To say that the Roman Catholic church is more palatable than Adventism simply because of its apostolic roots is to miss the point of the Protestant Reformation.

Simply stated, apostolic roots do not trump the denial of justification by faith alone.  In other words, the “true Jesus” is not being preached anywhere the “true gospel” is not being taught with clarity.

Say what you want about Adventism, but in their fundamental belief statements they articulate the doctrine of justification in a way that no true Roman Catholic could endorse.  Obviously there is great variability in the practice of both Adventism and Catholicism, and we can find examples of individuals on both sides who effectively deny what their respective churches teach.

Colleen asserts that Catholics are orthodox on the person of Jesus and the Trinity but she overlooks the doctrine of justification by faith alone–the very article upon which the Protestant church stands or falls.

Furthermore, apostolic authority is worthless when the gospel is compromised.  Have we so quickly forgotten what the apostle Paul said to the Galatian church?

“I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel–not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:6-9 ESV)

Speaking with full apostolic authority, Paul said that even he was to be damned if his teaching denied the gospel of Jesus Christ.  This is precisely what the Roman Catholic church does in its denial of justification by faith alone and this is precisely the reason the Reformers opposed it, even to the point of death in some cases.

Sadly, Colleen exposes her bias and lack of Christian discernment when she is willing to overlook this, effectively diluting the gospel for the “greater good” of setting the world against Adventism.

Greg

No disagreement, Greg.

I guess I just don’t read “deep” enough. I don’t see any implication that Catholicism’s errors are “more palatable”. The point being that the Roman Catholic Church did spring from the apostolic church and mainstream protestantism sprang from the Roman Catholic Church. I guess the question then becomes did SDA spring from mainstream protestantism or do we take it back to the arian offshoot that grew up next to the apostolic root?

IMHO, I’ve seen other things that Colleen has said that I disagree with. Jumping on this one just seems to be overreaching.

Brian, yes, I see your point.  I am cautious about being too critical of Colleen because I know she is fallible just like the rest of us.  If I point one finger at her, I have three pointing back at me!

My criticism of Colleen is delivered in the same way that I would hope any other Christian would criticize me to keep me accountable.  Our forum is open for such a purpose while FAF, unfortunately, is not.  This closed atmosphere lends itself to a “remnant” groupthink mentality such as what ironically can happen in Adventism.  Colleen is free to express her displeasure with anything I write here, but unfortunately I no longer have this freedom on her forum.

Now, getting back to your question about roots.  I’d frame your question slightly differently.  I’d ask, “Does Adventism teach the true gospel?” The answer to this question is not a straightforward “Yes”, and this is the reason for 4TG.  Some people within the Adventist church promote and believe the true gospel, while others do not.  If we take their fundamental belief statements at face value, they do embrace the authentic gospel, albeit not as clearly or forcefully as they might.

Roman Catholicism, in contrast, officially denounces the heart of the gospel in its denial of justification by faith alone.  At the Council of Trent, they declared the teaching of this doctrine as “anathema” and they continue to promote a system of works-based righteousness to this day.

We confuse the issue when we start looking at foundations and roots in an effort to discern whether today’s churches are true or not.  The question is not about being able to trace an apostolic lineage through history, but about whether a church or teacher is faithfully proclaiming the apostolic gospel.

For example, I could open up a non-denominational church tomorrow and if I preached the gospel faithfully, I would be operating a true Christian church even though I lack a direct apostolic pedigree.  Catholics, on the other hand, have this pedigree but have “given away the farm” by teaching a different gospel.  The Protestant Reformation was about recovering this gospel and restoring true apostolic teaching.

Incidentally, by using this “gospel yardstick”, we can also see a distinction between Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Christian Science and Adventism.  Walter Martin, Josh McDowell, Anthony Hoekema, John MacArthur, and even Dale Ratzlaff have recognized this distinction.

There’s no question that Adventism was founded under inauspicious conditions, arising out of the date-setting error of the Millerites.  But to the degree that any Adventist embraces the gospel of Jesus Christ and endorses justification by faith alone, they are carrying on the apostolic teaching and should not be criticized for having error in their theological pedigree.  This is akin to making a blanket criticism of all Americans who have slavery in their genealogical roots.  I am not a slave owner nor do I condone slavery, so it would be unfair and irresponsible to accuse me of such purely on the basis of history.

Greg

Brian,

One thing you have to understand, is I knew how Colleen used to oppose Roman Catholicism, and she was the one that liked this message from MacArthur:

http://www.gty.org/resources.php?section=transcripts&aid=231488

This is the most stinging indictment of RCC ever presented, and she endorsed this message. Now she is clearly saying that RCC is not all that bad.

A careful analysis by ex-catholics will find that RCC really does not worship the true Jesus either. And to imply that RCC worships the true Jesus and not SDA is so bad, that I cannot sit by silently.

All you have to do to prove this is click on MacArthur’s transcript, and you will find a detailed analysis of how the Pope believes that it is Mary that must lead people to Jesus. Yes, traditional SDA can be guilty of saying the same thing about Ellen. But the blasphemous doctrines of the pope making Mary an intermediary and an intercessor is a blasphemy far above any conducted by SDA.

The whole gospel message of the Reformation is being minimized by her softening of her previous position.

The martyrs died in vain, if RCC is really a church that has true roots, but somehow mixes a little faith and works.

Greg is correct. Rome declared ANATHEMA! on the Reformers.

Maybe Colleen would like to come on here and clarify her position. She is welcome to do that, but I can’t express my opinion on her site.

More to say, but not enough time.

Stan

[quote author="BrianL"]Stan, I don’t see where your getting that Colleen is saying SDAism is “worse” than Catholisism. It looks to me like she is saying they are both bad but for different reasons. Are any of her statements in the quote untrue or misleading?

I think it is strongly implied by her simply comparing Adventism and Catholicism, saying she was wrong in judging Catholicism (but obviously not Adventism) and giving the reasons:

“For quite some time I have compared and contrasted Adventism with Catholicism in my head in various ways. What I have come to see within the past six months, however, is that I was comparing “apples and oranges”, so to speak.

So the contrast is presented. What makes Catholicism different and acceptable compared to Adventism? She goes on…

In spite of doctrines I personally do not endorse, Catholicism does carry the orthodox understanding of who Jesus is, of the Trinity, of honor for the apostolic foundation of the church, and of the Scriptures.

Now the implication (and when we know the current discussion going on on how the FAFers don’t believe that SDAism understands and follows the traditional belief of the Trinity), we see that this is where Catholicism differs from their take on Adventism. Also notice in the next quote the reference to annihilation that Colleen particularily believes is a false teaching of Adventists:

Because they actually do teach the truth about the identity of God and have a true respect for God’s wrath and judgment, I believe it is possible for individual Catholics to have relationships with Jesus that transform their lives in Biblical ways.

Strange. I thought the problem with Adventism and Catholicism are the salvation by works problem. At the very least they should both be judged and condemned on that. Why must all orthodox issues be whipped out on the table to decide ‘which church is better’?

Such reasoning and methodology merely enforces the stereotype that SDAs have of formers that they are merely bitter, disgruntled dissenters that hate the church so much they will do whatever they can to tear it down.

Here is what John MacArthur says about the supposed roots of the apostolic origin of Christianity:

Reclassifying the Pope, reclassifying the Roman Catholics as believers isn’t that simple.  It has massive implications.  It has implications that literally overturn centuries of missionary effort.  It has massive implications that overturn centuries, if not millennia of martyrdom.  In the long war on the truth, the most formidable, relentless and deceptive enemy has been Roman Catholicism.  It is an apostate, corrupt, heretical, false Christianity, it is a front for the kingdom of Satan.  The true church of the Lord Jesus Christ has always understood this.  And even through the Dark Ages from 400 to 1500, prior to the Reformation, genuine Christian believers set themselves apart from that system, and were brutally punished and executed for their rejection of that system.  It’s not my purpose tonight to go into all that is Roman Catholicism and we will do that in the fall, we will do that.  We’ll take a look at it from many angles.  But those believers throughout those centuries along with genuine and discerning believers today understand this is a false system.  It has a false priesthood.  It has a false source of revelation, tradition and the magisterium.  It has illegitimate power granted to it by this magisterium, this papal curia.  It engages in idolatry by the worship of saints and the veneration of angels.  It conducts a horrific exaltation of Mary above Christ and even God.  It conducts a twisted sacrament of the Mass by which Jesus is sacrificed again and again.  It offers false forgiveness through the confessional.  It calls for the uselessness of infant baptism and other sacraments.”
-------------------------------------------------------

We need more people like john MacArthur standing for the truth.

On the other hand, he has a soft spot in his heart for Adventists, because his kids were born in an SDA hospital, and he has known Adventists all his life, and will not classify SDA the same as RCC. But he also has serious problems with Adventism, and he endorsed Dale Ratzlaff’s book “Sabbath in Christ”.

Stan

Posted anonymously by: Rick (aka Ric_b)

I am concerned at times when those who have left the SDA church seem to think that any alternative is better than SDAism. I think it is important to apply the lessons that we learned in SDAism in evaluating the alternatives. Catholicism may be more solid on the Trinity doctrine than SDAism, but this is not the only important doctrine. Catholicism and SDAism both fail when presenting the Gospel of salvation by grace alone through faith alone.

Gal 1:8-9 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!

We have to judge each church’s teaching by this criteria, no matter what else they have right or wrong, this one subject is a make or break issue.

There are real dangers and errors outside of SDAism as well. It isn’t healthy to pretend that these do not exist.

Hi Rick,

Good to hear from you again. I agree with your points. It really doesn’t make any sense claiming that one church has less error than another if both churches are teaching the same works heresy.

Stan