Possible Adventist here

[FaithfulPilgrim]

Hello!

I'm not Adventist, but I have had some experiences with them in the past. I once attended an SDA school and occasionally attended their church.

I find myself agreeing with a lot of Seventh Day Adventism. I think they got a lot of things right, but there are a few concerns about some of their doctrines concern me, so I figured I'd look around here.

I agree with the traditional bunch on the Saturday Sabbath. I don't see it as necessary for salvation and there is nothing wrong with worshiping on a Sunday, I just haven't see any good biblical reasons conclude that the sabbath has been moved or nullified.

I think they also make good points about Jesus and Archangel Michael being the same person. I am indifferent, but I don't think it is a heretical view.

Ben Carson's run for president reignited my interest in Adventism.

The biggest concern I have with the traditional Adventists is annihilationism. I'm open to the possibility of soul sleep in the sense that I don't believe people immediately go to the afterlife after death, but I believe that suffering in hell will be a permanent reality for the wicked. There is strong biblical support for annihilationism imo, but I think the traditional Christian view has slightly stronger support. Either way, I see both sides.

I'm also not a young earth creationist, but Idc what view a church leans towards as long as it does not take a dogmatic stance.

I believe the restoration of Israel is part of biblical prophecy and is of eschatological significance, another issue where I depart from the traditionalists on. However, I'm open to any eschatological view or millennial view as long as it allows a place for national Israel and does not promote replacement theology.

Are there any of you in the progressive group that has similar feelings or views?

Is there an Adventist denomination you can recommend.

 

[BobRyan]

Hello!

I'm not Adventist, but I have had some experiences with them in the past. I once attended an SDA school and occasionally attended their church.

I find myself agreeing with a lot of Seventh Day Adventism. I think they got a lot of things right, but there are a few concerns about some of their doctrines concern me, so I figured I'd look around here.

Sounds like you made the right decision. Welcome!

Also consider looking at these two threads - they may interest you and they offer a short summary that could be very useful when doing your research.

Oct 5, 2016 #1
Jan 4, 2016 #1

I agree with the traditional bunch on the Saturday Sabbath. I don't see it as necessary for salvation and there is nothing wrong with worshiping on a Sunday, I just haven't see any good biblical reasons conclude that the sabbath has been moved or nullified.

In which case you must ask yourself about the foundational Protestant principle of "Sola Scriptura" testing of all doctrine and tradition as we see Christ doing in Mark 7:6-13.

How "important is it" if one tweeks the commandment a little - but not with any ill intent - perhaps even well-intentioned. That Mark 7:6-13 is a perfect example of such a thing - and Christ's own response to it.

I think they also make good points about Jesus and Archangel Michael being the same person. I am indifferent, but I don't think it is a heretical view.

Our view is that Jesus is the 2nd person of the Trinity - or as we say "the Godhead" -- one God in three person. But as we see in Genesis 15 - God can appear in other forms. In Genesis 18 YHWH appears in the form of a man as do two angels.

Does not mean that God is merely "a man". Perhaps we agree on that point.

Ben Carson's run for president reignited my interest in Adventism.

The biggest concern I have with the traditional Adventists is annihilationism. I'm open to the possibility of soul sleep in the sense that I don't believe people immediately go to the afterlife after death, but I believe that suffering in hell will be a permanent reality for the wicked. There is strong biblical support for annihilationism imo, but I think the traditional Christian view has slightly stronger support. Either way, I see both sides.

IN Matt 10:28 God says he will "destroy both body and soul in fiery hell".

In Ezek 28 - even the devil himself is to be "Turned into ashes".

In Revelation 14:10-11 we see that Christ and the Angels are right there - and the wicked are "tormented in fire and brimstone IN THE PRESENCE of Christ and the angels" -- so then they are right there for it according to that text. Now if you think that they spend all of eternity at the brink of hell watching the wicked in torment then that is a bleak view of eternity.

It gives "strong motivation" to "consider the Bible alternative" ... one where the wicked are tormented in hell but as Jude 7 the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are exhibited as examples of undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. At some point the wicked are "destroyed".

I'm also not a young earth creationist, but Idc what view a church leans towards as long as it does not take a dogmatic stance.

Consider again the "Sola Scriptura" option -- then look at the "legal code" in the bible - which all agree - is not a parable. Specifically Exodus 20:8-11. It is clear that in text there is nothing about Darwinism being allowed for specifically in Exodus 20:11.

Darwin himself admitted that the Bible is not compatible with his doctrine on origins.

I believe the restoration of Israel is part of biblical prophecy and is of eschatological significance, another issue where I depart from the traditionalists on.

1. if all Jews were to accept Christ as their Saviour - all Jews would be saved AND God would most certainly use them to evangelize the world with the Gospel . IF they don't there is no second-place prize being offered.
2. God's plan of salvation is not "the Gospel plus the benefits of some piece of sand in the middle east" -- it is "The Gospel" and the new Heavens and new Earth. "He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11

Before the conversion of Saul - to Paul -- the 490 years of Daniel 9 which were given specifically to Israel to make up their minds to serve God as his chosen people or not - the Jews could have chosen to serve God when the Messiah came. They could still have chosen right up until Matt 23 -- and even beyond - right up until the stoning of Stephen. But at some point (as we see in Acts 13) they reached a limit.

However, I'm open to any eschatological view or millennial view as long as it allows a place for national Israel and does not promote replacement theology.

Do you consider Romans 2:25-29 and Romans 9:6-8 to be "replacement theology"??

Is there an Adventist denomination you can recommend.

Seventh-day Adventists have a world church governing body that votes on doctrine for the denomination. So while some local congregations may stray from that model to one extent or another - the denomination itself is pretty well defined.

 

[Alithis]

what forums this -so annoying these thread titles pop up on a list .we hit reply and then oh cant say that here .oh well
.. ? Jesus and Michael the same person ?.. of whom of the angels did he say thou art my son .. get real -its blasphemy .

 

[BobRyan]

what forums this -so annoying these thread titles pop up on a list .we hit reply and then oh cant say that here .oh well
.. ? Jesus and Michael the same person ?.. of whom of the angels did he say thou art my son .. get real -its blasphemy .

In the SDA context the argument is not that Christ is an angel - the argument is that God the Son - the 2nd person of the Trinity - can appear in the form of an angel as in Genesis 18 - where YHWH appears in the form of a man.