Steps to apostasy

In the following quotation, brother J. N. Loughborough, who was one of the pioneers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, warned us about the five steps to apostasy.

Quotation:

The first step of apostasy is to get up a creed, telling us what we shall believe. The second is to make that creed a test of fellowship. The third is to try members by that creed. The fourth is to denounce as heretics those who do not believe that creed. And fifth, to commence persecution against such. I plead that we are not patterning after the churches in any unwarrantable sense in the step proposed.

John N. Loughborough, Review and Herald, Oct. 8, 1861.

These principles are important to have in mind, and we ought to ask ourselves if we, today, are patterning after the churches in any unwarrantable sense in the step proposed. What would happen to a Seventh-day Adventist who would reject the Trinity doctrine in favor of the Fundamental Principles? Do we have a creed set up in our church? Do we test our membership by it?

The Fundamental Principles had a different nature and role in the Seventh-day Adventist Church contrary to that of the pattern held by other churches. The Fundamental Principles were not designed as a creed. In the preface of the 1872 statement, we read about their nature:

Quotation:

In presenting to the public this synopsis of our faith, we wish to have it distinctly understood that we have no articles of faith, creed, or discipline, aside from the Bible. We do not put forth this as having any authority with our people, nor is it designed to secure uniformity among them, as a system of faith, but is a brief statement of what is, and has been, with great unanimity, held by them.

A Declaration of the Fundamental Principles, Taught and Practiced by the Seventh-Day Adventists, 1872

In the preface of the 1889 statement, we read similar sentiments:

Quotation:

As elsewhere stated, Seventh-day Adventists have no creed but the Bible; but they hold to certain well-defined points of faith, for which they feel prepared to give a reason ‘to every man that asketh’ them. The following propositions may be taken as a summary of the principal features of their religious faith, upon which there is, so far as we know, entire unanimity throughout the body.

Seventh-day Adventist Year Book of statistics for 1889, pg. 147, The Fundamental Principles of Seventh-day Adventists

The Fundamental Principles were not designed to dictate someone’s faith. The believers, led by the Holy Spirit, freely rendered their consciences to the Word of God; under the influence of the Holy Spirit, they came to the same conclusions. There was entire unanimity throughout the body. All believers felt “prepared to give a reason to every man that asketh them” regarding their faith.

Today we see a striking difference in the principles and practice of Adventist beliefs compared to our pioneers. We are keeping the spirit of unity by disciplining our members for the denial of the Fundamental Beliefs. In our church manual, under the section “Reason for Disciplines”, we read the first point which states the discipline for denial of faith in the Seventh-day Adventist Fundamental Beliefs.

Quotation:

Reasons for Discipline

Quotation:

1. Denial of faith in the fundamentals of the gospel and in the Fundamental Beliefs of the Church or teaching doctrines contrary to the same.

SDA Church Manual, 20th edition, Revised 2022, p. 67

To discipline someone over their faith is nothing else than coercion of conscience. We are to render our conscience to the Bible alone—not to any man, councils or church creed(s). Disciplining members for their denial of the Fundamental Beliefs is clear evidence that we, indeed, have a creed besides the Bible. We cannot exercise the freedom of our conscience in subjection to the Word of God while confined to a set of beliefs that, if questioned with the authority of the Bible, will be disciplined. In our practice we have forgotten the foundation of protestantism and reformation. All reformers have had their conscience coerced to the extent of their lives. Martin Luther had famously put this principle in action in his defense before the Diet of Worms.

Quotation:

Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason—I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other—my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen.

Bainton, 182

If one Seventh-day Adventist member has his conscience captive to the Word of God and is not in harmony with the Seventh-day Adventist Fundamental Beliefs, his conscience should not be coerced by church discipline. We know that in the end of time, the whole Seventh-day Adventist Church will be coerced over the issue of the Sabbath. We have been fighting for religious freedom, yet we’re allowing ourselves to coerce the conscience of those who are not in harmony with the Fundamental Beliefs. If today we discipline our members for not subjecting their consciences to men, councils and creeds, how shall we act tomorrow when the government will discipline their citizens for not subjecting their conscience to its power, when they will force obedience to legislation contrary to the Scriptures?

Adventist pioneers were very much aware of the dangers of extorting church members’ consciences. The expression of their beliefs was not designed to form unity. They were ready to justify their faith, from the Bible, when asked. The Bible was their only creed and article of faith.

In 1883, there was a suggestion to introduce the church manual into the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This proposal was rejected after close investigation of the committee appointed by the General Conference. In the article “No Church Manual”, we read their reasons for not accepting the proposed church manual.

Quotation:

While brethren who have favored a manual have ever contended that such a work was not to be anything like a creed or a discipline, or to have authority to settle disputed points, but was only to be considered as a book containing hints for the help of those of little experience, yet it must be evident that such a work, issued under the auspices of the General Conference, would at once carry with it much weight of authority, and would be consulted by most of our younger ministers. It would gradually shape and mold the whole body; and those who did not follow it would be considered out of harmony with established principles of church order. And, really, is this not the object of the manual? And what would be the use of one if not to accomplish such a result? But would this result, on the whole, be a benefit? Would our ministers be broader, more original, more self-reliant men? Could they be better depended on in great emergencies? Would their spiritual experiences likely be deeper and their judgment more reliable? We think the tendency all the other way.

No Church Manual, The Review and Herald, November 27, 1883, pg. 745

Quotation:

The Bible contains our creed and discipline. It thoroughly furnishes the man of God unto all good works. What it has not revealed relative to church organization and management, the duties of officers and ministers, and kindred subjects, should not be strictly defined and drawn out into minute specifications for the sake of uniformity, but rather be left to individual judgment under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Had it been best to have a book of directions of this sort, the Spirit would doubtless have gone further, and left one on record with the stamp of inspiration upon it.

Ibid.

Since 1883, the Seventh-day Adventist Church had grown considerably; so, for the sake of convenience, in 1931, the General Conference Committee voted to publish a church manual.¹ The church, as an organized body, should exercise order and discipline, in the matters of organization and plans of the prosperity of the Church's mission. But no committee should exercise authority over someone’s conscience and someone’s belief. Only God holds the right to this authority. This is why the Bible is our only creed. We render our conscience to the Word of God, not a man, nor a group of men or committee. Contrary to this, many believe that God vested this authority to the general assembly of the General Conference. But such an idea is based on misrepresentation of one particular quotation. Let us read this quotation carefully.

Ellen G. White:

At times, when a small group of men entrusted with the general management of the work have, in the name of the General Conference, sought to carry out unwise plans and to restrict God’s work, I have said that I could no longer regard the voice of the General Conference, represented by these few men, as the voice of God. But this is not saying that the decisions of a General Conference composed of an assembly of duly appointed, representative men from all parts of the field should not be respected. God has ordained that the representatives of His church from all parts of the earth, when assembled in a General Conference, shall have authority. The error that some are in danger of committing is in giving to the mind and judgment of one man, or of a small group of men, the full measure of authority and influence that God has vested in His church in the judgment and voice of the General Conference assembled to plan for the prosperity and advancement of His work.

9T 260.2; 1909

Sister White pointed out that the world wide assembly of the General Conference meeting does have authority as the voice of God, yet she is very particular over what matters it has this authority. The authority God vested in the assembly of the General Conference is to plan for the prosperity and advancement of His work. It is about making mission plans, not about managing beliefs or the conscience. God’s church does have His voice regarding beliefs; the voice of God pertaining to the faith is the Bible. The Bible is fully sufficient for us and we are free to render our conscience to it. No synopsis of any denominational faith has authority to dictate someone's faith; neither do Fundamental Principles, or current Fundamental Beliefs.² Sister White was very clear about the Bible being the only rule of faith, and every doctrine should be questioned with Scripture. In the Great Controversy, we read the following:

Ellen G. White:

But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority - not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain ‘Thus saith the Lord’ in its support.

GC 595.1; 1888

The liberty of conscience is the basics of protestantism and reformation. We hope and believe that every Seventh-day Adventist can exercise freedom to render his conscience to the Bible without being coerced by discipline, or any other means. The issue of the church's creed and discipline becomes more relevant today, when we have the promise that God will re-establish the original foundation of our faith. We hope and pray that the evidence brought up here will bring light to the church leadership and encourage them to eradicate the false practices in our midst. As the religious leaders in Christ’s time were entrusted with the duty to preserve the Truth and to recognize the time of God’s visitation, so it is today with the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. In what follows, we will present the prophecies God specifically gave to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. In our time, the end-time, all the pillars of our faith that were held in the beginning will be re-established. May every member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church recognize the importance of the revival that God is about to establish.