A Look at The Seventh Day Adventist Doctrines and Practice: Is it a Cult?

In the ever changing world where philosophies that rule this world are ever changing, we are forewarned to be alert lest we fall into the pitfall of worshipping a false god. Today, materialism, pluralism and entertainment are the main aspect of worship in the world. Cults have mushroomed and have conveniently taken their seat in the driver’s wheel. We don’t know who is going where as every body seems o be another busy body. I’d like to take a look at some of the religious outfits that have been accused at one time or another in history of being cultic in nature. I will endeavour to explore the Adventist movement, the Jehovah witnesses, the Mormons, the Monists, among others.  Before I we embark on this very important task of identifying the unwanted species in the Christendom we need to have a working definition of cults. This is imperative, for it is only in so doing that we will we able to objectively judge whether the Adventist movement is cultic or not. So what is a Cult? The term is derived from the latin cultus, “worship”. In this sense the cultic act is an act of worship involving external rights and ceremonies as well as attitudes of reverential homage.There are three basic approaches to defining the term:  sensational/popular approach; sociological approach and theological approach. 1. Sensational approach is built on journalistic accounts in the popular press which frequently focus on dramatic and sometimes bizzare aspects of cultic behaviour.2. Sociological approach includes the authoritarian, manipulative, totalistic and sometimes communal features of cults.3. Theological approach involves some standards of orthodoxy, in which case, basic issues of truth and error are involved.Unlike secular sociologist who is unconcerned about the truth of a particular belief and unlike the typical person whose religious naivete precludes any serious interest in doctrinal matters, the Christian must be able to distinguish truth from error.A theological definition of cult must be based on a standard of Christian orthodoxy. Thus using the Bible’s teachings as a focal point…a cult is any religious movement that is organisationally distinct and has  doctrines and/or practices that contradict those of the Scriptures as interpreted by traditional Christianity as represented by the major Catholic and Protestant denominations, and as expressed in such statements as the Apostles’ creed.To be more specific, a cult is a perversion, a distortion of biblical Christianity and/or rejection of the teachings of the Christian Church. It is a group of people polarized around someone’s interpretation of the Bible and is characterized by major deviations from orthodox Christianity relative to the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, particularly the fact that God became man in Jesus Christ.Theological concerns in the study of cults therefore are: §              The person and work of Christ§              Human nature and sin§              Salvation§              Trinity§              The nature and role of the BibleWe must note that due to religious diversity, counterfeits of biblical Christianity are well disguised. Unorthodox religious groups often use the same terms Christians use BUT they re-interpret statements of doctrines and biblical passages. They seek to overwhelm with false scholarship, and they might even willingly deceive or not reveal their whole theology.General Characteristics of CultsNot every cult necessarily has all of the following characteristics, but most have many of them.1. New truth- almost all claim some new truth or revelations, their founders considering themselves to have reclaimed that which was lost by the apostate, Christian Church (ex. John Smith and the Mormons, Sun Myung Moon and the

Unification
Church, Baha’u'llah and Baha’ism)2. New Interpretation - In line with new truth, most have their own understanding of the Bible, many times complete with their own translation of it (ex. JWs and the New World Translation). 3.  Non-Biblical sources of Authority. They have both Static Sources eg, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Dynamic Source (usually ongoing interpretations of the Bible by Church leaders) eg, “The Watchtower”, “Awake!”4. Another Jesus – They reject the deity of Jesus as being equal in essence with God. In other words, their Jesus is different from the Jesus of orthodox Christianity. 

5. Rejection of orthodox Christianity – this is characterised by disdain for Church history, isolationism, in which they teach adherents not to associate with other religious groups and Exclusivism – theirs is the only true Church and/or the only way to be saved.6. Double Talk – Many publicly proclaim they believe one thing while secretly they teach something else. Closely asociated with this is the redefinition of Christian words and terminologies to make it appear that they talk the same language as other Christian groups.7. Changing theology – Closely tied in with false prophecy, theology that was supposed to have been revealed by God is later changed, again per revelation of God (ex. Mormonism with polygamy).8. Authoritarian leadership- Beliefs, behaviour and lifestyle dependent on the leadership, simply because the leadership claims to speak for God. Closely associated with this is mind control. Characteristics of this group include a hierarchical understanding of authority and spirituality where people are taught to ask their elders’ and leaders’ opinions on just about any small decision before proceeding. Other characteristics are people being isolated from outside input like TV, Newspapers, friends and family; excessive use of peer pressure, shame, public confession and shunning, breaking of people’s personal habits, mannerisms, personalities, hobbies, interests, career and goals.; breaking of people’s wills, self initiative and independent thinking; sleep deprivation, forcedd early morning prayers, forced street or door-to-door evangelism, forced money making and fund-raising; isolation of men from women.9.  Salvation by Work:   a). Must believe and practice completely what is taught by the Church in order to be saved.   b). Strange legalism – Peculiar rules and regulations that MUST be obeyed. (ex. JWs: no blood transfusion, no celebration of Christmas and birthdays; Mormons – no hot drinks). Many times, the items listed under authoritarian leadership are justified under the guise of legalism.10. False Prophecy: They make claims about the future that never come true (ex. JWs no less than seven times have predicted the Second Coming of Christ; JWs predicted before 1914 that Christ would visibly return in 1914; now say he did but secretly). 

I am not able to cover everything about cults in full. I hope that the general characteristics can suffice as a reference point upon which we evaluate all claims of ‘truth’ that we come across. As it is said, we don’t need to study every counterfeit currency to tell that they are fake, all we need to do is to study the real money so that when we come across the counterfeit we will be able to tell it.Apostle Paul warns: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! Galatians 1:8. Having established the definition and general characteristics of cults, we can now move to evaluating Seventh Day Adventism in light of the same. This will form the basis of the ensuing phases.Debate has raged from calling the Seventh Day Adventist a cult to just another protestant denomination. For our purposes, we will use it as a difficult case study concerning the issue of what actually makes a cult a cult and in so doing vindicate the actual standing of SDA in so far as this debate is concerned.Brief History of the Seventh Day AdventistSeventh-Day Adventism finds its route in the nineteenth century
America as does Mormonism and the Jehovah’s witnesses. It did not come as a result of a split from an existing denomination, as many other denominations have done, but began from the beginning of one man, William Miller as he developed an eschatological expectation of the second coming of Christ. Using mainly the book of Daniel and it’s information concerning the ‘seventy weeks”, the “2300 days” and the ‘abomination of desolation’, Miller believed that the Bible clearly taught that the coming of Christ would be in 1843. he made this conclusion in 1818 and begun to share it with others with little positive response at first.
Miller became a Baptist minister in the early 1830s and began an itinerant preacher ministry. He became a popular conference speaker and his views concerning the coming of Christ began to catch fire. Still, many opposed his views and considered them far fetched, but Miler gained a number of powerful and wealthy supporters who publicized his views more widely. As 1843 came closer, the Millerites, as his followers had became known, became greatly excited at the prospect of Christ’s return.
New year’s Day 1843, Miller gave a message in which he boldly proclaimed, “this is the last year that Satan will reign in our earth.” And as has happened with so many other predictions and moments focused on the coming of Christ, the year came and went. The time was extended to March 21st, 1844, but still no Lord. Miller publicly admitted his error some two months later, but others would not give up hope. The seventh-month Movement arose whereby Christ was expected to return on the tenth day of the seventh month of the Jewish calendar, October 22, 1844. Miller again was caught up in the enthusiasm but this date, too came and went. It is this point that historians of the movement call “the great disappointment”.
The very next day, Hiram Edson and others met for prayer, asking the lord why these events had unfolded as they did. After this meeting, while walking through a fiel, Edson had a vision of heaven in which he saw Christ move from one “apartment” of heaven to the other. Miller’s prediction of the date was not wrong in the actual time but in the actual even that was to unfold at that time. Edson saw Christ move from the outer apartment, where the High Priest offers forgiveness to the people to the “inner sanctuary”, the Holy of Holies, to blot out the sins of believers who had die. This view would later yield the SDA doctrine of “investigative judgement” which we shall look at later. This could be considered ‘first phase’ of the development of seventh day Adventism.The ‘second phase’ came in 1846 when a retired sea captain Joseph bates published a 48 page treatise entitled the Seventh Day Sabbath, a Perpetual Sign.” In it he argued that from creation through the Mosaic Law, god instituted worship on the seventh day, Saturday. It was the papacy that had changed this day of worship to Sunday, and as many regarded Roman Catholicism as the “Beast” of Revelation 14, the “mark of thee beast” was worshipping on Sunday.

This ‘third phase’ would involve the ‘the spirit of prophecy’, Specifically as it related to the prophecies of Ellen Harmon (White). Born in 1827,White came under the influence of the Millerite teaching and was struck with fear at the impending date. She reported having dreams in which Jesus would come and enclose her, butt it wasn’t until the great disappointment that her truly influential dreams and visions occurred. Two months after the Great Disappointment, the 17 year-old White experienced the first of her many visions. During a small home prayer meeting, she later testified began “rising higher and higher, far above the dark world,” where she looked down and saw Adventist believers on the road to heaven.
White’s second vision was an answer to the question that had arisen given the Adventist view of the “inner sanctuary”. If Jesus had indeed moved to the Holy of Holies to judge the lives of the dead, the implication was that God had now closed the door of salvation to sinners. White’s vision, and a controversial one, confirmed the “shut-door’ belief. Her third vision controversial at the time, confirmed the teaching of Joseph Bates and the Sabbath. In it White testified that Jesus showed her the Ten Commandments on the tablet of stone, and the fourth commandment had “a short halo of light encircling it.” An angel explained to her the Adventist must keep the seventh day as the prerequisite to the Lord’s coming. In all three visions White placed herself and her followers in direct opposition of the moderate wing of the Millerite Movement.
Observers of white and her visions described the events as such. Upon falling to the floor, sometimes for a few minutes, others for hours, ‘she often uttered words singly, and sometimes sentences which expressed to those about her that nature of the view she was having, either of heaven or earth. …When the vision was ended … she was then limp and strengthless, and had to be assisted to her chair.”

In 1963, mainly due to the work of Ellen and her husband, the

Seventh-day
Adventist
Church was founded. In just twenty years, its membership grew from four thousand to twenty thousand strong.
Up to her death in 1915, questions continued to surface from without as well as within the denomination as to the visions of Ellen White. Of particular concerns were the discoveries of “plagiarism” found in many of her over fifty books. In certain instances, what White had called information coming from a vision from God had been found word-for-word in other published works. Many begun to question if indeed her teachings had come not from God but from elsewhere. It should be noted that despite these problems Ellen White remained amazingly orthodox in her view. When the denomination had a reform movement in the early part of the century, calling for a re-emphasis of justification by faith not by works, Ellen White put her voice behind it. When issues of the divinity of Jesus were questioned, much like the contemporary Jehovah’s witnesses, Ellen White helped to steer the Church towards orthodoxy. And yet, many still questioned the authority of her teaching, seeing the Church as placing them on par with or her in authority than the ScripturesGeneral Beliefs of the Seventh Day Adventist
It should be quickly pointed out that there are a number of orthodox doctrines on which the Seventh Day Adventists agree with other mainline protestant denominations. They wholeheartedly support the Trinitarian view of God, especially the deity of Christ. They believe in the sinfulness of man and his need for forgiveness and salvation. They believe in the divinely inspired word of God, inerrant and infallible, as the authority upon which the Church is built. They believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus and in his literal, physical second coming. In all these, there is no disagreement.
The SDAs would also say that they believe in the full and final atonement on the cross by Christ, as well as salvation by faith in this event, not by personal works of righteousness. But in both of these issues, we must look a bit closer at the distinct SDA beliefs before we can fully agree that they say the same thing that evangelical Christianity says.
The investigative Judgement: This is the cornerstone of SDA doctrine, coming as we have seen from the early Millerites and their unwillingness to admit error, and the subsequent vision of Hiram Edson. Reviewing a few official statements the SDA church make concerning it can best do an understanding of this unique doctrine. (Martin. P.49).
“The time of the cleansing of the Sanctuary, synchronizing with the period of the proclamation of the message of Revelation 14, is a time of investigative judgement; first, with references to the dead, and second, with reference to the living. This investigative judgement determines who of the myriads sleeping in the dust of the earth are worthy of a part in the first resurrection, and who of its living multitudes are worthy of translation.”
“In view of the principle here set forth, it seems to us abundantly clear that acceptance of Christ at conversion does not weal a person’s destiny. His life record after conversion is also important.”
“It is our understanding that Christ as High Priest, concludes his intercessory ministry in heaven in a work of judgement. He begins his great work of judgement in the investigative phase. At the conclusion of the investigation the sentence of judgement is pronounced. Then as judge Christ descend to execute or carry into effect, the sentence.”
“The blotting of names out of the book of life is, we believe, a work of the investigative judgement. A complete and thorough check of all the candidates for eternal life will need to be completed before Christ comes in the clouds of heaven.”
The Scapegoat Doctrine: The SDA have been accused of minimizing the complete and final work of Jesus on the cross as atonement for sins with its scapegoat doctrine. In short, using the notion of a scapegoat from the Old Testament Day of Atonement, SDA theologians teach that for each sin there is a twofold responsibility: first, the personal responsibility of the person that sinned and second, Satan’s responsibility as the instigator or tempter. Christ most definitely died as atonement for the first sin, but SDA doctrine also teaches that the consummation of all things will not come until Satan also bears his sins. It is from this notion that many opponents of the seventh day Adventism have accused them of making Satan the ultimate sin-bearer, thus diminishing the completed work of Christ. But although this scapegoat doctrine is a bit strange, the Adventists make it a point of saying that it does not mean that Satan bears the sins of believers. He only bears his own sins, for which no offer of redemption by God has been made.
The Sabbath: we have already reviewed the influence of John Bates on the Adventist movement. Again, a review of the official Adventist statements will help us here. (Martin, p. 430).
We believe that the Sabbath was instituted in
Eden before sin entered, that it was honoured of God, set apart by divine appointment, and given to mankind as a perpetual memorial of a finished creation.”
“We believe that the restoration of Sabbath is indicated in the Bible prophecy of Revelation 14:9-12. Sincerely believing this, we regard the observance of Sabbath as a test of our loyalty to Christ as our creator and redeemer.”
In regard to the Revelation 14 passage, it there speaks of the mark of the beast, and the Adventists have been portrayed as saying that everyone who does not honour the Sabbath has the mark of the beast. And clearly in the past, certain SDA members have said exactly this. But again, we must turn to the ‘official’ view of the Church, and there it is clear that no one has yet received the mark of the beast. “But when the decree shall go forth enforcing the counterfeit Sabbath, and the loud cry of the third angel shall warn men against the worship of the beast and his image, the line will be clearly drawn between the false and true. Then those who still continue in transgressions will receive the mark of the beast.” (words penned by Ellen White).
View of Hell: Seventh-Day Adventism does not profess a belief in literal and eternal Hell. In fact, they hold to the notion that unbelievers will be annihilated, destroyed or simply made to cease to exist. They posit a number of reasons why, but the main ones would seem to be: 1) An eternal Hell detracts from the biblical view of a loving God; 2) an eternal Hell would serve as a constant reminder that God did not or could not in fact rid thee universe of sin; 3) the final consummation of all things envisions a “new heaven and a new earth” which would seem to necessitate against an eternal place of torment.
This is the final phase of the post responding to the argument thar the

SDA
Church is a cult. In the initial phases of this article, I have been giving facts about SDA andd cultism without any critique of either. This portion is dedicated entirely to criticism of the Adventist doctrines and reflects the full views of the author on this rather controversial debate.
Critique of the Adventist Doctrine and PracticeEnd-Times predictions: With any such movements that attempt to discern the exact return of Christ, we must turn to the Scriptures themselves. Jesus tells his disciples, “no one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, not the Son but only the Father. Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come.” (Mark 13:33). And in what are practically his last words before his ascension, Jesus tells them, “it is not for you to know the times and dates the Father has set by His own authority.” (Acts 1:7) The fact of the matter is, the very presumption of some people to think they can know something that is clearly unknowable has been the foundation upon which all sorts of errors have been erected.
Seventh Day Adventism is no exception here. In fact, in order to maintain the Miller calculation, they have had to resort to fabricate a doctrine such as the investigative judgement, one that can be found no wherein Scripture. If the Adventists had simply, as Miller did, admitted their error and moved on from there, that may have ended things. But is holding to such a doctrine in itself ground for calling them a cult?The writings of Ellen White: Its view concerning the position of Ellen White and particularly her writings is also for alarm for many SDA’s opponents who see her writings on par with Scripture, but this must be balanced by the official statements of the

SDA
Church concerning White’s works (Martin, pp. 439-440).
“We do not regard the writings of Ellen White G. White as an addition to the sacred canon of Scripture.”
“We do not regard them in the same sense as the Holy Scriptures, which stand alone and unique as the standard by which all other writings must be judged.”
“We have never considered Ellen G. White to be in the same category as the writers of the canon of Scriptures.”“In his word, God has committed to men knowledge necessary for salvation.”
“However, it is our belief that the Holy Spirit opened to her mind important events and called her to give certain instructions for these last days…. We as a denomination accept them as inspired counsels from the Lord. But we have never equated them with Scripture as some falsely charge.”“While Seventh-Day Adventists recognize the Scripture canon closed nearly two thousand years ago and that there have been no additions to this complication of sacred books, yet we believe that the spirit of God, who inspired the divine word known to us as the Bible, has pledged to reveal Himself to the Church and through the different gifts of the Spirit…. take the place of the word of God, nor does their acceptance make unnecessary the Scripture of truth.”
“Concerning the matter of Church fellowship, we would say that while we revere the writings of Ellen G. White, … we do not make acceptance of her writings as a matter for Church discipline.”These are excerpts from the official statements from the

SDA
Church concerning Ellen White’s writings. It remains to be seen if this is in fact the practice of all SDA Churches. In other words, this may be nothing more than an example of “double talk” as we saw was one of the characteristics of cults (see phase on of this series). On the other hand, we cannot discount an entire denomination because some of its pastors or leaders do or teach some things other than the official position of the Church. If we did that, we could label virtually every protestant denomination a cult!In this instance, probably is to give the

SDA
Church the benefit of doubt, yet with wary eye open to the possibility that the sole authority of scripture may be in question. If they were to hold on to this special ‘inspiration’ in all the writings of Ellen White, then we would rightly have to call this into question. But the simple fact is that, at least officially, they do not.Their view of Hell: This is by no means a unique SDA doctrine, as cults such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses hold to it, a number of liberal, mainline protestant denominations profess it, and many today in the evangelical circles also flirt with the idea. Is it necessary to believe in a literal, eternal hell in order to be a genuine believer? This is a difficult question to answer, and although biblically one must use flimsy arguments to disprove a literal hell, certainly the idea of a loving God sending people for eternity to hell is not an appealing notion.
A simple view of Scripture on this issues shows us, though, that despite the fact that the idea of an eternal hell may make us uncomfortable, it is clearly taught in Scripture. For one thing, in instances when Jesus refers to both heaven and hell in the same passage (for example, Matt. 25:46, Mark 9: 42-48), for us to make his references there to hell as figurative while the ones to heaven remain literal is highly flimsy. It also ignores statements like “will be tormented day and night for ever and ever” (Revelation 20:10), “where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matt. 8:12) and “where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched” (Mark 9:48), making them meaningless.the key issue to address when confronted with the “Annihilation theory of Hell” is the entire basis upon which it is based. In both Matt. 10:28 and 2 Thess. 1:8-9 we are told that those who do not follow Christ will suffer everlasting ‘destruction.’ This word destruction is the cornerstone upon which the doctrine of annihilationism is built. Those who state there is no eternal hell posit the annihilation, evaporation or destruction of the soul not an ongoing punishment of it. Unfortunately for them, though, this view fails to see the Greek meaning of the word translated destruction.
The root words in the Greek are in the Matthew passage ‘appolumi’ and in the Thessalonians passage ‘olethros’ which literally mean ‘running.’ It does not mean annihilation or complete destruction into oblivion, but to be undone. “The idea is not extinction but ruin, loss, not of being, but of well-being.” (Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, p. 164).
A simple example from everyday life may be helpful here. When someone drops a light bulb, it falls to the floor and shatters into many pieces. The bulb we say has been ‘destroyed,’ but is most certainly not annihilated. It has lost its useful function. Similarly, the words in the Greek translated ‘destruction’ or ‘to destroy’ have the same connotation. This, coupled with the other arguments above, makes the SDA doctrine of annihilation untenable. The unique SDA Doctrines: The investigative judgement, the scapegoat doctrine and the view of Sabbath are controversial doctrines, but are they grounds enough to label Seventh-Day Adventism a cult? Many would say yes on the basis that they 1) diminish the complete work of Christ’s atonement, and 2) they demand that a works-righteousness necessarily creep into the salvation scheme of the SDA. But are these fair criticisms of the doctrines?
Some view the investigative judgment as nothing more than a tool to keep the SDA members in check, with the impending threat that you may be judged wanting now by Christ if you do not ‘toe the line.’ And with it comes the necessary conclusion that you can lose your salvation if you do not live a proper life. From the official SDA statements, “in view of the principles here set forth, it seems to us abundantly clear that the acceptance of Christ at conversion does not seal a person’s destiny. His life record after conversion is also important.” This is a striking statement. A “normal” protestant view of salvation at conversion would involve the receiving of the Holy Spirit at that time, “a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance.” (Eph. 1:13-14).I say “normal” because there are certainly many Christians who believe they can lose their salvation. I am inclined personally to find it difficult to find a works-righteousness of sorts in such a belief, simply because if you can “work” to lose your salvation, by not doing certain things you can work to keep it. I think such a view is destructive to the security all believers in Christ should have. But is it an outright heresy? I’d say close, but mostly probably people have not thought through the implication of such a belief. And to condemn the SDA as a cult for holding such a view would leave us condemning many Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals and others as well.We must also keep in balance other official SDA statements concerning justification by faith, such as: “the vicarious, atoning death of Jesus Christ once and for all, is all sufficient for the redemption of a lost race… Salvation through Christ is by grace alone, and through faith in his blood… nothing we can ever do will merit the favour of God. Salvation is of grace… we are not saved by works.” (Martin, p.426-437). Is this just another form of double-talk, saying in the same breath “we are saved not by works but by faith” and “you better lead a good life or you will lose your salvation?” A true biblical view of faith and works does keep in balance “salvation by grace through faith, not by work,” while at the same time maintaining that “faith without works is dead.” If the SDAs mean this in their doctrinal position, then we can have no problem with them.Biblically, we find the entire doctrine of the Investigative judgment to be a fabrication. In fact, Scripture seems to teach directly against such a notion. “He that hears my word and believes him that sent me has everlasting life and shall not come under judgement but has passed death to life.” (Jn. 5:24) “When you were dead in your sins and in the circumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sin.” (Col. 2:13) That believers have yet to be judged completely and can in fact be judged to have fallen short in regards to salvation is clearly unscriptural. Scripture does teach that our works will be judged or tested by fire (1 Cor. 3:10-15), but this is already having built our lives upon ‘the foundation that is Christ.”Adventists rely heavily on apocalyptic portions of Daniel and Revelation for this doctrine; something not considered all that wise a practice. There are plenty of eschatological passages in Scripture, which are clear to understand without going to the quite unclear passages to develop a doctrine quite important as this one to the SDA beliefs.The question of Sabbath keeping is another thorny issue. Again, are the SDAs pushing legalism here? If you do not keep this day, you have the mark of the Beast and are condemned with the unbelieving? It is a clear fact of Church history that the early Church begun to worship on Sunday, the Lord’s Day, and not that this was a later imposition on the Church by the state under Christian emperor Constantine. And in any case, the Apostle Paul seems to bend over backwards in making it clear that to impose one day as special or sacred over another is nothing more than a vestige of the old law, since fulfilled in Christ.
“Therefore let no one pass judgement on you in questions of food or drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are only a shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.” (Col. 2:16-17)
“But now that you know God – or rather are known by God – how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.” (Gal. 4:8-11)“Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? …. One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special does so to the Lord.” (
Rom. 14:4-6)It is clear that to observe Sabbath is to observe part of the law already fulfilled in Christ and hence to turn back from the faith, something Paul makes clear in his letter to the Galatians. But it is also clear that some people still consider some days more ‘sacred’ than others, and in Romans Paul calls for liberty in this area. In short, if the Seventh-Day Adventists want to worship on Saturday, it is their freedom to do so. But if they want to say that true believers must do so, then they are clearly at odds with Paul. And even further, if they say that those who do not worship on Sabbath have or will have the mark of the Beast, in effect being owned by Satan, then their view should be flatly condemned.It seems more clearly that the doctrines of Sabbath-keeping and the investigative judgement are kept not because they are biblical but because they are original beliefs upon which Seventh Day Adventism was founded. The fear may be that to turn away from these doctrines would cause the SDA to lose its distinctiveness and its roots. Unfortunately, though, maintaining clearly non-biblical doctrines only help to perpetuate the suspicions that most protestant denominations have in regard to the

SDA
Church.As for the scapegoat doctrine, it seems clear that the SDA bend over backwards to state that Satan is not the one who atones for the sins of men. Christ accomplished this completely and finally on the cross. Yet, Satan must bear his own sins as a scapegoat, and given this view, although again it may be a strange doctrine, it does not detract from the work of Christ. Conclusion: Is Seventh-Day Adventism a cult? It would be helpful to summarize the prominent reasons why some would answer in the affirmative to this question.

1. Seventh – Day Adventism has an extra-canonical source of authority (the writings of Ellen G. White).
2.  Seventh – Day Adventism denies that salvation is solely by justification through faith (the doctrines of the investigative judgement and the keeping of Sabbath).
3. Seventh – Day Adventism diminishes the completed, atoning work of Christ (the doctrine of Satan as a scapegoat).

If indeed the official statements of the Seventh – Day Adventism are true concerning these controversial doctrines, then we should have no problem calling them another protestant denomination, albeit one with some strange views. But if these doctrines are indeed taught in such a way that they do yield the above three conclusions (and some, like Anthony Hoekema, having come from this denomination have made this claims) then we would be safe in calling Seventh – Day Adventism a cult.History has shown that Seventh – Day Adventism has moved more from a strange sect to ‘just another’ protestant denomination. Is this a real change, or simply a disguise used by the SDA to attempt to give them more credibility with other Christian groups? Only time will tell!Enough said. Enough exhibit has been laid on the table the verdict remains yours. Shalom 

Habari!

Hi all -

Tiz me here.

I’ll be publishing some more trash soon.

Thanks for reading and welcome again.

God bless.