If ellen is White, you ll burn in hell

[Dr. Rich]

Why does anyone need the opinion of anyone else other than the words of Jesus given to us by His eyewitnesses (See John 14:26) What is the difference between EGW and Joseph Smith? Didn't both claim to have visions from God?

How about Mohammud and Paul? (One invented Islam and one invented Christianity) If both are from the true God--then why all the differences? But, if both are from Satan--wouldn't it just be like Satan to play one against the other?

I don't see anywhere (in the words of Jesus) that Jesus came to this earth to die for anyone's sin. Jesus taught righteousness by following His words. Yep, you actually have to do something to overcome sin because He did not overcome sin for you. (Rev. 3:4-5)

So why can't we just get rid of all of the opinions of people that said they had visions from God--because how are we to trust them?

Blessings, Dr. Rich

[Robert]

I don't see anywhere (in the words of Jesus) that Jesus came to this earth to die for anyone's sin. Jesus taught righteousness by following His words. Yep, you actually have to do something to overcome sin because He did not overcome sin for you. (Rev. 3:4-5)

Blessings, Dr. Rich

???? Maybe my eyes are kidding me...?

Nope, if it looks like a duck it must be a duck.....I think I'm witnessing good, old salvation by overcoming sin. Hmmm? Yes, I am...

[phkrause]

Yes there are books. And I believe one of the things we will be doing for those thousand years is looking at those books to see why people we thought would be there are not there.

pk

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

I don't see anywhere (in the words of Jesus) that Jesus came to this earth to die for anyone's sin. Jesus taught righteousness by following His words. Yep, you actually have to do something to overcome sin because He did not overcome sin for you. (Rev. 3:4-5)

Blessings, Dr. Rich

???? Maybe my eyes are kidding me...?

Nope, if it looks like a duck it must be a duck.....I think I'm witnessing good, old salvation by overcoming sin. Hmmm? Yes, I am...

Quack Quack.

Hey Rob. I so appreciate your clear explanations in this thread. Way to go ... as usual. You put it SO clear and balanced.

And hey pk ... good comment.

In the end .... it will come down to if we have accepted the sacrifice of Jesus ... for it is by HIS record that we are saved and not our own.

And to minky , mikey or mindy or whoever it was that said we should just blinding accept everything that EGW said and not try to compare it to scripture .... I would refer you to EGW.

And TS ... Hey friend. Not nice to put down a person that most here respect by being disrespectful. Calling her Miss White is really not appropriate.

[oldsailor29]

Yes, "Miss White" is inappropriate. And the topic, "If Ellen is White, you'll burn in hell," does bring up another point. I have heard that EGWs mother was Black or half Black. So I guess we don't have to worry about burning in hell.

[Robert]

Hey Rob. I so appreciate your clear explanations in this thread. Way to go ... as usual. You put it SO clear and balanced.

:lock:

[Woody]

Well ... I was going to say "fair and balanced" but wasn't sure you would appreciate that as much. Maybe I will declare you to be the new Fox Man on CA.

[Robert]

[Ted Oplinger]

Quote:

"The IJ shows who has true, saving faith in Christ and who doesn't" So you believe a billion cases will pass the review before the throne of God and each case gets tremendous attention? Wouldn t that be boring, after say 1000 cases? The manifestation of sin may differ, but the core is all the same.

The Investigaive Judgment is a very necessary thing. When Christ comes back, He says His reward is with HIm, to render to every man according to his works. There must be a basis in justice for each and every reward, whether for good or for evil. While God is a God of perfect love, He is also a God of perfect Justice. No detail is too small to leave aside, no case too redundant.

The Investigative Judgment does have the effect of separating the righteous from the wicked, but the primary focus is not to determine who gets in and who stays out, but rather upon revealing what is to be given to all people when He returns.

There also seems to tbe the point to determining to the angelic beings the redeemed are "safe" enough to bring into the realms of heaven.

God doesn't need the information; it's the non-omniscient races who serve the Living God who need to know (read, angels). It was Paul who said we are spectacles before men and angels...

Remember also, the Great White Throne scene - where the wicked are brought before Christ in the Final Judgment - is where literally billions have their cases presented. Will God simply show a very small percentage of cases, then summarily decide the rest?

No, every one of the wicked will see every point where their feet turned from the path, where they beat back the mercies and love of Christ.

Again, God does not need this, for the wicked have already have been judged (see Eden, the cross, and the IJ). Indeed, it appears redundant to our perspective, yet God has His reasons.

Last chance for the wicked? Since nary a one is noted as changing sides, that cannot be the reason. Final demonstration of the mystery of iniquity - how a sentient being can see the full love and justness of God, yet turn away and rebel against Him?...maybe.

We will know when we get there.

[Ted Oplinger]

Dr. Rich,

Quote:

How about Mohammud and Paul? (One invented Islam and one invented Christianity) If both are from the true God--then why all the differences? But, if both are from Satan--wouldn't it just be like Satan to play one against the other?

Mohammed may invented Islam (I prefer to think of it as of satanic origin, though), but Paul decidedly did not "invent" Christianity.

It was Peter who preached the Sermon on the day of Pentecost, through whom the Lord pricked the hearts of thousands.

The book of Acts (written by Luke) records it was the Lord adding to His church as many as should be saved.

My dear Dr., Christianity is the Lord's "invention", not man's.

Again, if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck,...

[True-believer]

It finished on the Cross the Investigative Judgment... and I have Biblical proof... I'll respond only if your ready to receive what I have to say...

Any takers???

[oldsailor29]

It finished on the Cross the Investigative Judgment... and I have Biblical proof... I'll respond only if your ready to receive what I have to say...

Any takers???

Probably already heard and rejected your proof text arguments. But if you have something new, I would like to see it.

When God was searching for Adam in the garden, that was the first investigation.    The judgment followed.    And there are numerous other instances of investigation and judgment throughout the Bible.

Although the sacrifice has been made and that part of the plan of salvation is finished, there is still more to do.    In the ancient rituals, when the lamb was killed, nothing good had happened yet.    In fact, if you were the lamb, something very terrible had happened.    But following the sacrifice, the blood of the lamb was taken into the most holy place.    This is where we are right now.    The high priest(Jesus/God)is covering our sin with His blood.    So, in this investigative judgment, it isn't us who are being judged.    It is God who is being judged.

[phkrause]

I think oldsailor that he miss wrote the title. I think he meant it to be "If ellen is Right, you'll burn in hell". Besides I think he's misinterpreting her about that anyway. As far as her being part black, I've heard that that was true. As a matter of fact I think the church came out with a statement about that.

pk

[Dr. Rich]

Any takers?? Sure, why not? However, there might be one problem for you. You said you could prove it from the bible. How about proving 'it' from ONLY the words of Jesus given to us by His eyewitnesses? Any takers on this?

Jesus said He was the Passover Lamb--NOT the Atonement Sacrifice. There is a big difference! The Atonement is yet to come. Jesus' death took the punishiment for sin away for ONLY those that enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and these are the ones who have overcome sin by learning the truth from the words of Jesus. Have not you heard "The truth shall set/make you free" "Thy word is truth"

Set free from what? Isn't this 'sin'? If one is free from sin are not they righteous? Jesus' death did not do away with sin.

Dr. Rich

[Robert]

Jesus' death took the punishment for sin away for ONLY those that enter into the Kingdom of Heaven and these are the ones who have overcome sin by learning the truth from the words of Jesus.

1 Cor 1:26 Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things--and the things that are not--to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him [God the Father] that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God--that is, our justification, sanctification and glorification. 31 Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord."

It seems you have limited what Christ did during His life on earth to only the punishment of sin. Well, you are mistaken!

"In Christ" I have a new life that already stands justified, sanctified and glorified.

I'll prove my position by taking one at a time starting with justification!

Rob

[Robert]

that is, our justification, sanctification and glorification.

Justification

What does the law require of the sinner?

Answer: The 2nd death

Has the law been satisfied when it comes to justice?

Answer: Yes

Proof:

Romans 5:18 So then as through one transgression there resulted [past tense] condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted [past tense - refers to the cross] justification of life to all men.

2 Cor 5:14 One died for all, then all died;

Romans 6:6 We know that our old self [our old, sinful life] was crucified with him so that the our old life might be destroyed

Romans 7:4 "You [your old life] died to the law [it demanded your death] in the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another

[Robert]

Sanctification

Did we obey in the body of Christ?

Answer: Yes

Romans 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life [the power of the Spirit, where?] in Christ Jesus has set me [my old humanity] free from the law of sin [the power of the sin nature] and death [the 2nd death]. [How?] 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, He [Jesus] condemned sin in the flesh [our humanity]....

For 33 years Christ said no to the flesh. Where were you? "In Him"! Hence, He defeated "the law of sin" and took upon Himself the 2nd death (justification)"

Hebrews 10:6 When Christ [as Son of God] came into the world, he said, "Sacrifices and offerings thou hast not desired, but a body [i.e., our humanity] hast thou prepared for Me...

7 Then I said, 'Lo, I have come to do thy will, O God,' as it is written of me in the roll of the book."....10 And by that will [His doing & dying] we have been sanctified (past tense) through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all

Titus 3:4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared [2000 years ago], 5 he saved us [past tense, how?], not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, [where, in our expereince? No] 6 whom he (God) poured out on us generously in Jesus Christ our Savior

So "in Christ" we have a new humanity that has obeyed the law of God. Hence we already stand sanctified in Him.

Rob

[Robert]

Glorification

Do we already stand glorified in Christ?

Answer: Yes!

Proof:

Eph 2:4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions--it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus

Col 1:3 For He [God] rescued us from the domain of darkness [this world under Satan], and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

"In Christ" we already have a glorified humanity free from indwelling sin.

As I said "in Christ" we already stand justified, sanctified and glorified.

[Guest truthseeker007]

Rob you are right about all this stuff. Glad to see that at least somebody in here focuses on God s grace rather than God being a harsh legalistic judge.

This has been quite helpfull in understanding why the SDA denomation is such a mess nowadays:

Answer

Randall, thank you for your question about whether Ellen White is a true or false prophet. This is a very controversial issue that is the source of much debate and confusion. However, it is a very misleading question that rests upon a false premise and an incorrect assumption.

Today, Ellen White is very misunderstood by both her critics and her supporters. This is because the Seventh-day Adventist church has not been honest about her role or her theology. Not only did the White Estate suppress and hide thousands of her documents during most of the 20th century, they also deliberately misrepresented her theology, including the position about her doctrinal authority. Thus they have promoted Ellen White in a manner that she would never approve; one that is against the Protestant Hermeneutic and against the fundamentals of the Adventist Faith.

While Ellen White obviously had spiritual gifts, she was not like an Old Testament Prophet as the SDA's have taught, nor does she have any doctrinal authority as if she were an Apostle. Therefore, when the SDA's claim she is a TRUE PROPHET they are very misguided and wrong, and so too the critics that declare she is a FALSE PROPHET. So this exercise about trying to determine if she passes this contrived and fabricated test of a prophet is misguided, pointless and wrong.

The veneration of Ellen White and the embellishment of her as a Prophet was a creation of the Takoma Park apologists. The White Estate is especially guilty of promoting this heresy that none of the Adventist Pioneers, including Ellen White, would ever support. Consequently, the church is paying a horrible price for this fabrication and historical fraud. And until this great error is corrected, the SDA church will continue to self-destruct.

The attitude of the Pioneers towards the writings of Ellen White was vastly different from that held by the 20th century Adventists. In fact, if anyone in the 19th century claimed that her writings represented an inspired commentary on the Bible, or that she had doctrinal authority, Ellen White and the other leaders would have strongly rebuked them. None of the Adventist Pioneers would have ever approved of such a position that was relentlessly promoted by the White Estate.

The Adventist Movement was Protestant. Therefore, the Pioneers made it clear that only the Bible is the correct source for doctrinal truth. In fact, they prohibited Ellen White's writings from being viewed as an authoritative source of doctrine. Which is the exact opposite of how the White Estate promoted Ellen White during the entire 20th century.

Listen to the Adventist Pioneers on this point:

Every Christian is therefore duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say the very moment he does, he places the gifts in a wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position. (James White, Review & Herald, October 3, 1854)

To be sure, there was always a class of persons that wanted to skip the Bible and use Ellen White as a shortcut to truth. There was always a cultic group that became so enamored with Ellen White's spiritual gifts and writings that they wanted to make her into an authoritative source for doctrine and a test of church fellowship. Especially towards the very end of the 19th century and even more so in the 20th century.

But James White repudiated this great error in no uncertain terms. Thus he would have never approved of how a number of people in Battle Creek, after his death, viewed Ellen White (like Irwin, Haskell, and others.) Nor would he have approved how the 20th century leaders promoted Ellen White and made her into an infallible source of doctrinal authority, especially after her death. James White would have hotly condemned the White Estate for the way they promoted Ellen White and he would have demanded that they repent and set the record straight.

Listen to James White on this point:

There is a class of persons who are determined to have it that the Review and its conductors make the view of Mrs. White a Test of doctrine and Christian fellowship. What has the Review to do with Mrs. W.’s views? The sentiments published in its columns are all drawn from the Holy Scriptures. No writer of the Review has ever referred to them as authority on any point. The Review for five years has not published one of them. Its motto has been, The Bible and the Bible alone, the only rule of faith and duty…

It should be here understood that all these views as held by the body of Sabbath-keepers, were brought out from the Scriptures before Mrs. W. had any view in regard to them. These sentiments are founded upon the Scriptures as their only basis. (James White, Review and Herald, Oct. 16 1855)

This is how the great SDA Pioneer and founder James White viewed his wife's gifts. They were NOT doctrinal in nature, nor where they to be used in place of the Bible. They were NOT even the basis for any SDA doctrine or belief. And he invited anyone to correct him if he ever abandoned the Bible as the sole rule of faith and doctrine and looked to some new revelation instead. Listen to James White again:

Every Christian is therefore duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say the very moment he does, he places the gifts in a wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position. (James White, Review & Herald, October 3, 1854)

Now we shall go right along believing and teaching the word of the Lord. This is our business. And if we choose to believe Mrs. W.'s views, which harmonize with the Word, this is our business, and nobody else’s. But if we should leave the word, and look for a rule of faith and duty by some new revelation, then it would be the business of the Church to silence me as a religious teacher. (James White, Gifts of the Gospel Church, p.14)

In fact, while the 20th century church incorrectly promoted Ellen White as an authority for doctrine, and even made belief in her a part of their written fundamental creed in 1980, the Battle Creek SDA's did not do this. Belief in Ellen White was not a test of fellowship, nor was she promoted as such. Listen again to James White on this test point in 1871:

They (SDA's) believe in the perpetuity of spiritual gifts. They believe that the spirit of prophecy has rested upon Mrs. White, and that she is called to do a special work at this time, among this people. They do not, however, make belief in this work a test of fellowship. (Review and Herald, June 13, 1871)

Uriah Smith, the longtime Editor of the Review was also in agreement with the Protestant position of the Battle Creek SDA's. Listen to him make the same point as James White:

The Protestant principle of the Bible and the Bible alone, is of itself good and true; and we stand upon it as firmly as anyone can; but when reiterated in connection with outspoken denunciations of the visions, it has specious appearance for evil. So used, it contains a covert insinuation, most effectually calculated to warp the judgment of the unguarded, that to believe the visions is to leave the Bible, and to cling to the Bible, is to discard the visions. . . . When we claim to stand on the Bible and the Bible alone, we bind ourselves to receive, unequivocally and fully, all that the Bible teaches. Uriah Smith, Editor, Review and Herald, Jan. 13, 1863

Ellen White was also in full agreement with her husband and Uriah Smith. She never claimed to have doctrinal authority as the SDA church teaches today. She was a Protestant, and therefore she understood and upheld the Bible as the only rule of faith and doctrine. Listen to Ellen White on this point:

When God's Word is studied, comprehended, and obeyed, a bright light will be reflected to the world; new truths, received and acted upon, will bind us in strong bonds to Jesus. The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this Holy Word will be in harmony. Our own views and ideas must not control our efforts. Man is fallible, but God's Word is infallible. Instead of wrangling with one another, let men exalt the Lord. Let us meet all opposition, as did our Master, saying, It is written. Let us lift up the banner on which is inscribed; The Bible our rule of faith and discipline. Ellen White, Review and Herald, Dec. 15, 1885.

We must study to find out the best way in which to take up the review of our experiences from the beginning of our work, when we separated from the churches, and went forward step by step in the light that God gave us. We then took the position that the Bible, and the Bible only, was to be our guide; and we are never to depart from this position. We were given wonderful manifestations of the power of God. (Lt 105, 1903. 31)

But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. (The Great Controversy, p. 595)

The words of the Bible, and the Bible alone, should be heard from the pulpit. (Prophets and Kings, p. 626).

Many from among our own people are writing to me, asking with earnest determination the privilege of using my writings to give force to certain subjects that they wish to present to the people in such a way as to leave a deep impression upon them. It is true that there is a reason why some of their matters should be presented; but I would not venture to give my approval in using the Testimonies in this way, or to sanction the placing of matter, which is good in itself in the way which they propose. (Ellen White to Brother Littlejohn, Aug. 3, 1894)

Don’t you quote Sister White. I don’t want you ever to quote Sister White until you get your vantage ground where you know where you are. Quote the Bible. Talk the Bible. It is full of meat, full of fatness. Carry it right out in your life, and you will know more Bible than you know now. (Spaulding-Magan Collection, p. 174).

The testimonies of Sister White should not be carried to the front. God’s Word is the unerring standard. The Testimonies are not to take the place of the Word.... Let all prove the positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim as truth from the revealed Word of God. (Evangelism, p. 256)

The Bible is our rule of faith and doctrine. (Gospel Workers, p. 249)

Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill-defined ideas of what constitutes truth. Their faith must be firmly founded upon the Word of God. (Testimonies, Vol. 5, p. 708).

http://www.presenttruthmag.com/7dayadventist/1844/12.html

Today the SDA church officially teaches that Ellen White has doctrinal authority. This is part of their creed that was developed at Glacier View in 1980. But not only is this against the fundamentals of the Protestant Faith, it is also against the teachings of Ellen White and the Pioneers. In fact, not only do the Adventist Pioneers not support this false hermeneutic, they also do not support any written creed whatsoever.

Listen to James White, in1861, repudiate the notion of a creed and declare that such a position is against the doctrine of Spiritual Gifts:

On the subject of creeds, I agree with Brother Loughborough. I never weighed the points, which he has presented, as I have since I began to examine the subject myself. In Ephesians 4: 11-13, we read; And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets, et cetera. Here we have the gifts of the church presented. Now I take the ground that creeds stand in a direct opposition to the gifts. Let us suppose a case: We get up a creed, stating just what we shall believe on this point and the other, and just what we shall do in reference to this thing and that, and say that we will believe the gifts, too. {1BIO 454.1}

But suppose the Lord, through the gifts, should give us some new light that did not harmonize with our creed; then, if we remain true to the gifts, it knocks our creed all over at once. Making a creed is setting the stakes, and barring up the way to all future advancement. God put the gifts into the church for a good and great object; but men who have got up their churches, have shut up the way or have marked out a course for the Almighty. They say virtually that the Lord must not do anything further than what has been marked out in the creed. {1BIO 454.2}

A creed and the gifts thus stand in direct opposition to each other. Now what is our position as a people? The Bible is our creed. We reject everything in the form of a human creed. We take the Bible and the gifts of the Spirit; embracing the faith that thus the Lord will teach us from time to time. And in this we take a position against the formation of a creed. We are not taking one step, in what we are doing, toward becoming Babylon. Ibid. {1BIO 454.3}

But the SDA's in the 20th century have repudiated their founders, and promoted a written creed called the 28 Fundamentals. Including number 18 that gives Ellen White doctrinal authority. But neither she nor any Adventist Pioneer would accept this creed. Thus the modern Adventists have repudiated her position that The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed. (Selected Messages Vol. 1, p. 416)

http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/fundamental/index.html

For generations, the SDA's have been dishonestly promoting creedal doctrines about hermeneutics, and many other things, that have no support from Ellen White or the Pioneers.

Listen to Dr. Ford correctly explain how to view Ellen White. Not as a prophet or an Apostle, but as someone who had the gifts of the Spirit as taught by the New Testament:

In the Glacier View manuscript and in The Adventist Crisis of Spiritual Identity, I have discussed the role of E.G. White at great length. She had the gift of prophecy spoken of in l Corinthians 14 which is not identical with that of the canonical writers of Scripture (see l Cor. 14:29 and l Thess. 5:19-21 for clear statements that the gift in our day—since the completion of the canon—is not infallible). Ellen White never claimed infallibility and her writings should be studied as those of a great church leader and pastor but not as a Bible.

Yes, it was my supposed threat to Ellen White that contributed to the Glacier View debacle. I have highly valued the writings of Ellen White since my first encounter with them. But for the last fifty years, I have accepted her own warnings that her writings were not to be used as Scripture and that the Bible—and the Bible only—is our source of doctrine. Were she living today, she would say the same thing as she said during the long theological debate over the daily (see SM, vol. 1, pp. 164ff). During that debate, she told the brethren not to use her statements but to go to the Bible.

http://www.adventistreform.com/DrFordInterviewP2.html#Q8

Dr. Ford has also correctly said that #18 of the Fundamental SDA creed needs to be revised:

Article 18, The Gift of Prophecy: This needs rewording. The gift of prophecy has always been in the church and was not reserved just for the remnant yet to be developed. If I remember rightly, our early pioneers, including the Whites, interpreted Revelation 19:10 more broadly than we have in recent decades. I think the word, authoritative, should be removed as it implies infallibility, which Ellen White rejected. (Ibid)

After the death of Ellen White, the Takoma Park White Estate incorrectly embellished and elevated the role and authority of Ellen White far beyond anything what the Adventist Pioneers envisioned or allowed. Listen to the White Estate double-talk about Ellen White.

Her inspiration is equal in quality to the inspiration of the Bible, but the function and purpose of Ellen White's inspiration is different from that of the Bible. A parallel is found in Scripture. The prophet Nathan was as fully inspired as King David, but Nathan's inspiration had a different function from David's. David's inspired writings became a part of the canon of Scripture. Nathan's inspiration did not result in any canonical writings.

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/whitelie.html#bible

But this comparison of Ellen White with an OT prophet is absurd. It has no NT basis. Ellen White did not live in the OT but only in the NT era. So there can be no such comparison. And it is even more absurd to say that she is like Nathan the prophet, because he was inspired but did not author any writings. Why? Because, unlike Nathan, Ellen White wrote thousands of pages of so called inspired writings. So she was not like the pen less Nathan at all, but more like David, who wrote lots of scripture! So this makes no sense.

The White Estate goes on to say that;

One cannot make differences in the quality of inspiration because inspiration is either present or absent, so that various manifestations of it cannot be distinguished by degrees. The Holy Spirit was just as careful in the superintendence of Nathan's inspired messages as in David's writings, although, in harmony with the divine purpose, only the latter were incorporated into the canon. (The truth About the White Lie, by the White Estate, cited above)

However, since when is the Protestant Hermeneutic confused about inspiration? This is nonsense. Ellen White has no authority about doctrine; regardless of how much INSPIRATION she was given. It doesn't matter if she had a vision every hour on the hour. She has zero doctrinal authority. Her quality of inspiration is not like that of the Old Testament Prophets or the NT Apostles and therefore it can never be like those who ALONE have doctrinal authority for the church.

Thus the whole argument by the SDA denomination is silly, illogical, and against the Protestant Hermeneutic. Ellen White does NOT have any doctrinal authority. She is NOT a PROPHET as they claim, nor is she inspired like the OT prophets or the Apostles. Therefore she does not write scripture, or anything close to it. The fact that she had genuine spiritual gifts, as delineated in the NT, in no way makes her inspiration like that of anyone who wrote scripture. The White Estate is guilty of deceiving generations of SDA's about Ellen White and Adventist hermeneutics and they should be ashamed of themselves.

It is time for the White Estate to confess this nonsense that they have taught for so long. Ellen White would not approve of what they teach about her. They have misled and deceived the Adventist Community about all this for generations, and it has had a devastating effect upon the church.

But to this very day, the SDA's refuse to tell the truth about Ellen White. Rather, they continue to double-talk and play word games. Thus, when cornered about Ellen White they say:

Ellen White's writings do not function as a standard or rule for doctrine. The Bible does function in this manner. In this sense Ellen White does not have equal doctrinal authority with the Bible.

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-insp.html

So in essence the White Estate claims that Ellen White has the same inspiration as the bible writers, but not the same authority. How does that work? It does not work. It is semantics and word games. Because the moment one admits that Ellen White has scriptural like inspiration, then it logically follows that her writings must also be authoritative like the Bible. Even becoming an inspired commentary on scripture. Which is what the SDA's actually teach.

Listen to Morris Venden say exactly that, with the full approval of the White Estate:

There is hope for every remnant believer today who sometimes feels confused at all the differing views taken by different scholars and commentaries. We have that which was given for the purpose of settling the disagreements among the uninspired commentaries. What do you do when the scholars disagree? Do you have to become a better scholar than the best in order to settle the disagreement in your own mind? No, let me repeat. God has given to our church an inspired commentary to settle the disagreements among the uninspired commentaries. And we can still be thankful for that today. (Morris Venden, The Pillars, p. 30, 1980)

In fact, the church is on record as officially claiming that Ellen White has doctrinal authority. This is what was proclaimed at Glacier View and this is what they proclaim in their creed, which was approved at the General Conference Session in Dallas in 1980. Here is a portion of the official Statement of Fundamental Beliefs that was adopted:

One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As 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. (Statement of Fundamental Beliefs, 1980)

So there it is for all to see. In spite of their double-talk, the SDA's clearly teach that Ellen White's writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth. Therefore, they are guilty of a great hermeneutical deception, as well as an historical one. The real Ellen White, and all the Pioneers, repudiates this nonsense. It is not true or valid and no one should be taken in by the dishonest and self-serving White Estate. Only when the church changes their present position about Ellen White can the Adventist Church become a credible Protestant denomination. Until then they are a confused and dishonest cult.

It should be noted that at the end of her life, Ellen White predicted exactly what would happen to her reputation and why. Not only have legions denounced her as a false prophet, as she predicted, but they have done so because her testimony has been misrepresented by the church in such a manner as to change what she called the truth of God into a lie. Thus, many minds, of both her supporters and her critics, have been deceived and misled about Ellen White's status and authority. Which is why there is a useless and endless debate over whether she is a false or true prophet. She is not a Prophet at all, at least not like the White Estate has promoted.

Listen to Ellen White make what has to be one of her greatest predictions. There can be little doubt that she was correct. In fact, she hit a prophetic bulls eye by saying:

I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT MANY WOULD …DENOUNCE MY WORK AS THAT OF A FALSE PROPHET, AND WOULD PLACE UPON THE TESTIMONY SUCH INTERPRETATIONS AS TEND TO CHANGE THE TRUTH OF GOD INTO A LIE. SATAN IS ON THE ALERT; AND SOME WHO IN THE PAST HAVE BEEN USED BY THE LORD IN DOING HIS WORK, BUT WHO HAVE PERMITTED THEMSELVES TO BE DECEIVED, WILL BE STIRRED UP TO MAKE AN IMPROPER USE OF THE MESSAGES GIVEN. BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WISH TO LISTEN TO THE WORDS OF REPROOF, BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT HEAR COUNSEL, AND IMPROVE THEIR COURSE OF ACTION, AND DO THEIR APPOINTED WORK, THEY WILL MISCONSTRUE THE MESSAGES TO THE CHURCH, AND CONFUSE MANY MINDS. (GCB, June 1, 1913 par. 22, 23, June 1, 1913 CONFIDENCE IN GOD W. C. WHITE, MAY 30, 8:30 A. M.)

The facts are clear that once in Takoma Park, the denomination turned Ellen White into a posthumous theological genie in a bottle that supported their every whim. They made her into a prophet like Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy and used her as a celebrity for marketing purposes to gain members as well as to control and manipulate the members.

Although they made it seem like they were honestly representing Ellen White, they were deceiving the people as they deliberately misrepresented her theology, suppressing her true position about hermeneutics and other important points as well as hiding her most damning reproofs to the leaders deep in the White Estate vaults. Thus, the leaders have horribly deceived the Adventist Community about Ellen White's role and authority, as well as her theology about many other things. And they are still doing it today.

The SDA organization has been very dishonest about Ellen White. Arthur White has done more harm and damage to her reputation then all the critics combined. And at some point the Adventist Community needs to hold the White Estate accountable for what they have done. More than that, they need to understand the real Ellen White and stop this silly and useless debate about whether she a true or false prophet.

Ellen White is not a prophet in the sense that SDA's were taught. While she has great authority in the church as a leader and co-founder, she has no doctrinal authority and her writings are not canonical. The fact that she had spiritual gifts as taught in the NT does not make her into an Old Testament prophet who wrote scripture, much less into an Apostle with doctrinal authority for the church.

Ellen White understood the Protestant Faith and she never thought her writings were on a par with scripture or that she had any doctrinal authority. In fact, she was wrong about a number of theological points, and thus had to change her position about the Sabbath, the Law, and the Gospel. But the White Estate has failed to explain or promote these historical facts. Even as they have failed to explain that neither her powerful husband James White or the other Battle Creek Adventists gave her doctrinal authority. The White Estate is guilty of promoting serious historical and theological error in this matter

I hope that this answer helps both the supporters and critics of Ellen White to better understand the issues. Everyone needs to stop pursuing these diversionary, false, and irrelevant issues about Ellen White that interfere with the true and legitimate issues about Adventist theology.

Tom Norris, for All Experts.com & Adventist Reform.com

[oldsailor29]

Prophets of God understand how divine inspiration works. Belief in the fundamentalist doctrine of Bible inerrancy reveals a lack of such knowledge. The OT prophets and other writers were not inerrant. The Bible is not inerrant. The decisions about which writings to include in the canon were not inerrant.

Saying that Ellen White had spiritual gifts, but was not a prophet, devalues spiritual gifts in general. I see it as part of the misguided movement in the church, to elevate talents to the level of spiritual gifts. Ellen White was a messenger of God. She was taken in vision to the divine council, just like all the other true prophets.

And as an added bonus, I will illustrate the difference between a talent and a spiritual gift. We can learn other languages and we can be multilingual and know many tongues. This is a talent. It is easier for some people than for others. The spiritual gift of tongues involves languages which are not known, unknown tongues. When someone speaks in a language which they do not know, that is a spiritual gift. It is the Holy Spirit speaking through them. Another one - A talented marksman is able to shoot and kill a lion, if all goes well. The Holy Spirit acting through a person can rip a lion to shreds as easily as a lion could rip a baby goat. That's what the story of Samson says. See the difference? A talented person can learn to do things in their field of talent, but a person with a spiritual gift performs by being filled with the Holy Spirit, who acts through them. A talented doctor can patch us up, but a divine healing uses God's power of creation to renew the sick. So, don't let some highly educated Sabbath School Quarterly contributor slick talk you into believing they are the same. Don't devalue spiritual gifts, and don't elevate talents. They are totally different.

[True-believer]

I think your reading too much into it truth-seeker???

[Maschil]

Brother Truthseeker...

The Law and the Prophets

The Flood

i.) Long term prophet – Enoch (Jude 14)

(a) Methuselah – “when he is dead, it shall be sent”

(i) Gen. 5:25 – Methuselah 187 when Lamech was born

(ii) Gen. 5:28 – Lamech 182 when Noah was born

(iii) Gen. 7:11 – Noah 600 years when the flood came

(iv) Gen. 5:27 – Methuselah 969 when he died

ii.) Short term prophet – Noah

iii.) Remnant – Noah’s family

The Exodus

i.) Long term prophet – Abraham (Gen. 20:7; 15:12-15)

(a) If Paul (Gal. 3:16-17) refers to the first promise made to Abram in Haran (Gen. 12:1–3), the 430 years began when Abram was 75 years old (ch. 12:4). The 400 years of affliction would then begin 30 years later, when Abram was 105 and his son Isaac 5 years old (ch. 21:5). This would be about the time Ishmael, who “was born after the flesh persecuted him [isaac] that was born after the Spirit” (Gal. 4:29; Gen. 21:9–11). - SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 1, p. 314.

ii.) Short term prophet – Moses (Deut. 18:18; Hos. 12:13; Ex. 12:41)

iii.) Remnant – Israelites who left Egypt

The Messiah

i.) Long term prophet – Daniel

ii.) Short term prophet – John the Baptist

iii.) Remnant – Those who believed in Him

The 2300 Day Prophecy

i.) Long term prophet – Daniel

ii.) Short term prophet – Ellen White

iii.) Remnant – Those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus

The law and the prophets

a. The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war… (Rev. 12:17)

i.) There is a deep significance to this text, especially these two characteristics – the law and the prophets. These two go hand in hand. This theme is consistent throughout the Scripture, and we are going to look at a few texts to establish this.

b. The law and the prophets go together

i.) Ps. 78:5 – God established a testimony and a law

ii.) Ac. 24:14 – believing all things written in the law and the prophets

iii.) Is. 8:16, 20 – bind up the testimony, seal the law…

iv.) Is. 30:9-10 – won’t hear the law, tell prophets to “prophesy smooth things…”

v.) Prov. 29:18 – where there is no vision… happy is he who keeps the law

c. However, God’s people rebelled against the law and the prophets.

i.) Neh. 9:26 – they cast the law behind their backs and slew the prophets

ii.) Is. 30:10 – won’t hear law, tell prophets to prophesy “smooth things”

iii.) Jer. 18:18 – the law shall not perish… nor the word from the prophet

d. God warned that their apostasy would not go unpunished. If they continued to reject his law, he would remove the prophetic ministry from their midst and leave them to the delusions they had chosen.

i.) Jer. 26:4-6 – If you will not listen to the law or the prophets…

ii.) Ezek. 7:26 – they shall seek a vision from the prophet, the law shall perish from the priest

iii.) Zech 7:10-13 – lest they should hear the law… and… the prophets

iv.) Prov. 28:9 – He who turns his ear from hearing the law…

v.) Lam. 2:8-9 – the law is no more, prophets find no vision

Here’s the point – the law and the prophets go together. Those who refused to obey God’s law also refused to heed the voice of His prophets. Those who rejected His prophets, also rejected His law (regardless their profession – Jer. 18:18). Because of their rebellion, God removed the law and the prophets from His people. Yet the Lord did not leave His people alone. He promised that, if obedient, He would restore the prophetic gift to His church.

[Maschil]

The Authority of the Prophet

a. “By whose authority…?” (Luke 20:1-8).

i.) What is the question of the priests, scribes and elders? “Where did you get your authority?” Jesus had just cleansed the temple the second time. “Who authorized you to do this?”

(a) Does Jesus answer them? Only with a question. “You tell me, where did John the Baptist get his authority?” They refused to answer His question, so Jesus refused to answer theirs. Why?

b. Those who rejected John the Baptist rejected Christ (Luke 7:24-30).

i.) John was to prepare the way before Christ. Notice what happened: Those who received John’s ministry and baptism also received the teaching of Jesus. Those who rejected the ministry of John also rejected Jesus.

c. Those who rejected the servants rejected the Son (Luke 20:9-14).

i.) The issue is one of authority – Jesus would enter into no debate. The priests, scribes and elders asked Him where He received His authority. He responded by asking them where John the Baptist received his authority, because He knew that if they could recognize John’s authority they would recognize His; if they could not recognize John’s authority, He would be wasting His time in answering them. If they could not recognize God speaking through His prophet, neither would they hear God’s voice speaking through His Son.

d. “He that receiveth you receiveth me… (Mt. 10:41-2; Eze. 3:4-7)

i.) You see, it is God who speaks through the prophet His messages of warning and reproof, as well as comfort and encouragement. Those who reject the prophet are in reality rejecting the one who sent them.

e. The Bible and the Bible only (Jn. 9:28-9; 5:44-7)

i.) In essence, the religious leaders said, “We have Moses, and that’s all we need. Moses and Moses only!” Had they truly received Moses, wouldn’t they have received Christ, whom Moses said would come (Deut. 18:18-19)?

(a) “I am come in my Father’s name and you receive me not… (Jn. 5:44-7)

(i) You are not familiar with the Scriptures. If you had made God's word your study, with a desire to reach the Bible standard and attain to Christian perfection, you would not have needed the Testimonies. It is because you have neglected to acquaint yourselves with God's inspired Book that He has sought to reach you by simple, direct testimonies, calling your attention to the words of inspiration which you had neglected to obey, and urging you to fashion your lives in accordance with its pure and elevated teachings. (5T 664)

f. “They knew Him not, neither yet the voice of the prophets… (Ac. 13:27; 1 Thes. 2:15)

i.) Note here that those Jewish leaders who rejected the messages of the prophets ended up fulfilling those messages in their rejection of God and His Son, Jesus Christ. If one would have told them early on that their failure to conform their lives entirely to the prophetic messages would result in their rejection of their own Messiah, they would surely have scoffed at the idea. Likewise today, there is an unsettling overconfidence in our own ability to “steer our own vessel safely into the harbor” (6BC 1108). Could it be possible that our failure to conform our lives to the messages of the prophet could lead us to be unprepared for our Savior’s return?

g. “If they hear not Moses and the prophets… (Lk. 16:27-31)

i.) Lk. 23:8-9. Why didn’t Jesus answer any of Herod’s questions? Because he had already given him every opportunity of hearing the truth through the message of John the Baptist. There was nothing more to say.

(a) When a view of Scripture is presented, many do not ask, Is it true--in harmony with God's word? but, By whom is it advocated? and unless it comes through the very channel that pleases them, they do not accept it. So thoroughly satisfied are they with their own ideas that they will not examine the Scripture evidence with a desire to learn, but refuse to be interested, merely because of their prejudices. The Lord often works where we least expect Him; He surprises us by revealing His power through instruments of His own choice, while He passes by the men to whom we have looked as those through whom light should come. God desires us to receive the truth upon its own merits--because it is truth. (TM 106)

( Whoever turns from the light in one instance hardens his heart to disregard the light upon other matters. Whoever violates moral obligations in the matter of eating and dressing prepares the way to violate the claims of God in regard to eternal interests. (3T 63)

© Had Elder Smith, and those united with him, been standing in the light, they would have recognized the voice of warning and reproof; but he calls it a human work, and casts it aside. The work he is doing he will wish undone ere long. He is weaving a net around himself that he cannot easily break. This is not my opinion. What voice will you acknowledge as the voice of God? What power has the Lord in reserve to correct your errors, and show you your course as it is?… You have, by your own course, closed every avenue whereby the Lord would reach you. Will he raise one from the dead to speak to you? If you refuse to believe until every shadow of uncertainty, and every possibility of doubt is removed, you will never believe. The doubt that demands perfect knowledge will never yield to faith… The word of the Lord comes to us all who have not resisted his Spirit by determining not to hear and obey. This voice is heard in warnings, in counsels, in reproof. It is the Lord's message of light to his people. If we wait for louder calls, or better opportunities, the light may be withdrawn, and we left in darkness. (Pamphlet 117, p. 51; a portion found in 3SM 69)

h. No Remedy (2 Chr. 36:14-16)

i.) [some of the Brethren] talk flippantly of the Testimonies given of God for the benefit of His people, and pass judgment upon them, giving their opinions and criticizing this and that, when they would better place their hands upon their lips and lie with their faces in the dust; for they know no more of the spirit of the Testimonies than they do of the Spirit of God. (4T 443)

Thank God for the prophetic guidance He has given us! We don’t have to spend our precious time chasing the devil’s rabbits – church steeples, head coverings, feast days, the personality of the Holy Spirit, etc. We have a wonderful lighthouse to guide us safely home; to shed light on the way when we can’t see, and to redirect our course when we are going the wrong way. We have wonderful counsel on how to live as Christians, how to care for our bodies, how to raise our children, how to educate them, how to share Christ with those around us. Why is it that we spend so much time reading the works of uninspired authors even to the exclusion of inspiration? If an angel from heaven were to appear with a heavenly message, how many would flock to hear all about it? How much would people be willing to pay just for the smallest piece of heavenly instruction? Why is it we have to a great degree neglected this wonderful gift of light? Are we afraid we may have to change our course? My dear friends, if this light fails to stir us, greater light can do no more. If we wait for louder calls, we may be left in darkness. Today, will you divert your course, commit your ways to the Lord, and walk fully in the light?

[Maschil]

Ellen White answers objections

How our doctrines were formed

Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid… I met with [founders of the movement], and we studied and prayed earnestly. Often we remained together until late at night, and sometimes through the entire night, praying for light and studying the Word. Again and again these brethren came together to study the Bible, in order that they might know its meaning, and be prepared to teach it with power. When they came to the point in their study where they said, "We can do nothing more," the Spirit of the Lord would come upon me, I would be taken off in vision, and a clear explanation of the passages we had been studying would be given me, with instruction as to how we were to labor and teach effectively. Thus light was given that helped us to understand the scriptures in regard to Christ, His mission, and His priesthood. A line of truth extending from that time to the time when we shall enter the city of God, was made plain to me, and I gave to others the instruction that the Lord had given me. (1SM 206)

You claim to believe the testimonies

You say that Anna's visions place the forming of the image of the beast after probation closes. This is not so. You claim to believe the testimonies; let them set you right on this point. The Lord has shown me clearly that the image of the beast will be formed before probation closes; for it is to be the great test for the people of God, by which their eternal destiny will be decided. (2SM 80)

Enabled to define truth

We are to be established in the faith, in the light of the truth given us in our early experience. At that time one error after another pressed in upon us; ministers and doctors [“educated scholars”] brought in new doctrines. We would search the Scriptures with much prayer, and the Holy Spirit would bring the truth to our minds. Sometimes whole nights would be devoted to searching the Scriptures, and earnestly asking God for guidance. Companies of devoted men and women assembled for this purpose. The power of God would come upon me, and I was enabled clearly to define what is truth and what is error. (GW 302)

Counsel from God or Ellen White’s Opinion? (see Jer. 29:27)

After I wrote you the long letter which has been belittled by Elder H as merely an expression of my own opinion, while at the Southern California Camp Meeting, the Lord partially removed the restriction, and I write what I do. I dare not say more now, lest I go beyond what the Spirit of the Lord has permitted me... Had Elder H, and those united with him, been standing in the light, they would have recognized the voice of warning and reproof; but he calls it a human work, and casts it aside. The work he is doing he will wish undone ere long. He is weaving a net around himself that he cannot easily break. This is not my opinion. In the testimonies sent to Battle Creek, I have given you the light God has given to me. In no case have I given my own judgment or opinion. I have enough to write of what has been shown me, without falling back on my own opinions. You are doing as the children of Israel did again and again. Instead of repenting before God, you reject His words, and attribute all the warnings and reproof to the messenger whom the Lord sends.--Testimony for the Battle Creek Church, pp. 50-58 (1882). (3SM 69, 70)

How to help the devil

I have my work to do, to meet the misconceptions of those who suppose themselves able to say what is testimony from God and what is human production. If those who have done this work continue in this course, satanic agencies will choose for them… Those who have helped souls to feel at liberty to specify what is of God in the Testimonies and what are the uninspired words of Sister White, will find that they were helping the devil in his work of deception. Please read Testimony No. 33, page 211 [Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 682], "How to Receive Reproof."--Letter 28, 1906. (3SM 70)

(a) If Ellen white as a prophet of God can’t clearly define truth and error, what makes Graeme Bradford or anyone else think that they have the ability? If God can’t keep His own prophet from speaking error, how can we assume that He is able to enable scholars to discern the error?

( The reality is that everything is a matter of interpretation. Since we didn’t write the Bible, for example, we all are left with the option of interpreting it. We may choose to disagree with Ellen White’s interpretation of the text, but whose interpretation are we then left with? Our own.

Whose message?

i.) Permit me to express my mind, and yet not my mind, but the word of the Lord.--Letter 89, 1899. (Quoted in Counsels to Writers and Editors, p. 112). (3SM 70)

(a) Even though the prophet speaks through plenary inspiration, that does not in any sense change the fact that the message is of God; the words are His.

Where there is no special light

i.) I am not at liberty to write to our brethren concerning your future work.... I have received no instruction regarding the place where you should locate.... If the Lord gives me definite instruction concerning you, I will give it you; but I cannot take upon myself responsibilities that the Lord does not give me to bear.--Letter 96, 1909. (3SM 51)

As indelible as God’s law

i.) How many have read carefully Patriarchs and Prophets, The Great Controversy, and The Desire of Ages? I wish all to understand that my confidence in the light that God has given stands firm, because I know that the Holy Spirit's power magnified the truth, and made it honorable, saying: "This is the way, walk ye in it." In my books, the truth is stated, barricaded by a "Thus saith the Lord." The Holy Spirit traced these truths upon my heart and mind as indelibly as the law was traced by the finger of God, upon the tables of stone…--Letter 90, 1906. (CM 126.2)

Not one heretical sentence

I am now looking over my diaries and copies of letters written for several years back… I have the most precious matter to reproduce and place before the people in testimony form. While I am able to do this work, the people must have things to revive past history, that they may see that there is one straight chain of truth, without one heretical sentence, in that which I have written. (3SM 52)

Common things

But there are times when common things must be stated, common thoughts must occupy the mind, common letters must be written and information given that has passed from one to another of the workers. Such words, such information, are not given under the special inspiration of the Spirit of God. Questions are asked at times that are not upon religious subjects at all, and these questions must be answered. --Manuscript 107, 1909. (1SM 39)

No need for confusion

NOTE: EXCEPT FOR THAT WHICH IS IN THE NATURE OF EVERYDAY MATTERS OR BIOGRAPHICAL, THAT WHICH MRS. WHITE SET BEFORE THE PEOPLE WAS BASED UPON THE VISIONS GIVEN TO HER, WHETHER OR NOT SHE USED THE TERM "I SAW." SHE, IN HER DAY, AND WE TODAY, DRAW THE LINE, NOT BETWEEN BOOKS AND LETTERS, ET CETERA, BUT BETWEEN THE SACRED AND THE COMMON. NO ONE NEED BE CONFUSED. (3SM 60)

The more self is exalted

The more self is exalted, the more will faith in the Testimonies of the Spirit of God be lessened. . . . Those who trust wholly in themselves will see less and less of God in the Testimonies of His Spirit.“ (5T 681).

i.) “Are we not free…?”

(a) “I die daily.”

(i) On another occasion I spoke in reference to genuine sanctification, which is nothing less than a daily dying to self and daily conformity to the will of God. While in Oregon I was shown that some of the young churches of the New England Conference were in danger through the blighting influence of what is called sanctification. Some would become deceived by this doctrine, while others, knowing its deceptive influence, would realize their danger and turn from it. Paul's sanctification was a constant conflict with self. Said he: "I die daily." His will and his desires every day conflicted with duty and the will of God. Instead of following inclination, he did the will of God, however unpleasant and crucifying to his nature. (4T 299)

Prostrated in the dust

I was shown that many had so little spirituality that they did not understand the value of the Testimonies or their real object. They talked flippantly of the Testimonies given by God for the benefit of His people, and passed judgment upon them, giving their opinion and criticizing this and that, when they would better have placed their hands upon their lips, and prostrated themselves in the dust; for they could not appreciate the spirit of the Testimonies, because they knew so little of the Spirit of God. (4T 443; 5T 672)

( Note: 5T, “Nature and Influence of the Testimonies,” explains the value of the Testimonies and their real object.

Tearing away the barrier

Where there is no vision, the people cast off restraint – Prov. 29:18, nkjv

The enemy has made his masterly efforts to unsettle the faith of our own people in the Testimonies, and when these errors come in they claim to prove all the positions by the Bible, but they misinterpret the Scriptures. They make bold assertions… and misapply the prophecies and the Scriptures to prove falsehood. And, after men have done their work in weakening the confidence of our churches in the Testimonies, they have torn away the barrier, that unbelief in the truth shall become widespread, and there is no voice to be lifted up to stay the force of error. (3SM 83)

When the testimonies are given up

One thing is certain: Those Seventh-day Adventists who take their stand under Satan's banner will first give up their faith in the warnings and reproofs contained in the Testimonies of God's Spirit. (3SM 84)

If it were possible

Men may get up scheme after scheme, and the enemy will seek to seduce souls from the truth, but all who believe that the Lord has spoken through Sister White, and has given her a message, will be safe from the many delusions that will come in these last days.--Letter 50, 1906. (3SM 83)

When my ideas are crossed

Many times in my experience I have been called upon to meet the attitude of a certain class, who acknowledged that the testimonies were from God, but took the position that this matter and that matter were Sister White's opinion and judgment… If the preconceived opinions or particular ideas of some are crossed in being reproved by testimonies, they have a burden at once to make plain their position to discriminate between the testimonies, defining what is Sister White's human judgment, and what is the word of the Lord. Everything that sustains their cherished ideas is divine, and the testimonies to correct their errors are human--Sister White's opinions. They make of none effect the counsel of God by their tradition.-- Manuscript 16, 1889. (3SM 68)

It appears that Ellen White is not at all in agreement with Bradford, et. al.’s conclusions. The “defense” offered by Bradford, like so many today, is a more of a defense for him than for the prophet. It is a very supportive-sounding excuse for not receiving that which she has written as a true prophetic utterance.

Study the Testimonies

The volumes of Spirit of Prophecy, and also the Testimonies, should be introduced into every Sabbathkeeping family, and the brethren should know their value and be urged to read them. It was not the wisest plan to place these books at a low figure and have only one set in a church. They should be in the library of every family and read again and again. Let them be kept where they can be read by many, and let them be worn out in being read by all the neighbors. {4T 390.3}

I am instructed to say to our churches, Study the Testimonies. They are written for our admonition and encouragement, upon whom the ends of the world are come. If God's people will not study these messages that are sent to them from time to time, they are guilty of rejecting light… The Lord has a controversy with His people because in the past they have not heeded His instruction and followed His guidance. {3SM 358.2}

Consider with much prayer.... God Bless

[Robert]

Do not think that, because we have a glimmer of the light of God, that we have it all.--Ms. 3, 1889, pp. 1-3. (Morning Talk at Ottawa, Kansas, May 14, 1889.)

The question has been asked me, "Do you think that the Lord has any more light for us as a people?" I answer that He has light that is new to us, and yet it is precious old light that is to shine forth from the Word of truth [the Bible]. We have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light that is yet to come to us. [1SM 401]

We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. [CW 37]