Why SDAs Reject the Historic Creeds

[miz3]

John317,

I appreciate you kind response to numbers 1 through 4.

I will have an additional response to you on these as soon as you are finished responding to my others.

I will not forget to respond. I am also trying to not forget to respond to "teresaq(sda) and the inquiry that she made earlier.

[John317]

Babylon consists of false religions and false churches. One of the larger groups included here is the Roman Catholic Church, the "mother of harlots," but it also includes "the daughters," which are many of the protestant churches.

The fall of spiritiual Babylon took place when the churches rejected the first angels messages.

However, the message of the fall of Babylon will be repeated. The churches are not completely fallen away from the truth. The fall of Babylon is progressive as the churches reject more and more truth. In forming the mark of the beast, they will have fallen completely away from the truth of God.

Originally Posted By: miz3

5. Where in the Bible does it state that Babylon falls a second time or even falls more than once? Its not in the messages of the Angels.

A close study of Rev. 14 to 18 shows that the fall of Babylon is progressive and ends in its complete and utter fall into sin and rejection of God as well as rejection by God.

This occurs in direct proportion to the light that God sends the churches. The greater the light it rejects, the greater its fall.

As I said before, the letters of Paul show that the fall, or apostacy, began not long afer the death of Paul and was even beginning in the time of John. It began with the introduction of false doctrines, such as those referred to in the epistles of Paul, of Jude and of Peter. It wasn't very long before the churches at Rome and Alexandria began to keep Sunday in the place of the Sabbath. Other false teachings and practices followed.

Rev. 14:8

Another angel, a second, followed, saying, "Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who made all nations drink the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality."

Rev. 16:19

The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell, and God remembered Babylon the great, to make her drain the cup of the wine of the fury of his wrath.

Rev. 18:1-8

After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was made bright with his glory. [2] And he called out with a mighty voice,

"Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!

She has become a dwelling place for demons,

a haunt for every unclean spirit,

a haunt for every unclean bird,

a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast.

[3] For all nations have drunk

the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality,

and the kings of the earth have committed immorality with her,

and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power of her luxurious living."

[4] Then I heard another voice from heaven saying,

"Come out of her, my people,

lest you take part in her sins,

lest you share in her plagues;

[5] for her sins are heaped high as heaven,

and God has remembered her iniquities.

[6] Pay her back as she herself has paid back others,

and repay her double for her deeds;

mix a double portion for her in the cup she mixed.

[7] As she glorified herself and lived in luxury,

so give her a like measure of torment and mourning,

since in her heart she says,

'I sit as a queen,

I am no widow,

and mourning I shall never see.'

[8] For this reason her plagues will come in a single day,

death and mourning and famine,

and she will be burned up with fire;

for mighty is the Lord God who has judged her."

NOTE: A close comparion of these verses will show that the fall of Babylon is progressive and that there is more than a single fall.

[miz3]

Thank you John317,

I appreciate your response.

I am not going to be able to read or respond to anything at this time.

However, in the morning or at latest in the afternoon I will read anything you write and will respond to all that you have said regarding my eight statements.

When I say tomorrow, I mean daylight May 7, 2001 for me.

You see how simple it is to respond to each other and to communicate so that we know that we are not being ignored.

[John317]

Babylon consists of false religions and false churches. One of the larger groups included here is the Roman Catholic Church, the "mother of harlots," but it also includes "the daughters," which are many of the protestant churches.

The fall of spiritiual Babylon took place when the churches rejected the first angels messages.

However, the message of the fall of Babylon will be repeated. The churches are not completely fallen away from the truth. The fall of Babylon is progressive as the churches reject more and more truth. In forming the mark of the beast, they will have fallen completely away from the truth of God.

Originally Posted By: Miz3

6. You state that the entities of #1 have not completely fallen away. Does this mean the Second Angel was wrong about his 1844 message of the fall?

No. It means that before Christ's return, we will see the second announcment of Babylon's fall in Rev. 18 fulfilled. Those 3 angels work together with the angel of Rev. 18: 1-3. God's angels never work at cross purposes and they are never wrong.

[John317]

You see how simple it is to respond to each other and to communicate so that we know that we are not being ignored.

As moderator:

You never were being ignored. I sent you several PMs.

But even if you felt you were being ignored, never put your personal arguments with the moderator on the public threads.

For all:

If I don't answer a post, it will never be because I don't want to or can't answer. It may be because my computer won't start. I also have a family to take care of. The Forum is for fun, but I have other responsibilities, believe it or not.

[John317]

Babylon consists of false religions and false churches. One of the larger groups included here is the Roman Catholic Church, the "mother of harlots," but it also includes "the daughters," which are many of the protestant churches.

The fall of spiritiual Babylon took place when the churches rejected the first angels messages.

However, the message of the fall of Babylon will be repeated. The churches are not completely fallen away from the truth. The fall of Babylon is progressive as the churches reject more and more truth. In forming the mark of the beast, they will have fallen completely away from the truth of God.

Originally Posted By: miz3

7. The Second Angel seems certain that the fall is complete and permanent. There is no way to infer from this text that the "fall" is a gradual process.

See previous posts on this subject. Also compare Rev. 14: 8 and Rev. 18: 1-8.

If you are interested in the SDA perspective, read GC 381-383 and 389-390. These last pages are especially apropos of your inquiry.

[John317]

Sonny you nailed it.

Sonny [aka Robert] posted what someone else said, ie, a man named Jack. Maybe you're thinking Jack nailed it. And you might be right. Jack Sequiera often gets things right. I respect him. However, I don't always agree with him but my agreeing with someone never has anything to do with my respect and love for them.

[John317]

Babylon consists of false religions and false churches. One of the larger groups included here is the Roman Catholic Church, the "mother of harlots," but it also includes "the daughters," which are many of the protestant churches.

The fall of spiritiual Babylon took place when the churches rejected the first angels messages.

However, the message of the fall of Babylon will be repeated. The churches are not completely fallen away from the truth. The fall of Babylon is progressive as the churches reject more and more truth. In forming the mark of the beast, they will have fallen completely away from the truth of God.

Originally Posted By: miz3

8. If the Roman Church is the "mother of harlots" does this mean the Roman Church spawned and/or is somehow responsible for Islam, Buddhism, the numerous other eastern religions, devil worship found in pagan cultures, Communism, Darwinism, other atheistic and agnostic belief systems, Socialism, etc.?

Good question, and the answer is both yes and no as to the question of the responsibiliteis of the Roman Church.

However, you apparently misunderstand the meaning of the title,"Mother of harlots."

A spiritual whore is a fallen church. There is no evidence that the groups you named were ever pure churches or a part of God's church. Therefore, it is unbiblical to refer to Islam, eastern religions, communism, atheism, Darwinism, or devil worship etc., as spiritual harlots.

Having said that, it is true that all those false teachings and practices have influenced the Roman Catholic Church as well as many of the protestant churches. There is some devil worship mixed with Catholicism, for instance, in places such as Cuba, Mexico, Haiti, etc. There's also a relationship between Buddhism and Catholicism, as well as a relationship between Islam and Catholicism. Islam probably would not have gotten its start if it hadn't been for the corruption in the sixth century Christian church.

[Sonny]

What happened was that God made available to all people the righteousness of Christ through faith in Him.

Jack:

... historically we [Adventists] belong to the Arminian camp. As a result, most, if not all, Adventists have been raised up to believe that Christ did not actually save anyone on the cross, but simply made provision for the salvation of all mankind; that unless we take the initiative and believe, repent (i.e., turn away from sin), and confess all our sins, we stand as lost or condemned sinners before God.

....the greatest tragedy of all is that this Arminian mind-set has become a real stumbling block to many Adventists. When they hear the true good news of the gospel, to them it sounds like heresy, or it is too good to be true. It’s beyond belief.

[Sonny]

What happened was that God made available to all people the righteousness of Christ through faith in Him.

Pay close attention to the context:

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.

Here Paul is writing to the Ephesian believers. He addresses them as "you". Notice that before they claimed Christ that they were dead in your trespasses and sins. This is very, very important to the context. Let's continue.

3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

Again, Paul is writing about pre-conversion.

4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love [i.e., agape love] with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ, by grace you have been saved , 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus....

What's Paul clearly stating? That before these Ephesian believers were converted - i.e., while they were they dead in their transgressions and living for the flesh, that God saved them in Christ Jesus!

Notice that faith didn't save the Ephesian believers! What does Paul say? "By grace you were saved." Again, when? When they were dead in transgressions & living for their flesh, God saved them by grace in the humanity of Christ.

[John317]

Sonny, Jack is no authority to me. Just because he says soemthing does not make it true. All I see there is a claim on his part. He is neither a prophet (like Ellen White was) nor the son of a prophet.

Christ's death on the cross merely-- apart from the faith with which people receive that sacrifice-- would save no one.

The Bible plainly teaches that people are justified by faith.

Can you give me the name of a single person in the Bible who was not justified by faith?

Does the Bible ever say that anyone was justified WITHOUT FAITH? If so, what's the name of the person?

Are you justified without faith? Can I be?

[John317]

4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love [i.e., agape love] with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ, by grace you have been saved , 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus....

What's Paul clearly stating? That before these Ephesian believers were converted - i.e., while they were they dead in their transgressions and living for the flesh, that God saved them in Christ Jesus!

Notice that faith didn't save the Ephesian believers! What does Paul say? "By grace you were saved." Again, when? When they were dead in transgressions & living for their flesh, God saved them by grace in the humanity of Christ.

Sonny, faith doesn't save us. I never suggested that faith does save us. It is God who saves us by his grace, and that gracious gift is to be received by faith.

That verse is not saying that all the world was saved when Christ died. You statement would mean that it would be possible to say that Hitler was saved. Absurdity!

Paul is not saying that people were saved while still deliberately committing sin. Your (or rather Jack Sequiera's belief) here would mean that a prosttitue was saved even as she was having sex with a client, before she had any faith at all in Christ. Such is not taught in the Bible.

The Scripture saith

Ephes. 2:8

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

All Paul is saying is that no one is saved because of their odedience to God. He says we are saved through faith, by God's unmerited favor.

Ephesians 2: 5 is simply repeating that we are saved by God's grace and not by our obedience. It is not saying that people are saved before they even accept Christ. That would be getting close to universalism.

Why even preach the gospel if people are already saved before they hear the gospel and before they accept Christ by faith-- and before they even decide they want to be saved?

[miz3]

Sonny,

Once again you have nailed it!

I agree it is very difficult if not almost impossible for humans to accept the Truth that they did nothing and they do nothing.

Praise God and Jesus Christ forever, and ever for the greatness of their work.

[miz3]

1. Babylon according to you is false religions, false churches, the chief among these is the Roman Catholic Church.

Yes, certainly. Do you agree or deny it?

OK, the Roman Catholic Church is Babylon.

Roman Catholic Church = Babylon.

Thus, the terms then are interchangeable.

I get this.

[miz3]

2. These entities cited in #1 above have "fallen" because they rejected the First Angel.

Those churches or groups have fallen away from the truth, and as churches, they will not change doctrinal positions in regard to Bible truth. In other words, a person in those churches will not hear the full truth of the Bible by staying inside those churches. For instance, a person won't hear the Three Angels messages from priests, bishops, or popes. They won't hear the Sabbath taught or the truth about the state of man in death, nor will he hear the truth about Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. However, since the church is not completely fallen away from truth, people in the Catholic Church will hear some of the gospel. Hence people can still learn some of the truth while in those Babylonian, i.e, fallen, churches. Most of them teach the Trinity and the death of Christ for our sins, even though much of it is mixed up with false teachings, "the wine of Babylon."

PS. Most of my wife's family are nominal Catholics, and my wife was one until about 6 years after we married. I used to take her to Mass and sit with her through it. One of her sisters is a very faithful Catholic and a wonderful person and a devoted Christian. I often watch Catholic TV and study Cathoiic publications.

The part in blue states pretty clearly that these "entities" led by the Romans Catholic Church have "fallen" and will not return to Truth ever again.

It appears to me that such a fall is all that is needed to fulfill the Second Angels statement. If one could still "fall" further it would not matter because a "fall" is a "fall", is a "fall", is a "fall". In other words lost is lost. The distance of you lostness is not relevant because whether you are far lost or only near lost, the result is the same.

Being partially evil you will still burn just the same as you will burn if you are 50%, or 75%, or 100%. The percentage of lostness is not relevant. The fact is you are lost.

Or in this case, Babylon (the Roman Catholic Church and her offspring) is fallen regardless of how far they have fallen.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

3. When did these entities in #1 "reject the First Angel and his message? Was that in 1844? What event can we all independently use to verify this fall of Babylon in 1844?

The fall of the churches away from truth was (is) a process. No church falls into error overnight, or all at once. It is one step at a time, and usually the church is not even aware of its fall. They don't intend to fall. History shows clearly that the Catholic church, as well as some of the protestant churches, had been falling into false doctrines for a very long time, starting in the third and fourth centuries AD.

Read GC 375-390. See esp. 379- 384.

1. The text does not say that it is a process. However, granting you that point, the text still states that Babylon (Roman Catholic Church and her offspring) have fallen. It is a complete fall. There is no inference here at all that there is more falling to be done. Babylon is fallen!

2. The text as you assert is fulfilled in 1844. As such these entities called Babylon have been falling away since as you state the third or fourth century. That's an awful lot of falling.

3. It seems to me as I have already pointed out that Babylon has done the damage already and is lost case closed. The text tells us that the "whole world" has already drunk the "wine of her adulteries".

You can't fall more than that!

Your scenario does not make sense in light of the text and its message.

[miz3]

4. The messages of the Three Angels (especially the Second Angel) never even hint that Babylon will fall more than ONCE.

You need to read the whole of Revelation, and in fact, the whole of the NT. Compare Rev. 14: 8 and Rev. 18: 2-4.

The Christian church began to fall as far back as the time of John, basically as soon as the apostles passed off the scene of action. They warned the church of what to expect, a great falling away, or apostacy. See 2 Thess. 2: 1-5; 1 Tim. 4: 1-5. History records that this is exactly what occurred.

I have read the whole of the New Testament and I have read the whole of Revelation.

1. The Book of Revelation is not sequential list of events in order. If you do this you will have unending confusion. It appears that such your case.

2. We already covered the early falling away of the Christian Apostolic Church.

3. You still have not linked the First and Second Angels to 1844 from the Bible. You have only asserted so.

4. Even when we follow your logic it does not add up. There are so many holes because you rely on assumptions that are not even hinted at in the texts themselves.

5. You refer me to an Ellen White source to back up what the Bible says because you cannot demonstrate your scenario from the Bible and the Bible only.

6. You can only get your scenario because that is the scenario given you by Ellen White. That scenario does not come from the Bible and the Bible only!

[miz3]

5. Where in the Bible does it state that Babylon falls a second time or even falls more than once? Its not in the messages of the Angels.

A close study of Rev. 14 to 18 shows that the fall of Babylon is progressive and ends in its complete and utter fall into sin and rejection of God as well as rejection by God.

This occurs in direct proportion to the light that God sends the churches. The greater the light it rejects, the greater its fall.

As I said before, the letters of Paul show that the fall, or apostacy, began not long afer the death of Paul and was even beginning in the time of John. It began with the introduction of false doctrines, such as those referred to in the epistles of Paul, of Jude and of Peter. It wasn't very long before the churches at Rome and Alexandria began to keep Sunday in the place of the Sabbath. Other false teachings and practices followed.

Rev. 14:8

Another angel, a second, followed, saying, "Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great, she who made all nations drink the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality."

Rev. 16:19

The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell, and God remembered Babylon the great, to make her drain the cup of the wine of the fury of his wrath.

Rev. 18:1-8

After this I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was made bright with his glory. [2] And he called out with a mighty voice,

"Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great!

She has become a dwelling place for demons,

a haunt for every unclean spirit,

a haunt for every unclean bird,

a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast.

[3] For all nations have drunk

the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality,

and the kings of the earth have committed immorality with her,

and the merchants of the earth have grown rich from the power of her luxurious living."

[4] Then I heard another voice from heaven saying,

"Come out of her, my people,

lest you take part in her sins,

lest you share in her plagues;

[5] for her sins are heaped high as heaven,

and God has remembered her iniquities.

[6] Pay her back as she herself has paid back others,

and repay her double for her deeds;

mix a double portion for her in the cup she mixed.

[7] As she glorified herself and lived in luxury,

so give her a like measure of torment and mourning,

since in her heart she says,

'I sit as a queen,

I am no widow,

and mourning I shall never see.'

[8] For this reason her plagues will come in a single day,

death and mourning and famine,

and she will be burned up with fire;

for mighty is the Lord God who has judged her."

NOTE: A close comparion of these verses will show that the fall of Babylon is progressive and that there is more than a single fall.

1. Revelation chapter 16 which you cite above makes my point most eloquently. This text is NOT asserting a gradual fall. In fact it is God giving Babylon her punishment for all her sins. This is a punishment phase.

Come on John317, this too transparent.

2. Revelation chapter 18 is nothing more than a repeat of Revelation Chapter 14. This is NOT nor is there even the SLIGHTEST INFERENCE that this a "SECOND CALL".

My, my John317, the leaps of fancy you get. The Bible and the Bible only does not, nor can it, lead one reading these passages to see a downward spiral. We can only see repetition.

3. Oh, using Revelation chapter 16 to infer there is a bridge between the texts to prove your point is a good try but you and I both know that you are stretching beyond the limits of all reason and Truth.

4. I think it is time for you to admit that without Ellen White your Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment and the fall of Babylon scenario that you are palming off on SDA and others is rooted in Ellen White.

5. Without Ellen White no clear headed Godly person would conclude what you are asserting.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: Miz3

6. You state that the entities of #1 have not completely fallen away. Does this mean the Second Angel was wrong about his 1844 message of the fall?

No. It means that before Christ's return, we will see the second announcment of Babylon's fall in Rev. 18 fulfilled. Those 3 angels work together with the angel of Rev. 18: 1-3. God's angels never work at cross purposes and they are never wrong.

See my remarks on #5.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

7. The Second Angel seems certain that the fall is complete and permanent. There is no way to infer from this text that the "fall" is a gradual process.

See previous posts on this subject. Also compare Rev. 14: 8 and Rev. 18: 1-8.

If you are interested in the SDA perspective, read GC 381-383 and 389-390. These last pages are especially apropos of your inquiry.

The fact that you would refer me to Ellen White in order to make things clear to me:

Proves to me beyond a shadow of doubt that without Ellen White your scenario is impossible. You are here admitting that Ellen White is the SOURCE of this Doctrine of Investigative Judgment, something you took great pains earlier to deny.

Therefore the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment and the Three Angels Message are based on Ellen White and her interpretations of Scripture.

That means that SDA Doctrine at least in these two areas is NOT based on the Bible and the Bible only.

Anyone being honest and reading this exchange can see the Truth of what I am saying.

[Gerr]

And I might add - if He is not coming again, if He is not putting an end to sin, if He is not making all things new, what He did at the Cross is of no use.

There is too much compartmentalization about what the gospel is. What is the Cross without His birth & life? What is the Cross without the resurrection? What is the Cross without His mediation? What is the Cross unless He is coming again? What is the Cross unless He puts an end to sin & suffering?

[miz3]

Quote:

Originally Posted By: miz3

8. If the Roman Church is the "mother of harlots" does this mean the Roman Church spawned and/or is somehow responsible for Islam, Buddhism, the numerous other eastern religions, devil worship found in pagan cultures, Communism, Darwinism, other atheistic and agnostic belief systems, Socialism, etc.?

Good question, and the answer is both yes and no as to the question of the responsibiliteis of the Roman Church.

However, you apparently misunderstand the meaning of the title,"Mother of harlots."

A spiritual whore is a fallen church. There is no evidence that the groups you named were ever pure churches or a part of God's church. Therefore, it is unbiblical to refer to Islam, eastern religions, communism, atheism, Darwinism, or devil worship etc., as spiritual harlots.

Having said that, it is true that all those false teachings and practices have influenced the Roman Catholic Church as well as many of the protestant churches. There is some devil worship mixed with Catholicism, for instance, in places such as Cuba, Mexico, Haiti, etc. There's also a relationship between Buddhism and Catholicism, as well as a relationship between Islam and Catholicism. Islam probably would not have gotten its start if it hadn't been for the corruption in the sixth century Christian church.

1. The Second Angel does say that Babylon is a "church". The fact that Babylon is a "church" is because Ellen White says it is a church. Without Ellen White the text itself would never even give the slightest hint that it was referring to a church.

2. History shows that the Roman Church has had connection in some way, as you say with all of those entities I listed. However the Roman Church neither takes credit for being the "mother" of all these entities and these same entities are autonomous from the Catholic Church. Some have great differences with Roman Catholicism.

3. Because of Ellen White and the 19th Century Protestant militancy against the Roman Catholic system is why the SDA Church has pitted itself against the Roman Church and painted her as the "great harlot".

4. A Bible and Bible only study would never reveal that the Roman Catholic Church in specific is and was the great harlot or Babylon.

5. Thus, again SDA Doctrine of the Little Horn etc. is based not a Bible and Bible only but on the prophet Ellen White and the Protestant sentiments of the 19th Century.

John317, thank you for allowing me to clarify this Truth about SDA Doctrines your answers to my statements on the Second Angel were very enlightening and reveal the Truth about SDA and the Source of their Doctrinal beliefs.

[miz3]

SDA are a viable Church without:

1. 1844.

2. their unique Sanctuary Doctrine.

3. the investigative judgment.

4. the 2300 days.

The SDA investment in these doctrines is so deep and has so stubbornly been held that SDA feel they would lose all credibility if they agreed that they had been wrong all along.

[Gerr]

3. Because of Ellen White and the 19th Century Protestant militancy against the Roman Catholic system is why the SDA Church has pitted itself against the Roman Church and painted her as the "great harlot".

4. A Bible and Bible only study would never reveal that the Roman Catholic Church in specific is and was the great harlot or Babylon.

5. Thus, again SDA Doctrine of the Little Horn etc. is based not a Bible and Bible only but on the prophet Ellen White and the Protestant sentiments of the 19th Century.

Hmmm. I wonder where the Bishop of Orleans in the 10th c. get the idea that the antichrist was the papacy, Eberhard II archbishop of Salzburg in the 13th c. that the little horn is the papacy, and where did the Reformers of the 16th c. get the idea that the anti-christ and the little horn was the papacy? From EGW?

[Gerr]

Just because you can only hear to 16 kHz doesn't mean there's no more sound beyond that. Or that there are no more "light" because you can only see a small segment of the electromagnetic spectrum. Do you play scrabble? Just because you can only make out two different words out of your 7 tiles does not mean there aren't any more words. There are millions of people who are seeing those truths in the Bible "alone". Maybe have your vision checked instead of telling others it's not there.