Did Willie White Influence his mother?

[Gail]

Listening to Eugene Prewitt, who was teaching at one of our conservative schools down south (but has recently left to go establish a school overseas), I heard a comment that relates to some discussion that has been going on here not too long ago.

Now Eugene is an expert on Old Testament Biblical history and early Seventh-Day Adventist history. His book Deeper is a fun, interesting way to use OT Scripture to defend Adventist doctrine.

He said, in this lecture called, "Uriah and the Precipice- 1888" that sometime or another you will encounter rumours that Willie White influenced his mother, Ellen.

He says that an excellent book on the topic is called, "Willie White and Ellen White." It is a doctoral dissertation by Jerry Moon on the subject. So, as a doctoral dissertation you would expect that he had lots of time for research.

Anyone up to the challenge?

[Gail]

Dr. Moon is a professor at Andrews, and I got the full title of the paper:

W. C. White and Ellen G. White: The Relationship between the Prophet and Her Son. Andrews University Doctoral Dissertation Series, vol. 19. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 1993.

Available at Andrews University Press!

[Gerr]

Influence her to do what?

[John317]

Usually it's anything that people wish Ellen White hadn't done or said. They blame it on Willie.

[james423]

I've read it - and basically the paper said (in my view) that Willie didn't influence his mother very much at all.

There was one time when Ellen White couldn't quite remember a charismatic situation in the Indiana Conference - and her son reminded her of what she had said to the conference president. That's the closest I've come to seeing any influence Willie had over his mother.

[miz3]

Everyone,

There are so many axes to grind on this issue. It depends on what or which axe you want to grind.

Anyone writing a dissertation at Andrews U. or any other SDA school would never be able to write anything that would show that Ellen White was influenced by any other human and/or that any human would have profited by manipulating the "Prophet" for their own selfish purposes. The Church Powers would see to that. Only in the rarest of circumstances has anyone been able to use the Church's Ellen White evidence to assert negatively in any way, shape, or form. The SDA Church has been very tight-fisted in this regard.

I have seen some "what are asserted to be documents of real uncontroverted evidence" that those around Ellen White (family included) manipulated the writings and the "testimonies" from Ellen White to suit themselves. In some cases those doing the manipulation are shown to have clearly done so. The one holding these documents claims these are true documents from people like Kellogg, AT Jones etc.

Now these people did have a falling out with Ellen White and/or the SDA Church. However, it appears that the falling out comes after the manipulations and because of the manipulations. It also appears that Ellen White may have known about her son's involvement in such acts but it was hard or impossible for her to confront such a painful thing.

I personally believe that something was going on and it was NOT "righteous". It is not far fetched that such would occur. Look at the case of Elisha and his greedy servant who tried to capitalize on the Power of God's miracle. Whether Kellogg or anyone else of her contemporaries has credibility in specific, I do not know. The Kellogg incident was clearly about money, control, and power! Many will say Kellogg was about "Pantheism" and that may have been a factor. However, was "Pantheism" just a smoke screen or was it a true credible indictable crime. To those who know the history of the SDA Church with some credibility can see that the Church has had warts all the way back to William Miller. James White for instance is not a man with "clean hands". Those who sent Ellen White to Australia are clearly clothed in dirt. President Daniels, around the turn of century,(19th to 20th)although he did some good things that helped the Church was not always "clean" in his methods and ways to accomplish it. He often exerted a very heavy, even dictatorial, hand. He was not shy about destroying what he viewed as "enemies" to himself and the church by any means necessary.

Interesting topic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[John317]

...I have seen some "what are asserted to be documents of real uncontroverted evidence" that those around Ellen White (family included) manipulated the writings and the "testimonies" from Ellen White to suit themselves. In some cases those doing the manipulation are shown to have clearly done so. The one holding these documents claims these are true documents from people like Kellogg, AT Jones etc.

What's your evidence for this? Please give documentation and references. Otherwise all it is is mere claims, and anyone can claim anything they want.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Now these people did have a falling out with Ellen White and/or the SDA Church. However, it appears that the falling out comes after the manipulations and because of the manipulations.

Again, give the evidence. This is not a Forum for merely spreading rumors and gossip.

What is it that makes it "appear" the way you describe it?

Originally Posted By: miz3

It also appears that Ellen White may have known about her son's involvement in such acts but it was hard or impossible for her to confront such a painful thing.

Show your evidence and give references. What exactly makes it "appear" so? Ellen White never did show that she was unable to unwilling to confront evil when she saw it or it was revealed to her.

Originally Posted By: miz3

I personally believe that something was going on and it was NOT "righteous". It is not far fetched that such would occur.

On what basis do you say this? What was that "something" that was going on? It sounds more like a rumor or gossip to me.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Whether Kellogg or anyone else of her contemporaries has credibility in specific, I do not know.

Credibility in what?

Originally Posted By: miz3

The Kellogg incident was clearly about money, control, and power! Many will say Kellogg was about "Pantheism" and that may have been a factor.

It is certainly true that Kellogg wanted control of the Battle Creek Sanitarium and of the church there as well.

Originally Posted By: miz3

However, was "Pantheism" just a smoke screen or was it a true credible indictable crime.

What do you mean by "true indictable crime"?

What is your evidence that Kellogg's Pantheism, or false doctrinal views, was a "smoke screen"?

He clearly held views that were contrary to the Bible and to Ellen White's writings. He said such things as that when we eat food, we are "tasting God." He said that God is in our bath water and in the trees and flowers.

Originally Posted By: miz3

To those who know the history of the SDA Church with some credibility can see that the Church has had warts all the way back to William Miller.

What are you talking about? Please be specific and show your evidence.

Originally Posted By: miz3

James White for instance is not a man with "clean hands".

What are you talking about? Speak plainly.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Those who sent Ellen White to Australia are clearly clothed in dirt.

No one "sent" her Australia. She went to Australia of her own free will. She could have refused to go. She was asked to go. She wasn't told to go. It turned out that it was a blessing both to Ellen White and to the church that Ellen White went.

Originally Posted By: miz3

President Daniels, around the turn of century,(19th to 20th)although he did some good things that helped the Church was not always "clean" in his methods and ways to accomplish it. He often exerted a very heavy, even dictatorial, hand.

What is the worst thing you can prove about Daniells? Please give references.

Originally Posted By: miz3

He was not shy about destroying what he viewed as "enemies" to himself and the church by any means necessary.

Who do you believe Daniells "destroyed"?

[miz3]

John317 and to everyone else,

OK, you asked for it. I will tell you up front that you are not going to like it. In fact you are going to reject it probably out of hand.

Do those that I am referring you to have an axe? Yes!! Does that mean they are not credible in "every way". One can be credible on part while not being credible in other parts.

Maybe you even know those associated with this. Or, maybe you are acquainted already with their work.

Here it is:

http://www.adventistreform.com/

[ClubV12]

AdventistReform dot com promotes the views of Desmond Ford, who denies the Investigative Judgement doctrine.

I've seen enough, don't need to see anymore, it's a junk web site.

[miz3]

ClubV12,

OK, that is your privilege.

[ClubV12]

miz3, do you agree with Dr. Fords view's on the investigative judgement?

[Kevin H]

Actually I have found that those who tended to blame Willie have been frequently from the ultraconservative branch from our church. Even thought that branch today is trying to prove that Willie was a good ultra conservative who actually agrees with their view and blames the problems in the church to later periods, especially to the publication of Questions on Doctrine, you find them carrying on the ideas and their heros tend to be those who were blaming Willie for bringing in the New Theology and that he was trying to sneek it in through his mother's writings.

[miz3]

ClubV12,

I do not know Desmond Ford's views on this in great detail. I do know that he questions the SDA position and that he got into great trouble with the SDA powers because he threatened the very foundations of Adventism as the powerful define it. I also know that involved in this question of the "Investigative Judgment" was also the question of "When did Christ enter the Most Holy Place?" This is also a question I have on that issue. I know they had a big confab up at Glacier View Camp in Colorado about all this and that finally Dr. Ford was dismissed as an ordained minister (defrocked).

However, that is basically all I know. I am not associated with Dr. Ford in any way, shape, or form!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If my views and his coincide in any way it is mere coincidence. I do not look to him or any other human and attach myself to them as their disciple. If I am a disciple I greatly desire to be a Disciple of Jesus Christ and of God the Father only!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I look to the Bible and the Bible only as the Rule of my Faith!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am a great admirer of Ellen White and do believe that God used her as His instrumentality to the SDA Church. I believe that she received visions and directions from God. However, I do not believe that "every single word" of her writings is "inspired". I do believe that some of what she wrote was her opinion or her beliefs, some of which were typical beliefs of her day. I also have no problem with her being designated as a prophet. But like Moses she was prone to sinning the same as Moses when he struck the rock and assumed Authority which was not his to assume. Ellen White is not the "pristine" entity that the SDA Church has in its history tried to cultivate. I believe the SDA Church has consistently used her and her writings as a "club" to mold and shape the Church and its members into their view and to vault them into the seats of power and money that they desire. I believe the SDA Church says one thing about its basis for its Doctrinal Views and in reality bases some of their Doctrines on an other basis. I have intimate experience deep in the Church which leads me to these views.

Yet in spite of all the negativity concerning SDA history on up to the present God has given the SDA Church more Light than any other entity I know. It pains me greatly to see the SDA Church squander the great wealth of Truth they have been given just as Ancient Israel did in Bible times.

[ClubV12]

I do not view membership in the organized SDA church as my ticket to heaven. At the same time I fully support the church no matter how destitute it may appear now or in the future. One of the great lessons from the bible, for me, has been the story of the widow's mite. She supported what was clearly the corrupt "church" of her time. And Jesus acknowledged this support and blessed her. For me, the issue was not how much she gave or why, it was her support of the church in doing so.

As Dr. Ford was defrocked, for whatever reason, I cannot give weight to his views because he does not support God's church for this time. For me, it's as simple as that, no matter how powerful and how well documented his argument's are. As he is prominently featured on AdventReform dot com that is a big red warning flag.

I thank God I do not have a PhD in religion! The message is simple enough for any man to understand it. All my rightousness is as filthy rags. I accept that at face value, it is only by His sacrafice that I can be saved. Now, I need to get to work, for God, for His church, for character developement as He leads me.

The devils most powerful tool is a mixture of truth and error.

[miz3]

ClubV12,

Your interpretation of the "widows mite" is wrong. She was not giving to the "Church" she was giving to God. You are making the same mistake the Jews made in their day and that is to think that the "Church" and/or the "Temple" (the temple was a monument to the Jews that they were the only correct church and as such the only vehicle of Salvation despite their warts)are their Salvation. The Jews of Christ's day took the same position as you are taking now.

You don't care whether Des Ford is right or wrong you just care about whether the "Church" accepts his views or not. If the Church doesn't accept his views then you won't have anything to do with him. Its not based on your investigation it is based solely on whether the "Church" endorses him or not.

Thank you for making my point!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You ClubV12 are very typical of what SDA are and unfortunately have for the most part been throughout their history. Even Ellen White spoke against those in the "Church" that were the way you are. It is a common disease among humanity. They trust in almost anything but they are loathe to TRUST IN GOD AND IN HIS WORD!!!! It seems they always have to Trust in something they can hold in their hand rather than Trust in the God who they can neither hold or manipulate. Like I said this is a typical human disease and a typical SDA disease.

Only God can cure it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ClubV12]

When I give my offerings I am giving to God, not the church. The concept is very clear in my mind, as it was for the widow.

I will not choose to whom I give my tithe, to someone institution or charity or person doing good work. I will give it to the "church" for God to use as He will.

[miz3]

ClubV12,

Which is it?

Do you give to the "Church"?

or

Do you give to God?

Oh, by the ClubV12 I don't have a Phd. either!!!!!

I study the Bible a lot!

[ClubV12]

How do you hand over your tithe envelope directly to God?

You can't, He used the tribe of Levi in the past and He uses His spiritual tribe of Levi today. Therefore, I give my tithe to God through the method and channel He has ordained. I don't pick and choose some group that I wish to support because I some how I deem them more worthy than His organized church today. I don't even consider if my tithe is being properly used or not by the church. I don't stop to consider IF the SDA organization is still God's church or not. That is not my place, nor was it the place of the widow. The church is the appointed place to "drop off" your tithe, period. I give my tithe to God, through His church, to support His work and His workers. After that, what becomes of it is in His hands. Whoa to those brethren that would miss use God's monies, or those who would withold it, but that is between them and God.

As for me and my house, I will serve the Lord, in the capacity He has established for this day and age, the Seventh-Day-Adventist church. Not the Mormon's, not the Lutherans, not the 7th Day Church of God, not the Branch Davidians, not some offshoot that follows Desmond Ford. But the officially sanctioned world wide church established by Him for these last days. The one, the only, no matter how destitute it may appear to be or how Godly it may appear to be.

[miz3]

ClubV12,

Thank you!!! You did answer my question.

The only reason I asked it again, and again, is because at first you said, "you paid your tithe to the SDA Church" and you asserted that the widow paid her offering to the "Church".

Now that you have clarified what you meant by those statements I can concur with you.

We pay our tithe and our offerings to God!!!!! How do we do that? Through the vehicle of the "Church". In your case that is the SDA Church, in the widow's mite case it was the "Jewish Church" at the temple in Jerusalem of her day.

Is my analysis of your position correct? If it is then we are in agreement on that issue.

[ClubV12]

It's obvious from the story of the widows mite that she brought an offering to church. The question then revolves around it is, on whose behalf or to whom was the offering made, if not to God? Jesus' response of course makes it clear her offering was to God.

Lacking a definitive Godly response, such as the widow had, it is valid to question to whom my offering, in church, was made. I can assure you, it was to God, to do with as He will.

I should have considered the other possibility. That I was making an offering like the "rich man", a big showoff making sure other folks saw how much he was giving. I can assure you, that is not the case with myself.

I'll be careful to avoid the widow's mite example in the future for fear some may misunderstand the application and accuse me of being a big show off, or something.

However, if this keeps up, I fear I may have no examples left to share at all, on any principle, out of fear they might be misunderstood or I might be blamed for something of which I am innocent.

May God grant me the courage to push on and proclaim His principles without fear, no matter what they might be.

[miz3]

ClubV12,

Don't stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The widow's mite is a good example when correctly stated which you did. Maybe not at first but that is OK. The important thing is that you did get it RIGHT!!!!!!!!

Praise God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Now we can go back to Gail's marvelous question about Willie White's influence on his mother, Ellen White.

[Guest]

Here it is:

http://www.adventistreform.com/

[miz3]

It is a junk website, promoting the same views as Desmond Ford, (that the investigative judgment is not biblical) Such nonsense has no place in a serious discussion about adventism. Not because Desmond Ford went against the church, but because he is wrong.

I have nothing to do with Des Ford. I have nothing to do with the website that I cited. I am not promoting the cited website except to state that it appears to have some credible documentation on SDA History and Ellen White and those that may have influenced her.

Mr. Holbrook, you state above in your quoted words that it is nonsense that the "Investigative Judgment" or "pre-Advent Judgment" CANNOT BE PROVED FROM THE BIBLE ALONE!

Please then go to where that Question is posed on this website in the Theology Townhall and give me the Bible proof from the Bible and the Bible ONLY that any type of Pre-Advent Judgment exists!

I know there is a Judgment but not a Pre-Advent Judgment.

I await with eager anticipation your stunning ability to do this. Show us all so that we can put this baby to bed once and for all.

[ClubV12]

Ellen White put that baby to bed a long time ago... moving on. :)

[Guest]

I don't have time to give Bible studies to professed adventists. But, of course it can be proven from the Bible alone. And rather easily I might add. None of our doctrines require the words of Ellen White, in order to stand.

Although she was instrumental in leading us to the Bible evidence in many cases, and shedding light on it.