Letter to the Brethren: July 10, 2025

Greetings from the Five Cities Region of California.

Evangelist Evans Ochieng arrived in Malawi yesterday to visit, follow up with some of the newly baptized, teach, and to check out various matters and issues there.

Over here, I was the guest on another podcast on Tuesday as we continue to go through doors which Jesus has opened up for us (cf. Revelation 3:7-9).

Donation Receipts

On the administrative side of things, we sent out contribution receipts to our financial supporters in the USA this week for those we had mailing addresses for. We tend to send these out twice per year. If you did not receive a receipt for whatever reason and want one, simply send me an email and we will strive to take care of that.

Our income for calendar year 2025 is currently down a little from 2024.

Jesus said:

37 …  “The harvest truly is plentiful, but the laborers are few. 38 Therefore pray the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest.” (Matthew 9:37-38)

The need for the harvest is truly here now. Please pray for more truly converted laborers for the harvest.

Seventh-day Adventists

Last week, the Seventh-day Adventists voted to replace their president Ted Wilson with Erton Köhler, who is a Brazil-born pastor in their church.

Many people in the Continuing Church of God in Africa once were part of the SDA church.

Those who left it, realize many of the scriptural and other issues it has.

Because the SDAs go to church on Saturday as well as avoid biblically unclean meat consumption, some have thought that the SDA church is quite similar to groups like the Continuing Church of God.

The SDA church claims to be Protestant, and it basically is. However, the Continuing Church of God (CCOG) is NOT Protestant (see our free ebook Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism) nor do we vote in leaders.

Also, unlike the CCOG, the SDAs changed on matters such as the use of crosses and the Godhead.

Regarding crosses, Ellen White wrote:

Papists place crosses upon their churches, upon their altars, and upon their garments. Everywhere is seen the insignia of the cross. Everywhere it is outwardly honored and exalted. But the teachings of Christ are buried beneath a mass of senseless traditions, false interpretations, and rigorous exactions. … The worship of images and relics, the invocation of saints, and the exaltation of the pope, are devices of Satan to attract the minds of the people from God and from His Son. (White EG. The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan. Guttenberg Project edition, p. 590)

How was that interpreted?

Historically our Adventist church viewed the cross as a pagan symbol … (Bacchiochi S. Is the Cross a Pagan Symbol? Endtime Issues Newsletter, 124, 2005, p. 17)

But that changed and since no later than 1997 a cross containing logo has been in use by the official SDA church.

Some have indicated part of the reason that church did that was to make the SDAs more acceptable to other Protestants and Rome (cf. Nyazika P. The Final Call. Lulu.com, pp. 131, 176).

The SDAs also changed their view on the Godhead.

Notice what James White (the husband of Ellen White) wrote in the 1800s:

The Father is the greatest…The Son is next in authority…The inexplicable Trinity that makes the godhead three in one and one in three, is bad enough…(Quoted in Wiebe E. Who Is the Adventist Jesus? Published by Xulon Press, 2005, p. 167).

…the Trinity does away with the personality of God…(ibid, p. 88).

The greatest fault we can find in the Reformers is, the Reformers stopped reforming.  Had they gone on, and onward, till they had left the last vestige of the Papacy behind such as the natural immortality, sprinkling, the trinity, and Sundaykeeping, the church would now be free her unscriptural errors (Ibid, p. 89).

So James White considered the trinity to be in the same category as Sundaykeeping–do SDAs realize this?

Here are some admissions concerning Ellen White and the trinity from The Ellen White Estate, Inc. official website:

Ellen White never used the term “trinity”…at times she used the pronoun “it” when referring to the Holy Spirit (The Ellen G. White Estate. Questions and Answers About Ellen G. White: The Godhead.  http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/faq-egw.html#faq-section-c2 viewed 7/30/08).

In a book co-written with James White, SDA pioneer Joseph Bates wrote:

Respecting the trinity, I concluded that is was an impossibility for me to believe…(Bates J, White J. The Early Life and Later Experience and Labors of Elder Joseph Bates.  Published by Steam Press of the Seventh-day adventist publishing association, 1878, p. 210).

SDA pioneer J. Waggoner wrote:

The inconsistencies of Trinitarians, which must be pointed out to free the Scripture doctrine of the Atonement from reproaches under which it has too long lain, are the necessary outgrowth of their system of theology. No matter how able are the writers to whom we shall refer, they could never free themselves from inconsistencies without correcting their theology…“To the contrary, the advocates of that doctrine really fall into the difficulty which they seem anxious to avoid. Their difficulty consists in this: They take the denial of a trinity to be equivalent to a denial of the divinity of Christ. Were that the case, we should cling to the doctrine of a trinity as tenaciously as any can; but it is not the case. They who have read our remarks on the death of the Son of God know that we firmly believe in the divinity of Christ; but we cannot accept the idea of a trinity, as it is held by Trinitarians, without giving up our claim on the dignity of the sacrifice made for our redemption. (J. H. Waggoner, ‘The Atonement in Light of Nature and Revelation’, 1884 Edition, chapter ‘Doctrine of a Trinity Subversive of the Atonement’)

SDA scholar Samuele Bacchiocchi wrote:

The truth is that our Adventist church would not be here today, had it not been for the prophetic guidance of Ellen White. She played a leading role in shaping our message and mission. For example, we noted in the newsletter no. 150 the role of Ellen White in leading our church to accept the Doctrine of the Trinity (ENDTIME ISSUES NEWSLETTER No. 153.”The Pre-Advent Judgment – Part I”).

He also wrote:

The doctrine of the Trinity has been under the crossfire of controversy during much of Christian history. Our Adventist Church has not been exempted from the controversy. In the newly released book The Trinity: Its Implications for Life and Thought (Review and Herald, 2002), Prof. Jerry Moon, one of the three authors, offers a most informative historical survey of the gradual evolution of Adventist pioneers from anti-Trinitarian to Trinitarian beliefs…

It is unfortunate that those apologetic endeavors often resulted in heretical anti-trinitarian teachings that have plagued Christianity until our time. In fact, most of today’s anti-trinitarian heresies found in such religious movements as the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Unitarians, and liberal theologians, trace their roots to the early church (Bacchiocchi S. The Importance of the Doctrine of the Trinity. ENDTIME ISSUES NEWSLETTER NO. 147. 5/11/06).

The above is probably not a good use of the term “liberal theologians.” The normal definition (as Dr. Bacchiocchi must have known) is that liberal theologians are normally those that discount original teachings–that is what the SDAs themselves have sadly done. The truth is that the SDAs were once anti-Trinitarian. This is a significant difference between the COGs and the SDAs as the Church of God has always been non-Trinitarian (please see the article Binitarian View). (For quotes from SDA scholars on what the SDAs once believed and now believe on the Godhead, please also see the article titled Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity?).

The SDA Church was not just anti-Trinitarian, it was also binitarian/semi-arian.

Another SDA scholar, G. Pfandl, wrote this about the Semi-Arians (a title that somewhat applies to those in the COGs):

While the Seventh day Adventist Church today espouses the doctrine of the Trinity, this has not always been so. The evidence from a study of Adventist history indicates that from the earliest years of our church to the 1890’s a whole stream of writers took an Arian or semi Arian position…

Semi Arianism…They rejected the Arian view that Christ was created and had a different nature from God (anomoios dissimilar), but neither did they accept the Nicene Creed which stated that Christ was “of one substance (homoousios) with the Father.” Semi Arians taught that Christ was similar ( homoios) to the Father, or of like substance (homoiousios), but still subordinate” (Pfandl, Gerhard. THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY AMONG ADVENTISTS. Biblical Research Institute Silver Spring, MD June 1999, http://www.macgregorministries.org/seventh_day_adventists/trinity.html, 5/12/06).

A number of Adventist authors today who are opposed to the doctrine of the Trinity are trying to resurrect the views of our early pioneers on these issues. They are urging the church to forsake the “Roman doctrine” of the Trinity and to accept again the semi-Arian position of our pioneers…

J. N. Loughborough, in response to the question “What serious objection is there to the doctrine of the Trinity?” wrote, “There are many objections which we might urge, but on account of our limited space we shall reduce them to the three following: 1. It is contrary to common sense. 2. It is contrary to scripture. 3. Its origin is Pagan and fabulous.”

And R. F. Cottrell, in an article on the Trinity, stated:

To hold the doctrine of the trinity is not so much an evidence of evil intention as of intoxication from that wine of which all the nations have drunk. The fact that this was one of the leading doctrines, if not the very chief, upon which the bishop of Rome was exalted to the popedom, does not say much in its favor…

The rise of the Trinity doctrine in our church was the outworking of a slow process that occurred over many years. It was not imposed on the church arbitrarily; it evolved slowly from within. The first positive reference to the Trinity in Adventist literature appeared in the Bible Students’ Library series in 1892…

Most early Adventist pioneers were anti-Trinitarians… In 1931 the Adventist Yearbook contained a statement of twenty-two fundamental beliefs, one of which was the Trinity (Pfandl G. The Doctrine of the Trinity Among Seventh-day Adventists. Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 17/1 (Spring 2006): 160–179).

What the above quotes leave out is that the anti-Trinitarian writers lost out because Ellen White allegedly published a pamphlet in 1897 declaring the Holy Spirit “the third person of the Godhead” (the SDAs were “Semi-Arians” before this–though they did not tend to use that term). The truth about the Holy Spirit can be found in the article Did Early Christians Think the Holy Spirit Was A Separate Person in a Trinity?

Furthermore, SDA scholar Dr. Jerry Moon reported:

In 1846 James White dismissed the doctrine of the Trinity as “the old unscriptural trinitarian creed”… That most of the early leaders among Seventh-day Adventists held an antitrinitarian theology, and that a major shift has since occured, has become standard Adventist history  in the 43 years since E. R. Gane wrote an M.A. thesis on the topic…

At the core of the debate is the question whether Ellen White’s position on the Trinity ever changed. Some assume that she never changed, that either she always believed in the Trinity or never believed in the Trinity. There is ample evidence, however, that Ellen White’s beliefs did change…

She did not initially recognize His trinitarian nature… About 1850 she reported, “I have often seen the lovely Jesus, that He is a person. I asked Him if His Father was a person and had a form like Himself.  Said Jesus, ‘I am in the express image of My Father’s person.’”   Thus she gained visionary confirmation of what her husband had written in the Day-Star in 1846, that the Father and the Son are “two distinct, literal, tangible persons”…

Brick by conceptual brick, (perhaps without even being aware of it herself) she was slowly but surely dismantling the substructure of the antitrinitarian view, and building a trinitarian view. In another clear break with the prevailing semi-Arian consensus, she declared in 1878 that Christ was the “eternal Son”…

In 1890, she followed up her 1888 affirmation of Christ’s unity with the Father (in nature, character, and purpose) with perhaps her last major statement that can still be read ambiguously. “The Son of God shared the Father’s throne, and the glory of the eternal, self-existent One encircled both.”46 Retrospectively, this phrase harmonizes perfectly with her later statements (especially Desire of Ages, 530) that Christ is “self-existent” and that His Deity is not “derived” from the Father. It is also possible, however, to read the sentence from a binitarian (two-person Godhead) or even semi-Arian (Christ inferior to the Father) perspective…

As the conflict dragged on into 1905, Ellen White wrote … There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers–the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit–those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will co-operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ… Her latest affirmations of one God in three persons are fully in harmony with the first explicitly trinitarian belief statement among Seventh-day Adventists, published in 1913, during her lifetime, by F. M. Wilcox, editor of the Review and Herald…

As the conflict dragged on into 1905, Ellen White wrote … There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers–the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit–those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will co-operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ… Her latest affirmations of one God in three persons are fully in harmony with the first explicitly trinitarian belief statement among Seventh-day Adventists, published in 1913, during her lifetime, by F. M. Wilcox, editor of the Review and Herald …

… the 1946 General Conference session voted the first officially Adventist endorsement of belief in the Trinity, just 100 years after James White’s strong rejection of that idea in the 1846 Day-Star. This change was not a simple reversal. The evidence is that Ellen White agreed with the essential positive point of James’s belief, namely that “the Father and the Son” are “two distinct, literal, tangible persons.” Subsequent evidence shows that she also agreed with James’s negative point: that the traditional, philosophical concepts held by many trinitarians did “spiritualize away” the personal reality of the Father and the Son.82 Soon after this she added the conviction, based on visions, that both Christ and the Father have tangible forms. She progressively affirmed the eternal equality of Christ and the Father, that Christ was not created, and by 1888, that an adequate concept of the atonement demands the full and eternal Deity of Christ. Only in the 1890s did she become aware of the full individuality and personhood of the Holy Spirit…at Avondale in 1899 she declared, “the Holy Spirit, who is as much a person as God is a person, is walking through these grounds, unseen by human eyes; . . . He hears every word we utter and knows every thought of the mind.”83 This confirms the fourfold hypothesis with which this article opened. First, E. R. Gane’s characterization of Ellen White as a “trinitarian monotheist” is accurate regarding her mature concept of God, from 1898 onward. (Moon J. “Ellen White and the Trinity”1. ENDTIME ISSUES NEWSLETTER No. 150. June 27, 2006).

It is important to note that SDA scholars admit that the Semi-Arian position was the prevailing view as late as 1878–thus this is something that the SDAs have changed (some others have claimed that some changed Ellen White’s writings and that she never endorsed the trinity).

SDA Gilbert Valentine, vice-president for academic administration, Mission College, MuakLek, Thailand wrote:

Many early Adventist pioneers such as James White, Joseph Bates, J. H. Waggoner, and R. F. Cottrell were, in fact, strongly anti-Trinitarian… semi-Arian concepts of Christology were fairly deeply imbedded in early Adventist beliefs and literature (Valentine G. How clear views of Jesus developed in the Adventist Church. At Issue, December 2006).

Unlike the SDAs, the Church of God (while believing in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) has been essentially anti-Trinitarian and has never accepted the Roman, Eastern Orthodox, nor Protestant views of the Trinity (as adopted in 381). But, the SDAs have.

Additionally, notice:

A historical “Ecumenical Charter” was signed by Seventh-day Adventists, Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Evangelicals and Methodists on January 25th, in Bologna, Italy. The charter says that “the most important task of the Churches is to proclaim the Gospel together through word and action, for the salvation of all human beings. (Gendron M. Catholics Seek Unity with SDA’s and Evangelicals. Proclaiming the Gospel newsletter, March 2020)

Yes, many within the Protestant world believe that they are basically unattached versions of the same church based in Rome. The ecumenical movement is pushing ahead. The SDA signer of the “Ecumenical Charter” was SDA Pastor Giovanni Caccamo, who was the former Secretary of the Italian Union of Seventh-day Adventist Churches:

The Ecumenical Charter was signed on the final day of the 2020 Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. A 17-minute sermon was given by Seventh-day Adventist Pastor Giovanni Caccamo to commemorate the ecumenical signing ceremony. Pastor Giovanni Caccamo is the former Secretary of the Italian Union of Seventh-day Adventist Churches. . .

There is a long history of ecumenism in Italy, and those responsible for this are at the highest levels of leadership in the church. . . .

Pastor Stefano Paris is the President of the Italian Union of Seventh-day Adventist Churches. He is the top Adventist leader in Italy. Not only does Pastor Stefano Paris oversee the churches throughout Italy, he is also a leading participant in the ecumenical movement.

Pastor Stefano Paris was featured in the 2019 Brochure advertising the 2019 United Nations Interfaith Harmony Week. When you look at the brochure you realize that the President of the Italian Union of SDA Churches is part of the “Interfaith Table of Rome!”. . .

The ecumenical crisis in Italy goes even higher than President Stefano Paris. Ted Wilson, President of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, was in Rome with President Stefano Paris in 2018. Ted Wilson addressed specifically the ecumenical movement. . . .

In the above video Ted Wilson says we should not engage in the ecumenical movement or compromise our faith. But then he says that we must be in the “forefront” of making friends by being friendly with the leaders of other churches. These two statements are problematic when considering the current ecumenical crisis in Adventism.

Signing this Ecumenical Charter was not simply expressing friendship; it was entering into an ecumenical confederacy with the other churches. We have a major problem because we can’t seem to distinguish between being friendly and entering into ecumenical partnerships with Rome. Every time church leaders get admonished for engaging in ecumenism they respond with a reassuring smile and say, “No, that was not ecumenism, we were just being friendly.” 02/20/20 http://adventmessenger.org/seventh-day-adventists-roman-catholics-and-evangelicals-sign-a-historic-ecumenical-charter-that-affirms-faith-in-one-holy-catholic-apostolic-church/?fbclid=IwAR374C_ixIZwQaLFoCzA5-sLqPamu69pfUjJVctHWaoKK48y72DoRCO6Xlk

Now, it should be noted that that the Inter-European Division of the SDA church denounced the signing, essentially stating that it went too far towards unity (Statement on the position of the Inter-European Division on the involvement of an Italian Seventh-day Adventist Pastor in the signing of the Ecumenical Charter of the Council of the Christian Churches of Bologna. Press release EUD: “Charta Ecumenica di Bologna”. February 24, 2020; see also Seventh-day Adventists’ ecumenical controversies).

Officially, “Seventh-day Adventists . . . stress the conviction that many Roman Catholics are brothers and sisters in Christ” (How Seventh-day Adventists View Roman Catholicism. This statement was recorded on April 15, 1997, by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Administrative Committee (ADCOM) and released by the Office of the President, Robert S. Folkenberg).

By calling “many Roman Catholics … brothers and sisters in Christ,” the SDA movement looks like it has moved away from its views on the papacy, like it has on crosses.

A member of the SDA church asked me to summarize the differences between his church and the Continuing Church of God (CCOG). Here is a list of some of them:

1. 1. The SDAs accept Ellen White as God’s prophetess. CCOG does not. We see her as false on many points. Hence, CCOG sees no need to heed her pronouncements from a biblical perspective as some are in conflict with scripture and reality.
   2. Ellen White taught that the angel Michael became Jesus. CCOG strongly disagrees (see Did the Archangel Michael become Jesus?).
   3. Ellen White falsely taught that the Day of Atonement was October 22 in 1844, whereas it in 1844, the Day of Atonement began at sunset September 22 and ran through sunset September 23rd (see http://www.hebcal.com/hebcal/?year=1844&v=1&month=x&yt=G&nh=on&nx=on&o=on&s=on&vis=on&a=on&D=on&d=on&set=on&heb=on&c=off&zip=&m=72).
   4. SDAs believe 1844 has a significance that CCOG says the Bible does not support.
   5. The SDAs changed to accept the Greco-Roman trinity. CCOG does not (see Did the True Church Ever Teach a Trinity?).
   6. The SDAs teach a Sunday morning resurrection, whereas the CCOG teaches Jesus was resurrected on a Saturday afternoon (see also What Happened in the ‘Crucifixion Week’?).
   7. The SDAs changed to accept pagan holidays like Christmas. CCOG does not (see Should You Keep God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays? and What Does the Catholic Church Teach About Christmas and the Holy Days?).
   8. The SDAs often consider themselves Protestant and the Protestants as true Christians. CCOG does not (see Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God differs from Protestantism).
   9. SDAs do not keep God’s holy days. CCOG does (see Should You Observe God’s Holy Days or Demonic Holidays?).
   10. CCOG keeps Passover annually in accordance with the scriptures, whereas the SDAs keep some version of it quarterly, which is not biblical. See also Passover and the Early Church.
   11. SDAs do not understand God’s plan of salvation. CCOG does as we understand that God will offer salvation to all that ever lived (see Universal OFFER of Salvation, Apokatastasis: Can God save the lost in an age to come? Hundreds of scriptures reveal God’s plan of salvation).
   12. Ellen White and other SDAs put forth the view that the United States of America is the two-horned beast of Revelation 13:11 (see SDA/CCOG Differences: Two Horned Beast of Revelation and 666). We in the CCOG teach Revelation 13:11 is a reference to the “false prophet” (Revelation 16:13,19:20) and final “Antichrist” (1 John 4:1-3), which is an individual, not a nation.
   13. SDAs believe swearing oaths is fine (White EG. Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing), the CCOG does not because instructions from Jesus in Matthew 5:34-36.
   14. SDAs do not understand Isaiah 65:20 and admit that it looks like in contradicts an official SDA belief–the SDA’s hold more of a Protestant, than biblical view, on that (see also Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism).
   15. SDAs do not clearly teach that 666 is the European Beast of the Sea, but CCOG does (see also Who is the King of the North?).
   16. SDAs do not believe that saints will be on the Earth during the millennium, CCOG does (cf. Revelation 5:10; 20:4-6; see also Did The Early Church Teach Millenarianism?).
   17. SDAs use crosses a part of the symbols for their religion, whereas CCOG does not (see also What is the Origin of the Cross as a ‘Christian’ Symbol?).
   18. The CCOG teaches an “age to come” (Matthew 12:32; Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30; Hebrews 6:5), whereas because of a vision from Ellen White, the SDAs do not teach that.
   19. SDAs call the truth that Jesus was killed on a Wednesday “unscriptural” (Standish RR, Standish C. The General Conference Confronts Apostasy. Hartland Publications, 2006, p. 84), whereas the CCOG accepts that Jesus died then.
   20. CCOG teaches the good news of the Kingdom of God and we do not believe the SDA church understands the full gospel or that it teaches it (see also The Gospel of the Kingdom of God).
   21. CCOG’s priorities are essentially Matthew 24:14, Galatians 2:10, and Matthew 28:19-20, while the SDAs do not consider those the same way as CCOG. (see Behind the Work 2016: All Nations, Tribes, People, and Tongues and also MATTHEW Here are links to twelve sermons covering the 28 chapters of Matthew: Matthew 1-2: Greek or Aramaic, Jesus, and the Star?, Matthew 3-5: John the Baptist, Temptations, and the Beatitudes, Matthew 6-7: Charitable Deeds, the Rosary, Prayer, the Golden Rule, and Faith, Matthew 8-10: Married Clergy, Faith, Coming Persecution, and the Ecumenical Agenda, Matthew 11-12: John the Elijah, Sodom, Unpardonable Sin, & 3 Days and 3 Nights, -14: Parables, Mustard Seeds, Birthdays, and Faith, Matthew 15-16: Tradition, Signs of the Times, and The Rock & Peter, Matthew 17-18: Transfiguration, Elijah to Come, Taxes, and Forgiveness, Matthew 19-20: Transgender? Divorce? Purgatory? The first shall be last?, Matthew 21-23: ‘Palm Sunday,’ Come as You Are?, and the Greatest Commandments, Matthew 24: Temple Destruction, Sorrows, Tribulation, and the Return of Jesus, and Matthew 25-28: Midnight Cry, False Christians, Resurrection, & Teaching what Jesus Taught.
       MARK Here is a link to a sermon covering all of Jesus’ words in the Gospel of Mark: What did Jesus teach in the Book of Mark? Here is a link to six sermons covering all the verses in the Gospel of Mark: Mark 1-2: Author, Prophecy, & Miracles, Mark 3-5: Healing, Demons, and Parables, Mark 6-9: Tradition, John’s beheading, Elijah, and Restoration, Mark 10-12: Marriage, Divorce, Needle Eye, Greatest Command, & Taxes, Mark 13: Temple, Four Horsemen, Troubles, Great Tribulation, and Gospel Proclamation, and Mark 14-16: Jesus’ Priorities & Betrayal, the Resurrection, Signs, and Reaching the World.
       LUKE Here are links to eight sermons covering the entire ‘Gospel of Luke’: Luke 1-2: John the Baptist, Mary, and the Census, Luke 3-6: John the Baptist, Jesus’ genealogy, Satan’s Influence, and the Sermon on the Mount, Luke 7-9: Miracles, Purpose of Parables, Kingdom of God, and Women Supporting the Ministry, Luke 10-11: The 70, Doing the Work, the Good Samaritan, Prayer, and Signs, Luke 12-13: Priorities, Delayed Fruit Bearing, Little Flock, Prophecy, and the Narrow Way, Luke 14-16: The Lost Sheep, the Prodigal Son, the Rich Man and Lazarus, Luke 17-20: Faith, the Kingdom, Gathering, Prayer, & Rewards, and Luke 21-22: Giving, Sorrows, Persecution, Tribulation, Fig Tree, and Violence. The last sermon also covers Jesus’ words in the Book of Acts.
       JOHN Here are links to a seven-part sermon series covering the entire ‘Gospel of John’: John 1-3: Anti-unitarian, Wine, Being Born Again, & Heaven, John 4-6: Jesus and the Samaritan Woman, Miracles and the Bread of Life, John 10-12: Sheep, Hirelings, Lazarus/Soul Sleep and ‘Palm Day’, John 13-15: Footwashing and the Words of Jesus, John 16-18: Truth, Trinity, and Pontius Pilate, and John 19-21: Do not only try, do what God wants.
       REVELATION This is a link to a sermon covering words Jesus spoke as recorded in the Book of Revelation and in first and second Corinthians: Revelation: Jesus’ Final Words.)
   22. CCOG traces its history from Acts 2 to present. The SDA church traces itself from the Protestant and Advent movements. See also Continuing History of the Church of God.
   23. SDAs improperly teach that the Church of God came out of their church. The CCOG teaches that the early SDAs had some exposure to COG doctrines, but ended up rejecting many to follow Ellen White. The COG preceded the formation of the SDA movement by over 18 centuries (see also the free online book: Continuing History of the Church of God).
   24. The SDAs remnant teaching about itself now is mistaken as the ‘remnant’ it taught pointed to in Revelation 12:17 are non-Philadelphian Christians who are not protected in a place in the wilderness during the Great Tribulation and Day of the Lord (see also There is a Place of Safety for the Philadelphians. Why it May Be Near Petra).
   25. The CCOG teaches that God is calling the elect now (see God Calling You?), but will call others later (see Universal OFFER of Salvation, Apokatastasis: Can God save the lost in an age to come? Hundreds of scriptures reveal God’s plan of salvation). The SDAs do not teach that.
   26. The CCOG teaches more fully the meaning of life than the SDAs (see also The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN Why Did God Create Anything? Why did God make you?).
   27. CCOG seems to more clearly teach deification than the SDAs (see The Laodicean Church Era and also What is Your Destiny? Deification? Did the Early Church Teach That Christians Would Become God?).
   28. The CCOG teaches more fully how to live as a Christian than the SDAs (see also Christians: Ambassadors for the Kingdom of God, Biblical instructions on living as a Christian).

There are other differences, but hopefully this will assist those interested in knowing that.

But, basically, the SDAs are Protestants who differ because of Ellen White, Saturday, and unclean meats. See also Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God differs from Protestantism.

As far as Ellen G. White goes, her writings are considered “inspiration” by many SDAs (e.g. Vance MP. The Future of Democracy. Plain View, Jan-Mar 2005, pp.5-6). But as a prophetess, she had numerous failed prophecies.

Perhaps I should add that the late Richard Nickels reported the falseness of at least one of Ellen G. White’s “visions”:

1856 Vision Proven False

Ellen G. White wrote in her Testimonies for the Church that “At the General Conference at Battle Creek, May 27, 1856, I was shown in vision some things which concern the church generally; . . . I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel, ‘Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus’.”12

All of the people alive at that conference have died, presenting a serious question as to the authenticity of Mrs. White’s visions. (Nickels R. History of the Seventh Day Church of God, Volume I. Chapter IV)

The seven last plagues still have not began, Jesus has still not returned, and all that attended that Conference are dead. This vision was false.

Notice something else that Ellen White taught:

…the Day of Atonement occured on the tenth day of the seventh Jewish month (Leviticus 16:29-34)…So it was believed that Christ, out great High Priest, would appear to purify the earth by the destruction of sin and sinners, and to bless His waiting people with immortality. The tenth day of the seventh month, the great Day of Atonement, the time of the cleansing of the sanctuary, which in the year 1844 fell upon the twenty-second of October, was regarded as the time of the Lord’s coming…

“There shall be no man in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in the holy place, until he comes out.” Leviticus 16:17.  So when Christ entered the holy of holies to perform the closing work of the atonement, He ceased His ministration in the first apartment.  But when the ministration in the first apartment ended, the ministration of the second apartment began.  When in the typical service the high priest left the holy on the Day of Atonement, he in before God to present the blood of the sin offering on behalf of all Israel who truly repented of their sins.  So Christ has completed only one part of His work as our intercessor, to enter upon another portion of the work, and He still pleaded His blood before the Father in behalf of sinners. (White EGH.    The great controversy between Christ and Satan: the conflict of the ages in the Christian dispensation.  Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1911, pp. 400, 428-429)

Notice how she is tying her interpretation in with the biblical Day of Atonement.  R. Nickels, discussing Ellen White’s position, pointed out:

It is a well-documented fact that the Day of Atonement in 1844 fell on September 23, and Atonement can NEVER fall as late as October 22 (Nickels, We Are Sabbath-Keepers, Not Seventh-Day Adventists, p. 8).

In 1844, the Day of Atonement began at sunset September 22 and ran through sunset September 23rd (see http://www.hebcal.com/hebcal/?year=1844&v=1&month=x&yt=G&nh=on&nx=on&o=on&s=on&vis=on&a=on&D=on&d=on&set=on&heb=on&c=off&zip=&m=72).

Thus, Ellen White’s interpretation does not square with what one would expect with the biblical/Hebrerw calendar. But this was her first big “prophetic” insight–and biblically in error.

Also notice this warning from Ellen White:

It is not really wise to have children now. Time is short, the perils of the last days are upon us, and the little children will largely be swept off before this. –Letter 48, 1876 (White E.  Last Day Events: Facing Earth’s Final Crisis.  As printed by Pacific Press Publishing, 2002, p. 36)

As far as I have been able to see, the Adventist children were not “swept off” then as it was not time for “the perils of the last days” that Ellen White discussed in 1876.

Here is another prediction from Ellen White:

Testimonies Volume 1…“January 4, 1862, I was shown some things in regard to our nation…it is all a bitter denunciation of Lincoln’s administration and management of the war. Every move had been wrong and only defeat was prophesied…” (Cornelius J. The Commandments of Men.  Xulon Press, 2008, p. 286)

But Lincoln’s side did win that war (granted at a major cost). Thus saying she “was shown” that Lincoln’s side would be defeated is proof that she was not shown by God.

A former SDA sent the following:

I thought you would be interested in the following prophecies from Ellen White that did not come true. They were not conditional. Notice she says she saw and said the angel. That means in a vision. According to Deuteronomy you only need one prophecy to fail to discredit the prophet. I don’t know how adventists still believe in her. When referring to her they use the term the spirit of prophecy.

“I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up …” Early Writings p75

“But now time is almost finished, and what we have been years learning they will have to learn in a few months …” A Sketch of the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White p55

“… the graves opened … and in the same moment we were changed and caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air.” The Day Star January 4 1846

“At the conference a very solemn vision was given to me. I saw that some of those present would be food for worms, some subjects for the seven last plagues, and some would be translated to heaven at the second coming of Christ, without seeing death …” Spiritual Gifts Vol 2 p208

“Said the angel … when England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion … this nation will yet be humbled in the dust …” Testimonies for the Church Vol 1 p259

Note: this nation is referring to the United States. (Email to COGwriter 11/08/16)

But, of course, old Jerusalem has been built up, the time was not almost finished in the 1800s, the SDAs of the 1800s are all dead, and when England declared war (WWI and WWII) the USA was not humbled in the dust, as the allies’ side won.

Thus, while Ellen G. White may have correctly stated some events before they occurred, the falseness of many of her “predictions” indicates that she was not truly God’s prophetess.

Yet Ellen White claimed:

In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me.  I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own views.  They are what God has opened to me in vision– the precious rays of light shining from the throne (White EGH.  Testimonies for the church, Issue 31.  Pacific Press, 1882.  Original from Columbia University. Digitized Aug 19, 2009, p. 63).

The Bible teaches that if someone claims God gave a prophecy that does not come to pass, that person is a false prophet:

21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?’ — 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:21-22)

Several groups, like the SDAs, do keep the seventh day Sabbath, but are not part of the Church of God (COG).

The Continuing Church of God has the following sermon about some of the reasons certain Sabbath observing groups are not COG on our ContinuingCOG channel:

1:20:28

Seventh Day Baptists/ Adventists/ Messianics: Protestant or COG?

Although Seventh Day Baptists (SDBs), Seventh-day Adventist (SDAs), and Messianic Jews keep some version of the seventh day Sabbath, are they Protestant or Church of God. What do they claim? What do they teach? What do SDAs and Messianic Jews teach about their history? Do SDBs cite groups who held Church of God (COG) and not SDB doctrines? Which group teaches the original biblical Christian faith? How do the SDAs, Messianics, and SDBs agree with Protestants on issues such as salvation, history, and the Godhead, which differ greatly from the Continuing Church of God (CCOG)? Are there really 613 laws of the Torah? What are 28 ways the SDAs differ from the CCOG? Are ‘Black Israelites’ right about Jesus being a black African? Was the Day of Atonement on October 22, 1844 according to Rabbinical or Karaite Jews? Did the SDAs or COG come out of the Millerite movement? Did Ellen White make false prophecies that she insisted came from God? If so, what were some of them? Did the SDA church send out literature it knew was clearly wrong? Was Ellen G. White’s sanctuary interpretation the “complete system of truth”? Did SDAs once teach crosses were pagan, but now include them in their official logo? Which of the 4 church’s (SDB,SDA, Messianic, CCOG) doctrines have the most biblical and historical support? Dr. Thiel addresses these issues and more.

Here is a link to the sermon video: Seventh Day Baptists/Adventists/Messianics: Protestant or COG?

We are truly not like the SDA church.