Would the (SD) Adventist church be considered fundamentalist?

[NHI]

I don't think I quite know for sure what the definition of 'fundamentalist' is in relation to this thread even after reading the sticky above.

I feel the SDA church would fall under it, adhering to a lot of old testament laws and what not.

But then the SDA church reads a lot on Ellen White....so does that automatically make SDA unfundamental?

 

[muffler dragon]

I would not consider the SDA a fundamentalist organization. Many label it a pseudo-cult. There are some things that are very cool, but there are some that are not.

Just my two cents: no, not fundamental.

m.d.

 

[NHI]

I would not consider the SDA a fundamentalist organization. Many label it a pseudo-cult. There are some things that are very cool, but there are some that are not.

Just my two cents: no, not fundamental.

m.d.

I guess I'll have to find the pseudo-cult board then

The only thing thats not cool with me is when Ellen White starts to get talked about more..or qouted more than the Bible...

and how some of the churches thinking is oblivious to Romans...

but it's not funamentalist then.....do you know which catagory in would go in?
(not familiar with all the denominations)

 

[Bulldog]

It dpends. Some SDA could almost be considired a cult, and some are orthodox.

 

[NHI]

It dpends. Some SDA could almost be considired a cult, and some are orthodox.

yea...orthodox..that's it...

but some how SDA wouldn't seem to fit well in the
"The Ancient Way - Orthodox" board...

(Do you know where this should/would go? )

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

As the SDA accept EGW as authority they would not be considered Fundamentalist. This is an official statement from the church:

As Seventh-day Adventists, we believe that "in His Word God has committed to men the knowledge necessary for salvation. The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the revealer of doctrines, and the test of experience" (The Great Controversy, p 7). We consider the biblical canon closed. However, we also believe, as did Ellen G White's contemporaries, that her writings carry divine authority, both for godly living and for doctrine. Therefore, we recommend:

1) That as a church we seek the power of the Holy Spirit to apply to our lives more fully the inspired counsel contained in the writings of Ellen G White, and

2) That we make increased efforts to publish and circulate these writings throughout the world.

 

[muffler dragon]

I guess I'll have to find the pseudo-cult board then

The only thing thats not cool with me is when Ellen White starts to get talked about more..or qouted more than the Bible...

and how some of the churches thinking is oblivious to Romans...

but it's not funamentalist then.....do you know which catagory in would go in?
(not familiar with all the denominations)

NHI:

Please understand that I was not labeling you pseudo-cult. Many others have. I have a researched a decent amount about SDA, but not enough to come to a firm position. It's not one of those things I truly concern myself with.

However, I do appreciate the time taken by Flesh to point out the matter regarding Ms. White.

m.d.

 

[hraedisc]

As the SDA accept EGW as authority they would not be considered Fundamentalist.

Matthew 21:26
But if we say, 'From men'–we are afraid of the people, for they all hold that John was a prophet."

Matthew 11:11
I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist

Would you consider the followers of John the Baptist as non-fundamentalist? He didn't write any portion of the OT or the NT! How could the greatest prophet, according to Jesus, not have authority?

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

Matthew 21:26
But if we say, 'From men'–we are afraid of the people, for they all hold that John was a prophet."

Matthew 11:11
I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist

Would you consider the followers of John the Baptist as non-fundamentalist? He didn't write any portion of the OT or the NT! How could the greatest prophet, according to Jesus, not have authority?

it is really simple, EGW's teachings contradict scritpure. This is not a forum for deabte though. In fact it is disallowed, because of their acceptance of EGW as a prophet they are not fundamentalists.

 

[NHI]

it is really simple, EGW's teachings contradict scritpure. This is not a forum for deabte though. In fact it is disallowed, because of their acceptance of EGW as a prophet they are not fundamentalists.

Really?

could you link/tag/give quotes?

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

I cannot in this forum, there have been many lively debates on the topic though here at CF in other fourms, just search for her name.

 

[CrossMovement]

Really?

could you link/tag/give quotes?

I've seen a lot of people who twist her scripture so that they can say that she is contradicting the bible ... the thing is that we should never accept something from a forum or a person thoughts ... just go to the source ... it is not dangerous ... read it and see by yourselves ... Because if you do not do that it will be like when someone talk to you about the bible and you accept everything he say because he is the pastor or he has a reputation so that's make him right about the subject. I did not read quite frankly all of EGW stuff , but from what I read , it's sound ok for now.


I don't want a person reply and bring me all the contradiction and say to me : ok well if you think she is a true prophet , how come she says this and that ? ... I don't have all the answer about her and I am not here to debate also (debating is useless) . So if you really want to know , just pick up her book and read it ... If I want the truth personnaly about somebody thoughts , I go directly to the source.

 

[NHI]

I've seen a lot of people who twist her scripture so that they can say that she is contradicting the bible ... the thing is that we should never accept something from a forum or a person thoughts ... just go to the source ... it is not dangerous ... read it and see by yourselves ... Because if you do not do that it will be like when someone talk to you about the bible and you accept everything he say because he is the pastor or he has a reputation so that's make him right about the subject. I did not read quite frankly all of EGW stuff , but from what I read , it's sound ok for now.


I don't want a person reply and bring me all the contradiction and say to me : ok well if you think she is a true prophet , how come she says this and that ? ... I don't have all the answer about her and I am not here to debate also (debating is useless) . So if you really want to know , just pick up her book and read it ... If I want the truth personnaly about somebody thoughts , I go directly to the source.

I agree...

but the question still remains....where does SDA fit in the Congregation boards? Surely CF.com doesn't write it off now, right???

 

[LynneClomina]

it depends on what erwin says. ask him in the bugs suggestion/help forum.