Why I Left Seventh-day Adventism – Proclamation! Online Magazine

RONALD N. EMANUEL | Former Third-Generation Adventist |

Leaving the Seventh-day Adventist Church was one of the most difficult spiritual decisions I have ever made. For years, I was committed to the church’s teachings, endeavored to live by the 28 Fundamental Beliefs, and fellowshipped within the community with sincerity and conviction. I do not write this as one embittered or hostile, nor do I desire to disparage those who remain; rather, I write as one who, after careful Bible study, prayer, and soul-searching, could no longer uphold several foundational teachings of the denomination in good conscience.

This journey was not unique to me. I have since discovered a growing number of former Adventists quietly and reverently stepping away from the organization. They did so not out of moral failure or personal offense, but out of a deep concern for truth. This is not a story of rebellion but one of theological reformation. It is a matter of conscience held captive to the Word of God. What follows are the three primary doctrinal reasons that compelled me to leave the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Reason 1: The Investigative Judgement is a doctrine that undermines the finished work of Christ on the cross.

The doctrine of the Investigative Judgement is one of the core pillars and founding teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This doctrine claims that in 1844, Christ entered the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary to begin a process of reviewing the lives of believers, a sort of divine audit to determine who will be saved. This teaching was developed to account for the failed prophecy of William Miller, who predicted Christ’s return in 1844. When that return did not occur, early Adventists, under the prophetic guidance of Ellen G. White, reinterpreted the event as a transition in Christ’s heavenly ministry from the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place.

For years, I accepted this worldview because it was all I knew. But when I began studying the Scriptures more directly, particularly the epistle to the Hebrews, I encountered a problem. Hebrews 9:12 says explicitly that Christ entered into the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. There is no indication that He waited 1,800 years to begin this work; rather, the cross itself marked the decisive moment of atonement, and His resurrection and ascension confirmed its completion. Moreover, Christ’s entry into the Holy Place was the consequence and presentation of that finished work, not the act that secured the redemption itself. The text does not say that He entered in order to obtain redemption, but that He entered having already obtained it on the cross.

After offering a single, “once-for-all” sacrifice for sins, Christ sat down at the right hand of God (Hebrews 10:12-14). That sitting down signifies finality, not continuation of his sacrifice. The idea that Christ’s atoning work remained incomplete until 1844 not only lacks biblical support, but it also undermines the sufficiency and finished nature of His sacrifice.

The practical consequence of this doctrine is equally troubling. It introduces uncertainty and anxiety. Adventists are left wondering whether their names will survive the investigative process, whether their past sins might rise against them in judgement. This was my experience. I affirmed justification by faith with my lips, but in my heart, I felt I was always under review. There was no assurance of salvation in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

It was only when I returned to the gospel—the true, biblical gospel—that I discovered the peace that comes from resting in Christ’s finished work on the cross. There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). The judgement for sin fell on Him. There is no second phase. The cross was enough. The cross is enough.

Reason 2. The Sabbath is a shadow mistaken for the substance of believers’ faith.

Perhaps the most cherished doctrine in Adventism is the observance of the seventh-day Sabbath. It is more than a day of rest; it is viewed as the seal of God, the identifying mark of the true remnant, and a sign of faithful obedience in the end times. Conversely, Sunday observance is portrayed as the mark of the beast, a dangerous deception. And anyone who worships on Sunday will lose their salvation, no matter how sincere and faithful they were to Christ.

For most of my life, I guarded the Sabbath with a sense of devotion and even pride. I believed I was upholding God’s unchanging Law. I held firmly to Sabbath observance, often weighing the delight of some Sabbaths against others. But again, Scripture compelled me to rethink this.

In Colossians 2:16–17, the apostle Paul writes, “Let no one pass judgement on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.” Paul does not speak vaguely here. He identifies Sabbaths, along with other ritual observances, as shadows, types that have found their fulfillment in Christ.

Some argue that the Sabbath Paul refers to in Colossians 2:16–17 applies only to ceremonial Sabbaths, not the seventh-day Sabbath. However, Scripture never classifies Sabbaths into ceremonial, moral, or civil categories. To the Jew, a Sabbath was simply a Sabbath—an indivisible covenantal sign. Moreover, Paul follows a well-established Old Testament liturgical pattern: festival (annual), new moon (monthly), and Sabbath (weekly). To interpret “Sabbath” here as merely ceremonial disrupts this clear sequence and weakens Paul’s allusion to the covenantal calendar (cf. 1 Chronicles 23:31; 2 Chronicles 2:4, 8:13; Isaiah 1:13-14; Ezekiel 45:17; Hosea 2:11 for Old Testament references of Israel’s covenantal calendar and worship rhythm). In short, the apostle teaches that under the New Covenant, believers are no longer bound to dietary laws or calendrical observances, including the weekly Sabbath.

I also noticed that in Romans 14:5, Paul allows for freedom in the observance of days: “One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” There is no binding command to keep the seventh day under the New Covenant anywhere in the New Testament. The early church gathered on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2), celebrating the resurrection and the dawning of the new creation in Christ. It is on this event that the early church based its liturgical and calendrical worship rhythm.

More importantly, I came to understand that Christ is our true Sabbath rest (Hebrews 4:9-10). He is the One in whom we cease from our labors, trusting not in our observance but in His perfect obedience on our behalf.

To make Sabbath observance the final test of loyalty to God, or the seal of the saved, is to impose a legal burden that the New Testament never commands. It is to place a shadow above the Savior.

Reason 3. Ellen G. White is a prophet without scriptural warrant.

Ellen G. White’s role in the Seventh-day Adventist Church is both foundational and problematic. Though the denomination claims she is a “lesser light” leading to the “greater light” of Scripture, in practice, her writings function as the authoritative lens through which all Scripture is interpreted. Her visions are used to confirm doctrine, explain prophecy, and settle theological disputes.

For many years, I revered her writings. But over time, I began to see that her authority subtly displaced that of Scripture. I also could not ignore the numerous theological errors and failed predictions scattered throughout her work, nor the fact that some of her key teachings, such as the Investigative Judgement, lacked a biblical basis entirely.

The Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura—that Scripture is the only infallible authority for faith and life—requires us to reject any post-New Testament or extrabiblical, non-canonical prophet on whom rests infallible authority over the church. We are not to bind consciences to private visions or extra-biblical revelations.

When I finally laid aside Ellen White’s writings and approached Scripture without her interpretive lens, I began to experience the clarity, sufficiency, and freedom of God’s Word in a profoundly new way. It took time and effort to read the Bible without her shadow hovering over every passage, without her familiar voice supplying interpretations and details the text itself never gave. But in due course, the gospel emerged simple and glorious. Christ is enough. His Word is enough.

Leaving Adventism to find Christ.

Leaving the Seventh-day Adventist Church did not mean leaving Christ. On the contrary, it meant finally understanding the sufficiency of His grace and the finality of His work of redemption. It meant trusting in His righteousness, not my effort. It meant letting go of fear and embracing the assurance that comes from the gospel alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

I know this path is not easy. Many who begin questioning do so privately, quietly, afraid of the consequences. I have walked that road, but I also know that on the other side of that struggle is joy. There is peace. There is rest.

The Adventist worldview is doctrinally flawed in matters that strike at the very heart of the gospel. For such a system, I can have compassion, but I cannot remain. I write this to those still wrestling: You are not alone. Others have walked this road. And on the other side, you will find not emptiness, but fullness; not uncertainty, but assurance; not Ellen, but Jesus.

Listen to Jesus when he says, “Come to Me, all who labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28).†

Ronald Emanuel is a former third-generation Seventh-day Adventist who came to saving faith in Jesus Christ in 2021 through the convicting power of the inerrant Word of God. In 2020, he declined a ministerial appointment and formally separated from the Adventist Church. Prior to that, he served actively as an ordained elder in two local congregations within the Guyana Conference. He holds a degree in theology from the University of the Southern Caribbean in Trinidad, an Adventist institution under the Caribbean Union, and a degree in mathematics from the University of Guyana. He is currently completing a master’s degree in educational psychology. Ronald now worships at a local Presbyterian church in Guyana—a Reformed congregation committed to the authority of Scripture and the doctrines of grace. He lives with his wife of ten years and their newborn son. Although he now serves as a mathematics educator, his enduring interests remain in biblical and systematic theology, Reformed doctrine, and strengthening discipleship within the local church.