Life on other planets

[John317]

In this case the onus is on Bates not on Ellen White.

Why is there an onus on Bates? What wrong did he commit?

Bates was simply going by what he knew about Saturn at that time. We know he was wrong about the number of moons, but we only found out recently. He can't rightly be blamed for saying what he did.

The vision, as Ellen White expressed it, helped convince Captain Baits that Mrs. White's visions were genuine. If she had had a vision which he interpreted to show that Saturn had either 6 or 8 moons, he would not have been persuaded by the vision. I believe God gave the vision to convince this influential Christian leader that Ellen White's visions were indeed of divine origin.

[ClubV12]

There is a BIG difference between a guess and reasonable and prudent evidence that points to a solution. My ex, bless her heart, is a Ph.D. research chemist. You can bet she doesn't go into the lab and start mixing chemicals based on a guess! She formulates a theory, an opinion, based on knowledge of the subject matter AND "counsel" of the "brethren". Typically running an idea by a theoritcal chemist whose SOLE job is to "think" about "opinion" and theories. He doesn't do anything in the lab but is often the most brilliant member of the team.

In this case, the weight of evidence favors a reasonable hypothesis, a theory, a sustainable opinion that the statement is not ambiguious. Can you PROVE a theory? Not always, but depending on how it was formulated, the over all evidence, you would be a fool to dismiss it as a "guess".

If you don't know much about the subject matter and your making a guess based on little or no knowledge, the lab is not a safe place to try experimenting. Do that in your basement, if you survive, I'll take a look at your data (and run it by an esteemed colleage for due consideration). Because in the counsel of many there is safety. :)

[ClubV12]

Actually, I THINK the referrence of seven moons was attributed by some as referring to Jupiter. She also identified a planet with red rings that was supposedly Saturn. By the way, are Saturns rings red? That seems to be the color she used, as consistently reported among the eye witness'. Not that it matters, just curious.

The biggest problem here is numerous reports and books by various people over the years recounting eye witness testimony from Bates, primarily, but others as well. They report different things and get the planets confused, Uranus was also suggested. She said something about four moons as well as six, there were several planets involved. No doubt Bates was trying to keep up and assigning planets right and left.

The best source I've found is a small report by James White himself in 1849. This vision was VERY early in her ministry and it's apparent she had not yet setup assistants to very carefully record the events as they happened and exactly what she said.

Arthur White wrote about it sometime after her death and he was STILL somewhat confused by the number of moons and who said what about which planets. The whole thing is hopelessly messed up due to the by-standers.

BUT, it achieved it's PRIMARY PURPOSE for that time, which was convincing Bates that she did indeed have a gift of prophecy. This vision was for THAT purpose, to establish her authenticity, not just with Bates, but for others as well. While the details of this vision shall forever remain a bit fuzzy, the end result was achieved. She herself never erred in what she said, THAT is abundantly clear! AND her gift was acknowledged and accepted by important leaders of that time.

[Aliensanctuary]

I believe this world was modified, then colonized with life by a group of highly advanced extra-terrestrials. The terse account of these events in Genesis bypasses the technical aspects of how this planet was made hospitable for life, including the details of how the complex programming of numerous life-forms was generated. We could assume that the Spirit of Elohim was responsible for the creation of the basic DNA molecule, and the many variations of life that populated the antediluvian world.

Maybe these extraterrestrials have a home world somewhere that humans will be able to visit.

Perhaps some of the technology of the antediluvians survived the Great Flood for a time; perhaps we see only faint clues of pre-flood technology preserved in stone monuments.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

In this case the onus is on Bates not on Ellen White.

Why is there an onus on Bates? What wrong did he commit?

Bates was simply going by what he knew about Saturn at that time. We know he was wrong about the number of moons, but we only found out recently. He can't rightly be blamed for saying what he did.

The vision, as Ellen White expressed it, helped convince Captain Baits that Mrs. White's visions were genuine. If she had had a vision which he interpreted to show that Saturn had either 6 or 8 moons, he would not have been persuaded by the vision. I believe God gave the vision to convince this influential Christian leader that Ellen White's visions were indeed of divine origin.

I was not saying that Bates did anything wrong. However, he did assume something. Thus, the onus is on him and not Ellen White.

I was saying you cannot blame Ellen White if Bates jumped to the wrong conclusion.

However I will add that it is curious that such a mistake done so openly was not corrected.

Even though Ellen White did not mean to deceive Bates, Bates believed Ellen White was a prophet under false pretenses. Does God actually work that way?

[ClubV12]

Footnote to the planet vision:

Sister White actually visited FOUR planets in that vision. The first she only described the general surroundings and the people she encountered, making no mention of moons or rings or any distinguishing features of the planet itself. Thus, there was no speculation as to which planet it might be, lacking any distinctive characteristics to identify it.

The other three planets, were described in some manner, in terms of moons, rings, etc. These were the planets to which speculaters assigned names.

[John317]

I was not saying that Bates did anything wrong. However, he did assume something. Thus, the onus is on him and not Ellen White.

OK, but blame is usually associated with the word "onus."

Originally Posted By: miz3

I was saying you cannot blame Ellen White if Bates jumped to the wrong conclusion.

I agree as long as we acknowledge that Bates did nothing wrong in jumping to this conclusion. It was certainly reasonable and in harmony with what Ellen White described.

We can be wrong about things without committing a sin.

Originally Posted By: miz3

However I will add that it is curious that such a mistake done so openly was not corrected.

But why or how would it have been corrected? Ellen White could not have corrected it unless God gave her a message for Joseph Bates.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Even though Ellen White did not mean to deceive Bates,

Not only did Ellen White NOT mean to deceive Joseph Bates but she did not deceive Bates at all. She gave him true information. Bates' reaching the conclusion he did was not due to any deception on anyone's part.

Originally Posted By: miz3

Bates believed Ellen White was a prophet under false pretenses. Does God actually work that way?

Do you mean that Bates believed Ellen White was a prophet because he came to a false conclusion about true information she gave him?

As you said yourself, Ellen White is not at fault for Joseph Bates' decision about the vision. She merely related what God had shown her in vision.

There was no more dishonesty attached to God's sending this vision than there was in the disciples deciding Christ was the Messiah on the basis of their false views. Christ did not give them their false views, and neither did God give Bates his false view of the planet Saturn.

God allowed both Bates and the disciples to follow their own wrong ideas. God doesn't keep people from having wrong ideas.

There was no harm done to anyone by Captain Bates' having reached the wrong conclusion about Saturn.

[Gerr]

Ambiguity still stands and you cannot wish it away. You do not know what Ellen White meant. You are only guessing.

Your desire for it be in a certain way does not make it so. That is why it is ambiguous. No one knows what Ellen White meant except Ellen White and God.

I KNOW what she meant because within the context of her total writings, you won't find one iota of evidence that she ever mentions a race of people being the product of amalgamation BETWEEN man AND beast. People who are trying to discredit someone are hellbent on sticking to their stories no matter how base and baseless they are.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

Ambiguity still stands and you cannot wish it away. You do not know what Ellen White meant. You are only guessing.

Your desire for it be in a certain way does not make it so. That is why it is ambiguous. No one knows what Ellen White meant except Ellen White and God.

I KNOW what she meant because within the context of her total writings, you won't find one iota of evidence that she ever mentions a race of people being the product of amalgamation BETWEEN man AND beast. People who are trying to discredit someone are hellbent on sticking to their stories no matter how base and baseless they are.

Where else in Ellen White's Writings besides the two already cited does she talk about the subject of "amalgamation"?

[Gerr]

She had a lot to say about the image of God. None of them ever mention about any race who were not created in His image.

Here's a statement where she uses the word "amalgamation" in the same sense of being "unequally yoked with unbelievers" :

Those who profess to be followers of Christ, should be living agencies, co-operating with heavenly intelligences; but by union with the world, the character of God's people becomes tarnished, and through amalgamation with the corrupt, the fine gold becomes dim. When worldly agencies are introduced into the church, it is evident that Satan is carrying out his devices, working through those who profess to be followers of Christ, making them ready at any time to engage with him in disheartening and discouraging those who are faithful, who would stand wholly on the Lord's side. RH 8/23/1892

Here's another:

Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge, which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the sower the question was asked the master, "Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? From whence then hath it tares?" The master answered, "An enemy hath done this." [Matthew 13:27, 28.] All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. {16MR 247.2}

[BobRyan]

As a matter of fact, Mrs. White herself, relating this vision, described Saturn as having only seven moons

[Tom Wetmore]

Does it really matter?

[BobRyan]

Depends on whether you think that revelation from God is trustworthy and accurate or "just the best efforts of well intentioned individuals living in pre-scientific cultures".

And it depends on the degree of "accountability to actual facts" that you insist upon for those making wild accusations against the servants of God

[Klapas]

Asmy kids used to say when they were little; WHAT A KOINKIDINK!

It seems funny that the planets she visited all bore a striking resemblance (at the time) to the planets in our solar system.

It wasn't till we discovered extra moons on these planets that the SDA Spin Team changed their possition

[miz3]

She had a lot to say about the image of God. None of them ever mention about any race who were not created in His image.

Here's a statement where she uses the word "amalgamation" in the same sense of being "unequally yoked with unbelievers" :

Those who profess to be followers of Christ, should be living agencies, co-operating with heavenly intelligences; but by union with the world, the character of God's people becomes tarnished, and through amalgamation with the corrupt, the fine gold becomes dim. When worldly agencies are introduced into the church, it is evident that Satan is carrying out his devices, working through those who profess to be followers of Christ, making them ready at any time to engage with him in disheartening and discouraging those who are faithful, who would stand wholly on the Lord's side. RH 8/23/1892

Here's another:

Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge, which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the sower the question was asked the master, "Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? From whence then hath it tares?" The master answered, "An enemy hath done this." [Matthew 13:27, 28.] All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. {16MR 247.2}

I agree with your view of the first statement (RH 8/23/1892). In that case the use of the word amalgamation has a clear usage. This usage does not support one way or the other the mixing of humans with animals. Yet this statement does not mean that Ellen White did not use that word "amalgamation" in a different sense in those two previously cited statements.

As to the second statement (16MR 247.2) such a use of the word "amalgamation" seems to only fuel the controversy of the first two quotes. This second one seems to confirm that satan with evil minds and "ingenious methods" did indeed practice the "amalgamation" throughout the entire spectrum of nature. Thus this seems to at least indirectly support the view that "amalgamation" means mixing things in nature, including "humans with animals".

[Gerr]

As to the second statement (16MR 247.2) such a use of the word "amalgamation" seems to only fuel the controversy of the first two quotes. This second one seems to confirm that satan with evil minds and "ingenious methods" did indeed practice the "amalgamation" throughout the entire spectrum of nature. Thus this seems to at least indirectly support the view that "amalgamation" means mixing things in nature, including "humans with animals".

The amalgamation referred to is that of the wheat and the tares. Look how ingeniously Satan takes something that is perfectly wholesome and mix a little toxin in it. Music, food, TV, movies, cars, you name it. That's ingenious method of amalgamation.

[Gerr]

Does it really matter?

Does truth matter?

[miz3]

As to the second statement (16MR 247.2) such a use of the word "amalgamation" seems to only fuel the controversy of the first two quotes. This second one seems to confirm that satan with evil minds and "ingenious methods" did indeed practice the "amalgamation" throughout the entire spectrum of nature. Thus this seems to at least indirectly support the view that "amalgamation" means mixing things in nature, including "humans with animals".

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Does it really matter?

Does truth matter?

I think some are confusing accuracy for truth. One can speak the truth and not have all the details correct.

For example, the inspired writers of Scripture wrote that the sun stood still. Well, we now understand that it would be more accurate to say the earth stopped revolving for the daylight to be extended. Are we going to argue about whether the Biblical writers were truly inspired since they were inaccurate and scientifically incorrect?

Read the Ezekiel's description of the throne of God and Isaiah's and compare it with John's description in Revelation. All similar enough that we see common features but all different in detail. So, shall we argue about which of these men had the truth since they differed on the accuracy and detail? Or which ones were the false prophets and which one the true prophet of God?

[jasd]

QR frame:

Given that EGW was a wordsmith par excellence, one wonders at her inept use of the word "amalgamate" re man and beast.

We know that she would have been familiar with the concept of man/beast interludes by reading Writ. We know also that she would have been familiar with Jesus' words re "...as in the days of Noah". And her astuteness would have made her aware that Genesis said that it was only Noah whose bloodline had remained pure/perfect. Ipso facto,

the rest of mankind had corrupted its bloodline. Hence,

"amalgamate."

Why "amalgamated"? Umm, how many of y'alls think that genetic engineering or genetic manipulation, or genetic modifying, or... etc

was part of her vernacular. No way! Therefore,

she resorts to "amalgamation".

And per her take on the same amalgamation occurring after the flood, the giants of Canaanland may have given her cause to mention that.

Not making a positive assertion, just sayin' - that 'genetic engineering' was not available as part of the vernacular of her time.

[BobRyan]

Why "amalgamated"? Umm, how many of y'alls think that genetic engineering or genetic manipulation, or genetic modifying, or... etc

was part of her vernacular. No way! Therefore,

she resorts to "amalgamation".

The concept of amalgum was not as foreign to people in the 1800's as you seem to suppose.

But it is not likely at all that Ellen White knew anything about Cosmology or about genetic engineering. However God showed her that mankind had corrupted its way and defiled the image of God via the form of amalgamation that they were practicing.

It is only now that we have the problem of animal-human chimeras - that we "begin" to understand the depth of the problem of the "one sin above any other" that called for the end of the world in Noah's day.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

It seems funny that the planets she visited all bore a striking resemblance (at the time) to the planets in our solar system.

So err...umm. "if you were god" you would have done it differently? And that is supposed to provide the much-lacked missing evidence behind your failed accusation that Ellen White herself made a claim about being on Saturn or the moons of Jupiter or Saturn?

Is that really all you need in your own thinking - to justify such wild accusation?

Why not stick with something that you might have a ghost of a chance of sustaining? Doctrinal differences. Sola scriptura testing of Bible doctrine?

in Christ,

Bob

[Gerr]

Gerry: Does truth matter?

I think some are confusing accuracy for truth. One can speak the truth and not have all the details correct.

On the matter under discussion, this is not just about accuracy but about the truth. She may have had just a 3rd grade education, but she was well-read enough to know as well as from observation that copulation between man with beast does not and cannot produce offspring. However, amalgamation of human and beast DNA is now a possibility.

[ClubV12]

I made a comment about "does truth matter" on another thread and it got deleted. Watch your back Gerry, someone is trigger happy and I'd hate to see ya disappear. :)

[BobRyan]

Does it really matter?