The Adventist Journey: From Charismatics to Pseudo-Calvinists

Einstein believed that if given an hour, sixty minutes, to solve a problem, a person should rather spend fifty-five of those minutes seeking the right question to ask. After that, one need only five minutes to find the solution.

Granted I think Einstein was giving an analogy to a greater point, you cannot find the exact problem without asking the right question.

Many are asking within the Seventh-day Adventist denomination and outside the denomination, “what does it mean to be a Seventh-day Adventist?” However, this question does not get to the root of the list of problems that the Seventh-day Adventist church is facing. The question only demonstrates the actual problem, disconnection. With each definition given, a group within or without will disagree and provide evidence for the validity and veracity of their claim.

I learned a valuable lesson when pursuing high value targets during my time participating in the Global War on Terrorism. Many people ask themselves, “where are they???” This is more of a waste of time than many realize. When pursuing a problem or a person, one has to move through the layers of a life. Forming an understanding of thought, beliefs, growth, ideology, habits, actions, formations, and foundational trauma and other personal factors. The same goes for understanding anyone or anything that is comprised of human beings. The same goes for Seventh-day Adventism.

The easy route for me would be to walk away and not bat an eye or give a care. The evidence is overwhelming that the denomination is broken, flawed deeply, erred, and theologically counter to claims of the New Testament canon, and has been since it’s foundation. So why pursue what it means to be Seventh-day Adventist?

Responsibility.

I am now a father, husband, theologian, pastor, leader, and Christian. First and foremost, Seventh-day Adventism makes claims that if true, have theological impacts on the universe, believers, and non-believers. When shown to be false, then the impact is significant on those who identify and submit to being members of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. This is made difficult by the disconnection and politics within the denomination itself. Combine that with the passion of the denomination’s critics, sorting out the truth, getting to the right question seems almost impossible.

Moving through layers of questions to get to the one that exemplifies the absolute truth of the matter, the definite problem, we find ourselves asking, is Seventh-day Day Adventism a cult? A heterodoxical sect? Satanic? Disallusioned? Just another protestant denomination?

To address the cult / sect question, one needs to go to authentic sources. In my hunt for answers, I have spent countless hours reading through original material, purchasing books, and searching through archives. One thing I have found is that all critics who slate Seventh-day Adventists as a cult often use one another as sources. Meaning, they become an echo chamber. That is until Martin and Barnhouse sat down with leaders of the Seventh-Day Adventist denomination in the 1950’s as they were researching for their work on cults. The Kingdon of the Cults, is still seen as an authoritative work to this day, with constantly updated versions being published.

What should be of note is that Martin places Seventh-day Adventism in an appendix, not within the manuscript at large. It is a place of warning, rightly so.

“Together with the Evangelical Foundation, we conducted a thorough new evaluation of the Seventh-day Adventists several years ago [writing this from 1981 looking back to 1957]. The results of that new evaluation were presented comprehensively in the book The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism and then later in the previous editions of this volume. It is my [Martin] conviction that one cannot be a true Jehovah’s Witness, Mormon, Christian Scientist, etc. and be a Christian in the biblical sense of the term; but it is perfectly possible to be a Seventh-Day Adventist and be a true follower of Jesus Christ despite certain heterodox concepts, which will be discussed.

Such Christian leaders as Louis T. Talbot, M.R. DeHaan, John R. Rice, Anthony A. Hoekema, J.K. Van Baalen, Herbert Bird, and John R. Gerstner have taken the position that Adventism is in fact a cult system; whereas, the late Donald Grey Barnhouse, myself [Martin], E. Schuyler English, Ruth Tucker, and Josh McDowell and quite a few others have concluded the opposite. Since the opposing view has had wide circulation over a long period of time, I felt it was necessary to include here Seventh-day Adventism as a proper counterbalance - presenting the other side of Adventism and representing the theology of Adventism as the Adventists themselves believe it [as presented in Questions on Doctrine] and not as many critics have caricatured it….Stating that they began cultic and moved into evangelical thinking is not to be construed in any sense of the term as an endorsment of the entire theological structure of Seventh-day Adventism, a portion of which is definitely out of the mainstream of historical Christian theology and which I have taken pains to refute. But I believe it is only fair and ethical to consider both sides of an extremely difficult and provocative controversy, which shows very little sign of abating in our day(The Kingdom of the Cults, Martin, pg. 587).”

Martin goes on in length to warn Seventh-day Adventists as well as readers that Adventism could at any time become cultic, moving finally across the lines of Christianity into a Christian cult, like Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormonism, and others. This is where we are today. The leaders in the General Conference and even to an extent in the Divisions have now taken Seventh-day Adventism from growth to cult. Seventh-Day Adventist history is not about the Truth fighting against erorr. It is a history of searching for Truth through a multitude of error, both within and without the body of Christ. It is about change and growth fighting against power, comfort, and complacency.

Sitting here in my Dad’s office, I look out often and think about how Seventh-day Adventists see themselves, and yet how others see them. Being a Seventh-Day Adventist is often equated to living on the set of The Truman Show. What we think is reality is simply a show. However, I would argue it is a show within a much greater, universal show.

Questions need to go deeper.

So we move from, is Seventh-day Adventism a cult? to, what are the foundations of the Seventh-Day Adventist denomination?

Critics point out that Seventh-day Adventists hold unbiblical beliefs. This is true and even admitted by church commissioned committees such as DARCOM, the Daniel and Revelation Committee and others. Not as an excuse, but almost all denominations hold unbiblical positions. Just the other day I was watching a popular theologian on his Youtube channel and he was presenting on why he was not a Calvinist and how it was unbiblical. He paused, looked straight in the camera after stating his intention and even stating, “Calvinism holds unbiblical views,” and then stated that Calvinists were still brothers and sisters in Christ. Those that view Pentecostals, will point out their unbiblical views and doctrines, yet they are considered members of the body of Christ, the church. Wesleyans are often criticized for their unbiblical beliefs and yet they are considered members of the body of Christ. Yet, when it comes down to all the critics of Seventh-day Adventism, the denomination is considered a cult, not a member of the body of Christ, and condemned. This, they unknowingly and uncaringly, plays into the deeply saturated persecution complex many have in the Seventh-day Adventist denomination today.

So forgive me if I do not really care what the greater protestant church thinks about Seventh-day Adventism, when a majority are of the opinion that their positions are right and everyone else is wrong, and many hold to unbiblical views that are then defend passionately. To give definition to unbiblical, this is given to mean not directly provable nor apparent in the Old and New Testament canons. This does not mean that the denomination should continue to dismiss, ignore, slander, and demonize it’s critics. For when critics point out cohesive arguments, biblical evidence, and even demonstrate that those within the denomination have the same critique, the denomination has a responsibility to listen, and act. A responsibility that has been neglected and even avoided.

The second reason for not personally cutting away and moving on is the fact that then I become guilty of the very thing I pointed out in the above paragraph, shirking a responsibility to stand against error.

I will take a moment and say that I do not believe at all that the denomination WILL change. For I think that what has been behind the hardness of it’s collective heart is the same spirit that brought the people of Israel to wander in the desert for forty years, to be sent into exile, and to be sent into diaspora. The spirit of pride and Satan’s whispers. Before we judge, remember that there is not a single protestant denomination nor leader who has fallen to pride and the whispers of the devil, even Martin Luther. However, the extent that the Seventh-day Adventist denomination has succumbed cannot be combated without being brought to a humble place and conviction, something that I think is being currently underwent.

The Seventh-day Adventist church needs to accept that it started on the shoulders of charismatic believers, who would be more a kin to the far limits of Pentecostalism and apostolic churches in America today. Ironically, the denomination has instead ignored and hidden it’s charismatic Pentecostal foundations and with the rise of Pentecostalism in the twentieth century, critiques what it once was.

This will stir a deep negative emotion within many Seventh-day Adventists, however, facts are facts. Let’s look at those facts.

Starting in 1844, Ellen White was seen by others to have fire come down and hit her while she was in vision. (Life Sketches of Ellen G. White, pg. 71).

The Millerites used Ellen White and others who presented visions and to enter into trance like states as oracles to decipher biblical truth. From postmillerist meetings in private homes or halls, to confrontations in public, they centered around individuals, especially females, that presented the charismatic gift of prophecy. William Foy had public visions, an individual that Loughborrough attempted to kill off forty years before Foy’s actual death in the 1880’s. Hazen Foss, which is solely reliant on Ellen White’s account. Dorinda Baker, who accompanied Ellen Harmon (White) and James White exhibited the same physiological phenomena as Ellen White and apparent visions. Then there is Hiram Edson, who had visions outside of the apparent Corn Field vision. Yet, suspiciously, Ellen White systematically suppressed, not discredit, but simply suppressed all others. The trial of Israel Dammon and the events surrounding demonstrate the extent of the charismatic / Pentecostal foundations of Seventh-day Adventism. Holy kissing, shouting, holy laughter (with an incident documented by Ellen White and James White in 1874 between them), healings (with another incident occurring in 1872 focused on Ellen White), miracle working, shaking in the ‘spirit,’ prophecying (not just Ellen White), visions, trances, acts demonstrating humility, writing admonitions and insights, dress reform, food reform, and free worship.

Yet where is it now in the Seventh-day Adventist denomination?

This is by no means a demonstration that we need to return to these charismatic movements. The church today would kick out and condemn as heretical, probably even satanic, the very founders that established the denomination that these churches rest on. If Ellen Harmon (White) where to show up today, along with the other founders and act, worship, speak, and preach as they did back then, Adventist churches today would have none of it. That is the deeper issue, why?

Because it is outside Scripture, it is extreme, and it discredits those individuals. If it would cause deep suspicion now, then we should have deep suspicion of them back then. Why are we not suspicious of them? Because our entire faith is built on their backs and work. So we do not want to admit error because it would make us look bad?

Yes.

Prescott wrote this to W.C. White in 1915,

“It seems to me that a large responsibility rests upon those of us who know that there are serious errors in our authorized books and yet make no special effort to correct them. The people and our average ministers trust us to furnish them with reliable statements, and they use our books as sufficient authority in their sermons, but we let them go on year after year asserting things which we know to be untrue. I cannot feel that this is right. It seems to me that we are betraying our trust and deceiving the ministers and people. It appears to me that there is much more anxiety to prevent a possible shock to some trustful people than to correct error… The way your mother's writings have been handled and the false impressions concerning them, which is still fostered among the people, have brought great perplexity and trial to me. It seems to me that what amounts to deception, though probably not intentional, has been practiced in making some of her books, and that no serious effort has been made to disabuse the minds of the people of what was known to be their wrong view concerning her writings (Letter April 11, 1915, Prescott to W.C.White).”

There is a clear pattern in the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. One that I myself have experienced.

Seventh-day Adventist theologians and academics have no problem with the errors in the church, see the potential, seek the change, present the evidence, and yet are demonized and forced into a demonic decision….tow the line and ignore, or leave. When God has placed gifts and calls on men and women’s hearts, skills and talents to discern theology, explain, examine, teach, develop, and grow theology, the church leaders, administrators, and the majority of members will then demonize, limit, and push out these individuals.

See the disconnect?

We will admit that Ellen White and the founders ‘grew’ in their theology, yet we will not admit that the denomination needs to continue to grow. We will admit that Ellen White is authoritative, however we will not follow her own words given to us that Truth is ever growing, that we will hold doctrines as biblical for years, and yet upon examining them closely in Scripture, will change our position.

So the church started as a charismatic movement and ends as a conservative Christian cult?

That is the present course and reality.

It continually leaves me awed at the irony that the denomination will ban individuals like Conrad Vine, Walter Veith, and Stephen Bohr, and yet it will also ban, albeit more of a shadow ban, push out, suppress, and blacklist for hire individuals that align with protestant Christianity, that openly challenge standing theology. .

The reasoning?

Because the position of the denomination and it’s leaders are threatened. It is the Caiaphas syndrome, “better a man dies than an entire nation (John 11:50, ESV).”

We need to acknowledge that the denomination is no longer about defending biblical truth or theological purity, it is about defending it’s position on the hill that was established by the Adventist founders. Defending the reality that it has made for itself.

I look around, surveying the data, surveying the spiritual states of the churches, family members, peers that are bought in to the extremist program of Adventism, and I genuinely am sad. For those of us in exile have searched, pondered the data, prayed diligently over the evidences, and stood at the edges of the denomination hoping for a chance to help change.

Why did the denomination move from being a charismatic movement? I believe this is due fatigue. In consulting other denominations, mentoring and simply building relationships with other Christian leaders and believers, one things stands out. Fatigue. Those that I know well that are no longer charismatic grew tired. They read their Bibles and saw through the facade of pentecostalism and the charismatic beliefs. They didn’t produce quality discipleship or the peace promised in Scripture. Yet in my many discussions I have also come to realize those same individuals are counter balanced by those who have left Calvinism / Reformed churches. That too brings fatique, as well as spiritual nominalism in the greater membership.

Today it is apparent that Christ, the King and Messiah, is moving hearts and minds. Drawing through the work of the Holy Spirit. That work involves confrontation, conviction, repentance, and action.

There are truths that the church has that have been hidden in the theological and administrative mire, that the Seventh-day Adventist founders pursued, we could finally grasp, and yet continually get trampled over for the sake of power, control, position, and ultimately pride.

It is my definitive believe that all it would take is one conference president, steeped in prayer and humility, gathering a Spirit led team, fed by the desire to pursue truth, empower the body, grow the gospel, encouraging Christ culture, and leaning in to the hard and arduous work of change and growth.