What do Seventh-Day Adventist believe.

[reddogs]

We have central distinct doctrines which are the Pillars of Adventism, but we also share doctrines of the basic truths of Christianity.

Here is what Wikipedia has on the doctrines which Seventh-day Adventists have which are the central doctrines of Protestant Christianity:

The Trinity, the incarnation, the virgin birth, the substitutionary atonement, justification by faith, creation, the second coming, the resurrection of the dead, and last judgment.[citation needed]

In Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine (1957), four authors outlined the core doctrines that they share with Protestant Christianity.

"In Common With Conservative Christians and the Historic Protestant Creeds, We Believe—
1. That God is the Sovereign Creator, upholder, and ruler of the universe, and that He is eternal, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent.
2. That the Godhead, the Trinity, comprises God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
3. That the Scriptures are the inspired revelation of God to men; and that the Bible is the sole rule of faith and practice.
4. That Jesus Christ is very God, and that He has existed with the Father from all eternity.
5. That the Holy Spirit is a personal being, sharing the attributes of deity with the Father and the Son.
6. That Christ, the Word of God, became incarnate through the miraculous conception and the virgin birth; and that He lived an absolutely sinless life here on earth.
7. That the vicarious, atoning death of Jesus Christ, once for all, is all-sufficient for the redemption of a lost race.
8. That Jesus Christ arose literally and bodily from the grave.
9. That He ascended literally and bodily into heaven.
10. That He now serves as our advocate in priestly ministry and mediation before the Father.
11. That He will return in a premillennial, personal, imminent second advent.
12. That man was created sinless, but by his subsequent fall entered a state of alienation and depravity.
13. That salvation through Christ is by grace alone, through faith in His blood.
14. That entrance upon the new life in Christ is by regeneration, or the new birth.
15. That man is justified by faith.
16. That man is sanctified by the indwelling Christ through the Holy Spirit.
17. That man will be glorified at the resurrection or translation of the saints, when the Lord returns.
18. That there will be a judgment of all men.
19. That the gospel is to be preached as a witness to all the world."[38]

 

[reddogs]

Here is more from Wikipedia...

The theology of the Seventh-day Adventist Church resembles that of Protestant Christianity, combining elements from Lutheran, Wesleyan/Arminian, and Anabaptist branches of Protestantism. Adventists believe in the infallibility of Scripture and teach that salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ. The 28 fundamental beliefs constitute the church's official doctrinal position.

The denomination also has a number of distinctive doctrines which differentiate it from other Christian churches. There are very few teachings held exclusively by Seventh-day Adventists. Some of their views which differ from most Christian churches include: the perpetuity of the seventh-day Sabbath, the unconsciousness of man in death, conditional immortality, an atoning ministry of Jesus Christ in the heavenly sanctuary, and an “investigative judgment” that commenced in 1844. Furthermore, a traditionally historicist approach to prophecy has led Adventists to develop a unique system of eschatological beliefs which incorporates a commandment-keeping "remnant", a universal end-time crisis revolving around the law of God, and the visible return of Jesus Christ prior to a millennial reign of believers in heaven.

 

[tampasteve]

What do SDA believe about the earthly Third Temple and sacrifices? I understand they believe the sacrifice of Jesus nullified the ceremonial laws like sacrifice, but how does it relate to the Third Temple?

 

[Gary K]

What do SDA believe about the earthly Third Temple and sacrifices? I understand they believe the sacrifice of Jesus nullified the ceremonial laws like sacrifice, but how does it relate to the Third Temple?

I have to confess complete ignorance as to what the Third Temple is. I have no idea what you're speaking to. If you could give me a short explanation of what you mean by this maybe I could help. The way it is, I'm pretty much in the dark.

 

[tampasteve]

I have to confess complete ignorance as to what the Third Temple is. I have no idea what you're speaking to. If you could give me a short explanation of what you mean by this maybe I could help. The way it is, I'm pretty much in the dark.

No worries, we might be starting from a completely different view point. I am not looking for a debate, just information and fellowship.

Basically, most Messianic believers believe in an eventual rebuilt temple and reinstitution of the sacrificial system. The summary is that Yeshua's sacrifice was for the access to Heaven while sacrifices in the earthly Temple are to draw near to G-D on Earth and to fulfill those requirements. Obviously this applies more to Jewish people than gentiles. Do SDA have a set belief in the Temple?

 

[Gary K]

No worries, we might be starting from a completely different view point. I am not looking for a debate, just information and fellowship.

Basically, most Messianic believers believe in an eventual rebuilt temple and reinstitution of the sacrificial system. The summary is that Yeshua's sacrifice was for the access to Heaven while sacrifices in the earthly Temple are to draw near to G-D on Earth and to fulfill those requirements. Obviously this applies more to Jewish people than gentiles. Do SDA have a set belief in the Temple?

I'm not looking for a debate either. I simply had no idea what you were referring to as I'd never heard of a 3rd Temple.

In historical SDA doctrine we have no similar belief. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross did away with the sacrificial system forever as the sacrificial system was a prophetic system looking forward to the life and sacrifice of Christ. It was the Gospel in symbols. Jesus is the reality that the shadow of the sacrifical system pointed to. So, what need for a further system of sacrfices pointing back to Jesus when He has made the one atoning sacrfice that can in reality cleanse us from sin? The blood of animals was never able to, by itself, cleanse us from sin. It was the faith in the coming Redeemer's sacrifice which made them efficacious. And it is now by faith in the Redeemer's past sacrifice that we have forgiveness and cleansing from sin.

I'm sure someone else might say it differently, but boiled down to a nutshell that's the historical viewpoint of the SDA church on what you're referring to.

 

[tampasteve]

Thanks for the clarification

 

[Gary K]

Thanks for the clarification

You're welcome. Glad I could help.

 

[Dave-W]

In historical SDA doctrine we have no similar belief. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross did away with the sacrificial system forever as the sacrificial system was a prophetic system looking forward to the life and sacrifice of Christ. It was the Gospel in symbols. Jesus is the reality that the shadow of the sacrifical system pointed to. So, what need for a further system of sacrfices pointing back to Jesus when He has made the one atoning sacrfice that can in reality cleanse us from sin? The blood of animals was never able to, by itself, cleanse us from sin. It was the faith in the coming Redeemer's sacrifice which made them efficacious. And it is now by faith in the Redeemer's past sacrifice that we have forgiveness and cleansing from sin.

Indeed. And that is also the position of much of evangelical protestant christianity.

But some have a different take - that many (or even most) of the sacrifices had little or nothing to do with sins. And that COULD be restored in a future 3rd temple. Also, that 3rd temple is supposed to be where antichrist (may his name be blotted out) is to reign from.

 

[Gary K]

Indeed. And that is also the position of much of evangelical protestant christianity.

But some have a different take - that many (or even most) of the sacrifices had little or nothing to do with sins. And that COULD be restored in a future 3rd temple. Also, that 3rd temple is supposed to be where antichrist (may his name be blotted out) is to reign from.

I to this I would offer you the following:

Mark 12: 32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
33 And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.
34 And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

Psalm 40: 6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.

Micah 6: 6 ¶Wherewith shall I come before the Lord, and bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old?
7 Will the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams, or with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

I Samuel 15: 22 And Samuel said, Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

 

[Dave-W]

I to this I would offer you the following:

Those all speak of the sin offerings.

What about the Peace offering? The thank offering? There are others as well that have nothing to do with sin.

 

[Gary K]

There is something I just realized that I left out of the following paragraph.

In historical SDA doctrine we have no similar belief. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross did away with the sacrificial system forever as the sacrificial system was a prophetic system looking forward to the life and sacrifice of Christ. It was the Gospel in symbols. Jesus is the reality that the shadow of the sacrifical system pointed to. So, what need for a further system of sacrfices pointing back to Jesus when He has made the one atoning sacrfice that can in reality cleanse us from sin? The blood of animals was never able to, by itself, cleanse us from sin. It was the faith in the coming Redeemer's sacrifice which made them efficacious. And it is now by faith in the Redeemer's past sacrifice that we have forgiveness and cleansing from sin.

To that I should have added the continuing work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary that Jesus is doing for each and every believer, as this is something that no other denomination that I know of believes. This is also taught in the sanctuary services/sacrificial system.

 

[Gary K]

Those all speak of the sin offerings.

What about the Peace offering? The thank offering? There are others as well that have nothing to do with sin.

To that I would once again offer the following texts.

IIChronicles 29: 31 Then Hezekiah answered and said, Now ye have consecrated yourselves unto the Lord, come near and bring sacrifices and thank offerings into the house of the Lord. And the congregation brought in sacrifices and thank offerings; and as many as were of a free heart burnt offerings.*n13
32 And the number of the burnt offerings, which the congregation brought, was threescore and ten bullocks, an hundred rams, and two hundred lambs: all these were for a burnt offering to the Lord.
33 And the consecrated things were six hundred oxen and three thousand sheep.

IIChronicles 33: 16 And he repaired the altar of the Lord, and sacrificed thereon peace offerings and thank offerings, and commanded Judah to serve the Lord God of Israel.

Not all burnt offerings were offerings for sin. Some were peace offerings. Some were thank offerings. And, if you do some research oil was incorporated into sin offerings, meat offerings, thank offerings, etc.... So it is representative of all the offerings. Since agricultural products were the "money" of the day, and even the poor man had some wheat, barley, etc... it was used as an offering to the Lord. Just like we now give offerings of money rather than oil, a bird, a sheaf of wheat, etc.... It's simply a cultural difference because many of these things just are not available to a large portion of the population in non-agriculture based economies. Yeah, some farmers will have these things available to them, but not even all farmers would have them.

Its the idea, the love for God that sparks the gift, that the offerings were to represent. They were physical object lessons for a people who had just come out of generations of slavery and made their living off of agriculture. That's the lesson taught in what I quoted from Mark, Micah, and Psalms. The offerings weren't what God was looking for. He was looking for a people who loved Him and who freely gave of what they had to His cause. The form itself is actually pretty meaningless. It's what the forms represented that counts. It's the principle behind them.

 

[reddogs]

What do SDA believe about the earthly Third Temple and sacrifices? I understand they believe the sacrifice of Jesus nullified the ceremonial laws like sacrifice, but how does it relate to the Third Temple?

Adventist believe that the tabernacle/temple as well as the ceremonial laws all were pointing to Christ and His Atonement for sin, so when He came, He fulfill what these things pointed to and the prophecies.

Now history tells us that the Jews are the ones that hold out of tradition that they need to rebuild a Third Temple as they claim the Messiah didn't come. And they tried to build it to remove the pagan abominations put there, but they failed.

Here is some explanation:
"John Chrysostom (A.D. 347-407)
"Homilies on Matthew"
Homily IV, Chapter II


...And if ever miracles were done, they were done for the aliens' sake, to increase the number of the proselytes; and for manifestation of God's power, if haply their enemies having taken them captives, fancied they prevailed, because their own gods were mighty...

And what took place at a later periodwere few and at intervals; for example, when the sun stood still in its course, and started back in the opposite direction. And this one may see to have occurred in our case also. For so even in our generation, in the instance of him who surpassed all in ungodliness, I mean Julian, many strange things happened. Thus when the Jews were attempting to raise up again the temple at Jerusalem, fire burst out from the foundations, and utterly hindered them all; and when both his treasurer,and his uncle and namesake, made the sacred vessels the subject of their open insolence, the one was "eaten with worms, and gave up the ghost,"the other "burst asunder in the midst." Moreover, the fountains failing, when sacrifices were made there, and the entrance of the famine into the cities together with the emperor himself, was a very great sign. For it is usual with God to do such things; when evils are multiplied, and He sees His own people afflicted, and their adversaries greatly intoxicated with their dominion over them, then to display His own power; which he did also in Persia with respect to the Jews."

"He [Julian the Apostate] planned at vast cost to restore the once splendid Temple at Jerusalem, which after many mortal combats during the siege by Vespasian and later by Titus had barely been stormed. He had entrusted the speedy performance of this work to Alypius of Antioch... But though this Alypius pushed the work on with vigor, aided by the governor of the province, terrible balls of fire kept bursting forth near the foundations of the Temple and made the place inaccessible to the workmen, some of whom were burned to death; and since in this way the element persistently repelled them, the enterprise halted. ....What Happened When the Jews Tried to Rebuild the Temple

 

[tampasteve]

Thanks everyone. Another question, do SDA believe/celebrate Lent? The churches near me do not have any Lenten program or service, so it would seem not. I am on the fence about this celebration as it is pivotal to many Christian churches, but it is absent from Messianic Judaism (or any Judaism, obviously). What is the SDA view on Lent?

 

[Gary K]

Sorry I haven't answered this before, Steve, but I just now saw this post.

No, the SDA church does not observe Lent. It is based in human tradition, and it's observance cannot be found in the Bible, thus you will not find Lent to be a part of traditional SDA teaching nor observance.

 

[Ultimate Reality Quest]

I am a former SDA for several years now, after having followed it ardently for over a decade prior. I also have brothers and parents who are ardently committed SDAs, and I continually try and engage in dialogue with them. What I believe in is having open honest discussion about the most central foundational issues affecting Adventism, based on evidence and obviously in a respectful way. Therefore, I applaud you for opening up this discussion in such a way.

Obviously being labelled as a former SDA there can be a misconception that one holds such a position due to bitterness due to relationships within the church, but I want to reassure such concerns. Truth issues, particularly surrounding some of the key salvational such as the Santuary doctrine or Investigative Judgment doctrine, are issues that are far more serious than personal feuds because they have eternal repercusions. Therefore, through mutual respect, but honest open engagement, and in the spirit of searching for the path that God wants for each and every one of us, I believe it is essential that such dialogue take place.

Anyway, after that long preamble, I want to say that I commend very much what the authors of 'Questions on Doctrine' (QoD) were trying to do. But there was a backlash against it within the SDA community due to a particular conflict of between the 'saved by grace' issues in points 7 and 13, which contrasted with the Investigative Judgment (IJ) and Sanctuary doctrines (SD), pointed out in the Wikipedia post you cited. This I believe is because the fundamental issue in the IJ SD is judging whether or not Christians are saved, thus conflicting with the QoD point 13 that they are saved.

One of the key challenges I find against the SD - which states that there is a duplicate Tabernacle in Heaven in which Jesus went to upon his ascension, but only to the Holy Place (HP) section of it until 1844, after which he went into the Most Holy Place (MHP) to begin the IJ - is that there is no evidence to suppose that such a concept exists. And this was realised by associate editor of the SDA Bible Commentary Raymond Cottrell (articles of which can by found on google).

I believe there is a lot to gain from QoD and the authors' sentiments of trying to link hands with fellow evangelicals. This thorny issue of IJ SD stands in the way, however. If it can be faced head on then I believe there is hope for it to become part of the wider Christian dialogue particularly on the Third Temple, Jewish Roots and Israel's Endtime role.

God be with you

 

[reddogs]

I am a former SDA for several years now, after having followed it ardently for over a decade prior. I also have brothers and parents who are ardently committed SDAs, and I continually try and engage in dialogue with them. What I believe in is having open honest discussion about the most central foundational issues affecting Adventism, based on evidence and obviously in a respectful way. Therefore, I applaud you for opening up this discussion in such a way.

Obviously being labelled as a former SDA there can be a misconception that one holds such a position due to bitterness due to relationships within the church, but I want to reassure such concerns. Truth issues, particularly surrounding some of the key salvational such as the Santuary doctrine or Investigative Judgment doctrine, are issues that are far more serious than personal feuds because they have eternal repercusions. Therefore, through mutual respect, but honest open engagement, and in the spirit of searching for the path that God wants for each and every one of us, I believe it is essential that such dialogue take place.

Anyway, after that long preamble, I want to say that I commend very much what the authors of 'Questions on Doctrine' (QoD) were trying to do. But there was a backlash against it within the SDA community due to a particular conflict of between the 'saved by grace' issues in points 7 and 13, which contrasted with the Investigative Judgment (IJ) and Sanctuary doctrines (SD), pointed out in the Wikipedia post you cited. This I believe is because the fundamental issue in the IJ SD is judging whether or not Christians are saved, thus conflicting with the QoD point 13 that they are saved.

One of the key challenges I find against the SD - which states that there is a duplicate Tabernacle in Heaven in which Jesus went to upon his ascension, but only to the Holy Place (HP) section of it until 1844, after which he went into the Most Holy Place (MHP) to begin the IJ - is that there is no evidence to suppose that such a concept exists. And this was realised by associate editor of the SDA Bible Commentary Raymond Cottrell (articles of which can by found on google).

I believe there is a lot to gain from QoD and the authors' sentiments of trying to link hands with fellow evangelicals. This thorny issue of IJ SD stands in the way, however. If it can be faced head on then I believe there is hope for it to become part of the wider Christian dialogue particularly on the Third Temple, Jewish Roots and Israel's Endtime role.

God be with you

No matter where we are in our walk, we must stay connected to Christ who gives us life and allows the fruit of righteousness to come forth, as SOP tells us:

'All Christ's followers have as deep an interest in this lesson as had the disciples who listened to His words. In the apostasy, man alienated himself from God. The separation is wide and fearful; but Christ has made provision again to connect us with Himself. The power of evil is so identified with human nature that no man can overcome except by union with Christ. Through this union we receive moral and spiritual power. If we have the spirit of Christ we shall bring forth the fruit of righteousness, fruit that will honor and bless men, and glorify God. 5T 230.3'