Ron Lambert Posted May 11, 2005 Share Posted May 11, 2005 Cardw, you would be forced to say the same and even worse about the ways that God chastised ancient Israel for its continued apostasies--allowing them to be attacked repeatedly with multitudes being killed, and ultimately conquered, with all of the royal family being castrated and the whole population carried away captive. None other than Moses himself had laid out exactly how all these things would happen, and over the course of hundreds of years prophets faithfully reminded people of these things. Perhaps the spiritual need and appropriateness of divine chastisement escapes you. Jesus Christ Himself said: "Him whom I love, I rebuke and chasten." (Rev. 3:19) Speak of wanting a child's God, you sound like you want Santa Claus. Sin matters. Eternally. Do you get that? Do you understand what it would have meant to the SDA church and to the plan of God for Adventists to serve as God's faithful witnesses in the final conflict if Kellogg's seditious book that espounsed a spiritualistic "divinity-in-our-flesh" pantheism had been published as an official denominational book, in the same binding and style as the Spirit of Prophecy books--or even if the book had been published by the Review and Herald as a commercial job--as was about to happen when the Review and Herald burned down? When you accuse God of acting inappropriately, or accuse Ellen G. White of "lack of depth in her own spirituality" when she said that God was chastising the denomination in those fires, the truth is that you are revealing a lack of comprehension of how serious, truly serious, were the sins that were threatening to overthrow the church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Quote: Cardw, you would be forced to say the same and even worse about the ways that God chastised ancient Israel for its continued apostasies--allowing them to be attacked repeatedly with multitudes being killed, and ultimately conquered, with all of the royal family being castrated and the whole population carried away captive. None other than Moses himself had laid out exactly how all these things would happen, and over the course of hundreds of years prophets faithfully reminded people of these things. Well, I have the same problem with people using the Bible as a proof. To me, the Bible is not an authority but a record of people trying to find meaning in life. This idea that God would primarily use a human technology to communicate with us is something that was not believed in the beginning of Christianity. Spiritual practice was the primary method of communication with individuals. This was a far less defined method than a theology. Quote: Speak of wanting a child's God, you sound like you want Santa Claus. Well, there would be no suffering if we had a Santa Claus God. The idea that God uses punishment and reward is too simple and creates monster gods. It is when we begin to simplify the problem of suffering that we often create even more suffering. God burning down buildings to make a point is just as immature as a Santa Claus god. Quote: Sin matters. Eternally. Do you get that? Do you understand what it would have meant to the SDA church and to the plan of God for Adventists to serve as God's faithful witnesses in the final conflict if Kellogg's seditious book that espounsed a spiritualistic "divinity-in-our-flesh" pantheism had been published as an official denominational book, in the same binding and style as the Spirit of Prophecy books--or even if the book had been published by the Review and Herald as a commercial job--as was about to happen when the Review and Herald burned down? It was exactly this type of reasoning that justified the torture and killing of "heritics" by both Protestant and Catholic churches during the middle ages. Ellen White didn't have the option of physical torture, but she did have the option of mental inducements. She experienced these herself during the Millerite meetings. You can read the sermons. They basically used a visualization of hell to bring about a "revival." All of these types of things are based on fear. Perfect love casts out all fear. Since God IS Love, it would seem that fear or anything associated with it would be highly counter productive to wellness and healing. The term Salvation has at its root the word salve, which is a healing balm. Salvation is about healing. It is not about fear. Quote: When you accuse God of acting inappropriately, or accuse Ellen G. White of "lack of depth in her own spirituality" when she said that God was chastising the denomination in those fires, the truth is that you are revealing a lack of comprehension of how serious, truly serious, were the sins that were threatening to overthrow the church. What you prove to me, in this statement, is that you can't tell the difference between God and Ellen White. This giving of Ellen White the authority of God is simply abusive and elevates some of the most toxic views of God to the level of the very words of God. Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicklunds Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Cardw, The problem I have with your above post is that if the Bible is without authority in spiritual matters, then there can be no common authority for belief between believers. If there is no absolute authority in religious matters, how can there be any semblance of order and peace? This is not of God friend!! I know you think I am harsh and judgmental but I think your view of the scriptures is why you will have problem with any religion. How could a person remain a Muslim unless they believed and taught what the Koran says as religious governing mores? Your view of the Bible sounds Atheist to me. In addition to your view of the Bible, your view of God is also sounding atheist to me. What the scriptures say about God and what EW say about God are the same friend. If one is damaging, then the other must be also. Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. I need to mention something about a healthy fear of God here since the scriptures do. I know love is a necessary ingredient in our relationships, but fear is always there is it not? The Bible mentions fear with reckless abandon: Fear God and give glory to Him, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, the Fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, we ought to fear God rather than men, thou shalt fear the Lord your God, it is mentioned 29 times in the book of Dueteronomy alone, we should not fear the wicked, Perfect love casts out fear, etc... (400 times in the King James) I think the problem is that we, as humans, do not understand what healthy fear is. If we fear what will happen to us if we accept the Sabbath more than what will happen to us if we don't, then that fear is unhealthy wouldnt you say? So there is a strong case for a healthy fear of God!! Quote It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy. {ST, February 19, 1894 par. 4} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Quote: If there is no absolute authority in religious matters, how can there be any semblance of order and peace? How about tolerance, love, understanding, and the Holy Spirit? This mystical absolute authority you are looking for did not exist in OT or NT times, but they seem to not have had a problem... /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Quote: The problem I have with your above post is that if the Bible is without authority in spiritual matters, then there can be no common authority for belief between believers. If there is no absolute authority in religious matters, how can there be any semblance of order and peace? Bevin put it very well in his rhetorical question. I want to add another angle. What you would advocate is a method of restriction based, not on love, but on authority. You have no faith in the Spirit of God to change a person's heart. When that occurs you don't need authority. Quote: This is not of God friend!! I know you think I am harsh and judgmental but I think your view of the scriptures is why you will have problem with any religion. How could a person remain a Muslim unless they believed and taught what the Koran says as religious governing mores? Well, what you are worshipping is the Bible and I would say the same of many Muslims, except they worship the Koran. When we exalt a technology such as language and writing over God, we have created an idol. You and other literalists practice idolotry. God is so much more than words in books, theology, and anything else the human mind can come up with. You are so ignorant of how and who put the Bible together, and you are unwilling to even look at the evidence, that to even have an intelligent dialog is impossible. Here is only one example of how you use smear tactics to make your case.... Quote: Your view of the Bible sounds Atheist to me. In addition to your view of the Bible, your view of God is also sounding atheist to me. First of all, an atheist believes there is no God and would not even be having this conversation. You follow this with the oxymoron that an atheist would have a view of God. How can you have a view of something you don't even believe exists. An atheist would say that God not existing is a fact based on the inability of believers to prove that God exists. So you use this buzzword, which you don't even understand, to slander my position. If you are going to even be able to dialog in the real world, you better understand what you are talking about with a little better precision. Quote: I think the problem is that we, as humans, do not understand what healthy fear is. If we fear what will happen to us if we accept the Sabbath more than what will happen to us if we don't, then that fear is unhealthy wouldnt you say? So there is a strong case for a healthy fear of God!! Healthy fear is so we take our hand out of something that is too hot and going to burn us. It is not a principle to live life by. It not meant to be a chronic state. Unfortunately I observe it as a chronic state for many Christians. And I treat the diseases the result from these fear based beliefs every day. I see the disease go away when the fear goes away. I see people restored to health, vitality and joy. You think I am going to advocate your system of belief when I see its harmful results every day? No way! Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicklunds Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Richard, Yet again you take my words and twist them into a meaning and light that I never would admit to holding to. Every time someone is found defending the authority of the Bible they are misrepresented by certain ones claiming they are "worshipping" the Bible. Not only is this a slanderous and damaging representation of truth, it will lead many of the faithful to believe that they are "saved" when they really have deeper soul searching to do. And you have no faith that the scriptures were completely inspired by God. Don't try to tell me I have no faith in the Spirit!! That is for Atheists and Agnostics. In addition to making my types sound like idolaters, and ignorant of the issues of canonization, you also place my perceptions in a false light. I stated in my initial post to you that your view sounded atheist to me. Then you come back and bash my choice of words. Would have made a huge difference if I said your views sounded agnostic? Who cares! The real issue is that you undermine any authority the scriptures might have in a persons decision-making process because of the way you pidgeon-hole every little point the Bible makes. Can anyone develop faith by hearing the word with you at the controls? I doubt it. The point is that you are leading people on to think that the Bible and SDA faith are both predicated on misguided and stupid human fables. Get real man! If you think I am more ignorant than you about spiritual things, you got some nerve mister doctor man. or nurse, or PA. See what happens when you give someone a license to cut and treat humans because the world places their stamp of approval on them? NUTS!! I am very skeptical now about going to see the doctor. Not that I wasn't before. Is this not the real world? And why must I always dialogue with people about these things? I rarely would do this type of dialoging face to face with folks in these matters. Only if they asked me something. And I would tell them just as I am telling you now. If the fear of God is the BEGINNING of wisdom, you must have a long way to go to even reach the starting line sir. If I were a Church administrator, I would certainly put the word out on folks who perpetuate these types of views. Enough said. Quote It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy. {ST, February 19, 1894 par. 4} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Quote: You are so ignorant of how and who put the Bible together, and you are unwilling to even look at the evidence, that to even have an intelligent dialog is impossible. Hi Richard, this is off topic, but I would like to know more about how and who put the Bible together. Maybe you can start a new thread and you and others can share what you know about it. Thanks BAPM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Cardw, I most certainly do not equate Ellen G. White with God. You are the one who lumped them together, not me. You gave your opinion of a God who chastizes, and you gave your opinion of Ellen G. White for speaking of God's chastisements. I do not give Ellen G. White the same authority of God when I address both your expressed opinions. I do not think that Jeremiah was equal to God either, when he gave Judah its final warnings that God's chastisements--promised all the way back by God in the writings of Moses--were about to be fully realized, and Judah was about to be conquered and its people carried away into captivity. The messenger is not the Message-Giver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Quote: Cardw, I most certainly do not equate Ellen G. White with God. You are the one who lumped them together, not me. I may have stated it too strong and I fully believe that in your own mind you don't lump them together. My point is that, in application, you do. If we have to accept everything that Ellen White writes and publishes as authoritive then in practice she becomes equal to God. If nothing that Ellen White writes is considered in error, then her writings become God. This would be the same for the Bible in my belief and observation. When we place any writings in this position we become bound by human logic and its tools. Writing is a human technology. That is all. God is always MUCH more than any writing, Bible or EGW. Most people who have this belief that God saves some because they are doing good and punishes others because they are doing bad haven't looked in the real world in a while. They tend to be unwilling to ask the hard questions like.... Why doesn't God punish others like certain televangelists who are frauds? Some of them are making over 300,000 a month selling prayer cloths, healing water from the Jordon, and the like. Where are the fires burning down their publishing centers? Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 12, 2005 Share Posted May 12, 2005 Quote: Yet again you take my words and twist them into a meaning and light that I never would admit to holding to. Its interesting that you acuse me of doing the very thing you do. I can quote you if you like. I can present evidence. Where is yours? You have stated that you aren't interested in facts. Quote: In addition to making my types sound like idolaters, and ignorant of the issues of canonization, you also place my perceptions in a false light. You are ignorant of canonization and you refused to even read the evidence I gave you. It is my opinion that a literal reading of scripture and saying that is the only way to read it is idolotry. It makes an idol of words and this particular form of human communication. Its limited and God is not. Quote: And you have no faith that the scriptures were completely inspired by God. Don't try to tell me I have no faith in the Spirit!! That is for Atheists and Agnostics. You betray your idol worship here. I have faith in God, not writings. Quote: Would have made a huge difference if I said your views sounded agnostic? Who cares! There is a huge difference between an athiest and an agnostic. And it would make a difference to the agnostic and the atheist. You reveal your further ignorance. Quote: The real issue is that you undermine any authority the scriptures might have in a persons decision-making process because of the way you pidgeon-hole every little point the Bible makes. Can anyone develop faith by hearing the word with you at the controls? I doubt it. The point is that you are leading people on to think that the Bible and SDA faith are both predicated on misguided and stupid human fables. Get real man! Well, the approach you advocate is responsible for many becoming atheists and agnostics. One cannot believe something that insults the intelligence. You assume that because someone doesn't believe like you they are being arrogant or wanting to cherish some sin. That's arrogance, because you don't know. You would like it to be true. All you really reveal is your own motivations. Quote: If you think I am more ignorant than you about spiritual things, you got some nerve mister doctor man. or nurse, or PA. See what happens when you give someone a license to cut and treat humans because the world places their stamp of approval on them? NUTS!! I am very skeptical now about going to see the doctor. Not that I wasn't before. Well Dennis, I'm not any one of those. I am glad doctors are there for the trauma stuff. They are not very good on the chronic stuff. So I won't argue with you there. Quote: And why must I always dialogue with people about these things? LOL! I don't know Dennis, you tell me. I'm not forcing you to dialog. You are the one who decided to comment. Take responsibility for your own actions. Quote: If the fear of God is the BEGINNING of wisdom, you must have a long way to go to even reach the starting line sir. If I were a Church administrator, I would certainly put the word out on folks who perpetuate these types of views. Enough said. This is what is always comes down to. When reason ends, threats begin. You complain about people persecuting you. By calling on authority to place judgements on people you become the persecutor. This is the main reason I reject your views and others that promote them. When it comes down to it, Love is not the response when the chips are down, threats are. I see this over and over and over again. I learn very well when I see it happen so often. So you can keep your churchianity. Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 13, 2005 Share Posted May 13, 2005 Quote: Hi Richard, this is off topic, but I would like to know more about how and who put the Bible together. Maybe you can start a new thread and you and others can share what you know about it. OK, I'll see if anyone is interested. Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted May 13, 2005 Share Posted May 13, 2005 Cardw, just so you know, I do not regard Ellen G. White as infallible. I never take anything she says as the last word on doctrine, or on the proper interpretation of Bible prophecy, or anything else in the Bible. Such would be a misuse of her writings, and would in fact elevate her above the Bible. When Ellen G. White first received the prophetic gift, she believed may errors, learned from the church she was raised in. God did not correct these doctrinal errors through her visions. He allowed her to be corrected through the Bible study of her brethren, sometimes years later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 14, 2005 Share Posted May 14, 2005 Quote: Cardw, just so you know, I do not regard Ellen G. White as infallible. Good, then it is entirely possible that she is incorrect about God burning down buildings to punish people. Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Yes, Cardw, Ellen G. White could have been mistaken about that. In fact, as far as I know, she never said explicitly that the fires were judgments from God meant to chastise His people--she only implied it. But such would be in harmony with the Bible principles of God rebuking and chastising His people when necessary, and as I understand our denominational history at that time, such chastisement would surely have been warranted and desperately, urgently needed. In addition, Ellen G. White was given the prophetic gift, and she did testify that she was shown a vision of an angel with a sword of fire standing over Battle Creek. I think that receiving such testimony shows proper respect for the true purpose of the prophetic gift God gives to the church. The Bible admonishes us, "Believe His prophets, so shall ye prosper." (2 Chronicles 20:20) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicklunds Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Quote: Yes, Cardw, Ellen G. White could have been mistaken about that. In fact, as far as I know, she never said explicitly that the fires were judgments from God meant to chastise His people--she only implied it. But such would be in harmony with the Bible principles of God rebuking and chastising His people when necessary, and as I understand our denominational history at that time, such chastisement would surely have been warranted and desperately, urgently needed. In addition, Ellen G. White was given the prophetic gift, and she did testify that she was shown a vision of an angel with a sword of fire standing over Battle Creek. I think that receiving such testimony shows proper respect for the true purpose of the prophetic gift God gives to the church. The Bible admonishes us, "Believe His prophets, so shall ye prosper." (2 Chronicles 20:20) Amen! Amen! Amen! *Sigh* Finally, a person of integrity and a true Seventh-day Adventist...CHRISTIAN!!! Quote It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy. {ST, February 19, 1894 par. 4} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted May 15, 2005 Moderators Share Posted May 15, 2005 Re: " . . .Finally, a person of integrity and a true Seventh-day Adventist...CHRISTIAN!!!" It is for reasons like this that people have probems with you. In such statements the clear implication is that you judge and determine who are true SDA Christians. The Bible is clear, God has not given you the work of determining who are true SDA Christians. Also, I have no knowledge that the SDA Chruch has has given you such a work. Quote Gregory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bevin Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Ron Lambert wrote: Quote: Cardw, just so you know, I do not regard Ellen G. White as infallible. Perhaps you could give one example where you think she is wrong on a significant point of theology. My experience is that many peopls from your end of the "liberal-conservative" scale are prepared to admit that she might have made such a mistake, but when pressed can not actually name one - and on any and every point where she is challenged, actually defend her. To me, such behaviour is a debating trick. It takes away the heat of the "treating her as infallible" argument, but allows the holder to continue to actually treat her as infallible. /Bevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wicklunds Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Quote: It is for reasons like this that people have probems with you. In such statements the clear implication is that you judge and determine who are true SDA Christians. The Bible is clear, God has not given you the work of determining who are true SDA Christians. Also, I have no knowledge that the SDA Chruch has has given you such a work. I never said I represented either Christ, or the SDA Church in my OPINION. I do have a right to my opinion Greg. Just like you and those who agree with your...ideas. Quote It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy. {ST, February 19, 1894 par. 4} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Lambert Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Bevin, I hate to make an explicit statement that someone can take out of context and use against me. But since you demand something to prove I am not just using a debating trick, let me say that I think that Ellen G. White was wrong to use Uriah Smith's understanding of Revelation 11. The scenario involving the two witnesses has nothing to do with the French Revolution. I can actually cite several statements by Ellen G. White herself where she indicates that there must be a last-day application of Revelation 11. Also there are people who try to cite Ellen G. White as their authority for believing that the prophecies of Daniel 12 should be applied to the historical past. But I see for myself that a sound exegesis of the text completely contradicts any possibility of that being a valid interpretation. All of Daniel 12 applies exclusively to the final time of the end. The "time, times, and half of time" of verse 7 was given as an answer to the question asked in verse 6, "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" (in other words, what is their duration) and the expression "these wonders" can only possibly apply to the events of verse 1, when Michael stands up and there is a time of trouble, and everyone who is "found written in the book" (in the Judgment of the Living) is delivered. So this prophecy is telling us that the Judgment of the Living and the Final Conflict will last three and one-half years. No other interpretation is exegetically sound. Therefore, any statement by Ellen G. White that contradicts this is contrary to Scripture, and I will go by the Word of God--as Ellen G. White herself many times insisted that we should. As for doctrinal errors--I am not aware of any that she held to all the way to the end of her life, because as far as I can see, her doctrines were in harmony with what the Bible teaches. But show me where she contradicted Bible teaching, and I will set aside Ellen G. White on that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardw Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Quote: In fact, as far as I know, she never said explicitly that the fires were judgments from God meant to chastise His people--she only implied it. But such would be in harmony with the Bible principles of God rebuking and chastising His people when necessary, and as I understand our denominational history at that time, such chastisement would surely have been warranted and desperately, urgently needed. This method she used of implication is a form of manipulation. When you aren't really a prophet you need plausable deniability. If you stay vague enough, it leaves one wiggle room if one happens to be wrong. The second point is that even I can think of better ways to discipline than burning down buildings. Burning down the press would restrict the publication of everything. This seems pretty stupid. This would be like me blowing up my son's calculator because he didn't do his math assignment. This is also placing God in a position where it accuses God of book burning. This is God practicing censorship. This is also a practice we would condemn as the restriction of free speech. This would also not fit with our great controversy theology since God isn't following His own principles of open discussion. This makes God look more like an oppressive dictator than a benevolent creator. Quote: In addition, Ellen G. White was given the prophetic gift, and she did testify that she was shown a vision of an angel with a sword of fire standing over Battle Creek. I think that receiving such testimony shows proper respect for the true purpose of the prophetic gift God gives to the church. The Bible admonishes us, "Believe His prophets, so shall ye prosper." (2 Chronicles 20:20) The problem with Ellen White is that often she has her visions after the fact. This also indicates manipulation. There are many things that Ellen White has endorsed that have restricted my ability to prosper. Her views of God as someone who burns down buildings if we print something He doesn't agree with is just one of them. If someone disagreed with Ellen White, she used a pretty predictable system of judgements to discredit them. Either they were too proud, or had some cherished sin, or were possessed by evil spirits, or some other gossip type character smear. I see this used by many of those who hold her the most closely. It tells me that her influence has taken over their lives. This idea that we are to read the Bible or some other writing that is supposedly inspired and follow it to the letter is a very recent idea. A vigorous arguement or even anger directed against God was considered part of the process of spiritual growth. Why do you think that God asks us to be hot or cold? The Bible and even Ellen White can be seen simply as a narrative of spiritual journeys, not a systematic theological system of do's and don'ts. Its a history of dialog that has new parts to be written every generation. When we freeze the knowlege of God in some books, we create an image that is just as much an idol as any other image we form and call god. Richard Quote Rich http://tiny.cc/CM2j8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.