| Author | Message | ||
| Windmotion Registered user Username: Windmotion Post Number: 163 Registered: 6-2001  |
OK, here's some statistics that I've found and analyzed. I've rounded quite a few of my numbers just to keep it simple. Let me start out with raw numbers, and then I will extrapolate from them some interesting facts. In 2001 the NAD had 98,5434 members. In 2005 the NAD had 1,006,317 members. There are 6,000 churches in the NAD Net converts between 2000 and 2005 was 153,000. The U.S. loses about 1 out of every 100 people to death every year. OK, using those numbers I can estimate the 2000 membership to be 980,213, which means they converted 153,000 to have a net gain of 26,104. So, in the last five years almost 127,000 people left the church for one reason or another. Of those, using the above average, 50,000 left because they died. I think this number may be somewhat higher because the SDA population on average seems to be older than the general population. So then almost 77,000 people left the church for other reasons, at about 15,400 people per year. Spread out over 6,000 churches, that's about 13 people per church. So there is some deleting from the membership roles going on. Do you think maybe you people are not members but still receive the magazines? If not, I wonder about the people who are inactive for years and years and then die. Do they ever get removed, since the church doesn't know they are dead? Here are some statments from the church manual, and they are quite vague. "Except in the case of the death of a member, the clerk of the church can remove a name from the church records only on a vote of the church in a business meeting." (Does anyone remember doing that?) "Members Not to be Removed from Church Membership for Nonattendance - Absentees should be faithfully visited by the church leadership, and each should be encouraged to revive church attendance, explaining the seriousness of neglecting the obligation of church membership in deliberately absenting oneself for indefinite periods of time and making no report of one's faith and hope to the church. When because of age, infirmity, or other unavoidable cause, a member finds it impossible regularly to attend divine worship, it should be considered an obligation to keep in contact with the church leaders by letter or by other means. However, as long as a person is loyal to the doctrines of the church, nonattendance at church services shall not be considered sufficient cause for removal from church membership." "Members Moving Away and Not Reporting - When members move away from the vicinity, it is their duty to inform the church elder or clerk as to their new location and address. While they remain members of that church they should recognize their responsibility of reporting regularly to the church and sending in their tithes and offerings. It is desirable for such a report to be sent at least once each quarter. If, however, such a member leaves no address behind and makes no effort to reach the home church or send a report and it is found impossible to locate the missing member, then, after an absence of two years, an individual may be removed from the membership of the church by a vote of the church, provided the church officers can certify that they have faithfully endeavored to locate the person but without success. The clerk should record in the proper column, "Whereabouts unknown. Voted to designate as missing." "Notification to Persons Removed from Membership - It is incumbent upon the church that removes a member from church membership to notify the individual in writing of the action that was reluctantly taken with the assurance of enduring spiritual interest and personal concern. This communication should, where possible, be delivered in person by the church pastor or by a church board designee. The erring member should be assured that the church will always hope that reaffiliation will take place and that one day there will be eternal fellowship together in the kingdom of God." (I would suspect none of you who think you are still members received that) I remember when I became a member of the Christian Missionary Alliance church, I was told if I stopped attending church for six months I would be considered inactive, and if I stopped attending for a year I would be removed from membership (I asked because I was making college plans) Anyways, if I had nothing else to do, and lots of money, I would be interested in looking into this more closely. Still investigatively, Hannah | ||
| Pheeki Registered user Username: Pheeki Post Number: 592 Registered: 1-2003 |
Apparently, I left at the same time the newly hired youth pastor, fresh from seminary, and his wife asked their membership be dropped also. That was a big shock for the church, so I didn't get much discussion. I was on the fringe and didn't really matter anyway...but my husband mattered. He had slavishly played the piano for them week after week. Anyway, I got a short and sweet email from the church secretary simply saying it was a done deal....no regrets or anything. Oh well. We still get the church newsletter, the SW Record, and the Review on a regualar basis because my husband's name is still on the books, though he hasn't attended in nearly 2-years. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 2261 Registered: 12-2003  |
Hannah, this is all very interesting. Thanks for the research. Regarding names being removed: When we wrote to LLU church and asked for our membership to be terminated, they did delete our names from their local books, and they did send us a letter verifying this action. What I'm suspecting, however, is that somehow at the local conference level, our names have not left the lists. I've no idea whether or not the local church sent our termination notice to the local conference or not, or whether they simply update the conference with their current numbers every year. Perhaps the deletion simply didn't get tranferred to the mailing list--or maybe our actual names didn't make it to the conference, so while the local numbers reflect loss, the actual names might still be there. I've no idea--just speculating. Further, I'm not sure how the Church figures its membership. It's beginning to appear to me that the "official" figures probably come from the conference offices, not directly from the local churches. The unofficial figure of 300,000 came, according to the report we heard, from people canvassing the local churches to find active members to participate in the health study. As the quote above mentions, non-attendance is not sufficient reason to remove people from the official rolls. The conferences, therefore, would logically have much greater membership numbers than the local churches would have active members. Regarding giving as mentioned in Don Schneider's report. Apparently Schneider said "per capita giving" equalled $1401 per year. That figure can include much more than tithe. "Giving" can include mission offerings and also local church expense funds. Schneider would have had to have said "per capita tithe" to have meant just tithe funds. In reality, many active SDAs no longer pay tithe; they pay their "tithe" to the local church or to mission funds. Conversely, some true-blue members pay double tithe--they pay not only 10% in tithe, but they pay at least another 10% in offerings. Richard was raised in a home that believed they must pay at least a double tithe. In fact, I remember hearing this principle encouraged from the pulpit during offering appeals, etc. Schneider's figure, I believe, is misleading because it doesn't break down the "giving" and show where it went. When tithe falls, the church structure starts having trouble supporting itself. I remember hearing our pastor at LLU Church say repeatedly that giving to mission projects (which was encouraged, and special projects were even sponsored by the church) should not replace other giving because it did not benefit the local church or contribute to tithe. Interesting... Colleen | ||
| Tisha Registered user Username: Tisha Post Number: 106 Registered: 3-2005 |
I have a question. When did the SDA worship service begin to be called Divine Worship? I started hearing it referred to that about three years ago by some Historic Adventists. And a comment - when I was disfellowshipped from the SDA Church, I never recieved a letter or a visit, either before that action was taken or after, to let me know I was no longer a member. I found out when I tried to transfer my membership to another SDA Church. Another comment! When Jan Paulson spoke at the last General Conference and stressed getting back to "our distinctives", that was the final straw for me. I had already given up EGW and thought I could still be SDA, but after that speach I realized that was not possible for me. I hope this later push to keep EGW in the limelight will force other "fence-sitters" to make a decision one way or the other. I can't help but think that this has to be the best thing to happen - it clarifies the real doctrines of the SDA Church and makes it impossible to ignore their dependence on EGW. The more they push for a "one-way" doctrine around the world, the more apparent their cultric doctrine becomes. While now there is room for differing beliefs regarding EGW (and other "distinctives"), there are many who call themselves SDA who really don't subscribe to the real SDA doctrines. As the SDA Church reaffirms its identity, I think more people will have to leave the SDA Church. While it just makes me sick at heart to hear the rhetoric, I know in the end it will be as God wishes! Praise God from Whom all Blessings Flow! -tisha | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 347 Registered: 7-2000 |
Divine Worship? Well, it may have been picked up from the Hispanic term for the main service 'culto divino'---which, strictly translated, is 'Divine Worship'. As for membership, I suspect that Colleen is correct about the locals not notifying the Conference. I do know that a letter has to be created and sent to the conference, along with the local records being updated when a member quits the church. It's a bit time consuming and I'd bet in a lot of churches it doesn't get done. My membership is still with the Ohio conference. They told me I would have to have the membership transferred to a local church, which could then vote to remove me from the record books. I wasn't too interested in being involved enough with another SDA congregation to go through all of that! | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 504 Registered: 3-2005 |
Another good question would be, What do the numbers really prove? In my web surfing today I ran across an article by a Southern Baptist who did a very interesting numbers analysis for the SBC, and I think there experience parallels Adventism. This author is illustrating how few people in the SBC are born again. So there are interesting parallels if anyone is interested, at www.ccwonline.org/sbc.html Stan | ||
| Freeatlast Registered user Username: Freeatlast Post Number: 397 Registered: 5-2002 |
Colleen, your reference to double-tithe sent chills up my spine! In our household, tithing was considered the bare minimum standard. Double tithing was touted as the magic formula for blessings from above. "You can't outgive God, you know" was the accompanying mantra. My folks broke their backs trying to out-tithe themselves each consecutive week while I had two pair of jeans for my entire 8th grade year. We never had any savings or cash for emergencies, drove broken-down cars and shopped for school clothes at Goodwill on many occasions. You've heard of people who live paycheck to paycheck? We would have loved to be those people! We lived payday-advance to payday advance. The only sure thing financially in our house was that the tithe envelope never went to church empty. Do I resent it? Yes, I do. But I leave it all to God to sort out. But, to this day, the concept of double tithe makes me bristle. "You can't outgive God"??? I have another one... "Charity begins at home". I wonder how many other SDA families have children who are economically unsecure because of the tithing mandate. | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 131 Registered: 2-2005 |
After I ran that last post, I said the same thing to a church employee today who made the same point as Colleen. Then I felt like a dork because for some reason I was thinking only tithe when tithe is only a portion of giving. D'oh! Anyhow, I probably shouldn't be doing any thinking or posting in the middle of the night. Despite the effort to present a glowing report to the stockholders (i.e., the church), haven't we been hearing that tithes are actually down? I know they are here in this conference since they have laid off at least 7 pastors, cancelled a significant amount of travel for conference personnel, etc. becasue of this loss. Does anyone have any stats regarding the declining tithe denomination wide (or at least NAD)? A few months back the church had launched a campaign to get more money out of it's members with suggested contribution plans. They did this by producing a DVD that was to be shown in every local church. In addition to a 10% tithe they wanted another 9 or 10 percent (I don't remember exactly)in things like missions, local church, evangelism, etc. When tithe dries up you have a harder time feeding the enormous bureaucratic, layered, administrative system which will force some tough decisions sooner or later. Heretic | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1697 Registered: 3-2004  |
Tisha, When my name was removed from the church books, I was not notified it was to be removed and was not notified after it was removed. I found out a few years later, even though I went to church occasionally, at a local supermarket from an SDA friend. By that time, I could have cared less. In fact it was freeing because I was no longer contacted about anything about the church. I came from a cash strapped family also, but Mom always paid her tithe, even with 7 kids at home. What I am amazed about as I write this, is that God took care of us and how He cared for us. He is truly awesome. Diana | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 132 Registered: 2-2005 |
I was just reading an article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch online newspaper regarding the re-election of Jan Paulsen. This article stated," After the "great disappointment" of their hopes in 1844, believers broke into several groups. One group, turning to their Bibles for increased understanding, recognized Saturday as the Sabbath. The group became the nucleus for the Seventh-day Adventists Church, which officially organized in Battle Creek, Mich." **sigh** Here's the link: http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/55522B9395971526862570310074A302?OpenDocument&highlight=2%2C%22adventist%22 Is it just me or does it seem like due to the wording -- "...turning to their Bibles for increased understanding, recognized Saturday..." -- the AP author here is in a way endorsing continued Saturday Sabbath observance as biblical truth? How about "turning" to Ellen White? I don't suppose there are any forum members in the St. Louis area who would consider writing a letter to the editor to correct this error? Heretic (Message edited by Heretic on July 06, 2005) | ||
| Benevento Registered user Username: Benevento Post Number: 26 Registered: 4-2005 |
Speaking of paying tithes and church membership We were not removed from church membership, but they somehow had the Review and Local union paper stopped. They still sent us requests for money. When I did write and ask to have our names removed and asked for a verifiation, they didn't respond. I have two friends who have not attended church for years, make no pretense of being members and still faithfully send in their tithe.I was thinking the Sabbath was about the last thing formers gave up but with these people it was tithe. As far as I know they are still [aying it. | ||
| Pheeki Registered user Username: Pheeki Post Number: 593 Registered: 1-2003 |
If you do a study on tithing...we are commanded to remember the widows and children first. So I totally understand having resentment for doing without things as a child to keep some big albatros (top heavy) heirarchy called the GC afloat! Have you seen how good their insurance is? It pays for going to those SDA health resorts to get yourself back in shape, it pays for Lasik surgery...the list goes on. It is way better insurance than most of us get. My mother's family left nothing to their children instead leaving their entire estate to "finish the work". How would that make you feel if you were that child? Plus I have seen people who can't even take care of their children but make a big show of putting that envelope in the offering plate. And my SDA brother once told my mother that his farm wasn't selling because God knew that if it sold he could pay my mother back the money she so generously lent him and because she (the widow on a fixed income) stopped paying tithe, God was holding up the sale on the farm because He was unable to bless this non-tithepaying heretic, called my mother! The audacity. But in most SDA's eyes, we buy God's blessings, we don't get them because we are His children and He loves us. What does that say about their understanding of God? | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 133 Registered: 2-2005 |
I don't know how many of you may have seen this already, but at the GC session they voted in an alternative set of SDA baptismal vows which include only 3:
I know they can be considered to be lumped in with #2, but isn't it interesting that the Spirit of Prophecy, the Sabbath, or the Remnant are not explicitly mentioned in any of these "alternate" vows? Why the action taken here? Hmmm. It seems to me like one way of making the church appear less exclusive and more like other evangelical churches to appeal to more of the folks. Wouldn't this make it easier to gloss over some of the dicier doctrines with potential converts? Just a thought. Here's the link to the article: http://news.adventist.org/data/2005/06/1120840514/index.html.en (Looks like you'll have to cut and paste it. Sorry.) I'd be interested to hear any thoughts on this subject. Heretic (Message edited by Heretic on July 09, 2005) (Message edited by Heretic on July 09, 2005) | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1706 Registered: 3-2004 |
It still mentions the Statement of fundamental beliefs, which include the SOP, sabbath, tithing and all the rest. And the person is baptized into the SDA church. doesn't look like much of a change to me. Diana | ||
| Heretic Registered user Username: Heretic Post Number: 134 Registered: 2-2005 |
Here are a couple of more excerpts from the article:
So I'm unclear on who gets to decide which vows are used, the pastor or the candidate. From what Mr. Howard stated, it sounds like it's up to the one doing the baptizing. If that's the case, wouldn't that enable the pastor or evangelist to place emphasis (or de-emphasis) on whichever points he feels would appeal most to the candidate throughout the proselytization process knowing that the vows could be presented this way?
"Keep relevant?" In other words, repackage the vows to minimize the importance of core, fundamental church doctrine in order to appeal to and retain youth. Why else would they bother to go to the trouble of debating and ultimately passing this? Yes, all the doctrinal points are still there, but they are more implicit this way. I may be over-reacting as usual, but it all just seems like more deception. Heretic | ||
| Windmotion Registered user Username: Windmotion Post Number: 165 Registered: 6-2001 |
What I found most interesting in that hyperlink was the comments on rebaptism: "The delegates then turned their attention to the tricky question of rebaptism and a heavily reworked section of the Church Manual based on the idea that rebaptism is the exception rather than the norm." My husband was actually baptised three times as an adventist, the second two times were done after periods of backsliding (the last time he was baptised was after he backslid into a sunday-keeping church, ha) I had never heard of anyone being baptised more than once, other than my mom and that's because she was baptised as an infant. Has anyone here been baptised more than once? Do you think adventists take baptism too literally, or what? Dryly, Hannah | ||
| Seekr777 Registered user Username: Seekr777 Post Number: 198 Registered: 1-2003  |
To: Dryly, Hannah, From: Wetly, Richard,  In answer to your question I was rebaptised about 8 years ago when I realized that my understanding of baptism had changed so much. Do I feel it was important for my salvation? no but it was to my own sense of making a statement. Richard PS: It is interesting that this subject has come up since last Sunday night I had a vivid and powerful dream on this issue of rebaptism. I almost never dream or at least never remember them. This was a fairly long dream and woke me up and I went out and typed it up on my computer. I'm considering sharing it but not sure what to do with it. | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 571 Registered: 7-2004 |
Dear Dry Hannah and Wet Richard, I have been baptized twice, and a minister who was a close friend wanted to dunk me a third time, but I demured. I was first baptized when I was eight, then after a particularly moving Week if Prayer at academy I chose to be baptized again, mainly because I had been raped when I was 12 and was willing to try anything to wash away the memory and stain of that experience. I grew up, became discouraged and faded away from the church, then after having my children was willing to try religion again. That's when my friend wanted to "bathe" me again. It is interesting to me that now, when I remember that I was baptised the one that matters to me is the first one, and since I've become acquainted with what scripture has to say about these things I realize that I have been held in the safety of Jesus' hand since long before my 8th birthday. When you have a religion that is based on appearances, and SDAism is, then you will always find these kinds of opportunities to "start over" so that maybe this time YOU will get it right. Gospel tells me that I need to put my trust in Jesus only, to confess my sins, and that he is faithful and just to forgive my sins and to cleanse me from all unrighteousness. The baptismal font does not cleanse, Jesus does that. Baptism is like a wedding, an opportunity to publicly display your relationship with Jesus, and like the wedding, ideally you already know him before you go through the ceremony. Belva | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 1708 Registered: 3-2004 |
I was baptized twice in the SDA church. First when I was 13, the year after I had polio. I was baptized because God healed me. The second baptism was after my divorce and I really went worldly-dancing, going to the theatre, and doing other things SDAs are not supposed to do. I wanted to get right with God and start over. It was somethime after I was baptized the second time that my name was taken off the church books, because I "backslid" again for lack of church attendance. The third time I was baptized was at the church I now attend. I was baptized for all the right reasons. I love and accept Jesus and His sacrifice for me. Those were never mentioned the two other times I was baptized. Diana | ||
| Carol_2 Registered user Username: Carol_2 Post Number: 341 Registered: 2-2002  |
I was baptized at around 10 in the SDA church. I did it because all the other kids my age were doing it, and had no idea of what I was really doing. I was re-baptized in the SDA church at the age of 31 when I truly came to know and accept Jesus as my Savior. I definitely don't feel a need for re-baptism just because I was baptized in the SDA church. I truly had come to know the Lord. I've notice in my new (non-SDA) church that many children, quite young by SDA standards, ASK for baptism totally on their own. They seem quite sincere, and want to ask Jesus to be their "forever friend" which is the verbiage used at our church with the young children. Last Sunday one of my very precious little girls I taught at age 4 (who is now 6,) excitedly told me at church she wanted to be baptized. I think it's beautiful and very exciting. |
