Summations Only

No, it is a denomination.Not that you care about the truth, but words do have generally accepted meanings for most of us. Other than the colloquial fundagelical definition ("anyone whose theology I don't like") the SDA church fits none of the criteria for being a cult. You could google the definitions of these words, but really, don't bother. Reality has proven incapable of changing your mind and I doubt this would be an exception.KP

Yeah, they're the nuts who invented "flood geology". By their fruits ye shall know them.

Now, wait a minute there. Creation Science arguments are not taught in any church I know of, and I don't ascribe my views along these lines to any particular church or even to Christianity in general. A good Bible church will teach that all of Genesis is literally true, but does not teach any particular brand of science.And about SDA, many Adventists appear to believe truly in Christ and are probably saved, but the church itself is a cult because it is founded on the aberrant teachings of Ellen White who is regarded as a prophet.

For my point it doesn't matter if it was a formal doctrine of the SDAs or not (although Christian Science does seem to have beliefs of that sort).It's enough that it was a sincerely held religious belief.

quote:

---

... the church itself is a cult because it is founded on the aberrant teachings of Saul of Tarsus who is regarded as a saint.

---

Wow! AZ Paul has already said everything that needs to be said on the entire internet for the rest of the day. I will bow out now.That was brilliant!

I don't know, man. It is a big internet and there is still a whole big bunch of day left.Besides, I can't take credit for this - it was Faith.

Faith, you're simply not being honest here. It is not necessary to take a position on any aspect of theology to define the words "church", "denomination", "sect", or "cult". As AZP has so properly pointed out, using your criteria, people who take a contrary position to yours could easily define all of Christianity as a cult on that basis.Please desist from making up meanings for words just to serve your own biases.[begins holding breath...]

Think about those metaphors. Both salt and light are positive influences, not negative. The "social corruption" here is people throwing mud instead of being an example of love.

It is no accident that Conservapedia leaves out the 'cast the first stone story' from their Bible 'translation'.http://conservapedia.com/Essay:Adulteress_Story

quote:

---

In the story a mob surrounds a woman to stone her for adultery, and ask Jesus what they should do. Jesus is describing as writing in the ground, and eventually beseeches those who have not sinned to cast the first stone. The crowd then disperses, beginning with the eldest first. This apocryphal passage is a favorite of liberals who oppose those who stand up for Christian values, as when the left-leaning Bill O'Reilly cited this passage to criticize the star of Duck Dynasty for standing up against homosexual conduct.

---

There is no point in telling zealots like Andy and Faith what Jesus actually said, because haters just hate. Citing the red words in the Bible either causes them to cite the Torah like Elihayu or inspires them into dispensationalism cult talk.'Left leaning Bill O'Reilly.' Lol. 'Duck Dynasty'??Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

It should be noted that Jesus, whether He was without sin or not, did not cast the first stone.What Would Jesus Do? What Would Faith Do?

quote:

---

Adventists were influential in the redevelopment of creationism in the 20th Century. Seventh-day Adventist geologist George McCready Price was responsible for reviving flood geology in the early 20th century. He was quoted heavily by William Jennings Bryan in the Scopes Monkey Trial. His ideas were later borrowed by Henry Morris and John Whitcomb for their landmark 1961 creationist text The Genesis Flood.[117] The Morris and Whitcomb position is distinct from Seventh-day Adventism because they postulate both a young earth and a young universe.[118]

​

About the time that The Genesis Flood was having a large impact in the evangelical world, a number of progressive Adventist scholars educated in secular universities began promoting Theistic Evolution.[119][120] Some Progressive Adventists no longer hold the literal view of Genesis 1.[121]

​

In 2009, the Seventh-day Adventist Church held an international creation emphasis day as part of a "worldwide denominational celebration of the biblical account of creation."[122] The event was part of a church initiative to underscore its commitment to a literal creation model.[122] In 2010, the World Seventh-day Adventist Church's highest ecclesiastical body, the World General Conference Session, officially reaffirmed the Church's position in support of a literal six-day creation week.[123]
Seventh-day Adventist theology - Wikipedia

---

One of the "abberant" teachings of Ellen White is that Genesis be taken literally, and at her urging the modern creationist movement was born.

A literal reading of Genesis is not an aberrant teaching so that's not one of Ellen White's aberrant teachings.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

And a Seventh-Dayer (like the late Buzsaw) would say "Seventh-Dayism is not an aberrant teaching so that's not one of Ellen White's aberrant teachings." You could in fact say that sort of thing about any teaching, no matter how false it was.It is at least something to consider. If there is a God, as you suppose, then for what reason did he decree that the True Truth That All Christians Should Believe should have originated in a cult that you don't even acknowledge as Christian? Isn't that like adopting (for example) some point of Gnostic theology and supposing that in this one instance they knew something that St. Paul and the Evangelists didn't? "That's not an aberrant teaching", you could say, "so that's not one of the Gnostics' aberrant teachings". But why wasn't it one of the Apostles' teachings instead?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Sincerely Held Religious BeliefBy Baptist Minister Rev. Paul Brandeis Raushenbush Edited by PaulK, : Fixed tag