Why do you consider yourself a Seventh Day Adventist?

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Belief in the second coming and choosing to rest on the 7th day is enough IMO for a person to be a sda.... keep it simple...

If only it were that simple!

 

[Byfaithalone1]

If only it were that simple!

Indeed it isn't that simple, and there are 28 FUNDAMENTALS that prove it. It is the SDA denomination that selected the word "fundamental" and not any outside group.

BFA

 

[DarylFawcett]

To answer Windmill's question on why do I consider myself a Seventh-day Adventist, I am a Seventh-day Adventist simply for the reason that the doctrines/teachings/beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church are the closest to the truth than any other one denomination that I am aware of.

Point me to another denomination that is even closer to the truth than the Seventh-day Adventist Church, then you will definitely perk my interest to the point where I will check it out in the same way I checked out the Seventh-day Adventist Church after coming into contact with a Seventh-day Adventist couple.

 

[StormyOne]

To answer Windmill's question on why do I consider myself a Seventh-day Adventist, I am a Seventh-day Adventist simply for the reason that the doctrines/teachings/beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church are the closest to the truth than any other one denomination that I am aware of.

Point me to another denomination that is even closer to the truth than the Seventh-day Adventist Church, then you will definitely perk my interest to the point where I will check it out in the same way I checked out the Seventh-day Adventist Church after coming into contact with a Seventh-day Adventist couple.

there are 38,000+ denominations in North America..... I am sure you have not made yourself familiar with even 10% of that number.... will you be investigating those other denominations? Or not?

 

[DarylFawcett]

I wasn't investigating the SDA Church when I came in contact with one of them as a result of a community function.

If there is one out there closer to the truth than what I found in the SDA Church, then God will lead me to that one as He led me to the SDA Church from the Baptist Church, and prior to that from the United Church of Canada.

 

[sentipente]

I have as many concerns with general Christian doctrine as I have with SDA doctrine. I consider myself to be a Seventh-day Adventist because my membership is in one of their churches and no one has any basis for removing it. If you want to be technical I am a member of the human race and that is good enough for me. That is the group that was saved by the Creator. He did not come to save Seventh-day Adventists. Our obsession with denominational membership as reflected in this OP is sad.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

To answer Windmill's question on why do I consider myself a Seventh-day Adventist, I am a Seventh-day Adventist simply for the reason that the doctrines/teachings/beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church are the closest to the truth than any other one denomination that I am aware of.

Point me to another denomination that is even closer to the truth than the Seventh-day Adventist Church, then you will definitely perk my interest to the point where I will check it out in the same way I checked out the Seventh-day Adventist Church after coming into contact with a Seventh-day Adventist couple.

I agree with Sentipente's sentiments (sorry, I couldn't help myself). However, even though denominationalism is hardly important to God, many of us still want to be a part of a church and have to think about what to look for when selecting a church home.

Daryl, you and I might agree that there is no such thing as a perfect church. When considering which church to attend, my wife and I were not looking for perfection. We understood that, when humans are involved, there are bound to be problems. Rather, we were convicted that the most important criteria is that the church must teach the gospel of salvation by grace through faith, and not a gospel of salvation by works. Although there were other things we were also considering, we concluded (and still believe) that the gospel is the most serious consideration. If a church fails in presenting the true gospel, would you consider that a major or a minor problem to be addressed?

BFA

 

[DarylFawcett]

I am a first generation Seventh-day Adventist coming from two other denominational backgrounds beginning with the United Church of Canada from my childhood and from the United Baptist Church as from my young adulthood.

From the United Baptist Church background in particular I accepted Christ by faith just as it says in Eph. 2:8-9 as quoted below:


Eph 2:8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
Eph 2:9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Nine years later, from this same United Baptist background I became a Seventh-day Adventist. I understood the SDA Church to teach the same thing about salvation by grace through faith and not of works, however, I liked the connection of faith and works as brought forth in verse Eph. 9:10 quoted below:

Eph 2:10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them.

I am glad that the SDA Church didn't stop at Eph. 9:9 but included verse 10.

If we are truly in Christ, then our works of faith and acceptance of Jesus Christ should follow, which is one of other reasons why I became a Seventh-day Adventist Christian.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

I understood the SDA Church to teach the same thing about salvation by grace through faith and not of works,

I suppose that, if I were able to really accept this statement as truth, I might still be an SDA today. However, I know what SDAism teaches and it isn't salvation by grace through faith and not of works.

SDAism teaches that I must be perfect prior to the close of probation in order to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator.

SDAism teaches that the mark of the beast will one day be applied to non-sabbatarians, and the seal of God will one day be applied to sabbatarians.

Because I know these things to be true, it is impossible for me to conclude that the SDA denomination teaches the same things about salvation by grace through faith and not works.

You made some comments about Ephesians 2:10. You are correct to point out that the Spirit creates fruits in the lives of justified persons. Yes, God is the author and the finisher of our faith. However, even according to Ephesians 2, we could not begin to take credit for anything good, for there is only One who is good (see Matthew 19:17). Even Ephesians 2 confirms that the basis of my salvation has nothing to do with anything that I have done. Therefore, I will not hang my hopes of salvation upon my sinless perfection or my sabbath keeping. I will hang my hopes of salvation upon the author and the finisher of my faith.

BFA

 

[VictorC]

I am a first generation Seventh-day Adventist coming from two other denominational backgrounds beginning with the United Church of Canada from my childhood and from the United Baptist Church as from my young adulthood.

From the United Baptist Church background in particular I accepted Christ by faith just as it says in Eph. 2:8-9 as quoted below:


Eph 2:8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,
Eph 2:9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Nine years later, from this same United Baptist background I became a Seventh-day Adventist. I understood the SDA Church to teach the same thing about salvation by grace through faith and not of works, however, I liked the connection of faith and works as brought forth in verse Eph. 9:10 quoted below:

Eph 2:10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them.

I am glad that the SDA Church didn't stop at Eph. 9:9 but included verse 10.

If we are truly in Christ, then our works of faith and acceptance of Jesus Christ should follow, which is one of other reasons why I became a Seventh-day Adventist Christian.

Daryl,
I'm curious to know what drew you to the seventh-day Adventist church, as your post isn't typical of what I read from Adventists. Many of your peers are adament in regard to the necessity of "keeping" the sabbath ordinance as a means for salvation, and it is very easy to present quotations from Ellen White to that effect. as well.

Since you selected Ephesians 2 as your text, I would like to present an even greater context than you have, and show you that this epistle addressed to a Gentile church isn't consistent with the Adventist message:

8: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10: For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
11: Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12: That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14: For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15: Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16: And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17: And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18: For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19: Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20: And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21: In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

This passage demonstrates that the Gentiles were alienated from a relationship with God until the Mosaic covenant (the wall of partition) was removed. Salvation is via reconciliation to God by the Blood of Christ alone, and the enmity of the commandments was abolished.

The Adventist message is the vindication of the Mosaic covenant, otherwise known as the ten commandments.
The Christian Gospel is reconciliation by the Blood of Christ, for Israelite and Gentile alike.

These two aren't compatible.
So, it is with curiousity that I appeal to you for clarification of what appeals to you in Adventism.

Thanks!
Victor

 

[DarylFawcett]

In response to the last two posts, I do hang my hope of salvation upon the Author and Finisher of my faith.

My hope of salvation isn't based on anything that I have done, but on what Christ has done for me.

As far as sinless perfection goes, I do not claim sinless perfection, whatever that is supposed to involve, therefore, that is both a non-issue and concern to me, for my own righteousness is as filthy rags when compared to Christ's righteousness.

It is His righteousness that both covers me and saves me.

If, however, I am covered by Christ's righteousness, then the fruits of being covered by His righteousness will follow in my life in which I will want to do His will.

If it is Christ's will that I live by the Ten Commandments, which I believe it is, then I shall endeavour to do that to the best of my ability in conjunction with His enabling power, however, I want to make it very clear that it is as a result of my saving relationship with Christ, not in order to have a saving relationship with Christ.

 

[Adventtruth]

In response to the last two posts, I do hang my hope of salvation upon the Author and Finisher of my faith.

My hope of salvation isn't based on anything that I have done, but on what Christ has done for me.

As far as sinless perfection goes, I do not claim sinless perfection, whatever that is supposed to involve, therefore, that is both a non-issue and concern to me, for my own righteousness is as filthy rags when compared to Christ's righteousness.

It is His righteousness that both covers me and saves me.

If, however, I am covered by Christ's righteousness, then the fruits of being covered by His righteousness will follow in my life in which I will want to do His will.

If it is Christ's will that I live by the Ten Commandments, which I believe it is, then I shall endeavour to do that to the best of my ability in conjunction with His enabling power, however, I want to make it very clear that it is as a result of my saving relationship with Christ, not in order to have a saving relationship with Christ.

And how successful have you been in following the ten commadments? I can't do it, so I don't try. All they do is condemn me.

AT

 

[VictorC]

In response to the last two posts, I do hang my hope of salvation upon the Author and Finisher of my faith.

My hope of salvation isn't based on anything that I have done, but on what Christ has done for me.

As far as sinless perfection goes, I do not claim sinless perfection, whatever that is supposed to involve, therefore, that is both a non-issue and concern to me, for my own righteousness is as filthy rags when compared to Christ's righteousness.

It is His righteousness that both covers me and saves me.

If, however, I am covered by Christ's righteousness, then the fruits of being covered by His righteousness will follow in my life in which I will want to do His will.

If it is Christ's will that I live by the Ten Commandments, which I believe it is, then I shall endeavour to do that to the best of my ability in conjunction with His enabling power, however, I want to make it very clear that it is as a result of my saving relationship with Christ, not in order to have a saving relationship with Christ.

Daryl, most of your post sounds like you have been exposed to the Gospel. BFA is more proficient at documenting Ellen White's variance with what you have written, but I could post some as well and belabour a point I don't think you're entirely receptive to.

So, I will focus on your last paragraph.

The commandment that Adventism focuses on is the sabbath ordinance, usually citing Exodus 20:11. However, they miss the commandment itself in Exodus 20:8, instructing the recipient to keep the sabbath holy - and Adventists vary all over the page as to how they are to keep the sabbath day holy.

Ellen wrote that it was to be according to the law.
The law specifies that you are to have two lambs sacrificed for a burnt offering every sabbath, and this appears in Numbers 28:9-10.
No one is in compliance to the law, and no one is keeping the sabbath holy.

Now, consider this passage from Romans 7:1-7
1: Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2: For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3: So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4: Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
5: For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6: But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
7: What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

Two things stand out in this passage, addressed to those familiar to the law of Moses.

• Paul equates servitude to the law with adultery against their Redeemer.
• We are delivered from the same law that contains the words "thou shalt not covet", a quote of Exodus 20:17.

It isn't the Gospel of Jesus Christ that is leading you into servitude to the law you have been delivered from by His Blood.
It is adultery.
That law we have been delivered from, consistent throughout this passage, is the ten commandments, the Mosaic covenant identified in the law (Exodus 34:27-28 and Deuteronomy 4:12-13).

Salvation is indeed adoption by grace, and His righteousness is imputed to us, as we aren't able to attain perfection in the flesh (see Romans 7:14). It isn't Christ's will that you return to bondage embodied in a covenant that you have neither the means nor ability to adhere to, For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all (Romans 11:32).

Victor

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Darryl,

It isn't for me to document the ways in which your statements represent a departure from your denomination. Rather, I would simply like to praise God for your statements.

In response to the last two posts, I do hang my hope of salvation upon the Author and Finisher of my faith.

Fantastic! Praise God!

Is it safe to assume that you've rejected the SDA position on the close of probation, the remnant, the mark of the beast and the seal of God? How have your SDA brothers and sisters responded to this news? I praise God for your willingness to take such steps toward the true gospel.

My hope of salvation isn't based on anything that I have done, but on what Christ has done for me.

Is it safe to assume that your hope of salvation is also not built on anything you will do in the future? If so, then I join you in praising God for the good news of the gospel.

As far as sinless perfection goes, I do not claim sinless perfection, whatever that is supposed to involve,

Good. Except for Jesus Christ, we have nothing to boast about. He is the author and the finisher of our faith.

Is it safe to assume that you do not believe that you will ever have to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator, and that you believe that Jesus Christ ALWAYS LIVES to intercede for us? If so, let's praise God together for His intercession on our behalf!

therefore, that is both a non-issue and concern to me, for my own righteousness is as filthy rags when compared to Christ's righteousness.

You're not alone my friend. My righteousness is also as filthy rags.

It is His righteousness that both covers me and saves me.

Praise God for the good news of His robe of righteousness!

Is it safe to conclude that you've rejected any teaching that suggests that the robe of righteousness only covers the obedient? If so, then I join you in praising God for His unconditional love toward us.

If, however, I am covered by Christ's righteousness, then the fruits of being covered by His righteousness will follow in my life in which I will want to do His will.

And, if you do His will, you realize that it is He who creates fruit in you.

If it is Christ's will that I live by the Ten Commandments, which I believe it is, then I shall endeavour to do that to the best of my ability in conjunction with His enabling power,

If this is Christ's will, what do we do with Galatians 4 and Romans 7:1-7?

however, I want to make it very clear that it is as a result of my saving relationship with Christ, not in order to have a saving relationship with Christ.

I definitely hear you, and I praise God that you understand the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

BFA

 

[DarylFawcett]

From my understanding of the FBs of the SDA Church, as far as my salvation by faith in Christ alone goes, none of those FBs goes against what I have posted here so far.

 

[VictorC]

From my understanding of the FBs of the SDA Church, as far as my salvation by faith in Christ alone goes, none of those FBs goes against what I have posted here so far.

BFA, AT, and I have all written responses that are worth your consideration and comment. I don't want to add too much to distract from the previous effort, but I will comment on what you wrote here.

Re-read SDA Fundamental #19, entitled 'the law of God':

The great principles of God's law are embodied in the Ten Commandments and exemplified in the life of Christ. They express God's love, will, and purposes concerning human conduct and relationships and are binding upon all people in every age. These precepts are the basis of God's covenant with His people and the standard in God's judgment. Through the agency of the Holy Spirit they point out sin and awaken a sense of need for a Saviour. Salvation is all of grace and not of works, but its fruitage is obedience to the Commandments. This obedience develops Christian character and results in a sense of well-being. It is an evidence of our love for the Lord and our concern for our fellow men. The obedience of faith demonstrates the power of Christ to transform lives, and therefore strengthens Christian witness.

This fundamental is unBiblical; the ten commandments were the Mosaic covenant (Deut 4:13) that were binding on the children of Israel for a 1500-year time span, never given to anyone else, and have been replaced with "a better covenant, which was established upon better promises" (Hebrews 8:6). It was this covenant that "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second" as mentioned in Hebrews 10:9.

Salvation by grace, as you have written, is antithetical to the works-based salvation presented in this fundie.
The ten commandments do not express God's love, for they are called the 'ministration of death' in 2 Corinthians 3:7 and 'abolished' in verse 13 of the same chapter.
Christian character isn't developed by compliance to a legal covenant that "God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all".

The sentence that appears above, reading:
Salvation is all of grace and not of works, but its fruitage is obedience to the Commandments
is a logical fallacy that condemns itself.

The fruit of the Spirit is not bondage to the ministration of death, for:
what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman (Galatians 4:30).

Grace doesn't fit in this fundie, and you wrote about grace as the provision for your salvation.

Victor

 

[Byfaithalone1]

From my understanding of the FBs of the SDA Church, as far as my salvation by faith in Christ alone goes, none of those FBs goes against what I have posted here so far.

Do you accept and embrace SDA fundamental belief #18? If so, do you believe that important statements written by the continuing and authoritative source of truth can be ignored? If so, which things can be ignored? The close of probation? The investigative judgment? EGW's perspective on the mark of the beast and the seal of God? Certainly all of these statements have a direct impact on "salvation by faith in Christ alone."

Should we seek to reconcile Mrs. White's statements with Scripture? If certain statements cannot be reconciled with Scripture, what do we do with fundamental belief #18?

BFA

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Victor, has Daryl answered your question as to why he is SDA to your satisfaction? It sounds as though you are crossing the line from asking him questions to arguing with him, and that's not the purpose of this thread.

Grace doesn't fit in this fundie, and you wrote about grace as the provision for your salvation.

Daryl has made perfectly clear, at least to me, that he disagrees.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Victor, has Daryl answered your question as to why he is SDA to your satisfaction? It sounds as though you are crossing the line from asking him questions to arguing with him, and that's not the purpose of this thread.

Victor's comments seem to be quite germaine to the original post in this thread, which included the following:

• Why do you consider yourself a SDA, even if you don't follow/believe in the fundamentals?
• If you do not believe in the very fundamentals, then how can you still be a Seventh Day Adventist?
• I'm not saying you can't think/call yourself one, but I am saying that there must come a point where you are, no matter what you call and think, are no longer a SDA. So what stops you from tipping over the edge as a progressive/moderate etc.?

BFA

 

[StormyOne]

Victor's comments seem to be quite germaine to the original post in this thread, which included the following:

• Why do you consider yourself a SDA, even if you don't follow/believe in the fundamentals?
• If you do not believe in the very fundamentals, then how can you still be a Seventh Day Adventist?
• I'm not saying you can't think/call yourself one, but I am saying that there must come a point where you are, no matter what you call and think, are no longer a SDA. So what stops you from tipping over the edge as a progressive/moderate etc.?

BFA

to the portion I highlighted I would ask "Why?" Who said that one must come to that point? Again I go back to my simple definition, if one chooses to observe the sabbath and is looking for the 2nd advent of Christ, they are in my mind a seventh day adventist.... what's the problem?

This scrutinizing reminds me of some in the black community who suggest that some black people are not "really" black. The accuse the offenders of not sounding black or not acting black etc, though the person or persons have black skin and were born in the U.S.... what this thread has shown is that in religion people do the same kind of assessing, and in my opinion it is all moot...