the Trinity, in reality they actually have their OWN definition of it which amounts to Tri-Theism (a watered-down Arianism with Christ some Divine attributes). They have never accepted orthodox Christianity's definition of the Trinity in full.

Because of this false doctrine of IJ, Adventists compounded the error again by announcing that Sabbath Keeping is necessary for Salvation, and asserted that the Pope "changed the Sabbath to Sunday. Which never happened (given that the Eastern Orthodox also insist that they worshiped on Sunday from the First Century, and were and are highly unlikely to have taken marching orders from any Pope!). They now hold that Catholics will one day start murdering anyone who does not worship on Sunday. This whole toxic stew of doctrine fits in well with their very human Jesus and their belief in a very partial atonement on the Cross.

Jesuits, by contrast, have been an amazing force for good in the world, founding many top-notch Universities and many amazingly-brilliant scientists that have done humanity incalculable good. Here again, their low self-esteem shines forth: They know that in a debate with a Jesuit (or really any educated person) their ludicrous and false doctrines would be shredded as there are no scriptural or historical basis for any of them. Adventism is a House of Cards, formed on false prophecies and easily provable lies, with more aberrant doctrines piled on top to hide the prior false doctrines.

I hope this helps.

 

[from scratch]

I am not Catholic and grew up SDA......

SDA is an odious, non-Christian cult, imho, that has very low self-esteem about itself. Which is the REAL basis for their anti-Jesuit diatribes. Most of the founders and early followers of SDA were so illiterate and ignorant they would have trouble writing or reading their own name. They absurdly predicted that Christ would return in 1844, and when that fell flat on its face, creating a horrendous public embarassment, they escalated the error by conjuring their bizarre "Investigative Judgment" doctrine out of thin air. The Doctrine is so ludicrous, it has been repeatedly denounced by many of their top-notch theologians over the years as being non-Biblical and completely contrary to the Gospel of Jesus. The SDA church rejects the Trinity as a hellish doctrine created by the Pope, and instead throughout their history have embraced various mutant heretical doctrines such as outright Arianism for the first 100 years. Although Adventists presently dishonestly state they believe in the Trinity, in reality they actually have their OWN definition of it which amounts to Tri-Theism (a watered-down Arianism with Christ some Divine attributes). They have never accepted orthodox Christianity's definition of the Trinity in full.

Because of this false doctrine of IJ, Adventists compounded the error again by announcing that Sabbath Keeping is necessary for Salvation, and asserted that the Pope "changed the Sabbath to Sunday. Which never happened (given that the Eastern Orthodox also insist that they worshiped on Sunday from the First Century, and were and are highly unlikely to have taken marching orders from any Pope!). They now hold that Catholics will one day start murdering anyone who does not worship on Sunday. This whole toxic stew of doctrine fits in well with their very human Jesus and their belief in a very partial atonement on the Cross.

Jesuits, by contrast, have been an amazing force for good in the world, founding many top-notch Universities and many amazingly-brilliant scientists that have done humanity incalculable good. Here again, their low self-esteem shines forth: They know that in a debate with a Jesuit (or really any educated person) their ludicrous and false doctrines would be shredded as there are no scriptural or historical basis for any of them. Adventism is a House of Cards, formed on false prophecies and easily provable lies, with more aberrant doctrines piled on top to hide the prior false doctrines.

I hope this helps.

There is much supporting evidence found within this forum to support exactly what you say. Many of us here who debate them daily fully understand them and their false doctrines. So it does really blow me away that they continue posting here even when a poster with and SDA icon confessed without coercion some of the above.

 

[Rick Otto]

I have noticed that some SDA really do not understand Catholic religious orders in particularly the Jesuits. For example I told one gentlemen that I went to school to study theology and he said something like "So you have been schooled by Jesuits". LOL. No I was not. I am curious why the SDA is so paranoid of these Jesuits and not the Dominicans or Franciscans or Carmelites or even diocesan priest etc?

Maybe for the same reason they got kicked out of so many countries.
I find it incredulous you know nothing of the 'dark side' of their reputation - not the salt-of-the-earth rank & file, but of an alleged 'inner cabal' of politicaly militant elite, what's-his-name Rivera representing the extreme end of the critique.

 

[Rhamiel]

Maybe for the same reason they got kicked out of so many countries.
I find it incredulous you know nothing of the 'dark side' of their reputation - not the salt-of-the-earth rank & file, but of an alleged 'inner cabal' of politicaly militant elite, what's-his-name Rivera representing the extreme end of the critique.

Catholic Countries sometimes go through periods of anti-clericalism, it is not the same as general anti-catholicism or athiestic thought that you find in Protestant cultures, ofcourse there are similarities, but the two are differant beasts

the supression of the Jesuit order had to do with problems between the Jesuits and the house of Bourbon
Bourbon monarchs stuck together and had serious influence

the Jesuits were not banned from Russia at first, if the Jesuits were so dangerous, why would the Orthodox Czarina allow them to stay? (Russia did latter go along with the supression of the Jesuits after the Czarina died and the next Czar was pressured by the Orthodox Bishops to get rid of the Jesuits)
Catholic Austria (a hapsburg monarchy and not a Bourbon monarchy) also allowed the Jesuits to stay
Also most shocking of all, Protestant Prussia allowed the Jesuits to stay!

so what did Austria, Prussia, and Russia all have in common?
one is Catholic, one is Protestant one is Eastern Orthodox
They were not Bourbon monarchies

so really when you get down to basics, the whole thing about the supression of the Jesuits had to do with anticlaricalism among some Catholic countries, the Bourbon monarches supporting eachother, and the State being able to grab up the land and other resourses that belonged to the religious order that they expelled

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by LarryP2

I am not Catholic and grew up SDA......
​

SDA is an odious, non-Christian cult, imho, that has very low self-esteem about itself. Which is the REAL basis for their anti-Jesuit diatribes. Most of the founders and early followers of SDA were so illiterate and ignorant they would have trouble writing or reading their own name. They absurdly predicted that Christ would return in 1844, and when that fell flat on its face, creating a horrendous public embarassment, they escalated the error by conjuring their bizarre "Investigative Judgment" doctrine out of thin air. The Doctrine is so ludicrous, it has been repeatedly denounced by many of their top-notch theologians over the years as being non-Biblical and completely contrary to the Gospel of Jesus. The SDA church rejects the Trinity as a hellish doctrine created by the Pope, and instead throughout their history have embraced various mutant heretical doctrines such as outright Arianism for the first 100 years. Although Adventists presently dishonestly state they believe in the Trinity, in reality they actually have their OWN definition of it which amounts to Tri-Theism (a watered-down Arianism with Christ some Divine attributes). They have never accepted orthodox Christianity's definition of the Trinity in full.....*snip*

​

There is much supporting evidence found within this forum to support exactly what you say. Many of us here who debate them daily fully understand them and their false doctrines.

So it does really blow me away that they continue posting here even when a poster with and SDA icon confessed without coercion some of the above.

What he said!



.

 

[LarryP2]

There is only one common theme that runs through every single important SDA doctrine, either overtly or subtly: Denigrating and Degrading the effect of the Resurrection, or denying the Divinity of Christ.

Unless you understand that, they will stitch together an impressive and mind-numbing stew of half-verses and unrelated and out of context verses to baffle the unwary, illiterate and non-Biblically savvy. It is an extremely devious and deceptive non-Christian cult. I wasted my first 22 years in it, so I know of what I speak. If you understand how their corrupt and un-Biblical system works, you need not debate then on their specific stitched-together rambling collection of half verses and verses taken out of context, because they all are held together with the common "glue" of denying or denigrating the divinity of Christ, or the effect of the Cross, or the effect of the Resurrection. Or all three.

First and foremost, the SDA Church would not exist were it not for their multiple false predictions of Christ's return between 1843 and 1850. They devised an amazing stitched-together and botched misinterpretation of Daniel 8:14 to repeatedly falsely predict the return of Christ. Throughout the cult's lifetime, there have been a truly-jaw dropping massive number of their own theologians who have denounced the 1844 scandal and its mutant bastard child: The Sanctuary Doctrine or the "Investigative Judgment(IJ)" Many of their own top theologians have declared the entire debacle unscriptural and unbiblical. Sadly, the cult's General Conference always fires their dedicated theologians and pastors for being honest about this clearly non-Biblical doctrine.

Misusing Daniel 8:14 like that denigrates Christ, how? By making his return the subject of human prediction, by binding him time wise into your erroneous scripture-sculpting and stitching fetish. Like the Bible is some sort of esoteric code that only a few insiders can crack, rather than the extremely simple and plainly-obvious story of Gospel salvation that was given to the entire world at the Cross.

The IJ was strictly a face-saving fraud, devised out of thin air to compensate for the colossal disaster of 1844. The cult now posits Jesus entered the Holy of Holy places in Heaven in that year, to commence review of our conduct to see if we have earned our salvation with good works. This necessitates an incomplete and unfinished work on the Cross, and a severe denigration of the effect of the Resurrection. This is the REAL reason that Adventist do not worship on Resurrection Day (Sunday and Easter) and insist on their Salvation by works-based Sabbath instead. They want to cow their terrified and panicked members into huddling together in paranoid fantasy, and relieving them of their money most importantly. They instill a paranoid and panicked fear of Roman Catholicism, who they falsely claim "changed Saturday to Sunday," and that one day the Catholics will hunt them down and murder them for keeping the Sabbath. Hence, their Sabbath keeping is really based on virulent Anti-Papacy paranoia coupled with an Un-Biblical fetish of Salvation by Works. Again, this entirely non-Biblical doctrine of Sabbath Keeping was absolutely proven false by their own theology professor, Dr. Samuele Bachiochi.

The IJ itself led logically to many satanically cult doctrines like Sabbath Keeping, Works based Salvation, following the Levitical dietary laws, and various forms of non-Christian and heretical views on the Trinity. In fact, for the first 100 years, the cult revived the ancient Arian Heresy and outright denied the Divinity of Christ. Due to the outcry from orthodox Christendom, they watered down their Arianism, and now deceptively teach a modified Aryanism known as Thritheism (while deceptively claiming they believe in the Trinity). It still is not the Trinity that has provided Salvation "once and for all" and that is THE CENTRAL doctrine of Christianity. The Adventist anti-Trinitariansm heresy eventually spawned such overtly Satantic cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, Worldwide Church of God and the Branch Davidians. Adventism is much more deceptive and thereby much more successful than those three satanic cults in that the genius of Adventism is to disguise mutant and unbiblical cult doctrines with a thin veneer of superficially Christian-sounding doctrines that disguise its true core. They even managed to sucker cult expert Walter Martin into believing that they were Orthodox Christianity, even though at the end of his life, Martin was ready to write a new book denouncing them as a non-Christian cult once he realized that he had been "Had."

So when they focus obsessively on the Sabbath (which in actual practice, is MUCH more important to them than the Cross or the Resurrection) beware of their perspective. Disregard their ludicrous scripture-sculpting and scripture stitching, and go right for the jugular: Their odious and anti-Christian history of teaching heretical cult doctrine denying or denigrating the Divinity and his role in the unified Godhead of the Trinity.
Last edited by LarryP2; 20th March 2014 at 02:01 PM.

 

[BobRyan]

I have noticed that some SDA really do not understand Catholic religious orders in particularly the Jesuits. For example I told one gentlemen that I went to school to study theology and he said something like "So you have been schooled by Jesuits". LOL. No I was not. I am curious why the SDA is so paranoid of these Jesuits and not the Dominicans or Franciscans or Carmelites or even diocesan priest etc?

Why ask why non-Catholics who are actually informed about history - object to the deeds of the Jesuit order over the centuries. Why not ask the more telling question - why the Popes themselves opposed the Jesuit order!!

The Pope never irrevocably banned from ever existing again - the Dominicans, Farnciscans etc -- just the Jesuit order alone.

Why do you suppose that is??

in Christ,

Bob

 

[MoreCoffee]

We are all Jesuits deep down

Especially Ellen White.

 

[Rhamiel]

Why ask why non-Catholics who are actually informed about history - object to the deeds of the Jesuit order over the centuries. Why not ask the more telling question - why the Popes themselves opposed the Jesuit order!!

The Pope never irrevocably banned from ever existing again - the Dominicans, Farnciscans etc -- just the Jesuit order alone.

Why do you suppose that is??

in Christ,

Bob

in post 204 I talk about why the Jesuit order was suppressed for a time

 

[BobRyan]

in post 204 I talk about why the Jesuit order was suppressed for a time

[FONT=&quot] conforming ourselves to the examples of our predecessors, and particularly to that of Gregory X. in the general Council of Lyons; the rather as, in the present case, we are determining upon the fate of a society [/FONT]classed among the mendicant orders, both by its institute and by its privileges; after a mature deliberation, we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the fulness of our apostolical power, SUPPRESS AND ABOLISH THE SAID COMPANY: we deprive it of all activity whatever, of its houses, schools, colleges, hospitals, lands, and, in short, every other place whatsoever, in whatever kingdom or province they may be situated; we abrogate and annul its statutes, rules, customs, decrees, and constitutions, even though confirmed by oath, and approved by the Holy See or otherwise; in like manner we annul all and every its privileges, indults, general or particular, the tenor whereof is, and is taken to be, as fully and as amply expressed in the present Brief as if the same were inserted word for word, in whatever clauses, form, or decree, or under whatever sanction their privileges may have been conceived. We declare all, and all kind of authority, the General, the provincials, the visitors, and other superiors of the said Society to be FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED, of what nature soever the said authority may be, as well in things spiritual as temporal.

Sounds a lot like "Ex Cathedra" -- we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the fulness of our apostolical power,


Where the Pope said " the General, the provincials, the visitors, and other superiors of the said Society to be FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED" you limit to "suppressed"

You provide an 'anticlaricalism' comment not found at all in the long list of reasons the Pope gave for why he and many Popes before him tried to exterminate the Jesuits "forever". FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED

One might suspect revisionist history - why not take the actual document and walk through the main points? There are a "number of details" in that document that your summary misses.

And of course the "bigger issue" is that apparently whatever the Pope says in the "fullness of Apostolic power" and "the seal of the Fisherman" - to be "forever" in place - can be over turned on a mere whim.

Seems like that ended the infallibility doctrine regarding ex cathedra statements.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I have noticed that some SDA really do not understand Catholic religious orders in particularly the Jesuits. For example I told one gentlemen that I went to school to study theology and he said something like "So you have been schooled by Jesuits". LOL. No I was not. I am curious why the SDA is so paranoid of these Jesuits and not the Dominicans or Franciscans or Carmelites or even diocesan priest etc?

the common perception of Jesuits is . they take on the form of the people they are ministering to, to communicate their message .

so if they're paranoid, they're probably paranoid that there are Jesuits in their church services posing as SDAs

 

[MoreCoffee]

the common perception of Jesuits is . they take on the form of the people they are ministering to, to communicate their message .

so if they're paranoid, they're probably paranoid that there are Jesuits in their church services posing as SDAs

Muhahahahaha we Jesuits are everywhere

 

[Rhamiel]

Sounds a lot like "Ex Cathedra" -- we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the fulness of our apostolical power,


Where the Pope said " the General, the provincials, the visitors, and other superiors of the said Society to be FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED" you limit to "suppressed"

You provide an 'anticlaricalism' comment not found at all in the long list of reasons the Pope gave for why he and many Popes before him tried to exterminate the Jesuits "forever". FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED

One might suspect revisionist history - why not take the actual document and walk through the main points? There are a "number of details" in that document that your summary misses.

And of course the "bigger issue" is that apparently whatever the Pope says in the "fullness of Apostolic power" and "the seal of the Fisherman" - to be "forever" in place - can be over turned on a mere whim.

Seems like that ended the infallibility doctrine regarding ex cathedra statements.

in Christ,

Bob

very good points
I am curious as to why this is not counted under Papal infallibility

 

[LarryP2]

and her name was Ellen White, and SDAs have granted her unequivocal authority and infallibility - with absolutely NO counterweight in history or Christian doctrine.

The Catholic Pope has MANY magnitudes MORE restriction on their pronouncements than does the Adventist Pope. For instance, if the Pope were to suddenly declare that abortion was okay, there would be widespread outrage and probably his forcible removal.

The Adventist Pope, by contrast, was able to simply DECLARE certain things had happened in history, when in fact, they had not. For instance, she declared MANY times that the Catholic Pope had unilaterally changed the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. Their own "Sabbath Expert" Samuele Bachiochi who worked in SDA's own theological seminary researched the issue and found out Ellen White was full of idiotic nonsense. Even though he proved that Christians had demonstrably been worshiping on Sunday from no later than 135 AD (and even THAT is being extremely generous to the Adventist position), it did not matter one whit to Adventists: Their Pope said it, therefore it was true. People who have escaped (like me) from this vile cult will tell you rabid anti-Catholicism is just rampant. THAT is their issues with Jesuits, plain and simple. Even the most incompetent Jesuit theologian could easily make mincemeat out of that psychopath's idiotic and anti-Christian pronouncements. Everyone of her ex cathedra pronouncements are a colossal fraud on their face.

Another example of Ellen White's Papal infallibility: She repeatedly predicted the return of Christ between 1844 and 1850. What a colossal fraud and embarrassment!!!! But no, even being caught with her pants down around her ankles, she wiggled out of the intense public embarrassment and groveling humiliation that resulted from that false prophecy. She declared, ex cathedra that something ELSE had happened in 1844: The Start of the Investigative Judgment. One after another, Adventism's leading theologians have denounced that pernicious and evil doctrine as completely unbiblical with no basis in fact or history, and one after another has been summarily fired. You would THINK such an unending parade of their best Bible teachers and theologians denouncing such a clearly unbiblical doctrine would cause a "Church" to reexamine its fundamental beliefs, wouldn't you? Really? If you think that, then obviously you have no comprehension of Ellen White's infallibility as the Adventist Pope.

This huckster and shameless grifter, masquerading as a prophet of God, made so many laughably erroneous predictions and pronouncements that she should be utterly absent of credibility. She unctuously declared that very tall people lived on Jupiter, that masturbation causes almost all of the disease and malfunctions of the human body, that people and animals had sex and created new amalgamated species before the flood. Do you think this makes any difference to Adventists? Not one bit.

She predicted in the 1860s that Catholics were on the verge of passing laws making Sunday worship mandatory and would start summarily murdering Adventists who insisted on worshiping on Saturday. You would think they would withdraw those predictions somehow, wouldn't you? Here we are 150 plus years later, and the latest Pope can't get lay Catholics to pay attention to the Church's position on birth control. But he is supposedly able to get laws passed to murder Adventists? Come again?

I am not Catholic. That does not matter. The vicious, utterly dishonest and over-the-top anti-Catholic bigotry that I heard for the first 22 years of my life in that vile cult now disgusts and embarrasses me. I am deeply ashamed of myself for every single day I stayed in that ridiculous cult after my 18th birthday.

I hereby publicly apologize to Catholics and Jesuits, wherever they may be for my part in growing up in that hideous and satanic cult that spewed such noxious and hateful venom at one of Christ's most spectacular and effective witnesses, the Catholic Church.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Muhahahahaha we Jesuits are everywhere

you were successful, i got a good giggle out of that .

 

[VictorC]

Another example of Ellen White's Papal infallibility: She repeatedly predicted the return of Christ between 1844 and 1850. What a colossal fraud and embarrassment!!!! But no, even being caught with her pants down around her ankles, she wiggled out of the intense public embarrassment and groveling humiliation that resulted from that false prophecy. She declared, ex cathedra that something ELSE had happened in 1844: The Start of the Investigative Judgment.

Well, I perceive a different account of Adventist history (or should that be 'herstory'?)

Ellen embraced William Miller's prediction of the second advent in 1843, and then while within the Millerist movement she embraced the 'correction' for 1844. Which wasn't really a correction at all, and after the fact William Miller repudiated his whole model that 'predicted' the second advent in this time period:

I have thus given a plain and simple statement of the manner of my arriving at the views I have inculcated, with a history of my course up to the present time. That I have been mistaken in the time, I freely confess; and I have no desire to defend my course any further than I have been actuated by pure motives, and it has resulted to God's glory. My mistakes and errors God, I trust, will forgive.

But you're right that Ellen White didn't accept the failure of Miller's model she depended on for the adventist 'Little Flock' that became the SDA church.

But the Investigative Judgment wasn't the immediate means conjured to retain the failed date. It was the Shut Door doctrine.

While in Exeter, Maine, in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others, many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand. There was one sister there that was called very spiritual. She had traveled and been a powerful preacher the most of the time for twenty years. She had been truly a mother in Israel. But a division had risen in the band on the shut door. She had great sympathy, and could not believe the door was shut. (I had known nothing of their differences.) Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad. At length my soul seemed to be in an agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the Holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom. They were all deeply interested in the view. They all said it was entirely new to them. The Lord worked in mighty power setting the truth home to their hearts. Sister Durben knew what the power of the Lord was, for she had felt it many times; and a short time after I fell she was struck down, and fell to the floor, crying to God to have mercy on her. When I came out of vision, my ears were saluted with Sister Durben's singing and shouting with a loud voice. Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door. Previous to this I had no light on the coming of the Bridegroom, but had expected Him to [come to] this earth to deliver His people on the tenth day of the seventh month. I did not hear a lecture or a word in any way relating to the Bridegroom's going to the Holiest.

Ellen claims divine inspiration for her 'view' of the Shut Door.
And what was the Shut Door?

My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners as used to be. I looked, but could not see it; for the time for their salvation is past.

Nobody is saved after 1844.
But it is pretty hard to establish a religious movement based on a claim that nobody is saved listening to the Adventist message...
so...
Ellen turned away from her 'divine' message and with a little help from Hiram Edson, conjured the Investigative Judgment that is integral to the Sanctuary Doctrine exclusive to the SDA church.

Ellen White didn't believe her own 'view' was divinely inspired, or else she wouldn't have replaced it with another doctrine incompatible with the former. And if Ellen didn't believe Ellen, no one else has a reason to.
But 1844 is the solitary reason for the SDA church to exist, which is based on a faulty interpretation based on the KJV's mistranslation of one verse in the Bible:

The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith was the declaration, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed". (Daniel 8:14)

Ellen White defined the constraints of the Investigative Judgment, which no one has been able to defend using Scripture. As defined in pages 479-483 of the 1911 edition of The Great Controversy:

• Convened only after 1844, 'it is...in 1844...to perform the work of investigative judgment'
• Addresses only the 'professed people of God', and is not a general judgment
• Convened in absentia of the accused, 'they will not be present in person'
• The accused are judged according to the old covenant, 'The law of God is the standard'
• Adventist soteriology is dependent on this alleged judgment, 'their names will be blotted out of the book of life'

The second advent didn't happen in 1844, the Shut Door doctrine endorsed via a claim of divine inspiration was rejected by its source, and the IJ continues to be the apology for a date when nothing happened.

One after another, Adventism's leading theologians have denounced that pernicious and evil doctrine as completely unbiblical with no basis in fact or history, and one after another has been summarily fired.

One needs only procure a copy of Dr. Raymond Cottrell's presentation 'The Sanctuary Doctrine - Asset or Liability?' to see that this is true.

 

[LarryP2]

"The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith was the declaration, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed". (Daniel 8:14)

You can have no clearer statement of Seventh Day Adventism's anti-Christian cult status.

It is a solid case.

Not a verse from the Gospels. Nor is the Cross the Foundation. Nor is the Resurrection. Nor is a verse from the Pauline Epistles. NOTHING from any of the other New Testament writers either. NOTHING from the early church ex-Biblical history. Nothing from Church Tradition, received orally from the Apostles and kept alive throughout the ages by both the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.

By the way, with all of the nasty, over-the-top venom that has been directed at Catholics by the Adventists, you would THINK they would find it necessary to at least MENTION the Easter Orthodox Church ONCE, wouldn't you? Here, the Eastern Orthodox Church was 1/2 of the early Christian Church that split in 1054, the other half being Roman Catholism. You can't COMPLETELY IGNORE EO (a church presently with 300 million adherents!!!) and blame Sunday keeping ONLY on the Roman Church and its Pope, can you? REALLY? You THINK the Eastern Orthodox would do ANYTHING the Pope suggested after that little deal in 1054? Ellen White Never mentioned it one time!!! REALLY? Definitely not a good way to formulate a conspiracy theory about the Pope unilaterally changing Saturday to Sunday. What, she didn't think somebody might notice someday? Oops.....I must forgot about that 300 million member church that dates back to the Apostles with unbroken succession. If the Eastern Orthodox had followed the Pope's orders and adopted Sunday Keeping, surely they would not have continued to do so after 1054, would they?

Nope. Daniel 8:14 is the FOUNDATION of Adventism. Can you possibly imagine a more non-Christian, heretical foundation for a religion? A text that Christianity has NEVER paid one iota of attention to, probably knowing that it contained the seeds of rank heresy, confusion, and naked cult exploitation.

The fears of Christianity have been fully realized.

That is precisely why the SDA Church in my mind is one of the most dangerous anti-Christian cults. It hides its heretical doctrines under a thin veneer of Christian-sounding jargon, when in reality, the foundation of the cult is an obscure verse in the Old Testament.

This is not Christianity. Christianity is not based on an obscure Old Testament verse insanely mis-interpreted beyond ALL bounds of reasonableness and decency and good order. Why oh why does a Christian website allow such an vile organization have a place here?

 

[Erose]

Sounds a lot like "Ex Cathedra" -- we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the fulness of our apostolical power,


Where the Pope said " the General, the provincials, the visitors, and other superiors of the said Society to be FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED" you limit to "suppressed"

You provide an 'anticlaricalism' comment not found at all in the long list of reasons the Pope gave for why he and many Popes before him tried to exterminate the Jesuits "forever". FOR EVER ANNULLED AND EXTINGUISHED

One might suspect revisionist history - why not take the actual document and walk through the main points? There are a "number of details" in that document that your summary misses.

And of course the "bigger issue" is that apparently whatever the Pope says in the "fullness of Apostolic power" and "the seal of the Fisherman" - to be "forever" in place - can be over turned on a mere whim.

Seems like that ended the infallibility doctrine regarding ex cathedra statements.

in Christ,

Bob

Ex Cathedra statements only apply to statements based upon faith (doctrine) and morals. By definition you cannot have an Ex Cathedra statement on something as mundane as abolishing or suppressing a religious order, because it isn't a doctrinal or moral position to do so; but rather a pastoral decision to do so. Huge difference.

 

[Erose]

very good points
I am curious as to why this is not counted under Papal infallibility

The statement doesn't fall into the realm of Faith and Morals. It is a pastoral decision only, so it cannot be an Ex Cathedra declaration.

 

[VictorC]

"The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith was the declaration, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed". (Daniel 8:14)

You can have no clearer statement of Seventh Day Adventism's anti-Christian cult status.

Actually, SDA Fundamental Belief # 24 shows how deeply their Sanctuary Doctrine permeates their theology:

There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry of Christ will mark the close of human probation before the Second Advent.​

Their need to apologize for a non-event in 1844 postulates that Christ's atonement isn't complete; they demand a second phase contrary to the Gospel's bold proclamation that His propitiation was sufficient to justify and reconcile us before a Holy God.

That is precisely why the SDA Church in my mind is one of the most dangerous anti-Christian cults.

Dr. Walter Martin shared this view.

For over a century Adventism has borne a stigma of being called a non-Christian cult system.

Dr. Martin concluded a variance to the historical stigma Adventism earned for itself, when he allowed himself to acknowledge the General Council's 1957 publication 'Questions on Doctrine' to reflect the SDA church's claim to be changing to embrace the basic tenets of Christianity. However, this publication fell out of print and was considered a heresy within Adventism, showing that the General Council resorted to deceit to gain Martin's favor. This was noted by David Cloud in 1999:

The truth is that Seventh-Day Adventism today does not differ in any significant doctrinal way from the Seventh-Day Adventism of Ellen White's day, except that it presents its doctrines in a more subtle manner today. If the Seventh-day Adventist leaders were to change their major distinctive doctrines as outlined by Ellen White, they would be denying their prophetess and pulling the pillars from under themselves. The Adventist Church admits this in the following statement from one of their recent publications:

• "Great lines of truth were gradually unfolding before them [Ellen White and early Adventist leaders]. Now the time had come for the convergence of these truths into one body of doctrine. This was brought about in 1848, through a series of Sabbath conferences. Five in all were held. At the earlier of these, the doctrines were clarified and bound together as a unity of truth; the later conferences served largely as teaching and unifying agencies.
• "A careful study of documents of the time reveals what was denominated 'present truth' in this formative period ... made up of vital 'essentials,' 'pillars,' 'foundations.' These may be listed as: 1. The second advent of Christ. 2. The binding claims of the seventh-day Sabbath. 3. The third angel's message in its fullness, in correct relationship to the first and second angel's messages. 4. The ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary, which ministry would cease not long before the second advent (with emphasis on the work beginning the tenth day of the seventh month, 1844). 5. The non-immortality of the soul.
• "These structural doctrines formed the 'firm platform' which, in 1858, was described by Ellen White, upon which 'nearly all stood firm' ... These constituted the 'landmarks' enumerated by Ellen White thirty years later..." (Messenger to the Remnant, pp. 39,40).

Since Mrs. White and the Adventist Church teach that their major doctrinal platform was finalized in their early days (and since the Adventist Church tells us that Mrs. White was an inspired prophetess), there is no need for re-evaluation of this group as Walter Martin required. A study of recent Seventh-Day Adventist publications confirms this judgment, since they continue to teach the same heresies promulgated by Ellen White and other early Adventist leaders.

As a group, the Seventh-Day Adventists today are the same divisive heretics they have been from their origin. To deserve a re-evaluation and re-labeling, they would have to denounce and turn away from every one of their heresies, including the foundational heresy that Ellen White was a prophetess of God.​

You asked why a Christian website allows Adventists to post here. I'm not the one tasked with providing that answer.

Refer to that Fundamental Belief again.
The Gospel declares how God saves man.
Adventism's message is to vindicate God.
That's a major reversal one can't ignore.