Is the Seventh Day Adventist Church orthodox

[Albion]

Actually I think it is pretty accurate - you're the one saying that their view represent an interpretation that does not agree with the majority.

I also said that the wrong impression is sometimes given ("sloppy" I called it) in some Catholic publications and by some Catholic speakers. They're explaining something to ordinary people.

But the point was that the church itself does not say that it switched the Sabbath to another day.

Earlier, I even gave evidence of that by pointing out that Catholics are now permitted to meet their "Sunday Obligation" by attending Mass on Saturday evening, the explanation being that since the Sabbath begins late on Saturday it makes sense to consider this as much a fulfillment of that obligation as is attending Sunday morning services.

 

[BobRyan]

They do not repudiate their Egyptian brothers/sisters who keep the standard Christian practices, such as foregoing circumcision and foregoing dietary restrictions. SDA seem to do this with regards to other Christians

1. I don't see the "repudiate other Christians" posts here.
2. But EVERY denomination holds to at least one doctrinal distinctive where they differ with their neighbor denomination.

that is not "news".

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

By definition every denomination has at least one doctrine that they believe is correct and distinguishes them fromr their neighboring denomination. This is not "news".

your argument then is that all denominations must only have negative relation to each other since they all hold that their doctrines are correct in every case where they have even one difference with their neighbor. Your view requires that they ignore the doctrines they hold in common and only view each other in a negative light.

That is not logical.

My view is that there are certain historical connections and common beliefs that unify Christendom broadly. If when we're describing Orthodoxy in a general sense then we can only really talk about Nicene Christianity as the common inheritance of most Churches. Orthodox, Catholic, Oriental, Assyrian and Protestant.

When asked how you viewed the Nicene inheritance you compared such teaching to the traditions of men. Basically unnecessary teaching or mistaken teaching which can be done away with because it is not really from God.

As much as I disagree with the Reformed Calvinist on matters of soteriology, at least we have our Christology mostly in common. At least we don't both say that for the last two thousand years the Church has been in complete darkness or non-existent.

For me to hold such a view is to believe there would be a break in the communion of God's people. That there was a time when true worship ceased and the people of God became Apostate. Which is what the SDA seem to believe. If you consider yourself utterly apart from historic Orthodoxy and have inherited nothing from it, how are the SDA then Orthodox when they repudiate the historic Church which came before then?

 

[BobRyan]

I also said that the wrong impression is sometimes given ("sloppy" I called it) in some Catholic publications and by some Catholic speakers. They're explaining something to ordinary people.

So you claim that we are not reading the texts the way everyone else is - but then when the others have the same reading as we do regarding the fact that no NT text exists showing a weekly Sunday service or a command to "transfer" the Sabbath or "change the Sabbath commandment to read some other way" -- they are "sloppy"??

But the point was that the church itself does not say that it switched the Sabbath to another day.

It explicity shows that it changed the Sabbath commandment

from this form

• Q. What is the Third Commandment?
• A. The Third Commandment is: Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day.

Changed to this

• Q. What does the Third Commandment command?
• A. The Third Commandment commands us to sanctify Sunday as the Lord's Day.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

1. I don't see the "repudiate other Christians" posts here.
2. But EVERY denomination holds to at least one doctrinal distinctive where they differ with their neighbor denomination.

that is not "news".

Do you not repudiate Sunday worshippers and urge them to worship on the correct day, that is Saturday? That to worship on Sunday is a mistake that desperately needs to be corrected? That we also need to avoid Pork? That we need to regard the past teaching of the Church these last two thousand years as 'man made' teaching?

Sounds like repudiation to me. If that is the case, what is your historical connection with the believers before the SDA came into existence? What from the past do you adhere to that makes you part of Christendom broadly? SDA say the Trinity, but they will not affirm the Nicene definition explicitly. That's a pretty big departure.

 

[BobRyan]

Earlier, I even gave evidence of that by pointing out that Catholics are now permitted to meet their "Sunday Obligation" by attending Mass on Saturday evening, the explanation being that since the Sabbath begins late on Saturday it makes sense to consider this as much a fulfillment of that obligation as is attending Sunday morning services.

I agree that viewing Saturday evening as the first part of Sunday (which is also what the Bible does and what SDAs do in terms of sunset on Saturday) qualifies as week-day-1

 

[BobRyan]

Do you not repudiate Sunday worshippers

no. We point out correct bible doctrine. Why would we need to "repudiate Sunday worshippers"??

If you are going to define that term as "hold some doctrine that is not exactly the same as your neighboring denomination" then once again you are recasting all denominations as repudiating all Christians not of that denomination.

 

[BobRyan]

Sounds like repudiation to me. If that is the case, what is your historical connection with the believers before the SDA came into existence?

The first century NT church was SDA in doctrine - we are very firm in supporting and affirming historic Christianity.

 

[BobRyan]

SDA say the Trinity, but they will not affirm the Nicene definition explicitly. That's a pretty big departure.

We have never been creedal. We are Bible based not creed based.

"three persons of the Godhead"

God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.
One God in three Persons.

All knowing, all powerful, from everlasting to everlasting... no beginning and no end.
So then in John 17 - Jesus is not "praying to Himself" but rather to God the Father.

It is rooted in scripture. not on man-made-tradition.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

no. We point out correct bible doctrine. Why would we need to "repudiate Sunday worshippers"??

If you are going to define that term as "hold some doctrine that is not exactly the same as your neighboring denomination" then once again you are recasting all denominations as repudiating all Christians not of that denomination.

I don't think you're understanding my specific criticism. You consider a Sunday worship a grave and horrible mistake right? An evil invention right?

I don't expect all Christians to hold all the same doctrines but if I am going to consider someone a Christian we have to identify what makes us Christian as opposed to something else. Mormons are not Christians by virtue of their Polytheism/Henotheism. Jehovahs Witnesses are not Christian by virtue of their Arianism. SDA claim a a belief in a Trinity but without reference to the Nicene Creed specifically. Thus it seems vague to me and that the first reaction by the SDA was to refer to the fathers as the teachers of man-made tradition argues to me that you consider consider yourself apart from them.

Those past Christians, you consider beneath your consideration, not really in the same communion as your own. Educated Protestants don't even go that far.

 

[Albion]

The problem then being that the only person to really understand the bible in 1900 years was Ellen G White. Why did God not inspire anyone before her to comprehend the meaning of scripture from it alone? Would have saved a lot of historical grief and prevented the Great apostasy.

This is a good point. One that needed to be said. It is too little to say that Ellen G. White was a prophet (or "prophetess"), and Christianity isn't without prophets.

BUT her proclamations were much more than prophesy, properly understood. Her role and her pronouncements are more in line with those of Emanuel Swedenborg or Herbert W. Armstrong.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

The first century NT church was SDA in doctrine - we are very firm in supporting and affirming historic Christianity.

Well you are are affirming a particular interpretation of the first century Church. The problem I see is that it is at odds with the historical Church over the last two thousand years. Which you seem to be fine separated from. If that's the case, it's not really a problem for you to be outside of Christendom is it? Since the rest of us have it all wrong.

Think of it this way. Can you name a true Christian inbetween about 100 AD to 1800 AD?

 

[BobRyan]

? That to worship on Sunday is a mistake that desperately needs to be corrected?

Those who claim that the NT shows weekly Sunday worship "need a Bible text"

Bible Sabbath keeping Christians have one.. "EVERY SABBATH" they met for Gospel preaching to both gentiles and Jews - Acts 18:4.

And I show Catholic documents admitting that they have no such text in the NT for weekly Sunday worship services or for any NT command to make such a change.

 

[BobRyan]

If that's the case, it's not really a problem for you to be outside of Christendom is it?

Even you admit that not all denomination believe every doctrine exactly the same.

Your spinning this to then view all other denominations other than your own - as "outside of Christendom" or that your own group is by your logic "outside of Christendom"

 

[Albion]

I agree that viewing Saturday evening as the first part of Sunday (which is also what the Bible does and what SDAs do in terms of sunset on Saturday) qualifies as week-day-1

The point was that the church which all SDAs blame for allegedly moving the Sabbath to Sunday does not, in fact, say that Saturday has ceased to be the Sabbath. It's quite the opposite, and this policy I referred to shows it.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

We have never been creedal. We are Bible based not creed based.

That's part of the problem. Historical Christianity is creedal. Even Luther affirmed the Nicene Creed and regarded it as an inheritance to be treasured. If you do not even have the creed in common with the rest of Christendom, how are you part of her and not willfully separate?

 

[BobRyan]

The problem then being that the only person to really understand the bible in 1900 years was Ellen G White.

Not by reason of anything any SDA has said here. You are spinning your own view of how others should think.

No SDA has said that Ellen White gave even one doctrine to SDAs.

Which of our doctrines did she introduce? I know of none.
How about you?

Why did God not inspire anyone before her to comprehend the meaning of scripture from it alone?

1 Cor 12 says God gives gifts as He wills -- I don't make the claim you just made.

 

[BobRyan]

The point was that the church which all SDAs blame for allegedly moving the Sabbath to Sunday does not, in fact, say that Saturday has ceased to be the Sabbath.

They say the Sabbath commandment is changed to this --

Q. What does the Third Commandment command?
A. The Third Commandment commands us to sanctify Sunday as the Lord's Day.

And they say this --

Dies Domini pt 13 -
"the Sabbath ...is therefore rooted in the depths of God's plan. This is why unlike many other laws - it is not within the context of strictly cultic (Jewish) stipulations but within the Decalogue the "ten words" which represent the very pillars of moral life inscribed on the human heart!! In setting this commandment within the context of the basic structure of ethics, Israel and then the church declare that they consider it not just a matter of community religious discipline but a defining and indelible expression of our relationship to God, announced and expounded by biblical revelations.
.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Even you admit that not all denomination believe every doctrine exactly the same.

Your spinning this to then view all other denominations other than your own - as "outside of Christendom" or that your own group is by your logic "outside of Christendom"

No, that's not my claim. My claim is there needs to be some baseline by which we regard each other. I do not consider Catholics non-Christians because we agree on so much. I likewise do not consider many Protestants non-Christians because they adhere to an Orthodox Christology and belief in the Trinity and incarnation. Likewise those same Protestant's would not, if they are educated ones, simply refer to the Fathers as the teachers of man-made traditions.

So no, I'm not insisting everyone agree with Eastern Orthodox doctrine. I allow a wide berth for what I consider Christendom generally. It is rather yourself who wants to willfully be kept apart from historic Christendom. For I can see no connection between the SDA and the Church that has existed for the last two thousand years.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Not by reason of anything any SDA has said here. You are spinning your own view of how others should think.

No SDA has said that Ellen White gave even one doctrine to SDAs.

I can only but conclude from this two possible things. Either you view the bible as the source of these doctrines, of which Ellen G White simply discovered the true teaching so she didn't reveal anything. Or Ellen G White has no real importance to you and you consider as you would any other historical figure, a teacher of man-made tradition. I doubt it's the latter.

Which of our doctrines did she introduce? I know of none.
How about you?

I think you're considering this conversation from a polemical point of view instead of actually addressing my concerns.

Is Ellen G White not one of the founders of your Church? If not, who was the first SDA teacher? Please don't say the Apostles and tell me of an SDA teacher/believer after 100AD and before Ellen G White. just one.