Isn't there one aspect that is unique to us in the area of health in relation to the clean and the unclean?

How would it be unique to us?

Aren't there others that follow the teaching of clean and unclean as given in Scripture?

I don't see the teaching listed in either the 28 FB or the Pillars.

True, the health message is not unique. Muslims, Buddhists, New Agers, secular world are aware of the benefits of being healthy, are aware of the health risks involved in eating unclean meats for whatever reason whether it be religion, science, conscious.. This would apply to clean meats as well considering there is a large group of people who are generally secular, and do not eat nor consume any animal products whatsoever. The thought of killing an animal to be served on a plate is abhorrent to them, and if you do some reading on it, the whole industry itself is rather barbaric.
Anyways I digressed abit, but the gist is really that it's not:
A. A fundamental belief.
B. A requirement for Salvation
C. Man adds to it, and make their own version of the Gospel based on the health message.

God Bless,
Will

While it's not a requirement for salvation, how one relates to it definitely has salvific implications.

BTW, my experience tells me that New Agers are much more committed to this than most Adventists.

Very true asygo. In fact they have no problem informing you of the joys of being healthy, and how to get healthy. They show great enthusiasm, and are very educated, and kind, ironic don't you think?
But this isn't about the health message, it's about our pillars of faith as established by the pioneers of our faith of which the health message is not a part of, and the 28 fundamental beliefs currently held by our church, and if they still are intertwined.
God Bless,
Will

The SDA confession.

This week's Sabbath School is on the Bible and Health, therefore, you may wish to go to that topic and take a look at the link to the lesson material itself, as well as the discussion going on there.

Three quick points (as I'm just catching up with this thread).

In that earlier quote from CW is the message she gave that the foundations of the pillars would be moved by those in the church - along with not understanding the pillars in the 1888 crisis...a very true insight. It can easily be proved - is indeed well known, that the foundations of our pillars of our faith have been shifted to produce yet another variant but mistaken understanding of those truths: an untrue meaning differing from that studied out by the pioneers.

Which leads to the other points here - both raised before on this thread. The nature(s) of Christ, and those other few that Asygo discussed very briefly with Will, who observed that they were not doctrines listed among the pillars of Adventism's faith. True, but they are the foundations of the pillars (at least I one I named is), and their shifting by some in our church is well known by now.

How they effect the affect of the pillars is their relevance to our understanding of the pillars and our faith. The "Independent Ministries" is a politically correct label, of course - bearing their history in mind; to continue being dramatic is not necessarily wise of them. The SOP is being challenged - no, attacked - from within the church these last several years, in the name of holding her up(!)....The issues are moving on since the 60-80's, so how should the 'old' and 'new' issues be balanced?

....cont./

What is the central truth of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ which is potentially misunderstood by the church AND the so-called independent ministries AND the members? The HISTORY, SIZE and ACHIEVEMENTS of God's grace.

Now, it's sad infamy for Our Firm Foundation to be known via its regular readers as critical of the church, given the lack of coverage of and understanding by the church of the issues that magazine seeks to trumpet.

Some 11 or so years ago I looked closely at that group and the other (both are) self-supporting ministry appealing to our history for its hidden treasures: the loved, loathed or disregarded 1888 Message Study Committee. The one highlighted (& still does) for remembrance' sake Adventism's omnipotent line on sanctification - Ellen herself unabashedly taught Christian, character perfection by faith, in the context of the final atonement of & by Christ. The other group highlighted (and still does) the full truth about what grace has done with this world when God gave it his only begotten Son: a most positive, "most precious message" which Adventism has been given the beginning of by "two men". Now that's a positive angle - which Elder Folkenberg personally continues to evangelise with.

What is this "full truth" about grace? I am sounding overly arrogant, I know, but...: consider, when property (painting or real estate, etc...) is passed by death in a will, when is legal ownership of that property transferred from the deceased to the heir? Possessing property is another question: when does title pass??? At point of death, of course (not being unsympathetic, here, now). What property did Christ give by will, and to whom, and when?...

...Why do I bother, or in that new BBC slang, why am I bovered?

It touches and facilitates our truly unique doctrine, for everyone's sake.

There is only one part of the gospel which relies on Christ's atonement intercession: preparation for translation. Preparation to fall asleep in Jesus is both common practice among all denominations - including Roman Catholics (and thus most definitely NOT not a belief & practice unique to us!...), and all who die after coming to faith in Jesus are saved for the kingdom by the light they have received & believed because the cross has already saved all men in Christ (Rom 3:23,24) and the final atonement isn't the height of their experience of Christ's righteousness.

IOW, the cross is effective by grace without faith - for faith, and Adventism was raised by God to give the final atonement minsitry of Christ meaning as the preparation for translation wihtout seeing death (sorry,...of course), that is marriage counselling for the wedding of the Lamb which is the close of probation.

I've only heard that 'wedding' illustration from Elders Wieland & Short's group and Dwight Nelson's youth pastor (with Dwight's endorsement, he said), and I hope others present that understanding, too, but I've not observed any mention of it from the so-called historics.

There is a gross lack of preaching and printing on these issues, let alone motivated understanding. The pillars of our faith inform the general spread of beliefs, else they lack purpose.

Let me abbreviate all that. The 28 Fundamentals express our whole Christian, spiritual reality and experience with God and his Spirit. The old landmarks, pillars of our faith, emphasise the goal of our message: finishing the work of the gospel with Jesus so he can come again to give us the promised eternal life.

Those landmarks and their emphases have been shaken and diminished over the last 60 years by our literature and preaching due to just one doctrinal change in our church history: now there are at least two understandings of the human nature of Jesus, one of which supports the old landmark truths and one of which does not. Those truths are a complete package, so the several that link directly to the humanity of the Saviour make this issue directly relevant to the other truths in turn.

The literary debate over the humanity of Christ has gone to bed for the last 10 years or so, and Ellen White's authority is now in the spot light, but the old landmarks remain largely silent in the pulpit for 30 years now, or 60 years...

The heart of our message is missing and without it we just appear to ourselves - and sound - like any other Protestant church, while others allege we're Roman Catholic because those others don't understand true gospel power - a truth we're also battling to grasp.

A sorry situation, after Jesus wanted us to proclaim that gospel power to the world and witness to it ourselves. Do the old landmarks not focus our message and faith goal for the generality of the breadth of all our beliefs?

Comments anyone? I mustn't do all the talking here...