In this forum are listed the fundamental beliefs of the SDA Church, but nowhere have I yet been able to locate any listing of the pillars of our faith, therefore, is there a difference between the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the SDA Church and the Pillars of the SDA Church?

I also asked this question in a group email list that I am a member of, where I received the following response:

-----beginning of slightly reformatted email-----

Usually, when people speak of the pillars of Adventism, they are referring to Ellen White's statement in Counsels to Writers and Editors, pp. 30-31:

"The passing of the time in 1844 was a period of great events, opening to our astonished eyes the cleansing of the sanctuary transpiring in heaven, and having decided relation to God's people upon the earth, [also] the first and second angels' messages and the third, unfurling the banner on which was inscribed, 'The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.' One of the landmarks under this message was the temple of God, seen by His truth-loving people in heaven, and the ark containing the law of God. The light of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment flashed its strong ways in the pathway of the transgressors of God's law. The nonimmortality of the wicked is an old landmark. I can call to mind nothing more that can come under the head of the old landmarks."

The landmarks, or pillars, here listed include:

1. The cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.
2. The three angels' messages
3. The law of God
4. The seventh-day Sabbath
5. The nonimmortality of the soul

This entire chapter, titled, "The Foundations, Pillars, and Landmarks," deserves to be read carefully by all (CW 28-32).

The 28 Fundamental Beliefs, by contrast, is a larger summary of what Scripture teaches on a wider range of topics.

The above pillars, or landmarks, represent our more distinctive teachings which set us apart from other Christians.

-----end of slightly reformatted email-----

For those who want to compare these pillars with the 28 Fundamental Beliefs, click on the following link:

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html

Here is what I discovered in comparing the pillars of our faith list to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs:

1 - The cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary = Fundamental Belief #24.
2 - The three angels' messages = Fundamental Belief #13.
3 - The law of God = Fundamental Belief #19.
4 - The seventh-day Sabbath = Fundamental Belief #20.
5 - The nonimmortality of the soul = Fundamental Belief #26.

According to this, contrary to the thoughts of some, I am happy to show the SDA Church is continuing to hold up the pillars of our faith, but that's really another topic.

That was interesting. Thanks for sharing Daryl.

I read the entire chapter as recommended above and I found some precious gems, especially as it pertains to those who call to "stand by the old landmarks" when they don't even now themselves what they are. This shows me that the many offshoots that exist today making such claims are nothing but all polish and no substance.
The crux of the issue is not to remove a peg of the landmarks and pillars of our faith which have been defined in black and white. Building on them as long as it does not contradict what has been established is fine.
God Bless & Happy Sabbath,
Will

That, Will, is also what I say.

I decided to quote below what Will already read:

-----beginning of quote-----

Chap. 3 - The Foundations, Pillars, and Landmarks

Early Workers to Speak.--God has given me light regarding our periodicals. What is it?--He has said that the dead are to speak. How?--Their works shall follow them. We are to repeat the words of the pioneers in our work, who knew what it cost to search for the truth as for hidden treasure, and who labored to lay the foundation of our work. They moved forward step by step under the influence of the Spirit of God. One by one these pioneers are passing away. The word given me is, Let that which these men have written in the past be reproduced. And in the Signs of the Times let not the articles be long or the print fine. Do not try to crowd everything into one number of the paper. Let the print be good, and let earnest, living experiences be put into the paper. {CW 28.1}

Not long ago I took up a copy of the Bible Echo. [THE BIBLE ECHO, SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS THE ECHO, WAS ISSUED IN AUSTRALIA IN 1885 AS A WEEKLY MISSIONARY PAPER. IN 1903 IT BECAME THE AUSTRALIAN SIGNS OF THE TIMES.] As I looked it through, I saw an article by Elder Haskell and one by Elder Corliss. As I laid the paper down, I said, These articles must be reproduced. There is truth and power in them. Men spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. {CW 28.2}

Let the truths that are the foundation of our faith be kept before the people. Some will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. They talk science, and the enemy comes in and gives them an abundance of science; but it is not the science of salvation. It is not the science of humility, of consecration, or of the sanctification of the Spirit. We are now to understand what the pillars of our faith are,--the truths that have made us as a people what we are, leading us on step by step.-- Review and Herald, May 25, 1905. {CW 29.1}

The Message to Present.--Our lesson for the present time is, How may we most clearly comprehend and present the gospel that Christ came in person to present to John on the Isle of Patmos,-- the gospel that is termed "the revelation of Jesus Christ"? We are to present to our people a clear explanation of Revelation. We are to give them the word of God just as it is, with as few of our own explanations as possible. No one mind can do this work alone. Although we have in trust the grandest and most important truth ever presented to the world, we are only babes, as far as understanding truth in all its bearings is concerned. Christ is the great teacher, and that which He revealed to John, we are to tax our minds to understand and clearly to define. We are facing the most important issues that men have ever been called upon to meet. {CW 29.2}

The theme of greatest importance is the third angel's message, embracing the messages of the first and second angels. All should understand the truths contained in these messages and demonstrate them in daily life, for this is essential to salvation. We shall have to study earnestly, prayerfully, in order to understand these grand truths.--Letter 97, 1902. {CW 29.3}

The Landmarks Defined.--In Minneapolis God gave precious gems of truth to His people in new settings. This light from heaven by some was rejected with all the stubbornness the Jews manifested in rejecting Christ, and there was much talk about standing by the old landmarks. But there was evidence they knew not what the old landmarks were. There was evidence and there was reasoning from the word that commended itself to the conscience; but the minds of men were fixed, sealed against the entrance of light, because they had decided it was a dangerous error removing the "old landmarks" when it was not moving a peg of the old landmarks, but they had perverted ideas of what constituted the old landmarks. {CW 30.1}

The passing of the time in 1844 was a period of great events, opening to our astonished eyes the cleansing of the sanctuary transpiring in heaven, and having decided relation to God's people upon the earth, [also] the first and second angels' messages and the third, unfurling the banner on which was inscribed, "The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." One of the landmarks under this message was the temple of God, seen by His truth-loving people in heaven, and the ark containing the law of God. The light of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment flashed its strong rays in the pathway of the transgressors of God's law. The nonimmortality of the wicked is an old landmark. I can call to mind nothing more that can come under the head of the old landmarks. All this cry about changing the old landmarks is all imaginary. {CW 30.2}

Now at the present time God designs a new and fresh impetus shall be given to His work. Satan sees this, and he is determined it shall be hindered. He knows that if he can deceive the people who claim to believe present truth, [and make them believe that] the work the Lord designs to do for His people is a removing of the old landmarks, something which they should, with most determined zeal, resist, then he exults over the deception he has led them to believe. The work for this time has certainly been a surprising work of various hindrances, owing to the false setting of matters before the minds of many of our people. That which is food to the churches is regarded as dangerous, and should not be given them. And this slight difference of ideas is allowed to unsettle the faith, to cause apostasy, to break up unity, to sow discord, all because they do not know what they are striving about themselves. Brethren, is it not best to be sensible? Heaven is looking upon us all, and what can they think of recent developments? While in this condition of things, building up barriers, we not only deprive ourselves of great light and precious advantages, but just now, when we so much need it, we place ourselves where light cannot be communicated from heaven that we ought to communicate to others.--Manuscript 13, 1889. {CW 31.1}

Let Pioneers Identify Truth.--When the power of God testifies as to what is truth, that truth is to stand forever as the truth. No aftersuppositions, contrary to the light God has given are to be entertained. Men will arise with interpretations of Scripture which are to them truth, but which are not truth. The truth for this time, God has given us as a foundation for our faith. He Himself has taught us what is truth. One will arise, and still another, with new light which contradicts the light that God has given under the demonstration of His Holy Spirit. {CW 31.2}

A few are still alive who passed through the experience gained in the establishment of this truth. God has graciously spared their lives to repeat and repeat till the close of their lives, the experience through which they passed even as did John the apostle till the very close of his life. And the standard-bearers who have fallen in death, are to speak through the reprinting of their writings. I am instructed that thus their voices are to be heard. They are to bear their testimony as to what constitutes the truth for this time. {CW 32.1}

We are not to receive the words of those who come with a message that contradicts the special points of our faith. They gather together a mass of Scripture, and pile it as proof around their asserted theories. This has been done over and over again during the past fifty years. And while the Scriptures are God's word, and are to be respected, the application of them, if such application moves one pillar from the foundation that God has sustained these fifty years, is a great mistake. He who makes such an application knows not the wonderful demonstration of the Holy Spirit that gave power and force to the past messages that have come to the people of God.-- Preach the Word, p. 5. (1905.) {CW 32.2}

-----end of quote-----

Will,

Could you point out in the above quote what really spoke out to you about this?

Though the 28 Fundamental Beliefs & The Pillars of the SDA Church seem to be in tune to each other, I can see why certain "independent ministries" have emerged over the years.

"Our Pulpits" as well as, "Our Publishing" seem to be lacking when it comes to presenting the "Pillars of the Faith".

I will admit to not receiving the Review, and only occasionally reading it online, or at my mothers. If I recall correctly, the last I knew, there are several versions of the publication, and you chose which version is for you. Do I have that correct?

Seems like they are trying to be to many thing to various people, and neglecting the past, the pioneer teaching of the "Landmarks of the Faith". Especially in light of some illumination shed in the article. The first paragraph:


I can see why "independent ministries" are republishing the works of the "Pioneers" as there is neglect, of this from the SDA publishing house's.

I occasionally read from Our Firm Foundation as it shows up in the mail as a sample issue. I just checked it out online and looked at the Jan 2007 issue. The "headlines" are:


How often do we even see one of this subjects addressed in the Review?

I have noted that the dead usually speak in one or two articles per issue, either Ellen or one of the other "Pioneers". In this particular issue that I have just looked over, I see an intriguing sub-heading, from a reprint article of Ellen's:


This makes since to me as Jesus is our Sabbath rest.

Daryl & Others,
I quoted basically the entire chapter in pieces, and highlighted the important areas that spoke very clearly to me. The entire paragraphs were included so we can understand the context in which I highlighted certain areas.













God Bless & Happy Sabbath,
Will

Crater,
The only thing I have seen independent ministries do is bash the SeventhDay Adventist church.
Where I live there is a lady who is with HopeInt, and this is exactly what she does. I have also seen others who profess to be Christians, and the same venomous accusations come out of their mouths, and they do the exact same thing that Ellen White wrote about i.e. Sow discord, break up unity, and have their imaginary battlecry "standing by the old landmarks".
I have actually entertained ideas from these independent groups, have talked with them to get an understanding of what it is they believe, and in fact look at what I believe and see where I may be wrong. I see very little and in fact very rarely anything about the 3rd Angels message, or talks about having the mind of Christ. Some have areas of specialty i.e. Feast Days, the Trinity, or showing documentation at how much the SDA organization has apostatized.
My mental response is "Who cares" since we share the same air with murderers, look at the same moon as prostitutes, and share the same telephone connections and internet connections used to broadcast pornography, and all live on a planet where evil is all around us, and all they can talk about is how worldly the church is, how it has apostatized, how it has lied bla bla.
I am sure every organization has its dark secrets, but I am not attached to a mental collective and turned into a drone. I as an individual make up my own mind, and take action based on what I have seen, and I actually prefer the SDA organized church to be more fruitful with all it's faults in it's proclamation of the Gospel than I do these independent minsitries, who seem to be a support group for disgruntled people. This is what I have seen, and heard with my own eyes and ears.
What are your thoughts?
God Bless & Happy Sabbath,
Will

Your list is very similar to the list I made from the same quote (Pillars/Landmarks). It looks like the 28 is a superset of the pillars from that quote. But I wouldn't say that the rest of the 28 are non-essentials. Topics such as the Scriptures and the Godhead did not make it on the list in CW, but I think they are pretty important.

I've had my share of experiences with those you describe. And I think one fundamental reason why they do what they do is because they are drones. Perfectly mimicking their leader, they will attack the church by enumerating the errors of past and present leaders, evidently believing that SDAs are members because of particular human leaders and assuming that you will join them once you see that the leadership is imperfect. They can't quite comprehend that one can be part of an organization, without surrendering one's will to the human head of the organization.

But don't ever try to disagree with their leader. Their leader is perfect in all his interpretations and pronouncements. If you do, you are a Jesuit spy, or a dumb dog, or a willing dupe, or a ....

OTOH, the SDA organization does fall short of its mission. And there are too many who are satisfied with the status quo. If we would be more faithful to duty, I think there would be fewer independent ministries (and their followers).

I read the entire thread from the link you posted asygo, and I think the landmarks you listed and the ones here are exactly the same thing.
The items you listed were not mentioned as being a landmark. This is not what made the SDA church special with the message God had given it to proclaim to others. All other churches have that, what was a landmark in making the SDA Church different? I believe the landmarks identified illustrate it in all its simplicity.
What do you think?
God Bless & Happy Sabbath,
Will

I agree asygo, many are satisfied with the status quo, and there are several areas the SDA church falls short in, let alone condones things that aren't correct, but that's "them". I know that when I made the decision to join the SDA church it was for one obvious clear reason, and it was because of they keep the commandments of God and are strong regarding prophecy.
As a body made up of members, we can all do something to tell others about Jesus Christ and how He is coming again.
God Bless & Happy Sabbath,
Will

I'm not sure that the landmarks are unique to Adventism. The 7th-day Baptists got the Sabbath first. I've heard that our only unique teaching is the sanctuary. But regardless, they are all true.

And to answer the original question, I think there is a difference, but there is no conflict.

You're right asygo, I forgot about SDB's. However isn't the Three Angels Message unique to SDA's also, and also what is called annihilation where the dead are completely destroyed instead of living for eternity in hell also unique to SDA's?
God Bless,
Will

Come to think of it, maybe the Sanctuary teaching is unique to the SDA's. The reason I mention that is that the early SDA's were a mixture of people from different backgrounds, William Miller was Baptist, Ellen White Methodist, and others were from different denominations. Some doctrines from each of those or from some came into the SDA church.
God Bless,
Will

I was thinking of the terms being used here: pillars, landmarks, fundamentals, etc. The word pillar reminds me of construction. The foundation, therefore, must be Christ and Him crucified. The pillars stand upon it. The roof rests upon the pillars. I suppose the rest of the fundamental beliefs make up the roof? I dunno know. Was just thinking out loud.

RE: Babylon bashers. I like the following statement: " The way to dispel darkness is to admit light. The best way to deal with error is to present truth. It is the revelation of God's love that makes manifest the deformity and sin of the heart centered in self." {DA 498.5} Why focus on fighting darkness when focusing on the light does the job?

I think not any of them isolately, but all of them together is what distinguishes the SDA Church from other churches.

I will try and restate this, hopefully more clearly.

Daryl furnished a list of "Pillars" aligned with "Fundamental Beliefs" My question is: Do we see them being taught in "official SDA publications"?


Though the 28 Fundamental Beliefs & The Pillars of the SDA Church seem to be in tune to each other, I can see why certain "independent ministries" have emerged over the years.

I find that the majority of, "Our Pulpits" as well as, "Our Publishing" seem to be lacking when it comes to presenting the "Pillars of the Faith" as listed above.

Seems to me that the Review is neglecting the past, the pioneer teaching of the "Landmarks of the Faith". Especially in light of some illumination shed in the article that Daryl posted. Did you note the first paragraph, the first sentence (Chap. 3 - The Foundations, Pillars, and Landmarks, Early Workers to Speak.--God has given me light regarding our periodicals {CW 28.1}?) "God has given me light" and "The word given me is:" are used in the first paragraph! To me that is perhaps the most significant part of the whole article.


I can see why "independent ministries" are republishing the works of the "Pioneers" as there is neglect, of this from the SDA publishing house's.

Our Firm Foundation I just checked it out online and looked at the Jan 2007 issue. The "headlines" are:


I have noted that the "dead" usually "speak" in one or two articles per issue, either Ellen or one of the other "Pioneers".

How often do we even see one of this subjects addressed in the Adventist Review
"Or the dead speak"?

Now compare the titles for the articles of the same month of Adventist Review. (I picked both at random).


Looking over the titles for the current issue of the Adventist Review, for just a second I was happy to see the heading, "Church Launch 'New Sanctuary' Movement. I thought oh, I'm glad to see I am wrong, here is an article on the "Sanctuary", then I read the next two words. Sorry the jokes on me!


My only further comment on "independent ministries" is that I can see why "independent ministries" are republishing the works of the "Pioneers," as there appears to be neglect of this from the SDA publishing house's. To discuss the independent ministries further in this thread would be .

Good point Crater, very good points. Why is it that such things happen? I mean why aren't more articles whether they are 100 or 1 year old being published today? Personally I find it inspiring to see the object lessons taught in the sanctuary services which pointed to Christ, the plan of Salvation, forgiveness, the angels surrounding the throne, etc etc. Really wonderful truths and promises. I like some things that independent ministries write, but they are far and between, [EDIT]but will be reading HopeInt articles with a little more open mind i.e. disregarding anyone's bad behavior should not reflect on those which they claim to represent.
Maybe it's time to email the editor at Adventist Review to print an old article from yesteryear, one that speaks powerfully?
God Bless,
Will

MM,
I agree with your analogies, maybe the fundamental beliefs make up different parts of the building, but not what makes up the structural integrity? Does that sound, or would you think it to be correct to describe it as so?
I am just starting to read DA so thanks for that quote. I am hoping to learn a lot, and am trying to get back to the basics of my Faith.
God Bless,
Will

Rosangela,
When you have some time can you expand abit on your post?


I understand what you said, but am thinking that the sanctuary doctrine, three angels message, Spirit of Prophecy, (Is that unique to us?), can be isolated as being unique, but together they paint a portrait that is beautiful and makes a truly unique doctrine pointing to Christ.
What do you think?
God Bless,
Will

Yes, Will, they indeed paint a portrait that makes a truly unique doctrine pointing to Christ. The portrait of Christ’s mission is not complete without the emphasis on His mediatory ministry. Other churches focus mainly on the cross, forgetting that, without Christ’s intercessory ministry, the cross wouldn’t have saved us.

It’s interesting that the pillars were the truths rediscovered by our pioneers, and they are all intertwined. By October 23, 1844, Edson had already reached the conclusion that the sanctuary to be cleansed was the heavenly one. Then the Adventists related the perpetuity of the Law of God and of the Sabbath with the heavenly sanctuary, mainly through the text of Rev. 11:19. The Law and the Sabbath were also related to the third angel’s message, through Rev. 14:12. The Adventists also concluded that on October 22, 1844 Christ had entered the Most Holy Place to begin the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, which was understood as comprehending an investigative judgment. But the belief in the unconscious state of the dead was fundamental for their belief in an investigative judgment, since if the dead received their reward at death, there would be no need for an investigative judgment and for a final resurrection. Thus, these intertwined truths formed the core of our distinctive message as a church.

Hi Will,

Did you ever consider the earlier, original books?

• Spiritual Gifts, Vols. 1 - 4.
• Spirit of Prophecy, Vols. 1 - 4.
• Sketches from the Life of Paul.

These smaller, black, hardbound volumes are the fore-runners to the current Conflict Series. They are photofacsimile reprints of the original volumes, which were reasonably priced when bought some years ago from the Adventist Book Center. They may still be available. Spiritual Gifts also contains some Testimonies for the Church and the early health message. Compact, very readable, every bit inspired.

Gordon

Hi Gordonb1,
I have considered it, but I don't see a reason to get all of these editions, when I have the set my mom bought me many many years ago. Currently I have 3 versions of the Great Controvbersy, the little skinny one that is around 100 some odd pages, the thicker black book which I find valuable as it contains footnotes on verses, and the later one in a cream colored binding with a picture of Christ and His Angels on it.The message is still the same.
I did see them at the ABC not too long ago, so they are in circulation.
On a side note, the health message is not a pillar of our faith, many religions, and creeds adopt a health message, so it is not unique to us. I am looking more towards what we believed in.
Thanks for your input.
God Bless,
Will

Thanks for that summary Rosangela, it really captures the essence of our faith as it is in Christ. Not long winded, but short, to the point and packs a punch!
God Bless,
Will

Very important, but not a pillar. Same goes for the nature of Christ? Trinity/Godhead?

Very true asygo.
God Bless,
Will

Isn't there one aspect that is unique to us in the area of health in relation to the clean and the unclean?

How would it be unique to us?

Aren't there others that follow the teaching of clean and unclean as given in Scripture?

I don't see the teaching listed in either the 28 FB or the Pillars.

True, the health message is not unique. Muslims, Buddhists, New Agers, secular world are aware of the benefits of being healthy, are aware of the health risks involved in eating unclean meats for whatever reason whether it be religion, science, conscious.. This would apply to clean meats as well considering there is a large group of people who are generally secular, and do not eat nor consume any animal products whatsoever. The thought of killing an animal to be served on a plate is abhorrent to them, and if you do some reading on it, the whole industry itself is rather barbaric.
Anyways I digressed abit, but the gist is really that it's not:
A. A fundamental belief.
B. A requirement for Salvation
C. Man adds to it, and make their own version of the Gospel based on the health message.

God Bless,
Will

While it's not a requirement for salvation, how one relates to it definitely has salvific implications.

BTW, my experience tells me that New Agers are much more committed to this than most Adventists.

Very true asygo. In fact they have no problem informing you of the joys of being healthy, and how to get healthy. They show great enthusiasm, and are very educated, and kind, ironic don't you think?
But this isn't about the health message, it's about our pillars of faith as established by the pioneers of our faith of which the health message is not a part of, and the 28 fundamental beliefs currently held by our church, and if they still are intertwined.
God Bless,
Will

The SDA confession.

This week's Sabbath School is on the Bible and Health, therefore, you may wish to go to that topic and take a look at the link to the lesson material itself, as well as the discussion going on there.

Three quick points (as I'm just catching up with this thread).

In that earlier quote from CW is the message she gave that the foundations of the pillars would be moved by those in the church - along with not understanding the pillars in the 1888 crisis...a very true insight. It can easily be proved - is indeed well known, that the foundations of our pillars of our faith have been shifted to produce yet another variant but mistaken understanding of those truths: an untrue meaning differing from that studied out by the pioneers.

Which leads to the other points here - both raised before on this thread. The nature(s) of Christ, and those other few that Asygo discussed very briefly with Will, who observed that they were not doctrines listed among the pillars of Adventism's faith. True, but they are the foundations of the pillars (at least I one I named is), and their shifting by some in our church is well known by now.

How they effect the affect of the pillars is their relevance to our understanding of the pillars and our faith. The "Independent Ministries" is a politically correct label, of course - bearing their history in mind; to continue being dramatic is not necessarily wise of them. The SOP is being challenged - no, attacked - from within the church these last several years, in the name of holding her up(!)....The issues are moving on since the 60-80's, so how should the 'old' and 'new' issues be balanced?

....cont./

What is the central truth of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ which is potentially misunderstood by the church AND the so-called independent ministries AND the members? The HISTORY, SIZE and ACHIEVEMENTS of God's grace.

Now, it's sad infamy for Our Firm Foundation to be known via its regular readers as critical of the church, given the lack of coverage of and understanding by the church of the issues that magazine seeks to trumpet.

Some 11 or so years ago I looked closely at that group and the other (both are) self-supporting ministry appealing to our history for its hidden treasures: the loved, loathed or disregarded 1888 Message Study Committee. The one highlighted (& still does) for remembrance' sake Adventism's omnipotent line on sanctification - Ellen herself unabashedly taught Christian, character perfection by faith, in the context of the final atonement of & by Christ. The other group highlighted (and still does) the full truth about what grace has done with this world when God gave it his only begotten Son: a most positive, "most precious message" which Adventism has been given the beginning of by "two men". Now that's a positive angle - which Elder Folkenberg personally continues to evangelise with.

What is this "full truth" about grace? I am sounding overly arrogant, I know, but...: consider, when property (painting or real estate, etc...) is passed by death in a will, when is legal ownership of that property transferred from the deceased to the heir? Possessing property is another question: when does title pass??? At point of death, of course (not being unsympathetic, here, now). What property did Christ give by will, and to whom, and when?...

...Why do I bother, or in that new BBC slang, why am I bovered?

It touches and facilitates our truly unique doctrine, for everyone's sake.

There is only one part of the gospel which relies on Christ's atonement intercession: preparation for translation. Preparation to fall asleep in Jesus is both common practice among all denominations - including Roman Catholics (and thus most definitely NOT not a belief & practice unique to us!...), and all who die after coming to faith in Jesus are saved for the kingdom by the light they have received & believed because the cross has already saved all men in Christ (Rom 3:23,24) and the final atonement isn't the height of their experience of Christ's righteousness.

IOW, the cross is effective by grace without faith - for faith, and Adventism was raised by God to give the final atonement minsitry of Christ meaning as the preparation for translation wihtout seeing death (sorry,...of course), that is marriage counselling for the wedding of the Lamb which is the close of probation.

I've only heard that 'wedding' illustration from Elders Wieland & Short's group and Dwight Nelson's youth pastor (with Dwight's endorsement, he said), and I hope others present that understanding, too, but I've not observed any mention of it from the so-called historics.

There is a gross lack of preaching and printing on these issues, let alone motivated understanding. The pillars of our faith inform the general spread of beliefs, else they lack purpose.

Let me abbreviate all that. The 28 Fundamentals express our whole Christian, spiritual reality and experience with God and his Spirit. The old landmarks, pillars of our faith, emphasise the goal of our message: finishing the work of the gospel with Jesus so he can come again to give us the promised eternal life.

Those landmarks and their emphases have been shaken and diminished over the last 60 years by our literature and preaching due to just one doctrinal change in our church history: now there are at least two understandings of the human nature of Jesus, one of which supports the old landmark truths and one of which does not. Those truths are a complete package, so the several that link directly to the humanity of the Saviour make this issue directly relevant to the other truths in turn.

The literary debate over the humanity of Christ has gone to bed for the last 10 years or so, and Ellen White's authority is now in the spot light, but the old landmarks remain largely silent in the pulpit for 30 years now, or 60 years...

The heart of our message is missing and without it we just appear to ourselves - and sound - like any other Protestant church, while others allege we're Roman Catholic because those others don't understand true gospel power - a truth we're also battling to grasp.

A sorry situation, after Jesus wanted us to proclaim that gospel power to the world and witness to it ourselves. Do the old landmarks not focus our message and faith goal for the generality of the breadth of all our beliefs?

Comments anyone? I mustn't do all the talking here...

Colin,

You may want to read a sermon I did and presented one Sabbath in our local church.

Here's the link:

http://www.maritime-sda-online.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=89037&page=1#Post89037

I would be interested in your comment on that sermon as it relates to this topic.

I agree that a proper understanding of Christ's human nature is important. Moreover, I think the "Christ's human nature is just like ours" concept easily leads to the "dry as the hills of Gilboa" message, and militates against the Everlasting Gospel with which we are to enlighten the world. Essentially, it undermines the pillars set forth in the SOP.

However, I find it hard to believe that the pillars all stand or fall based on one's position on a doctrine that inspiration does not list among the pillars. If it was that important, don't you think EGW would have mentioned it?

Just spotted your linked sermon and had a look at it, and it's good.

The problem it shows up, in this thread's discussion, is how we now understand the pillars of our faith, compared to how they are properly understood from the Bible & SOP: what is the gospel's message contained in those pillar truths? Having the topic listed among the beliefs doesn't mean we understand it correctly.

Oops, I feel a sermon coming on here so this may not be brief but it'll be good.

The pillars of our faith constitute an issue of practical Godliness, but there's this "in Him" in both paragraphs quoted below (here) from your citing of the doctrinal statement in your sermon (iow I didn't go and search it out elsewhere on the internet!), and....

"The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection.

It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom."

This Biblical wording, "in Him", is taught by other churches as referring to Christ filling the gap of our character deficiencies in our spiritual record as Christians with his perfect traits, as they simultaneously deal with sanctification and the final judgement - the former is never finished for the latter, so "in Him" by faith we also achieve complete righteousness (we Adventists say "characters") in the judgement.

We allow this meaning in our doctrinal statement, if we don't actually rely on it.

"in Him" also refers to the source of merits which justify us, or rather the location of those merits: Adventism no longer teaches that Christ's merits are recreated in us by the renewal of the mind (Rom 12:2) of justification, since justification by faith is now supposed to be purely a legal declaration by God that "in Christ" we are righteous: no internal change like creating the righteous mind of Christ in us as we submit to the Spirit's Lordship of "Christ in [us] the hope of glory". (You can detect practical issues of the Godhead involved at this point!...)

Rather than the rest of the details, are we getting the picture of an incomplete gospel in which salvation has Christ's merits covering our heavenly record of guilt but not recreating those merits as our justified minds - through faith?

This is the Evangelical gospel, which does not require perfect sanctification, and all required gospel elements - grace, faith, justification (ie. righteousness) and judgement - are "in Christ". That is, Christ's life lived in our place, and recorded for us on our heavenly records, in place of our guilt.

Yes, we officially say that justification is done for us, and sanctification is done in us, but that's not Biblical: unless the renewal of our minds (Rom 12:2) is the basis of character building, and hence regeneration itself is justification by faith, sanctification is impossible for there is no legal or practical basis in our experience for transforming our characters - for lack of a renewed mind. Sanctification uses the renewed mind, it doesn't actually put it there.

In 1976 what I have suggested just now was reported by the Review as the truth, in the consensus statement at Palmdale after the GC discussed with the Australian leadership led by Desmond Ford what righteousness by faith means. The statement said: "Righteousness by faith...is the experience of justification." That mandates sanctification for the gospel since justification experienced is the sanctified life.

Our doctrinal statement allows the exclusion of sanctification from the gospel, with that "in Him" as the reason ("therefore") that we are ready for translation, which is ambiguous wording: it either means we are also justified in the legal sense alone, which is the straight forward Evangelical lack of sanctification (which has been rendered impossible), or it's unclear! - an oxymoron, placed along side the character cleansing of the faith of Jesus in the proper understanding of the sanctuary truth.

Since we now view the investigative judgement as obtaining an acquittal - like the Sunday churches view it, rather than the cleansing of our characters - though we use that language ("Commandments..." keeping), the sanctuary truth of producing Christlike characters because we're justified by faith in our minds is combined with the Evangelical notion of having "in Christ" the missing righteous character traits for the judgement: finished Christlike charater is incompatible with that Evangelical notion.

Rev 19:8 states that the saints develop perfect characters, with "the righteous deeds of the saints" which traits constitute the perfect wedding dress of the Lamb's bride.

That "righteous deeds of the saints" is not "in Him" since its been installed in us by him! Since the judgement fits us for heaven with our own Christlike characters while we're here, and Christ doesn't even seek to acquit us, that emphasis is at best omitted in this doctrinal statement and at worst cancelled by the contradiction of "in Him" in the context of readiness for translation.

BTW: Sanctification is not required by Evangelicals because there's no chance of it working properly (however the Evangelicals present the Christian faith!), since facilitating successful sanctification happens to require the Saviour taking the same humanity as his own which also has to go through the trials of perfecting characters in us saints....Sorry for sounding obvious.

In the context of the sanctuary cleansing and the internalising of imputed and imparted righteousness, the humanity of Christ is the cornerstone. That was its context in the 1888 message, for upholding the sanctuary truth.

One cannot believe that Jesus had to take our "humanity as his own which also has to go through the trials of perfecting characters in us saints" and also believe that all humans, save Christ, have sinned and fall short of God's glory. The fact that I have sinned and Jesus never did is incontrovertible proof that I must do some things that Jesus did not. IOW, I need a Savior, while Christ did not.

I appears from what you say, asygo, that you have missed out 9 tenths of the gospel - especially after quoting a side comment of mine added to a summary of the gospel.

Yes, Jesus is our Saviour and not the other way round. Jesus also did several things that we haven't done, like being a Christian all his life rather than just after "adult" baptism, and learning righteousness from overcoming every temptation, and also not having sinful traits of character to replace with righteous traits - that's our task with him. You already mentioned the obvious difference that we have sinned and Christ has not.

The real issue I think you're upset about is that you think I'm saying the we saints save ourselves by character perfection apart from Jesus. If that is your concern, you should be able to see it is not my position from the rest of my post you responded to. Have you no comment about the point I made on "in Him" and preparation for translation?

So we still have to clarify the connection between the humanity of Christ and the sanctuary's cleansing?

Why, asygo, can we who have sinned not also develop cleansed and perfect characters through Christ's sanctuary atonement ministry? That is after all your assertion. Or do you consider that perfect characters aren't on the menu for the redeemed - just necessary for the Redeemer?

Seems to me if we disregard the idea that we incur guilt and condemnation, even before we are born or commit a sin, by merely inheriting sinful flesh nature, that we could agree Jesus inherited the same sinful flesh nature we inherit. Again, no one is guilty or condemned based on the fact they inherit sinful flesh nature. Having sinful flesh nature is not the origin of our sin and guilt and condemnation.

Sinning is the source of our guilt and condemnation, not ancestry or inheritance. "All have sinned." This is one of the most basic tenets of Christian belief. "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief." Through faith in the shed blood of Jesus, God does not hold our sinning against us. "Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin." From the dawn of consciousness, we naturally, automatically, instinctively sin. Which is precisely why we must be born again.

Jesus existed in heaven before His incarnation, therefore, He was able to make a choice before His birth to be born "born again." Jesus did not enter the world like we do, that is, under the "dominion of sin". Instead, He began life like a born again believer. Unlike us, Jesus started His earthly journey submitted and surrendered to God. Which is right. He did not come to show us what it is like to be lost. Jesus came to show us how to be godly, how to recognize and resist the unholy clamorings of sinful flesh nature. Yes, He was tempted from within and from without in exactly the same way we are.

5BC 1128
He was tempted in all points like as man is tempted [from within and from without], yet He is called "that holy thing." It is a mystery that is left unexplained to mortals that Christ could be tempted in all points like as we are, and yet be without sin. The incarnation of Christ has ever been, and will ever remain a mystery. {5BC 1128.6}

The fact Jesus did not sin as an adult is no "mystery", thus, she is obviously referring to the ages of non-accountability. That is, the fact Jesus did not sin before He reached the age of accountability is a mystery to us. God has chosen not to explain it to us. Exactly how and why Jesus did not sin as an infant is something God has not told us. The reason it is a mystery is due to the fact infants automatically sin. Otherwise, it would not be a mystery.

To say the reason why Jesus did not sin as an infant is due to the fact He did not inherit the same sinful flesh nature we inherit attempts to explain an unexplainable mystery. To say the reason He did not sin during infancy is because He was born "that holy thing" also attempts to explain an unexplainable mystery. The thing that makes it a mystery is the fact He was born with the same sinful flesh nature we inherit and yet He did not sin automatically like we do.

Yes, the nature of sin is the correct beginning of the issue of the Incarnation, and everything in your post yesterday is accurate, including the last paragraph.

But, asygo, the experience of justification is righteousness by faith, so what about the meaning of "in Him" for preparation for translation in the sanctuary doctrine's official definition?

This thread is about the truths which gave birth to the Advent Movement, not just the Incarnation. Put "the Word became flesh" next to true righteousness by faith for him and us, and the sanctuary cleansing in heaven becomes an enthralling topic, since...

The pillars of our faith make that cleansing of the sanctuary the necessity of our time, as getting to heaven isn't about getting into the first resurrection anymore: it's about participating in translation/glorification in its one occurrence in history for mankind. The resurrection depends on the Second Coming, which depends on those living being ready for translation. What else does it mean with 'what manner of people ought ye to be' and 'hasten the return of our Lord'?

The 28 Fundamentals may expand our philosophical expression of faith as far as we find by experience and insight, but the pillars focus our experience of justification (that's RBF, don't you know), do they not?

Colin

It's my understanding that the pillars are what makes us unique as a church.

Yes, that at least is true. They're a unique doctrinal package for a unique experience, aren't they?

Yes, which is why we need to bring them before the church more often than what is presently being done.

No, it's not. My beef is with this statement about Jesus: "has to go through the trials of perfecting characters in us saints."

The implication that Jesus had to go through the same process of perfecting character that we do is odious to me. Why? Because it means that He was spiritually dead at some point.

Why does it necessitate such an implication? Jesus didn't have to sin to become sin for us. Nor did He have to sin to suffer and die on our behalf.

If Jesus "has to go through the trials of perfecting characters in us saints" then He had an imperfect, even evil, character at some point, just like the saints.

Are these the three pillars?

"Perfecting holiness" (2 Cor 7:1) does not require starting off with sinful traits of character. Believers begin, as it were, at rebirth where Jesus began at birth. Paul makes this point in the following passage:

Romans
6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

Ellen White wrote the following:

Unless there is a possibility of yielding, temptation is no temptation. Temptation is resisted when man is powerfully influenced to do a wrong action; and, knowing that he can do it, resists, by faith, with a firm hold upon divine power. This was the ordeal through which Christ passed. (3SM 132)

God takes men upon trial; He proves them on the right hand and on the left, and thus they are educated, trained, disciplined. Jesus, our Redeemer, man’s representative and head, endured this testing process. (4T 86)

Ellen White wrote:

In Minneapolis God gave precious gems of truth to His people in new settings. This light from heaven by some was rejected with all the stubbornness the Jews manifested in rejecting Christ, and there was much talk about standing by the old landmarks. But there was evidence they knew not what the old landmarks were. There was evidence and there was reasoning from the word that commended itself to the conscience; but the minds of men were fixed, sealed against the entrance of light, because they had decided it was a dangerous error removing the "old landmarks" when it was not moving a peg of the old landmarks, but they had perverted ideas of what constituted the old landmarks. {CW 30.1}

The passing of the time in 1844 was a period of great events, opening to our astonished eyes the cleansing of the sanctuary transpiring in heaven, and having decided relation to God's people upon the earth, [also] the first and second angels' messages and the third, unfurling the banner on which was inscribed, "The commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." One of the landmarks under this message was the temple of God, seen by His truth-loving people in heaven, and the ark containing the law of God. The light of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment flashed its strong rays in the pathway of the transgressors of God's law. The nonimmortality of the wicked is an old landmark. I can call to mind nothing more that can come under the head of the old landmarks. All this cry about changing the old landmarks is all imaginary. {CW 30.2}

Now at the present time God designs a new and fresh impetus shall be given to His work. Satan sees this, and he is determined it shall be hindered. He knows that if he can deceive the people who claim to believe present truth, [and make them believe that] the work the Lord designs to do for His people is a removing of the old landmarks, something which they should, with most determined zeal, resist, then he exults over the deception he has led them to believe. The work for this time has certainly been a surprising work of various hindrances, owing to the false setting of matters before the minds of many of our people. That which is food to the churches is regarded as dangerous, and should not be given them. And this slight difference of ideas is allowed to unsettle the faith, to cause apostasy, to break up unity, to sow discord, all because they do not know what they are striving about themselves. Brethren, is it not best to be sensible? Heaven is looking upon us all, and what can they think of recent developments? While in this condition of things, building up barriers, we not only deprive ourselves of great light and precious advantages, but just now, when we so much need it, we place ourselves where light cannot be communicated from heaven that we ought to communicate to others.--Manuscript 13, 1889. {CW 31.1}

The 28 Fundamental Beliefs would probably be better compared with the pioneers stated fundamental beliefs to see if there is a difference.

Pioneers statement of faith 1874 -1914
Printed in most of the year books during that time, as well as in numerous Reviews and Signs of the Times

The following is from Signs of Times June 4, 1874

1. That there is one God, a personal, spiritual being, the creator of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal, in finite in wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, truth, and mercy; unchangeable-, and everywhere present by his representative, the Holy Spirit. Ps. 139 :7.

2. That there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the* Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom God created all things, and by whom they do consist; that he took on him the nature of the seed of Abraham for the redemption of our fallen race; that he dwelt among men, full of grace and truth, lived our example, died our sacrifice, was raised for our justification, ascended on high to be our only mediator in the sanctuary in Heaven, where, with his own blood he makes atonement for our sins; which atonement, so far from being mode on the cross, which was but the offering of the sacrifice, is the very last portion of his work as priest, according to the example of the Levitical priesthood, which foreshadowed and prefigured the ministry of our Lord in Heaven. See Lev. Iti ; Heb. 8:4,5;
9:G,7;&c.

3. That the Holy Scriptures, of the Old and New Testaments, were given by inspiration of God, contain a full revelation of his will to man, and are the only infallible rule of faith and practice.

4. That baptism is an ordinance of the Christian church, to follow faith and repentance, an
ordinance by which we commemorate the resurrection of Christ, as by this act we show our faith in his burial and resurrection, and, through that, of the resurrection of all the saints at the last day and that no other mode fitly represents these facts, then that which the scriptures prescribe, namely immersion. (Romans 6:3-5; Col. 2:12)

5. That the new birth comprises the entire change necessary to fit us for the kingdom of God; and consists of two parts, a) A moral change wrought by conversion and a Christian life, b) a physical change at the second coming of Christ. Whereby, if dead we are raised incorruptible , and, if living, are changed to immortality in a moment, in the twinkling of eye. John 3:3, 5; Luke 20: 3G.

6. We believe that prophecy is a part of God's revelation to man; that it is included in that scripture which is profitable for instruction ; 2 Tim. 3 : 16; that it is designed for us and our children ; Deut.29 : 29; that so far from being enshrouded in impenetrable mystery, it is that which especially constitutes the word of God; a lamp to our feet and a light to our path Ps. 119 : 105; 2 Pet. 2:19; that a blessing is pronounced upon those who study it Rev. 1: 1-3; and that, consequently, it is to be understood by the people of God sufficiently to show them their position in the world's history, and the special duties required at their hands.

7. That the world's history from specified dates in the past, the rise and fall of empires, and chronological succession of events down to the setting up of God' everlasting kingdom, are outlined in numerous great chains of prophecy; and that these prophecies are now all fulfilled except the closing scenes.

8. That the doctrine of the world's conversion and temporal millennium is a fable of these last days, calculated to lull men into a state of carnal security, and cause them to be overtaken by the great day of the Lord as by a thief in the night ; that the second coming of Christ is to precede not follow, the millennium; for until the Lord appears, the papal power, with all its abominations, is to continue, the wheat and tares grow together, and evil men and seducers wax worse and worse, as the word of God declares.

9. That the mistake of Adventists in 1844 pertained to the nature of the event then
o transpire, not to the time; that no prophetic period is given to reach to the second advent, but that the longest one, the two thousand and three hundred days ) Dan. 8:14, terminated in that year, and wrought us to an event called the cleansing of the sanctuary.

10. That the sanctuary of the new covenant is the tabernacle of God in Heaven, if which Paul speaks in Hebrews 8, and inward, of which our Lord, as great High Priest, is minister; that this sanctuary is the antitype of the Mosaic tabernacle, and that the priestly work of our Lord, connected therewith, is the antitype of the work of the Jewish priests of the former dispensation; Heb. 8:1-5, etc..; that this is the sanctuary to be cleansed at the end of the 2300 days; what is termed as to cleansing being in this case, as in the type, simply the entrance of the high priest into the most holy place, to finish the round of service connected therewith, by blotting out and removing from the sanctuary the sins which had been transferred to it by means of the ministration in the first apartment; Heb. 9: 22, 23; and that this work, in the antitype, commencing in 1844, occupies a brief but indefinite space, at the conclusion of which the work of mercy for the world is finished.

11. That God's moral requirements are the same upon all men in all dispensations; that these are summarily contained in the commandments- spoken by Jehovah from Sinai, engraven on the tables of stone, and deposited in the ark, which was in consequence called the "ark of the covenant, or testament; Num. 10:33; Heb. 9:4, &c.; that this law is immutable and perpetual, being a transcript of the tables deposited in the ark in the true sanctuary on high, which is also, for the same reason, called the ark of God's testament; for under the sounding of the seventh trumpet we are told that "the temple of God was opened in Heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of His testament." Rev. 11:19.

12. That the fourth commandment of this law requires that we devote the seventh day of each week, commonly called Saturday, to abstinence from our own labor, and to devout ourselves to the performance of sacred and religious duties; that this is the only weekly Sabbath known to the Bible, being the day that was set apart before paradise was lost, Gen. 2:2,3, and which will be observed in paradise restored; Is. 66 : 22,23. That the facts upon which the Sabbath institution is based confine it to the seventh day, as they are not true of any other day; and that the terms, Jewish Sabbath and Christian Sabbath, as applied to the weekly rest-day, are names of human invention, unscriptural in fact, and false in meaning.
13 . That, as the man of sin, the papacy, has thought to change times and laws (the laws of God), Dan. 7: 25, and has misled almost all Christendom in regard to the fourth commandment, we find a prophecy of a reform in this respect to be wrought among believers just before the coming of Christ. Isa. 56:1, 2; 1Pet. 1:5; Rev. 14: 12,&c.

14. That, as the natural or carnal heart is at enmity with God and his law. This enmity can be subdued only by a radical transformation of the affections, the exchange of unholy for holy principle ; that this transformation follows repentance and faith, is the special work of the Holy Spirit, and constitutes regeneration or conversion.

15. That, as all have violated the law of God, and cannot of themselves render obedience to His just requirements, we are dependent on Christ, first for justification from our past offenses, and, secondly, for grace whereby to render acceptable obedience to his holy law in time to come.

16. That the Spirit of God was promised to manifest itself in the church through certain gifts, enumerated especially in 1 Cor. 12, and Eph. 4 ; that these gifts are not designed to supersede, or take the place of, the Bible, which is sufficient to make us wise unto salvation, any more than the Bible can take the place of the Holy Spirit; that in specifying the various channels of its operation, that Spirit has simply made provision for its own existence and presence with the people of God to the end of time, to lead to an understanding of that word which it had inspired, to convince of sin, and work a transformation in the heart and life; and that those who deny to the Spirit its place and operation do plainly deny that part of the Bible which assigns to it this work and position.

17. That God in accordance with his uniform dealings with the race, sends forth a proclamation of the approach of the second advent of Christ; that this work is symbolized by the three messages of Rev. 14, the last one bringing to view the work of reform on the law of God, that his people may acquire a complete readiness for that event.

18. That the time of the cleansing of the sanctuary (see proposition X), synchronizing with the time of the proclamation of the third message, is a time of investigative judgment, first, with reference to the dead, and, at the close of probation, with reference to the living, to determine who of the myriads now sleeping in the dust of the earth are worthy of a part in the first resurrection, and who of its living multitudes are worthy of translation— which must be determined before the Lord appears.

19. That the grave, whither we all tend, expressed by the Hebrew “sheol” and the Greek “hades”, is a place of darkness in which there is no work, device, wisdom, or knowledge. Eccl. 9 :10.

20. That the state to which we are reduced by death is one of silence, inactivity, and entire unconsciousness. Ps.. 146 :4 ; Eccl. 9:5, 6; Dan. 12 :2, &c.

21. That out of this prison house of the grave, mankind are to be brought by a bodily resurrection; the righteous having part in the first resurrection, which takes place at the second advent of Christ ; the wicked, in the second resurrection, which takes place a thousand years thereafter. Rev. 20 :4-6.

22. That at the last trump, the living righteous are to be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, and with the resurrected righteous are to be caught up to meet the Lord in the air to go and be forever with the Lord.

23. That these immortalized ones are then taken to Heaven, to the New Jerusalem, the Father's house in which there are many mansions, John 14: 1-3, where they reign with Christ a thousand years, judging the world and fallen angels, that is, apportioning the punishment to be executed upon them at the close of the one thousand yean; Rev. 20 : 4; 1 Cor. 6 :2, 3; that during this time the earth is in a desolate and chaotic condition, Jer. 4: 20-27, described, as in the beginning, by the Greek term “abuseos” bottomless pit (Septuagint of Gen. 1:2) and that here Satan is confined during the thousand years, (Rev. 20 :1, 2,) and here finally destroyed; Rev. 20 :10; Mal. 4:1 ; the theater of the ruin he has wrought in the universe, being appropriately made for a time his gloomy prison house, and then the place of his final execution.

24. That at the end of the thousand years, the Lord descends with his people and the New Jerusalem, Rev. 21 : 2, the wicked dead are raised and come up upon the surface of the yet unrenewed earth, and gather about the city, the camp of the saints, Rev. 20:9-10 and fire comes down from God out of heaven, and devours them. They are then consumed root and branch, Mal. 4 :1, becoming as though they had not been. Obad. 15, 16. In this everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 2 Thess. 1:9, the wicked meet the everlasting punishment threatened against them. Matt. 5:46. This is the perdition of ungodly men, the fire which consumes them being the fire for which the heavens and the earth which are now " are kept in store, which shall melt even the elements with its intensity, and purge the earth from the deepest stains of the curse of sin. 2 Pet. 3 :7—12.

25. That a new heavens and earth shall spring by the power of God from the ashes of the old, to be, with the New Jerusalem for its metropolis and capitol, the eternal inheritance of the saints, the place where the righteous shall evermore dwell.
Pet. 3:13; Ps. 47:11,29; Matt. 6:5.

The question that serves as title of this thread asks if there is a difference between the 28 Fundamental Beliefs & The Pillars of the SDA Church. If we compare the historical 25 beliefs Dedication posted above with the current 28 beliefs several things stand out one of them being the space devoted to personal piety. The historical beliefs devote three short statements and the current beliefs devote 5 detailed statements.

Historical Statements


Current Statements


Both statements of belief say the "obedience" we "render" by faith and grace is "acceptable" to God.