Adventist Online

Is this a good question? I'd love to hear from the world. If you answer, could you please explain why.


Views: 1823

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I don't agree with disfellowshipping anyone unless it is the last remaining option.

In regard to WO (or any other topic/belief) it is up to the person concerned. Personally, I would not remain a member of a church whose teachings I do not believe in. If I don't believe as SDAs believe then why would I continue to call myself an SDA and claim association with a body of people whose beliefs I do not share?

In his book, A Search For Identity: The Development of Seventh Day Adventist Beliefs, historian George Knight points out that early advent movement held to some theological beliefs that were subsequently altered.  Ideas that were altered included the shut door theory, the time to begin and end the Sabbath, and the consumption of pork. As a matter of fact Knight went so far as to state that most of the founders of the Seventh Day Adventism would not be able to join the church today if they had to agree to the denomination's 27 (28) Fundamental Beliefs specifically belief 2, 4,and 5. (pages 17-18)

It seems to me that our pioneers had the right idea and embraced the concept that truth was progressive. Rather than developing a creed the pioneers adopted the viewpoint that truth was advancing and that points of faith would change when good reason from the scriptures could be found.  The pioneers therefore held the Bible as their creed and strove to bring their doctrinal beliefs into harmony with the Bible.

In Great Controversy page 595 Ellen white offers this very useful bit of advice:

"But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority—not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain “Thus saith the Lord” in its support."

In Counsels to Writers and Editors  page 37 she adds: "We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed."

Based on the above I would have to say that a minister of the SDA church should believe every doctrine of the SDA church providing that said doctrines conform to reasonable, logical and consistent Biblical hermeneutics.  Having said that it is also my opinion that the SDA church as a matter of priority needs to engage in more discussions especially on controversial Biblical topics.

Here is a parting thought from Counsels to Writers and Editors page 39.1:

The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God's people, should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves, to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition, and worship they know not what." 


Yes, otherwis you are not a SDA pastor.


Site Sponsors


Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free

USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:


© 2019   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service