Brethren in Christ or not

from a biblical perspective, would a person who is an apostolic or a oneness pentecostal
or a 7th day adventist be a brother in Christ? or is it like any church, and there are those
in these denominations who are christian and those who are not. grace and peace

zacchaeus wrote:

from a biblical perspective, would a person who is an apostolic or a oneness pentecostal
or a 7th day adventist be a brother in Christ? or is it like any church, and there are those
in these denominations who are christian and those who are not. grace and peace

Wow. That's a seemingly easy question on the onset, but it's loaded.

If a person seriously holds to the apostolic view of a non-trinitarian God, I would consider them to not be of the faith. However, not all Apostolic denominations are non-trinitarian. Oneness Pentecostals deny the Trinity explicitly. The Scripture speaks of the importance of a right Christology in 2 John. If you don't have the Son right, you don't have the Father.

7th Day Adventists are harder to pick out. I believe SDA is a cult. Peep the thread about Ellen White's teachings.

http://byhisgrace.heavenforum.org/cults-false-religions-f13/a-careful-examination-of-ellen-g-white-s-teachings-t104.htm

If you remember, I tried to have a debate with a SDA member on another forum.

I will say this, however. Just because someone is in a SDA, Apostolic, or Oneness Pentecostal church, it doesn't necessarily put them outside of the faith. I believe there are true believers within these congregations, but as a general rule, I'd say the majority are outside of the faith.

yeah man, i feel pretty much the same way...I mean, there are even people who attend reformed churches who aren't of the flock...If there is no true revelation of the True Christ, then "depart..worker of iniquity (HE) never knew you"...a lot of people have adopted Chritianity as a moral point of reference...or a self esteem booster...or an afterlife insurance plan...but how many people have a true revelation of the True and living GOD?

If your fruit indicates otherwise, I wouldn't be so quick to call you brother...nah mean?

zacchaeus wrote:

from a biblical perspective, would a person who is an apostolic or a oneness pentecostal
or a 7th day adventist be a brother in Christ? or is it like any church, and there are those
in these denominations who are christian and those who are not. grace and peace

Heh.

Oneness/Apostolic churches, I'll say this:

- If they are truly in the faith, they will accept the doctrine of the Trinity eventually (before they die). It's a spiritual truth and the Spirit of God dwells in believers to help them understand spiritual truth (1 Cor. 2:14).

- conscious, consistent rejection of truth is grounds for doubting whether or not someone is in the faith.

SDA's are a bit harder to nail down. There are some SDA churches that look just like regular churches, minus the occasional citation of Ellen G. White as 'the inspired prophet'. My girl attends one right now.... for all intents and purposes, it looks like a black baptist church....in every aspect. But the SDA's are Trinitarian and at least on the surface, believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

Unfortunately, their main organization can often be very slippery in terms of what they officially believe. They leave it to 'other people' in the organization to lay out what they believe regarding the scapegoat theory, investigative judgment and other doctrines - and the official organization doesn't make a huge fuss over the Sabbath. However, they DO link to a site that has bible study lessons that eventually leads you to being taught that those who worship on Sunday will one day be considered as bearing the mark of the beast.

I believe there are plenty of genuine believers in the SDA - moreso than any other 'Christian' cult of similar composition. But if they're consistent, you can't be saved and believe all that the SDA teaches.

Problem with most of the SDA members I've spoken with is that they believe the keeping of the Sabbath is the test of true believers and will stand as a sign in the end times. That's adding works to salvation, thereby removing them from the faith.

If you want to hear some testimonials from real former SDA members, hit up www.formeradventist.org

Expositor wrote:

Problem with most of the SDA members I've spoken with is that they believe the keeping of the Sabbath is the test of true believers and will stand as a sign in the end times. That's adding works to salvation, thereby removing them from the faith.

If you want to hear some testimonials from real former SDA members, hit up www.formeradventist.org

Oh, I know.

Thing is, even in those circles, you run into people who are inconsistent on that point when pushed.

Don't get me wrong at all - I don't believe the SDA is a healthy church at ALL - at least not for the type of growth the Christian is required to have. And I do believe that some of the SDA's doctrines necessarily place those who hold them outside of the faith.

I have to broach this topic carefully with my girl. She's going to an SDA church now, she's not really 'theological', but knows enough to not be led completely astray. Her main issue is that she just wants to do what God says - so she's still trying to study out the Sabbath thing (mind you, she's been a member at this church for 3 years and attending for 5.....and a few of her closest friends in this area go there).

I'm about a month and a half out from writing a paper on the Sabbath. Stay tuned for it.

But, is it merely an unhealthy church, or is it a cult?

Expositor wrote:

But, is it merely an unhealthy church, or is it a cult?

Church by church. Waaaay too many variations between churches and their emphaseseseses.

Strictly theological - they're cultish. Cultic. They have cult-like tendencies and exhibit many of the signs of a cult (i.e. 'one true church' syndrome). But they have enough orthodoxy (some of their churches do) and even the national office (on paper) that you can't necessarily call them a cult (since they haven't fully departed from the faith).

G.R.A.C.E. Preecha wrote:

Expositor wrote:

But, is it merely an unhealthy church, or is it a cult?

Church by church. Waaaay too many variations between churches and their emphaseseseses.

Strictly theological - they're cultish. Cultic. They have cult-like tendencies and exhibit many of the signs of a cult (i.e. 'one true church' syndrome). But they have enough orthodoxy (some of their churches do) and even the national office (on paper) that you can't necessarily call them a cult (since they haven't fully departed from the faith).

I don't know. I'd beg to differ. Elevating Ellen White's teachings/visions/revelations to the same level of Scripture sends off a red alert in my mind. No matter how carefully they package their statement that the Bible is the authority for their church, the national statement says that they view the writings of White to be:

18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)

That statement sounds as if it's saying that the Bible is the only source of authority AT FIRST, but when you understand that they're saying that her writings are authoritative AND continuing, it takes on a different meaning. And a careful examination of her teachings would find many damnable teachings (like the scapegoat for example) that they say make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. If they really tested her teaching by the Bible, they would be able to conclude that she was a false prophet.

While I believe there are true believers who have yet to see the error in the SDA, I believe the SDA church is a cult. We can disagree here. I've studied this pretty extensively and my opinion is that it is a cult. Reading through her actual writings, which the national church calls authoritative, was discomforting because I wanted to believe that all was well.

No Sola Scriptura. Also no justification by faith alone (keeping Sabbath to be saved).

Yeah, in some cases, it's a toughy. I mean, as I knock Giano's LP, I'm like "dude seems to have some proper ducks in a row." But I hear some of his statements on the Sabbath that mirror what is known about them and their feelings (mark of the beast, etc).....what do you guys make of his CD. .......I'm torn a bit.
As far as Oneness, my initial Christian experience was with the United Pentecostal Church International. Straight up legalistic cult. I belonged to one for a few years before God's grace intervened. The fact that they (the UPC anyway) don't consider us brethren (Trinitarians) but heretics speaks volumes to me...................2cents just to reintroduce myself to the board.
Grace and Peace...........

TrueConvert wrote:

Yeah, in some cases, it's a toughy. I mean, as I knock Giano's LP, I'm like "dude seems to have some proper ducks in a row." But I hear some of his statements on the Sabbath that mirror what is known about them and their feelings (mark of the beast, etc).....what do you guys make of his CD. .......I'm torn a bit.
As far as Oneness, my initial Christian experience was with the United Pentecostal Church International. Straight up legalistic cult. I belonged to one for a few years before God's grace intervened. The fact that they (the UPC anyway) don't consider us brethren (Trinitarians) but heretics speaks volumes to me...................2cents just to reintroduce myself to the board.
Grace and Peace...........

I had an email conversation with Giano a while back. I wanted to ask him some specific questions about SDA teachings. He was very willing to discuss them. However, I walked away still confused with their position on Ellen White's teachings/writings/visions.

On one hand, they say that the Bible is the only source of authority. But, then they say that her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth. That's contradictory. As much as they say they don't elevate her teachings on the level of Scripture, statements like that on their official doctrinal statement say otherwise.

1. Holy Scriptures:
The Holy Scriptures, Old and New Testaments, are the written Word of God, given by divine inspiration through holy men of God who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. In this Word, God has committed to man the knowledge necessary for salvation. The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God's acts in history. (2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Ps. 119:105; Prov. 30:5, 6; Isa. 8:20; John 17:17; 1 Thess. 2:13; Heb. 4:12.)

So far, so good.

18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)

This says that her teachings make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. While I agree that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested, I don't believe the Bible needs any sort of validation outside of itself. Also, if this is the case, when looking at Mrs. White's teachings, they should accurately depict what the Bible says since her teachings are which makes clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.

Jewel wrote:

I may not know as much as you guys, but I'll say this. In order for a person to be saved, they must realize that they are wretched sinners, in need of a savior. They must also believe that God sent His son, in the person of Jesus, to die for our sins, and that there was nothing we did to ever deserve that love and sacrifice. When He died, He paid for the penalty for our sins and what we must do is put our complete faith and trust in Him and the work He did on the cross. If the person did that, they are saved and, thus, a part of the body of Christ. As they continue to grow in Christ, they will find out TRULY who He is and govern themselves accordingly (as far as where they worship). That's just my opinion.

That's true, but what Jesus are they believing in? Some groups believe Jesus is a created being. Some believe He was a mere mortal man who was sent by God to be a prophet. Some believe He is actually the archangel Michael in bodily form. A proper Christology (the person and work of Christ) is important.

2 John 9:

Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. ESV

That teaching of Christ includes the person and work of Christ. Those who are truly saved will understand Christ properly. They will understand that He is co-equal and co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Perhaps they will not understand how the Trinity works fully (I think the concept of three Persons of One essence is vastly superior to our finite minds), but they will not reject what is clearly shown throughout Scripture.

Paul told Timothy to watch his life and doctrine closely. Life and doctrine go hand in hand. What we believe about God and His Word makes a huge difference. Many a false convert can quote Scripture and even preach a sermon that is Biblically on point.

It's not merely believing in four essential truths of the gospel. It's much more than that. Think about the parable of the sower. Of four people who heard the gospel, only one of them was truly saved. The one who continued in the faith, continued believing, continued bringing forth fruit, he was the one. The stony ground hearer also believed the gospel, but it wasn't a saving faith in Christ. When the temptations and trials came, they fell away because of the bedrock of a hard heart.

I say all that to say that doctrinal distinctions are very important. What I believe about God will either lead me to worship of the great Triune God, or worship of an idol I've made in my own mind about who God is.

With that said, I believe there are probably genuine believers in many of those denominations. But, like Jewel said, I believe that after some time, the Lord will begin opening their eyes to His Truth, and they will be moved to leave such congregations. Jesus said that His sheep know His voice and will not follow a stranger, and I believe that.

thanks for all the replies. learned a lot and still have concerns about those 2 fronts. faith in Christ alone and a true understanding of Scripture is important. it's sad that over the generations we have all these interpretations and beliefs that have fractured the body of Christ. i do understand, however, that God will call His flock to Him ultimately. guess i'm looking at this from a human, living on earth with other humans point-of-view. stay strong in the faith and continue to study and submit to Scripture.