Leaderboard

Absolutely fascinating. I've thought this same thing for awhile but have never worded it so clearly. By the way, my wife's family comes from Rhode Island and to my knowledge are direct descendants of Roger Williams. Kevin, do you know of any Roger Williams books that are available. Or even a good book on Roger Williams? My wife likes reading about him.

I'd like to look a little more as to what is going on: Catholic Europe had it's feudal system with it's kings and lords and peasants. Church and State were together. We had the Roman Catholic church and two reformed churches. One was an early attempt of reform but where they did not know how much of the corruption crept into the Bible so while they respected the Bible they did not trust it and tried to read it filtering truth from error. This became Islam. Then there was the reform based on trusting the Bible, Protestantism. But whether Roman Catholicism, eastern reformed Catholicism (Islam) or western reformed Catholicism (Protestantism) they all believed in the church state. The pilgrims and puritans wanted to set up their version of Catholic Europe in the Americas. But out of this came Roger Williams, and back in Europe the Quakers got a piece of land that could have been a Quaker version of Catholic Europe, but they had the same weird idea that Roger William had; instead of Catholic Europe with it's church state, to allow liberty of conscience. (What is interesting and I don't know why but Roger Williams hated the religion of Quakerism, but believed that they had a right to their beliefs and were welcomed in Rode Island). As the American Revolution started some people like Patrick Henry wanted a protestant version of Catholic Europe here in the US. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were infected with the ideas of Roger Williams and William Penn and wanted the United States to follow the plan of Rode Island and Pennsylvania; to allow all religions free access, to have people listen to all ideas and to accept what made the most sense to them. Jefferson suggested to Madison that they should pray for Henry to die. Madison said he had a better idea, that they should unite to make Patrick Henry governor of Virginia and use that to get his voice out of the congress. Thanks to these four men, Williams, Penn, Jefferson and Madison the American Revolution was something new; based on seeing the laws of Catholic Europe as being inferior to a higher set of law that was not man made but came from God (granted they had a deist view of God and a lot of messed up ideas about God's interventions, but their ideas of liberty of conscience and God's higher law was correct.) The US was based on freedom through good laws based on the inalienable law of the creator, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (In many ways Seventh-day Adventism was an application of Williams, Penn, Jefferson and Madison applied to religion.) Then there was the French Revolution. At first Jefferson was excited about the French Revolution, but soon saw it was based on different ideas. Instead of appealing to freedom through the law of God, they looked for freedom through no law and no God. This lead to the reign of terror. It was Satan's ideal society,, but they discovered that it was exhausting for the demons a they had to individualize temptation. They found that they had it a lot easier under Catholic Europe. Napoleon came to power with the same view of freedom being freedom from law. But he came to see freedom as something that only the elite leaders can use that the common people can't handle freedom. This developed into Communism where the government takes care of the common people who can't handle freedom and thus control them. Over the past 30 years in American politics we are finding the Republican party leaving the constitution and pushing for a return to Catholic Europe and the ideas of Patrick Henry. We are finding the Democrats responding to this by leaving the constitution and supporting the views of the French Revolution. (well both trends started around the turn of the 20th century, it is the past 30 where they could voice the cry without causing an uproar.) These are issues Mrs. White was predicting with her applying them to the civil war and world war 1.

Kevin, thank you for clarifying Green's point. I understand the bigger picture much better now. Imagine if England had made war with the US as a lead up to the world wars?Life as we know it would be very different!

Yes it was. The issue is again dealing with the purpose and nature of prophecy. All prophecy is conditional to people's response. The "If" is always implied. Dispensatioinalism ignores these "If's" and wants the church to be raptured away so that all the details in the prophecies are fulfilled. Mrs. White was talking about how England was indeed planing to join the war at the side of the south. that would have been to England's advantage. However, England did not see that it would have lead to what later became the first world war. God warned Mrs. White about this issues. World War 1 was already in the making. It would have broken out just as predicted except that the Holy Spirit was speaking to the heart of Prince Albert. Price Albert was a man of God. He was also German who gave him a bigger perspective than the "What's good for England" views of the Prime Minister and Parliament. The monarchy still had more power than they do today. So Queen Victoria had influence and she would consult her husband in decision making. Prince Albert was able to make compromises between England and Lincoln that kept England out of the war. Thus the conditions were not met. The angels held back the winds of strife and World War 1 was postponed about 50 years. And as Green pointed out the events of World War 1 were still there and growing. (in a lot of ways World War 1 has never ended) While the Civil War would have triggered it had not Prince Albert cut the fuse the events that Mrs. White began seeing about Europe and applied to the Civil war but continued to talk about in Prophets and Kings as world war 1 was breaking out were developing. The critic looking at only the specific application and not the framework sees it as a failed prophecy because she did not use the word "If" The conservatives correctly see the "If" as implied. But there were things that she was saying about Europe both around the time of the Civil war and 50 years later in Prophets and Kings that we don't realize were references to the first world war that has outlived the war and are still worthy of our study today. (I'd also like to see the connection with the French Revolution which set this in motion). Thank you Green for pointing these things out. We often do not see eye to eye, but on some points (and for some reason you still criticize me when I thank you) you show incredible insight. Thank you for your last two points. Bulls-eye! (I hope the fact that we are in agreement on these two posts doesn't scare you away.)

I haven't the time right now to read the whole article but what I did scan ,especially the last one it is obvious someone as yourself would not have jumped to conclusions....... Unfortunately our police officers are not blessed with the divine insight of the Monday morning experts. I know that in that number you will find the racist or power tripping PO as in any profession. But given that at least half were white victims,why were they killed? The following story is interesting. Perhaps a man suspected to be armed and with a violent history should have been asked nicely to let the PO know if he had a gun,was it loaded and did he intend to use it. I am sure you would have. Most PO don't have the time or luxury that would require if they intend to go home to their families.

How was the "ceremonial laws" against us? Heb 10:1 For the Law...was only a shadow of the good things to come (i.e., Christ righteousness)... verse 3: in those sacrifices (i.e., the ceremonial laws - see Lev 23) there is a reminder of sins year by year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. I submit to you that the "handwriting of the ordinances" was the record of our sins. These sins were "against us" and placed in death row awaiting the judgment.

The problem is, officers jump to conclusions that frequently result in fatalities. See the story below for a case where a white man feels he was not murdered by the police partly because he was white. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/08/16/father-utterly-terrified-after-trooper-points-gun-at-his-7-year-old-during-traffic-stop/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na&utm_term=.28baabf3b300 This kind of "experience" will become more common as time goes by, I fear. First they came for the Native Americans, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Native American. Then they came for the Blacks, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Black. Then they came for the illegal immigrants, and I did not speak out— Because I was not an illegal immigrant. Then they came for the refugees, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a refugee. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Republicans have spent millions of Dollars every since Bill was in office trying to find something illegal in their lives. That was taxpayer money. Decades later, still nothing to support the claim. Maybe for the conspiracy minded who seldom seem to accept factual data.

Was not the context of England in the prophecy directly related to the time of the Civil War?

This wasn't even a conditional prophecy unless the condition was if England gets involved. There were no conditions attached regarding what would have caused England's involvement. The prophecy was fulfilled very literally in the World Wars. At those times, "all nations" had "an interest of their own to serve," just as she predicted.

When smoke rises, you know the barometric pressure is high. When smoke stays low, the pressure is low. Did I use "if"? But what did I mean? Apply that to Mrs. White. End of problem. I happened to see the "if" right away. The grammar she used would never have been questioned like this in her day, because people understood it. Today, people are too uneducated to recognize the grammatical function of the words she used in her English style. This whole "failure" is not one pertaining to Mrs. White. It is a "false prophecy" formed in the eye of the reader. Mrs. White never said what people are saying she said. I teach English for a living. Sad to say, many "native English speakers" back home seem to need the instruction as well.

First point is simple a false statement. An extremist right wing label that is a favorite of the factually challenged false narrative about her. No real evidence of actual corruption. None. Nada. Zip. Her only elected public office she has held (her entire political career other than running for president) was as US Senator from NY. By most accounts, including by Republicans that may have differed with her positions, she served well and with distinction as a Senator. Most objective assessments (i.e., with no political agenda) of her time as Secretary of State have been that she was a very hard working Secretary that represented the US well, did a lot to repair our damaged image in the world and strengthened our ties with our allies. No accusations of corruption or criminal activity have come to anything other than empty political rhetoric. No prosecutions. No convictions. As for accusations of lying and dishonesty, same thing. Even with the misstatements about her e-mails and the confusion about the claimed mishandling of classified material, independent fact checkers rank her as the most honest politician that has been in the race through the primaries and now. Your second point... Hard to see how that is an issue now. Maybe consider the strength of character and apparent forgiveness she has shown about her husbands obviously public infidelity. Standing by your man is considered a virtue by many.