A response to Dr. Ben.

[John317]

Quote:

---

Well, one time was when she stated that her angel had told her that some of the people in a meeting would not die. That not all would become "worm food", but would see the Lord return.

---

Ellen White wrote the above statement in a Testimony that was published in 1856. The writer's implication is that Ellen White lied or that the angel lied. If either of them lied, Ellen White was a false prophet, and all of her writings are not to be believed. If I believed that, I would have nothing to do with either her or any of her writings.

Almost all of the questions or objections brought up here are fully dealt with in a number of good books, including one by F.D Nichols, Ellen G. White and Her Critics.

If the interested reader would visit the Ellen White Estate or the website, he or she would find the answers. These questions are asked over and over again, and people who keep asking them apparently make no effort to get the answers. For instance, the simple answer to this question is that Jesus would have returned in the 1880s if Christ's followers had accepted the Third Angels Messages and proclaimed them to the world. Alas, they failed to do so, and are we doing any better today?

The same charge, by the way, could be made against Saint Paul because he included himself among those who would be alive when Jesus returned, yet we all know that he died almost two thousand years ago. (1 Thess. 4:15)

Quote:

---

Another case is that of the Shut Door, where she is catergorical in stating that Jesus himself closed the door, and no one else could be saved.

---

If the reader is interested in finding out the truth, please see Early Writings, pp. 42-45, 86, 250-253; Great Controversy pp. 428-432. See as well pp. 161 to 252 of Francis D. Nichol's fine book, Ellen G. White and Her Critics. This book and many more may be found online at EllenGWhite.org/ Also check out all of the references to Shut Door in the Comprehensive Index to the Writings of Ellen G. White.

Quote:

---

There are more things, but off the top of my head right now I can't remember them all. Then there are the smaller issues... such as, statments to the effect that, "those who are unconverted in regards to the eating of meat will be lost" (not word for word)... and yet she ate it nearly till she died, including unclean meats such as Oysters.

---

Ellen White never said that people who eat clean meats will be lost. That is a misunderstanding of what she taught.

One should really read everything Ellen White said on the subject in order to understand it, just as it is necessary to read everything the Bible says on a subject in order to understand it fully. The problem is when people read a little here and a little there, and think those two littles add up to the whole.

I suggest that anyone interested in the subject should read the Comprehensive Index to the Writings of Ellen G. White under the subject of Flesh Foods.

As for Oysters, the Bible does not mention them specifically. It should be remembered that Ellen White never said that she had a vision in which the eating of Oysters was condemned. In the early years of the Adventist church, there was some disagreement as to which animals were included among the unclean.

It is not true that Ellen White ate meat "nearly till she died." Her table didn't have any meat on it for many years before she died.

However, it has to be kept in mind that Ellen White was not opposed to the eating of meat under all conditions. For example, if she were in a situation in which she was faced with the choice between eating meat or going without a good, healthful diet, she would choose eating meat. The principle was to have the best food possible. It is very important to keep this in mind.

Quote:

---

If God told her these things through an Angel, why didn't she live them? Things like when she chastised the brethren for spending money on Photographs, when she did the same herself.. and on and on and on.

---

The fact is that Ellen White did follow the instructions that God sent to her. Please read the biographies of Ellen White that can be read online at EllenGWhite.org and EllenGWhite.estate/

Quote:

---

There are many many instances of, if not, prophetic error, of at least "contradictions". I know that we all know what God wants from us, and yet don't always obey. But it seems like if one is called as a Prophet, and one gets these directions from an ANGEL on a near daily basis, that one would be much more obedient than the rest of us (if for no other reason than that you will be standing before your guardian angel that night, or even Jesus Himself, in vision). It would also seem that if she was disobeying all these specific commands that at some point she would no longer be worthy as a Prophet.

---

I agree that if what you say here is true, Ellen White would not be worthy of being read or studied as a prophet, in which case I would not be a Seventh-day Adventist. But I think you have only a little knowledge and ought to continue studying these issues. I know people who make similar charges against the Bible, consisting of only half-truths and not a few outright lies.

Quote:

---

Also, the fact that she borrowed from books. And allegations that Steps to Christ were really written by her assistants (through copy and paste of her past writings)... and yet she does not credit them. When Paul dictated to Theophilus he gave him credit. It just seems like, if God is using her, and showing her the visions and making her capable of seeing all these things, would He give her an incomplete gift? Would she need to copy examples out of other books? Would the Lord not enable her to write what she saw for herself? She had the "editors" anyways... they could have fixed any mistakes...

---

For anyone interested in studying this issue, please consult pp. 403 to 486 of Nichol's book, Ellen G. White and Her Critics. This book and many others that deal with the questions may be read online at EllenGWhite.org/

Quote:

---

Now, please understand, I don't want to doubt her.

---

Then I suggest you spend a few weeks doing more than what you have done here, which is to make some accusations based on what is at best sketchy information.

Quote:

---

But how can I expect my mormon friends to closely scrutinize their prophet, but not be willing to do the same to mine?

---

Everyone, including SDA's, should closely scrutinize "their prophet." I have spent over 30 years closely studying the writings and life of Ellen White. That includes time talking with Ellen White's niece who lived in Ellen White's home. (Both of my grandmothers saw Ellen White, and one of my grandfathers had a personal, private interview with her.)

I also spent several years closely studying the life and writings of Joseph Smith. But such close scrutiny will be based on the truth about both of these people.

Quote:

---

Why are their explanations, "Excuses" but mine truth?

---

Would you believe their explanation for how Joseph Smith translated the brass plates on which he claims the original Book of Mormon was written? Do you know what that explanation is?

In other words, there is nothing wrong with comparing Ellen White's life and writings with Joseph Smith's. I wish more would do it.

Quote:

---

Am I being honest, or just believing as I have been taught? And if I am believing incorrectly, won't God require me to be honest and search out the truth? After all, he warned us not to be taken in by false prophets... Again, I am not saying she is a false prophet. I hope she isn't. But I guess that as an SDA it is very scary to scrutinize her, because in a way, it feels like in doing so, I am "losing my religion".

---

God requires us to be honest, of course.

You "hope she isn't a false prophet"? You mean you aren't sure or don't know whether Ellen White was a false or true prophet? It's time to study and make up your mind now.

There is only one way to find out: study all of her writings. It doesn't sound like you have done that yet. Get started now and do it prayerfully and with a heart ready to know the truth. May the Spirit guide you.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

If you are not completely given to God, SOP will be a problem.

---

I've quoted statements from EGW, yet you've categorically denied them. Perhaps you are not completely given to God?

Rob

[Paula]

Hey John 3:17!

Thanks for the reply. I am sorry if my questions offended you (you seemed a little upset over them). That was not my intention. In fact the reason I asked is so that the people here who know more than I do could give me some answers. If my mind were made up, I wouldn't have asked.

As for reading the SOP, being a life long SDA (4th generation), I've read GC, Acts of the Apostles, Desire of Ages, Propehts and Kings, Steps to Christ, Adventist Home, Messages to Young People, Story of Redemption, Last Day Events.. etc... You get the idea.

What bothers me, however, is the fact that we are taught that God showed her the truth, and that she was to be a light (though a lesser one to the Bible, a light none the less). And yet, God didn't tell her if oysters were ok or not? He didn't tell her whether Sabbath started at sundown or at a set time every week? She only stopped adopting an Arian point of view after reading a pro-Trinitarian pamplet written by someone of another denomination? Why didn't God tell her that she had gotten the Shut Door interpretation wrong prior to her publishing it? She didn't stop eating pork until a Catholic lady told her it was wrong? I had always thought God had shown her, or would be the one to show her these things. It would seem to me, that if God raised up a prophet to make things clearer for His people to follow, wouldn't He make sure the prophet got things right the first time around, so that we wouldn't be even more confused? Now why raise up a prophet, and NOT tell her things that she needs to know. But let her learn and grow and come to the same conclusions as the rest of us could come to from years and years of Bible study? Don't get me wrong. I love reading her books. But either she was not a prophet, or she was a godly woman used by God "pastorally", or she was a prophet and yet God let her publish things that were wrong.

Again, I am not raising these questions here to bash EGW. I read her books and even quote her. But in the back of my mind there is always a nagging doubt. Am I making her to be more than God did? Or am I making her out to be less? It just seems like it takes faith in EGW to accept her. And I don't think a present day (nonBiblical) prophet should be accepted by faith. I think GOD and His writtings should be accepted by faith, but not a present day (non Biblical)prophet. We should be able to compare "precept upon precept, verse upon verse" to see if all things coming from the prophet are true or not.

However, if you could look in my heart you would see that I would like nothing more than to have all these doubts dispelled and have an assurance that I was right in believing her writtings. The reason I am asking questions here, is not to be reprimended, it is to learn from the various points of views that others, from pastors on down to laymen, have come to.

[Robert]

Quote:

---

in the back of my mind there is always a nagging doubt.

---

Then forget Ellen White! She, like you, will get to heaven by faith in Christ. EGW wasn't good enough to merit heaven...she is not your SDA pope. She was a woman who stated she had "a glimmer" of the light that was yet to come. If she says go to your Bible...then do it, forget her. Go to the Bible alone.

I quote EGW for her "other quotes"...the ones that the legalists are unaware of (there I go ending sentences with prepositions again)....

Anyway, let the Bible be your guide.

Rob

[Paula]

Hey Rob!!

I agree with you that we must use the Bible and it alone. But then what do we do with statements by EGW that those who do not accept the SOP will be the ones to turn away in the end times? IF she is a true prophet, and IF what she says is true, than not believing CAN be hazardous to ones spiritual health. Can't it?

[Gregory Matthews]

Re: "What bothers me, however, is the fact that we are taught that God showed her the truth, and that she was to be a light (though a lesser one to the Bible, a light none the less). And yet, God didn't tell her if oysters were ok or not? He didn't tell her whether Sabbath started at sundown or at a set time every week? She only stopped adopting an Arian point of view after reading a pro-Trinitarian pamplet written by someone of another denomination? Why didn't God tell her that she had gotten the Shut Door interpretation wrong prior to her publishing it? She didn't stop eating pork until a Catholic lady told her it was wrong? I had always thought God had shown her, or would be the one to show her these things. It would seem to me, that if God raised up a prophet to make things clearer for His people to follow, wouldn't He make sure the prophet got things right the first time around, so that we wouldn't be even more confused? Now why raise up a prophet, and NOT tell her things that she needs to know. But let her learn and grow and come to the same conclusions as the rest of us could come to from years and years of Bible study? Don't get me wrong. I love reading her books. But either she was not a prophet, or she was a godly woman used by God "pastorally", or she was a prophet and yet God let her publish things that were wrong."

Just maybe, there is a simple answer:

Perhaps God niver intended that Ellen White should have the place in the developing Church of the final doctrinal authority. Perhaps, God intended that the Bible would serve that role, and therefore God did not correct doctrinal misunderstanding by a new vision to Ellen White. Just perhaps God waited until people got into the in-depth bible study that God wanted, and at that time God led them through the agency of the Holy Spirit, not EGW, to discover the time for the Sabbath, the concerns regarding unclean foods, and a multitude of other Biblical issues.

[Gregory Matthews]

It should be noted that the basic Biblical understandings of the developing SDA Chruch grew out of a series of five Bible Conferences, in which it was the Bible that was studied in depth, and Ellen White did not determine the validity of the doctrine.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Rob,

Quote:

---

I've quoted statements from EGW, yet you've categorically denied them.

---

Quite often you have misquoted EGW and used her statement out of context to support what you believe. In the past, I have always gone back to the source of the statements you have posted and posted the statements that follow or precede what you have erroneously used to say something she did not say. That is what I deny, not what she is saying, but what you say she is saying.

At no time have I not answered what you have posted unless I missed your post.

Quote:

---

Perhaps you are not completely given to God?

---

Perhaps.

Norman

[Robert]

Quote:

---

Quite often you have misquoted EGW and used her statement out of context to support what you believe.

---

Do you believe that one can fully keep the law?

Rob

[olger]

When people jettison Ellen's writings in favor of the Bible, it is possible that many of them forget that her writing are packed with scripture. Saturated with it.

It's good stuff and we can use a flashlight in this dark era.

olger

[David Koot]

Quote:

---

What bothers me, however, is the fact that we are taught that God showed her the truth, and that she was to be a light (though a lesser one to the Bible, a light none the less). And yet, God didn't tell her if oysters were ok or not? He didn't tell her whether Sabbath started at sundown or at a set time every week? She only stopped adopting an Arian point of view after reading a pro-Trinitarian pamplet written by someone of another denomination? Why didn't God tell her that she had gotten the Shut Door interpretation wrong prior to her publishing it? She didn't stop eating pork until a Catholic lady told her it was wrong? I had always thought God had shown her, or would be the one to show her these things. It would seem to me, that if God raised up a prophet to make things clearer for His people to follow, wouldn't He make sure the prophet got things right the first time around, so that we wouldn't be even more confused? Now why raise up a prophet, and NOT tell her things that she needs to know. But let her learn and grow and come to the same conclusions as the rest of us could come to from years and years of Bible study?

---

Paula, it is interesting to see how Jesus worked with people in the gospels, and with His own disciples. The Bible says that He taught the people 'as they were able to receive it.' It was progressive. He also did that with His own disciples. Even after His resurrection, they still had misconceptions about the restoration of Israel. We read in Acts 1 that He chose not to correct those misconceptions. (See Acts 1:6, 7) He also had said that He had many things yet to tell them, but they were not able to receive them.

Apply that principle to EGW, and what do we find? You mentioned pork. Around 1860 or so, someone in the Advent movement wrote to the White's about eating pork. Sister White's response was that it was not an issue, and that it would be divisive to try to make it an issue. A couple of years later, she had the great vision on health, in which she was shown that eating pork was wrong. The time was right, apparently, in God's timing. As for the source of the info being a Catholic lady, as I recall it was a man who brought it up, before she received the vision, and she and James counseled him as noted above.

As for the Shut Door, I have read that whole thing a number of times, and came away each time with a different understanding. The Advent believers who hung in there after the Great Disappointment believed that the door of mercy had been closed for the world, and that Jesus was about to come. Ellen Harmon was in that group. However, that was BEFORE she received her first vision. After receiving visions, and for the rest of her life, she definitely stated that there was a shut door, as far as Christ leaving the Holy Place and entering the MHP, and that those in the movement who refused to follow Him in their understanding and experience, were left in darkness behind. As for oysters and fish? My understanding is that Sr. White's understanding of the question was progressive, starting with pork, and expanding over the years. To this very day, many people in America do not consider fish to be 'meat.'

Why didn't God reveal everything to Sr. White at once? Because that is how Jesus works with people. He leads them a little step at a time. He did not lead Sr. White farther or faster than His providence saw that His people were able to receive it, maintaining the unity of the faith and the growth of the movement.

[bevin]

Quote:

---

My understanding is that Sr. White's understanding of the question was progressive

---

and she wrote at various points during that progression.

What about Paul - was his understanding of some aspects of theology progressive? Can you give an instance of such progression? What about Moses?

/Bevin

[Robert]

Quote:

---

When people jettison Ellen's writings in favor of the Bible, it is possible that many of them forget that her writing are packed with scripture. Saturated with it.

---

Anyone can quote Scripture....You can piece things together all day long and come up with your own theology. Why do you think there are so many denominations?

Ellen White is not the measuring stick of truth. God used her where she was at during that time. Why? Either the people then were illiterate, or they didn't read the Bible for themselves.

Anyone out there that allows EGW to be his or her Bible commentator is flawed from the start. If you want to understand EGW, go learn the gospel. Why? Because her primary focus was Christian living. If you start with that you'll end up in trouble. Been there done that....If you make her your conscience, I guarantee you that you will become legalistic.

Funny, Adventists jump on the Catholic Church because they listen to the Pope for matters of faith, but many SDAs do the same with EGW. Shame!

Rob

[John317]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Hey John 3:17!

Thanks for the reply. I am sorry if my questions offended you (you seemed a little upset over them). That was not my intention. In fact the reason I asked is so that the people here who know more than I do could give me some answers. If my mind were made up, I wouldn't have asked.

As for reading the SOP, being a life long SDA (4th generation), I've read GC, Acts of the Apostles, Desire of Ages, Propehts and Kings, Steps to Christ, Adventist Home, Messages to Young People, Story of Redemption, Last Day Events.. etc... You get the idea.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

First, I'd like to apologize to you if I said anything to make you feel that I was reprimanding you. I realize I must have said something to make you feel this way, and I didn't mean to. Your questions didn't offend me at all and I am not upset. I ask questions myself all the time as I study and I believe that sincere and honest questions are a good thing. I understand the point you are making here, that you are well aquainted with the writings of Ellen White.

The fact, however, that you have read those books doesn't mean that you understand them or that you have faith in what they say and have put their teachings into practice in your personal life. Doing this can take time and is a process, just as understanding the Bible and putting it into practice takes time and does not usually happen overnight.

A lot of people have some knowledge of the Bible and have read it, yet they have doubts about it and don't practice what it teaches. I once took a college course in the Bible as literature from a professor who read the Bible at least 50 times, but he didn't believe it and consequently it had no power in his life. Remember that the fallen angels are also well acqauinted with the Bible and the writings of Ellen White, but they don't have faith in what those books teach. So it is obviously not enough just to know what those books say. One must also allow the Holy Spirit to apply their words to one's personal life. (I am not saying you have not done this. I'm directing these words to myself more than to anyone else, actually.)

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

What bothers me, however, is the fact that we are taught that God showed her the truth, and that she was to be a light (though a lesser one to the Bible, a light none the less).

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

That is true; God did show her the truth, of course. But it's important to keep in mind that God never shows all the truth at one time. God showed the truth to the Apostles Paul and John, but He didn't show them all of the truth. Neither did He show all of the truth about health to Ellen White in the first visions He gave her on that subject. Revelation is progressive.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

And yet, God didn't tell her if oysters were ok or not?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Why does that matter? There are many things God did not reveal at that time. Where in the Bible does it specifically mention oysters? Remember that God chooses when it is the right time to reveal truth. Who are we to judge God's timing on those issues? Many men of God ate, and still do eat, pork. Luther and Calvin and all the other great leaders of the Protestant movement ate it. God did not chose to reveal to them the truth about pork and oysters. The truth about these things was revealed gradually to the early Adventists as God was preparing to give the world the first angels message. Thank God He does not shine all the light of truth at once on us because we have a hard enough time accepting a little of it, don't we?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

He didn't tell her whether Sabbath started at sundown or at a set time every week?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

A complete explanation of this issue is given on pages 34 to 37 of the book, Ellen G. White Messenger to the Remnant, by Arthur L. White. It's apparent that God doesn't use the special gifts of the Spirit to reveal truths that He has already revealed in Scripture but that the church has not yet studied. The Bible contains everything we need to know about when the Sabbath begins and ends. The time of the commencement of the Sabbath was studied and a vision was then given to Ellen White establishing the correctness of the conclusion that Sabbath began at sunset. Ellen White at first held the view that the Sabbath began at six o'clock, but she changed her mind as a result of a vision given to her on this subject, during which she heard the angel repeating Lev. 23:32, "From even unto even, shall ye celebrate your Sabbath."

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

She only stopped adopting an Arian point of view after reading a pro-Trinitarian pamplet written by someone of another denomination?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I would like to know exactly which statements Ellen White made that show that Ellen White held an Arian point of view. Certainly she never said that she was shown in vision anything that supported the Arian viewpoint. That is despite the fact that many of the early leaders at that time, including her husband, James White, held strong Arian views.

It must be remembered that these men-- James White, Joseph Bates, Loughborough, Uriah Smith, J.H. Waggoner, and D.M. Canright-- came from different denominational backgrounds and were all attempting to reject everything they beleived was the result of paganism and Catholicism. They believed the Trinity doctrine, like Sunday, originated with paganism and was "unscriptural."

Despite that fact, however, Ellen White's writings contain only statements supporting the doctrine of the Trinity.

On this subject, please read pp. 167, 168 of Light Bearers to the Remnant by R. W. Schwarz. See also Movement of Destiny by LeRoy Edwin Froom, pp. 281-290, 149-152.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Why didn't God tell her that she had gotten the Shut Door interpretation wrong prior to her publishing it?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

The one thing that must be remembered is that Ellen White never claimed to have had a vision in which she was shown that probabtion had ended for all mankind after October 22, 1844.

On the subject of the shut door, take a close look at GC 427 to 432; EW 42-43, 250-253; and Ellen G. White and Her Critics by Francis D. Nichol, pp. 202-252.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

She didn't stop eating pork until a Catholic lady told her it was wrong? I had always thought God had shown her, or would be the one to show her these things. It would seem to me, that if God raised up a prophet to make things clearer for His people to follow, wouldn't He make sure the prophet got things right the first time around, so that we wouldn't be even more confused? Now why raise up a prophet, and NOT tell her things that she needs to know. But let her learn and grow and come to the same conclusions as the rest of us could come to from years and years of Bible study?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

If God chose to show Ellen White the truth about certain things through people of other denominations, would that be contrary to your understanding of how God works? It shouldn't be. Prophets learn from various sources like any other human beings. Ellen White learned about the Sabbath through studying writings by Joseph Bates. Joseph Bates in turn learned it from a Seventh-day Baptist named Thomas M. Preble.

Therefore, if Ellen White's view of Pork underwent a change due to a contact with a Catholic, that should not cause you to think less of Ellen White. Truth is truth no matter what source it comes from. I did not realize that a Catholic told her that it was wrong to eat Pork, but if that happened, it just shows that Ellen White had an open mind and did not reject it simply because it was told to her by a Catholic.

It seems to me that you have a number of wrong views, or misconceptions, of how God inspires prophets and of how Ellen White came to write her books and articles. I'm convinced that Ellen White did "get things right the first time around." However, more details were added in later visions, yet those details did not contradict what she said she had been shown before. The same principle applies to the Bible. God never gave the special gift of prophecy in order to take the place of Bible study.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Don't get me wrong. I love reading her books. But either she was not a prophet, or she was a godly woman used by God "pastorally", or she was a prophet and yet God let her publish things that were wrong.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Please be specific about what things "God let her publish things that were wrong." I have never read anything that she wrote that I consider "wrong." There are some things, however, that she wrote when she was very young that she would have written better and differently later in her life, but that is not the same thing as writing what is wrong. Her writing style in her first articles is much simpler than her style later in life. In that sense, Ellen White progressed in the same way anyone else makes progress. Her husband, James White, helped her quite a bit in her early writing. He was a good and practiced writer, whereas Ellen at that point was not.

Of course, as you know, Ellen White always said that her work included that of a prophet, yet she preferred to be known as a messenger of the Lord. I believe she was a prophet of God. Everyone has to decide for himself after thorough study and prayer. It is not something a person should believe just because others believe it. That is one reason it has never been a "test" among SDAs. It's a conviction one comes to through personal study led by the Holy Spirit.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Again, I am not raising these questions here to bash EGW. I read her books and even quote her. But in the back of my mind there is always a nagging doubt.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

There can only be two sources for that nagging doubt. It is either of God or of that other power. Ask yourself why you have doubt. For instance, are there things in her writings that you don't want to accept and practice? When you study Steps To Christ, or any of her other books, do you have doubt whether what you are reading is of God? Do you put those things into practice? Does practicing what she wrote draw you closer to God or away from God? What is the direction of the influence of her writings on you? Do her writings draw you towards the Bible? Do they draw you closer to Christ? How have they influenced the development of the SDA church? Would the Adventist church be what it is today, and have grown to be what it is today, without Ellen White? The Bible says you will know them [whether they are true or false prophets] by their fruits, or the results of their work. That is just one way to know the true from the false. There are others. Let me suggest that you study three books: (1) Christian Beliefs by T. H. Jemison, pp. 53-67; (2) A Prophet Among You by T. H. Jamison, pp. 135-293; and (3) Believe His Prophets by D. E. Rebok, pp. 30-182. You might also want to read the biographies that you can access online at EllenGWhite.org/ I realize you may have read these before, but I would encourage you to study them again, taking your time to think things through carefully and prayerfully.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Am I making her to be more than God did? Or am I making her out to be less? It just seems like it takes faith in EGW to accept her. And I don't think a present day (nonBiblical) prophet should be accepted by faith. I think GOD and His writtings should be accepted by faith, but not a present day (non Biblical)prophet. We should be able to compare "precept upon precept, verse upon verse" to see if all things coming from the prophet are true or not.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

It takes faith to believe in God's existence and in any of the Bible prophets. Therefore, why shouldn't it require some faith to believe in Ellen White as a prophetess? Should we reject all that God has revealed through Ellen White-- or that she claims was shown to her-- just because it requires a certain amount of faith to believe in her? What a waste that would be!!!

Of course one should honestly, sincerely, and intelligently compare Ellen White's life and writings to the tests the Bible gives for a true prophet. Again, each person must make up his or her own mind. No one can transfer their faith to another in respect to either the Bible or to Ellen White.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

However, if you could look in my heart you would see that I would like nothing more than to have all these doubts dispelled and have an assurance that I was right in believing her writtings. The reason I am asking questions here, is not to be reprimended, it is to learn from the various points of views that others, from pastors on down to laymen, have come to.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Examine the evidence and ask God to lead in your thinking and help you to practice what Ellen White wrote. Be willing to learn and willing to obey what God reveals to you through her. Finally, keep asking God to give you faith. Keep knocking and keep seeking. It will be opened to you. That is God's sure promise. Have faith in God. We need to pray for each other.

PostScript: I am in close association with some Jehovah's Witnesses and I must admit that they are much more fervent and dedicated in helping each other and in their united study and preaching than I have ever seen among Seventh-day Adventists during my 35 years as an SDA. They are wrong in many of their doctrines, yes, but I have found them to be lovely, wonderful people, and I have not seen them arguing over doctrine or questioning their own beliefs. I would like to see SDA more united and not constantly doubting the church's teachings on almost everything. (I say this at the same time that I admire the openness and freedom of SDAs to discuss differences of opinion on doctrine.) I believe that Satan knows that if he can keep SDAs doubting and questioning and arguing among ourselves instead of preaching the Truth, he can delay delay the Second Coming even more than he already has and thus cause more and more people to be unprepared for Christ's return. Jim

[olger]

"PostScript: I am in close association with some Jehovah's Witnesses and I must admit that they are much more fervent and dedicated in helping each other and in their united study and preaching than I have ever seen among Seventh-day Adventists during my 35 years as an SDA. They are wrong in many of their doctrines, yes, but I have found them to be lovely, wonderful people, and I have not seen them arguing over doctrine or questioning their own beliefs. I would like to see SDA more united and not constantly doubting the church's teachings on almost everything. (I say this at the same time that I admire the openness and freedom of SDAs to discuss differences of opinion on doctrine.) I believe that Satan knows that if he can keep SDAs doubting and questioning and arguing among ourselves instead of preaching the Truth, he can delay delay the Second Coming even more than he already has and thus cause more and more people to be unprepared for Christ's return. Jim"

A healthy Amen.

I had reservations regarding the SOP until I read it. It wasn't at all what I expected. Very enlightening & encouraging. I am a writer, yet I can't write like she did. There is a unique element to her writings--a ring of assurance that you cannot find outside of the Scriptures. The Scriptures come first, on that we are not ambivalent. 3.5 Weeks ago a Mennonite minister told me that he had been reading an EGW book (GC compilation). He had found it in his driveway 8-years ago and it had been on his shelf ever since. He said "Have you ever read her books?"

"Yes."

He said "I am amazed at what I am reading.." His eyes were full of hope.

Were you raised in the church Robert?

rejoice always,

GCW

[John317]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Hey Rob!!

I agree with you that we must use the Bible and it alone. But then what do we do with statements by EGW that those who do not accept the SOP will be the ones to turn away in the end times? IF she is a true prophet, and IF what she says is true, than not believing CAN be hazardous to ones spiritual health. Can't it?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Yes, it certainly can be. We SDAs would be foolish indeed to ignore and disobey the writings of God's prophet, Ellen White. We would then be no better than ancient Israel which ignored and even made fun of the prophets God sent to them with warnings and promises. Please read 2 Chronicles 36: 15-21.

Everything must be tested by the Bible, of course. Ellen White herself states over and over again in many different ways that the Bible is to be our only rule of faith and duty. (Look up Bible in the general index of the Great Controversy.) Does that mean we are to ignore what God has revealed through Ellen White? Of course not, because the Bible itself points to the manifestion of the gift of prophecy a short time before the Second Coming of Christ. The Bible certainly does not tell us-- as we hear so many voices and read so many pens these days calling us to do-- to ignore the light God chooses to shine on our pathway. Jim

[John317]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I am glad this subject was brought up. For a couple of years now I have been struggling with EGW. The Bible says that if even one thing that a prophet predicts does not come true, to stay away, for it means they are a false prophet. It seems to me that Sister White said more than one thing that did not come true. So does this make her a false prophet? If not, why? Because she is "our prophet"? I want to believe her and have no doubts... but I feel torn between the Bible and SOP. I have very close friends who are mormons, and I tell them they must not believe in their prophet just because it is what they have always known... that they must compare with the Bible, and if it is found lacking in ANYTHING, that they must then reject him. So is not the same required of me?

I just pray that the Lord will open my mind and show me His Truth... whatever it may be, and wherever it may lead.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I like your attitude and think you should be commended for being open to study and discovery.

It may come as a shock to you to realize that the Bible itself contains prophecies that will never come true, and that is because all prophecy is conditional. What this means is that we have to take the context of the prophecy into account. Take, for instance, the prediction of Jonah in Jonah 3:4. There Jonah prophesied that Ninevah would be overturned in 40 days. It was not. Was Jonah then a false prophet? No. But notice that that is exactly what Jonah was afraid people would say about him.

Take the book of Zechariah as another instance. That book contains two very different views of what would happen when the Messiah came: in one view the Messiah would be accepted by His people and murdered by the gentiles, and in the other the Messiah would be rejected and murdered by His own people. It's important to remember that most prophecies conclude with some phrase such as, "All this will happen if..." or "If you obey my voice and keep these commandments..." God's promises and threatenings are alike conditional, based on obedience to Him, of course.

Paul wrote that he expected to be among those who would be left alive at the Second Coming of Christ. (1 Thess. 4:15) Does that make him a false prophet? No. Then by the same reasoning neither was Ellen White when she said an angel told her that certain people would be alive when Christ returned. We understand that Christ would have come back for His people over a hundred years ago if the church had accepted the Third Angels Message and proclaimed it to the world. But we didn't. And I don't think we still have. Many of us haven't even made up our decided whether God's prophet was of God or of Satan. As she herself said, "Either my work is of God or of Satan."

Which is it? I say if it is of God, we need to listen carefully and obey; if on the other hand, it is of Satan, we need to reject it outright. If the latter is the case, then I am in the wrong church, because my Bible tells me that God's remnant church will both keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus AND have the Spirit of prophecy, i.e., have among them the manifestion of the gift of prophecy, by the very reason that it is keeping God's law.

[Robert]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Were you raised in the church Robert?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Yes...through the 8th grade, then I stopped going because of the terrible experiences from elementary school. In 1988 I joined the local SDA church....In 1997 I stopped after trying to reform the legalists....Old dogs don't learn new tricks very easily.

Rob

[Robert]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

IF she is a true prophet, and IF what she says is true, than not believing CAN be hazardous to ones spiritual health. Can't it?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Yes, it certainly can be. We SDAs would be foolish indeed to ignore and disobey the writings of God's prophet, Ellen White.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I say follow the Bible. IF you go through EGW to understand the Bible, well, then she becomes your pope!

Rob

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Hi Rob,

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Do you believe that one can fully keep the law?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

This is the Biblical answer to your question,

God gives His children the Holy when they accept Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise,

From then on we learn, grow and patiently trust the Lord:

2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness. 18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever. Amen.

With converted hearts, filled with love for our God and His creatures we then bring this Gospel to the lost.

2Co 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

God does all the doing in us and we must make the choice.

Phi 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. 13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

The Holy Spirit in us gives us the power to overcome all known sin.

Luke 10:19 Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over ALL the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. (Not just some of the power of the enemy but ALL!)

1John 3:6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. (refers to bondage and willful continual sinning)

We are counseled not to sin.

1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Pro 24:16 For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief.

To summarize: it is possible to keep the law as far as we know. Thereby leaving us guiltless, just and righteous (because of the sacrifice of Christ) But there will come a time when we see ourselves in a brighter light as we learn more of God’s love in Christ. At that point we will see that we have sinned in some area of our lives, and then we are to ask for forgiveness and continue to learn and grow.

In the beginning God told Adam and Eve that if they ate of the forbidden tree, they would surely die and that is better translated “Dying, thou shalt die.” This is an important statement because it tells us that sin would not be ultimately punished in them at the moment they sinned. There would be a buffer to absorb the consequences of sin. During this buffer time they could be as though they never sinned if they accepted the substitute sacrifice. That meant that they could continue to live and if they broke the law they would not suffer the full penalty, but have justification of life. And so it is today, we live and break the law and do not suffer the full the penalty. At least not right now.

He’s getting a people together who can love as Christ loves in order to show that it is possible to love and to fulfill the law in the power of the Holy Spirit.

God is looking for perfection in love, not primarily in law keeping. He has made it possible in and through Christ to love and thereby keep the law perfectly, as perfectly as we can; not ultimate perfection. That means no willful sinning or bondage to sin or habits. If we do then we do not know God, because it is the knowledge of God, the love for God, that causes us to choose not to sin. Acceptance has a profound effect on our consciences and this we have in Christ. Condemnation on the other hand causes us to reject God. This is why Christ came to pay the wages of sin in a legal answer to Satan’s charges and the law’s demand of death. While doing so He demonstrated a love that was so amazing so powerful that it completely destroyed Satan and his host power. 1Jo 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

It also awakened in man a love and acceptance that now gave us the ability to come to Him to receive help, to ask for forgiveness and receive that same power that He had, so we could have the power and right to live as Sons of God. The bottom line is so simple; if you are sinning willfully or are in bondage you don’t know God as He truly is.

John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

John 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, (in Love) even as we are one: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; (Is that in the new kingdom or now?) and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. (It’s now!)

The question is, do we love by the power of the Holy Spirit or do we love in the weakness of our fallen sinful nature? If by the Spirit we will live and fulfill the law of liberty. If we try to love with our fallen nature we will not be able to keep the law.

Think from cause to effect.

Norman

[LifeHiscost]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

In 1997 I stopped after trying to reform the legalists....Old dogs don't learn new tricks very easily.

Rob

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

It's no wonder you became discouraged and left the church (or stopped attending), Robert. Maybe if you were to stick to the responsibilities God said He would give us ablity to perform, instead of trying to do that which He said He would do, you would find greater satisfaction with the results of your efforts.

[:"red"] "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." [/] Acts 5:31 KJV

[:"red"] "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth..." [/]

John 16:13 NASB

[:"red"] "Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? " [/]

Rom 2:4 KJV

[:"red"] "...Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." [/] Romans 14:5 KJV

<img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/DOVE.gif" alt="" />

Keep looking up!!

[Planey]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

after trying to reform the legalists....Old dogs don't learn new tricks very easily.

Rob

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Rob I think this a good idea. We don't want to associate with or listen to the ideas of these legalists.

I have just one question:

• How do I discriminate between these legalists and the saints described in Rev 12:17, you know "those who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus."

It seems that both groups are obeying the commandments. How do I tell them apart?

Graeme

[Robert]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

That means no willful sinning or bondage to sin or habits. If we do then we do not know God, because it is the knowledge of God, the love for God, that causes us to choose not to sin.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

That is your opinion....However, the context disagrees with you.

1 John 1:7 "...if we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.

Jesus said, "I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life.”

Now what does "the blood of Jesus" refer to? Go to Hebrews 10:19

"Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus...."

Clearly this is referring to Christ's life laid down in death. As Paul states, "We were reconciled to him through the death of his Son." This speaking of justification by faith. So "the blood of Jesus" refers of Christ's justification of believers through His merits.

1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin [i.e., we are without sin], we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us [we are unconverted?]

9 If we confess our sins [i.e., known sin], He is faithful and He is just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

What does it mean "to cleanse us from all unrighteousness?" Well, go back to the context of verse 7:

"The blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin."

Again, this refers to Christ justification of us, not what He does in us.

10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us.

You see if you interpret verse 9 as to mean Christ makes us sinless, verse 8 immediately crys out - "If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves!"

Don't be deceived.... Grow, but never say you are living Christ's life. If you do the Bible says you’re deceived.

What about EGW?

• He who says, "I am holy, I am sinless," is self-deceived. Some have said this, and some even dare to say, "I am Christ." To entertain such a thought is blasphemy. Not to see the marked contrast between Christ and ourselves is not to know ourselves. [RH 9-25-1900]

[Robert]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

I have just one question:

How do I discriminate between these legalists and the saints described in Rev 12:17, you know "those who obey God's commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus."

It seems that both groups are obeying the commandments. How do I tell them apart?

Graeme

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Paul warned believers about the self-righteous:

Phil 3:2 Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh. 3 For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh....

A legalist has confidence in his performance! He doesn't see "the marked" difference between his righteousness and Christ's....He sees himself as measuring up.

The last generation of Christians will develop a faith that is unshakable. They will not only have "faith in Jesus", but will have "the faith of Jesus." They will not love their lives even unto death. They have walked away from all worldly binds. They are totally depending on Christ for literally everything!

This group is future. It is formed after "the shaking" and the call to come out of Babylon [all works oriented gospels]. The legalists, unless they repent, will never be apart of that group. I believe that group to be the 144,000 [not a literal number].

Rob

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Rob said,

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

That is your opinion....However, the context disagrees with you.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Rob, how could that be my opinion when I just used the Bible to back up what I said?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

You see if you interpret verse 9 as to mean Christ makes us sinless, verse 8 immediately crys out - "If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourselves!"

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Show me where I said this. You're not getting what I'm saying. Let me put in simple English.

Converted Christians who love the Lord and live by the Spirit will not willfully choose to sin nor will they be in bondage to sin. I then said that we will learn more of Christ as we grow and realize that we have sinned in some area of our lives. At that point we will ask for forgivenss and move on. Does that sound like I'm saying Christ makes us sinless? Ok course not because that's not what I said.

The love of Christ when believed and experience will cause us to live for Him and not for ourselves. To say anything less weakens the Gospel and makes the work of God in us on par with faulty weak humans.

Bondage means we haven't experienced God's amazing love because we still look to the sinful habit to meet our inner and deepest need. Willfull sin is the result of the same thing. This is why John says "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him." 1Jo 3:6

Norman