Is the Seventh Day Adventist Church orthodox

[BobRyan]

2190 The Sabbath, which represented the completion of the first creation, has been replaced by Sunday which recalls the new creation inaugurated by the Resurrection of Christ.

Isn't that why we have a 5 day work week? The Sabbath and THe Lord's Day.

BobRyan said: ↑
No. In fact at one time the Catholic church demanded that people work on the Bible Sabbath.

The question was about why Saturday was made to be a day off from work, in addition to Sunday.

But it was in response to the Catholic church changing the Sabbath commandment to point to week-day-1 as the day of holy obligation -- I was pointing out that they also made the Bible-Sabbath a work day which would not allow for a weekend off in that case.

This article points to the 19th century as the timeline origin for a two day weekend

Workweek and weekend

Which further points to the fact that the Catholic church method of changing the Sabbath obligation from the 7th day as in the Bible - to week-day-1 and then demanding that people work on the 7th day was not trending to a two-day weekend. The 19th century would be needed apparently.

 

[BobRyan]

Those who have rejected the creeds have always been considered heretical by Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant standards.

Well historic references of Catholic intolerance for Protestants is a matter of history.

I am not too concerned that some denominations do approve of "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine (while others do not) - but Protestants are pretty happy with it so far.

But you see my point right? By placing yourself outside of the boundaries of Nicene Christianity, which you call a tradition of men, it becomes more difficult for you to claim any sort of communion and or connection with Christianity more broadly.

Not true at all since I have attended a great many non-SDA churches and am always welcomed there, and so also non-SDAs welcomed in SDA churches as well as the fact that Christianity is not at all limited to "creedal denominations" including not on CF.

 

[rturner76]

The first century Christians were SDA in doctrine.

Uh, no. The first-century church was Apostolic, not SDA even if they had a Saturday Sabbath, SDA is Protestant. No Bishops, no Apostles. Now, did the first Christians follow the 613 Mosaic laws? Yes. Paul and Peter disagreed. Peter thought Christians should first become Jews and get circumcised. Paul argued for gentile Christianity without requiring the observance of the 613 Jewish laws. Paul's view was adopted by The Church and the Mosaic laws were no longer required. That doesn't eliminate the 10 in my view.

Well for starters the first century A.D. church was SDA in doctrine.

See above. I hate to be contradictory but I think the statement is not accurate. The first-century Church is basically Eastern or Oriental Orthodoxy. Quite different from SDA with the sacraments, Real Presence, and Apostolic Succession.

The fact that we are not "creedal" means we hold absolutely no doctrine at all "just because someone put it in a creed". The only criteria for accepting doctrine is "sola scriptura" testing. A key Protestant theme and also in the practice of first-century Christians holding to SDA doctrine as we see in Acts 17:11 with their "sola scriptura" testing.

I am sure you are aware that the first creeds were accepted by "The Church" before the Bible was canonized. There was over 300 years of church building before the Bible was canonized. Many things in Christianity are based on the teachings of the Apostles and their students.

The first book of the NT (Matthew) was written no sooner than 50 years after the resurrection. Was nothing taught in those 50 years? Or the next 250 years before the books of the Bible were agreed upon. Approved by the entire global church body at the time. The same kind of council of Bishops more or less that approved the Nicene Creed. So they had the knowledge to approve the Bible but the same people did not have the knowledge to approve the Nicene creed?

I believe the SDA is one of the most solid Protestant religions but claims to be Orthodox are misplaced.

 

[RBPerry]

SDA doctrine was not something that any of the Millerites including Ellen White believed in though as Christians from many different backgrounds they held various beliefs that still exist in the SDA denomination today. It was not until 1848 that the Millerites that had not left the movement started to work out a set of doctrinal beliefs to hold in common other than the ones Miller already had which were:
1. the Protestant Day-for-year method,
2. Historicism,
3. the 2300 years of Dan 8 ended in Oct 22, 1844.

(And they were not asking recently married Ellen White - for a standard set of common beliefs either. Though her husband and she were both considered leaders or at least of significant influence for the group)

Have you read her books, you must have gone to a different Adventist school than I did. To put it simply we were taught that the SDA church came into existence based on her visions (dreams). She was very much responsible for the Saturday issue, the dietary issues. How to raise our children, that's a good one because she didn't raise hers, she ran around the country preaching. You are correct she came out of the Millerite movement. SDA is just one of the many groups that came out of the "great awakening".

You asked why other denominations read commentaries from their founders. The difference is Calvin and Westley were never considered prophets, Mrs. White was.

 

[rturner76]

Well historic references of Catholic intolerance for Protestants is a matter of history.

There is blood on everybody's hands when it comes to oppression. It was illegal to be anything but Catholic in Britain but they switched to the Church of England and looted and burned all of the monasteries in the country. Sold the best ones land. However, the man that did that, his offspring was nicknamed "bloody Mary" for the number of protestants she had killed.

There was brutality on all sides, It was even worse in the Holland/Belgium area and Germany. It was basically a war fought county by county.

 

[BobRyan]

Have you read her books,

I am a Seventh-day Adventist -- I have read them and I like knowing about the denomination I am a member of.

you must have gone to a different Adventist school than I did.

Agreed and I doubt that those who did go to your academy had the same experience as you did every year. Individuals change, methods change etc. Life is funny that way. I have gone back to my old academy from time to time and it is a lot different than when I attended.

To put it simply we were taught that the SDA church came into existence based on her visions (dreams).

I suppose in some sort of ad hoc scenario someone could teach kids that for a while -- everyone has free will and can make those sorts of decisions I suppose. But hopefully they then read a bit more of actual Adventist church history after that period.

She was very much responsible for the Saturday issue

She was very much against it when it was brought up to her - she had to be convinced. History is a funny thing. After all as a United Methodist it was not something she was used to doing.

You asked why other denominations read commentaries from their founders.

It was a rhetorical question - I was pointing out that reading the works of great Christian leaders is actually quite common within all denominations. For some it is D.L. Moody and/or C.H. Spurgeon and/or Luther and/or Calvin

The difference is Calvin and Westley were never considered prophets, Mrs. White was.

Well then we do agree on something.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
Well historic references of Catholic intolerance for Protestants is a matter of history.

There is blood on everybody's hands when it comes to oppression. It was illegal to be anything but Catholic in Britain but they switched to the Church of England

True. But as far as I know - only one of them ran the Holy Roman Empire for centuries, declared that their inquisitions and policies coming out of ecumenical councils or Papal statements were "infallible" etc. Which means it was more difficult to simply walk away with "well in the dark ages a lot of people made mistakes ...glad we are past that".. Which is where I think we all should go with it.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Well historic references of Catholic intolerance for Protestants is a matter of history.

I am not too concerned that some denominations do approve of "sola scriptura" testing of all doctrine - but Protestants are pretty happy with it so far.

You'll find intolerance was a mark of all Christian society at the time. Protestants were not classical liberals and would have, if they could have, destroyed everything Catholic. Neither could, thus they learned to somewhat tolerate each other.

But this isn't particularly relevant to what I'm saying. While Both Catholics and Protestants fiercely dissagreed with each other on certain things, they did have commonalities. A common inheritance in the Fathers (which Protestants respected) and in the creeds and confessions of Christianity. Heck when it comes to the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and Son, Protestants owe the entirety of that theology to their Catholic forebears.

No Protestant, unless he were part of the radical reformation can deny this history and must affirm they have some descent from those before them. Martin Luther did and Calvin did also.

Not true at all since I have attended a great many non-SDA churches and am always welcomed there, and so also non-SDAs welcomed in SDA churches as well as the fact that Christianity is not at all limited to "creedal denominations" including not on CF.

Then let's consider the Creedal Churches, which compose the majority of Christianity. How are these Churches related to teh SDA? are they in apostasy?

 

[BobRyan]

You'll find intolerance was a mark of all Christian society at the time.

History seems to back you up on that point in the dark ages and even in the early days of the Americas.

 

[BobRyan]

Then let's consider the Creedal Churches, which compose the majority of Christianity. How are these Churches related to teh SDA? are they in apostasy?

All denominations differ with every other denomination on at least one doctrine. On that point of difference each denomination declares their own view to be correct and the other guy to be incorrect.

That is the nature of the system in general - everyone already agrees to this. But all are still Christian.

 

[BobRyan]

While Both Catholics and Protestants fiercely dissagreed with each other on certain things, they did have commonalities.

Also true of all denominations -- I can't think of a single one having nothing in common with other Christian denominations.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

History seems to back you up on that point in the dark ages and even in the early days of the Americas.

Calling the medieval period the 'dark ages' perhaps exacerbates the difference between us.

All denominations differ with every other denomination on at least one doctrine. On that point of difference each denomination declares their own view to be correct and the other guy to be incorrect.

That is the nature of the system in general - everyone already agrees to this. But all are still Christian.

But where is the SDA continuity with the 1700 years of Christians which came before them? So far I see none. You regard our teachers as propagators of man-made traditions and our practice is contrary to God. So how are you and I related to each other?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Also true of all denominations -- I can't think of a single one having nothing in common with other Christian denominations.

Where are our commonalities? You won't even confess the Nicene Creed.

 

[BobRyan]

Where are our commonalities? You won't even confess the Nicene Creed.

I have repeatedly given you the trinity definition - which even you could not object to --
The Bible is the Word of God
The virgin birth
The New Covenant of Jer 31:31-4 and Isaiah 8:6-12
Jesus bodily crucified, buried in the tomb resurrected on the third day - ascended into heaven
A literal Satan, literal fallen angels
Literal good angels.
Literal miracles in the Bible.
Eph 2 - Saved by Grace through Faith
In the case of EO -- No OSAS
All TEN of the TEN Commandments included in the moral law of God

. So how are you and I related to each other?

we are both Christians

 

[BobRyan]

But where is the SDA continuity with the 1700 years of Christians which came before them? So far I see none.

1. No one has lived that long.
2. No EO in the NT church 2000 years ago.
3. Just like no one called themselves SDA 2000 years ago (but they had SDA doctrine)

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I have repeatedly given you the trinity definition - which even you could not object to --
The Bible is the Word of God
The virgin birth
The New Covenant of Jer 31:31-4 and Isaiah 8:6-12
Jesus bodily crucified, buried in the tomb resurrected on the third day - ascended into heaven
A literal Satan, literal fallen angels
Literal good angels.
Literal miracles in the Bible.
Eph 2 - Saved by Grace through Faith
In the case of EO -- No OSAS
All TEN of the TEN Commandments included in the moral law of God

Do you regard the Church before the SDA and after the Apostles as Brothers and sisters in the faith adhering to the truth?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

1. No one has lived that long.
2. No EO in the NT church 2000 years ago.
3. Just like no one called themselves SDA 2000 years ago (but they had SDA doctrine)

1. Never said anyone has lived that long.
2. Ah. So when was my Church created? Be specific.
3. Can you name one true believer in between the year 100AD and 1800AD. Just one person who embodied a genuine faith in Christ.

 

[Albion]

But it was in response to the Catholic church changing the Sabbath commandment to point to week-day-1 as the day of holy obligation -- I was pointing out that they also made the Bible-Sabbath a work day which would not allow for a weekend off in that case.

Naah. I don't know where you picked up this fiction, but the time frame is all wrong. The idea of Saturday "off" in addition to Sunday (which is what we were asked) is fairly recent in history.

 

[BobRyan]

Do you regard the Church before the SDA and after the Apostles as Brothers and sisters in the faith adhering to the truth?

Christians are in every age from the first century until know. Unless they are atheists or Buddhists etc So long as they accept Christ as Savior they are brothers and sisters in Christ.

I think everyone pretty much agrees with this as well, so it is not just SDAs that view it that way.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
But it was in response to the Catholic church changing the Sabbath commandment to point to week-day-1 as the day of holy obligation -- I was pointing out that they also made the Bible-Sabbath a work day which would not allow for a (2-day) weekend off in that case.

This article points to the 19th century as the timeline origin for a two day weekend
Workweek and weekend

Which further points to the fact that the Catholic church method of changing the Sabbath obligation from the 7th day as in the Bible - to week-day-1 and then demanding that people work on the 7th day was not trending to a two-day weekend. The 19th century would be needed apparently.

Naah. I don't know where you picked up this fiction, but the time frame is all wrong.

Naah -- I prefer History.


Emperor Constantine I Sunday enforcement law of March 7, A.D. 321, reads as follows: “On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed.” (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3, trans. Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 5th ed. (New York, 1902), 3:380, note 1.)

The Sunday law was officially confirmed by the Roman Papacy. The Council of Laodicea in A.D. 364 decreed, “Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day they shall especially honour, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ” (Strand, op. cit., citing Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Councils of the Church, 2 [Edinburgh, 1876] 316).