Differences between JWs and Seventh-day Adventist official beliefs

[BobRyan]

1. The SDA denomination is trinitarian as its 28 Fundamental Beliefs statement clearly says. So God the Son is the second person of the godhead, and the Holy Spirit is the third person of the godhead.
2. SDAs consider themselves to all be under the "New Covenant" so long as they accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. JW's don't think that is possible for their own members since they claim only 144,000 of them could be under the New Covenant and those slots were all taken up a long time ago according to them.
3. SDAs fully accept all 66 books of the Bible as scripture that is valid for Christians today - JW's think only the NT applies.
4. SDAs accept the literal death, burial , bodily resurrection and literal bodily ascension of Christ into heaven.
5. SDAs accept the literal visible second coming of Christ - that is yet future and the bodily ascension of saints in that rapture event - with saints taken to heaven - JW's do not.
6. SDAs do not prohibit members from reading with non-SDAs the material of non-SDA authors.
7. SDAs do not have a "group of 8" some place dictating the beliefs of the church and changing their ideas every 10 years or so.
8. SDAs do not have "their own Bible" taken along with every bible study as if an SDA bible is needed to get the Bible study right. JW's do.
9. SDAs believe that salvation is by grace through faith and that our own works are not what saves us. But we also believe that genuine faith is not apart from works as stated in James 2 because works are the fruit of faith.
10 SDAs affirm the Eph 6:2 and James 2 text showing us that the unit of Ten is still valid - while Jehovah's witnesses say that Christians are not obligated to keep the Ten.
https://www.jw.org/en/library/books...ndments? ,day to hold it sacred, you... More


While SDAs do not have a fundamental belief stating that God the Son appears at times in the Bible as Michael the archangel, they do teach that just as God and 2 angels appear as "3 men" in Genesis 18:1-5, so also God the Son appears in the form of Michael when being described as at war with Satan or at war with the kingdom of Satan.

JW's by contrast believe that Michael is merely an angel and that this is the person that came to Earth as Jesus Christ.

SDAs believe in sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and practice and as noted above we believe there are 66 books of the Bible.

 

[BobRyan]

There are more differences but I am not sure which of them is of interest to this group so I will wait for responses.

 

[The Liturgist]

JW's by contrast believe that Michael is merely an angel and that this is the person that came to Earth as Jesus Christ.

Indeed, as described here: https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-teach/who-is-michael-the-archangel-jesus/

Obviously SDA doctrine is extremely different from the J/W heresy, but I suspect that the J/W you mentioned who attended an early, pre-Ellen White meeting of the Adventists ripped off some doctrines. This assumes that the idea of our Lord also being St. Michael predates Ellen White establishing the Trinity as an official doctrine, and it also assumes that in order to stoke up fervor for the J/W cult, they intentionally repeated the mistake Miller made concerning the Great Disappointment, where according to SDA doctrine Miller did not understand that 1844 was the start of the Investigative Judgement.

 

[The Liturgist]

1. The SDA denomination is trinitarian as its 28 Fundamental Beliefs statement clearly says. So God the Son is the second person of the godhead, and the Holy Spirit is the third person of the godhead.
2. SDAs consider themselves to all be under the "New Covenant" so long as they accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. JW's don't think that is possible for their own members since they claim only 144,000 of them could be under the New Covenant and those slots were all taken up a long time ago according to them.
3. SDAs fully accept all 66 books of the Bible as scripture that is valid for Christians today - JW's think only the NT applies.
4. SDAs accept the literal death, burial , bodily resurrection and literal bodily ascension of Christ into heaven.
5. SDAs accept the literal visible second coming of Christ - that is yet future and the bodily ascension of saints in that rapture event - with saints taken to heaven - JW's do not.
6. SDAs do not prohibit members from reading with non-SDAs the material of non-SDA authors.
7. SDAs do not have a "group of 8" some place dictating the beliefs of the church and changing their ideas every 10 years or so.
8. SDAs do not have "their own Bible" taken along with every bible study as if an SDA bible is needed to get the Bible study right. JW's do.
9. SDAs believe that salvation is by grace through faith and that our own works are not what saves us. But we also believe that genuine faith is not apart from works as stated in James 2 because works are the fruit of faith.

While SDAs do not have a fundamental belief stating that God the Son appears at times in the Bible as Michael the archangel, they do teach that just as God and 2 angels appear as "3 men" in Genesis 18:1-5, so also God the Son appears in the form of Michael when being described as at war with Satan or at war with the kingdom of Satan.

JW's by contrast believe that Michael is merely an angel and that this is the person that came to Earth as Jesus Christ.

SDAs believe in sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and practice and as noted above we believe there are 66 books of the Bible.

By the way, as proof that the SDA is a Christian religion, despite the difference between my denominational background (which is LCMS, traditional United Methodist before the liberal takeover, traditional Episcopalianism and Continuing Anglican, Eastern Orthodoxy (the Orthodox Church in America and the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad*) and liturgical high church Congregationalism) and that of the SDA, I still fully agree with with items 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9, and agree with item 3 except that I recognize the Deuterocanoncial books, in fact, I accept everything in the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Narrow Canon, and also Psalms 152-155 (which were at one time accepted by Syriac Christians, and survive only in Syriac), although I regard as a primary source of doctrine only the books found in the Greek Orthodox Septuagint (which are the same as the Apocrypha in the KJV and the Deuterocanon in the Vulgate, plus the longer, more spiritual versions of Esther and Daniel, and Psalm 151, and a few other added bits).

On the subject of doctrine 3, I was unaware that J/Ws reject the Old Testament, so we can add Marcionism to Arianism and Docetism among the list of heresies they subscribe to.

Also, according to one report I saw, J/Ws were the poorest denomination in the US, per capita, which is unsurprising considering the extent to which they are financially exploited using the threat of shunning.

*The Metropolitan of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (also known as ROCOR), His Eminence Hilarion Kapral, reposed in the Lord ten days ago. He was a Ukrainian-born Canadian who fluently spoke English, Ukrainian, Russian and Church Slavonic, and who was opposed to the attack on Ukraine, and ROCOR has raised enormous sums for the assistance of Ukrainian refugees in Poland. ROCOR also has a long history of mistrust for the Russian government, since the Bolshevik takeover, and only re-entered into communion with the Moscow Patriarchate in 2007 after being persuaded that most of the former KGB agents who had been turned into spying on the church through Comprimat and other incentives had been retired.

 

[Andrewn]

3. SDAs fully accept all 66 books of the Bible as scripture that is valid for Christians today - JW's think only the NT applies.

On the subject of doctrine 3, I was unaware that J/Ws reject the Old Testament, so we can add Marcionism to Arianism and Docetism among the list of heresies they subscribe to.

According to JW websites, this is not the case. Jehovah’s Witnesses view the Bible as God’s Word and accept both the Old Testament and the New Testament as integral parts of it. In fact, it is my own observation that JW's and SDA's have in common that they put too much stress on OT teachings.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20081201/Do-Jehovahs-Witnesses-Accept-the-Old-Testament/

Perhaps the best thing that happened to the Adventist movement is that the non-Trinitarian faction separated to form the Watchtower Society (JW's).

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/

 

[LoveGodsWord]

According to JW websites, this is not the case. Jehovah’s Witnesses view the Bible as God’s Word and accept both the Old Testament and the New Testament as integral parts of it. In fact, it is my own observation that JW's and SDA's have in common that they put too much stress on OT teachings.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20081201/Do-Jehovahs-Witnesses-Accept-the-Old-Testament/

Perhaps the best thing that happened to the Adventist movement is that the non-Trinitarian faction separated to form the Watchtower Society (JW's).

Not really they say they believe the old and new testament but they have there own modified version of the bible to suit there doctrines (the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures). So trying to make claims that SDA's beliefs are similar to JW's is not being truthful in my view.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

1. The SDA denomination is trinitarian as its 28 Fundamental Beliefs statement clearly says. So God the Son is the second person of the godhead, and the Holy Spirit is the third person of the godhead.
2. SDAs consider themselves to all be under the "New Covenant" so long as they accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. JW's don't think that is possible for their own members since they claim only 144,000 of them could be under the New Covenant and those slots were all taken up a long time ago according to them.
3. SDAs fully accept all 66 books of the Bible as scripture that is valid for Christians today - JW's think only the NT applies.
4. SDAs accept the literal death, burial , bodily resurrection and literal bodily ascension of Christ into heaven.
5. SDAs accept the literal visible second coming of Christ - that is yet future and the bodily ascension of saints in that rapture event - with saints taken to heaven - JW's do not.
6. SDAs do not prohibit members from reading with non-SDAs the material of non-SDA authors.
7. SDAs do not have a "group of 8" some place dictating the beliefs of the church and changing their ideas every 10 years or so.
8. SDAs do not have "their own Bible" taken along with every bible study as if an SDA bible is needed to get the Bible study right. JW's do.
9. SDAs believe that salvation is by grace through faith and that our own works are not what saves us. But we also believe that genuine faith is not apart from works as stated in James 2 because works are the fruit of faith.

While SDAs do not have a fundamental belief stating that God the Son appears at times in the Bible as Michael the archangel, they do teach that just as God and 2 angels appear as "3 men" in Genesis 18:1-5, so also God the Son appears in the form of Michael when being described as at war with Satan or at war with the kingdom of Satan.

JW's by contrast believe that Michael is merely an angel and that this is the person that came to Earth as Jesus Christ.

SDAs believe in sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and practice and as noted above we believe there are 66 books of the Bible.

Good post Bob, you might also want to add to your list that SDA's are Sabbath keepers while JWs do not keep the Sabbath.

 

[BobRyan]

This assumes that the idea of our Lord also being St. Michael predates Ellen White establishing the Trinity as an official doctrine,

technically - Ellen White was raised as a united Methodist and was not the one who established Trinity doctrine per-se, since Methodists before Ellen White -- had already accepted the Trinity doctrine.

And there was never a published fundamental belief list in SDA denomination history that said either "there is no Trinity" - or that "now we do accept the Trinity as a denomination instead of rejecting" as if there had ever been an official position against it -- to then be changed. The only statements on the trinity/godhead in any of our published fundamental beliefs were ones affirming the triune godhead. But I don't think this topic was something that JW's claim they were informed about - while one of their founders sat in one meeting held by an Adventist.

 

[BobRyan]

Good post Bob, you might also want to add to your list that SDA's are Sabbath keepers while JWs do not keep the Sabbath.

Good point - I added a section on the 10 commandments

 

[BobRyan]

According to JW websites, this is not the case. Jehovah’s Witnesses view the Bible as God’s Word and accept both the Old Testament and the New Testament as integral parts of it.

They teach that the OT is only for Jews - so while they do accept the 66 books as included in the Bible - they consider that the New Covenant is the New Testament and only this is applicable to Christians.

 

[BobRyan]

Perhaps the best thing that happened to the Adventist movement is that the non-Trinitarian faction separated to form the Watchtower Society (JW's).

https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/

I don't know of any JW or Adventist source claiming that the JWs used to be a non-trinitarian faction of Adventist. Given that Charles Taze Russel (who started the JW organization) never claimed to be Adventist and that his first contact was in 1870 - simply by sitting in one meeting... I does not look like an early split of Adventists becoming JW. At least not from their own documents.

 

[BobRyan]

I still fully agree with with items 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9, and agree with item 3 except that I recognize the Deuterocanoncial books, in fact, I accept everything in the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Narrow Canon, and also Psalms 152-155 (which were at one time accepted by Syriac Christians, and survive only in Syriac), although I regard as a primary source of doctrine only the books found in the Greek Orthodox Septuagint (which are the same as the Apocrypha in the KJV and the Deuterocanon in the Vulgate, plus the longer, more spiritual versions of Esther and Daniel, and Psalm 151, and a few other added bits).

Ok that brings a question to my mind -- Deuterocanon "the second canon"

Deuterocanonical books - Wikipedia

If the 66 books belong to the canon of scripture and the Dueterocanonical books to the second canon then by definition they are not the same canon.

if the 39 books (Hebrew Bible - OT) belong to the first canon and the Dueterocanonical books to the second canon, and then the 27 book (NT) belong to the third canon - then how is it we never hear a term for "third canon" used for the NT?? Even so -- in this case again it would be an argument against Deuterocanonical books belonging to the same canon of scripture.

 

[BobRyan]

In fact, it is my own observation that JW's and SDA's have in common that they put too much stress on OT teachings.

I studied with JW's for a year to discuss their views and found them spending zero time on OT scripture.. what did you find when you did that? what OT texts where they relying on in your studies with them?

Here is one form of their rejection not only of the ceremonial laws - but all of God's commands in the OT --

================
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/10-commandments/

What was the purpose of the Ten Commandments?
The Ten Commandments were part of the Mosaic Law. That Law code included over 600 commandments and formed the terms of an agreement, or covenant, between God and the ancient nation of Israel. (Exodus 34:27) God promised the people of Israel that they would prosper if they obeyed the Mosaic Law. (Deuteronomy 28:1-14) However, the main purpose of the Law was to prepare the Israelites for the promised Messiah, or Christ.—Galatians 3:24.

Must Christians keep the Ten Commandments?
No. God gave his Law, including the Ten Commandments, specifically to the ancient nation of Israel. (Deuteronomy 5:2, 3; Psalm 147:19, 20) The Mosaic Law is not binding on Christians, and even Jewish Christians were “released from the Law.” (Romans 7:6) * The Mosaic Law was replaced by “the law of the Christ,” which includes all that Jesus instructed his followers to do.—Galatians 6:2; Matthew 28:19, 20.

================

Trying to make a case with them that is of the form "Christians should do a, or b, or c - because scripture says so" won't go very far with JW's if that scripture is in the OT.

So there "are differences" between how the JW's reject the OT and how the SDA denomination affirms it as being included in the "all scripture" of 2 Tim 3:16

The idea that those two denominations teach the same thing on that point - is not supported by the documents.

 

[The Liturgist]

Ok that brings a question to my mind -- Deuterocanon "the second canon"

Deuterocanonical books - Wikipedia

If the 66 books belong to the canon of scripture and the Dueterocanonical books to the second canon then by definition they are not the same canon.

if the 39 books (Hebrew Bible - OT) belong to the first canon and the Dueterocanonical books to the second canon, and then the 27 book (NT) belong to the third canon - then how is it we never hear a term for "third canon" used for the NT?? Even so -- in this case again it would be an argument against Deuterocanonical books belonging to the same canon of scripture.

Deuterocanon is just a Roman Catholic name for them. Like the Orthodox I don’t draw a distinction; I regard them as protocanonical, although a few, such as 1 Enoch, are not as textually reliable as would be preferred, which isn’t a huge problem, as such books I think are meant to be read allegorically, but in certain parts of the Bible where there is a problem with manuscript reliability (for example, the Longer Ending of Mark), I don’t base doctrines on it (unlike the Pentecostal Snake Handlers of Appalachia, who regard Mark 16:9-20 as central to their faith).

 

[Andrewn]

They teach that the OT is only for Jews - so while they do accept the 66 books as included in the Bible - they consider that the New Covenant is the New Testament and only this is applicable to Christians.

They get from the OT their believe in post-mortem unconsciousness, the soul is in the blood and thus no blood transfusions, pre-Millennialism, Christ is Michael.

I don't know of any JW or Adventist source claiming that the JWs used to be a non-trinitarian faction of Adventist. Given that Charles Taze Russel (who started the JW organization) never claimed to be Adventist and that his first contact was in 1870 - simply by sitting in one meeting... I does not look like an early split of Adventists becoming JW.

From Wikipedia:

"At the formation of the church in the 19th century, many of the Adventist leaders held to an antitrinitarian view, thanks to many antitrinitarian Christian Connexion ministers entering the former Millerite fold."

"Jehovah's Witnesses originated as a branch of the Bible Student movement, which developed in the United States in the 1870s among followers of Christian restorationist minister Charles Taze Russell."

"The Bible Student movement is a Millennialist Restorationist Christian movement."

"In 1870, at age eighteen, he attended a presentation by Adventist minister Jonas Wendell. Russell later said that, although he had not entirely agreed with Wendell's arguments, the presentation had inspired him with a renewed zeal and belief that the Bible is the word of God."

"About 1870, Russell and his father established a group with a number of acquaintances to undertake an analytical study of the Bible and the origins of Christian doctrine, creed, and tradition. The group, strongly influenced by the writings of Millerite Adventist ministers George Storrs and George Stetson, who were also frequent attendees, concluded that many of the primary doctrines of the established churches, including the Trinity, hellfire, and inherent immortality of the soul, were not substantiated by the scriptures."

"Around January 1876, Russell received a copy of Nelson Barbour's Herald of the Morning in the mail. Barbour was an influential Adventist writer and publisher. Russell telegraphed Barbour to set up a meeting. Barbour and John Henry Paton visited in Allegheny in March 1876 at Russell's expense so that he could hear their arguments, and compare the conclusions that each side had made in their studies. Russell sponsored a speech by Barbour in St. George's Hall, Philadelphia in August 1876 and attended other lectures by Barbour."

History of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia