• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is Seventh-day Adventism a cult?

NightEternal

Evangelical SDA
Apr 18, 2007
5,639
127
Toronto, Ontario
✟6,559.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives


When Walter Martin met with LeRoy Froom and the rest of our denominational leaders, his final analysis was that we are not a cult in the strictest sense of the word. He categorized us as more of a heterodox group:

As far as the evangelicals were concerned, the three doctrines of Sabbatarianism, Ellen White's authority, and sanctuary/investigative judgment, though erroneous, if properly interpreted would not prevent fellowship between the two camps.

Other distinctive Adventist doctrines such as conditional immortality, annihilation of the wicked, health reform, and the remnant church concept were discussed and evaluated by the evangelicals. Their conclusion was that though these doctrines were out of the evangelical mainstream, and in some cases without any clear biblical support, the explanation given by these Adventist scholars would not prevent them from being genuine followers of Jesus.

After evaluating thousands of pages of documentation, and participating in extensive question and answer sessions with several of Adventism's most competent scholars, Walter Martin, speaking for the evangelicals, concluded that SDA "is essentially a Christian denomination, but that in the overall perspective its theology must be viewed as more heterodox than orthodox, and that its practices in not a few instances might rightly be termed divisive."[8] %% 351, 0, þ *Aftermath of the Conference*

The decision to reclassify SDA as a heterodox denomination, rather than a non-Christian cult, was very controversial. Barnhouse and Martin received considerable criticism within evangelical circles. In fact, after they revealed their findings in several editions of _Eternity_ magazine, 25 percent of the magazine's subscribers withdrew their subscriptions!

http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=569

Some harshly critcize his assessment in the book or disagree strongly with his conclusions:

It is our view that the SDA church may be the most dangerous of all the cults outside Catholicism, and although publicly they might want to be considered just another Christian denomination, privately they consider themselves the one and only, true "remnant church." Yet, the "Investigative Judgment" and the "Scapegoat Theory of the Atonement" are, by themselves, so non-Biblical as to contradict Galatians 1:8-9. It is "another gospel," about which the Apostle Paul wrote, "let such be anathema" (i.e., cursed/condemned).

http://millennium.fortunecity.com/li.../cult-yes.html

It is true that Adventist leaders often deny that their doctrine was developed through Ellen White's visions, but in the above statement Ellen White herself admitted that her visions played a definitive role in how the early leaders understood Bible doctrine. A cult researcher like Walter Martin should have known that it would be impossible to develop from the Bible alone Adventist doctrines such as Investigative Judgment, Satan as sin bearer, Sunday worship the mark of the beast, Seventh-Day Adventism as the fulfillment of Revelation 14:6, and Satan bound on earth for 1,000 years. He should have realized, therefore, that there would have to be duplicity involved in any such claim. Again, for some reason he failed to apply his knowledge of cultic deception to Seventh-Day Adventism. When the Jehovah's Witnesses play games with theological terms and appear in different colors according to different situations, Dr. Martin judged them as heretical chameleons. When the Seventh-day Adventists play similar games, he alleged that it is only because they "are handicapped by the lack of a comprehensive volume which adequately defines their doctrinal position."

Could it have been that Dr. Martin had developed close relationships with Adventist leaders in California, and therefore, became blinded to the reality of Adventism? We believe this is exactly what happened. He admitted such friendships in his writings.

Example #4: Salvation by Grace Alone
Dr. Martin's Statements: "Literally scores of times in their book Questions on Doctrine and in various other publications the Adventists affirm that salvation comes only by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ's sacrifice upon the cross" (Kingdom of the Cults, p. 378).
Contradicting Adventist Statements: "So we have clearly outlined the steps that we need to take in order to become a Christian: to believe in God, to repent of and to confess our sins, to be baptized, and to obey all the commandments of the Lord" (New Life Voice of Prophecy Guide #12); "Christ says to every man in this world what He said to the rich young ruler: 'If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments' ... In other words, the standards for admission into heaven is a character built according to the ten specifications, or commandments, of God's law" (Charles Everson, Saved by Grace, Review and Herald Publishing, pp. 45,46).
The Seventh-Day Adventist denomination teaches many doctrines that are contrary to those taught by the Apostles. God's Word commands that we mark them as false teachers and separate from them. That is not what Walter Martin did, though:
The Doctrine We Have Learned: "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (Romans 3;28).
Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrinal Offences: "Christ says to every man in this world what He said to the rich young ruler: 'If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments'" (Saved By Grace, pp. 45,46).
The Doctrine We Have Learned: "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him" (Romans 5:9).
Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrinal Offences: "Ellen White ... she was a fellow Seventh-day Adventist with no assurance of salvation except as she was faithful and trusted in the merits of her risen Savior" (Messenger to the Remnant, p. 127).
The Doctrine We Have Learned: "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster" (Galatians 3:24,25); "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" (Romans 11:6).
Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrinal Offences: "The fact that all who are redeemed are saved by grace does not dispense with the law of God any more in the one dispensation than in the other. The law is not against grace, and grace is not against the law. It is very evident, then, that in the new covenant we do not see the law as a thing of no consequence, but we find it occupying the center of the covenant" (Saved by Grace, pp. 11,36).
The Doctrine We Have Learned: "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ" (Colossians 2:16,17).
Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrinal Offences: "... it is evident that all ten commandments are binding in the Christian dispensation ... One of these commands is the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath" (Bible Footlights, p. 37).
The Doctrine We Have Learned: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life" (John 5:24).
Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrinal Offences: "As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus come into review before God ... every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected" (Ellen White, The Great Controversy, p. 425).
The Doctrine We Have Learned: "If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire" (1 Corinthians 3:14,15).
Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrinal Offences: "When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the book of life, and the record of their good deeds will be erased from the book of God's remembrance" (Ellen White, The Great Controversy, p. 425).
the Seventh-day Adventist denomination contradicts many clear apostolic doctrines. There are many other Adventist doctrinal heresies, of course. Upon the command and authority of Romans 16:17, and contrary to Walter Martin's misguided advice, Bible-believing Christians must mark the Adventist Church as false and avoid associations with the group.
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.
Martin certainly had some trouble arriving at this conclusion as a result of the cultic behavior of some SDA's he dealt with:​
MARTIN: At that juncture, I ran into F.D. Nichol. Nichol was an absolute worshipper of Ellen White. If he were here now (F.D. was a friend of mine), I would say it to his face. And we got to that place in our dialogues (just a couple I had with Nichol, independent of these men). I met with Nichol over in Illinois when we were covering a conference and we spent a day together.
It was before 1960, of historical value. Nichol said that he was very glad he did not have to defend the writers of the Scripture but only Mrs. White. And I said, "Brother Nichol, have you lost your reason?" I wasn't as tactful as I am today. "Have you lost your reason? Do you realize what you have just said? Do you realize that you have elevated Mrs. White over Scripture without even thinking about it? You said you are glad you only have to defend her and not the Scriptures, as if the Scriptures were more fallible than Ellen White.
He just paused and looked at me. I told him, "You can't say that. You say something like that publicly and Adventism is a cult. They have exalted the leaders' interpretations of capabilities and gifts over those of the Church, the Holy Spirit, the ministry of the Word. You can't do that." Well, the General Conference wisely separated Nichol and myself. he was prohibited from making contact with me.
Here are the distinguishing marks of a cultic organization. Go through them and give me your feedback and opinions as to wether or not we qualify as a cult:​

  1. The group is founded by a single, exceptional and highly charismatic individual.
  2. The group either unduly elevates man, or lowers God.
  3. The group adds other sources of authority equal to or of greater weight than the Bible.
  4. The group teaches some form of salvation by works.
 
A

AndrewK788

Guest
I think we qualify for all but the third. Only extreme fundies say EGW is equal to the Bible.

Wait, I'm confused. You mean in the first 2 we DO qualify as a cult? I didn't know we credited the founding of Adventism to one individual. Albeit, EGW was influential and such, but she wasn't the sole founder of the SDA church. Anyway, I actually see it the opposite, assuming I understood you correctly. I think we are not a cult, except number 3. Though we claim EGW is not equal to the Bible, if you were an outsider, you wouldn't be able to guess that by hearing how much some of us quote her.
 
Upvote 0

Avonia

Just look through the telescope . . .
Dec 13, 2007
1,345
36
✟16,813.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
In Relationship
I've watched and listened carefully to people as they've left various faith communities. The transition tends to have a similar set of issues. But the trauma of it is usually more defined by the individuals and the small circle around them than the larger organization. I've also noticed that the more vulnerable the leaders of an organization feel, the more cultic their organization becomes.
 
Upvote 0

freeindeed2

In Christ We Are FREE!
Feb 1, 2007
31,130
20,046
56
A mile high.
✟87,197.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Here are the distinguishing marks of a cultic organization. Go through them and give me your feedback and opinions as to wether or not we qualify as a cult:​

The group is founded by a single, exceptional and highly charismatic individual.

This one is rather obvious. Hmmm...I wonder who it could be?;)

The group either unduly elevates man, or lowers God.
Hmmm...how many times have I heard that man 'contributes to his own salvation' in some way.

The group adds other sources of authority equal to or of greater weight than the Bible.
Fundie 18. Her writings are the interpreter of Scripture itself. Whether one wants to admit it or not doesn't change the fact that her writings are esteemed above the Bible as evidenced by trying to arrive at any other interpretation apart from her writings.

The group teaches some form of salvation by works.
Double speak is used with this one. On the one hand Adventism claims righteousness by faith, but on the other has many externals that must be conformed to, the greatest of which is the old covenant.

 
Upvote 0

RC_NewProtestants

Senior Veteran
May 2, 2006
2,766
63
Washington State
Visit site
✟25,750.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The problem with defining anything as cultic is based upon the assumption that one has the correct understanding to begin with so that they can ascertain if another group is cult or not. We do this by history, e.g we say there are certain orthodox statements and it does not matter whether they make sense or not they have the orthodox seal of approval. I am proudly heterodox and and I think orthodox Christianity is wrong on many points. From eternal hell punishment, immortal soul, salvation by penal/substitution, sacraments of a physical church etc. So as much as I like Dr. Martin he begins with a faulty position and that position is defined as orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is rather like fundamentalism it seeks to protect what it has long assumed and that is not really the best approach to understanding God.
 
Upvote 0

honorthesabbath

Senior Veteran
Aug 10, 2005
4,067
78
76
Arkansas
✟27,180.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I'm not sure which SDA church you have attended, but that list does not apply to mine. I know of NO ONE who elevates EGW's writing equal or above scripture. As I recall--she even says her writings are NOT scripture and that they are only to lead to the GREATER LIGHT (the bible).
 
Upvote 0

freeindeed2

In Christ We Are FREE!
Feb 1, 2007
31,130
20,046
56
A mile high.
✟87,197.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm not sure which SDA church you have attended, but that list does not apply to mine. I know of NO ONE who elevates EGW's writing equal or above scripture. As I recall--she even says her writings are NOT scripture and that they are only to lead to the GREATER LIGHT (the bible).
I didn't expect you to be able to see it, which I qualified in my statements in the first place. It doesn't matter what you 'say', the practice is that Scripture is interpreted through the writings and 'visions' of EGW. She has already assigned the meanings for the SDA church.
 
Upvote 0