ex sda

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi brother, I was a SDA. I rejected it after I was told I had to be baptised in the name of Ellen White. It was good to debate the pastor for a while. But this took an emotional toll: a classic sign of brainwashing
 
I'm not ex-SDA, but I was raised in another cult, and in the aftermath of leaving I studied groups like the SDA to a limited extent.

From what I gathered the SDA does not literally pronounce words like "I baptize you in the name of Ellen G. White" (although, like any cult, I suppose it's conceivable there might be some extremist fringe groups that do). Nonetheless, some would contend that such happens in a de facto sense.

In any case, EGW was actually very insistent that the Trinitarian formulary be the spoken words upon baptizing.
 
Last edited:
Who are they I never heard of them
The Wiki article does a fair job describing the history and main beliefs of the man and his followers. Here's a briefer summary of beliefs. Their numbers are relatively small in North America and Europe (probably less than 15,000), but through intense targeted evangelism they have proliferated in places like Latin America (500,000+) and especially Africa (likely 1,000,000+).
 
Baptised in the name of Ellen white what do you mean
How long were you sda
I had to confess her teachings as inspired, and that she was a prophetess of God, or no baptism. I even asked to be baptised only in Christ, or the Trinity, depending on preference, but the pastor insisted that I had to confess Ellen White first.
I was never formally an SDA as in being a member of the church. It was the first church I went to after conversion, since it was nearby.
I ended up debating with the pastor for about four weeks about theological issues. And eventually, since I had not much of a scriptural foundation, I was essentially brainwashed into believing the churches teachings.
I wasn't precise enough: yeah that previous comment could be easily misunderstood.
 
I was told on many occasions that every Sunday worshipper would receive the mark of the beast, I was persuaded to quit coffee and avoid prawns, and I was taught what I could only conclude to be a form of universalism: that God is too kind to send people into eternal hellfire, that 'good people' can make it to heaven.
For example, for a time I was watching lectures from an SDA college to learn more about the church's doctrines; and the lecturer and the student agreed that Steve Irwin, even though he may not have been a believer, would probably be in heaven because he lived a full life and made the most out of God's graces.
There were some wonderfully friendly people there though!
Take Paul's warning.
2 Cor 11.14
 
The Wiki article does a fair job describing the history and main beliefs of the man and his followers. Here's a briefer summary of beliefs. Their numbers are relatively small in North America and Europe (probably less than 15,000), but through intense targeted evangelism they have proliferated in places like Latin America (500,000+) and especially Africa (likely 1,000,000+).
The Church of Iran is Branhamite. They are considered Christians by Voice of the Martyrs and supported as such. This put me in a quandary as I was unsure whether to continue or withhold support.
 
Not SDA but I was Worldwide Church of God (Herbert W. Armstrong) and later Philadelphia Church of God (Gerald Flurry) for the later part of my childhood and early adulthood. They share some of the same Adventist lineage, though they deny it.
 
The Church of Iran is Branhamite. They are considered Christians by Voice of the Martyrs and supported as such. This put me in a quandary as I was unsure whether to continue or withhold support.

It does seem VotM works on behalf of a very broad range of victims, basically along the lines of "any who name the name of Christ". In their particular context of ministry I can understand and perhaps even sympathize with that liberality. Having said that, I'm not sure they work on behalf of groups like the Mormons, and if not, it should call their support of Branhamites into question. I have simplistically, but I think aptly, described Branhamites as being something like Pentecostal Mormons (though they're certainly not identical to either in many specific points).
 
Yes I understand and share your perspective on being broadly flexible in many areas of the world where those who name Christ are paying a heavy price. In many instances new believers may have only a rudimentary understanding of the gospel, and the gospel they have, is mixed with prosperity teaching and even witchcraft. But in terms of Branhamism I keep going back to the early Creeds which set the boundaries of the Christian faith at least to the level of acknowledging the Trinity. Those who actively and adamantly denied the Trinity were outside the faith. I believe God has mercy on his ill-taught children and I can’t know of his disposition toward them but can I call them brethren? For some reason it’s a no-brainer for me to reject Mormons as brethren but it causes me anguish to cut off support to folks who are willing to lay down their lives for (their limited and erroneous understanding of) Christ. I’m perplexed.
 
But in terms of Branhamism I keep going back to the early Creeds which set the boundaries of the Christian faith at least to the level of acknowledging the Trinity. Those who actively and adamantly denied the Trinity were outside the faith.
Branhamism as a whole is perplexingly full of contradictions on the Godhead. Early in his ministry Branham sounded like a Trinitarian, but later on he would say "Trinitarianism is of the Devil", and the Branhamites I know take this as Thus Saith The Lord. With regard to the four Iranians, I read an article that they claimed to support a "certain understanding" of the Trinity, which the author said seemed to be supported by their so-called statement of faith, whatever that means.

Branham's Christology was unbelievably abominable. Although many Branhamites I know seem ignorant of the fact, he made statements that Jesus was born "just a man", became deity when the Spirit came upon him at his baptism, became a mere man again at Gethsemene, regained his deity at the Resurrection, gave up his deity once more when he sent his Spirit down at Pentecost, and will finally regain his deity at the Second Coming. But like I said, when I've brought up quotations by Branham to that effect to various Branhamites, they seem puzzled and, in reaction typical of cult victims, unwilling to pursue the issue further. It's really all very sad...
 
I'm not sure how appropriate it is for me to say this here, but I can't help it...

Whenever I recall how utterly terrible a system I was in, I tremble and simply marvel at my deliverance out of it. Very, very few ever leave, and most who do turn their back on God altogether. Yet in God's amazing providence, he did bring me out of that horrible darkness and into his Kingdom of eternal Light, to a saving knowledge of the beautiful Saviour, the true God-Man, our Lord Jesus Christ. But I didn't deserve it. I'm no better or smarter at all that my friends and family who remain mired in that heresy and darkness. It's only and all of God's great mercy and incomprehensible grace. Thank you, my dear Lord, thank you...
 
Being baptized into the name of Ellen White sounds extreme. But there have been extreme offshoots of SDA through the years. The Branch Davidians come to mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top