A letter to a "half-in, half-out" Adv... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » DISCUSSION » A letter to a "half-in, half-out" Adventist « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through July 07, 2014Mountaingirl20 7-07-14  10:40 am
Archive through July 22, 2014Resjudicata20 7-22-14  11:40 am
  Start New Thread        

Author Message
Registered user
Username: Mjcmcook

Post Number: 1510
Registered: 2-2011

Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2014 - 7:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


Thank-you again for sharing your research and insight.

My prayer, is that when people read the 'facts' you present, it will be used
by the HOLY SPIRIT to connect with their hearts, and the transformation that only HE can bring!

Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 184
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Wednesday, July 23, 2014 - 4:08 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank you Mjcmcook. I already know these letters are being distributed to at least 10 present Seventh Day Adventists and are rocking them to the core. Simply put, "The Great Controversy" is a thin tissue of lies and fraud. You can't get around that. And it is the deceitful foundational document of the Adventist Church. Worst of all, Adventist leadership has long been aware that very few of White's historical facts are remotely true. That is clear from the 1919 Bible Conference transcripts. Wouldn't an obvious solution to White's plagiarism be to simply distribute to Adventist membership the books she stole from? The reason they don't is obvious: The historians she stole from were honest. Neither their scholarship nor any other credible history supports the paranoid and conspiratorial "Great Controversy" worldview. There is no "there".....there.

During my intense examination and analysis of the "Great Controversy", I was repeatedly struck by the honesty and integrity of the post-Resurrection Apostles and First and Second Century Christians. And the integrity and acute analysis of the Reformers. The contrast is glaring. It is plain that Adventism systematically demotes and degrades the effect of the Resurrection on church history. It is Resurrection Denial writ large. The Resurrection is what transforms and revolutionizes people into being Real Christians. The Sabbath never has and never will. The Resurrection is what caused and causes Christians to reject Sabbatarianism. Not the Papacy.

The GC is the bedrock of the modern Sabbatarian revival. Why didn't the Protestant Reformers adopt Sabbath Keeping? They didn't have the Great Controversy. Instead, they were honest. They gave the Sabbath an honest and searching consideration, from both a historical and biblical standpoint, and then unequivocally-rejected it. They were fierce enemies of the Papacy, and yet they never indulged themselves in a complete psychotic breakdown like EGW apparently did. Like Calvin or not (and I don't), you cannot deny he is a breath of sanity compared to EGW:

"Hence the office of the Spirit promised to us, is not to form new and unheard-of revelations, or to coin a new form of doctrine, by which we may be led away from the received doctrine of the gospel, but to seal on our minds the very doctrine which the gospel recommends."
"Still there can be no doubt, that, on the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ, the ceremonial part of the commandment was abolished. He is the truth, at whose presence all the emblems vanish; the body, at the sight of which the shadows disappear. He, I say, is the true completion of the sabbath: “We are buried with him by baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we should walk in newness of life,” (Rom. 6:4). Hence, as the Apostle elsewhere says, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holiday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ,” (Col. 2:16, 17); meaning by body the whole essence of the truth, as is well explained in that passage. This is not contented with one day, but requires the whole course of our lives, until being completely dead to ourselves, we are filled with the life of God. Christians, therefore, should have nothing to do with a superstitious observance of days."

See how easy that was? Quoting at length from someone you disagree with? That is known as intellectual honesty. That the GC never mentions, let alone analyzes or rebuts Calvin's, Luther's, and Zwingli's careful deliberations that led them to reject Sabbatarianism is just shoddy scholarship and unforgivable. When I read Calvin, Luther and Zwingli they feel comfortable, like old shoes, given their legal backgrounds. EGW is a sustained, childish temper tantrum by comparison. The GC fairly reeks of her third-grade immaturity. It is not history. It is baloney.

In no way could you reach Calvin's, Luther's and Zwingli's sober and honest Sabbath conclusions by reading the GC. Without the "Great Controversy worldview," as Colleen has called it, rabidly-fanatic Sabbath Keeping as propagated by Adventism is utterly preposterous and groundless.

It is certainly not supportable from the Bible. Like their position on the Sabbath or not (and I don't), Seventh Day Baptists have never indulged themselves in hysterical and grandiose thinking. They think their Sabbath doctrine is supported by the scriptures, and the scriptures only. They have never felt the need for a grassy knoll Papal Sabbath assassin. Adventists adopted Sabbath Keeping by nursing their purple, seething outrage at Protestantism's unequivocal rejection of the Millerite hoax. Every fundamental Adventist doctrine was developed in a crazed and maniacal response to Protestantism's stinging rejection and public ridicule of the 1844 events. Adventist "doctrines" are fierce, childish resentments and grudges sealed in amber. "The Great Controversy" fairly reeks of White's fierce resentment at, and childish jealousy of established Christianity, which which was guilty only of having the good sense to reject and ostracize Millerism.

EGW was outraged that organized Christianity managed to stay sane in the midst of Millerite mass hysteria. So she punished organized Christianity with the perverted, insane ravings of the Great Controversy.
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 10160
Registered: 3-2004

Posted on Wednesday, July 23, 2014 - 2:11 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Rejudicata, I would love to see an article of yours, with all this accurate history, in Proclamation magazine.
Thank you for all your research.
Colleen Tinker, how about Resjudicata writing an article for Proclamation.
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 187
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Wednesday, July 23, 2014 - 5:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


Shhhhhh! Legend has it that Colleen may have been my Academy writing teacher. So I am envisioning her pouring over my writing with a red felt tip pin, and writing a HUGE "F" on it like she may have done that one time......

But I won't tell anyone if you don't.
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 188
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Thursday, July 24, 2014 - 4:30 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


One of the more disturbing facts about Ellen White was her prophetic emphasis on distinctively minor and localized events such as falling stars, dark days and red moons and so on. She argued that such trifling and insignificant phenomena were evidence of the fulfillment of some prophecies of Revelation. Those claims are systematically-debunked here:


Finding such religious significance in extremely-routine astronomical events by scientifically-illiterate laypeople reminds one of the mass cult suicide during the 1990's Hale Bopp Comet hysteria:


The Hale Bopp Comet - which indeed was very visible and dazzling to the naked eye - was a non-event in scientific terms: It was just a big ball of slush meandering haphazardly across the sky. It posed no danger and was a non-event astronomically-speaking.

Meanwhile, a truly unprecedented and extremely significant astronomical event happening near the same time as Hale Bopp,but was completely ignored by prophecy buffs:


I cite this recent history to make a point: Ellen White obviously missed several other significant astronomical events that occurred during her lifetime, and that had FAR greater impact on the Earth, and were notable for the coverage they received in the nation's press. How could this so-called "Prophet" have possibly missed these extremely-damaging events, and completely-avoided commenting on them? Was she "gun shy" after her botched Civil War predictions?

For instance, the 1859 Solar flair caused immense property damage and was the most notable astronomical event of the 1800's. It continues to be closely studied by scientists. And yet White said not one word about it that I can find:


Additionally, a massive comet explosion over Siberia in 1908 leveled thousands of acres of timber, involving the explosive power of many thousands of thermonuclear hydrogen bombs. I can find no evidence that White was aware of the event, or commented on it:


And I can find no evidence that Ellen White was aware of or commented on the most massive volcanic explosion of the 1800's, the Mount Tambora explosion in April 1815. The explosion was catastrophically-immense, and may have killed millions of people with a resultant tsunami and "nuclear winter" that erased an entire SUMMER in 1816:


White obsessed over a mere "dark day" in 1780, which was a localized event in New England caused by forest fires. But she missed an entire "dark SUMMER" caused by a Volcanic explosion that killed perhaps millions in 1815!

White also focused on the Lisbon Earthquake of 1755 as a prophecy fulfillment, presumably because of its proximity in time with her own life and 1844. Don't get me wrong: It was a bad earthquake. But there have been MANY earthquakes, both before and after that quake that vastly exceeded its damage and loss of life:


White pulled out the stops to find proximate events that supported the 1844 hoax. But she missed far more significant events that occurred right under her nose, which indicates the utter fallacy and futility of her entire approach to the Bible. Lesson? Christians need to keep their "eye on the ball" known as the Resurrection, which White clearly did not.
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 14884
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Monday, July 28, 2014 - 3:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I absolutely think we need an article, Diana! And to tell the truth, I don't believe I taught Res, but I did teach his sister... ;)!


(Message edited by Colleentinker on July 28, 2014)
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 213
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - 12:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You substitute taught at least one, if not a couple of my classes, that I very vividly remember, while Mrs. "H" was recovering from surgery. And I got back an "F" on a paper that was not in the normal teacher's handwriting right afterwords. Like I have already admitted, I was a very poor, sub-standard student in Academy.

As far as an article, I would love to. I would like even BETTER to talk about it at Michigan, if possible. (Being around a whole bunch of Adventists, albeit "Exes" is something I feel I need to do.) I am likely to be in Michigan in September anyway, lecturing at the University of Michigan Law School at Ann Arbor, which is only about 130 miles from St. Joseph (according to Mapquest). After working on it for a year, a drug cartel double-murder, Death Penalty case of mine has been dismissed outright. That happens about every.....um......NEVER.

Nothing I have written is rocket science. And the response among Spectrumites has quite caught me completely off guard. Many of them are emailing me for further information, and the level of education some of them have shocks me. I have been having a LOT of trouble getting my mind around the basic issue of Adventist educational competence lately. I am getting inquiries from people who, if they worked for a State University and demonstrated that level of incompetence,would be fired. With the internet, it is just so easy to sleuth through my basic analytical matrix: "When did Ellen White lie, and when did the General Conference discover the lie and then cover it up?"

Shouldn't someone with a PHD and works at a college be able to do the same? Isn't this pretty basic research?

However, one very earnest and honest person bravely responded to one of my posts on Spectrum with a quote out of the "Desire of Ages." I looked up the quote. In context, the quote was alarming, demonstrating nothing in common with the Biblical account, but not conflicting with it either. It stunned me. Ellen White didn't lie. She didn't plagiarize the idea (that I can tell anyway, after comparing it to the usual sources she stole from for DA). She didn't withhold critical facts. This was something just shocking, sinister and unprecedented:

She just made it up out of whole cloth! Really! It was actually original. It wasn't stolen. It wasn't an obvious lie. But yet it was spun out of thin air. It made me look TERRIBLE. That was quite a blow to my pride!

Here, I had become proud that I had her nailed and could predictably figure out any of her tactics very quickly without a lot of effort. So I had to change my matrix, to account for stuff that was complete fiction, dreamed up by her (or her talented phalanx of professional writers). Why oh why didn't I understand this already? How could I have missed this possibility? Granted, "The Great Controversy" was such a target rich environment that I never really had the time to branch out to her other books (aside from a few forays in "Patriarchs and Prophets;" which in my opinion, is the "granddaddy of all Adventist lies" because of her severe misrepresentation of Old Testament Law.) So now I wonder how much MORE I have missed in "The Great Controversy!" How many times has just straight original fiction slipped its way right under my nose, while I was off baying like a bloodhound after obvious lies, information actively withheld from membership, or straight up scientific nonsense?

I am now newly-humbled by the immensity of her talents!
Registered user
Username: Philharris

Post Number: 3058
Registered: 5-2007

Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 6:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


The power of Ellen has always amazed me and became apparent to me that it transferred to others who could claim ‘to have personally known the prophet’. My dad’s parents took their nurses training at the St. Helena Sanitarium and were married there in 1911. Immediately after the wedding Ellen sent them as medical missionaries to China where my dad and his older brother were born.

For some strange reason (to me that is) this gave my grandmother great power. All she had to do throughout the years of her life was to make a simple phone call and SDA conference officials would jump to her every request. I witnessed this happening many times over and it always puzzled my logical mind even back when I was a dedicated SDA myself.

So, as I was taught during my short tour in the Marine Corps, never never underestimate your enemy, not even when there is no hate in your heart and are willing to forgive. My SDA cousins just don’t understand why I have renounced her. There is no reasoning with them until the Holy Spirit opens their minds and hearts to God’s inspired Biblical truth.

Fearless Phil
Registered user
Username: Mjcmcook

Post Number: 1531
Registered: 2-2011

Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 8:14 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The Power of JESUS is Stronger!!!

To Break Every Chain that binds anyone to the lies of satan~

Prayer is the weapon for the Christian to use in this war..
and it is a "war", make no mistake!

JESUS ~ Name Above All Names!


Registered user
Username: Mjcmcook

Post Number: 1532
Registered: 2-2011

Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 9:49 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I truly believe the HOLY SPIRIT opened my eyes to the lies of Ellen G. White when
in my study of Scripture I read the following verses~

"And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him."

***(Very IMPORTANT)*** "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? (REALLY IMPORTANT!)...***When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." Deuteronomy 18:19-22.(KJV).

These verses really 'clinched' it for me! Ellen G. White claimed messages
from GOD~
It seems to me, if "any" of her prophecies did not come true~~~'she' was Not 'speaking' for GOD!

I have been released from the 'Chains of Fear' that her lies wrapped
me in for 50 years! Only GOD can work
such a Miracle! HE did it for me~ HE will
do this for anyone, who is brave enough to ask,
in His Name!

Registered user
Username: Capross

Post Number: 88
Registered: 7-2012
Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 10:05 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


The power of prayer cannot be overestimated. God truly hears and answers our prayers for truth.

I would like to add study of the scriptures also. God helped me see the inconsistencies in what I was taught by the adventists in my studies of the Bible.

Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 10166
Registered: 3-2004

Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 12:13 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What clinched EGW for me was reading Dirk Anderson's website about her. After I finished reading all of it I sat here at my computer and told myself that I could not go back to "that" church as she had too much influence on it. When I said that, out loud, I felt a burden lifted off my shoulders that I did not know was there. And I have never been back, not even for a funeral or wedding. Of course I have not been invited to either.
It was after that that I began to read the NT, in context, and learned what the Bible really taught. What a very pleasant surprise to learn.

(Message edited by Flyinglady on July 30, 2014)
Registered user
Username: Mjcmcook

Post Number: 1533
Registered: 2-2011

Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 1:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

As I wrote in my post above, it was through the study of Scripture
that my eyes were opened to the Only Truth, on which we can stake our eternal life!

Those verses from Deuteronomy set me Free from the fears instilled in
me by Ellen G. White! Fears from my cradle into my 50's~

Our minds and hearts are changed by bathing them in Scripture~

Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 215
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 3:23 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Thank you all for your kind compliments and for giving my research some of your precious time. And PLEASE, if you find errors in what I have written, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE let me know in short order, if possible.

That last Spectrum encounter really threw me for a loop, I have to admit. I have reluctantly accepted that EGW was likely demon-influenced at the very least, in spite of my overwhelming predisposition to reject such an explanation. But that passage out of Desire of Ages has really caused me to reevaluate my GC research and writing and do some intense soul searching.

Now I think it is highly likely that my GC research is FAR more superficial than I would have ever imagined. I think the depths of EGW's deception goes FAR deeper, and on MANY more different levels than I had imagined. I honestly believe now that I have not even scratched the surface, with what I have found just in the GC. What I have written on this thread is likely less than 1 percent of the MAJOR deceptions that is in the GC (and I, quite frankly, am uninterested in pursuing the plagiarizing angle, unless I can show she withheld critical information). Her penchant for just making stuff up in my opinion has almost been entirely overlooked. Everyone has gone "baying" after the plagiarism, which indeed is bad. Don't take me wrong, the plagiarism is awful. And I actually had imagined that my exposition of the deliberate withholding of critical facts broke some uncovered ground.

Now I think it is piffling. Here is my proposed new analytical matrix for evaluated EGW's deception:

- Plagiarism: Obvious but superficial dishonesty. There is some, but not THAT much merit to the Adventist apologist response that "Everyone at that time was doing it, and as long as it was competent research that was beneficial, then it is not that big of a deal." I DO have to say that many of EGW's "sources" were highly-Academic, and well over the head of her audience. I am not justifying her plagiarism, please do not jump to that conclusion. It reflects on her honestly, which is the underlying theory that motivates my research. But she "translated" some pretty heavy duty academic stuff and made it understandable for the average lay person. And early Adventism was populated by quite a few people that would have trouble reading and writing their own name. Had she simply noted her sources or even explained that she was making research readable for the general public, nobody would have given it any second thought. You can see that in the tension between the ignorant and uneducated Millerites, and the better-educated mainline Protestants that condemned the hoax. While it definitely does reflect on her honesty and integrity, I find that the plagiarism angle has been beat to death.

- Deliberately withheld information: This is FAR more serious in my opinion, especially the withholding of the Noahide Laws, given that the GC's central theme is the Sabbath. The existence of the Noahide Laws all by themselves demolish the Great Controversy world view. And she was looking right at them while she was plagiarizing from Edersheim. In my mind, withholding the existence of these laws from Adventists is FAR more serious than plagiarizing from Edersheim. Presently, I am also researching whether Adventist leadership knew that resident Gentiles were subject to the Death Penalty for attempting Sabbath Keeping. The Jewish Encyclopedia was first published in 1903. There are some intriguing leads that I am following in Adventist literature and lore that suggests that at the very least, Adventist leadership "borrowed" heavily from that Jewish Encyclopedia for some early articles I have found in the Review and Herald. Why is this important? Because in no way can I expect any Adventist scholar to follow my twisted and convoluted logic straight from the Mishnah Torah, the Babylonian Talmud, the Jerusalem Talmud and the mammoth Responsa writings. That is just asking too much, I have found. However, the Jewish Encyclopedia brings down the Torah Law to the non-Torah Scholar, layperson level. Withholding known information from THAT is truly unforgivable, in my opinion. If (and that is a big IF) this is true, then Adventism also withheld the long-standing Jewish prohibition that the Mosaic Law and the Sabbath did not apply to Gentiles, and their vigorous punishment of violators with execution. BAD BAD BAD.

- Outright historical lies: Like the 1840 Ottoman Empire Hoax, even after the OE had won a major military battle against the combined armies of France, Britain and Russia in 1915, four months before EGW's death. 100 years later, and this obvious falsehood has never been corrected in GC. BAD BAD BAD. Or the 1798 Papal mortal wound" hoax. Clearly, the truth about that has been brought to Adventism's attention many times, and it has never been corrected. What about the OTHER pope that was captured in 1803? What about the Papacy defeating Napolean and getting back more than they lost at the Council of Vienna in 1815? Why is THAT not the "mortal blow?" Why has that never been disclosed to Adventists? The 538 AD date means nothing in the history of the Papacy. It has been beat to death. I added some rejoinders from Eastern Orthodoxy and the Protestant Reformation to disprove the notion that Papal Superiority has ever existed.

- Scientific buffoonery: As per the last lengthy entry I made. I believe that I have only barely scratched the junk scientific nonsense that has been foisted onto the Adventist membership. I haven't even STARTED on the "health gospel," for crying out loud! How much junk is that going to be? For a hilarious, screamingly funny sarcastic and irreverent overview of some of that utter garbage, you have to read THIS article, hilariously titled "Porn Flakes":

"Though unpleasant to the taste, Granula found a ready-made market at Jackson's sanitarium in Dansville, NY, where it was digested by residents. It was here that Sister Ellen White of the Seventh Day Adventists visited on the advice of an angel."

- Finally, stuff she just made up out of thin air. Nonsense that does not conflict with the Bible, or history, or science, but on its face, is just plain contrived nonsense. This is to be compared and contrasted with stuff that DOES conflict with the Bible, which I haven't even started analyzing, or even thinking about. I am having trouble grasping the extent of both of these issues, since I am quite sure that Adventist apologists will immediately respond with "She saw it in a vision, and we are the only ones that have it. See, she was a prophet after all!" That would be a fairly decent counterattack for contrived nonsense that does NOT conflict with the Bible. NOT so much for stuff that DOES conflict with the Bible. I want you guys's analysis on this issue.

This is getting to be a FAR bigger project than I had originally thought. I am not certain that I have the time or energy to do it real justice. Quite frankly, I am very discouraged with the late realization that my research has now been proven to be extraordinarily superficial, at best. The contrived out of thin air junk has me spooked. Realizing almost too late that it existed has been an emotional body blow.

(Message edited by Resjudicata on July 30, 2014)
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 14889
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - 5:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Res, i understand what you are saying...and the startling reality that her plagiarism and pick-and-choose copying is really the least of her offenses. I haven't done the research you have done, but as I have studied Scripture and have had to unlearn so many basic beliefs that defined life and reality at every level—from basic earth science to the metaphysical stuff of angels, spirits, and death, I have concluded that her copying and the exclusions in her worksares just the superficial problem she had.

The stories and her written accounts of her handsome angel guide, the light that would shine under her door when she received her revelation at night, the accounts of her smelling the scent of roses in some of her trances, her dream of conversing with her dead husband James and getting advice from him...even her particularly strange and cruel writings about children's discipline, her "green cord" vision, etc etc...these things reflect an occultic source.

I have had to conclude that EGW did not invent her theology; she received it—from demonic sources. No one could invent such a twisted version of Christianity that is so internally consistent and which completely eviscerates the Person and the work of the Lord Jesus except an anti-Christ power.

Adventists are inoculated against the gospel by being fed an anti-gospel that is sewn together with proof-texts and internal logic that defines every single aspect of reality for its victims.

No, I do not believe that EGWs picking and choosing and "borrowing" are the REAL story of her deception. She channeled spirits, or their information. She was not an innocent victim, I do not believe. She knew what she was doing. She destroyed lives.

I have come to believe that the very best way to figure out her falseness is to be immersed in Scripture. It is powerful and living, and it divides between bone and marrow, soul and spirit, and it reveals to us the falseness of our own framework of reality that we were taught with our mothers' milk.

Only the living and eternal word of God can reveal the depth and degree of EGWs deception.

Your legal insights are very helpful, Res, and they help me understand the completeness and the depth of the arguments that separate the New Covenant from the old. Thank you so much for sharing what you are learning...both of your studies of her plagiarism and omissions and of your ongoing insights into her utter willingness to be the vehicle of an evil deception.

And I understand the emotional body blow feeling. But know this: these deeper ongoing realizations are God's provision and are accomplished in God's own time. This realization is from Him...and He gave it to you at exactly the time He knew you needed to "see" it. You can thank Him for His faithfulness!

His word truly is our comfort and the revealer of what we must know! He chose you and brought you to Himself, and He is teaching you what He knows you need to know for the purpose of doing the work He is giving you to do!


PS--I have no memory of that paper and that F...but I can say that I do not remember ever grading papers for another teacher. Not saying I didn't, I just don't remember it. We all were drowning in our own papers

Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 217
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2014 - 7:36 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LOL....the "Fs" I got back back then were richly deserved. Although I more than made up for it at the two State Universities I attended, which to me strongly demonstrates the healing that I received just by divorcing myself from Adventism, without really understanding the nature of how I had been affected or what I was rejecting. This segues into my arguments against the superficial plagiarism charges.....

I have heard that even Walter Rhea continues to be a faithful Adventist. The Plagiarism issue gives you NO insight into the actual anti-Christian, false Gospel nature of Adventism. It's a start, but barely even that. It could even be just a diversion from the real issues. If someone leaves Adventism because of the Plagiarism issue, they have left for what I consider to be a very superficial reason. They will have no insight into their destructive, anti-Gospel world view. It is highly unlikely they have done the REAL work of abandoning false ideas and embracing the earth-shattering power of the REAL Gospel. In fact, REAL Christianity would probably compel you to forgive EGW for her plagiarism and continue to look for the good in her, IF that was really the only issue. Or if it were the most serious issue.

Similarly, the Investigative Judgment issue seems to me to be a real diversion, at best. Lots of people remain deceived Adventists, and yet have rejected the IJ. Walter Martin and Donald Barnhouse were deceived into giving Adventism a "clean cult bill of health," even though they insisted that the IJ had not the slightest "suspicion" of Biblical support.

Which is what has me spooked about other convoluted parts of EGW's writings that were just made up (like the IJ), but which do not necessarily conflict with the Gospel (like the IJ clearly does). The disturbing thing about the "made-up, non-biblical conflicting stuff" is that it gives EGW a LOT of unmerited prophetic credibility. And gives her anti-Gospel stance a LOT more credibility.
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 222
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2014 - 11:41 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Although I have spoken briefly about the major errors in Ellen’s recitation of the history of the Waldensians from a doctrinal developmental standpoint, I am shocked and amazed that I did not “dig deep enough.” White’s deliberate misrepresentations run in many surprising directions and leave a extraordinarily-deceptive perception of historical events in the reader’s minds. I was careless and shallow, and for that, I apologize. For reference, here is a link to the chapter under discussion:


White repeatedly refers to “Rome” as the Waldensians’ persistent persecutor. Not one single word in the Chapter mentions the role of the French Kings in the persecution of the Waldensians. Rome was far from the Waldensians’ greatest enemy. In fact, during one particular era of great religious tolerance where the Waldensians enjoyed their greatest religious freedom, the Pope wasn’t even residing in Rome. White, who exclusively hated Rome with a venomous passion, apparently was unaware that for almost 70 years at least seven Popes were French and the Papal headquarters existed solely in France:


And hilariously, in sharp rebuttal to White’s frequent condemnation of “Papal Supremacy,” a great schism took place in the Papacy where up to three contenders at a time vied for the seat of the Bishop of Rome. This went on for 100’s of years of the Waldensian saga, during which time Catholicism was virtually leaderless:


Thus, the entire chapter is egregiously-dishonest with its repeated denunciations of “Rome.”

Second, the two worst persecutions of the Waldensians were not ordered by, nor did the Popes have anything to do with either. The horrific massacre of 1655 was carried out by a renegade Duke of Savoy, with the Pope – Roman, French, schism or otherwise – having nothing to do with it:



The next worst massacre of the Waldensians occurred at the direct orders of the French King, AFTER the Papacy returned its headquarters to Rome. Again, neither “Rome,” nor the Papacy had anything to do with the Massacre of Merindol:



French King Louis XIV revoked religious freedom in France, and forced the conversions of thousands of Waldensians back to Catholicism, although this particular era of religious intolerance did not result in any massacres. By that time, the Waldensians had their own standing army and fought back valiantly, giving the French King some of his own medicine. White never mentions the Waldensians had their own army for substantial amounts of its history, nor does she mention they won some substantial military victories over the French army! However, it appears that many Waldensians returned voluntarily to Catholicism without much, if any coercion:



That White referred exclusively to “Rome” as the persecutor in chief of the Waldensians is an egregious and clearly deliberate misrepresentation of history. Without a doubt, French Kings and renegade Dukes – none of which were operating under orders of, or the blessing of the Papacy - caused the greatest bloodshed of the Waldensians. Nor is it accurate to describe this era of the Papacy as one involving “Papal Supremacy.” It was a time of discord and schism while the Papacy was split asunder and moved from France to Italy and around Italy.

Throughout this history, there was immense tension between the Pope and the French royalty. And during a large period of time in Waldensian history, the Popes resided in France and allowed the Waldensians FAR more religious freedom than any subsequent French royalty. Go figure!

Finally, I recap the doctrinal assertions made in my last post on this issue: The Waldensians were NOT opposed to any of the major Roman Catholic doctrines and only wished to be recognized as their own religious order. They were more than willing to submit to Papal authority. The Pope’s declaration that they were heretics stopped their hope of being recognized as a separate but recognized Order by Catholicism. Their “heresy” had absolutely nothing to do with printing or distributing Bibles, nor did it have anything to do with keeping the Sabbath as White insists. It had everything to do with unauthorized preaching.

In this Chapter of the Great Controversy, White repeatedly misstates history; makes egregiously deceptive statements about Waldensian doctrinal evolution; luridly and falsely accuses Rome of involvement in two massacres and several other persecutions Rome (or more accurately, the Catholic Church) had nothing to do with; and never mentions the particular French royalty who were the actual perpetrators that carried out the massacres. The biggest enemies of the Waldensians were always the French Royalty. Rome played at best a peripheral role in the persecution of the Waldensians.
Registered user
Username: Islander

Post Number: 26
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2014 - 3:07 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

This is a very interesting thread of discussion.I have looked up the Waldensisans on the web. Their own statement beliefs and practices is contrary to what EGW says they believe and practice. I have actually pointed this out to several SDA's I know and the proof is right in front of them and they will still believe EGW. Also, a comment about the demonic aspect of EGW. I also always agree with the SDA's when they tell me EGW was inspired by a spirit. The devil and his minions are also spirits. I went to public school K-2. Then SDA school.3-5. Public school 6-10. Monterey Bay Academy grade 11 and 2 months of local SDA school in grade 12 then got to graduate from high school with my public school friends. The only time with any school kids I was ever exposed to blatent in my face demonic activity was in SDA schools. In Monterey Bay Academy was a lot of ouiju board activity and girls looking in the mirror and faces of different forms would appear in the mirror with them and so on. When I went to the dean and told all heard was, "Satan knows we have the truth so he works extra hard at Adventist schools because the people in the public schools are already lost so he doean't have to win them over." Thank the Lord my parents let me go back to public school.
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 224
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2014 - 4:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


Dear Lord: How on earth did I ever become the Defender of Roman Catholicism? Have I committed some sort of Mortal Sin? Is this my way of serving penance without knowing it?

This is a review of some of the more Lurid 19th Century Anti-Catholic literature that was wildly popular during Ellen White’s day and age. I have tried to keep my selections narrowed to books that were the most popular and easily available around 1844 and during the time the original literary compilations that eventually led to the publishing of the 1911 “Great Controversy” were first being written and distributed. Clearly, “The Great Controversy” was a product of its time, as the unmistakable and inevitable conclusion of this review/letter will prove. In fact, there is nothing new in the GC and its extravagant and lurid accusations of Papal perfidy. A virulent nativist/anti-popery movement was extremely popular in the United States around the time of the “Great Disappointment”, and led to the creation of the explicitly anti-Catholic and anti-Papacy Know-Nothing party:

“The Know Nothing movement was an American political movement that operated on a national basis during the mid-1850s. It promised to purify American politics by limiting or ending the influence of Irish Catholics and other immigrants, thus reflecting nativism and anti-Catholic sentiment.” It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by German and Irish Catholic immigrants, whom they saw as hostile to republican values and controlled by the Pope in Rome. Mainly active from 1854 to 1856, it strove to curb immigration and naturalization, but met with little success.


Following are some of the most popular and lurid “anti-Popery” literature that was written concurrently with the “Great Controversy,” and most likely strongly-influenced its over-heated and breathless tone. Many of these books have been digitized and are online for your dubious viewing pleasure.

One of the most popular genres of anti-Catholic literature featured the alleged revelations of former priests about the inner workings of the Church. Invariably, the Church was presented as the enemy of true faith, whose motives were accumulation of power and the seduction of women by a supposedly celibate clergy. The Church not only taught error to the ignorant masses it controlled but knew that it was error and taught it anyway to keep its nefarious hold on Catholic life. The Church’s greatest weapon in maintaining this control, along with the Inquisition, was the confessional. “The Master Key to Popery, The Great Red Dragon” while written in 1729 remained wildly popular and virtually a playbook for the Know Nothing Party in the mid-1800’s:


In “Fifty Years in the Church of Rome,” (1886) Charles Chiniquy was a Canadian priest who came to the United States and was eventually thrown out for, among other complaints, burning down a church and attempting to abscond with its funds. His greatest claim to fame was the creation of President Lincoln’s "Dark Cloud prophecy" that warns of the Vatican taking over America. His book features Catholic priests seizing Protestant books and burning them.


The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk (1836)
“was as sensational as it promised to be, and immediately became a rallying point for the Nativist movement. According to the Protestant Vindicator, by the end of July, 1836 it had already sold over 26,000 copies. By the start of the Civil War, it would have sold 300,000 copies. It was reprinted, under varying titles by various publishing houses, at least half a dozen times just in 1836, and continued to be reprinted well into the twentieth century. A second work, Further Disclosures of Maria Monk, sold well also, and was reprinted several times, along with various other works refuting or supporting her claims. Quite an industry was born out of Maria Monk's story.”


The Awful Disclosures of Maria Monk, as Exhibited in a Narrative of Her Sufferings During a Residence of Five Years as a Novice and Two Years as a Black Nun, in the Hotel Dieu Nunnery in Montreal


The American Protestant vindicator was a full-time and very popular anti-Catholic magazine that was a self-proclaimed defender of civil and religious liberty against “the inroads of popery.” It was published in New York from 1836-1839:


“Juggling of Jesuits” was a very popular and scathing anti-Jesuit book written in 1885 that featured all manner of devious and murderous Jesuits seeking to suck the blood out of innocent Protestant maidens and torture Protestant tots into submission.

“Juggling of Jesuits: Forty Popish Frauds Detected and Disclosed” 1885 Richard Baxter


“Six Month in A Covenant” was a venomous anti-Catholic screed that ultimately incited a mob raid against a covenant, which resulted in it burning to the ground.

Six months in a Convent 1835 by Rebecca Reed.


In “Rosamond Culbertson: or, A narrative of the captivity and sufferings of an American female under the popish priests, in the Island of Cuba with a full disclosure of their manners and customs,” 1837, a Protestant maiden was seized and impressed as a sexual slave to gluttonous and goatish Catholic Priests and Bishops.


“Father Eustace: A Tale of the Jesuits,” written in 1835 was another tale of scheming Jesuits, planning on a world takeover and the imminent outlawing of Protestantism.


In “Six Hours in a Convent: Or, The Stolen Nuns! A Tale of Charlestown in 1834,” we have the usual lurid tale of Jesuits abducting Protestants and impressing them into Papal Sexual Slavery.


“The arch bishop, or, Romanism in the United States,” by Orvilla Belisle (1855), was for its time a nuanced and thoughtful anti-Papacy bromide.


Overdale; or, The story of a pervert,” (1869) By Emma Jane Worboise, was another tale of gluttonous and goaty bishops and priests impressing Protestant virgins into a life of sexual slavery.


“Westward Ho!,” by Charles Kingsley (1855) was a breathless novel of Protestants escaping the oily clutches of Rome for a new life in Protestant America.


A comprehensive review of 19th Century anti-Papal popular books is here:

Anti-Catholicism and Nineteenth-Century Fiction By Susan M. Griffin


I wonder how many Adventists realize just how run-of-the-mill and ordinary the central message of “The Great Controversy” really is, compared to the overheated and popular genre of stridently anti-Catholic literature that was widely-available during Ellen White’s time?
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 225
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2014 - 5:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


I earlier analyzed Waldensian doctrinal development at some length in this thread, and posted a few statements of their official doctrines. Not only did they fully-support the most repugnant (to Protestants)of Roman Catholic doctrines; and not only did they emphatically NOT observe the Sabbath; but they were not particularly involved in Bible distribution and preservation in any organized manner, as White alleges. In fact, it is hard to even call them "Protestants" at all, given the fact that the Waldensians repeatedly sought Papal recognition of themselves as a legitimate Church order and to overturn the Papacy's earlier order of excommunication.

Sheesh. Now people are REALLY going to think I am some sort of Jesuit agent provocateur! Honest! I have never been, nor ever will be interested in Catholicism. That is my official position. Do not forget this!
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 227
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2014 - 2:35 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


This is very disturbing entry to write. I have just been severely humbled by realizing the extent of White’s vast fabrication of events out of thin air. I did not see that coming. I am acutely aware that I have been fundamentally and unforgivably shallow and un-rigorous in my analysis. This will be my first attempt to set things right.

Zwingli the Reformer appealed to me for some reason that I couldn't "quite put my finger on," so I returned to the Great Controversy and have now made a deeper and more accurate analysis and rebuttal of White’s rendition of his life.

One of White’s repetitious canards is the Reformers were humble and devout men who were born in humble, bible-believing circumstances. White often compared and contrasted their alleged threadbare lifestyles against the lavish and resplendent and “haughty” lives of the Papacy and its functionaries. Without further ado, I will analyze The Great Controversy's chapter on Zwingli, as recited here:


White said: “Ulric Zwingli was born in a herdsman's cottage among the Alps.” (From "The Great Controversy").

I am not going to accuse Ellen White of outright lying here, but this is at best an extremely-severe misrepresentation of Zwingli’s family background. His father was a local judge and very prominent administrator. He was NOT a “herdsman,” nor was Zwingli born into anything remotely resembling a humble start in life:


In fact, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Zwingli descended from a long line of Swiss Noblemen:


“Zwingli came from a prominent family of the middle classes, and was the third of eight sons. His father Ulrich was a district official of the little town of Wildhaus, and a cousin of his mother, Margaret Meili, was abbot of the Benedictine monastery in Fischingen in Thurgau.”


The descriptions I found of Zwingli’s early life are unanimous: Zwingli was NOT born into a “herdsman’s cottage” but in the home of a prominent local judge, who was himself descended from a long line prominent Noblemen.

Here are some extremely disturbing false representations White made about Zwingli’s early education:

EGW: “And at the side of his pious grandmother he listened to the few precious Bible stories which she had gleaned from amid the legends and traditions of the church.”
“Like John Luther, Zwingli's father desired an education for his son, and the boy was early sent from his native valley. His mind rapidly developed, and it soon became a question where to find teachers competent to instruct him.” (From "The Great Controversy").

I could find NO supporting authority of any kind for White's descriptions of Zwingli's early education anywhere on the web. I found a complete absence of support for White’s assertion that Zwingli’s grandma played any role in his education. It appears that in fact Zwingli’s father had NO trouble finding “competent instructors.” In fact, Zwingli’s formal education commenced in earnest a solid 3 years before White claims it did later on in the same paragraph. What I did find is the following consensus statement regarding this period of the young Zwingli’s life:

“Zwingli's primary schooling was provided by his uncle, Bartholomew, a cleric in Weesen. At ten years old, Zwingli was sent to Basel to obtain his secondary education where he learned Latin under Magistrate Gregory Bünzli. After three years in Basel, he stayed a short time in Bern with the humanist, Henry Wölfflin.”


White claims that Zwingli was tempted by various dishonest and underhanded ploys to become a monk, and that is father stepped in forcibly to prevent the disaster:

EGW: “Here, however, a danger arose which threatened to blight the promise of his life. Determined efforts were put forth by the friars to allure him into a monastery. The Dominican and Franciscan monks were in rivalry for popular favor. This they endeavored to secure by the showy adornments of their churches, the pomp of their ceremonials, and the attractions of famous relics and miracle-working images. By deceit and flattery they endeavored to induce Zwingli to enter their convent. Luther, while a student at school, had buried himself in a convent cell, and he would have been lost to the world had not God's providence released him. Zwingli was not permitted to encounter the same peril. Providentially his father received information of the designs of the friars. He had no intention of allowing his son to follow the idle and worthless life of the monks. He saw that his future usefulness was at stake, and directed him to return home without delay.” (From "The Great Controversy")

I could find no evidence whatsoever that ANYONE attempted to induce Zwingli to become a monk in any such of a manner. The Catholic sources I found indicated that Zwingli never even showed the slightest interest in becoming a Monk. I found that actually Zwingli exhibited little appreciable interest in becoming a monk, or that anyone – including himself – made any effort to make him into one. Actually, the real danger to Zwingli’s future as a leading protestant reformer did not come from the humble monastic Dominicans and Franciscans, it came instead from his attraction to non-religious, humanistic studies and his close and lucrative financial ties to the Papacy:

“For his higher studies he went to Berne, whither the celebrated Swiss Humanist Schuler was attracting many students for Classical studies.”
“His studies at Berne, Vienna, and Basle, where Humanism was eagerly cultivated, made Zwingli one of its zealous supporters.”
“As pastor of Glarus from 1506 to 1516, the continuation of his humanistic studies was one of Zwingli's chief occupations. He studied Greek, read the Classics and the Fathers of the Church, and entered into familiar intercourse with the Humanists of the time, especially with Heinrich Loriti (Glareanus), Erasmus, and Vadian. He also engaged in teaching…..In public life he was chiefly conspicuous for his political activity….
“These works, which reveal Zwingli as the devoted adherent and champion of the papal party, won him the friendship of the powerful Swiss cardinal Matthew Schinner and an annual pension of fifty gulden from the pope. So zealously indeed did he then espouse the cause of the pope that his position in Glarus became untenable when the French party became predominant there in 1516.”
“…..that at the end of 1518, at his own petition, he was appointed by the pope acolyte chaplain of the Roman See, and that his friendly intercourse with Cardinal Schinner still continued when he was engaged at Zurich in 1519.”
“As a scholar he was a Humanist rather than a theologian.”
“Zwingli did the same and came into prominence first as a politician, a fact which makes his case essentially different from that of Luther. It was only in 1520 that he voluntarily renounced his papal pension.……Owing to his success as a politician his prestige and importance increased.”


Once Zwingli attained a position of some authority and prestige with the Roman church, he became the “secular pastor” of the church at Einsiedeln. Here’s White’s version of events:

“Among the chief attractions of Einsiedeln was an image of the Virgin which was said to have the power of working miracles. Above the gateway of the convent was the inscription, "Here a plenary remission of sins may obtained." (From "The Great Controversy")

White deceitfully omits the fact that Zwingli; with absolutely no opposition from Rome; had the image and inscription removed, and had the full confidence and support of the Pope in doing so:

“Myconius, Bullinger, and Capito report, in substantial agreement, that Zwingli preached in Einsiedeln against abuses, and taught the people to worship Christ, and not the Virgin Mary. The inscription on the entrance gate of the convent, promising complete remission of sins, was taken down at his instance.
He enjoyed the full confidence of the abbot, the bishop of Constance, Cardinal Schinner, and even the Pope.”


Now here’s one of White’s most dishonest statements. She claims that once Zwingli began preaching the reformation Gospel, that he suffered an immediate financial reversal:

White: “There was a falling off in the offerings, and consequently in the salary of Zwingli, which was drawn from them. But this caused him only joy as he saw that the power of fanaticism and superstition was being broken.” (From "The Great Controversy.")

I call this an outright fabrication and an egregious falsehood. Here is the consensus of what actually occurred:
“At [Cardinal] Schinner’s recommendation, he was offered an annual pension of fifty guilders from Rome as an encouragement in the pursuit of his studies, and he actually received it for about five years (from 1515 to 1520). Pucci, the papal nuncio at Zurich, in a letter dated Aug. 24, 1518, appointed him papal chaplain (Accolitus Capellanus), with all the privileges and honors of that position, assigning as the reason "his splendid virtues and merits," and promising even higher dignities. He also offered to double his pension, and to give him in addition a canonry in Basle or Coire, on condition that he should promote the papal cause.

Why are all of these disputes so important? I will over-simplify my case by arguing that White plainly taught a theory of Salvation by Works in the Great Controversy, and that humans are indeed perfectible. And our present lack of perfection is the impediment to Christ’s return. Thus in marshaling her evidence of human perfectibility, she paints the Reformers as nearly sinless men, devoted to the Bible over tradition and rabidly-opposed to the Papacy. By contrast, she paints the Roman Church as absolutely and starkly evil. Her portrayal of fallen humanity (that would be "you" and "me") in general is thus plainly and egregiously dishonest.

First and foremost, Zwingli had a number of what we have came to know as “bimbo explosions” during various times of his career. The Papacy and his highly-placed powerful friends spent enormous efforts to quash these persistent rumors (“rumors” which turned out to be true in the end). Above all, Zwingli was far more interested in the humanities than he was in theology or the Bible. He was highly-reimbursed by the Papacy and continued to receive a generous Papal salary, even after he began his Reformation teachings. I have come to believe that Zwingli was actually one of the Papacy’s “golden boys” until well into his career as a reformer. And the Swiss Church in fact quickly adopted and incorporated some of his reforms. The Pope insisted on it. By the time of the Council of Trent, Roman Catholicism by all accounts had adopted most of the proposed reforms of the Magisterial Reformers.

In other words, Zwingli was a mixture of “Saint” and “Sinner” like all of us mere non-Adventist Mortals, who must pathetically depend completely on a Salvation by Grace. For those of us who realize that “Adventism cannot be ‘done,” Zwingli is our hero. He did not remotely achieve anything resembling perfection, even in advocating for a Bible-only theology. He favored a mixture of Bible teachings and humanities leavened with rationality. He favored incremental reforms of the Roman Church. He was well-paid for much of his life by the Papacy. He lost his very "worldly" political career as a result of getting “sideways” with the devoutly religious French Party. He was a mixed bag……like all of us mere sinful, non-Adventist mortals. His actual living and breathing life is a terrible example to include in a Book that argues that human perfection is a prerequisite for Salvation. But his life can be an inspiration for those of us whose Salvation depends completely on “It is Finished.”
Registered user
Username: Flyinglady

Post Number: 10167
Registered: 3-2004

Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2014 - 4:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

WOW! Thanks for the accurate history of Zwingli.
Registered user
Username: Resjudicata

Post Number: 263
Registered: 4-2014
Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - 5:06 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Well, as I announced on another thread, I am putting all my research together in an electronic book that I plan on marketing with Amazon. I feel absolutely led to do this. I cannot stand the thought of one person suffering needlessly, and if writing a book causes that not to happen, then I feel like I will have done an important service for mankind.
Registered user
Username: Mjcmcook

Post Number: 1549
Registered: 2-2011

Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2014 - 4:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)


"CHEERING" You On !! :-)

Registered user
Username: Thalarian

Post Number: 25
Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Monday, August 18, 2014 - 5:10 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Interesting links, will have to look them up when get the chance to do so... :-)


To pull something like that off, would require a tremendous amount of cooperation not only with the General Conference, but with the Publishers, Editors and Writers...

Take for example, Ellen G. White Estate... I did some checking years ago before I got a threat of a lawsuit from those bastards... Found to my horror that they on purpose have written or rewritten books in order to fool people and try to fool those who are seeing the lies...

As you all know one of the first thing they teach you in writing classes... IS TO FACT CHECK EVERYONE OF YOUR SOURCES....

Every Adventist Publishing Houses, Editors and Writers do not bother with that one important rule.

I have in my personal library, books on the1888 message and health reform, and frankly am disgusted not only with the hapazard way it was presented but the obvious massive errors, I gave up after a few chapters when I could not find any evidence of any non-sda sources that was used. 100% of the findings were false... That is bad, this indicates they never fact checked thier sources...

Sometimes wish could invite you guys out here, even though have kept the books and notes. Have not done any research in years... That is how disgusted am with the whole thing.

Plagerism of this massive undertaking is not the work of one person, it is like a house of cards...

Ellen "god" White
Publishing Housing
General Conference
Church Leaders
Adventist Book Stores
Adventist Churches
Adventist Ministers
Adventist Educational Systems
Adventist Teachers

By going through the list in that order, you begin to see how deeply rooted this lie is, so one has to wonder is the formation of the church a act of God or one of the tricks of Satan himself.. (something to think about).
Registered user
Username: Colleentinker

Post Number: 14903
Registered: 12-2003

Posted on Monday, August 18, 2014 - 12:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

You go, Res! I'm so glad you're doing a book!

Registered user
Username: Rocky

Post Number: 172
Registered: 3-2012
Posted on Monday, August 18, 2014 - 7:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Res - deeply grateful you are doing this \o/ Thank you!!

Add Your Message Here
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration