Why should a Christian become a Seventh-day Adventist Christian?

[BobRyan]

Given that becoming a Seventh-day Adventist could put stress on your current relationships in the family, and among friends and possibly cost you your job...

Why become a Seventh-day Adventist Christian? Why not remain in your current denomination? Certainly Adventists are not claiming they are the only Christians that are saved - so why do it?

If the 7-day creation account is not actually true...

If there is no "present truth" message of God for this world at this time that is uniquely taught by Seventh-day Adventists...

If the Seventh-day Adventist church is not actually the remnant that God has brought about at the end of time...

Why convert?

Why take the risk?

Why not just sit back and coast where you are?

"Move along... move along... nothing to see here" ??

============================================

On the other hand - if you are Seventh-day Adventist and you find the Bible to be true... and if you believe we have "present truth" as the lesson spoke about last week - and if you believe this is the Remnant church that God has raised up in the last days --- then...

What do you call "present truth" that is of such value it is worth risking all to leave one's current denomination and join this one?

What do you think it means to be "the Remnant Church" raised up by God for these last days?

Thoughts?..

in Christ,

Bob

[Kevin H]

First of all, I have to say that I believe that besides being a denomination, that Seventh-day Adventism is first of all a movement. I believe that we have a special job, but that we have a message (and in the future will have a message) that is to minister to those of other faiths. Although there is an aspect of our church that would like to collect as many people as we can to give their financial support and thus push church membership, I have to admit I'm one who sees belonging to this movement as a position for outreach and ministing to others rather than just going to make more members. That there is a role we play for people who stay in other churches and do not join ours.

This may not sound clear so let me put it this way. We have churches which has a pastor and members who have other professons. I believe that the Seventh-day Adventist church is like a pastor, but that we tend to be as if a pastor was demanding his congragation all quite there jobs and attend the seminary and all become pastors.

First, we are the only denomination that is officially moderate (maybe not in practice but at least in profession) In the mid 1800s the other churches went to fundamentalism/dispesentationalism on the conservative side, or modernism/preterism on the liberal side. While we have had elements of these come in among us, especially fundamentalism, and somewhat of a dispensationalist mindset that we are bringing to historism, we are at least not rapture believing 100% dispensationalists, and even when it comes to fundamentalism, those among us who are fundamentalists tend to be on the liberal side of fundamentalism. We tend to avoid the skecticism of the modernists. And while much of historism came out from the dark ages and it needs a tune up as we learn more about our historist heritage (before it was set in concreate by dispensationalist thinking) and we need to work it with modern discoveries about the Bible, we are at least in the ball park of the methods that God has been using through history to lead his church. This places us where we can be more open to the developing understanding if learning more about the Bible than the closed minded Fundamentalist who believes he has it all, or the modernist who does not take the truths all that serious. While we may find individual pastors here and there, a congragation here and there, a sunday school teacher/class here and there who are moderates, we are the only denomination that gives at least lip service to a moderate view. We argue ideas here that members of a lot of other denominations would not even think of asking.

I could add more, but I am tired and cannot think of how to say the other points, but I think this is a major issue as to why we should become Seventh-day Adventists.

[Kevin H]

I will say this about the question about seeing us as the remanant. On the one hand, I do not believe that there is an end time "The Remanant Church" but that the remanant are remanant individuals from all groups and not any group itself. However, related to the above I see us a remanant church in the fact that we hold on to ideas from before Chrstianity split into Fundamentalism/Dispensationalism and Modernism/Preterism. We are the ones carrying on moderateism and historisism to lay the ground work that we are to build on. And thus we are very much a remanant church of this mindset and have an important job.

[BobRyan]

The classic Seventh-day Adventist POV has always included the notion of "present truth" closely linked to "Pillars of our faith" and sometimes referred to as the 5-S.

1. Sanctuary and the Judgment

2. Spirit of Prophecy

3. Sabbath (Three Angel's Messages in here as well).

4. State of the Dead

5. Second Coming

Let's take one example of "present truth". Number 5 the Second Coming.

What makes this doctrine a specific unique Noah-Like build-the-ark message for SDAs at the end of time? After all when it was first proclaimed we were among the few proclaiming a pre-millennial 2nd coming and as Walter Martin points out in his book "Kingdom of the Cults" it was the pre-millennial message of both Millerites and later Seventh-day Adventists that was most objectionable to the popular Christianity of the 19th century.

Well - fine - then it was present truth for the 19th century -- is it "still present truth" given that so many evangelicals and protestants are now moved over to the right side of the pre-mill vs post-mill second coming doctrine?

Yes -- we still have a "present truth mission" when it comes to the 2nd coming. Not just because the pre-trib and mid-trib rapture view is eror - but also because no view of the 2nd coming today outside of the Seventh-day Adventist church warns mankind of the real issue - regarding the closed door of the ark PRIOR to the fall of the rain drops.

In Noah's day it was already "too late" 5 days BEFORE the rain fell. Anyone saying "when I see it - I will believe it and run into the ark for shelter" was to be rudely awakened to the "too late" reality of the door closing days BEFORE the rain fell.

In the same way - today's Christianity informs the saints that "it is never too late" no not at the pre-trib or mid-trib rapture. For even then you have the post rapture period to "change your mind" in a literal - "when I see it I will believe it" - manner for then they will have seen the effects of a global world-wide rapture.

Then all are told that when the 2nd coming does happen (rapture or not) - they they STILL have more time during the millennial kingdom on earth to cling to "well when I see it THEN I will believe it" manner, for then they will have seen the 2nd coming and can decide to follow Christ.

By contrast the Bible teaching on the 2nd coming is that at the Rev 15:8 event prior to the 7 last plagues it is too late. And the SDA view is that even prior to that - if you miss the Latter Rain you will not survive what comes next.

So even in the case of a generally accepted view regarding the 2nd coming - there is urgent "present truth".

in Christ,

Bob

in Christ,

Bob

[Gibs]

The Truth of the gospel is the most important issue of all and it was well ironed out starting even before 1888. Too many didn't accept it then and today it is far worse but there is a radical shift of what was the problen then and now.

Then it was a problem of pulling out of legalism, today it is a problem of pulling out of a extreme liberalism. Which is the worse of the two? Neither result in the salvation of the soul!

Their is a very bad slipping away in the denominatioal structure of SDAdventism.

The worldly teachings have come in that are not tolerable. I could go over them all that have infiltrated in the last 50 yrs that have hit me but most of them some of you know well, others are tottally blind that anyting is wrong.

It looks to me it has gotten to the place no right thing can come to fruitition at the top.

It all is very sadening to me, I knew the church in it's far purer days, when we had real pure and true SDAdventism in a little old country church back in the hills and all were very well read students of the Bible. If a preacher came in and didn't preach according to the Word and the SOP he was met at the door going out and straightened out.

My Aunt could almost quote the whole new testament and another lady Mrs. Hoover could quote you all the begats and she could quote you all the new testament and I never saw her miss.

Where do we find such dedication today? We don't.

I'm with Sister White, I long for a better land and I Hate Sin. She stated both!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[BobRyan]

In this Sabbath's lesson - we talked about the pillar of the faith doctrine regarding inspiration and the gift of prophecy.

As James 2:10-11 points out "HE who SAID..." one thing is the same "HE who SAID.." something else and thus the Word of God is based on the "HE who SAID" and not "who He said it to".

in Christ,

Bob

[Gail]

Great topic, Bob!

[Gibs]

There are a very many now who are not members of the SDA organization who keep Sabbath and understand the true pillars established that made the SDA the best of the reform movements. Yes the SDA denomination came the furthest in reformation.

But it began a down hill slide after 1903. It became rapid after 1950.

Yes I am one of those that am not a member no more. I am faithful to my Lord first, the denomination is not THE CHURCH! His Church is where two or three are gathered together and He is in the midst thereof. His Presence only constitutes CHURCH.

Jesus, God with us said, - - Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

MUST worship Him is spirit and in truth. If not He cannot be Present in the midst thereof.

Should I become a SDA denominational Christian? Well I was for a long while and then these apostasies came in of which I fought like a tiger against until I was hated so much by especially the leadership it wasn't a welcomed place to be.

A Christian isn't worth his salt if he don't stand up for the right of the Word.

Satan stole the march on the SDA church with, nlp, lab 1,2,3, the trinity doctrine, theology saved in sin, emerging church, mentoring and spiritual exercises that are no different than Ignatius Loyola and more as I don't remember them all.

Let me tell you there was a great falling away and it is continuing to this day. The true ones are pushed out.

She still keeps the Sabbath yes but let me tell you the Jews against Jesus did too.

A denominational SDA Christian, I would be if she hadn't of fallen, but sadly she has.

Now I'm a generic of the true teachings but follow Him only as His Spirit leads me. Now I have peace with my Lord!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[BobRyan]

Yes I am one of those that am not a member no more. I am faithful to my Lord first, the denomination is not THE CHURCH! His Church is where two or three are gathered together and He is in the midst thereof. His Presence only constitutes CHURCH.

Jesus, God with us said, - - Joh 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

MUST worship Him is spirit and in truth. If not He cannot be Present in the midst thereof.

Should I become a SDA denominational Christian? Well I was for a long while and then these apostasies came in of which I fought like a tiger against until I was hated so much by especially the leadership it wasn't a welcomed place to be.

There are a number of Christians that believe SDA doctrine but get upset about some practice or failing in the SDA church and leave the organization - yet still believing the same doctrines.

The OP for this thread does not address that group as non-SDAs.

The topic is in reference to those doctrines we know of as SDA doctrine - in the 28 FB. And it contrasts those inside that group vs those outside. I am asking the question about the gap - the leap - the stand that a non-SDA is called to make if they are considering the prospect of accepting SDA doctrine. The potential cost in relationships to family and friends (depending on how open one's family and friends might be to tolerating this level of acceptance of Bible doctrine) - and also the potential of risking one's job or even vocation.

I then consider a more dilute version and ask whether the watered down view is really worth risking-so-much to get into.

in Christ,

Bob

[JoeMo]

BobRyan,

This is an interesting question to me. I was ready to leave the denomination, when a dear friend of mine of this forum challenged me to explain to him which of the 28 Fundamentals I disagreed with. After an extended and animated discussion, I had to admit that I fully agreed with all of the 28 Fundies. What I did NOT agree with is how they were being applied by what I call the "frozen chosen" at my previous home church and by some here on CA. They take conservative fundamentalism into strict legalism; and judge others by their own standards rather than by God's and those set forth in the 28 Fundamentals.

I am still an SDA on the books; and I still lead praise and teach SS at a local SDA church; but my home church is a Sabbath keeping non-denominational church - a former SDA church (we are non-denominational now because the local conference kept threatening to disfellowship the entire church - so we left voluntarily before that happened).

Personally, I don't think being a member of the SDA church is a prerequisite for salvation. Faith in salvation by the grace of Jesus Christ is the only prerequisite. One should only become an SDA Christian if they are genuinely convicted of the truth on the 28 Fundamentals because they are convicted that there 28 truths define their relationship with Jesus Christ.

One does not have to be an SDA to get into heaven.

[Robert]

... I do not believe that there is an end time "The Remanant Church" but that the remanant are remanant individuals from all groups and not any group itself.

Bingo!

[Gibs]

The Remnant Church is His Ekklisia, the called out ones.

Mt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

"My Church" there is Ekklesia and means the called out.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Naomi]

Originally Posted By: Kevin H

... I do not believe that there is an end time "The Remanant Church" but that the remanant are remanant individuals from all groups and not any group itself.

Bingo!

As Daddy would say,"every tub has got to sat on it's own bottom"

As for me, there is no question about where or who I will worship

[Gibs]

True SDAdventism is the "called out ones", yes I advise all to get into it, just make sure it is TRUE SDAdventism. Yes there is still some true congregations, none close to me here however, I and many around me would like to have such a gathering. It is a true joy to worship our Lord and God in Spirit and in Truth!

The result for us here is Home Church.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[OzarkWoman]

I will say this about the question about seeing us as the remanant. On the one hand, I do not believe that there is an end time "The Remanant Church" but that the remanant are remanant individuals from all groups and not any group itself.

BINGO!!!! You got that right!

[Gibs]

I will say this about the question about seeing us as the remanant. On the one hand, I do not believe that there is an end time "The Remanant Church" but that the remanant are remanant individuals from all groups and not any group itself. However, related to the above I see us a remanant church in the fact that we hold on to ideas from before Chrstianity split into Fundamentalism/Dispensationalism and Modernism/Preterism. We are the ones carrying on moderateism and historisism to lay the ground work that we are to build on. And thus we are very much a remanant church of this mindset and have an important job.

I always understood that the termination of the 2300 yrs was the beginning time of the end and is one of the pillars of SDAdventism that cannot be moved. This is one thing taught by adventism that the last generation was soon to come up and not many seemed to realize that. Yes we have been in the time of the end now many years, 165 to 168.

o 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[BobRyan]

BobRyan,

This is an interesting question to me. I was ready to leave the denomination, when a dear friend of mine of this forum challenged me to explain to him which of the 28 Fundamentals I disagreed with. After an extended and animated discussion, I had to admit that I fully agreed with all of the 28 Fundies.

Anyone who believes the 28 FB's and lives according to that faith has already incurred all the risks mentioned in the OP.

My question is for those who do not agree with them and either are not-SDA or they are. Either way the issue is to figure out where that leaves us.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

I will say this about the question about seeing us as the remanant. On the one hand, I do not believe that there is an end time "The Remanant Church" but that the remanant are remanant individuals from all groups and not any group itself. However, related to the above I see us a remanant church in the fact that we hold on to ideas from before Chrstianity split

Consider this - in Rev 12 the remnant are those Christians being persecuted by the dragan - Satan, and his agents - which include the dark ages, inquistion, Catholic church etc.

And yet - we would all agree that there were saints not only among the catholics being persecuted by fellow Catholics, but some were even in the group that was siding with the persecutors.

And yet the "remnant" in Rev 12 is clearly speaking of just the one group. Thus it is not talking about "who are the only people that are saved" rather it speaks to the subject of "What truth is God bringing out during that time - and what group is He using to do it?".

So when we say that the SDA church is in fact THE remnant church in this final age - we do not mean that the remnant are the only ones saved today - any more than they were in Rev 12 the only humans saved.

WE are talking about the work of God in this age - the truths He is trying to get out to the world now, and the group He is using to do it.

in Christ,

Bob