What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Questions and conversation about religious beliefs, Scripture, the Spirit of Prophecy, and Creation 7th Day Adventism
User avatar
Pastor Chick
Posts: 80
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 3:03 pm
Location: Kisoro - Uganda
Contact:

What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby Pastor Chick » August 5th, 2013, 9:57 pm

We have often discussed these definitions during "times of refreshing" over the many years of our history. This topic will no doubt include some discussion of "the church militant," "the church triumphant," "the visible church," and other possible phrases used in the writings. I believe it is reasonable to leave no stone unturned as we deal with the instant questions.

I opt to begin my answers from sections of the Spirit of Prophecy.
The church is God’s fortress, His city of refuge, which He holds in a revolted world. Any betrayal of the church is treachery to Him who has bought mankind with the blood of His only-begotten Son. From the beginning, faithful souls have constituted the church on earth. In every age the Lord has had His watchmen, who have borne a faithful testimony to the generation in which they lived. These sentinels gave the message of warning; and when they were called to lay off their armor, others took up the work. God brought these witnesses into covenant relation with Himself, uniting the church on earth with the church in heaven. He has sent forth His angels to minister to His church, and the gates of hell have not been able to prevail against His people. [...] God has a church upon the earth, who are His chosen people, who keep His commandments. He is leading, not stray offshoots, not one here and one there, but a people. (The Faith I Live By, pp. 281, 282

The church is God’s appointed agency for the salvation of men. It was organized for service, and its mission is to carry the gospel to the world. From the beginning it has been God’s plan that through His church shall be reflected to the world His fullness and His sufficiency. The members of the church, those whom He has called out of darkness into His marvelous light, are to show forth His glory. The church is the repository of the riches of the grace of Christ; and through the church will eventually be made manifest, even to “the principalities and powers in heavenly places,” the final and full display of the love of God. (Counsels for the Church, p. 242)

All who believe are to be gathered into one church. (DA 821; AA 27)

Let us continue to build on what I have begun.

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby JamesPrest » August 9th, 2013, 9:25 am

All quotes below from Review and Herald are taken from a 4 part series of articles written by Ellen White and titled “The Remnant Church Not Babylon,” saving for the one proceeded with asterisks (***). In this series of articles, she refers to the Seventh-Day Adventist church as the remnant. Also, this series of articles was written in 1893, approximately 1 year after she indicated that the showers of the latter rain had begun to fall on some of the members of the church.)

The intention of this comment is to consider Babylon in relation to the Seventh-Day Adventist church. There have been many cries that have gone up over the years denouncing the Seventh-Day Adventist church as Babylon. Are they true? Could they be?

Contrary to our way of doing things, before we begin this comment, we want to take a moment to explain our personal experience with those who have boldly set forth the statements of Ellen White that say that the Seventh-Day Adventist church is not Babylon. We should be able to sum this up on one paragraph.

Those who have quoted Ellen White to us to say that the Seventh-Day Adventist church is not Babylon, always seem to be quoting it in context of justifying the sins of the church, or in saying that it is not possible for them to become Babylon. Justifying sin we do not tolerate, and we have a hard time saying that the Seventh-Day Adventist church could never constitute or make up part of Babylon. If she were to meet the criteria of the definition of Babylon, then the shoe fits, regardless of the term by which we choose to address her. To us, to claim that the Seventh-Day Adventist church can never become Babylon as many have, is to say that regardless of her future (or present) practice of sin, acceptance of the wine of Babylon (false doctrines of Rome), and stirring up the civil powers to persecute the righteous (see Great Controversy 608.2) she still cannot be the Babylon of which we are called to come out of. This idea to us is, in plain terms, utterly absurd. And for those who would claim that the Seventh-Day Adventist church will never do these things, is to say that its impossible for them to fall (something not even possible for the sinless Christ), or, it is to make a prophetic statement.

Now we cover that which we desire to address.

1st Statement of Prophecy:

“God has a people in which all heaven is interested, and they are the one object on earth dear to the heart of God. Let every one who reads these words give them thorough consideration; for in the name of Jesus I would press them home upon every soul. When any one arises, either among us or outside of us, who is burdened with a message which declares that the people of God are numbered with Babylon, and claims that the loud cry is a call to come out of her, you may know that he is not bearing the message of truth.” {Review and Herald, August 29, 1893 par. 5}

Shortly before the putting forth of this statement, the cry had gone forth that the Seventh-Day Adventist church was Babylon and that God’s people were called to come out of her. However, the prophetess did not say, “Those that have arose…,” (past tense) nor did she say, “Those who are now arising,” (present tense) but instead she said, “When any one arises….” (future tense).

Now let us read the whole sentence again:

“When any one arises, either among us or outside of us, who is burdened with a message which declares that the people of God are numbered with Babylon, and claims that the loud cry is a call to come out of her, you may know that he is not bearing the message of truth.” {Review and Herald, August 29, 1893 par. 5}

Who are the “people of God” to which she refers?

First, Ellen White makes it plain in this series of articles that at that time, Seventh-Day Adventists were the only people who were fulfilling the description given of the remnant people, who keep the commandments of God, and have the faith of Jesus:

“Let all be careful not to make an outcry against the only people who are fulfilling the description given of the remnant people, who keep the commandments of God, and have the faith of Jesus, who are exalting the standard of righteousness in these last days.” {Review and Herald, September 12, 1893 par. 11}

2nd Statement of Prophecy:

“Those who assert that the Seventh-day Adventist churches constitute Babylon, or any part of Babylon, might better stay at home. Let them stop and consider what is the message to be proclaimed at this time. In place of working with divine agencies to prepare a people to stand in the day of the Lord, they have taken their stand with him who is an accuser of the brethren, who accuses them before God day and night. Satanic agencies have been moved from beneath, and they have inspired men to unite in a confederacy of evil, that they may perplex, harass, and cause the people of God great distress. The whole world is to be stirred with enmity against Seventh-day Adventists, because they will not yield homage to the papacy, by honoring Sunday, the institution of this anti-Christian power. It is the purpose of Satan to cause them to be blotted from the earth, in order that his supremacy of the world may not be disputed.” {Review and Herald, August 22, 1893 par. 8}

Notice, the prophetess did not say, “The whole world was stirred with enmity…,” (past tense) nor did she say, “The whole world is being stirred with enmity…,” (present tense) but instead she said, “The whole world is to be stirred with enmity….” (future tense) And why? Let is read again:

“The whole world is to be stirred with enmity against Seventh-day Adventists, because they will not yield homage to the papacy, by honoring Sunday, the institution of this anti-Christian power. It is the purpose of Satan to cause them to be blotted from the earth, in order that his supremacy of the world may not be disputed.” {Review and Herald, August 22, 1893 par. 8}

This statement points out that in the future, hatred for Seventh-Day Adventists will be stirred because they will not honor Sunday. The only people we are aware of that went by the name of Seventh-Day Adventists at the time of the putting forth of this statement, were the Seventh-Day Adventists, thus there is no reason to believe that she was referring to any other Seventh-Day Adventists then the only ones which were. And this same body of Seventh-Day Adventists which was then, will be hated for not honoring Sunday.

We do not wish to claim from this statement that the Seventh-Day Adventist church will be faithful all the way through to the end, nor that she can never fall, but only that the Seventh-Day Adventist’s to which she referred in the statement, was the Seventh-Day Adventist’s to which she referred. To claim that she referred to the Seventh-Day Adventist Reform Movement, or any other church since that has borne the title of Seventh-Day Adventist, simply cannot be gathered from anywhere in the statement itself, nor from anywhere in the surrounding context of articles. In this series of articles, her continued mention of the people of God, the remnant, God’s faithful people…etc, was always referring to Seventh-Day Adventists.

3rd Statement of Prophecy:

“Has God no living church? He has a church, but it is the church militant, not the church triumphant. We are sorry that there are defective members, that there are tares amid the wheat. Jesus said, ‘The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. . . . So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the wheat into my barn.’” {Review and Herald, August 29, 1893 par. 9}

“The tares and the wheat are to grow together until the harvest; and the harvest is the end of probationary time.” {Christ’s Object Lessons, 71.3}

The body of Seventh-Day Adventists, which Ellen White referred to as “the remnant people,” and of which she prophesied saying that they would be hated for not honoring Sunday, will have “defective members” until probation closes.

A Claim Against Seventh-Day Adventists

There is a claim made by many that because the Seventh-Day Adventist Church fits the description of Laodicea, that they have been spued out of the mouth of God. Let us investigate this claim.

“In the parable of the wheat and the tares, we see the reason why the tares were not to be plucked up; it was lest the wheat be rooted up with the tares. Human opinion and judgment would make grave mistakes. But rather than have a mistake made, and one single blade of wheat rooted up, the Master says, “Let both grow together until the harvest;” then the angels will gather out the tares, which will be appointed to destruction. Although in our churches, that claim to believe advanced truth, there are those who are faulty and erring, as tares among the wheat, God is long-suffering and patient. He reproves and warns the erring, but he does not destroy those who are long in learning the lesson he would teach them; he does not uproot the tares from the wheat. Tares and wheat are to grow together till the harvest; when the wheat comes to its full growth and development, and because of its character when ripened, it will be fully distinguished from the tares. The church of Christ on earth will be imperfect, but God does not destroy his church because of its imperfection. There have been and will be those who are filled with zeal not according to knowledge, who would purify the church, and uproot the tares from the midst of the wheat. But Christ has given special light as to how to deal with those who are erring, and with those who are unconverted in the church. There is to be no spasmodic, zealous, hasty action taken by church-members in cutting off those they may think defective in character. Tares will appear among the wheat; but it would do more harm to weed out the tares, unless in God’s appointed way, than to leave them alone. While the Lord brings into the church those who are truly converted, Satan at the same time brings persons who are not converted into its fellowship. While Christ is sowing the good seed, Satan is sowing the tares. There are two opposing influences continually exerted on the members of the church. One influence is working for the purification of the church, and the other for the corrupting of the people of God.” {Review and Herald, September 5, 1893 par. 1}

Notice the words of the prophetess, “The church of Christ on earth will be imperfect, but God does not destroy his church because of its imperfection.”

Sacred history reveals time and time again that though the people that were called by His name and that He claimed as His own departed from Him, that a period of probation was granted them to repent and reform. It is unharmonious to say that as soon as God’s professed people depart from Him, that He departs from them, and yet claim that this same God, who changes not, did not immediately depart from ancient Israel who adulterated against Him, the Jewish church who murdered their only Saviour, and the protestant churches who took with them some of Rome’s errors. After their departure from Him, God granted to each of these a period of probation, and when that probationary period was over, then God signally departed from them. But it is not for man to say when God’s longsuffering is over, unless He Himself plainly reveals it first.

Some would say that the Jewish nation’s probation was over when they persecuted the followers of Christ, and that any religious entity’s probation is over when they do the same, but this also doesn’t stand up to sacred history. The prophets were persecuted and even slain for many centuries in ancient Israel, but they still bore the title of God’s chosen people. Finally, God sent His own son to them (See Mark 12:1-8). Him they slew too, yet their probation was still not up. Their probation ended when God Himself, through prophecy, declared that it would, at the end of the 490 years.

The claim that Seventh-Day Adventists have been spued out of the mouth of God because they fit the description of Laodicea, appears to deny these truths.

Only in light of the previous statements of inspiration given in this comment, we would now like to present all the ones that follow.

“Again I say, The Lord hath not spoken by any messenger who calls the church that keeps the commandments of God, Babylon. True, there are tares with the wheat; but Christ said He would send His angels to first gather the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into the garner. I know that the Lord loves His church. It is not to be disorganized or broken up into independent atoms. There is not the least consistency in this; there is not the least evidence that such a thing will be. Those who shall heed this false message and try to leaven others will be deceived and prepared to receive advanced delusions, and they will come to naught.

“There is in some of the members of the church, pride, self-sufficiency, stubborn unbelief, and a refusing to yield their ideas, although evidence may be piled upon evidence which makes the message to the Laodicean church applicable. But that will not blot out the church that it will not exist. Let both tares and wheat grow together until the harvest. Then it is the angels that do the work of separation.

“I warn the Seventh-day Adventist Church to be careful how you receive every new notion and those who claim to have great light. The character of their work seems to be to accuse and to tear down.” {Manuscript Releases, Vol. 1, 363.2-363.1}

Regardless of how much evidence can be given that the message to Laodicea is applicable to the Seventh-Day Adventist church, this does not make it Babylon. Nor does it mean that it has been or will be spued out of God’s mouth, for those who will be spued out are the tares, not the wheat in the church. They both grow together in the church till the close of probationary time. At that point, it will be evidently made manifest who is and who is not spued out of God’s mouth.

Now is not the time for the separating of the wheat from the tares, but rather, the selecting of the wheat from the tares. Separation comes at the harvest, at the close of probationary time. Now, however, is the time in which the 3rd Angel “selects” the wheat from the tares. Now is the time when the wheat is being for the heavenly garner, and the tares for fires of the last days:

“I then saw the third angel. Said my accompanying angel, ‘Fearful is his work. Awful is his mission. He is the angel that is to select the wheat from the tares, and seal, or bind, the wheat for the heavenly garner. These things should engross the whole mind, the whole attention.’” {Early Writings, 118.1}

“The true people of God are now bound up for the heavenly garner. The true people of God are now pulling apart, and the tares are being bound in bundles ready to burn. {1888 Materials, 995.2}

The message to Laodicea is applicable to the tares, not the wheat in the church.

“God is leading out a people. He has a chosen people, a church, on the earth whom He has made the depositaries of His law. He has committed to them sacred trust and eternal truth to be given to the world. He would reprove, and correct them. The message to the Laodiceans is applicable to Seventh-day Adventists who have had great light, and have not walked in the light. It is those who have made great profession, but have not kept in step with their Leader, that will be spewed out of His mouth unless they repent. The message to pronounce the church Babylon and call the people of God out of her, does not come from any heavenly messenger, or any human agent inspired by the Spirit of God.” {Manuscript Releases, Vol. 1, 300.3}

This statement does not say that the message to Laodicea applies to the church as a whole, but to those in the church who are not walking in the light. Those in the church, who do not walk in the light that they have been given, are unarguably the tares in the church. And those in the church, who do walk in the light that they have been given, are unarguably the wheat in the church.

*** “Of those who boast of their light, and yet fail to walk in it, Christ says, “But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum [Seventh-day Adventists, who have had great light], which art exalted unto heaven [in point of privilege], shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.” At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent [in their own estimation], and hast revealed them unto babes.” {Review and Herald, August 1, 1893 par. 5; bracketed comments by Ellen White}

Again, this statement only refers to those who have had great light, but have failed to walk in it. They are the ones to which the rebuke applies. This is ever how it has been. God has sent messages of rebuke to His people through His prophets, but these messages of rebuke have never applied to those 7000 that did not bow knee to Bail, but only to those that did.
The Use of Private Letters

It appears that those who give the cry to denounce the Seventh-Day Adventist church as Babylon, use extracts from her private letters to aid them in doing so, and that, without her permission. This practice she has plainly condemned:

“It was a betrayal of sacred trust to take that which Jesus designed should be kept secret, and publish it to others, and bringing upon the cause of truth reproach and injury. The Lord has given to his people appropriate messages of warning, reproof, counsel, and instruction, but it is not appropriate to take these messages out of their connection, and place them where they will seem to give force to messages of error. In the pamphlet published by brother Stanton and his associates, he accuses the church of God of being Babylon, and would urge a separation from the church. This is a work that is neither honorable nor righteous. In compiling this work, they have used my name and writings for the support of that which I disapprove and denounce as error. The people to whom this pamphlet will come, will charge the responsibility of this false position upon me, when it is utterly contrary to the teaching of my writings, and the light which God has given me. I have no hesitancy in saying that those who are urging on this work are greatly deceived.” {Review and Herald, August 22, 1893 par. 7}

On the same note, Ellen White says:

“This class of evil-workers have selected portions of the testimonies, and have placed them in the frame-work of error, in order by this setting to give influence to their false testimonies. When it is made manifest that their message is error, then the testimonies brought into the companionship of error, share the same condemnation; and people of the world, who do not know that the testimonies quoted are extracts from private letters, used without my consent, present these matters as evidence that my work is not of God, or of truth, but falsehood. Those who thus bring the work of God into disrepute will have to answer before God for the work they are doing.” {Review and Herald, September 5, 1893 par. 9}

Example of a Private Letter used to Teach that the Seventh-Day Adventist church is Babylon:

“We must as a people arouse and cleanse the camp of Israel. Licentiousness, unlawful intimacy, and unholy practices are coming in among us in a large degree; and ministers who are handling sacred things are guilty of sin in this respect. They are coveting their neighbors’ wives, and the seventh commandment is broken. We are in danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon, of allowing our churches to become corrupted, and filled with every foul spirit, a cage for every unclean and hateful bird; and will we be clear unless we make decided movements to cure the existing evil?” {Manuscript Releases, Vol. 21, 380.1}
Conclusion

I will give neither summary nor conclusion of the above because I am aware of the tendency of people to scan over a message without giving it due consideration. They do their work of scanning to see if they agree with the message right off or not. If they don’t agree with the summary conclusion, or what they think is being taught, they generally appear to not even look at the evidence given. This is out of harmony with God’s plain instruction:

“When a message comes in the name of the Lord to His people, no one may excuse himself from an investigation of its claims. No one can afford to stand back in an attitude of indifference and self-confidence, and say: ‘I know what is truth. I am satisfied with my position. I have set my stakes, and I will not be moved away from my position, whatever may come. I will not listen to the message of this messenger; for I know that it can not be truth.’ It was from pursuing this very course that the popular churches were left in partial darkness, and that is why the messages of heaven have not reached them.” {Testimonies on Sabbath School Work, 65.1}

Anyways... these are my thoughts, what are yours?

All comments may also be directed on this linked page in the comments below the note: http://answersforadventists.wordpress.c ... s-babylon/

David Aguilar
Posts: 63
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 4:28 pm

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby David Aguilar » August 10th, 2013, 1:06 am

Hi James,

This is actually quite an interesting thread, and it deals with matters that are both timely and vital for our understanding. I think that, during the course of your reply, you actually give a VERY good answer to the question, “What is ‘the Church’” and “What is ‘a church?’” In the course of doing so, you also raise a few questions that appear to be of concern to you, as you have touched on them before with me in previous emails, and so I would like to address those as well.

You write:
The intention of this comment is to consider Babylon in relation to the Seventh-Day Adventist church. There have been many cries that have gone up over the years denouncing the Seventh-Day Adventist church as Babylon. Are they true? Could they be?

I think it is clear to both of us that most of the claims that “the SDA Church is ‘Babylon’” over the years have been false ones. I think it is equally clear to us both that the description, if not the very name, (which means “confusion”) fits it just as well as it would any nominal or worldly religious organization. The question is, as you rightly ask “Could they be?” “Could” these claims be correct, or could it be possible that one of them is true when the previous ones are false?

It has always been Satan’s method of operation, when he cannot win an argument, to change the question. For example, he knew, even from the Garden of Eden, that one day a Son would appear and crush his head. And what did he do? He knew that people would desire hope, and so, instead of trying to convince the majority of people that “No messiah is coming,” he did exactly the opposite. He filled the earth with so many saviors (starting with Nimrod, and then his son) that by the time of the true Christ the skeptics had a far more powerful weapon that straight-up unbelief. They had counterfeits and bad examples. They said, “We have heard all this before. Which Messiah do you want us to believe in now? Theudas, who led four hundred men? Judas of Galilee?” Even Gamaliel, in arguing against punishing the apostles, pointed out that there were many who claimed to be someone special.

Christ also said, “Then if any man shall say unto you, ‘Lo, here is Christ, or there,’ believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.” (Mat 24:23, 24)

This did not mean there was no Christ, and in fact, He said that He would return; therefore, rather than saying, “Do not believe anyone claiming to be Christ,” or “Never believe anyone claiming to be a prophet.” Instead, He said, “I will return, and when I do it will be with glory, so that there will be no question about it.”

Similarly, we have Biblical records of various organizational changes to the Body of Christ. In each case, as we’ve discussed by email, the once-faithful body adopts pagan errors, at which point it is described as being in the condition of “Babylon.” No Church, no organization, anywhere, ever, or at any time, is declared to be “immune” from the Babylonian condition. It is not possible to construe any of Ellen White’s statements as some kind of wholesale immunity to Babylon, and several of her statements actually indicate that it is a very real danger. Therefore it is certainly possible that it “could” be true that the title would apply to the SDA Church, or ANY Church that was once honored as the Bride of Christ, if the circumstances were proper. Not every claim would be true, just as most “Christs” would prove false, but this does not mean we fall asleep and wait for the ship to sail causally into port. We are told to “watch and pray” for a reason.

Now the question is, IF such a claim were true, why would it be true? It is not merely because the SDA Church has adopted bad policies, and become corrupted by worldly theology. Even if this made them “Babylon” by definition, by description, (that is, confused) that is still not sufficient cause to leave it for another organization. If, however, an angel were to say of it, “Babylon is FALLEN,” then we would know the next step – “Come out of her, my people.”

You see, what the false prophets have claimed with regard to the SDA Church, “She is Babylon, so come out of her,” reveals that they were not truly speaking for God. God does NOT call people out of spiritual Babylon, and He never has. It is when Babylon falls that He calls people out of an organization that is not only corrupt, but corrupted beyond remedy.

And further, Christ – just as He has told us how to recognize Himself – tells us how to recognize His bride. He tells us how to recognize the voice of His bride, even if she is calling from the wilderness, and saying, “That false woman has fallen. The Groom is coming for me.”

How do we know when Babylon falls? We are told clearly:
“It was apostasy that led the early church to seek the aid of the civil government, and this prepared the way for the development of the papacy--the beast. [...] So apostasy in the church will prepare the way for the image to the beast.” [Great Controversy p. 443-444] As we know, the image of the beast is created by a fallen Church, a direct result, not of merely being Babylon (confused) but of being broken without remedy.

More directly:
“Thus by choosing a heathen ruler, the Jewish nation had withdrawn from the theocracy. They had rejected God as their king. Henceforth they had no deliverer. They had no king but Caesar. To this the priests and teachers had led the people. For this, with the fearful results that followed, they were responsible. A nation's sin and a nation's ruin were due to the religious leaders.” [Desire of Ages, Page 737, Paragraph 6]

“When the early church departed from God and imbibed pagan errors, she became Babylon. When she united with the state, she fell, and, as an organization, was the body of Christ no longer.” [First Quarter Sabbath School, Lesson IX, February 29, 1896, p. 33]

“It has ever been true that a backslidden body, one that has turned from God's word to men, from God's power to the state, was never reformed in itself. Invariably God's message has called out those from the fallen church who would do His will and preach His gospel.” [First Quarter Sabbath School, Lesson X, March 7, 1896, pp. 35, 36]

“[The priests] cried out for the crucifixion of Christ and, as representatives of the Jewish nation, placed themselves under the Roman jurisdiction, which they despised, by saying, ‘We have no king but Caesar.’ When they said this, they unchurched themselves.” [Manuscript Releases Volume Twelve, page 388, paragraph 1]

We have already discussed, by email, the wording that Ellen White uses with regard to civil courts in religious matters, specifically stating that such an action “crucifies Christ afresh,” which shows without controversy that the Bible, Ellen White’s writings, and the teachings of the then-faithful SDA Church are in perfect accord on these matters. It is, therefore, a sure word of prophecy, and a stable foundation on which to build.

When the CSDA Church says of the mainstream SDA Church with the voice of the angel in Revelation 18, “Come out of her, my people,” we are not merely repeating the accusations and words of the would-be reformers of the past. This is a new thing. The SDA Church has fallen due to its marriage to the civil powers of the world. That is a very recent event; up until that time, they had been innocent of the act that creates “Babylon fallen.” At this present time, and not before, they have “placed themselves under [the second beast’s] jurisdiction, which they despised...” etc. This is a thing that was never done in the days of Ellen White, but a thing that was routinely and repeatedly explained as THE point at which a confused body becomes “Babylon FALLEN,” a key distinction, and then true reform takes place, a re-form of the organized body.

To deal with some of your specific concerns:
“God has a people in which all heaven is interested, and they are the one object on earth dear to the heart of God. Let every one who reads these words give them thorough consideration; for in the name of Jesus I would press them home upon every soul. When any one arises, either among us or outside of us, who is burdened with a message which declares that the people of God are numbered with Babylon, and claims that the loud cry is a call to come out of her, you may know that he is not bearing the message of truth.” {Review and Herald, August 29, 1893 par. 5}

Shortly before the putting forth of this statement, the cry had gone forth that the Seventh-Day Adventist church was Babylon and that God’s people were called to come out of her. However, the prophetess did not say, “Those that have arose…,” (past tense) nor did she say, “Those who are now arising,” (present tense) but instead she said, “When any one arises….” (future tense).

The statement “when one arises” is indeed future tense, however (as I have mentioned in our emails) it refers to an organization that only exists IN the past. In other words, if anyone were to arise today, or at any point in the future, and say “The Seventh-day Adventist Church of August 29, 1893, or any time thereafter for a hundred years, was Babylon” we would dispute them with as much fervor as the prophetess did. The statement would simply be untrue.

To illustrate, let us look at the Bible:
“For David said, ‘The Lord God of Israel hath given rest unto his people, that they may dwell in Jerusalem for ever.’” (1Ch 23:25)

“But Judah shall dwell for ever, and Jerusalem from generation to generation.” (Joel 3:20)

Any good SDA apologist will say, “But these things ARE true, fulfilled to spiritual Israel.” And of course, they would be right. But this leads to the question, “What is Israel?” precisely as our question of today reads, “What is the Church?” The point here should be obvious, and lest we relegate it merely to Old Testament prophecy, superseded by the New Covenant, let us not forget the arguably strongest statement of all to this effect:

“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.’” (Mat 16:18)

Any good Protestant will say, “Of course, that Church is the same as THIS church, but the organization has changed because the previous ones fell.”

Well, now we are getting somewhere. The gates of hell “shall not” (future tense) prevail against the Church established under Peter and the other apostles. We all agree with that; yet the Church against which the gates of hell would NEVER (we agree) prevail no longer existed (as an organization) following its union with.... the government of pagan Rome.

You see, James... the Bible, and history, are 100% consistent on this point. Promises, made in whatsoever tense (past, present, future) only cover the existing organization as long as it exists in its present faithful, spiritual form. This is the reason WHY we are told by inspiration that all these promises are conditional upon corporate obedience to the Word of God.

Thus:
Now let us read the whole sentence again:
“When any one arises, either among us or outside of us, who is burdened with a message which declares that the people of God are numbered with Babylon, and claims that the loud cry is a call to come out of her, you may know that he is not bearing the message of truth.” {Review and Herald, August 29, 1893 par. 5}

To this we say, “Amen!” Those who attempted to draw people out of the SDA Church when she was faithful were agents of the enemy of souls. The were the false prophets, and the false christs, of which the Savior warned. And how can we know, with the sure word of prophecy, that she is NOT today the same Church, and therefore not currently protected by this promise? What are the fruits of its union with the world? Such a thing just about answers itself, and the fact that there IS such a union at all places this distinctly in the “fact” category rather than the “assumption” or “interpretation.” There is no need to interpret such phrases as “unchurched themselves” through any kind of apologetic spin.

I might also point out the danger in thinking along the lines of, “If the SDA Church was to fall, surely Ellen White would have seen it.” I am not saying that you would espouse that statement as it is written there, but of course if we even begin to entertain such an idea, we give her far too much credit, and place her higher than Daniel or Jeremiah, who were not permitted to see the fall of the Jewish Nations, even though their own prophecies gave the indicators of its eventual fall. Prophets, just like everyone else, are not given more than they can bear.

In any event, we declare today that, “The CSDA Church IS the SDA Church that is NOW, in this generation, faithful to the commandments of God, and has the faith of Jesus.” I think, upon further examination, you will be able to say, “Amen” to that as well. This issue, with regard to the tense of Mrs. White’s statement, also appears to cover the second quoted passage as well; if I have missed anything vital from it, please let me know.

Now, here is where you answer the question posed by the title of this thread:
Who are the “people of God” to which she refers?

First, Ellen White makes it plain in this series of articles that at that time, Seventh-Day Adventists were the only people who were fulfilling the description given of the remnant people, who keep the commandments of God, and have the faith of Jesus:

This is quite correct. The question that you, and everyone aware of these issues must ask is, “Is the mainstream SDA Church fulfilling the description given of the remnant people?” “Do they keep the commandments of God?” “Do they have the faith of Jesus?”

If we are really honest here, the results of such an examination would be 0/3.

The remnant people are a small, humble people, “unknown to the Catholics,” from one inspired description, who are faithful to the principles of religious liberty, because they are Protestants. Thus, the Gen. Conference’s version of Seventh-day Adventist does not fit the description of the remnant people.

The mainstream SDA Church does NOT keep the commandments of God. As the then-faithful SDA Church openly taught, “"Now I want to state a little further upon the principle that no Christian, being a citizen of the kingdom of God, can of right start any procedure in connection with civil government. After it is started by the government itself, that is another question . . . I repeat therefore, that upon the principles which govern kingdoms and governments, the very principle of the law in heaven,or law in earth, a Christian cannot start any procedure in connection with civil government. And of all Christians, Seventh-day Adventists cannot do it. The very keeping of the Sabbath forbids it." [1895 General Conference Bulletin, page 28. - by AT Jones]

Those corporately involved in a civil lawsuit over religious matters are not, in the truly important sense, Sabbath-keepers. A National Sunday Law, should it be passed tomorrow, would no more reveal the wheat from the tares in the SDA Church than would a law requiring everyone to avoid eating pork.

In another sense, by failing to teach the Victory over Sin doctrine, the righteousness by faith aspect of the Gospel that we both seem to promote, they also violate this second identifying feature, for as inspiration reveals: “All who claim to be Sabbath-keeping Adventists, and yet continue in sin, are liars in God’s sight.” [MS 19, p. 177]

According to Biblical principles, and supported by the Spirit of Prophecy, no Church can really be a commandment-keeping people, unless they are a Sabbath-keeping Body actively engaged in teaching (and living) the Victory over Sin through Christ (for that is the “Faith of Jesus,” the third criterion).

With regard to that third criterion more specifically, the Faith of Jesus as it relates to Righteousness by Faith, “When the doctrine we accept kills sin in the heart, purifies the soul from defilement, bears fruit unto holiness, we may know that it is the truth of God.” [Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, Ch.6 ]

By our examination, that leaves us with a candidate of exactly one, and the mainstream SDA organization is not it.


“Has God no living church? He has a church, but it is the church militant, not the church triumphant. We are sorry that there are defective members, that there are tares amid the wheat. Jesus said, ‘The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way. . . . So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them; but gather the wheat into my barn.’” {Review and Herald, August 29, 1893 par. 9}

“The tares and the wheat are to grow together until the harvest; and the harvest is the end of probationary time.” {Christ’s Object Lessons, 71.3}

We declare that at this point in the Investigative Judgment, this IS the harvest, and the end of probationary time. The problem is, unless people can accurately answer the question of “Where/What IS the Church?” they will not even know that they aren’t standing on the ground that is being shaken! They were long shaken out when their organization fell, and if they remain unwarned they will not so much as feel a tremor before it is too late, and the books are forever sealed.


There is a claim made by many that because the Seventh-Day Adventist Church fits the description of Laodicea, that they have been spued out of the mouth of God. Let us investigate this claim.

This is not a claim made by the CSDA church. The issue of “Laodicea” does not even enter into the matter, because that is a condition that pre-dates Babylon. God does not spue people out of Laodicea. He spues out a people who, while they WERE Laodicea, received a warning that went unheeded. If, during their time at Laodicea, God had sent them a message saying (for example) “We are in danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon if the camp is not cleansed,” He does not, at that point, visit any judgment upon them.

If, many decades later, they have made the situation even worse, becoming open in their defiance of Heaven, that is another matter entirely. Yahweh’s warnings are not to be taken lightly, and ONLY those who make light of them can ignore the penalties that were prophesied should the conditions become, well, exactly what they are now. God is faithful, and His messengers speak the truth, whether blessings or curses.

Notice the words of the prophetess, “The church of Christ on earth will be imperfect, but God does not destroy his church because of its imperfection.”

We agree. Any who have read our articles carefully (without merely skimming them for agreement or disagreement) will take note that we have been very clear in our reasons for identifying the SDA Church as being in a condition of “Babylon fallen,” a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. It is not because it is “imperfect,” but because it has followed the well-defined and specific steps that the Word of God itself identifies as the path to utter destruction for a religious organization.

After their departure from Him, God granted to each of these a period of probation, and when that probationary period was over, then God signally departed from them. But it is not for man to say when God’s longsuffering is over, unless He Himself plainly reveals it first.

This is correct. Our analysis of the development of the Trademark case against Kinship International, and the lawsuits that follow, outline this period of probation, and God's many warnings through the inspired writings, long before the events they described came to pass. A word of caution, however: it is a mistake to believe that every member will be aware that this probationary period has ended – or even that it had ever begun. One cannot say, “I never heard about any of this, so the SDA Church cannot have fallen yet.” The crucifixion of Christ, and the stoning of Stephen, was not revealed to most Jews until LONG after the Christian Church had replaced the Israelite Nation as the People of Yahweh. Nevertheless, they were responsible for it, and needed to, as the Book of Acts describes, repent and be converted to the truth.

This leads to:
Some would say that the Jewish nation’s probation was over when they persecuted the followers of Christ, and that any religious entity’s probation is over when they do the same, but this also doesn’t stand up to sacred history. The prophets were persecuted and even slain for many centuries in ancient Israel, but they still bore the title of God’s chosen people. Finally, God sent His own son to them (See Mark 12:1-8). Him they slew too, yet their probation was still not up. Their probation ended when God Himself, through prophecy, declared that it would, at the end of the 490 years.

This is generally correct with regard to the events listed, but the examples are not particularly relevant to the current situation. First, God does not always announce the fall of an organization with a specific day-year prophecy (for example, none was given for the Roman Catholic Church or the Sunday-keeping Protestants up until the time of William Miller, and the Cleansing of the Sanctuary did not clearly indicate a change of organization). Second, with regard to Israel, the prophets were persecuted and slain by their own people, who despised the message from God. Christ was slain in a manner that differed from the martyrs in two major ways:

1) He was the Son of God Himself, and not a mere messenger.

2) He was not killed by the Jews alone, but specifically by a “beast,” by a union of Church and State.

The persecution of Christians, as it is currently being undertaken by the mainstream SDA Church, is like this. Ellen White specifically says that the use of lawsuits to settle religious disputes was the crucifixion of Christ afresh, the killing of His own Son in an open, shameful way. Clearly, the means by which this was accomplished was through an “image” to that beast – a new ecclesiastical organization using civil power to accomplish its ends.

Thus, this modern crucifixion very much mirrors the fall of the Jewish Nation, and not the persecution or even murder of any individual prophet from the time of Israel’s disobedience. This is a far more serious matter, especially since we are in a period of history during which “time shall be no more.” We do not have any day/age/year statements to say, “The SDA Church will be given 120 years to repent.” The last movements, as it is written, have been rapid ones, and Christ is coming for His Bride.

Regardless of how much evidence can be given that the message to Laodicea is applicable to the Seventh-Day Adventist church, this does not make it Babylon. Nor does it mean that it has been or will be spued out of God’s mouth, for those who will be spued out are the tares, not the wheat in the church. They both grow together in the church till the close of probationary time. At that point, it will be evidently made manifest who is and who is not spued out of God’s mouth.

All quite true. All completely unrelated to the current state of the SDA Church. Laodicea is NOT Babylon, nor is it Babylon Fallen. Those are three very different states, and we have seen a number of SDA defenders setting up “straw man” arguments against our warnings due to ignoring or minimizing the distinction. We know the things of which we speak, and they are clearly set forth in what we have written with regard to this matter.

All the statements that follow, with regard to Laodicea, depend upon these states being the same, therefore I will leave them unless you have some particular quotation that you believe is not covered by what I have said.

“It was a betrayal of sacred trust to take that which Jesus designed should be kept secret, and publish it to others, and bringing upon the cause of truth reproach and injury. The Lord has given to his people appropriate messages of warning, reproof, counsel, and instruction, but it is not appropriate to take these messages out of their connection, and place them where they will seem to give force to messages of error.

No doubt, that referred to particular individuals of her time. Rest assured, we do not have any special access to Ellen White’s private writings. All that we have set forth are based on the Bible, and a few public statements by Ellen White, well published in her books, and other teachings of faithful SDA Bible workers. The “Manuscript Releases,” given as an example below, hardly constitutes a private letter that was never meant to be used for anything but a personal communication.

Of course, those who wish to say, “The SDA Church is not, and can never be, Babylon,” are going to pile up ANYTHING that can find that even remotely seems to support their position, regardless of context or relevance...

We prefer to avoid such kinds of disputes... if a reader objectively looks at what the Bible says with regard to what Babylon IS, and compares it to the current situation, they will have no difficulty making the identification. If they can see, and accept, what the Bible and Spirit of prophecy state is the way to become Babylon fallen (imbibe pagan errors, then unite with the civil government, then persecute Christians in a manner that can only be made possible BY that church/state union) then there can really be no question that we have accurately used the Scriptures to conclude what we have concluded.

In your last quote you say:
“When a message comes in the name of the Lord to His people, no one may excuse himself from an investigation of its claims. No one can afford to stand back in an attitude of indifference and self-confidence, and say: ‘I know what is truth. I am satisfied with my position. I have set my stakes, and I will not be moved away from my position, whatever may come. I will not listen to the message of this messenger; for I know that it can not be truth.’ It was from pursuing this very course that the popular churches were left in partial darkness, and that is why the messages of heaven have not reached them.” {Testimonies on Sabbath School Work, 65.1}

My thoughts, and my conclusion, are that if this statement were taken to heart, there would be a LOT more CSDAs in the world today.

Now, of course, most SDAs have been raised to think that even the consideration of the SDA Church as a fallen body is tantamount to blasphemy against God Himself. I understand that mindset perfectly, because it was my own. In fact, I had just decided to “come home” to the SDA Church after a period of lapsed attendance when I found out about the trademark lawsuits, and the doctrine of righteousness by faith. I could not deny that these things were facts – the documentation was clear – and I also understood what it meant on a spiritual and personal level.

God’s Church keeps His commandments, teaches the truth, and is NOT a persecuting power. The mainstream SDA Church, by definition, could NOT be that Church as surely as 1 = 1. It was a tremendous shock to me, and I felt betrayed that such things could happen to “my Church” without my knowledge, and here I was trying to be a good Christian...

But the good news is that by accepting the Gospel as it is, “self” is truly dead, and I could separate myself from the emotionality of it. Without a need to defend one side or another, or to choose a bias to hold, I was able to objectively examine what it is that God wanted me (and all of His people) to do.

I was baptized into His CSDA Church shortly thereafter, and He has kept me faithfully these several years. To those who have difficulty being convinced of all these things, I have said to them (as I have said to you), “Come and see!”

I make here a request for fellowship. It is good to have these discussions on the forum, and I hope that they continue, but if you only see the doctrines, and the on-paper theology, you will not get a true picture of the “Family of Yahweh,” which is more than just a sum of beliefs and practices. If you are truly examining the CSDA Church to see if we are the Remnant, then I make an appeal to you to do a thorough examination, and this includes the issue of fellowship.

As you know, we have our Bible studies online on Friday nights, and I know you made something of an attempt three weeks ago, but I haven’t really heard of anything further since. Nevertheless, I hold out hope that, if you wish to be a brother in Christ, we will have some “fraternity,” some true brotherhood.

To conclude with a return to the original question, “What is the Church?” I think you have actually answered the question sufficiently well from the Spirit of Prophecy (the description, the commandments, the faith of Jesus). I would only add that the Church of God is the Bride of Christ, the one woman in all the world who is a "virgin," such as a High Priest must marry (Lev 21:10-15) not known to other men (Pagan Rome, the U.S. Civil Government, International politics, etc., etc.).

While that once did, indeed, describe the mainstream SDA Church, today “she saith in her heart, ‘I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.’” (Rev 18:7)

User avatar
Pastor Chick
Posts: 80
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 3:03 pm
Location: Kisoro - Uganda
Contact:

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby Pastor Chick » August 10th, 2013, 7:50 am

I thought of two passages from the SOP that apply to the discussion regarding the state of the SDA Church presently:

There will be more and still more external parade by worldly powers. Under different symbols, God presented to John the wicked character and seductive influence of those who have been distinguished for their persecution of His people. The eighteenth chapter of Revelation speaks of mystic Babylon, fallen from her high estate to become a persecuting power. Those who keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus are the object of the wrath of this power [Revelation 18:1-8 quoted] (Manuscript 135, 1902).

Although the law of God will be almost universally made void in the world, there will be a remnant of the righteous that will be obedient to God’s requirements. The wrath of the dragon will be directed against the loyal servants of Heaven. Says the prophet, “The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” We can see from this scripture that it is not the true church of God that makes war with those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. It is the people who make void the law, who place themselves on the side of the dragon, and persecute those who vindicate God’s precepts. (ST, April 22, 1889)

Oh, and with regard to the phrase "high estate" (used by EGW in the above quote), in her writings, it is only applied to Christ Himself, Adam (and Eve) before their fall, the holy angels prior to their fall, political leaders holding top positions of authority (" kings, princes, and emperors,"), and the pure woman (the church in its holy state being "children of the Highest"). Notice that, for the heavenly angels, "their high estate" is associated with "their innocence" and "their happy home."
When Satan became disaffected in heaven, he did not lay his complaint before God and Christ; but he went among the angels who thought him perfect and represented that God had done him injustice in preferring Christ to himself. The result of this misrepresentation was that through their sympathy with him one third of the angels lost their innocence, their high estate, and their happy home. (5T, p. 291)

If any other writings come to mind that deal with this state of of the modern-day SDA Church, I'll post them.

User avatar
Lucan
Posts: 104
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby Lucan » August 10th, 2013, 6:18 pm

Here are some that come to mind:

First Quarter Sabbath School, Lesson VI, February 8, 1896 wrote:". . 3. Why did Babylon fall? Ans. Because of rejecting Christ and committing fornication with the kings of the earth.

. . 14. What was the next inevitable step for Babylon to take? Ans. The church turned from the Lord and sought power of the state. She left her lawful spouse and committed fornication with the kings of the earth. Compare 2 Cor. 11:2 with Rev. 14:8; 17:2. This was the last step in her separation from Christ. Out of this came persecution of those who did not subscribe to her creed."


A.T. Jones, Lessons from the Reformation, Ch. 5 wrote:"The men whose preaching made The Reformation could have said all that they ever said, and more, in denunciation of the iniquity in the church, and the enormities of the Popes; and yet could have remained in good standing in that church, all their days: if they had still held that church to be the only and true church, and have held themselves in conformity with her accordingly. . .
Even when they were compelled to admit that the church was inextricably involved in it all, and when they were thus required to reflect even upon the church, this was always done with the reservation and apology that in spite of all this she was the true and only church.

They denounced the men and the activities of the men, even of the Popes and the papal court, but still apologized and pleaded for the machine. They condemned the evil practices, but justified the system by which alone it was possible that those practices could not only be perpetuated, but could even exist. . .

The church was "the ark of God," the "ship of Salvation." The pilot, the captain, and the crew, might all be pirates, and use every motion of the ship only for piratical purposes, and load her to the sinking point with piratical plunder, and keep her ever headed straight toward perdition, yet "the grand old ship" herself was all right and would come safely to the heavenly port. Therefore, "cling to the ark," "stand by the old ship," and you will be safe and will land at last on the heavenly shore.

. . .And in the General Council of Basle, 1432, the Pope's legate exhorted the Bohemians that – "In the time of Noah's flood, as many as were without the ark perished." So long as this delusion was systematically inculcated, blindly received, and fondly hugged, of course reformation was impossible."


There's a helpful compilation under the drop-down boxes available on this page as well.
- Lucan Chartier

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby JamesPrest » August 13th, 2013, 4:25 pm

Brother David,

That was very well said. I need to study it out more. As for fellowship, its difficult. My internet access is being limited to when someone else decides to plug the router in. Such setting is not conducive for me to plan to get on at anytime. A few things for future reference.

#1: While I do appreciate their thoughts and Scriptural logic, the pioneers writings mean nothing to me in determining truth from error. They have great points, but their writings do not constitute an "It is written" to me (I'm not meaning to say that they are to you or anything.)

#2: I don't believe that you did or that you try to, but many have sterio-typed me as this or that type of Adventist or Christian. Clarifications that you are not doing this are helpful to me.

#3: Just so you know. I am not the type of person to skim and find what I disagree with and then comment. I try to understand what you are saying and where you are coming from.

Now a question. Let say that after studying out the matter more, that I still don't believe that the SDA church is Babylon, and for some reason ended up disagreeing with all of the CSDA's doctrines and teachings, BUT, I still lived a victorious Christian life, could I become a member of the CSDA?

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby JamesPrest » August 13th, 2013, 4:30 pm

Brother David, one more thing.

You didn't address the below part of my article. I would appreciate your thoughts on it.

"2nd Statement of Prophecy:

“Those who assert that the Seventh-day Adventist churches constitute Babylon, or any part of Babylon, might better stay at home. Let them stop and consider what is the message to be proclaimed at this time. In place of working with divine agencies to prepare a people to stand in the day of the Lord, they have taken their stand with him who is an accuser of the brethren, who accuses them before God day and night. Satanic agencies have been moved from beneath, and they have inspired men to unite in a confederacy of evil, that they may perplex, harass, and cause the people of God great distress. The whole world is to be stirred with enmity against Seventh-day Adventists, because they will not yield homage to the papacy, by honoring Sunday, the institution of this anti-Christian power. It is the purpose of Satan to cause them to be blotted from the earth, in order that his supremacy of the world may not be disputed.” {Review and Herald, August 22, 1893 par. 8}

"Notice, the prophetess did not say, “The whole world was stirred with enmity…,” (past tense) nor did she say, “The whole world is being stirred with enmity…,” (present tense) but instead she said, “The whole world is to be stirred with enmity….” (future tense) And why? Let is read again:

“The whole world is to be stirred with enmity against Seventh-day Adventists, because they will not yield homage to the papacy, by honoring Sunday, the institution of this anti-Christian power. It is the purpose of Satan to cause them to be blotted from the earth, in order that his supremacy of the world may not be disputed.” {Review and Herald, August 22, 1893 par. 8}

"This statement points out that in the future, hatred for Seventh-Day Adventists will be stirred because they will not honor Sunday. The only people we are aware of that went by the name of Seventh-Day Adventists at the time of the putting forth of this statement, were the Seventh-Day Adventists, thus there is no reason to believe that she was referring to any other Seventh-Day Adventists then the only ones which were. And this same body of Seventh-Day Adventists which was then, will be hated for not honoring Sunday.

"We do not wish to claim from this statement that the Seventh-Day Adventist church will be faithful all the way through to the end, nor that she can never fall, but only that the Seventh-Day Adventist’s to which she referred in the statement, was the Seventh-Day Adventist’s to which she referred. To claim that she referred to the Seventh-Day Adventist Reform Movement, or any other church since that has borne the title of Seventh-Day Adventist, simply cannot be gathered from anywhere in the statement itself, nor from anywhere in the surrounding context of articles. In this series of articles, her continued mention of the people of God, the remnant, God’s faithful people…etc, was always referring to Seventh-Day Adventists."

Thanks in advance!

User avatar
Lucan
Posts: 104
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 12:51 pm
Contact:

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby Lucan » August 15th, 2013, 12:58 am

Hi James,

While your posts were addressed to David, and he certainly may have more input to give, I wanted to address a few things as well.

Regarding becoming a CSDA while disagreeing with every doctrine thereof, I really cannot conceive of why you would want to. If you believe the Seventh-day Adventist church has not fallen, and you believe that we are in error on every doctrinal point, why would you join us? You would be leaving what you believe to be the true church to join with what you believe to be a group in gross doctrinal error. It would be absurd.

Regarding Mrs. White's quotes in your second post, I think that David did a fairly good job of answering it. While he did not quote that portion, the answer he gave to the portions he did quote covers it rather succinctly. I would suggest beginning with the line "No Church, no organization, anywhere, ever, or at any time, is declared to be “immune” from the Babylonian condition."

A few quotes come to mind regarding whether or not the Seventh-day Adventist church is magically immune to the Babylonian condition because 1) in Mrs. White's time they were not in that condition, and 2) she wrote prophecies that required them to remain clear of that condition.

"In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the sentence: “Found wanting.” By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged." [8T 247]

"I was confirmed in all I had stated in Minneapolis, that a reformation must go through the churches. Reforms must be made, for spiritual weakness and blindness were upon the people who had been blessed with great light and precious opportunities and privileges. As reformers they had come out of the denominational churches, but they now act a part similar to that which the churches acted. We hoped that there would not be the necessity for another coming out. While we will endeavor to keep the “unity of the Spirit” in the bonds of peace, we will not with pen or voice cease to protest against bigotry." [16MR 216, also 11MR 229]

"Of those who boast of their light, and yet fail to walk in it, Christ says, 'But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum [Seventh-day Adventists, who have had great light], which art exalted unto heaven [in point of privilege], shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.'" [RH Aug. 1, 1893]

"We are in danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon, of allowing our churches to become corrupted, and filled with every foul spirit, a cage for every unclean and hateful bird; and will we be clear unless we make decided movements to cure the existing evil?" [21MR 380]

The warnings of Mrs. White are no more empty than her encouragements; she did not idly state the danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon, proceeding to use the description of Babylon in Revelation 18.

Regarding a Sunday law:

"It should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional." [1SM 67]

"Confused, humiliated, and unable to understand God's purpose in sparing Nineveh, Jonah nevertheless had fulfilled the commission given him to warn that great city; and though the event predicted did not come to pass, yet the message of warning was nonetheless from God." [PK 272]

The world is to be stirred against Seventh-day Adventists in precisely the same way that Israel is to be exalted above all nations, unable to pass away from before God lest the stars can be counted. Had they remained faithful, these events would have come to pass. As they have not, the same laws as have applied through all of spiritual history come into play; the promises pass to the spiritual successors. There is no difference here; the same (and greater) promises can be quoted from the Old Testament to Israel as you have quoted from Mrs. White to the Seventh-day Adventist church.
- Lucan Chartier

User avatar
Pastor Chick
Posts: 80
Joined: May 28th, 2012, 3:03 pm
Location: Kisoro - Uganda
Contact:

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby Pastor Chick » August 15th, 2013, 7:32 am

I would add a link here that treats the subject: "The Seventh-day Adventist Church is NOT Babylon in 1893 -- Why?"

http://csda-adventistchurch.to/sda_1893.html
There should not be any explanation necessary here outside of what is on the site.

JamesPrest
Posts: 31
Joined: July 27th, 2013, 6:48 am

Re: What is "the Church"? What is "a church"?

Postby JamesPrest » August 18th, 2013, 9:46 am

Why would I want to join the church if I disagree with the church doctrines? Good question. I am interested in a church whose ONLY creed is the Bible. I can agree only to that specific creed that starts with "In the beginning" and ends with "Amen." I am not interested in being part of a church that requires its members to accept finite mortal interpretations of the word of God on pain of discipline and/or disfellowshipment. Here is a bit of Scriptural reason from James White that explains my position well. I do not quote him as authority.

“On the subject of creeds, I agree with Brother Loughborough. I never weighed the points which he has presented, as I have since I began to examine the subject myself. In Ephesians 4:11-13, we read, ‘And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets,’ et cetera. Here we have the gifts of the church presented.
“Now I take the ground that creeds stand in a direct opposition to the gifts. Let us suppose a case: We get up a creed, stating just what we shall believe on this point and the other, and just what we shall do in reference to this thing and that, and say that we will believe the gifts, too.
“But suppose the Lord, through the gifts, should give us some new light that did not harmonize with our creed; then, if we remain true to the gifts, it knocks our creed all over at once. Making a creed is setting the stakes, and barring up the way to all future advancement. God put the gifts into the church for a good and great object; but men who have got up their churches, have shut up the way or have marked out a course for the Almighty. They say virtually that the Lord must not do anything further than what has been marked out in the creed.
“A creed and the gifts thus stand in direct opposition to each other. Now what is our position as a people? The Bible is our creed. We reject everything in the form of a human creed. We take the Bible and the gifts of the Spirit; embracing the faith that thus the Lord will teach us from time to time. And in this we take a position against the formation of a creed. We are not taking one step, in what we are doing, toward becoming Babylon.” {The Early Years, Volume I, 453.6-454.3}

You can find out more as to why I am against any creed saving for the Bible by clicking the following link. The link takes you to a book I wrote and sent to thousands of SDA email addresses, including many many conferences and whatnot. Its a book of public rebuke to the SDA church for their creed, for patterning after Rome. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6u49j1 ... edit?pli=1


Return to “Doctrine and Theology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests