Adventist Neighbors Shared “Testing the Prophet”
Nearly three years ago we moved into our current home. Our close neighbors are a couple in their 50’s who are devout Adventists. Prior to meeting them, I never knew anyone who was SDA and I falsely believed they simply worshiped on Saturdays… but otherwise believed the same things as me! I was raised in an evangelical Christian home, and we are members of a reformed Baptist church.
I first heard of you on the Cultish podcast, then began a deep dive into Adventist beliefs that left me stunned. Our neighbors are multi-generational Adventists who were raised in Adventist schools, graduated from Adventist college, and sent their child to Adventist school. I see Ellen White books in their home, and they share from her on social media. Direct conversation on the topic hasn’t yet come up, however, even though they know we are Baptist and our faith is evident in our lives. They have invited us to a plant-based dinner party at their church (which I declined!). I’ve felt convicted to familiarize myself with Adventist beliefs, should the conversation ever arise.
The other day my neighbor shared a free ebook from Pathway to Paradise on testing the prophet, applied to Ellen White.
I read it, and the five tests they use are consistent with my understanding of Scripture’s tests for prophets: accuracy, agreement with Scripture, fruit of their life, etc. It appears to me, from my limited knowledge, that they choose passages from EGW purposely that do agree with Scripture, and prophecies that have (supposedly) come to pass, in order to present a positive picture.
The main thing I see is they draw a distinction between conditional and unconditional prophecy, using Jeremiah 18 in an attempt to show how God will relent from sending blessing or disaster depending on the people’s reaction to the prophecy. As a reformed Baptist, I obviously have a different understanding on the topic of God “relenting” than an Adventist does. I assumed they would use this to excuse some of Ellen White’s failed prophecies, but they never mention any in the ebook.
I wanted to reach out and mostly thank you for all your work, and share how helpful it has been to me personally. I’ve been raised in the church, am familiar with Scripture and theology, and read widely—but I never knew anything about Adventist beliefs until finding your podcast and resources. It has given me the opportunity to consider my answer to some of these questions I’ve taken for granted—like, why DO I not observe Saturday Sabbath? I’ve been able to flesh out Scripture-based answers to those questions.
I’m sure you receive large amounts of emails, but I am curious if you have any recommended resources on the topic of testing the “spirit of prophecy” or conditional/unconditional prophecy as it pertains to Ellen White. I plan to dig through your podcast episodes and see what I’ve missed. I’m aware in my relationship with my neighbors, as devout multi-generational Adventists, their commitment to the church and to Ellen White is incredibly strong. I want to be able to articulate why I believe what I believe, should the opportunity present itself.
Even if you aren’t able to respond, I’m grateful for what God is doing through your ministry and all you are doing!
—VIA EMAIL
Response: Thank you so much for writing and for sharing the e-pub on EGW. They use careful, deliberate arguments to defend her prophetic authority. As with most of Adventism’s doctrines, their arguments are proof-texted as opposed to contextual, and they assume definitions and meanings based on selected texts and passages from her.
In a nutshell, we have come to see that all claims to EGWs reliability are undercut by the fact that she, claiming an “I was shown…”, has written falsely about the nature of Jesus, the nature of the atonement, the Trinity, the role of the law, and the nature of salvation. In short, no prophet of God could ever declare a false statement about Him, such as He is not the Lord God Almighty, or that he took man’s fallen flesh, and then “undo” those statements by writing something slightly different years later so that she sounds orthodox.
No prophet of God begins in error and moves into truth. EGW wrote egregious error about our Lord Jesus, the Trinity, the nature of salvation, and the way to be saved. These statements are still in print and are still part of her giant opus that Adventism knows as “the spirit of prophecy”. She never repented, nor has the organization, for the overtly cultic teachings of the historic Adventists or for her visionary endorsements of heresies.
As for the “conditional/unconditional prophecy” view of Adventism, this very thing is one of the major worldview shifts when Adventists begin to understand the gospel. Adventism does not teach the biblical covenants and instead teaches its members that all of God’s promises in the Bible, no matter to whom they are made, can be claimed by anyone. They further teach that ALL of God’s promises are conditional. They seem not even to see that God’s covenant with Abraham, His new covenant, and His covenant with David all make UNCONDITIONAL promises of things He will do, and they are not dependent upon people’s behavior.
Adventism makes every one of God’s promises conditional, and they often use Jonah as an example of a prophet whose prophecy failed to come true: the people of Nineveh repented and thus were not destroyed. They use this story to explain EGWs failed prophecies.
They do not believe Scripture is inerrant; they actually teach that while it is infallible (it will accomplish what it was meant to accomplish), the actual words have errors, just as they admit EGWs prophecies have. They have to edit and interpret her in order to make her “work” for them, and they treat the Bible the same way. They do not believe God inspired the words of Scripture but rather the thoughts of the prophets, and He allowed them to write those inspired “thoughts” in their own words according to their own understandings, thus inserting cultural biases and misunderstandings. This idea comes from EGW who claimed the same kind of inspiration for herself.
I believe that our podcast series on the 28 Fundamental Beliefs might be very helpful for you. Those beliefs include, in cleverly deceptive words, the false worldview of Adventism. We go through each one, using the Adventists’ book Seventh-day Adventists Believe, and show how each fundamental belief is skewed away from Scriptural truth. Every.Single.One is twisted because each is based on the invisible foundation of the Adventists’ “great controversy” worldview. This foundation is almost invisible; never-been Adventists don’t know it is the Adventist picture of reality, and Adventists themselves do not know that their worldview is not the same as Christians’ biblical worldview. Thus conversations are unable to get to the bottom of what’s wrong because neither the Adventists (especially the lay people) nor the unsuspecting Christians understand the assumptions that underlie their claims.
I highly recommend this Fundamental Belief series. You can find them grouped in a collection here: https://blog.lifeassuranceministries.org/2021/10/04/inspecting-adventisms-fundamental-beliefs/
Please feel free to email anytime. I am so grateful that you are aware of the dangers of your neighbor’s religion, and I pray that the Lord will give you wisdom and prepare their hearts to hear the real gospel!
Adventist Sheep Rustling
My sister-in-law is a seasoned Adventist. A while back she casually mentioned “sheep rustling” and described it as luring Christians away from non-Adventist churches. Could you possibly elaborate on that?
—VIA EMAIL
Response: I have not heard Adventists use the term “sheep rustling” before, but what she describes is the way Adventists function. Traditionally they have targeted “Sunday Christians” rather than unbelievers. Oh, they’ll take whomever they can get, but their entire evangelism schemes are designed to intrigue Christians. They approach Christians who already believe and offer them “more” than they have: they have the FULL truth.
Our apologist friend Paul Carden says that in Africa, Christian missionaries go door to door sharing the gospel, and literally minutes behind them, the Adventists knock on the same doors and offer those hapless people the full truth of the Sabbath.
This is the usual way Adventists think of Christians: they’re ripe for conversion; they just need the whole truth. They are Adventism’s prime targets for Revelation seminars, personal evangelism, and so forth. Even friendships are driven by the ulterior motive of making the people Adventists.
What Law Says Women Should Be Quiet In Church?
I came across 1 Corinthians 14:34 which confused me a bit. Firstly, does that command mean that women should not speak at all in church? Secondly, which law is Paul referring to?
—VIA EMAIL
Response: This verse is not agreed upon by all people. In context, though, it seems Paul is emphasizing his teaching which occurs also in Ephesians 5:22, 1 Timothy 2:11, 12, 1 Corinthians 11, and so on, that women are to be subject to their husbands, and men are the heads of the church. In general, Paul’s teaching emphasizes that men are to be the preachers of the whole congregation and the elders of the church, and women are subject to their own husbands as Christ is head of the church.
1 Corinthians 11 also indicates, however, that women did (and were expected to) pray and prophecy publicly. So I don’t see this as a prohibition, in context and considering his other passages, of women ever speaking in church, but I do see him teaching that men are the leaders of the church. Men, it seems, should be the ones who teach the congregation God’s word. It doesn’t mean women don’t and can’t teach, but he seems clear that men are the leaders, not women. Women, further, are not to create disturbances in church but are to ask questions and clarify issues at home with their husbands. In general, when women begin to speak up in church or to take leadership, it almost always has the tendency to squelch the men’s participation.
The Law to which Paul refers seems to be Genesis; the entire Torah is considered “the Law”. Genesis establishes that a timeless order was established at creation: Adam was created first, and it was to him that God gave the command not to eat of the tree (Gen 2:16, 17). Eve was not yet created when God gave that command. There is no mention in Genesis of God telling Eve not to eat off the tree; it was, apparently, Adam’s responsibility to teach Eve. When she listened to the snake and ate the fruit, she gave some to Adam “who was with her”. She had not, as EGW said, wandered off.
Adam was with her, and he watched her be deceived by the snake without saying anything. In the New Testament, Paul says that Adam is the one who sinned and plunged all humanity into death (1 Cor 15:21; Romans 5). Adam, not Eve is blamed for human sin, and Jesus became the new head of the human race for all who believe.
Adam was the one with the direct command from God, and he didn’t instruct Eve but allowed her to lure him into sin as well. This establishment of men’s responsibility to protect and teach their wives was established at creation, and this seems to be the Law to which Paul refers. †
- May 4–10, 2024 - May 2, 2024
- We Got Mail - May 2, 2024
- April 27–May 3, 2024 - April 25, 2024