QC and SG accountability (8/12/17)
We asked ourselves whether Seventh-Day Adventists should be regarded as a cult or a denomination. (i..e is the guy in 'Hacksaw Ridge' saved?) From what I have read its articles of faith I note that the movement shares the fundamental characteristics of an evangelical Protestant denomination. ". Adventists claim but one creed: "The Bible, and the Bible alone."
Adventist doctrine resembles trinitarian Protestant theology, with premillennial and Arminian emphases. Adventists uphold teachings such as the infallibility of Scripture, the substitutionary atonement, the resurrection of the dead and justification by faith alone, and are therefore often considered evangelical."(Wikipedia). We also note some distinctive understandings of aspects of Christian belief, including celebration of the Sabbath, the nature of judgement, annihilationism and Christ's role in the heavenly sanctuary. There is a great deal of respect given to the writings of Ellen G. White (just as Methodists look to John Wesley, but do not place him on par with Scripture).
A more provocative question then would be, "Is Roman Catholicism a cult?". Because no additional writings are placed on par with Scripture, and because there is no single historical figure whose teachings are placed on par with Scripture, I would say, "No", Because Catholics differ from Protestants in the way salvation is attained (by baptism, through faith as well as works, rather than by faith alone), and in the way justification is viewed (not imputed, but manifested), it seems to me that the official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church make it difficult for a theologically compliant Catholic to be saved. Nevertheless, there are plenty of people in Protestant churches who are unsaved (!).
We must remind ourselves about what it does take to be 'saved'. What is the minimum content of the gospel necessary? A full theological understanding cannot be required, for if so children, the uneducated and the illiterate would fall short of the information content required. It is required that we fully trust in Jesus alone to save us from our sins and we acknowledge Him as Lord. This suffices to save.
We also asked about the possibility of losing salvation because of particular, more serious sins. Scripture tells us that all sins (not big or small) are equally unacceptable to God (Js 2:10). We constantly sin, for we fail to love God with heart, soul, mind and strength as we ought, even though we may not have conscious sin. So it can be seen that we do not keep our salvation because we have been morally perfect - we have been saved at the end if we hold fast to the confidence we have in Christ's redeeming work (Heb 3:14). We should certainly aim to be assured of our salvation (2 Pe 1:10, 1 Ti 3:13).
Our final discussion question was regarding the appropriateness of our witness when in a situation where a powerful/influential figure (e.g. a doctor or solicitor, or even an employer) shares the gospel with someone under his or her influence. We said that this would not be fine in the absence of a personal relationship, but fine IF the basis for sharing was when that figure was able to operate not only in a role that would construe undue influence, but out of a genuine personal connection.
A more provocative question then would be, "Is Roman Catholicism a cult?". Because no additional writings are placed on par with Scripture, and because there is no single historical figure whose teachings are placed on par with Scripture, I would say, "No", Because Catholics differ from Protestants in the way salvation is attained (by baptism, through faith as well as works, rather than by faith alone), and in the way justification is viewed (not imputed, but manifested), it seems to me that the official teachings of the Roman Catholic Church make it difficult for a theologically compliant Catholic to be saved. Nevertheless, there are plenty of people in Protestant churches who are unsaved (!).
We must remind ourselves about what it does take to be 'saved'. What is the minimum content of the gospel necessary? A full theological understanding cannot be required, for if so children, the uneducated and the illiterate would fall short of the information content required. It is required that we fully trust in Jesus alone to save us from our sins and we acknowledge Him as Lord. This suffices to save.
We also asked about the possibility of losing salvation because of particular, more serious sins. Scripture tells us that all sins (not big or small) are equally unacceptable to God (Js 2:10). We constantly sin, for we fail to love God with heart, soul, mind and strength as we ought, even though we may not have conscious sin. So it can be seen that we do not keep our salvation because we have been morally perfect - we have been saved at the end if we hold fast to the confidence we have in Christ's redeeming work (Heb 3:14). We should certainly aim to be assured of our salvation (2 Pe 1:10, 1 Ti 3:13).
Our final discussion question was regarding the appropriateness of our witness when in a situation where a powerful/influential figure (e.g. a doctor or solicitor, or even an employer) shares the gospel with someone under his or her influence. We said that this would not be fine in the absence of a personal relationship, but fine IF the basis for sharing was when that figure was able to operate not only in a role that would construe undue influence, but out of a genuine personal connection.
Comments
Post a Comment