Coffee - Health Food!

[David Koot]

Let the BIBLE speak for itself and allow the Holy Spirit to convict.

Yes, that is a good principle, and can be helpful, when properly applied. You are talking about HOW, of course. An issue foundational to that is whether or not the Bible says anything that bears upon a topic.

Dave

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

It's not helpful to your perspective so you explain it away to irrelevance.

It is truly unfortunate that you resort to ridicule....

Hardly ridicule... just a pertinent observation of your technique in dealing with a passage that does not support your point of view. You know very well that the technique I spotlighted is old hat stuff which you would have much more severely castigated had it been used to minimize a key authoritative source you were using.

I will also call you on your frequently used defensive ploy of feigned personal offense and lame attempt at trying to falsely characterize valid criticism as personal affront. Your reaction and attempted distraction tell me that my aim was sure. Just deal with the text in question, as I have done.

And by the way, thanks for flagging my post for much closer scrutiny by those who read your fussing and fuming.

Tom

[Woody]

Tom .... you are right on with your posts. This was what I was pointing to but you have much better articulated it.

And about the defensive tactics of the author in question. You are so right. This is a frequent ploy of his. When the argument is lost he resorts to defensive attacks.

I wish we could have more kind discussions here. The topic is a good one but lets keep it civil.

And to Olger .... I can appreciate that you like to get into MY head. But honestly ... you don't have a clue about me. I realize that you think you know me .... and you desire to keep guessing about me. But I would prefer that you just ask rather than guess and psycho-analyze me. Thanks Olger.

[David Koot]

just a pertinent observation of your technique in dealing with a passage that does not support your point of view.

[David Koot]

Now, as to Romans 14: I don't have much time this evening, about to head out to San Rafael, but for starters, note this verse which tells us the kind of things Paul is talking about:

"Ro 14:1 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things."

Throughout his epistles, Paul makes it clear that not all things are doubtful. It is possible to get a picture of the kinds of things Paul is speaking of, by reference to his teachings. Some clues appear in ch. 14. Also helpful would be an understanding of the issues in the local church which Paul was addressing. These items are worth taking a look at in some detail. However, I cannot do so tonight.

[Woody]

I pretend that as a non-SDA, I happen on to this forum. I soon learn that SDA's have two leaders, their claim, Bible and EGW. They call The Bible the 'Greater' light and EGW the 'Lesser' light. They also claim that they only follow the Bible. However, they also believe that EGW's writings agree with the Bible so her words are important also to their belief system. In their attempt to define 'right living', it seems that EGW is their leader. Example, all of the 'sins' they(sda) define can't be found in the Bible so they resort to the writings of EGW for guidance. Confusion!! Who do they rely on the most? Who do they really believe is their leader? To their credit, they will find texts in the Bible about clean and healthy living. But they look to EGW for 'sin' list. They seem to have some real problems with finding sin and defineing what exactly sin is. The forum seems to erupt with many topics on this matter and can get quite heated. Still, I am confused, who is their leader? Reminds me of the Jewish religious leaders and their attempts to define all sinful activity and behaviour. They believed right living would get them to heavan. They were not happy when Christ told them to follow and accept Him/God in order to be saved. The people were much confused as to whom their leader was...their fellow humans or this Christ/God. My confusion remains, just who do SDA's follow, God, as they claim, EGW, as they claim not too, but follow religiosly, a combintion of the two or .....? Maybe they aren't sure either, so will continue to watch and wonder...it is very entertaining though!

:duno :hya from the other side..

As a lifetime Adventist and a former Pastor in the church and a current SDA Pastor's spouse .... I can clearly state that this is the very best description of the Seventh day Adventist church that I have ever read.

CoAspen .... all the above is true. We are all that you have said. Thank you for your observation and description. I hope that we can learn from it.

[David Koot]

As far as perceptions "from the other side" . . . For over twenty years I have worked directly in soul-winning, in several capacities. I have enjoyed becoming acquainted with non-Adventists from a variety of backgrounds--everyone from atheists, agonstics, gang members, alcoholics, working class, middle class, white collar, etc. I have consistently observed a very positive reaction to the SEventh-day Adventist message. One of the most appealing aspects of that message, to non-Adventists in my experience, has been the health message. And, they have consistently been very impressed with the writings of Ellen G. White. I can share testimonial after testimonial, if there is interest. The baptismal preparation I have given, has consistently been full-message. The people have loved it. In those twenty-plus years, the problems I have encountered with the Adventist message, and with Ellen G. White, and the health message, and lifestyle, have uniformly been with long-time Adventists--not with non-SDA's. Non-Adventists have loved it. Some long-time Adventists seem to be either embarrassed about it, or dislike it. Vitriolic, visceral reactions. As for those watching from the outside . . . if Adventists would live the message, the light we have been given from heaven, openly, above-board, and do so with the Christian graces, it would be a wonderful witness to the world, and I believe many more people would be drawn to accept that message and unite with God's remnant church. I suggest that it is high time to stop being self-absorbed, and reach out to the world.

Dave

[olger]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

*whisper*some of us find it healthier than watching TV*whisper*

TV is indeed an unhealthy influence. I don't watch TV or have one, for that matter. The internet is a good source of needed information, and one may be selective.

Dave

Good move.

[Woody]

Quote:

For over twenty years I have worked directly in soul-winning, in several capacities.

Sounds like one of those long time Adventists. Impressive.

[lazarus]

I find the challenge concerning Ellen White these days in really is indifference. I think she is almost seems irrelevant or an optional extra at best.

Coupled with that, those that quote her often are many times perceived as being without many of the fruits of the Spirit.

[David Koot]

I find the challenge concerning Ellen White these days in really is indifference. I think she is almost seems irrelevant or an optional extra at best.

[Bravus]

I think it's also a matter of 'swings and roundabouts'. The culture more broadly is in a more permissive swing against authority at the moment, that started in the 60s and has morphed a bit but still left us, IMO, too wary of legitimate authority. The church has reflected that. (There are always both those who resist the swing and those who take it even further.) This swing is in response to an excess of authoritarianism in the 50s, and to perceived and real abuses of authority. The swing against EGW is due to perceived and real abuses of EGW's writings, and IMO has gone too far in reaction.

[David Koot]

As for Romans 14, a study of that chapter would seem appropriate for the Bible and Theology section. Accordingly, I shall begin a new thread focusing on an in-depth study of the passage, in that section.

Dave

[Amelia]

.

[Amelia]

.

[David Koot]

That is too funny! You scored again, Amelia!

[David Koot]

I think it's also a matter of 'swings and roundabouts'.

Excellent point. And that reaction against authoritarianism, in the U.S. at least, certainly was a protest against McCarthyism, the 'ol boy' network, the belief that the CIA orchestrated the assassination of JFK, etc. Personally, I thought it had rather petered out in the '80's, here in America, but perhaps I am mistaken. I am curious as to whether or not similar trends were observed in Australia, Canada and the UK? As to the SDA subculture, I tend to believe that the larger sociological trend was mirrored within the church, and given added impetus due to the authoritarian misuse of the Testimonies. I agree with your analysis of the current state of things. It has gone too far. I fear the stakes are so high, and we have gone so far down the road away from our origins, that it will take Divine intervention to swing the pendulum back.

Dave

[olger]

That is too funny! You scored again, Amelia!

10-points

[Planey]

I believe that a number of people of my age may have had their attitude to the writings of our esteemed elder female author coloured by experiences similar to my own. When I was in my formative years it was very noticeable that "the writings" were used to smack us young reprobates about the head on a regular basis. We had a joke that the largest and most popular book she wrote was called "Mrs White Says".

We also noted that many (most?) of the people who regularly belaboured us did not seem to let the books they "quoted" affect their own lives too much. No, indeed, apparently the red books were designed to ensure that these older paragons of virtue and righteousness could spot every little speck and spot of sin and wrongdoing in our lives and apprise us of these heinous deeds.

We believed that the "testimonies" could be summed up as "Are you enjoying yourself? Well stop it immediately, what you are doing must be sinful!" Many among us grew to dread hearing "Well, Mrs White says..." thus and thus. The sad thing is the good lady wrote so many letters with advice for different people, and she always seemed to couch said advice in absolute terms, that it seems possible to find an apropos quote for almost any position you want. Particularly if it means prohibiting something.

Just for instance in one letter she informed one father that "eggs should never appear on the meal table" while to another father on a different occasion she counseled that his son should include more eggs in his diet. It would seem on the second occasion the young lad was lacking something in his diet, but that didn't stop her on the first occasion putting the instruction to that particular family in such words as to make it seem that eggs were such a deleterious item of food that they should never, ever be consumed by any genuine Christian rather than in the particular case being referred to.

I must admit that after having her used primarily as a club for so many years, I took exception to the very idea of opening any of her books for myself. And this lasted for a long time. Even today I get upset when people quote her to "prove" some point or other. "It is a sin to be sick..." for instance. But don't get me started.

Graeme

[Gail]

True, Graeme... I do believe that Mrs. White herself still had to include some eggs in her diet as she was allergic to legumes

It's kinda like the Bible- excellent book, but it's just what people do with it that discredits the Lord. Mrs. White has suffered in like manner, IMHO

[Taylor]

I think this shows that EGW was balanced. Eggs, in general, aren't the best food, but you might need them and if so should eat them. EGW wasn't nearly as radical as some have tried to make her out to be. She was a lovely Christan woman who did many radical things in her day (such as support her son's work with the blacks to establish schools and missions along the Mississippi river, at a time when to do so was very unpopular.). She was considered "liberal" by many by advocating health above style or even what some viewed as modestly (by saying dresses shouldn't drag the ground picking up all the dirt and muck of the streets.) She wrote against eating meat but when a man wrote to her to say that he was upholding the health message by not allowing his pregnant wife to eat Chicken, she told him that was wrong of him to deny his wife the chicken.

[Woody]

Quote:

I think this shows that EGW was balanced. Eggs, in general, aren't the best food, but you might need them and if so should eat them. EGW wasn't nearly as radical as some have tried to make her out to be. She was a lovely Christan woman who did many radical things in her day (such as support her son's work with the blacks to establish schools and missions along the Mississippi river, at a time when to do so was very unpopular.). She was considered "liberal" by many by advocating health above style or even what some viewed as modestly (by saying dresses shouldn't drag the ground picking up all the dirt and muck of the streets.) She wrote against eating meat but when a man wrote to her to say that he was upholding the health message by not allowing his pregnant wife to eat Chicken, she told him that was wrong of him to deny his wife the chicken.

Ellen White may have been balanced. I don't know. But the way WE use her is NOT.

[David Koot]

Graeme, I am at the same time indignant and heartbroken, as I read about your very sad experience. I believe that in the judgment day, such people will be among those to whom Jesus says, 'Depart from Me, you workers of iniquity! I never knew you!" I hope they repent of the evil they have done, and make an effort to repair the harm they have inflicted.

In my case, I was not subjected to such things. Perhaps that is one reason I don't feel resentment against EGW.

Dave

[Woody]

Quote:

In my case, I was not subjected to such things. Perhaps that is one reason I don't feel resentment against EGW.

Thank you David for saying this. WOW . This is so important. We just can't know the path that others have walked. So ... for some it is just not possible to appreciate even the wonderful things of Ellen White because of their past experience. I do not question their ability or inability to appreciate her.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I believe that a number of people of my age may have had their attitude to the writings of our esteemed elder female author coloured by experiences similar to my own. When I was in my formative years it was very noticeable that "the writings" were used to smack us young reprobates about the head on a regular basis. We had a joke that the largest and most popular book she wrote was called "Mrs White Says".

We also noted that many (most?) of the people who regularly belaboured us did not seem to let the books they "quoted" affect their own lives too much. No, indeed, apparently the red books were designed to ensure that these older paragons of virtue and righteousness could spot every little speck and spot of sin and wrongdoing in our lives and apprise us of these heinous deeds.

We believed that the "testimonies" could be summed up as "Are you enjoying yourself? Well stop it immediately, what you are doing must be sinful!" Many among us grew to dread hearing "Well, Mrs White says..." thus and thus. The sad thing is the good lady wrote so many letters with advice for different people, and she always seemed to couch said advice in absolute terms, that it seems possible to find an apropos quote for almost any position you want. Particularly if it means prohibiting something.

**snip**

I must admit that after having her used primarily as a club for so many years, I took exception to the very idea of opening any of her books for myself. And this lasted for a long time. Even today I get upset when people quote her to "prove" some point or other. "It is a sin to be sick..." for instance. But don't get me started.

Graeme

Graeme, that is EXACTLY how I and my cohorts at JrAcademy and Academy felt about EGW. Exactly. Always the *Elders* would bring up an EGW quote which may or may not have been apropos to the situation or behavior. It always felt like a.... dare I say it?..... an SDA witch hunt... using EGW as the prime authority..