Biblical Interpretation

[Gregory Matthews]

The following article discusses and issue of interpreting the Bible that is important.  On a personal basis, I suggest that the author could have written with greater clarity.

https://atoday.org/interpreting-life-with-the-help-of-the-bible/

[Humble Disciple]

Ellen White isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. Is there a reason for this?

[phkrause]

20 hours ago, Humble Disciple said:

Ellen White isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. Is there a reason for this?

You need to ask them! Not Gregory!!

[GHansen]

21 hours ago, Humble Disciple said:

Ellen White isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. Is there a reason for this?

One reason might be that the Bible explains itself; consequently, there is no reason to mention EGW. If the article was about best dietary practices, I would expect EGW to have been quoted liberally. 

[Humble Disciple]

2 hours ago, GHansen said:

One reason might be that the Bible explains itself; consequently, there is no reason to mention EGW. If the article was about best dietary practices, I would expect EGW to have been quoted liberally. 

7th Day Adventism definitely turns to Ellen White in understanding the Bible in more than just dietary practices. Just look at the 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Practically everything that's unique about Adventism compared to other denominations can be traced to Ellen White or was endorsed by Ellen White. 

[GHansen]

The original article had to do with interpreting the Bible. Ellen G. White is not the Bible; consequently, there is no reason her name should come up in an article on Bible interpretation. Elon Everts, James White, John Andrews, Uriah Smith, probably others all wrote about the Investigative Judgment years before EGW did. Apparently, she endorsed it but it was not originally from her. People may say that SDA doctrines came from EGW but they did not. I'm not sure that a single doctrine originated with EGW. If you know of one, please share it.

The things she wrote about health, especially diet are suggested by Scripture; however, one of her earliest works on the subject of health plainly states that the volume (How to Live) included  health recommendations form other health care professionals 

[Humble Disciple]

Ellen White's prophetic role in interpreting scripture is the 18th fundamental belief. 

 

[The following is the voted SDA position that states the fundamental belief as to the role of the Bible:   " . . . the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested."--IOW, the Bible is authoritative over the writings of Ellen White, and this is also what she taught.  To say otherwise is to take a position that she rejected--Gregory Matthews.]

[GHansen]

8 hours ago, Humble Disciple said:

Ellen White's prophetic role in interpreting scripture is the 18th fundamental belief. 

“One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.” Fundamental Beliefs, 18 (from Seventh-day Adventists Believe..., p. 247

"They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.”

 

I don't see anything there about her interpreting Scripture. I would agree that her guidance in areas such as health, education and other areas of Christian living are a blessing.

[Humble Disciple]

9 hours ago, GHansen said:

“One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.” Fundamental Beliefs, 18 (from Seventh-day Adventists Believe..., p. 247

"They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.”

 

I don't see anything there about her interpreting Scripture. I would agree that her guidance in areas such as health, education and other areas of Christian living are a blessing.

It seems like you are being obtuse. Could you please set aside your personal opinion and convey traditional Adventist doctrine on Ellen White's role for interpreting scripture?

[Ghansen, it seems that you are stating your personal opinion and also you fail to understand both her teachings and taht   of the SDA Church--Gregory Matthews.]

[GHansen]

25 minutes ago, Humble Disciple said:

It seems like you are being obtuse. Could you please set aside your personal opinion and convey traditional Adventist doctrine on Ellen White's role for interpreting scripture?

"They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.”

That's not my "personal opinion."

[Humble Disciple]

When it comes to the teachings that are unique to Adventism, what usually happened is that Adventist pioneers would be studying the Bible and arrive at a particular interpretation, and then Ellen White would receive a vision which would confirm that the interpretation was true. Ellen White also wrote books, such as The Desire of Ages, which are considered inspired. The idea that Adventists rely on Ellen White only for health advice is absurd. 

[phkrause]

On 2/8/2022 at 2:01 PM, Humble Disciple said:

Adventist doctrine on Ellen White's role for interpreting scripture?

Personally I'm not understanding your statement here about EGW interpreting scripture!! I see it more as her getting visions, and/or help from the HS for her 5 set books, I believe called the Conflict Series, and also the 7 book Testimonies for the Church. Not sure about some of her other books!! Are you having a problem with her writings?? or what??

[Humble Disciple]

59 minutes ago, phkrause said:

Personally I'm not understanding your statement here about EGW interpreting scripture!! I see it more as her getting visions, and/or help from the HS for her 5 set books, I believe called the Conflict Series, and also the 7 book Testimonies for the Church. Not sure about some of her other books!! Are you having a problem with her writings?? or what??

I have a problem with the article in the OP, since it makes no mention of Ellen White, and it contains statements contrary to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Here's an example:

Quote

Truth is always defrauded by falsehood. Additionally, imposing dogma on the basis of one’s own interpretation of Scripture is not just an injustice against truth, but also is the muting of another’s voice. In other words, disempowered interpretive reading is a testimonial injustice, in which alternative interpretations receive an unfair amount of credibility because of the listeners’ bias or prejudice.

You cannot be an Adventist who professes belief in the 28 Fundamental Beliefs while also believing the above paragraph. Either the 28 Fundamental Beliefs correctly interpret scripture or they don't. Theology professors at Adventist colleges who teach things contrary to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs should have their voices muted. 

The author of the article, who is somehow allowed to teach at an Adventist college, also endorses liberation theology in the article, which is based in Marxism. He also says that our hermeneutics should be liberated from exegesis, meaning that the lived experience of Christians today should be more important to our theology than the actual words of scripture.

For any Adventist in any traditional sense of the term, the article is terrible. 

[Gregory Matthews]

In this discussion the purpose of the so-called 28 should be kept in mind.  

*  They are a statement of common SDA beliefs.  They are not a statement of what is required for one to be a SDA member.  Some people have attempted to make them to be a requirement (creed) in order to be a member.   Those people a\are wrong.  The requirements to be a member are outlined in the so-called 13. 

*  The paragraph, printed in Bold at the beginning of each chapter are an officially voted statement of SDA common beliefs.  The chapter that follows each is not an officially voted statement and cannot be said truthfully to be a requirement for belief.  

*  The so-called 28 are simply a revision of the so-called 27.  In the following quotes I will cite from the 27:

"While this volume [book] is not an officially voted statement--only a General Conference in world session could provide that--it may be viewed as representative of the truth. . . [sic.] in Jesus . . . that Seventh-day Adventists around the globe cherish and proclaim." page iv

"We have not written this book to serve as a creed a statement of beliefs set in theological concrete."  pagers v & vi

 

 

[Humble Disciple]

3 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

In this discussion the purpose of the so-called 28 should be kept in mind.  

*  They are a statement of common SDA beliefs.  They are not a statement of what is required for one to be a SDA member.  Some people have attempted to make them to be a requirement (creed) in order to be a member.   Those people a\are wrong.  The requirements to be a member are outlined in the so-called 13. 

*  The paragraph, printed in Bold at the beginning of each chapter are an officially voted statement of SDA common beliefs.  The chapter that follows each is not an officially voted statement and cannot be said truthfully to be a requirement for belief.  

*  The so-called 28 are simply a revision of the so-called 27.  In the following quotes I will cite from the 27:

"While this volume [book] is not an officially voted statement--only a General Conference in world session could provide that--it may be viewed as representative of the truth. . . [sic.] in Jesus . . . that Seventh-day Adventists around the globe cherish and proclaim." page iv

"We have not written this book to serve as a creed a statement of beliefs set in theological concrete."  pagers v & vi

 

 

If that is the case, why are there baptismal vows? 

[Gregory Matthews]

The Baptismal vows contain the official requirements to become a member of the SDA Chruch.

The Baptismal Vows exist in two (2) forms.  Candidates for membership have the choice but must agree to one of those vows.

*  The traditional set consists of 13 statements of belief.   This is a long-lasting set that has been in place for many years, and the set under which I operated as SDA clergy.

*  The second set consists of three statements of belief.

The traditional 13 may be found at:

OFFICIAL SDA BAPTISMAL VOWS (adventistchurch.org.uk)

Those 13, consist of the English language version in effect every where that English is the native language.

You will notice that it does not reference Ellen White in any manner.  It does mention the Biblical gifts of the Holy Spirit.  But, it does not attribute those to Ellen White.

As stated by Wikipedia, the Alternate Vows are:

An alternative baptismal vow was introduced in 2005. It originated with the

 South Pacific Division branch of the Biblical Research Committee.^[4] It consists of the following three affirmations:

1. Do you accept Jesus Christ as your personal Savior and Lord, and do you desire to live your life in a saving relationship with Him?

2. Do you accept the teachings of the Bible as expressed in the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and do you pledge by God’s grace to live your life in harmony with these teachings?

3. Do you desire to be baptized as a public expression of your belief in Jesus Christ, to be accepted into the fellowship of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and to support the church and its mission as a faithful steward by your personal influence, tithes and offerings, and a life of service?^[2]

 

[Humble Disciple]

4 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The Baptismal vows contain the official requirements to become a member of the SDA Chruch.

This is from the alternative baptismal vows:

Quote

Do you accept the teachings of the Bible as expressed in the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and do you pledge by God’s grace to live your life in harmony with these teachings?

This is from the traditional baptismal vows:

Quote

Do you know and understand the fundamental Bible principles as taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church? Do you purpose, by the grace of God, to fulfill His will by ordering your life in harmony with these principles?

7th Day Adventism isn't a theological free-for-all, as the article in the OP suggests. 

[Gregory Matthews]

You have raised a major issue (question):  Should membership in the SDA Chruch be restricted to a group of people who have agreed to a specific set of beliefs, and understand them in a common manner, or should membership be granted to people who are at different levels of spiritual development and are on a spiritual journey which are united by their travel on that spiritual journey?

*  Both types of SDA congregations exist in the SDA denomination.

*  In SDA policy, it is the local congregation that has the authority to determine whether or not a person may be admitted into membership.

*  Therefore, in actual practice, the theological beliefs of SDAs is much broader than you are able to acknowledge. 

 

 

 

[GHansen]

5 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

[Ghansen, it seems that you are stating your personal opinion and also you fail to understand both her teachings and taht   of the SDA Church--Gregory Matthews.]

Remark appended to Humble Disciple's February 9 post. 

 

Chaplain Matthews, Not sure to what you are referring. What is it that I fail to understand regarding the teachings of EGW or the denomination? 

[Humble Disciple]

38 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

You have raised a major issue (question):  Should membership in the SDA Chruch be restricted to a group of people who have agreed to a specific set of beliefs, and understand them in a common manner, or should membership be granted to people who are at different levels of spiritual development and are on a spiritual journey which are united by their travel on that spiritual journey?

*  Both types of SDA congregations exist in the SDA denomination.

*  In SDA policy, it is the local congregation that has the authority to determine whether or not a person may be admitted into membership.

*  Therefore, in actual practice, the theological beliefs of SDAs is much broader than you are able to acknowledge. 

 

 

 

What is the point of having baptismal vows if one isn't required to believe and keep them?

This is also from the traditional SDA baptismal vows:

Quote

Do you accept the biblical teaching of spiritual gifts and believe that the gift of prophecy is one of the identifying marks of the remnant church? 

As far as I can tell, this is referring specifically to the visions and writings of Ellen White, which play a larger role in Adventist belief and practice than just health advice. 

It should not be forgotten that Adventist Today is a "progressive" Adventist publication and that La Sierra University has been criticized for diverging from traditional Adventist teachings. 

[GHansen]

2 minutes ago, Humble Disciple said:

What is the point of having baptismal vows if one isn't required to believe and keep them?

HD, The word "vow" has a certain connotation which, regarding religious beliefs, seems negative. My recollection is that the baptismal certificate given in the mid 80s didn't even have the word "vow" on it.  Perhaps they differed from place to place. An affirmation of belief is not a vow. RCs entering religious orders take "vows." Traditionally, poverty, chastity, and obedience were among those vows. My personal opinion is that religious vows are a form of legalism, an extreme form. People who take vows are binding themselves to a human construct, something they might imagine will make them better in God's sight. Actually, vows might make a person worse.

If I affirm the belief that Jesus died for my sins and rose again, that's not a vow, which dictionaries define as a "solemn pledge." It's a confession of faith.

[Humble Disciple]

The title of this thread is Biblical Interpretation, while the article in the OP says that the theology of Adventist communities should be based on their own lived experience rather than the Bible. What is the point of the thread title? 

[GHansen]

1 hour ago, Humble Disciple said:

The title of this thread is Biblical Interpretation, while the article in the OP says that the theology of Adventist communities should be based on their own lived experience rather than the Bible. What is the point of the thread title? 

Last generation theology teaches that people will attain the holiness of Adam before the Fall. This will be accomplished in sinful flesh prior to the return of Jesus. My "own lived experience" tells me that this is a false teaching, one which the Bible, properly understood also says is false.

[phkrause]

On 2/21/2022 at 9:04 PM, Humble Disciple said:

I have a problem with the article in the OP, since it makes no mention of Ellen White,

That's his prerogative!! I have notice that more and more, even from some that have used her a lot in the past! I think they're trying to appease those that have a problem or just want to hear the answers straight from the Bible!!

[Gregory Matthews]

GHansen: My comment was related to your post on February 9.

*  EGW taught, as I   could cite, that the Bible in the traditional Protestant sense was the ultimate authority for doctrine and belief as it contained the autoreactive teachings of Christ.  You seem to present EGW as being the authority that determines what the Bible teaches.   That position elevates her over the Bible.

*  In the early days of the SDA denomination (therefore our traditional belief) SDA leaders held to the idea that the Bible had authority over the writing s of EGW.  In 1919, a division arose in which some leaders seem to have taken the position that the writings of EGW had authority over the Bible.  But, that position was not taken by all.