Ellen White Listed as "Heretic of The Week" on Catholic Herald Website

[B/W Photodude]

The Catholic Herald just listed Ellen G. White as heretic of the week on their website.

http://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2020/1/14/ellen-white-listed-as-heretic-of-the-week-on-catholic-herald-website

https://catholicherald.co.uk/magazine/heretic-of-the-week-ellen-g-white/

[BlessedMan]

its just like I was saying in another topic here.

[Gregory Matthews]

If we call the Pope the antichrist, we should expect such a response.

[B/W Photodude]

The link was primarily posted as a news item. But being named a “heretic” places her in the company of many good saints. Would we all be named heretics!

[BlessedMan]

4 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

If we call the Pope the antichrist, we should expect such a response.

some are very proud to be called anything like this, I would imagine you are right. They earned it. But to be fair; "the other side" has never spoken well of us. Oh yes, I know what the apologist would say. But that doesnt erase history, "tradition," or other stuff thats been written by "the faithful." One does have to wonder what they are so worried about that they would say this now.

[Gregory Matthews]

The Catholic. Church is not worried about us at all.  We are to small for us to concern them at all.  The article was the work of one person who writes each week about some person.  He finally got to EGW.  Look him up and see who he has written about.

[BlessedMan]

9 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The Catholic. Church is not worried about us at all.  We are to small for us to concern them at all.  The article was the work of one person who writes each week about some person.  He finally got to EGW.  Look him up and see who he has written about.

Yes, I knew that when I posted. IMO thats what they do say, but I am not sure that it means what we want it to here. I do make some effort to be just as hard on our church as I am on this one. Several threads would bear that out here. I like your idea of doing that research so Ill be back with a report.

[BlessedMan]

2 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The Catholic. Church is not worried about us at all. 

Concerning the article in the OP, I would agree, you are right. The author of said article was just doing his thing, and posting on his latest "heretic."  Is the RCC "concerned" about us? Likely not a whole lot right now. So I would say that right now you are correct.  "Heretic Of The Week" seems to be an ongoing series, each week depicting assorted Protestants as "heretic of The Week." IDK of any reliable or wholesome Protestant website that disparages Roman Catholics in this way. From the web site, some of their alleged "heretics" are Harry Emmerson Fosdick, William Booth, and Neville Goddard, so to be fair, this article from the OP was not singling out Adventists, per se; rather, they seem to have an express intention of disparaging all Protestants. This is quite in keeping with typical Roman Catholic "ministries."  Please, tell us, what would said disparagements be called in any other areas of the general public today? It would likely be illegal in certain cases as far as I know.

I don't think it can be denied, however, that the RCC is indeed concerned about "Sunday" which to them is much more than just a specific day of the week. It would be really hard to miss their ongoing efforts in that direction. "Sunday" in most of their web sites that could be considered half decent and reliable, does find confluence in just about everything people do in their daily life. If only Adventists kept the Sabbath the way others "keep" Sunday," there might actually be a lot more for them to really be worried about?

In my observations, "the seventh-day Sabbath" is about much more than just a specific day of the week; and few there be that find that "narrow way."  (likely including me most weeks). THAT Sabbath, in Scripture is called "the Sabbath of The Lord thy God."  THAT Sabbath does have a lot to do with almost everything we do in our daily lives, especially as it pertains to "the preparation day."

I admire your zeal in wanting to promote a fair, balanced message.

I question where it would lead to at the farthest, foreseeable point on that trail. May I ask how you think Adventists should respond to the RCC? Should we just scrap the message, and call it "unity?"

[Gustave]

The Catholic Church is worried about Sunday in following context [ what we call the Sunday Obligation ].

We believe that Hebrews 10, 25-26 says that failing to gather En Masse is a sin. 

Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."

"Christian Assembly", at the time of the Apostles, was held in home churches dedicated for such purposes. It's true that the Apostles went to the Temple and Synagogues "on the sabbath" HOWEVER, THAT wasn't Christian Assembly. Christians were not assembling themselves together at the Temple or the Synagogue on Saturday. The Bible states that Christians were assembling themselves together on the 1st day of the week.  Acts 20,7 / 1 Corinthians 16, 1-3 &

1 Corinthians 11, 17 

Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? what shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

I gather from the above that when Christians assembled themselves together THAT grouping was "the Church". After the service the individuals who made up the Church went about their ways and then gathered back together again. It would seem from reading Scripture this primarily took place on the 1st day of the week. It's in this context that the Catholic Church is concerned about Sunday. We are not thinking the SDA's are foiling the plans of Satan and therefore have to do something about it. 

[BlessedMan]

On 1/19/2020 at 10:29 AM, Gustave said:

I gather from the above that when Christians assembled themselves together THAT grouping was "the Church"

Good point; but what does THAT have to do with not keeping the original seventh-day Sabbath?

On 1/19/2020 at 10:29 AM, Gustave said:

When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

Sometimes in Adventist circles, I have attended communion on days other than the Sabbath. That does not mean that the Sabbath has been changes, moved, or omitted?

On 1/19/2020 at 10:29 AM, Gustave said:

It's in this context that the Catholic Church is concerned about Sunday

Are you sure this is all there is to it?

[Gustave]

On 1/21/2020 at 3:08 PM, BlessedMan said:

Good point; but what does THAT have to do with not keeping the original seventh-day Sabbath?

Sometimes in Adventist circles, I have attended communion on days other than the Sabbath. That does not mean that the Sabbath has been changes, moved, or omitted?

Are you sure this is all there is to it?

1. The original Sabbath was ceremonial / ritual and Christians were instructed it's purpose was terminated (Colossians 2, 16). 

2. Yes, Catholics serve it daily with particular emphasis on the 1st day of the week - just like the Apostles did in the New Testament.

3. Yes, that's all there is to it.

[B/W Photodude]

4 hours ago, Gustave said:

The original Sabbath was ceremonial / ritual and Christians were instructed it's purpose was terminated

If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Isaiah 58:13

God has often said He laughs at the wicked. How arrogant man is to think that he can removal the sacredness from something God has called holy. The Sabbath day is as holy as when God frist called it holy and will remain so until God in an unmistakable way declares differently. However, He has said He does not change, so in this lifetime I do not see that happening. NOTHING will change the Sabbath day into a profane day before the endtimes and anything attempting to do so will be a deception. No compromises with any group promoting world unity via Sunday "sacredness" is acceptable.

[Gustave]

9 hours ago, B/W Photodude said:

If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Isaiah 58:13

God has often said He laughs at the wicked. How arrogant man is to think that he can removal the sacredness from something God has called holy. The Sabbath day is as holy as when God frist called it holy and will remain so until God in an unmistakable way declares differently. However, He has said He does not change, so in this lifetime I do not see that happening. NOTHING will change the Sabbath day into a profane day before the endtimes and anything attempting to do so will be a deception. No compromises with any group promoting world unity via Sunday "sacredness" is acceptable.

How arrogant of man to remove the sacredness of the Day of Atonement and call it and the Sabbath a "shadow" after Jesus' death and Resurrection (Leviticus 23, 26-32 Compared with Colossians 2, 16-17. Particularly after God said the Day of Atonement was an "appointed time" (just like the sabbath) FOR EVER throughout the generations of Israel. 

Something to consider when pondering this would be asking yourself if God would ever reach a point where it would be insignificant (to God) that you violated the commandment about stealing, lying, cheating or murdering. God said, in speaking of the Sabbath; 

Isaiah 1, 14:  When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.

These are ALL ritual / ceremonial "appointed times" on the Israelite Liturgical Calendar - these were NOT native / natural to the people of Israel any more than they would have been native / natural to the Chinese or Greek peoples. They were introduced to Israel by supernatural means exactly as Scripture says they were: See: Ezekiel 20, 12 /  Ezekiel 20, 20 / &

Nehemiah 9, 14: "YOU [God] made known to THEM [Israel]  YOUR holy Sabbath and gave them commands, decrees and laws THROUGH YOUR SERVANT MOSES". 

Look at the following: 

Exodus 16, 29: See, for that the Lord hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.

The Lord did what there? He gave them [the Israelite's] the Sabbath and I'm going to assume here that you would agree that the Sabbath WAS "holy to the Lord"? Yes? 

I'm also going to assume that you would agree that the "blowing of the trumpets" on the 1st day of the 7th month was also 'holy to the Lord' (Nehemiah 8)? 

God "gave" or educated Israel as to these things. 

Leviticus  20, 26: You are to be holy to me BECAUSE I, THE LORD, AM HOLY, AND I HAVE SET YOU APART FROM THE NATIONS TO BE MY OWN". 

The Israelite's had DIFFERENT Feast days, different diet, different hair styles and cloths from ANY other nation - God said these distinctive's were a unique SIGN between God and Israel yet you argue that everyone since Adam observed the seventh day Sabbath until they forgot about it???? I have to say this idea does not seem very logical. Understand I'm all for your devotion of the Sabbath, it's really incredible. 

I would say SDA devotion to the Sabbath is past Catholic or Orthodox devotion to the Mother of God. The last time I went to an SDA Church I would have needed a clicker counter to accurately document every time someone said "Sabbath". Literally everyone I walked past said "Happy Sabbath" to me and I could tell they expected to hear the affirmation back. That was probably 30 or 40 times just walking into the Church. The pre- Church class started where the leader of the class again said "Happy Sabbath" & everyone responds back with the same affirmation, then the guy says prayer and thanks God "for the Sabbath". Eventually everyone goes into the main area and hold the Church service and the Pastor says "Happy Sabbath"  and everyone says back at him "Happy Sabbath", then the Pastor says Prayers over the congregation and thanks God for the Sabbath. This experience reminded me of the Japanese culture of bowing to each other or iguana's when they shake the salt out of their mouths and it they keep doing it over and over again. I'm sorry but to be honest this seemed excessive and almost like "programming". 

I'm not saying that the SDA is a cult or anything like that - I'm not even saying that you shouldn't have a devotion to the Sabbath if that helps you in your Christian walk - more power to you. All I'm saying is that the Catholic Church doesn't want to persecute you for the Sabbath's sake nor is the Church planing to do this. Of all the Christian Churches out there I'd say that the Catholic and Orthodox is most like or similar in nature to how the Jew's worshiped at the time of Christ - in fact Christianity started out as a Jewish offshoot. 

 

 

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Happy Sabbath:  That springs from the idea that there is a real blessing to be obtained in the expected fellowship with God on that day.  The person saying "Happy Sabbath" is stating a hope that you will participate in that blessing.

NOTE:  I often say, "Shabbat Shalom,"  which is a Hebrew phrase for wishing someone a happy sabbath.

NOTE:  The Hebrew word "Shalom" is often translated into English as "peace."  Actually that translation fails to fully communicate the Hebrew meaning, which is much more involved than the English.

 

[BlessedMan]

1 hour ago, Gustave said:

The last time I went to an SDA Church I would have needed a clicker counter to accurately document every time someone said "Sabbath".

glad to see you are commenting from personal experience, rather than a bunch of skull-duggery. :)

1 hour ago, Gustave said:

All I'm saying is that the Catholic Church doesn't want to persecute you for the Sabbath's sake nor is the Church planing to do this

Well; Ill play "devil's advocate on this one. It is my understanding that adventist teachings are not as much trying to say "the Catholic Church is planning this," rather, it seems more directed at saying, this is what they will, at some point in the future, make the choice to do that.  That time has not yet arrived; nor has the time when Sunday" will be "the mark of the beast." I think, correctly understood, Adventists teach that this is something that is to come, but has not yet arrived.

Quote

Since the middle of the nineteenth century, students of prophecy in the United States have presented this testimony to the world. In the events now taking place is seen a rapid advance toward the fulfillment of the prediction. With Protestant teachers there is the same claim of divine authority for Sundaykeeping, and the same lack of Scriptural evidence, as with the papal leaders who fabricated miracles to supply the place of a command from God. The assertion that God's judgments are visited upon men for their violation of the Sunday-sabbath, will be repeated; already it is beginning to be urged. And a movement to enforce Sunday observance is fast gaining ground. {DD 27.2}

It is impossible to prove that RCCs have not done things like this in the past, nor is it possible to show by their express policy that they wont do it again, should circumstances return again that would favor it.

In an article published by The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2018, Vol. 20(3) 521–539

Quote

" Whereas ordinary diplomats are serving the goals of a territorial unit, the unconventional nature of HS diplomats is nested in the hybrid character of their ecclesiastical role as the Pope’s representatives and their legal diplomatic status and commencement to
ordinary diplomatic practice. Their papal patron’s global perspective renders them unusually dedicated to influencing the conditions beyond their principal’s immediate possessions (such as a territory).

In fact, that article  goes even further:

Quote

Pope John XXIII (1966: 106) referred to the role of the nuncio (the papal ambassador) as ‘The Pope’s own hand outstretched’  [across the gulf] to the world of states. Popes before him made similar statements, and the ones after him keep echoing variations of it.

Its not a huge, nor an unreasonable step from this to imagine how agitation for "sunday" will be realized and carried out in the near future. Just as have many attempts been done in the past. But as Scripture reflects, God's law is perfect, and needs no adjustments, fine-tuning, or changes, such as being disparaged  as " cermonial."
 

[Gustave]

Pk, 

Are you not also confused as to how The Father, The Son & The Holy Ghost - Prophets in the Old Testament could all say without any hesitation that Christ would not fail yet Ellen White said that there was a real possibility that Jesus could have failed? I would argue that the New Testament is clear that observance of the Sabbath ceased being obligatory for Christians in just as clear language that animal sacrifice and the other appointed times ceased being obligatory.  I have zero issue with the devotion you have for the Sabbath, I'm just saying you have nothing to fear from us. 

[phkrause]

1 minute ago, Gustave said:

Pk, 

Are you not also confused as to how The Father, The Son & The Holy Ghost - Prophets in the Old Testament could all say without any hesitation that Christ would not fail yet Ellen White said that there was a real possibility that Jesus could have failed? I would argue that the New Testament is clear that observance of the Sabbath ceased being obligatory for Christians in just as clear language that animal sacrifice and the other appointed times ceased being obligatory. 

No I'm not!!

[Gustave]

1 minute ago, phkrause said:

No I'm not!!

That's exactly what I mean.

[BlessedMan]

25 minutes ago, Gustave said:

Pk, 

Are you not also confused as to how The Father, The Son & The Holy Ghost - Prophets in the Old Testament could all say without any hesitation that Christ would not fail yet Ellen White said that there was a real possibility that Jesus could have failed?

what specific reference are you going by for this Gustave?

Edited January 26, 2020 by BlessedMan

[Gustave]

2 minutes ago, BlessedMan said:

what specific reference are you going by for this Gustave?

There is over 100 direct statements as to the impossibility of Christ failing in Scripture and several statements by Ellen White to the contrary. I won't keep beating this horse dead here as I've posted about it a great deal here on this forum. I only wanted to show that, like the peccability issue, the termination of ceremonial aspects of the law is explained in Scripture. 

Another way to look at this is by looking at how Synagogues operate today. If you are a devout Jew you will not be putting money into a collection plate when you arrive at the Synagogue on the Sabbath. This is because today (just as it was at the time of Christ) observant Jews would NEVER bring money to a Synagogue on the Sabbath - they just won't do it. 

Knowing this illustrates why 1st Corinthians 16 supports the Catholic position on this matter. Christians were meeting (as Christians) or as Scripture calls it "assembling themselves together" on Sunday each and every week. There was no command for Christians to assemble themselves together on Sabbath - there was a command to assemble on Sunday. This is what I'm trying to illustrate.

[BlessedMan]

18 minutes ago, Gustave said:

and several statements by Ellen White to the contrary

its not really "beating a dead horse," is it, if someone is asking for said reference? I would still be interested to hear just one or two references you would use to make this statement regarding Ellen White. :)

[Gustave]

28 minutes ago, BlessedMan said:

its not really "beating a dead horse," is it, if someone is asking for said reference? I would still be interested to hear just one or two references you would use to make this statement regarding Ellen White.

I'll put a couple up then

 

[Gustave]

Isaiah 46,9:  Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.

Job 42,2
I know that you can do all things; NO purpose of yours can be thwarted

Psalm 33,11
But the plans of the LORD stand firm forever, the purposes of his heart through ALL generations

I take it from that - THAT God indeed knows what's going to happen before it happens. In some cases God declares what the end of a matter will be. 

Such as,

Isaiah 35, 4: Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.

Daniel 2, 44:  And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure".  

I take it from that -THAT God said the victory was assured. God would come and God would save. 

 

Matthew 1, 20: But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.  And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,  Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Luke 2, 25:  And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ. And he came by the Spirit into the temple: and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for him after the custom of the law, Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,  Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

John the Baptist sends two of his disciples to Jesus to ask of Him IF He was the one they had been waiting for. Jesus answers the question explicitly stating He was the God spoken of in Isaiah 35,4. 

I've provided 4 explicit Scriptures that assert that God would come and not fail to save us. I have around 96 additional Scriptures which say the same thing. All these Scriptures stand against the following statements. 

Seventh Day Adventist Signs of the Time April 2, 1940
It is VITAL for every Christian to know that Jesus Christ MIGHT have sinned. The Master was not beyond the clutches of temptation. The Heaven-sent Gift could have been eternally lost and the doom of humanity would have been eternally sealed. Jesus Christ knew the pull of evil. "In that He Himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted."

 

Charles S Longacre
IF it were impossible for the Son of God to make a mistake or commit a sin, then His coming into this world and subjecting Himself to temptations were all a farce AND mere mockery. IF it were possible for Him to yield to temptation and fall into sin, then He MUST have risked heaven and His very existence, and EVEN all eternity. That is exactly what the Scriptures AND the Spirit of Prophecy say Christ, the Son of God did do when He came to work out for us a plan of salvation from the curse of sin. IF Christ "risked all," EVEN His ETERNAL EXISTENCE in heaven, then there was a possibility of His being overcome by sin, and IF overcome by sin, He would have gone into Joseph's tomb and neither THAT tomb nor any other tomb would EVER have been opened. All would have been lost and HE would have suffered "eternal loss," the loss of ALL He ever possessed &; His DIVINITY AND His humanity and heaven itself would have been "lost & eternally lost
It was possible for one of the God-head to be lost, and eternally lost - and IF that had happened, and it WAS possible to happen, "God, the Father", would still have remained as the One and only absolute and living God, reigning supreme over all the unfallen worlds, but with all the human race blotted out of existence on this earth. The Deity of Christ’, paper presented to the Bible Research Fellowship Angwin, California January 1947, page 13 & 14)

 

Review and Herald November 14, 1854
Again, where it is declared, that there are none good except the Father, it cannot be understood that none others are good in a relative sense; for Christ and angels, are good, yea perfect, in their respective sphere; BUT that the Father alone is supremely, or absolutely, good; AND that he alone is immortal in an absolute sense; that he alone is self-existent; and, that, consequently, every other being, however high or low, is absolutely dependent upon him for life; for being. This idea is most emphatically expressed by our Saviour himself; " For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." John v, 26. This would be singular language for one to use who had life in his essential nature, just as much as the Father. To meet such a view, it should read thus: For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath the Son life in himself If as Trinitarians argue, the Divine nature of the Son hath life in himself (i. e., is self existent) jusl the same, and in as absolute a sense, as the Father, why should he represent himself as actually dependent upon the Father for life ? What propriety in representing the Father as conferring upon him a gift which he had possessed from all eternity ? If it be said that his human nature derived its life from the Father, I would answer, It does not thus read; 01 even if it did, 1 would still urge the impropriety of the human nature of the Son of God representing itself as being absolutely dependent upon the Father for the gift of life

Ellen White

As a member of the human family he was mortal, but as a God he was the fountain of life to the world. Review and Herald Sept 4,1900

 

Ellen White
He yielded up His life a sacrifice, that man should not eternally die. He died, not through being compelled to die, but by His own free will. {FLB 46.7}

 

Ellen White
Because of sin, his posterity was born with inherent propensities of disobedience. But Jesus Christ was the only begotten Son of God. He took upon Himself human nature, and was tempted in all points as human nature is tempted. He could have sinned; He could have fallen,

 

Ellen White Desire of Ages page 49
Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss.”

I think there is around 60 statements Ellen made about the real possibility of Christ failing - even to the point of describing how he would have rotted in the tomb had He given in to the sin he yearned for. 

What I'm trying to show with all this is that (at least to me) its just as clear that the ceremonial aspects of the law ceased being binding on Christians as its clear that God said there would be no failure as far as Salvation was concerned. 

 

[BlessedMan]

8 minutes ago, Gustave said:

I think there is around 60 statements Ellen made about the real possibility of Christ failing - even to the point of describing how he would have rotted in the tomb had He given in to the sin he yearned for. 

What I'm trying to show with all this is that (at least to me) its just as clear that the ceremonial aspects of the law ceased being binding on Christians as its clear that God said there would be no failure as far as Salvation was concerned. 

Hopefully, you are not condemning her for postulating the question that many others have wondered about too? But thank you for the efforts and references. I was happy to see you did not use too much from the many "compilations" of her writings, so that will make the discussion easier.

I totally agree with the green-bolded above. Bible says "God is love," (1 John 4:8) and that "love never fails." (1 Cor 13:8). A very vital truth that we can be agreed upon...but then there is that little fly in the room, something about EGW 

I may not have time to get into that more for a day or three, but will definitely come back asap to have a go at it.

The question you raise with that subject are totally fair, and deserve a credible reply.

[Gustave]

4 minutes ago, BlessedMan said:

Hopefully, you are not condemning her for postulating the question that many others have wondered about too? But thank you for the efforts and references. I was happy to see you did not use too much from the many "compilations" of her writings, so that will make the discussion easier.

I totally agree with the green-bolded above. Bible says "God is love," (1 John 4:8) and that "love never fails." (1 Cor 13:8). A very vital truth that we can be agreed upon...but then there is that little fly in the room, something about EGW 

I may not have time to get into that more for a day or three, but will definitely come back asap to have a go at it.

The question you raise with that subject are totally fair, and deserve a credible reply.

Yes, God said He would come and would succeed in saving. There was no possibility of failure. The 1st person who I know of who suggested that there was a possibility of failure was Arius (founder of Arianism). Scripture is explicit that notion was impossible.