Moderators John317 Posted June 6, 2007 Moderators Posted June 6, 2007 Quote: If Ellen White really is a prophet of God, we need to accept all of her statements, and not just a select few. John317 ... This is completely false. Never in all of Biblical history has there been such a standard in Prophetism. Prophets have always been sinful erroring human beings. There is NO requirements for infallibility nor complete accuracy nor complete inspireability in everything a prophet has ever said or done. We accept the whole Bible, don't we? We don't-- at least we shouldn't-- point to some verses written by Paul or James or Peter or David, and say that such and such a verse is merely their private opinion and we are safe to reject it on the basis of our own personal judgment that it is false. That is not to say that there are not prayers and Psalms, etc., that do not express human wishes and feelings. But for instance, it wouldn't be appropriate or right to conclude that Paul merely thought that Jesus was coming back, or that Jesus merely thought that He was the divine Son of God and that He existed before with His Father in Heaven. Nor would it be dealing honestly with Ellen White to say that she merely thought that the Sabbath would be the main issue of contention just before Christ's return. The point I am making is that if we believe that Ellen White was a true prophet of God, we should study everything she has to say on a subject, just as we do with the Bible. We can't discover the truth of what she said if we only accept the things we like and reject the things we don't like. In the same way, we shouldn't be satisfied by studying only a select few paragraphs or pages she wrote on a particular subject and ignore others. That is how NOT to study her writings and it is the way we come to many false and even dangerous conclusions. It would be the same if we want to understand what a particular philosopher or writer has to say on a topic. For instance, we are likely to arrive at a false understanding of what Nietzsche says about the "superman" if we only pay attention to one section of a single book. Truth, then-- particularly Bible truth-- is not a like a smorgasbord which offers a little bit of truth here and some untruth there, with each person deciding what to accept and reject on the basis of his personal tastes. That is what many do with Scripture, and it is what many do with the writings of Ellen White. Such a process results in a religion based not on God's revealed truth but on human opinion and human judgment. There are so-called churches like that, but I assume we don't want to be like them in that way. We are-- thank God-- still a church that constructs her doctrines, faith, and reforms on a clear "thus says the Lord." In applying this to the writings of Ellen G. White, we need to deal honestly and forthrightly with them and make a genuine effort to find harmony among them, just as we should the Bible. Some people look for contradictions and when they find something that apparently contradicts something else that she wrote, they immediately assume it is a true contradiction that has no solution and that it proves Ellen White cannot be depended upon. That is also how many treat the Bible. Quote: Perhaps you can explain the infalliblity of a donkey. We do not need to accept all the statements of Ellen White. NOR can we. She grew in her faith and undersanding like all humans. So .... NO way can we "accept ALL of her statements". Shall I bring out the list of her statements that you have said are not correct previously? Of course your excuse is that she didn't "know" that her words would be made public. However even in the words that were intended for publication ... we see growth. Yes, please do that. Bring out any of her statements she intended for publication that you have an "objection" to and let us discuss them. It would be good to start out with the books she intended for publication during her lifetime, such as the Conflict Series or the Testimonies For the Church, etc. However, please feel free to bring up any published or unpublished statements, even those she did not know would ever be published. For instance, her diaries and private letters. We can talk about those, too. I think we are fortunate to have all of Ellen White's writings and to know so much detail about a prophet of God. It helps us to have greater insight into how prophets are given visions and dreams and how they write out these visions and dreams. We also understand better their fallibility and their humanity in the midst of their being used by God to speak for Him to His church. Christ was both God and man, and the Word of God is both a product of fallible man and of the infallible God. The Bible itself, therefore, does contain error, but not error such as will lead you to lose your salvation if you accept 100% of it. Some people have rejected the whole Bible as unreliable because they found a few statements that they thought were not true. Thus they lose their faith in God and lose their salvation on account of their private understanding that a few chapters or a few verses are not correct. It would be better to accept the whole Bible as true than to lose confidence in the Bible because of one's private opinion. The same applies to Ellen White. We all probably know people who lost their faith in Ellen White, in the church, and finally in God altogether, because of statements in Ellen White's writings that they found objectionable. I had an aunt who ultimately lost her faith in God, and it all started with her doubts about the truth of certain statements in Ellen White to the effect that there will be slaves when Christ returns. She said that proved Ellen White was a false prophet. The great French writer, Voltaire, author of Candide, mistreated the Bible in the same foolish fashion. Not long before he died, he predicted that the Bible would soon no longer be read. It was a false prediction, of course, and proves without doubt that Voltaire cannot be depended on. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Woody Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Well John317. It is evident that we have a philosophical gulf that is wide. Your response is full of comparisons between the Bible and Ellen White. It appears you place both on the same level. And since I do not place all of Ellen White's writings on the same authority as the Bible .... we have great difficulty in coming to an agreement. I do wish you well with this kind of religion. It takes all kinds. I would just like to say that I believe that you are sincere. And God accepts you where ever you are at with you understanding. He will enlighten you are you are able. But at each stage you are perfect in Him. And so ... I see you as perfect in Him. This is an example of how our incomplete knowledge of God will not cause us to be lost. Just as any amount of knowledge will not save us. None of us have a full understanding of God and scripture. But ... when we See Him .... we will be like Him for we shall see Him as He is. That will be the day. We shall all be changed. Until then .... we will be like we are now. All different with different growth and understandings of God. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Moderators John317 Posted June 6, 2007 Moderators Posted June 6, 2007 Well John317. It is evident that we have a philosophical gulf that is wide. Your response is full of comparisons between the Bible and Ellen White. It appears you place both on the same level. And since I do not place all of Ellen White's writings on the same authority as the Bible .... we have great difficulty in coming to an agreement. You are wrong to say I place Ellen White and the Bible on the same level. The Bible is the standard of all doctrine and reform. The canon was closed about 100 AD. Ellen White herself has written extensively on the relation between her writings and the Bible. Among her major works, which ones do you believe to be false? Or which pages or which paragraphs, in your opinion, are false? Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
bevin Posted June 6, 2007 Author Posted June 6, 2007 John317 is the typical SDA. EGW is not canonical, but everything that she published is correct. It amuses me to see this discussion arising yet again. It is easily possible for anyone to access long lists of errors in the EGW Published Writings - such lists are all over the Internet, and yet he is asking you to produce one. Here is the White Estate's own take on the matter. http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/herm-pri.html Quote: In summary, it appears that Mrs. White's use of the term infallibility has to do with the Bible being completely trustworthy as a guide to salvation. She doesn't mix that idea with the concept that the Bible or her writings are free from all possible errors of a factual nature. Thus the faithful reader's belief is not shaken if he or she discovers that Matthew attributed a Messianic prophecy, written centuries before Christ's birth, to Jeremiah when it was actually Zechariah who inferred that Christ would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (see Matt. 27:9, 10; Zech. 11:12, 13). Nor will one be dismayed over the fact that 1 Samuel 16:10, 11 lists David as the eighth son of Jesse, but 1 Chronicles 2:15 refers to him as the seventh. Neither will faith be affected because the prophet Nathan wholeheartedly approved of King David's building of the Temple but the next day had to backtrack and tell David that God didn't want him to build it (see 2 Sam. 7; 1 Chron. 17). Prophets make mistakes. /Bevin Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 6, 2007 Moderators Posted June 6, 2007 John317 is the typical SDA. EGW is not canonical, but everything that she published is correct. It amuses me to see this discussion arising yet again. It is easily possible for anyone to access long lists of errors in the EGW Published Writings - such lists are all over the Internet, and yet he is asking you to produce one. Here is the White Estate's own take on the matter. http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/herm-pri.html Quote: In summary, it appears that Mrs. White's use of the term infallibility has to do with the Bible being completely trustworthy as a guide to salvation. She doesn't mix that idea with the concept that the Bible or her writings are free from all possible errors of a factual nature. Thus the faithful reader's belief is not shaken if he or she discovers that Matthew attributed a Messianic prophecy, written centuries before Christ's birth, to Jeremiah when it was actually Zechariah who inferred that Christ would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (see Matt. 27:9, 10; Zech. 11:12, 13). Nor will one be dismayed over the fact that 1 Samuel 16:10, 11 lists David as the eighth son of Jesse, but 1 Chronicles 2:15 refers to him as the seventh. Neither will faith be affected because the prophet Nathan wholeheartedly approved of King David's building of the Temple but the next day had to backtrack and tell David that God didn't want him to build it (see 2 Sam. 7; 1 Chron. 17). Prophets make mistakes. /Bevin Bevin sounds more and more like the typical former-SDA who has become anti-SDA. We've already discussed these things but you evidently haven't paid attention. I have no disagreement at all with the quote you posted here. The issue is, do we believe Ellen White is a true prophet of God and if so, are we studying her with a view to understanding what God is saying through her to us individually and to the church? Do you agree with the implication here, that Ellen White was among those true prophets of God who made some insignificant mistakes? I think there is something definitely wrong when every time there is a discussion about what Ellen White said on a topic, some, who make a show of merely being objectively amused, feel the need of leading the conversation back around again-- and again-- to the fact that after all Ellen White made errors. That is like people who cannot discuss the Bible without emphasizing that the Bible contains a lot of errors. They sound a lot different from Christ, who said things like, "Your word is truth," "The scriptures cannot be broken," and, "Man shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." They sound more like, "Do you really believe what God has said about such and such?.." Bevin, which books by Ellen White do you accept as true and which ones do you believe are false? Do you believe Steps To Christ, for instance, or The Desire of Ages? I give out the Steps to Jesus edition to the young people where I work. I'm re-reading it and have been really getting a lot out of the chapter on the "Test of Discipleship". Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Woody Posted June 6, 2007 Posted June 6, 2007 Quote: That is like people who cannot discuss the Bible without emphasizing that the Bible contains a lot of errors Again ... this constant comparison of Ellen White to the Bible. John317 ... in my book they are not the same kettle of fish. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
bevin Posted June 7, 2007 Author Posted June 7, 2007 There is middle ground - and it is the ground the White Estate is on. EGW made mistakes, some big, some small. EGW made contributions to our view of God, some big, some small. Actually I am inclined to view her writings as typical of the INPUTS to the FILTERING process that produced the Bible. I'm sure if we had all of Peter's letters, we would find a similar range of material, with similar issues, as we find with EGW's material. /Bevin Quote
olger Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Quote: And OLGER is the ONLY one that has the truth. Now you're being silly, friend. Jesus is the truth and His Spirit leads us. Forgive me if I misunderstood your statement. It seems sarcastic. Quote: People like Ford and Goldstein are not looking for truth. Are you sure about that? How do you know their heart? Quote: He is just looking for "error". RIGHT. But hey .... no name calling here. Most commendable. Lord bless, olger Quote "Please don't feed the drama queens.."
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 Quote: That is like people who cannot discuss the Bible without emphasizing that the Bible contains a lot of errors Again ... this constant comparison of Ellen White to the Bible. John317 ... in my book they are not the same kettle of fish. An inspired prophet is an inspired prophet. There aren't degrees of inspiration. It's like the old saying you can't be a little bit pregnant. Either you are or you aren't. The same with a prophet. It is true that Ellen White is not part of the canon or scripture, but if she was inspired by God and given visions and dreams, she was as much of a prophet as Paul or James or Peter. The only real difference is that she lived 1900 years after the close of canon. She does not have the same authority because the primary authority must always go to Scripture. Each prophet's authority and testimony must be tested by the previous prophet. Since Moses was the first prophet to write Scripture, everything anyone else wrote after that had to pass the test of agreeing with Moses, or agreeing with both Moses and Joshua, and next it had also to agree with Judges, and so on. Ellen White must agree with all of those who came before her. That is the standard. She appealed to people to read her writings and then to make the comparison and come to a conclusion. I realize that not all will agree with what I've said about inspiration being all of the same degree. Among the Jews there were those who would only accept Moses' books, while they rejected the writings and the prophets as inferior. Today there are some Adventist scholars who believe that the Old Testament is more inspired or authoritative than the New Testament. I believe they are wrong. If Jesus Christ spoke through her to the church and in some instances to the world, then to ignore her is to ignore Jesus Christ. That is what she said Jesus told her: when the people reject your messages, He assured her, they are really rejecting Me, not you. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 There is middle ground - and it is the ground the White Estate is on. EGW made mistakes, some big, some small. EGW made contributions to our view of God, some big, some small. Actually I am inclined to view her writings as typical of the INPUTS to the FILTERING process that produced the Bible. I'm sure if we had all of Peter's letters, we would find a similar range of material, with similar issues, as we find with EGW's material. /Bevin I don't want you to give me the answer, but ask yourself: How much authority do you give to the Bible in your life? When you read something, do you make a calculation as to how true it is and based on your answer decide whether to pay attention to it? Or do you immediately apply it to your life and ask God to give you the Holy Spirit to help you put it into practice? Ask yourself the same question about the writings of Ellen White. This is really where the rubber meets the road. It's what tells whether we really believe the Bible is from God and also whether we believe Ellen White was a prophet of God. No one can decide for us on these questions. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
olger Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 "This is really where the rubber meets the road." Indeed. og Quote "Please don't feed the drama queens.."
David Koot Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Actually I am inclined to view her writings as typical of the INPUTS to the FILTERING process that produced the Bible. I'm sure if we had all of Peter's letters, we would find a similar range of material, with similar issues, as we find with EGW's material. /Bevin Interesting thought. We do know that Paul, for example, wrote more than appears in the Bible. Doubtless, the same could be said for other New Testament figures. Every word they wrote was not included in the Bible. And, the evaluation process ("filtering") did take a bit of time. Are we suggesting a different level of inspiration for EGW? That every word she wrote was inspired by God as prophecy? As for EGW, first of all, I recall her describing herself as a 'lesser light.' I understand that to mean that she is not to be placed on the same level as Scripture. One of the earmarks of a cult is a 'prophet' figure who is claimed to be on the same level as Scripture, such as Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, and others. As Adventists, we (at least I, in my studies with people) can point with confidence to the fact that we all receive gifts of the Spirit, including EGW, but all, including EGW, are to be tested by the Bible, and are subject to the Bible. If that is not our church's position, then I have a bit of rethinking to do! Dave Quote
bevin Posted June 7, 2007 Author Posted June 7, 2007 Quote: If that is not our church's position, then I have a bit of rethinking to do! John317 is proposing a position on both the Bible and EGW that is not the standard SDA position. If we look through the Bible, we find () Abraham arguing with God () Moses asking God for signs () Gideon asking God for signs () David writing Psalms and also being very wicked () Nathan changing his mind () Solomon writing a Book and also being very wicked () Thomas asking for evidence () The disciples writing Books and disagreeing with each other And then we find EGW telling people NOT to use her PUBLISHED WORKS to settle theological issues. In short, the position that John317 is taking that we should take prophets as authoritative is simply contrary to the practise and expressed wishes of the inspired authors. /Bevin Quote
Woody Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Let me see ... First olger says : Quote: ]"Unfortunately, if his recent so-called book "reviews" are any indication, Ford is apparently more interested in winning debates and arguments than in searching for and finding out the truth." Quite! Then he says .... Quote: Quote:"People like Ford and Goldstein are not looking for truth." then "Are you sure about that? How do you know their heart?" Interesting. How do you manage to speak out of both sides of your mouth. So ... HOW DO you know that Ford is not interested in finding truth if you don't know his heart. I will wait for this explanation. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Ron Lambert Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 I think Clifford Goldstein is an excellent writer, not only in style, but also in critical thought. He goes "deeper" than most of our denominational writers. He is willing to look at things in a new way, and find new ways to say things. I do not always agree with him in everything he says, but I would certainly debate him respectfully. Whatever mistakes he makes are not stupid ones. Quote
Woody Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Well said Ron. I feel just as you have stated. Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 Quote: If that is not our church's position, then I have a bit of rethinking to do! John317 is proposing a position on both the Bible and EGW that is not the standard SDA position. If we look through the Bible, we find () Abraham arguing with God () Moses asking God for signs () Gideon asking God for signs () David writing Psalms and also being very wicked () Nathan changing his mind () Solomon writing a Book and also being very wicked () Thomas asking for evidence () The disciples writing Books and disagreeing with each other And then we find EGW telling people NOT to use her PUBLISHED WORKS to settle theological issues. In short, the position that John317 is taking that we should take prophets as authoritative is simply contrary to the practise and expressed wishes of the inspired authors. /Bevin The Bible is the basis of our doctrines and our faith. What issues do you believe prophets of God have the authority to settle? What issues do they settle for you? As a church, although we claim to believe that Ellen White speaks for God to the church-- which is the work of the prophet-- yet we have generally failed to follow her counsels regarding the health message, the organization and management of our medical work, and much regarding the work of the pastors. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
bevin Posted June 7, 2007 Author Posted June 7, 2007 My faith comes from a walk with the Lord - the Bible, people (inspired and otherwise), science, ... all feed into that walk /Bevin Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 Just wondering what do you do when other people you respect teach something that the Bible does not support? Also when your science conflicts with the plain teachings of the Bible, if that should ever occur? Off the subject, but have you read a book called The Creator and the Cosmos by Hugh Ross? It is about the Big Bang and how the Big Bang points to God as the creator and redeemer. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Woody Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 YES. Ellen White had some good things to say. But she is JUST a prophet. She did not have the answer for everything. God gave her a very specific message. We've broaden that to say that everything she ever said was the message. NO. Let's stick to what God told her to say. It is not an all or nothing deal. John317. Tell me what other prophet was used the way you use Ellen White? What prophet do you claim that every word they ever spoke was the Word of God? What other prophet has every letter or work whispered published like is in the Testimonies etc? Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
David Koot Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 As a church, although we claim to believe that Ellen White speaks for God to the church-- which is the work of the prophet-- yet we have generally failed to follow her counsels regarding the health message, the organization and management of our medical work, and much regarding the work of the pastors. Sad but true. And, for that matter, Christian education, evangelism and other areas. That doesn't affect the validity of her visions, but it is unfortunate. Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 Quote: If that is not our church's position, then I have a bit of rethinking to do! Of course that is our church's position, and should be. The issue has to do with who do we look to as our source of authority? First we look to the Bible, but we cannot deny that as SDA, our church has been rightly influenced also by Ellen White's theology. We would not be the church, doctrinally, that we are today, if she hadn't existed. In fact, I am quite certain that the SDA church would not exist today without her. It would have fallen into a hundred different theological pits if it hadn't been for God's direction through her. That is why God used her-- to keep His church on the right track, theologically and otherwise. That doesn't mean the church has not made some grevious mistakes but it does mean it has kept the church from losing its way and from being absorbed by other organizations, such as happened to Armstrong's Radio Church of God. Quote: John317 is proposing a position on both the Bible and EGW that is not the standard SDA position. The official position of the SDA church: "Ellen White, the Lord's messenger"-- "Her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested." Some people misunderstand Ellen White's role theologically. They think she should not be used as an authority when it comes to theological issues, but this is not the church's position. If it was, why does the Sabbath school adult lesson quarterly use her writings so freely in answering almost all the questions it asks? If people will read about how the SDA church accepted the doctrine of the Trinity, they will find that it wouldn't have happened apart from Ellen White's doctrinal authority. Her husband, Joseph Bates, Uriah Smith and almost the entire church opposed the Trinity. It was a struggle for the SDA church to accept the full deity of Christ and the personality of the Holy Spirit. That was part of the reason for the hard resistence against the 1888 Message delibered by Waggoner and Jones. Waggoner was teaching that Christ was equal with the Father, and many did not beleive this. But it was a necessary part of the 1888 Message. Ellen White accepted that Message and began to teach more and more that Christ is Jehovah, God Himself. It settled the issue in the minds of most in the church. The Bible is clear on this issue also, but due to people's prejudices they could not see the Bible's teaching. It took Ellen White's theological leadership and authority, along with the influence of many others, to settle the Trinity issue. Go to Adventist Theological Society for some good articles on this topic. Quote: If we look through the Bible, we find () Abraham arguing with God () Moses asking God for signs () Gideon asking God for signs () David writing Psalms and also being very wicked () Nathan changing his mind () Solomon writing a Book and also being very wicked () Thomas asking for evidence () The disciples writing Books and disagreeing with each other Do these things mean for you that the Bible has less authority than it would otherwise? Could you give some detail about how you believe these relate to our topic of the authority of prophet's writings? It's not immediately obvious how the fact that these things happened decrease the authority of God's written Word. For instance, how do they relate to Christ's words, "Man shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God"? Quote: And then we find EGW telling people NOT to use her PUBLISHED WORKS to settle theological issues. In short, the position that John317 is taking that we should take prophets as authoritative is simply contrary to the practise and expressed wishes of the inspired authors. /Bevin If you're going to tell people my position, Bevin, I would really appreciate it if you put the truth in my mouth rather things I neither said nor believe. I promise I won't summarize your beliefs in a twisted fashion, which is what you have done here. The issue is a bit more complex than the positions you are giving. See above. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 Originally Posted By: John317 As a church, although we claim to believe that Ellen White speaks for God to the church-- which is the work of the prophet-- yet we have generally failed to follow her counsels regarding the health message, the organization and management of our medical work, and much regarding the work of the pastors. Sad but true. And, for that matter, Christian education, evangelism and other areas. That doesn't affect the validity of her visions, but it is unfortunate. Yes, you are right on both points. My daughter works as a nurse at Loma Linda U Medical Center and she tells me of conditions there that show it is losing its focus on Christian mission. That is what happened to our hospital in San Diego, which was recently sold to a non-SDA corporation. I'm afraid the same thing will eventually happen to LLUMC. For the most part, you can no longer tell that it is a Christian hospital with the purpose of spreading the gospel. Most of the nurses working with my daughter are not even Christians, let alone Christian SDA. It used to be that patients could count on their doctors and nurses to pray with them and talk to them about Christ, but tragically that is no longer the case. Of course, Ellen White helped found both hospitals. In fact, she was given visions that led to their founding. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 7, 2007 Moderators Posted June 7, 2007 YES. Ellen White had some good things to say. But she is JUST a prophet. She did not have the answer for everything. God gave her a very specific message. We've broaden that to say that everything she ever said was the message. NO. Let's stick to what God told her to say. It is not an all or nothing deal. I'm certainly willing to do that. That is all I have ever said we should do. She said that God told her to write the things in The Great Controversy. ("As the Spirit of God has opened to my mind the great truths of His word, and the scenes of the past and the future, I have been bidden to make known to others that which has thus been revealed-- to trace the history of the controversy in past ages, and especially so to present it as to shed a light on the fast-approaching struggle of the future." p. xi. Please see the rest of her Introduction to The Great Controversy.) She also said God told her to say the things she wrote in the Testimonies For the Church and in many other writings. Quote: John317. Tell me what other prophet was used the way you use Ellen White? What prophet do you claim that every word they ever spoke was the Word of God? What other prophet has every letter or work whispered published like is in the Testimonies etc? I have never taken the position that every word Ellen White ever said or wrote is to be taken as coming from God or as inspired. What I do say is that we are fortunate to have everything she wrote, including her diaries and private letters. It's a blessing to know all that we do know about a true prophet because it gives us insight that we otherwise would not have into how God inspired them and gave them dreams and visions. I think it would be wonderful if we had all of the things Paul or Peter wrote, don't you? It doesn't mean everything they wrote would or should be treated as inspired. Ellen White wrote things that her enemies try to use to show she made mistakes. But those are private things and were not things that she said God revealed to her. I have said these things before, and I am sure I will have to say them again. There was a time in my life when I also disliked "old lady White," as I called her. I made fun of my friends if I saw them reading her. I hated people to point out what she wrote. But I felt the same way then about the Bible too. I just didn't like to be told what to do. But then I was not converted to Christ and didn't have Him as #1 in my life. I didn't have the Holy Spirit in my life. It led to about 30 years of my living for me and the devil, which was great fun at first. Now I live for Christ and I'm dead but it's a lot more fun, and I love Ellen White and praise God for everything she wrote. God only sent His love letters to us because He loves us but it takes some of us a really long time to realize that they are for our good. "Believe His prophets, so shall you prosper." That's for sure! Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Woody Posted June 7, 2007 Posted June 7, 2007 Quote: If Ellen White really is a prophet of God, we need to accept all of her statements, and not just a select few. Have you changed your mind about this statement of yours? OR This one? Quote: I have never taken the position that every word Ellen White ever said or wrote is to be taken as coming from God or as inspired Does this mean that you "accept" everything from Ellen White even though you believe it wasn't from God? Quote May we be one so that the world may be won. Christian from the cradle to the grave I believe in Hematology.
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.