Through the Bible: Genesis

[Nic Samojluk]

For instance, some think she was wrong about masturbation, and therefore they think it's OK. But they are wrong. Ellen White was not wrong about it. Masturbation is a sin. We don't need it verified by science in order to know it is wrong,

[Nic Samojluk]

She says clearly that the Holy Spirit is a Person and has a personality

What we need to do is to compare the evidence we find in the Bible with what Ellen White has written. I have done that and have concluded that I am safer believing the evidence I find in Scripture.

The evidence from the book of Daniel is too strong to be ignored. See my reference and my comments I have made about this in my previous postings. You have never given me a satisfactory explanation for this so far.

[Nic Samojluk]

I was wondering what subject Dr. Richard Koobs taught. I assume medicine and not theology.

[Nic Samojluk]

I can't see how the angel being used of God to teach Daniel the meaning of the vision is evidence that the angel took the place of the Holy Spirit. God is able to assign various work to both angels and men, including teaching people His truth, but of course that doesn't mean we're the Holy Spirit.

The clue is found in Daniel 10:21. Why would Gabriel tell Daniel that there is nobody else assisting him except Michael. He could have said: This is the task of the Holy Spirit, but God for some reason asked me to replace him. How do you explain this, if you keep in mind that the HS is omnipresent.

Daniel had to wait for 21 days for the prophetic revelation to resume. Since the HS is omnipresent, there was no reason for the 21 delay revealed in Scripture. The HS could have taken over the task of revealing the future to Daniel in the absence of Gabriel; after all the task of revealing the future belongs to the HS, according to 2 Peter 1:21.

[Nic Samojluk]

But if you object to discussing what Ellen White wrote on the Godhead or the Holy Spirit, I won't mention her writings any more but will only discuss the Bible with you.

I have no problem with the use of Ellen White material, as long as the emphasis is placed on the Bible and as long as we agree that the final authority regarding any doctrinal issue must be settled on what Scripture says and not the writings of Mrs. White.

[Nic Samojluk]

Do you believe an angel would say, "Set apart for me these men for the work to which I have called them"?

[Nic Samojluk]

Second, why do you understand "the Holy Spirit" here to be an invisible presence when elsewhere you understand "the Holy Spirit" to be the angel Gabriel?

[Nic Samojluk]

Notice that when Jesus was on earth, we had God with us. Matt. 1: 23. But when He left, He and the Father sent a different Comforter to be with us, and He is also God. Therefore, through the Spirit, God is truly with us in a literal sense.

[Nic Samojluk]

Are you saying you see no fundamental difference between the human spirit and the Holy Spirit? Do you see the Holy Spirit as comparable to the human spirit?

The Holy Spirit is Jesus spiritually dwelling in us. Don’t confuse our human spirit with the Spirit of Jesus dwelling in us!

[Nic Samojluk]

But that is not what Ellen White is saying.

[Nic Samojluk]

John3:17: : Matt. 1: 18, 20 is not saying that Mary was found to be with child of the holy breath. She was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.

[Nic Samojluk]

2) She says we need the continued GUIDING of the Holy Spirit. That shows the Holy Spirit guides and teaches us. Only a person can guide and teach a person.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

The discovery of the heavy dependence of Ellen White on other sources besides her visions was made by Walter Rae, not Desmond Ford.

"Discovery" is a poor choice of words. "Accusation" is better.

Quote:

Some critics have accused Ellen White of plagiarizing the contents of The Desire of Ages from the writings of various authors. But, did she really? Below is an analysis of one chapter of The Desire of Ages for which examples of alleged plagiarism are given. This particular one is from Walter Rea found online at http://www.ellenwhite.org/egw89.htm. In this case, Rea simply claims that Ellen G. White was simply "paraphrasing" pages 433-448 of Daniel March's Night Scenes in the Bible when she wrote this chapter. But, without actually presenting the evidence this claim cannot be evaluated.

Since Rea failed to present the evidence to support his claim it is now presented here. What we want to do here is to determine whether the critics did a fair analysis, or whether their comparisons actually distorted the real situation. Accordingly, we have color-coded the text so that you, the reader, can easily come to your own conclusion. (http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/David/DA_85_rea.html)

Unfortunately, many have the idea that error can be made into truth simply by repeating it.

The following site, http://dedication.www3.50megs.com/David/index.html, shows a meticulous comparison of every chapter of "The Desire of Ages" which the authors that Ellen White allegedly borrowed, or "plagiarized," from.

The truth is set before us in black and white. Anyone can look at the sources, and see for themselves what the truth is, as well as the tactics that Rea and others have used.

Go to the web site and see! The truth has nothing to fear from investigation.

[pnattmbtc]

This is what I have been telling you. Here is an example where you have to make a choice: either to believe Jesus or Ellen White. Jesus said it would be himself who would come and abide with the disciples and live in them, but Ellen says it would be a third person. Make your choice. I am choosing what Jesus said over the opinion of Ellen.

You said elsewhere that you believe Ellen White to be an inspired prophet. Yet here you're speaking of a choice we must make, between Jesus Christ, and an inspired prophet.

Does this choice apply to other inspired prophets as well? Or only Ellen White?

[Nic Samojluk]

Also notice what she does not say here: she doesn't say that we will one day discover that the main pillars of our faith are a mistake. What she is saying is that we will learn more truth, not that we will learn that Ellen White misled us into false doctrines and teachings.

[Nic Samojluk]

Nic, she is not contradicting what is found in the same book on pages 52-54. For instance, is she talking about the foundational pillars of our faith like the Sabbath and the Second Coming, the state of the dead, etc. Absolutely not. God will certainly help us understand those doctrines more clearly, but it won't be a matter of God showing someone that the Sabbath or the Investigative Judgment-- or truths that God revealed to Ellen White, such as the health message--- are false.

[Nic Samojluk]

The difference is that in the Bible "the Holy Spirit," "the Spirit of God," and "the Spirit," are shown to be a distinct person, and our own spirits are not. Ellen White also says plainly that the Holy Spirit is a distinct person.

[Nic Samojluk]

I accept everything just like I accept all of the Bible.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: John

I accept everything just like I accept all of the Bible.

Do you really accept everything we find in the Bible, including the errors introduced into the sacred pages by copyists who, according to Ellen White, wanted to clarify the true meaning of Scripture?

What about accepting the errors of critics who erroneously attribute errors to copyists who copied error free Scripture though the critics,in error themselves, accused them of errors which were,in fact,labeled as erroneous erroneously??Like some of your examples.

[Guest]

Now THAT ...was a mouthful of words.

[John317]

From this evidence, I conclude that the original reading of Matthew 28:19 was in the name of Jesus only. This is why Eusebius has 18 quotations of said text where the threefold name is not used. Why did he, after the Council of Nicea cited said passage with the Trinitarian version of said text on five occasions? Evidently someone convinced him to alter his former practice.

Matt. 18: 19 is definitely part of Scripture, but if you want to jettison it, it doesn't matter. It doesn't make the biblical argument for the Trinity any less strong. In fact, you can do the same with 1 John 5: 7 as well, and it won't make a whit of difference as far as Bible doctrine is concerned.

[John317]

For instance, some think she was wrong about masturbation, and therefore they think it's OK. But they are wrong. Ellen White was not wrong about it. Masturbation is a sin. We don't need it verified by science in order to know it is wrong,

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

If you read what Ellen White wrote about this topic you will discover that she was talking about the excessive, abusive, and unhealthy sexual activity. The context is very clear if you pay attention to the number of illnesses she mentions which are the result of the abusive self indulgence.

Yes, she is talking about deliberate masturbation. There's no such thing as healthy, good masturbation, any more than there is good, healthy sin of any other kind. Ellen White says nothing that indicates she thinks a little self-abuse, i.e., masturbation, is a fine thing.

This is precisely what the Devil would love people to think, because the reality is that it quickly becomes a habit that the person cannot break for many years. People are fools if they think they can play with sin and come out the victor.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

The normal sexual activity tends to promote health and is not sinful. It is a blessing the Lord has granted to us human beings.

Do you mean you think masturbation is a blessing of the Lord? You can't be serious. That's like saying porn or lust can be a blessing of God.

The only "normal sexual activity" that is a blessing of the Lord is what takes place within marriage between a man and a woman.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Read the book of “Songs of Solomon.”

Yes, I have, many times. It's about a man and a woman who are betrothed to each other, that is, about to be married. Being betrothed in those days and in that culture was the same as being married, since for a couple to break off their betrothal, it was necessary to divorce.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

The Lord even used the love between a man and his wife as an illustration of God’s relationship with his church, which is described in the Bible as his Bride.

Sure. Of course.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Ellen White made it very clear that self abuse is a sin. You cannot conclude from this that the normal sexual activity is also a sin. There is a big jump between sexual use and sexual abuse. The first one promotes health while the latter is responsible for many undesirable illnesses.

The only sexual activity that is not sinful is that which takes place between a husband and wife. Anything else is fornication or adultery.

Of course I'm not talking about "night emissions" that a young male will experience from time to time. These take place involuntarily.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

I suggest that you read Leviticus 15. It deals with the atonement connected with the unusual discharge of sperm.

Sure.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

Notice that there is a contrast between the normal discharge and the abnormal one. The abnormal discharge required a sin offering, while the normal one simply bathing.

I see no indication here that the Bible is condoning masturbation.

Originally Posted By: John3:17

But we need to make up our minds if she is in fact a true prophet of God. If she is not, let's throw out her books and forget her.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

King David was a true prophet, nevertheless he did sin with Bathsheba, and he told us the following:

"Happy is the one who takes your babies and smashes them against the rocks!" [Psalm 137:9]

King David wasn't inspired to murder anyone, and Ps. 137: 9 expressed the viewpoint of human beings, not God.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

Did the HS inspire him to make such a statement?

Ps. 137: 9 wasn't written by King David. But yes, of course, the Holy Spirit did inspire the writer of those words.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

Contrast this with how Jesus said we should treat our enemies. Should I believe David or Jesus? Both teachings are in the Bible, nevertheless we choose Jesus over David.

You should believe both, because both are true. Ps. 137: 9 is the expression of someone's true feelings which are not less legitimate than Christ's words. The Bible does not condemn the feelings expressed in Ps. 137: 9. In fact, they are similar to the words that express the feelings of the saved in Rev. 16: 5,6.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

The same applies to what Ellen White wrote. We need to compare what she wrote with what we find in the Bible. Compare what Ellen White wrote with what we find in Leviticus 15. What conclusion do you reach. Do you conclude that the normal discharge of sperm is sinful?

There's no true contradiction between Ps. 137: 9 and Christ's statements any more than there is between Ellen White's words and the words found in Lev. 15.

The "normal discharge of sperm" isn't masturbation.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

Ellen was a true prophet, nevertheless she made us believe that she did not rely on the writings of other authors, which we discovered was not true.

This is false. You seem to never miss an opporunity to make this false claim. She never made false statements for you to believe something that was untrue. If I believed this, her books would be in the trash right now. But I've looked into this false accusation that you apparently enjoy spreading, and there's absolutely nothing to it.

It was known that she used the writings of other people, but it wasn't known to what extent she used them until studies were done to determine this. But she never lied about it. She found writings that expressed what she wanted to convey. Anyone who is interested may compare the original writings with how Ellen White used them. They will see that Ellen White changed them in order to express her own ideas.

Originally Posted By: NicSamojluk

For this reason, we need to test her writing by the Bible instead of testing the Bible by her writings.

This also is false. It would be essential to test her writings by the Bible in any case, whether she used the writings of others or not. Her use of other people's writings have nothing to do with the necessity of testing her writings by the Bible. After people have tested her life and writings by the Bible and they are convincted that she is a true prophet, it is not necessary to continue testing every sentence they read in order to determine if she is a true prophet.

[Twilight]

Just a note:

Psa 137:8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy [shall he be], that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

Psa 137:9 Happy [shall he be], that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

This does not necessarily imply that it is God that is happy here.

But the "individual" who brings the punishment, will be happy.

[John317]

I accept everything just like I accept all of the Bible.

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

Do you really accept everything we find in the Bible, including the errors introduced into the sacred pages by copyists who, according to Ellen White, wanted to clarify the true meaning of Scripture?

Can you specify a few such errors?

I wonder about people who frequently talk about perceived errors in either the Bible or Ellen White's writings. I feel the same about people who often find fault with the Ten Commandments or with the writings of Paul or with one of the Gospels or with the first chapters of Genesis. What possible motive do they have for trying to cause people to question the truthfulness of the Bible or of Ellen G. White.

I believe it is better for someone to accept everything in Scripture than to allow so-called "errors" to keep them from having complete confidence in God or in the Bible as His inspired Word.

Believing a few insignificant errors is by far to be preferred to doubting any of the truth of the Bible.

Where do you find evidence that either Christ or one of the prophets or apostles doubted the truth of something in the Bible?

[John317]

Yes, good point, Mark.

Much of the Psalms express the feelings and thoughts of the writer, and obviously do not convey the viewpoint of God. That also is an important part of the Bible and of worship and prayer. God does not kick us in the teeth, so to speak, for talking to Him honestly about our feelings and wishes. The prophets were certainly honest about their feelings and frustrations and righteous indignation. They often called for God to do harm to the people who were harming them.

2 Thess. 1: 6 reads, "It is after all a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you."

We often forget or overlook these kinds of expressions, which are as legitimate a part of inspired Scripture as Christ's words, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Or:

Psalm 69:22-25

Let their own table before them become a snare;

and when they are at peace, let it become a trap.

[23] Let their eyes be darkened, so that they cannot see,

and make their loins tremble continually.

[24] Pour out your indignation upon them,

and let your burning anger overtake them.

[25] May their camp be a desolation;

let no one dwell in their tents.

On one level, Ps. 137: 9 can be seen as the cry of one who prays for the destruction of everything that opposes God, including Satan and his "children" [sins] who have enslaved the people of God.