We wanna be just like them...

[Stan]

The insecurity because trying to show other Churches that we are a Christian Church to, yes we are!!!!!

Evento the point of saying we are a 'Seventh day Adventist Christian' to convince people we are Christians.

If a person who states they believe God Created the world, the 10 Commandments that Christ gave, and are looking forward to the Second coming of Christ is not a Christian, than what is??

[Guest]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Stan Jensen said:

The insecurity because trying to show other Churches that we are a Christian Church to, yes we are!!!!!

Evento the point of saying we are a 'Seventh day Adventist Christian' to convince people we are Christians.

If a person who states they believe God Created the world, the 10 Commandments that Christ gave, and are looking forward to the Second coming of Christ is not a Christian, than what is??

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

surely you are not that naive.... its the egw question, and we have not dealt with that adequately.... to some it looks like we put more stock into what she says than what the bible says..... because of that perception we tend to be viewed like the LDS (latter day saints) as opposed to being christians....

[Gail]

For a start try Alden Thompson's book, Escape from the Flames. It's about how we Adventists relate to the Spirit of Prophecy

[GodsOath]

Well when I first started with the church I didn't want to hear anything about EW because I was thirsty for His Word. Now that I've learned about Him more I feel more comfortable reading her works and comparing it with the Bible as I go along.

The other thing is music, we are allowing certain elements to come into the church just to attract the younger generation. I firmly believe that if the youth are given more responsibilities within the church ie community services, brain storming ideas for ministries. They will feel that they are investing in the church so the church also belongs to them.

[nuff sed]

I have a hard time to not feel a bit smug as a Seventh-day Adventist because of EGW. Sometimes I have to step back when someone asks me, "Where did you get that idea?" and realize that it was one of the areas the Scriptures did not make clear but EGW did!

I think that we should value that knowledge. It has been my experience that some who want to destroy faith in her writings do so because EGW has prodded them in an area they cherish and do not want to give up.

[DrWhoCompanion]

I'll admit, Mrs. White is a sticking point with me. I am aware of times she has contradicted herself. I can only, at this point in my studies, say that perhaps she is divinely inspired, yet still a human.

Forgive me, I'm new!!

[Gerr]

I'll admit, Mrs. White is a sticking point with me. I am aware of times she has contradicted herself. I can only, at this point in my studies, say that perhaps she is divinely inspired, yet still a human.

Forgive me, I'm new!!

I am curious as to which/what doctrinal point she first presented as truth and then later contradicted?

Gerry

[olger]

I think that we should value that knowledge. It has been my experience that some who want to destroy faith in her writings do so because EGW has prodded them in an area they cherish and do not want to give up.

That ain't bad, Don. Well put.

[Pilgrim]

It is not unusual for people to fear, question, judge and ignore Prophets. Look at the history of the Jews. They had many Prophets who they ignored, were ashamed of and picked apart because the Prophet showed their true condition before God. A Prophet brings messages from God to His people. They don't contradict themselves. If there appears to be contradictions, as there does also in Scripture, then it is we who don't understand, not they who were in error.

I am so glad that God honored us with a Prophet. It is a gift from God that shows how much He loves us. I love the 'Spirit of Prophesy' for it gives such vantage ground in understanding the Scriptures. Yet we should be able to prove all that we believe from the Scriptures alone. I know many who can.

As for trying to convince other churches that we are Christian, we shouldn't need to even try, you see it is by our fruits they should know us. They are Babylon, yet with many sincere Christians in their fellowship still, because we haven't shown them how Christian we are. No need for words here, just action.

God is waiting for us to demonstrate to them the superiority of our Christianity, the immenseness of our love, our steadfastness to truth and the beauty of a faith that works by love flowing all over all we come in contact with.

We don't need to hide anything, or be ashamed of anything, we are God's church, a mighty army of conquerors, we need make no apologies except fot the fact that we have slipped into 'lukewarmness', a wishy washy state in which we love to talk about God's love, but don't know how to show it. We need not conform to Babylon, for we are to rescue the true believers from Babylon. They ought to be making apologies to us, seeking to prove to us that they are true christian churches. It is they who have spurned God's law, they who teach a dead faith and dishonor God by spurning HIS HOLY SABBATH and worship on the Pagan day of worship

It is time to arise and put on the Garments of Christ's righteousness, buy of Him that which we lack and then we can take our tails out from between our legs and finish His work soaking every one with the love and truth that flows out of us because of Christ who dwells in us and loves through us.

God Bless

Dennis

[Woody]

Quote:

It has been my experience that some who want to destroy faith in her writings do so because EGW has prodded them in an area they cherish and do not want to give up.

This is an old and tired finger pointing excuse for EGW.I just think that with Ellen it is clear that there are "problems". We can't take her literally with everything. She contradicts herself. But there is plenty of good.

Take the good and throw out the bad. EGW is not on the same level as the Bible. Her one purpose is to point us to the Bible. If she does that Fine. But we don't need to "trust" her or not trust her. IF she does her job then fine. If she doesn't do that for you ... then toss her writings. For me she does point me to Jesus. But don't worry if she doesn't do it for you.

The extremists get themselves in real trouble when they try to "follow" all of her. They actually find it is impossible. But OH they can try. In the end ... they give up start up their own church and go way off the deep end.

But to say that there aren't lots of problems for her followers is like burying you head in the sand. And we really don't need "faith in Ellen White" We need faith in Jesus Christ and the Bible.

Take the good and throw out the bad. But don't make her God or someone we need to have "faith" in. She herself would have shuttered at that comment.

[John317]

It has been my experience that some who want to destroy faith in her writings do so because EGW has prodded them in an area they cherish and do not want to give up.

Ellen White herself said this was true not only of her own writings but also of the Bible. It's not unusual for people to reject or ignore the Bible because they know accepting all of it would require them to make unwanted changes in their lives. So they may accept certain parts of the Bible or of the Spirit of prophecy that they find themselves in agreement with, but they reject those which call for them to change their lives or to adjust their thinking in ways they find objectionable.

[Tom Wetmore]

tu

[Neil D]

Quote:

It has been my experience that some who want to destroy faith in her writings do so because EGW has prodded them in an area they cherish and do not want to give up.

This is an old and tired finger pointing excuse for EGW.I just think that with Ellen it is clear that there are "problems". We can't take her literally with everything. She contradicts herself. But there is plenty of good.

Take the good and throw out the bad. EGW is not on the same level as the Bible. Her one purpose is to point us to the Bible. If she does that Fine. But we don't need to "trust" her or not trust her. IF she does her job then fine. If she doesn't do that for you ... then toss her writings. For me she does point me to Jesus. But don't worry if she doesn't do it for you.

The extremists get themselves in real trouble when they try to "follow" all of her. They actually find it is impossible. But OH they can try. In the end ... they give up start up their own church and go way off the deep end.

But to say that there aren't lots of problems for her followers is like burying you head in the sand. And we really don't need "faith in Ellen White" We need faith in Jesus Christ and the Bible.

Take the good and throw out the bad. But don't make her God or someone we need to have "faith" in. She herself would have shuttered at that comment.

Redwood, I am impressed with this....And it takes a bit to impress me....

[melvin mccarty]

When I was young our church had no pastor and we met in homes or school house. I remember many days when the "church service" consisted of someone reading from a red book. I do not remember anyone leading a service by reading from the Bible. Even today the "scripture reading" always consists of a verse or occasionally a few verses of Scripture. Usually done by a young person to make them feel needed.

Later in my experience I was persuaded to read "the testimonies" and I think I actually waded through the first volume and then quit. I became quite depressed. It seemed that every one had problems that EGW needed to address. Looking back I think the real problem was that all those personal messages should never have been published. And the many compilations are worse in my opinion.

They say "if the shoe fits wear it" but there is no way of knowing if the shoe fits.

mel

[carolaa]

When I was young our church had no pastor and we met in homes or school house. I remember many days when the "church service" consisted of someone reading from a red book. I do not remember anyone leading a service by reading from the Bible. Even today the "scripture reading" always consists of a verse or occasionally a few verses of Scripture. Usually done by a young person to make them feel needed.

Later in my experience I was persuaded to read "the testimonies" and I think I actually waded through the first volume and then quit. I became quite depressed. It seemed that every one had problems that EGW needed to address. Looking back I think the real problem was that all those personal messages should never have been published. And the many compilations are worse in my opinion.

They say "if the shoe fits wear it" but there is no way of knowing if the shoe fits.

mel

I totally agree with you. I appreciate a lot of what EGW has written, but I will not read the compilations. I find the whole idea distasteful, because we can't know the situations she was referring to well enough to ascertain if it applies to us, and it feels eerily like airing someone's dirty laundry. I agree they should never have been published. Imo, they have been more problematic than helpful.

[Woody]

Good Comments Mel and Carol ....

I have far more appreciation for Ellen White's writings than I do dislike. My purpose for pointing out problem areas like you two have articulated ... is more directed towards the extremists who take ALL of her writings including the compilations.

These people would have us get into the "dirty laundry" and figure out what we are to do in 2007. All these things are extra-Biblical any way. If we can't find what we need in the Bible ... then it can't be too important.

This again is why our church will have to continue with the issue of being a "cult". Trying to impose extra-Biblical requirements on people will only be "problematic" like you said Carol. And that is putting it mildly.

Ellen wanted to direct us to the Bible. She did not want us to have faith in her. She lifted up the Bible and told us that THIS was the book she recommended.

And this is what I believe we should do .... Lift up the BIBLE.

The words of Ellen White that lift up the Bible and draw me to it ... those are the words I will cherish. But the words that cause me to look at others "works" or lack of "works" ... those words I will knock down instead of "lifting up".

[John317]

The question is, who should the church follow, the personal opinions of individuals, or the words of a woman whom God showed hundreds of visions and dreams and who gave directions that "personal messages" be published for the entire church?

Ellen White stated that the Lord Himself approved the publishing of the "personal testimonies:"

"Since the warning and instruction given in testimony for individual cases applied with equal force to many others who had not been specially pointed out in this manner, it seemed to be my duty to publish the personal testimonies for the benefit of the church...

"I know of no better way to present my views of general dangers and errors, and the duty of all who love God and keep His commandments, than by giving these testimonies. Perhaps there is no more direct and forcible way of presenting what the Lord has shown me...

"In a vision given me June 12, 1866, I was shown that which fully justified my course in publishing personal testimonies: 'When the Lord singles out individual cases, and specifies their wrongs, others, who have not been shown in vision, frequently take it for granted that they are right, or nearly so. If one is reproved for a special wrong, brethren and sisters should carefully examine themselves to see wherein they have failed, and wherein they have been guilty of the same sin.'" 5 Testimonies 658, 659.

[John317]

Ellen wanted to direct us to the Bible. She did not want us to have faith in her. She lifted up the Bible and told us that THIS was the book she recommended.

Of course it is perfectly true that Ellen White directed us to the Bible. That was the reason God gave her the gift of prophecy. The problem was that people were not studying and practicing the teachings of the Bible. That is still the case today. Therefore, God gave the Spirit of prophecy to us in our own language and put it in plain words so that there is really no excuse for not understanding and not putting the Bible's teachings into practice.

But it is simply not true that there is no need to have faith in Ellen White as God's prophet. Why would anyone open one of her books if they have no faith in her? Why would I read one of Paul's letters if I have no faith in Him as an an apostle of Jesus Christ? If having faith in the prophets and apostles makes no difference, why does Satan try so hard to destroy our faith in them? Because he knows that if we lose faith in them, we will not study and practice what the Holy Spirit inspired them to write.

Please read:

"I saw the state of some who stood on present truth, but disregarded the visions-- the way God had chosen to teach in some cases, those who erred from Bible truth. I saw that in striking against the visions they did not strike against the worm-- the feeble instrument that God spoke through-- but against the Holy Ghost. I saw it was a small thing to speak against the instrument, but it was dangerous to slight the words of God. I saw if they were in error and God chose to show them their errors through visions, and they disregarded the teachings of God through visions, they would be left to take their own way, and run in the way of error, and think they were right, until they would find it out too late. Then in the time of trouble I heard them cry to God in agony, 'Why didst Thou not show us our wrong, that we might have got right and been ready for this time?' Then an angel pointed to them and said, 'My Father taught, but you would not be taught. He spoke through visions, but you disregarded His voice, and He gave you up to your own ways, to be filled with your own doings.'" 1 Selected Messages 40

"The testimonies of the Spirit of God are given to direct men to His Word, which has been neglected. Now if their messages are not heeded, the Holy Spirit is shut away from the soul. What further means has God in reserve to reach the erring ones, and show them their true condition?" 1 SM 46

"The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God... Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God's remnant people in the true testimony... There will be a hatred kindled against the testimonies which is satanic. The workings of Satan will be to unsettle the faith of the churches in them, for this reason: Satan cannot have so clear a track to bring in his deceptions and bind up souls in his delusions if the warnings and reproofs and counsels of the Spirit of God are heeded." 1 SM 48

[melvin mccarty]

"For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through Him might be saved" John 3:17

mel

[John317]

Amen and amen. Thank you, friend. As you can see, it's a favorite verse of mine.

[Kevin H]

I see two ideas in this thread: The first is being like other Christians the other is Mrs. White. I'll address the first here.

The disciples came from a very broad background, from Simon the Zelot (to become a Zelot you needed to first murder either a Roman or a Roman symphathiser) to Matthew the Tax collector (The ultamate Roman symphathiser). Notice they are not listed as Simon the "former" Zelot and Matthew the "former" tax collector.

In the Gospels, Luke tells about having read other books and that he researched and now was going to set the record streight, and scholars have noticed that he goes strongly after Mark, rarely agreeing with Mark and often dissagreeing.

The dissagreements are not limited to minor details but even to the very heart of Marks Gospel that Luke was not at all happy with. The major theam in Mark's gospel was that no one knows who Jesus really is until you get to the Roman Centerian, a man so far away from the truth that he expresses his realization in a pagan phrase that would have shocked any monothiestic Jew. Luke has Jesus known from before his birth and known through out his life, and when Luke gets to the centerian, instead of him being the only person who realized the truth about Jesus, he simply says "He must have been a good man." indacating that he was clueless as to Jesus' divinity, which was the very heart of Marks gospel.

Yet there was a point where Simon, Matthew, Luke, Mark, dispite having some very strong contradactory beliefs, had to place their beliefs on a secondary level and just be Christians.

But also, there is Big "C" Christians (menbers of the religion known as Christianity) and small "c" christians, people who do not belong to Christianity, but love God and are open to the work of the Holy Spirit.

Sadly, too much of modern Christianity has changed the relationship with Christ to saying the magic words about accepting Jesus as our savior and thus be saved.

I am very worried about just being another "Christian" religion due to the current emphesses on saying the magic words, which ends up leaving outside of salvation those who have not said those magic words, and many of them are small "c" christians. The doctrine of the Investagative Judgment reminds me that we are all at a state of growth, either towards the character of Jesus or away from it. Thus it has a lot more room for the small "c"christians than the say the magic words and be saved version of Christianity offered by those who oppose the Investagative Judgment (but granted, most Adventists don't understand the Investigative Judgment, and parents have used this misunderstanding to try to keep their children in line and ended up scaring them away.)

In the early days of our mission work, or missionaries did not know how to make Christians out of non-Christians. As they ran into the Jewish people in Europe, they offered them a Jewish version of Adventism. They accepted Jesus and Mrs. White but in a very Jewish way where they never considered themselves Christians but Jews who happened to be Seventh-day Adventists. Around the 1930s the church stopped this practice. Some of the Seventh-day Adventist Jews were still alive but in their 90s durring the 1980s. Most moved to Hifa Israel after WWII, and the Israeli Mission would report to the General Conference on how many Christian members they had and how many Jewish members they had.

I don't know if these stats have chanced since the 1980s, but the church with the most attendies each Sabbath was the Tel Avi Church, but only about half of the people in that church were members. The other half were Jewish people who fell in love with Adventism but refused to join the church because they refused to become Christians. But they attend faithfully week after week, year after year and would gladly join if the church would again allow them to be Seventh-day Adventist Jews. There are also Muslims in the same boat. There are those who are like the Waldencies hiding in the mountains, some who love Jesus and are focused on Jesus, and some of these keeping the Sabbath and reading Mrs. White's books and who love Adventism but apply Adventism to their life as a Muslim and have no interest in becomeing Christians. (and not all of these Muslims are hiding).

I'm sorry but I would like to see us once again become a denomination of Judaism, and to also become a denomination of Islam, as well as a denomination of Christianity. But even among the other denominations in Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism etc. God has his people. There is Mother Tressia, Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heshel, Anwar Saddat, Marc Chagall, etc. It's strange, but the friends who have come close enough to me to consider favorite former girlfriends have had a tendencey to be very godly women who belonged to the Jewish or Buddhist religion, and I am uncomfortable with a type of Christianity that does not have room for the small "c" christians.

Besides the danger of leaving out the small "c" christians, I also fear being too much like the others in that most other churches are either Fundamentalists/Dispensationalists or else Modernists/Prederists, while I find Mrs. White at a nice ballance between these views.

[Kevin H]

As to Mrs. White: It's late so I'll have to be brief. Most of the problems we have with Mrs. White is when we try to make her fit our tradition as to what a prophet should be, instead of how she, James, Willie, A.G. Daniels, and W. W. Prescott said she said her role was.

We are ignorant of the different types of Prophets in the Bible and History.

When Willie, Daniels and Prescott tryed to teach the church what Mrs. White taught them about her ministry they were denounced as liberal unbeliving modernists and called the destroyers of Adventism and in 1923 Daniels was thrown out of office, Prescott was demoted, and while Willie got to "keep his job" the job was stripped of it's previous authority and influence (in other words Willie was fired, but was allowed to come to his office and continue to get his pay check).

When we take Mrs. White at her job discription, and study the different types of prophets in the Bible, the differences between the Cananical World prophets and the local prophets, and leave our traditional views of inspiration and see how the prophets really were inspired, then there is no problem with accepting Mrs. White as a prophet.

But when you try to mesure her up to traditions that were somewhat subconscious until the late 1800s and early 1900s, but developed as an extream hyperreaction to Modernism/Preterism, then naturally Mrs. White, nor serious study of any other true propeht will mesure up.

[fccool]

We should not feel that the core of the problem is somehow with us and our views. Organizations and communities form around purpose and a view. It is very difficult matter to prove to someone a need for the modern day prophesy when the canon was established and the Revelation prophesies were written. The critics choose to overlook the evidence that she was, and the believers choose to rationalize away the evidence that she was not. We should be not ashamed to state that our sole reason for faith is not based on the writings of E.G. White, and we should be perfectly clear about it. At least I am, and my faith is really not based on her writings. These have been a HUGE help and encouragement to me in my spiritual journey, but they are by far not the president over Bible... and I think that it reflects SDA view in general.

There is a one views/statement that create a great deal of confusion and I would like to point these out:

The Seventh-day Adventist church was founded by Joseph Bates, Ellen G. White, and James White.

This statement is a heresy, and should be viewed as such IMO. God's church can not have people as founder's of it . Cults do, but God's congregation can not and does not. I think that those people would object to be viewed as a "founders" of the church. And that's what many other Christians object to, and it should be made perfectly clear that SDA history DOES NOT begin with Miller, and many SDA Clergy explain it that way and thus call these people "the founders".

This kind of mentality leads to such statement as:

" Without her the Church would not exists, so we should never question her role in the church"... as made by one of our elders in a Sabbath school class. Which is a heretical and outrageous statement to make, and unfortunatly... this is the mentality that is being upheld in many churches as they carry over the principle that were right for Mrs. White's era, and misapplying these to our times... things that she would not be so concerned about today. This is the reason why the young people flee the church as soon as they break away from their parents... and I really notice it in our local congregation. They think that the church is not progressive and is therefore irrelevant to their modern life and they abandon it all together.

Church is progressive, because it is not a set organization of perpetually elected clergy. It is a community first, and communities are made of people who hold different cultural backgrounds and preferences. So, as long these do not contradict Biblical views, I don't see any reason why we should not be fine with these. There are too many things that just stifle that community as people throw some weight around to build church in their image. And their image is predominantly Catholic, in which suffering is exalted... and church should reflect our suffering and that suffering atones for our sins. Our suffering that is. And to tell you the truth, I did suffer through many of such views, and I've seen people who view the participating in church community as a necessary burden in order to gain God's approval. It should not be that way. We should be proud and eager and excited to bring people to our churches, and not feel uneasy and ashamed. Unfortunately, I can not say that I would be a 100% eager to bring some of my friend s to our church today, as it could do more damage than good without a proper context that they have to understand before coming in. So many come in and have an impression of a cult rather than an empowering community, and they generally don't want to come back.

But I'm glad that we as a church begin to notice it and we are planning to do something about it!

[pacunurse30]

Well here's the way I look at things: In the end times, the majority will be wrong. I do not want to find myself trying to fit into the evangelical idea of what Christianity is. First of all, who are they to define what it is? Who are they to decide which interpretations of scripture are valid? To me that is a serious problem, and it makes THEM look cultic.

Remember that in the final events of this world there will be an entity (or entities) who will try to unify the world. This unification will most certainly have religious implications. So we should not seek to be accepted by the majority, because they will most certainly be going down the wrong path. What will start out as good intentions by sincere people, will turn into something more sinister.

Does this mean that we isolate ourselves from other Christian denominations? No. Most SDA's believe that God's true people are scattered among the denominations. Some of us believe that they are even among non-Christian religions. It's the Holy Spirit's job to gather his elect. He will do it when the time is right. Our only job to spread the gospel, and model what Christ wants us to be. Let God do the rest by his spirit.

[John317]

.....There is a one views/statement that create a great deal of confusion and I would like to point these out:

The Seventh-day Adventist church was founded by Joseph Bates, Ellen G. White, and James White.

This statement is a heresy, and should be viewed as such IMO. God's church can not have people as founder's of it . Cults do, but God's congregation can not and does not. I think that those people would object to be viewed as a "founders" of the church. And that's what many other Christians object to, and it should be made perfectly clear that SDA history DOES NOT begin with Miller, and many SDA Clergy explain it that way and thus call these people "the founders".

What does the Seventh-day Adventist church mean when we say it was "founded by Joseph Bates and James White"? We do not mean that it is not founded on Jesus Christ and on His gospel. We simply mean that Joseph Bates and James White were used of God to help raise up the church and to organize it. We simply mean that those two men were primary human leaders at the time the church adopted the main doctrines as well as its name, Seventh-day Adventist. We need to know the history of the SDA church and to realize how God used those those two men as well as many others to raise up His remnant church.

Of course the Seventh-day Adventist church, doctrinally speaking, does not have its beginning with Miller. Our teachings actually go all the way back to the beginning of human history when God first made the promise of eternal life to Adam.

At the same time that we don't want people to think we had our doctrinal beginnings with Miller, our members need to know who Miller was and have a good understanding of how the Seventh-day Adventist movement began in the 1860s. It's a wonderful story. We need to know our spiritual roots. Of course we need to know that our roots go back to the first centuries of this world's history, but we also need to know the first decades of the SDA church and know how God has led us from that point to where we are today.