The Great Controversy Project...hijacked??

[Lysimachus]

I got a newsletter from David Mould, and this link was in it:

http://www.lrltv.org/controversy-hijacked.html

This is very disturbing.

What do you make of it?

When I heard that there are only 11 chapters in this "The Great Hope" book, I about fell off my chair in disgust.

Ellen White would have fallen off her chair if she saw this.

[Gail]

Yep- that's what I've heard, too. I have seen a list of the chapters that were included. If you want, I can try and re-find that for you.

I'm not sure what I think of it... To me, the Great Controversy is a book that I would need to know the recipient first before trying it out on him/her. Maybe they thought this was a way to whet the readers' interest and ask for more?

[ClubV12]

The author refers to the work as rubbish, I wouldn't go that far. In general his tone is pretty severe. Is it warranted? I'm sure HE thinks it is, I'm not totally convinced though. At least we have eleven chapters. Gail please do post what those chapters are if you can find it.

I am reminded of the controversy that has always surrounded the book, "Great Controversy". Some prefer the older, more orginal versions. Some consider the 1911 edition as also being "watered down" as it concerns Catholicism. For the time being I won't take a strong stand on this work, but I am disappointed it's not the version I personally had hoped for (1911).

But then again, I'm not a publicist. I DID have some concern that such a LARGE volume as G.C. is would result in people NOT reading it at all. Society today has a very short attention span and the competition for that attention is very tough. TV, magazines, movies, cell phones, the internet, electronic games. Who has time to read a 600 some page book? In that respect, reality check is that perhaps a super condensed version, like eleven chapters, may be the best approach for reaching the most people in consideration of the time and expense.

Do we really need to get in the face of Catholics to drive out point home? Or is there a better way to deliver truth? I attended evangelistic meetings that led to my joining the Adventist Church, with a friend, a Catholic friend. I vividly recall the nights when this subject was being presented and how it was done with such caution and a spirit of love. But it was cutting never the less. My friend was very offended and never came back to another meeting. It was a hard message for me to digest as well. An "in your face approach" may have resulted in me not coming back either! There is no need to stir up controversy when it is not needful.

[Gail]

Found it:

Here is the Table of Contents of THE GREAT HOPE:

Chapter 1, “Why Is There Suffering?”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 29

Chapter 2, “Hope For Triumph Over Evil”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapters 30, 31

Chapter 3, “Dangerous Seductions”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 32

Chapter 4, “Everlasting Life”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 33

Chapter 5, “False Hope”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 34

Chapter 6, “True Peace”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapters 7, 27

Chapter 7, “Our Only Safeguard”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 37

Chapter 8, “In Defense Of The Truth”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapters 25, 26

Chapter 9, “Real Hope”

- - - From The Great Controversy, Chapters 1, 17, 36, 38, 39

Chapter 10, “The Great Rescue”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 40

Chapter 11, “Victory Of Love”

- - - from The Great Controversy, Chapter 42

[Dr. Rich]

LOL, the General Conference now sees the many problems in that book as those problems have been brought to their attention. Most of you don't know this, but EGW did NOT have Roman Catholics as being the problem because she said they were NEVER righteous from the beginning so they couldn't have fallen! it was Ballinger that said he 'edited' her original writings by adding ONE word, makeing is sound like EGW agreed that the RC was Babylon that had fallen. The 'babylon' that fell twice (REv.18:2) is clearly Israel/Jews. God gave them TWO times to become righteous and each time they refused to do so, therefore Jesus said they were now toast as found in Matt. 21:43.

But the errors in the Great Controversey are many and for the SDA's to even try to put this out is a violation of what Jesus said to do as found in Matthew 28:20, Matt. 24:14 and Rev. 12:17!

As for the article, where is there any evidence that any so called Jesuit is now in leadership of the SDA church? Don't just say it, prove it! Name names and then use solid evidence to prove it! If you can't do this then pick the log jam out of your own eye first!

[Gibs]

Well it looks like they "sweetened it up" and it brings my mind to the scripture,

It has been going on now for years, a "piece" at a time, Joe Crews rightly called it "creeping compromise".

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Sure enough, heaps of them!

Yes and it hurts! Believe me.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Lysimachus]

LOL, the General Conference now sees the many problems in that book as those problems have been brought to their attention. Most of you don't know this, but EGW did NOT have Roman Catholics as being the problem because she said they were NEVER righteous from the beginning so they couldn't have fallen! it was Ballinger that said he 'edited' her original writings by adding ONE word, makeing is sound like EGW agreed that the RC was Babylon that had fallen. The 'babylon' that fell twice (REv.18:2) is clearly Israel/Jews. God gave them TWO times to become righteous and each time they refused to do so, therefore Jesus said they were now toast as found in Matt. 21:43.

But the errors in the Great Controversey are many and for the SDA's to even try to put this out is a violation of what Jesus said to do as found in Matthew 28:20, Matt. 24:14 and Rev. 12:17!

As for the article, where is there any evidence that any so called Jesuit is now in leadership of the SDA church? Don't just say it, prove it! Name names and then use solid evidence to prove it! If you can't do this then pick the log jam out of your own eye first!

So Ellen White read her own book, and she failed to tell Ballinger, "Ballinger, I did not mean that the Papacy became Babylon!"?

Seriously Dr. Rich.

You seem to fail that it is the "thoughts" of Ellen White that are inspired, NOT the exact words she wrote down. Many times Pioneers would come to her and suggest a better way to phrase something, and then she liked it and approved it.

So even if the Pioneers suggested it, and she approved it, it's STILL inspired!

PERIOD!

And the notion that Israel is Babylon is TRASH!! Pure TRASH!

Israel has become a HARLOT, as "PART OF BABYLON", but the PAPACY is in DIRECT LINE OF OFFICIAL BABYLON.

Believe it or not, the Catholic Church can be traced back to the early apostolic Church. But Paul warned there would be a "falling away". It did fall. It did become Babylon. God gave the Catholic Church a chance to repent.

[Dr. Rich]

I need to make a correction--it was Prescott and not Ballenger who added one little word "also" which changed the whole idea about Babylon. See: http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/GC-Prescott.html and look for 14-page 57 to find this one little word added made a huge difference here.

[Lysimachus]

I need to make a correction--it was Prescott and not Ballenger who added one little word "also" which changed the whole idea about Babylon. See: http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/GC-Prescott.html and look for 14-page 57 to find this one little word added made a huge difference here.

Just like Jeremiah had a scribe, I'm sure Jeremiah's scribe offered suggestions to word things better.

The Lord allowed the word "also" to get in there for some reason. It's how He wanted it. God is in charge of how inspired writings end up in the end.

God was good at taking care of His Bible, the Old and the New Testament (including Paul's writings).

God is just as good at taking care of later inspired writings.

If thee writings are tampered, God is a failure in protecting His Word.

[ClubV12]

I have no doubt Paul also had a scribe, or many. I have no doubt that he too, like Ellen White, counseld and considered the wording of his letters to give it the best possible tone.

By the way, wasn't Ballinger disfellowshipped?

[Dr. Rich]

And that my friends IS the problem--no doubt. Rev. 2:2 points out that it was a good thing to doubt the words of those who "called themselves apostles". Their doubts caused them to put Paul and Luke to a test and found they were false apostles. (2Tim. 1:15)

And assumming something you have 'no doubts' about shows us how foolish you have been.

Know what a true prophet does with what God tells them? If you don't know, then read about it from their words. They do NOT editorilize God's words. Many of them didn't even understand what God said for them to tell the people. But NONE of them used fiction as a means to get the words of God to the people. Yet, Paul used lies all the time and said "But if through my lie the truth of God abounded to His Glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner.?"

[John317]

And that my friends IS the problem--no doubt. Rev. 2:2 points out that it was a good thing to doubt the words of those who "called themselves apostles". Their doubts caused them to put Paul and Luke to a test and found they were false apostles. (2Tim. 1:15)

What is your evidence that Rev. 2: 2 refers to Paul and Luke, etc.?

[Guest]

And that my friends IS the problem--no doubt. Rev. 2:2 points out that it was a good thing to doubt the words of those who "called themselves apostles". Their doubts caused them to put Paul and Luke to a test and found they were false apostles. (2Tim. 1:15)

[miz3]

This only goes to show you that even among SDA Church .org Ellen White has become an embarrassment because of her extreme anti RCC/Pope stand.

Today it is clear that the RCC/Pope is but a small pin prick of its former European glory days. Today there are powers abounding that are much more dangerous than the RCC/Pope even dreamed of being.

I am talking about those godless forces right here in America that seek to wipe out every vestige of Christianity that exists in American life. There is but one political party that is in lock step with such forces and they even have abettors in the Republican Party ranks as well.

Where are the worshipers of Ellen White going to go now?

[John317]

it was Ballinger that said he 'edited' her original writings by adding ONE word, makeing is sound like EGW agreed that the RC was Babylon that had fallen.

Show the reference of where Ballinger makes this claim.

[John317]

....Where are the worshipers of Ellen White going to go now?

NO SDA is a worshiper of Ellen White any more than you are a worshiper of Paul or Peter. Recognizing a prophet for what they are doesn't mean they are worshipped.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: miz3

....Where are the worshipers of Ellen White going to go now?

NO SDA is a worshiper of Ellen White any more than you are a worshiper of Paul or Peter. Recognizing a prophet for what they are doesn't mean they are worshipped.

Well hopefully none are. But I have met up with one or two. However the .org is not.

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

....Where are the worshipers of Ellen White going to go now?

NO SDA is a worshiper of Ellen White any more than you are a worshiper of Paul or Peter. Recognizing a prophet for what they are doesn't mean they are worshipped.

We judge by what we hear you say and what you espouse. You disclaimers not withstanding.

I would say anyone who places the writings of Ellen White over the Bible and the Bible only is a worshiper of Ellen White. Your words have so shown that you place Ellen White above the Word of God. I would call that worshiping Ellen White and her writings.

The question still remains:

Where are those who worship every word she wrote going to go if and when the SDA Church .org becomes ashamed, as it appears they are, of Ellen White's RCC/Pope bashing?

[Q.E.D.]

The question still remains:

Where are those who worship every word she wrote going to go if and when the SDA Church .org becomes ashamed, as it appears they are, of Ellen White's RCC/Pope bashing?

Perhaps they will go to the New Jerusalem come down out of heaven. . .

"1 ¶ And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."(Rev 21:1-2)

They sure ain't going where those that reject the Holy Spirit Inspired Writings of Ellen G. White are headed to.

"15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."(Rev 20:15)

Q.E.D.

Happy Sabbath to Ya!

" For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."(Rom 1:16)

(How DARE I say such politically incorrect things! Just thought I would give everyone some fresh red meat to chew on!)

[miz3]

Originally Posted By: miz3

The question still remains:

Where are those who worship every word she wrote going to go if and when the SDA Church .org becomes ashamed, as it appears they are, of Ellen White's RCC/Pope bashing?

Perhaps they will go to the New Jerusalem come down out of heaven. . .

"1 ¶ And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."(Rev 21:1-2)

They sure ain't going where those that reject the Holy Spirit Inspired Writings of Ellen G. White are headed to.

"15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."(Rev 20:15)

Q.E.D.

Happy Sabbath to Ya!

" For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."(Rom 1:16)

(How DARE I say such politically incorrect things! Just thought I would give everyone some fresh red meat to chew on!)

I see that you fantasy yourself as "judge" of other human beings. Who made you judge? Is this a self appointment?

Maybe those who "worship Ellen White" and her writings will find themselves in a place they did not plan on being at? A place where they like the Pharisees of Jesus Christ day will find themselves because they rejected the Truth as stated in the Bible and the Bible only.

Where in the Bible and the Bible only does it say that Ellen White is inspired by the Holy Spirit?

[miz3]

Ellen White worshipers betrayed by their own brethren.

[Gibs]

The last of the "prophets" have not as yet been recognized, the 144,000.

Re 7:3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

Re 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

Re 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

Will many know who are of this number? Not many is my thinking, most will be derided as "troublers of Israel". Their message the popular Christianity of today do not want. It will not be "smoooooth" things.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[wayfinder]

Originally Posted By: Dr. Rich

it was Ballinger that said he 'edited' her original writings by adding ONE word, makeing is sound like EGW agreed that the RC was Babylon that had fallen.

Show the reference of where Ballinger makes this claim.

It wasn't Ballinger it was W. W. Prescott.

Following excerpt is taken from the Bible Conference of August 1, 1919

W. W. Prescott: My interpretation was, (and I taught it for years in The Protestant Magazine) that Babylon stood for the great apostasy against God, which headed up in the papacy, but which included all minor forms, and that before we come to the end, they would all come under one. That was not the teaching of "Great Controversy." "Great Controversy" said that Babylon could not mean the romish church, and I had made it mean that largely and primarily. After the book was revised, although the whole argument remained the same, it said that it could not mean the Roman Church alone, just that one word added.

Prescott added the word "alone" to EGW statement; which, by his own admission, brought her statement in line with his teaching. This change allowed Prescott to accept the validity of the Great Controversy, whereas before the change he could not.

[Lysimachus]

There are dozens of quotations elsewhere throughout EGW's writings where she is clear that she believed that Babylon is realized in the Romish Church. Yet, all those nations who fall under her power, and under her spell, become a "part" of Babylon.

Even in the 1888 version she declared this:

Quote:

The woman, Babylon, of Revelation 17, is described as “arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness. . . . And upon her forehead was a name written, Mystery, Babylon the Great, the mother of harlots.” Says the prophet, “I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.” [Revelation 17:4-6.] Babylon is further declared to be “that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” [Revelation 17:18.] The power that for so many centuries maintained despotic sway over the monarchs of Christendom, is Rome. The purple and scarlet color, the gold and precious stones and pearls, vividly picture the magnificence and more than kingly pomp affected by the haughty see of Rome. And no other power could be so truly declared “drunken with the blood of the saints” as that church which has so cruelly persecuted the followers of Christ. Babylon is also charged with the sin of unlawful connection with “the kings of the earth.” It was by departure from the Lord, and alliance with the heathen, that the Jewish church became a harlot; and Rome, corrupting herself in like manner by seeking the support of worldly powers, receives a like condemnation. {GC88 382.2}

Babylon is said to be “the mother of harlots.” By her daughters must be symbolized churches that cling to her doctrines and traditions, and follow her example of sacrificing

383

the truth and the approval of God, in order to form an unlawful alliance with the world. The message of Revelation 14 announcing the fall of Babylon, must apply to religious bodies that were once pure and have become corrupt. Since this message follows the warning of the Judgment, it must be given in the last days, therefore it cannot refer to the Romish Church, for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries. Furthermore, in the eighteenth chapter of the Revelation, in a message which is yet future, the people of God are called upon to come out of Babylon. According to this scripture, many of God's people must still be in Babylon. And in what religious bodies are the greater part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith. At the time of their rise, these churches took a noble stand for God and the truth, and his blessing was with them. Even the unbelieving world was constrained to acknowledge the beneficent results that followed an acceptance of the principles of the gospel. In the words of the prophet to Israel, “Thy renown went forth among the heathen for thy beauty; for it was perfect through my comeliness, which I had put upon thee, saith the Lord God.” But they fell by the same desire which was the curse and ruin of Israel,—the desire of imitating the practices and courting the friendship of the ungodly. “Thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown.” {GC88 382.3}

Many of the Protestant churches are following Rome's example of iniquitous connection with “the kings of the earth;” the State churches, by their relation to secular governments, and other denominations by seeking the favor of the world. And the term Babylon—confusion—may be appropriately applied to these bodies, all professing to derive their doctrines from the Bible, yet divided into almost innumerable sects, with widely conflicting creeds and theories. {GC88 383.1}

So I'm not sure what Prescott was thinking. If anything, he simply helped her to clarify what she already believed, not conform to his teaching.

Or maybe I am not understanding the issue here?

[Lysimachus]

[it wasn't Ballinger it was W. W. Prescott.

Following excerpt is taken from the Bible Conference of August 1, 1919

W. W. Prescott: My interpretation was, (and I taught it for years in The Protestant Magazine) that Babylon stood for the great apostasy against God, which headed up in the papacy, but which included all minor forms, and that before we come to the end, they would all come under one. That was not the teaching of "Great Controversy." "Great Controversy" said that Babylon could not mean the romish church, and I had made it mean that largely and primarily. After the book was revised, although the whole argument remained the same, it said that it could not mean the Roman Church alone, just that one word added.

Prescott added the word "alone" to EGW statement; which, by his own admission, brought her statement in line with his teaching. This change allowed Prescott to accept the validity of the Great Controversy, whereas before the change he could not.

What page of The Great Controversy 1911 version is this word "alone" found?