Talk:Conservative Adventism

POV?

I'm not sure this is inherently neutral. I know many Adventists who consider themselves conservative, but who do no identify with the Historical Adventist movement. 78.26 (talk) 00:02, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

What exactly is the difference? I mean, I might be completely off here but everyone I know uses them interchangeably. I realize these aren't reliable sources, but it seems there are [1] [2] [3] Besides, that's the closest thing we have an article on, even if it's not the case? Thoughts? BelloWello (talk) 00:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from, and I don't think that Conservative Adventism necessarily needs it's own article. Perhaps a re-direct to Seventh-day Adventist theology would be a better choice. Here's my reasoning. Conservative generally means to try to hold on to things the way they are. Historic Adventism is really a reactionary movement, not a conservative one. They are pulling away from the main church body. It is similar to linking Liberal Adventists with those former Adventists who have left the main body and now worship on Sunday. It's not fair to link the two groups. 78.26 (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

But that would imply that Adventist Theology is conservative, which isn't the case. I wouldn't have a problem with "Liberal Adventist" linking to "Charismatic Adventist." I guess I just don't see the difference... BelloWello (talk) 00:39, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Almost all SDA's are conservative, but for the progressives. Historical Adventists are a minor sub-group who have major theological differences with the mainstream conservatives, i.e. salvation by works, perfectionism. If the SDA articles were to give proper weight to the various subgroups, Historical Adventists and Progressive adventists would barely be footnotes. 8een4Tfor (talk) 00:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

At least where I come from, Conservative Adventist and Historical Adventist are not at all the same. Perhaps it is a regional issue. Where I come from, if you are a Conservative Adventist you are mainstream, but if you are a Historic Adventist you are not, and probably aren't even a member of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. The more I think about it, the less comfortable I am with this re-direct. 78.26 (talk) 02:19, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

From the Historic Adventist article: "The label has also been applied to the mainstream Adventists who follow the teachings of the church as reflected in the church's fundamental beliefs." Wouldn't most conservative adventists fit within that category? BelloWello (talk) 17:52, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

rm unsupported statement from Historic Adventist article. There are Historic and Progressive editors who are continually trying to make their viewpoint appear to be the dominant view in the SDA world. 8een4Tfor (talk) 22:32, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Come on, most conservative adventists identify with the likes of Doug Batchelor, Dennis Priebe, Joe Crews and others who are considered historic. Your unsupported assertions are not appreciated. BelloWello (talk) 00:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Also from the article on [[Historic Adventism:

Ron Corson has given a definition of traditional and the fundamentalist historic Adventist beliefs as being characterized by the following four beliefs in particular:

• investigative judgment and heavenly sanctuary
• the Adventist church is the "remnant"
• Ellen White as a prophet for the church, and the "Spirit of Prophecy"
• the Sabbath as God's seal, with Sunday as a false day of worship (including concepts of Babylon and the Mark of the Beast).

Corson adds of the historic Adventist, they see Scripture as infallible or inerrant. They reject the major book Questions on Doctrine. They reject contemporary Christian music and drama in church as "worldly". They use Ellen White as an "inspired commentator" on the Bible. He claims her writings are often taken as having equal authority with the Bible. He also comments there is tension on doctrines such as the atonement and the nature of Christ.

Doesn't this imply that conservative/traditional/historic Adventists are all the same thing? BelloWello (talk) 01:28, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

My experience has been that most SDAs don't know that Bachelor, etc. support the Historic Adventism. Since much that Bachelor teaches is in line with mainline SDAs those times he supports HA is usually seen as occasional aberrations or slip ups. Probably most don't even know what Historic Adventism is. HAs do have many beliefs in common with other SDAs.

Most SDA churches have contemporary praise and worship music. Those that don't are often dying. Most SDAs that I know, And I travel a lot, don't have much tension over the doctrines of the atonement and the nature of Christ. Sure there are a few HAs around stirring things up, but most people brush them off as just eccentric. HA have much less influence than HAs think or wish. The purpose of the Sabbath School Quarterly to educate the church on SDA doctrine. Clifford Goldstein, editor of the Quarterly, is a mainline SDA and severe critic of HAs and Progressives. The Quarterly is probably the singe greatest influence on SDA thinking and beliefs. It is why HAs and Progressives have not had the influence for which they have hoped.

We sometime read that the only options are HA or Progressivism. That is a false dichotomy. The SDA position is neither extreme. 8een4Tfor (talk) 02:23, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

You are correct. There are Historic Adventists, Progressive Adventists, Charismatic Adventists, and those of us who simply do not give a fuck which they fall under. BelloWello (talk) 02:27, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I further note that most Adventists don't even go to church regularly. They certainly do not fall under the conservative/historic/traditional adventist category. BelloWello (talk) 02:35, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't go to church every week because I travel a lot, but I still keep the sabbath. Attending church doesn't make one a SDA, or even a Christian. I am a SDA because I study the Bible and find that what I have learned from it by the Holy Spirit is in agreement with most others in the SDA church. If I didn't agree with the 28 points, I certainly wouldn't bother being involved with others with whom I disagree. What a colossal waste of time and effort and emotion that would be. It would be much more impressive and influential to go to Westminster Cathedral where William and Cate were married. 8een4Tfor (talk) 02:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)