SDARM & Cult Behaviour

SDARM: Mini-Kingdoms of Cults

SUMMARY The Reformists of the SDARM generally BELIEVE and TEACH: - The have ‘the truth’ and that they (or rather their particular brand of the SDARM) is the real Adventist Church. The Reformists are WRONG because: - The SDARM Church(es) have cult-like characteristics. - The SDARM, like most cults, has strong leadership in virtually every dimension of their lives. - The SDARM devotees, like in most cults, characteristically display a displaced loyalty for the guru and the group and are galvanized together through physical and/or psychological intimidation tactics. - The SDARM, like most cults, adopt a “we/they” siege mentality and has been cut off from all former associations including their immediate families. - The SDARM, like most cults, operate under the guise of Christianity but deviate from the orthodox teachings of the historic Christian faith.  For example, they typically reject the doctrine of the Trinity and embrace Tritheism (worship of Father, Son and Spirit as three separate gods) or Arianism (holding Jesus as a lesser 'mini' god). - The SDARM devotees, like in most cults, become masters at taking texts out of context to develop pretexts for their theological perversions.

What is a cult exactly?

The notion of a cult is hard to define and can be hard to spot.  However, according to Walter and Martin and the Christian Research Institute (who famously declared the mainstream SDA Church not a cult), in the article “What is a cult”:

‘First, a cult may be defined sociologically. From this perspective, a cult is a religious or semi-religious sect whose followers are controlled by strong leadership in virtually every dimension of their lives. Devotees characteristically display a displaced loyalty for the guru and the group and are galvanized together through physical and/or psychological intimidation tactics. This kind of cultist more often than not displays a “we/they” siege mentality and has been cut off from all former associations including their immediate families.

Furthermore, a cult may be defined theologically. In this sense a cult can be a pseudo-Christian organization that claims to be Christian but compromises, confuses, or contradicts essential Christian doctrine. Such cults operate under the guise of Christianity but deviate from the orthodox teachings of the historic Christian faith as codified in the ancient ecumenical creeds. Typically, devotees become masters at taking texts out of context to develop pretexts for their theological perversions.’

Thus, according to the above definition, some of the key characteristics of a cult include the following:

1. Strong leadership in virtually every dimension of their lives.

2. Devotees characteristically display a displaced loyalty for the guru and the group and are galvanized together through physical and/or psychological intimidation tactics.

3. A “we/they” siege mentality and has been cut off from all former associations including their immediate families.

4. Such cults operate under the guise of Christianity but deviate from the orthodox teachings of the historic Christian faith as codified in the ancient ecumenical creeds.

5. Devotees become masters at taking texts out of context to develop pretexts for their theological perversions.

Is the SDARM Church(es) and groups a cult(s)?

Arguably this entire blog illustrates the cult-like attributes of the SDARM Church(es).  However, in this article, an closer examination of the SDARM will occur as against each of the relevant characteristics of a cult identified by the Christian Research Institute.

Test #1: Strong leadership in virtually every dimension of their lives

Jesus warned in Luke 11:42 about the nit-picking of the Pharisees:

‘Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone.’

Ellen White similarly warned herself:

‘There is prevalent a spirit that seeks the mastery over others.’ TM 260.


‘Special instruction has been given me for God’s people, for perilous times are upon us. In the world, destruction and violence are increasing. In the church, man power is gaining the ascendancy; those who have been chosen to occupy positions of trust think it their prerogative to rule.’ 9T 270.


Is this characteristic of strong leadership in virtually every dimension of life something found in the SDARM Church(es) – absolutely!

Reformists live the sort of regulated lives that would be an ultra-orthodox Hasid to shame. Almost every of life seems regulated.

As Helmut Kramer observes in SDA Reform Movement at page 42-43:

‘The concept of individual responsibility and freedom of conscience has caused much misunderstanding between Reformers and the Adventist ': Church. The Reformers insist that the church must hold up strict standards for the people to follow. In many cases the members themselves expect the church to specify every detail of how they are to act in any given situation. Little room is given for one to make decisions for himself.

The Adventist Church has given more latitude to its members by encouraging them to search the Scriptures for themselves. It has emphasized the need for every person to make moral decisions in accordance with the understanding he or she has gained from personal study of the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy. This different approach has led Reformers to believe that Adventists have lowered the standard of Christian living.

This concept of personal responsibility is foreign to most members of the Reform Movement. They have been taught to obey the dictates of the church without question. When a problem arises, instead of going to the Source of all wisdom, they send a letter to the leaders of the General Conference.’

As Vance Ferrel in The Truth About the Adventist Reform Church at page 12 further notes:

‘Reform Church leaders are determined that everyone remain in line and in subservience, or out they go. This is partly due to the German origin of the movement. By nature, Germans make excellent leaders/ followers. That is why they command such brilliant armies. Church members are also carefully marshaled like soldiers in the ranks. No one must get out of line. Perhaps that is partly why my later contacts with Amish and old-order Mennonites reminds me so much of them; they all tend to have Gothic origins.’

Similarly, as observed by Georead in the article ‘Extract from an Open Letter to John Thiel – Nit Picking’, about ‘independent historic’ Reformist leader John Thiel, whose sermons can be found publicly online at Sabbath Sermons and on You Tube:

‘John, you have scoured the [writings of EGW] for the minutiae, seeking Gods perfect will, and have decreed rules for the people to follow. These include rules on interpersonal relationships, personal hygiene, dress, diet, finances, holidays, haircuts, underwear, Sabbath keeping, music, suitable hymns, education, parenthood, social media, etcetera, etcetera.

… So, we have two categories of minutiae, the first is good and to be followed explicitly. The second being named by you as “Nit Picking”, both categories having equal validity in scripture but the latter is set aside under your decree. You are the only means by which the people can negotiate this legal minefield that is of your own making. You decide that which is good, and that which is laid aside. This isn’t Protestantism, It is Papal.’

So that is a definite yes to test #1 – the SDARM Church(es) have the clear hallmarks of a cult. 

Test #2: Devotees characteristically display a displaced loyalty for the guru and the group and are galvanized together through physical and/or psychological intimidation tactics

As explained by Vance Ferrel in The Truth About the Adventist Reform Church at pages 35-36, the SDARM have a specific doctrine known as the ‘Voice of God’, which is used to justify their authoritarian control:

‘It is the teaching of the Reform Church that the “Voice of God” is heard in the actions of their General Conference Sessions, as well as in the decisions of their General Conference Committee leaders in small committee meetings.’

Unfortunately, when a clique of key leaders controls a Session—because nearly all the other delegates are their employees (!)—one cannot expect the result to be the Voice of God. Yet that is what our own Sessions have become (see Captive Sessions [WM–114-116]). One of our typical [SDARM] General Conference Sessions, with about 2,000 delegates in attendance, will have no more than 7-9 percent laymen. All the others are church employees on various levels. Since the delegates are required to sit in certain blocks on the main floor of the assembly, if anyone votes out of line, it can easily be noted.’

This very Papal-like doctrine effectively subordinates the Reformist membership not to the Bible but to a Cardinal-like conclave of SDARM popes and prelates.  So much for supposedly having a faith based on the Bible and the Bible alone!

As for other forms of physical and psychological intimidation, the most obvious example is the common use of Church discipline for infractions of non-essential regulatory minutiae and other very minor perceived infractions.  As Helmut Kramer observes in SDA Reform Movement at page 51:

‘Reformers on the other hand believe the only way to show contempt for sin is to disfellowship members for any wrong action (apart from minor infractions). Since the Adventist leadership did not disfellowship Elder Conradi and his coworkers as punishment for their mistakes in World War I, they argue that the General Conference became guilty of committing the sin itself.

…Such longsuffering action is not in agreement with the underlying spirit of the Reformers. They believe that in order to rid the church of sin they must remove every "sinner." When this kind of procedure is followed, then the church is properly discharging its duty. Instead of working on the problem with the view of saving the sinner, Reformers commonly "solve" the problem by removing the sinner from fellowship. All too often there is a veiled, or not so veiled, threat that unless you get your life in order, the church will have to deal with you.

The SDARM position is not that dissimilar from the ancient heretics in the Early Church called the Donatists. They were best known for their extremely legalistic, authoritarian and strict views.  In particular, unlike the rest of the then-Church which saw itself more as a hospital for the sick, the Donatists saw themselves as an elite of saints, where any minor infraction must result in discipline.

Similarly, as observed by Georead in the article ‘Criticism of John Thiel’s Sermon Unquestioning Obedience’, about ‘independent historic’ Reformist leader John Thiel:

‘John Thiel’s sermon “Unquestioning Obedience” was posted on the internet in 2010. Throughout the sermon the idea of unquestioning obedience, blind obedience, implicit obedience is repeated.

The key points in the sermon are 1) The high pressure sell, that it’s the end of the world and there’s no time left. 2) Since it’s an emergency there is no room left for discussion. 3) You need to submit to the most experienced person. 4) You need to obey and do without understanding.’

Georead points to several direct quotes from John Thiel’s sermon “Unquestioning Obedience”, which best illustrate this point.  In particular, Mr Thiel states:

‘Can you trust me implicitly? Don’t seek to ask the reason for the things I am going to tell you as it will slow down the process. I’m asking you to simply obey all the standards and practices that are outlined for the church of the three angels. Don’t tell me you don’t fully understand. If I say to you, you must follow the dress code as studied in the sanctuary that is it, don’t ask why, just do it. It’s the dress code. The health message as studied, vegetarianism, don’t ask why, just simply know that I’m asking you to step fast, that’s why. Don’t ask about modesty, fashion, and vanity, worldly pastimes just do as I say. Don’t worry about your friends and your unbelieving relatives just do as I say.’

In effect, John Thiel asks his followers not to challenge his words – to study it in the Bible for themselves – but simply to trust his words for it.  Supposedly there isn’t time. How at odds is Thiel’s message of trusting in human flesh with Paul’s counsel in 1 Thes 5:20-22, to test everything:

‘Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good; abstain from every form of evil.’

Now compare John Thiel’s pressure-sales pitch with the Bereans, who are mentioned in Acts 17:11 were open-minded but still checked everything for themselves:

‘These Jews were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so.’

So that is also a definite yes to test #2 – the SDARM Church(es) clearly have a range of direct and indirect psychological intimidation tactics, whether it be the high-pressure sell or formal church discipline, in order to maintain their dictatorial authoritarian systems of control.

Test #3: A “we/they” siege mentality and has been cut off from all former associations including their immediate families   

Vance Ferrel observes in The Truth About the Adventist Reform Church at page 12, that on a practical level, the SDARM does suggest, if implicitly, that salvation is found only in its ranks.  As a result Reformist adherents are told they must separate or be lost:

‘That was not easy, for Anna had nowhere to go. Church conditions must have been pretty bad, if she had to leave all she had and go out to nothing at all! Aside from her son, she had utter loneliness. But, before she left, she was read the “unity and church texts” about how we must stay with the church. Years earlier, Reform workers told her she must separate from the church or be lost, and now they were telling her if she separated from the church, she would be irretrievably lost. So it goes.’ (emphasis added)

And at page 21:

‘We need to give the True Message—and let separation come if it will. But we should not preach separation as the message! Preach the message, not separation!’

As similarly argued by John Thiel in “The Love of God in Worldly Associations”, in the SDARM Sabbath Sermons:

‘Anything to do with friendship with the world is enmity with God. Contemplate the love of God in worldly associations. Our worldly associations must not be in friendship among them…

God loves this wicked world. He came very close and died for them. But here he says don’t get too close! What concord hath Christ with idols? Come out from among them and touch not the unclean. How does this fit in with his program. He wants to help them. If you will come out from them, I will be a father…

We are to follow in the footsteps of Abraham. Abraham had relatives he mingled with until the time it became difficult. Some make light of the atonement. Those who abide with these people, will have constant impasses made towards them. Abraham responded to the call. Come out and I will show you the land. What did it involve?

Can we see who we come out from and who we don’t? We see how we are to treat those who spurn God. We are living under the time of the latter rain. Under such a message the Lord qualifies in their experience of who is with the Lord and who is not…

What is the world today affected by? Drunkenness. How are we to meet the people in Babylon? It is a habitation of devils and the hold of every foul spirit. Babylon has a way of thinking, a way of being. Easter, Christmas, Mothers Day, attractiveness of the world, self indulgences. We are told to come out of her my people. The voice from heaven is the Holy Spirit. He works through the angel.

Jesus ate with Publicans and sinners some may say so its ok to do so. But those publicans and sinners were wanting to follow Jesus… However we are told not to eat with those who are not following God.’

The implication of the above statement is that:

- we should not have friendships with non-believers;

- we should sever our family relationships with non-believers, as Abraham did;

- we are now living in the end time of the latter rain, so we must separate now;

- we should have nothing to do with worldly social gatherings, including holidays such as Easter, Christmas or Mother’s Day; and

- we should not even eat with non-believers.

The end result of the above statement is the preclusion of any sort of fellowship or friendship between Christians (or rather SDARM Reformists) and non-Christians (or even ordinary mainstream Adventists).  A Reformist will therefore adopt classic ‘cult-like’ behaviour, in severing all relationships except those with sanctioned fellow Reformers – under the watchful eye of SDARM leadership of course. 

The SDARM view is so at odds with Jesus own conduct and character.  Jesus did regularly eat and drink with people we would today consider the scum of the earth.  As recorded in Mar 2:15-17:

‘While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax collectors and sinners were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him.  When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”’

Ellen White made a similar point several times, saying we should follow Christ’s example and never refuse to mingle with unbelievers if invited.  As made clear in Counsels for the Church, page 312:

‘The question may be asked, Are we to have no union whatever with the world? The word of the Lord is to be our guide. Any connection with infidels and unbelievers that would identify us with them, is forbidden by the Word. We are to come out from among them, and be separate. In no case are we to link ourselves with them in their plans of work. But we are not to live reclusive lives. We are to do worldlings all the good we possibly can.

Christ has given us an example of this. When invited to eat with publicans and sinners, He did not refuse; for in no other way than by mingling with them could He reach this class. But on every occasion He opened up themes of conversation which brought things of eternal interest to their minds. And He enjoins us, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” Matthew 5:16.

The society of unbelievers will do us no harm if we mingle with them for the purpose of connecting them with God and are strong enough spiritually to withstand their influence.

Christ came into the world to save it, to connect fallen man with the infinite God. Christ’s followers are to be channels of light. Maintaining communion with God, they are to transmit to those in darkness and error the choice blessings which they receive of heaven. Enoch did not become polluted with the iniquities existing in his day; why need we in our day? But we may, like our Master, have compassion for suffering humanity, pity for the unfortunate, and a generous consideration for the feelings and necessities of the needy, the troubled, and the despairing.’

So that is also a definite yes to test #3 – the SDARM Church(es) clearly attempt to separate members from the outside world.  Like most cults, the major underlying reason is largely driven by the cult-leaders desire to remove the adherent from any close external friend or relative who might talk some sense into them.

Test #4: Such cults operate under the guise of Christianity but deviate from the orthodox teachings of the historic Christian faith as codified in the ancient ecumenical creeds.

Probably the best and easiest demonstration of this fourth test is the SDARM rejection of the doctrine of the Trinity.  It is arguable that there is no more fundamental belief in Christianity, for if Jesus is not truly God, then how are we saved?  Similarly, if Father, Son and Holy Spirit are not truly one, then can we claim to be monotheists worshiping one God?

As Helmut Kramer, in SDA Reform Movement at page 55 observes:

‘The Reform Movement has never had a clear understanding of the nature of the Godhead. In the booklet, Principles of Faith, it is still stated that the Holy Spirit is a power. No mention is made that He is also a personal Being. It was not until the General Conference (IMS) session in 1978 that it was acknowledged for the first time that the Holy Spirit is actually a Person. Despite the decision to this effect, there are still leading men who strongly dispute this teaching.

Even more sad is the belief and teaching of some of the General Conference leaders regarding the divinity of Christ. Until recently, Arianism, the teaching that Christ is a created being, was taught at the mission school for potential workers. As late as the General Conference Committee (IMS) session of 1980, workers were requested to teach that Christ, while on earth, was totally human without any divinity.’

As stated by Parick Jones in the 'independent historic' Reformist publication The Godhead Is Composed Of Three Separate, Distinct, Eternal Beings:

‘The term “Trinity” is nowhere found in the Bible. It is an unscriptural term that describes an unscriptural entity… Could it be that many Seventh-day Adventists are ignorantly worshipping the same God that they are told not to worship in the third angel’s message—the god of the beast power? Or are we just calling the true Godhead by the name of a false god? What god are we worshipping today? Could modern Israel, like Israel of old, be worshipping a false god?’

In essence, most Reformists seem to hold to Tritheism – treating Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three separate gods.  In essence, they hold a belief similar to that found in Hinduism and other New Age cults.  Alternatively, some Reformists hold to the ancient heresy of Arianism – seeing Jesus as a ‘mini’ lesser deity. 

So that is also a definite yes to test #4 – the SDARM Church(es) operate under the guise of Christianity but deviate from some very orthodox teachings of the historic Christian faith, such as that of the Trinity.

Test #5: Devotees become masters at taking texts out of context to develop pretexts for their theological perversions

Finally, the SDARM Church(es) typically use the ‘proof-test’ (also known as ‘cherry-picking’ or ‘quote-mining’) method of reading the Bible, often out of context.  As explain in the 'independent historic' Reformist article “How to Study Your Bible”:

‘Precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little and there a little. You find a verse, you want to know what it means so you take a concordance or the middle reference if you have one and you follow the verse through that use the same words and as you do that the word of God builds before you a picture but it is God’s word. You may find a verse and you don’t know what it means. If we think we can read a chapter or verse and take it on its own we can’t. The word of God says it must be line upon line and precept upon precept. It will be paired up somewhere else. You can’t read the word of God from the front to the back. You can, you will gain many blessings and learn the stories and combine it with this principle you will learn the moral. When studying God’s word here a little and there a little be careful to not exclude the Old Testament.’

The SDARM rationale for their extreme use of proof-texting is supposedly supported by Is 28:10 (repeated in vs13), which is quoted in the Reformer’s passage above:

‘For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little’

The problem of the overreliance on this passage for the SDARM approach of cherry-picking scripture includes the following:

- It is circular reasoning to cherry-pick a text to justify more cherry-picking.

- The passage is actually in Hebrew ‘sav lasav sav lasav / kav lakav kav lakav’, which many Bible versions note in their margins is probably meaningless sounds mimicking the prophet’s words.  In other words, the prophet is effectively saying something meaningless akin to saying in gibberish English ‘Lah de dah, lah de dah; blah be blah, blah be blah.’

- As many Bibles also note in their margins, the actual reading of this passage in Hebrew is uncertain.

- Looking at the context of the chapter as a whole (something the SDARM deliberately avoid by their quote-mining method).  We can see from verses 7-8 the Bible is describing false prophets and false priests, who are intoxicated from beer and wine, who have drug-induced visions and who vomit:  ‘And these also stagger from wine and reel from beer: Priests and prophets stagger from beer and are befuddled with wine; they reel from beer, they stagger when seeing visions, they stumble when rendering decisions. All the tables are covered with vomit and there is not a spot without filth’

- We then learn in verse 9 that the false priests and false prophets teach the people only milk, like a baby at the breast. Isaiah echoes these thoughts in Is 30:10: ‘They say to the seers, “See no more visions!” and to the prophets, “Give us no more visions of what is right! Tell us pleasant things, prophesy illusions.’

- It is these false prophets and priests who then speak gibberish-baby words in verses 10 ‘sav lasav sav lasav / kav lakav kav lakav’, really meaning something like ‘Lah de dah, lah de dah; blah be blah, blah be blah.’ It is a result of these evil teachings of the false priests and false prophets that God effectively says fine, I’ll allow the people of Israel to listen to gibberish-baby words then, and so in verse 13 ‘sav lasav sav lasav / kav lakav kav lakav’ is repeated.

- We also read in the end of verse 13 that because the people also listen to the gibberish-baby words of the false priests and false prophets, God will allow them to be punished with impending doom (the destruction of Zion by Babylon): ‘so that as they go they will fall backward; they will be injured and snared and captured’

- There are allusions of this to the gibberish Glossolalia (Pentecostal tongue speaking) condemned by the Apostle Paul in 1 Cor 14:22.

Thus, Is 28:10-13 is not a proof-text in support of a method of biblical interpretation, as the SDRAM teach, but rather the very opposite – unbiblical gibberish of false priests and false prophets condemned by God!  It is not God’s wisdom – it is man’s wisdom.  It is the ‘smooth words’ that trick the people and don’t prepare them for the coming crises.

So finally, that is also a definite yes to test #5 – the SDARM Church(es) clearly twist the proof-text method of scripture, often out of context, to support their bizarre and extreme beliefs and practices.

Conclusion: Stockholm Syndrome and brainwashing techniques

In conclusion, it seems that the SDARM Church(es) (remembering there are in fact several groups who claim this name) have many if not all the hallmarks of a cult.  However, this author recognises that regardless of what is sad, most current Reformist devotees will seemly refuse to heed these warnings.

To some extent, the commitment of Reformist devotees could be explained by the Stockholm Syndrome, meaning:

‘a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.’

In large part, this also demonstrates the power of rationalisation and the success of the psychological intimidation tactics used by Reformist leaders.  If you are currently a SDARM devotee, or have a close family member or friend involved, ask if any of the following common brainwashing techniques are used:

- sleep deprivation;

- partial sensory deprivation;

- psychological harassment;

- inculcation of guilt; and

- group social pressure.

If you recognise these techniques – be worried – you have probably found a cult!