| Author | Message | ||
| Patti |
This is a study in three parts. I think it is easier to absord one part at a time. I wasn't sure what heading to put it under, so I started a new thread. Anyway, here goes: THE REAL PROBLEM WITH SDA BIBLIOLOGY -- Part I In Dr. Bacchiocchi's posts, he often refers to himself as a biblical scholar. In fact, I have heard it said by many SDAs that one of the main differences between them and other Protestant denominations is all their beliefs are Bible-based. I would like to compare and contrast the SDA method of proving their theology from the Scriptures to the "sola scriptura" attitude of the great reformers. The word "great" here is not meant not indicate their authority as much as magnitude their works had on the Christian world. First the similarities: Both SDAs and the reformers claim that the Bible is the final word of authority on matters spiritual. Both maintain that the Bible has spiritual integrity. Neither claims verbal inspiration. Both claim that the Scriptures reveal Christ. How then could they end up at such divergent conclusions, as follows: SDA: incomplete atonement, unfinished work of Christ Reformers: complete atonement; everything necessary for our salvation has been achieved by Christ SDA: The earthly sanctuary is a replica of the heavenly. Reformers: The earthly sanctuary was a shadow of the reality--Jesus Christ. SDA: Salvation comes of faith and works. Reformers: Salvation comes of faith in the grace of Christ alone. SDA: The time of the end began in 1844. Reformers: The time of the end began in 33AD. SDA: The Bible is the Word of God. Reformers: Jesus is the Word of God. SDA: The SDA church comprises God's remnant. Reformers: Jesus Christ is the only faithful remnant. SDA: The SDA church has a message from God uniquely for this age. Reformers: Jesus Christ is the ultimate revelation of God to the earth. SDA: The sabbath-keeping SDA church will vindicate God's character to the universe. Reformers: God's character needs no vindication. He is God; He is supreme. If it were necessary to so vindicate God's character, it has been accomplished once, for all, in the giving of His Son Jesus Christ. SDA: The sabbath is the seal of God; sabbath-keeping is the sign of the sealing. Reformers: We are sealed to God upon salvation; the Holy Spirit is the pledge of God's sealing us to Himself. SDA: Ellen White is the Spirit of Prophecy. Reformers: The Spirit of Prophecy is the Holy Spirit, a part of the Godhead. SDA: Jesus Christ was our example, showing us how to lead a pure life. Reformers: Jesus Christ was our Substitute and Surety, accomplishing for us perfect obedience to God's law that we can claim as our own by faith. SDA: God forgives sins. Reformers: God forgives sinners. SDA: We must never say that we are saved. Reformers: He is our Surety; He will save us to the uttermost. SDA: We must pass the judgment based upon our works. Reformers: There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. SDA: Ellen White clarifies and enhances the Bible. Reformers: Everyone can understand the Scriptures aided by the Holy Spirit. SDA: The Holy Spirit's main purpose is to convict the sinner of sin. Reformers: The Holy Spirit's main purpose is to lead people to Christ. There are many, many other contrasts, but let's move on to exploring the possible reasons for these divergencies. Both sides offer Biblical support for their individual stands. How, then, could they end up so far apart on these important issues? I would like to offer you a reason. I believe it has to do with their bibliology. Allow me to offer you the definition of bibliology as I am using it in this essay: Bibliology is the way in which the Bible is used to prove points of doctrine. I will discuss this in more detail in Part II. | ||
| Patti |
THE REAL PROBLEM WITH SDA THEOLOGY -- Part II Using this definition of bibliology, the way in which the Scriptures are used to prove doctrine, I submit that it is the SDA bibliology which is most responsible for the doctrine which are divergent from the reformed faith. Dr. B. wrote a post some time ago on Bible study, and how one should never start with a preconceived idea. I maintain that this is exactly what he and other SDAs do. They began with the premise of the inspiration and authority of Ellen White, and then they rummaged through the Scriptures to find texts to formulate doctrine (including their view on justification) that would support it. In contrast, reformed theology accepts justification in Jesus Christ as the foundation and builds its doctrine up from this great saving Truth. I am not criticizing the laity, because, generally, they are followers; they often unquestioningly believe what they have been told by EGW and the GC. It is the founders of the SDA faith and current SDA apologists, of which there can be no doubt that Dr. B. is, who have sown and nurtured a religious system based upon the preconceived notion that EGW was, not merely inspired of God, but His great final prophet to the world. It is this preconceived idea that spawned SDAism and without which there would be no SDA church. Ellen White is even more vital to the SDA church than 1844 and the Great Disappointment. It is because of her "gift," and only because of her "gift," that the Great Disappointment was not allowed to slip away into dim history as an unfortunate recompense for the sin of not taking God at His word. Using Ellen White as the preconceived notion, the SDAs have since gone to the Bible to find texts that support it. This is the great Achilles heel of SDA bibliology. Anyone can "prove" almost anything from the Scriptures if one is creative enough. Beginning with belief in Ellen White, SDAs have come up with doctrine that are necessarily divergent from the reformed faith. There are some things in SDA theology that are not consistent across the spectrum of their beliefs, but in general they have maintained a coherent system in their theology. A systematic theology is one in which one conclusion is based upon and naturally leads to others like the branch system of a tree. For example, let's begin with the basic assumption of the SDA church: that Ellen White was God's special messenger for the last day remnant. If one asserts this to be true then it logically follows that: 1. Jesus Christ was not God's final revelation to the world, which leads to: 2. There is something that God has to show us that He did not reveal to us in Jesus Christ, which leads to: 3. A greater work than Jesus' yet to be done, which leads to: 4. Jesus is not our Surety, merely the beginning of salvation, which leads to: 5. One must never claim to be saved, which leads to: 6. Insecurity in the saving power of Christ, which leads to: 7. Living in fear of the end of the world or our own mortality. And in so affirming, one must deny: 1. That Jesus Christ was God's final revelation of His character to mankind; 2. That Jesus completed the work of our salvation; 3. That Jesus did what no other human could do; 4. That Jesus paid it all; 5. That we can rest in His great salvation; 6. That we have blessed assurance that He is able to save us to the uttermost; 7. That we can live in hope and joy instead of fear and paranoia. Let's take another basic assumption: The sabbath is the seal of God. (Where did we get this? Correct. From our first assumption, that Ellen White is the authoritative inspirational prophet of God.) If one purports this to be true, then one must also admit that: 1. The keeping of this commandments is what will seal our eternal destiny; 2. That the Holy Spirit is not the sealing force in the life of the believer; 3. That although our salvation may have been generated by the work of Christ, yet it is our own work that "seals" us to Him; 4. We may have begun by faith, but our eternal security (sealing) is based upon our works. One must necessarly deny (if he is consistent and logical) that: 1. Belief in Christ (or lack of it) will seal our eternal destiny; 2. That the Holy Spirit is the downpayment on our salvation; that He seals our hearts to God; 3. Our works are all as filthy rags; we are totally "signed, sealed and delivered" in Jesus Christ; 4. We begin by faith; we end in faith. Our faith in His righteousness only can be substituted to our eternal account. Another one: The atonement, unfinished at the cross, continued in heaven. Admissions: 1. Jesus did not fully take care of the sin problem. 2. Satan is the scapegoat for our sins; 3. Satan still reigns on this earth; 4. If we are not careful, Satan will grab us out of the arms of Jesus. Denials: 1. The atonement for our sins was completed by Jesus on the cross; 2. Jesus was the scapegoat for our sins; 3. Jesus reigns as King of kings and Lord of lords; 5. Neither height nor depth nor principalities, things present or things to come can separate us from the love of God. The reformers also began with a single premise; but this premise (justification)became the foundation with which they proved all doctrine in the Bible. That issue? Justification. And what did they believe about justification? Sola Christe--Jesus Christ is our Substitute and Surety; in Him and in Him alone is salvation, and whom He saves, He saves to the uttermost; sola fide--justification, or the means by which man becomes just in the eyes of God, is only by faith until the consummation, when we shall see Him face to face and be like Him; sola gratia--salvation comes only by the grace of God, an unmerited mercy that God bestows on those who are in Christ, because of His supreme regard for His beloved Son; sola scriptura, the Scriptures are the only reliable source of the Truth of God. In the next part, we will look at the systematic theology of the reformed faith. | ||
| Patti |
THE REAL PROBLEM WITH SDA BIBLIOLOGY -- Part III Let's take a look at how the reformed faith holds up under a systematic analysis, based upon the reformed view of justification. Foundation--Salvation comes of Jesus Christ and His righteousness by faith: Sola Christe 1. Jesus' work is a finished work. 2. The believer had no part in this work (supremacy of God). 3. The believer can add nothing of positive value to this work. 4. Original sin--the depravity of man--all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags. SDA opposite equivalent: 1. Jesus' work is not finished. 2. The believer has an important part to play in his own salvation (denies supremacy of God). 3. The believer must add his good works to his faith. 4. Denial of the depravity of man. Man can and must defeat Satan and keep the law of God. Another one: Sola fide 1. We are justified (made right with God) by belief in Jesus Christ, the Author and Finisher of our faith. 2. Faith is the essences of things unseen; if we can see it, it is not of faith. 3. Since man is born with a sinful nature, only faith in Christ's perfection will suffice. 4. Jesus Christ was the spotless Lamb of God. 5. He is our Substitute and Surety. SDA opposite equivalent: 1. We are justified by belief in Christ, but this is just the beginning of our salvation. 2. Faith manifests itself in tangible evidence. (You show me your works and I'll show you your faith.) 3 Jesus Christ experienced the exact temptations that we have. 4. He is primarily our example of how to live a victorious Christian life. Sola gratia: 1. Sinners are saved only by the grace of God. 2. Grace is God's love and mercy which He shows to undeserving sinners. SDA: 1. Sinners are saved only by the grace of God. 2. The grace of God is both divine favor and the regenerating power in the believer. Sola scriptura: 1. The Bible is the only reliable source of the saving knowledge of God. 2. The saving knowledge of God is Jesus Christ and Him crucified. 3. Jesus was God's final and greatest revelation to man. 4. The canon closed with the New Testament. SDA: 1. The Bible is the only source of the knowledge of God, but Ellen White illuminates and enhances the Bible. 2. The saving knowledge of God is the 10 commandments, a transcript of the character of God. 3. Ellen White has a special message for these end times. 4. Ellen White is an extension of canonical writers. So you can see that the reformers came at Biblical study from an entirely different perspective than the SDA church does. Reformational theology begins with justification as a foundational doctrine builds upon it. The SDA church begins at with a doctrine and formulates a doctrine of justification that is compatible with it. The Reformers began (and ended) with the Gospel of Jesus Christ alone. The SDA church began with Ellen White and formulated their other doctrine to support this one unique doctrine. In an attempt to sound more evangelical or try to fit in the reformational view of justification with the SDA schema, and they get involved in all kinds of word plays and pious-sounding catch-phrases to prove that they do believe in Justification by faith alone. The telling factor, however, is the inevitable "but." They are very uncomfortable with a phrase like this one: "We are saved by faith in Christ alone." They must hurriedly add a "but," "and," "however," or "yet" such as: "We are saved by faith in Christ alone, but it is a faith that works." Or, "We cannot be saved by a faith that does not work." At any rate, there must always be the qualifying conjunction which is followed by a certain work, behavior, or characteristic which the believer must possess, which in turn denies sola fide (Now it becomes faith plus something.), sola gratia (Not merely God's mercy toward us, but the power of the Holy Spirit in our lives), sola Christe (Jesus started our salvation; there is a work we must do to finish it). The doctrine of justification by faith alone as taught by the great reformers is not compatible with the SDA system of theology. In fact, it is often in direct opposition to it. As I have shown in many posts on here, the SDAs side with the RCC on the doctrine of justification and against the works of the reformers. I believe the source of the problem is the very defining characteristic of the SDA church--her prophetess, Ellen White. Without Ellen, there is no SDA church, and there would never have been one. For those of you who say, "Forget Ellen; let her rest in peace; why do you dwell on her and not on the Gospel?" The reason is that Ellen is the reason for existence of the SDA church. Remove Ellen, and you have removed the SDA church. This is why we point out her errors so tenaciously. The SDA church was built upon heresies. Even the staunchest EGW defenders have to admit something that 20 years ago would never have been admitted: Ellen made mistakes both spiritually and theologically. And yet, the SDAs know they must hang on to her with all their might. As she stands, the church stands; as she falls, the church and all of its true-remnant, NSL, IJ, and other unique doctrine falls. Take away Ellen, and what is left of the SDA church? In summary, the bibliology of the SDA church begins with the premise that Ellen White is the uniquely inspired messenger of God for the last day. Then they turn to the Bible to build supports under this premise. This premise is the crux of the entire SDA belief structure. They take texts from here and there and construct a theology underneath this one premise to support their unique beliefs, including the belief in their uniqueness. If one removes, or proves invalid, one supporting point of the belief structure, the entire thing collapses like removing a supporting post out from under a bridge. The reformed view takes Jesus Christ, the Solid Rock, as its foundation. All things in the Bible are viewed in light of Jesus and His great work of salvation for mankind. All "truths" in the Bible stem out of this one Great Truth. Anything based upon this Foundation will stand though the gates of hell try to prevail against it. Watch out, SDA friends. The bridge is out. The only choice you have is to fall on the Rock and be broken, or have the Rock fall on you in the judgment. | ||
| Colleentinker |
Patti, what an interesting study. You're right; SDA bibliology does assume EGW's inspiration as a bottom line. This discussion reminds me of something Max (I hope he doesn't mind my quoting him) pointed out at our FAF meeting Friday evening: Adventists teach that Jesus' blood covers our sins. But in the Bible, blood never COVERS; it always CLEANSES. If his blood merely covered our sins, they would still exist somewhere. (My conservative relatives say they remain written in the books in heaven). But if blood cleanses, sins no longer exist. They are washed away; forever forgotten and gone! Praise God for His finished work! Colleen | ||
| Breezy |
Patti, I'm sure you've answered this before but, doesn't Paul also say "faith without works is dead"? I know that I do not believe that my works save me. My works however show as an outward sign that I am saved. If I claimed to be saved and then lived an anti-christian lifestyle, wouldn't it be hard to believe that I am a christian? Are we not to witness to others through the outward appearance of our lives. The love of Christ revealed in our characters? "They will know we are christians by our love" right. So even though works cannot save us and are as filthy rags, they do play a part in the saved life. Maybe more people understand that but cannot express it well, therefore the never-ending "but". Thanks and is there a way to tell your mom that I loved her story? God Bless! Wendy | ||
| Breezy |
P.S The corruption of the SDA church is certainly in the heirarical structure, not the laity. EGW herself warned against this happening yet the GC conveniently seems to forget to proclaim that part of her writings. Wendy | ||
| Sherry2 |
Patti, I'm not sure I understand what you see wrong with this picture of this one...."2. The grace of God is both divine favor and the regenerating power in the believer." Can you explain? I feel like I've been renewed, regnerated, or whatever because of this awesome gift of salvation. Am I not understanding this statement correctly? | ||
| Susan |
Wendy, "faith without works is dead", I think this is a reference to James 2:17 (not paul), "In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." My understanding of this verse is that it's NOT a reference to our "saving faith". But rather, a sign of genuine faith in a believer. Martin Luther said something like, "Man is justified by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone." I think you explained this rather well, "so even though works cannot save us and are as filthy rags, they do play a part in the saved life." How true that we sinners do not play a part in our salvation! It is only an awesome and mighty God that could enable us to seek holiness. But what a relief that we don't have to be perfect, and that we can never be, while we're here on earth. I loved the illustration on another thread (?Colleen's), of Christ's blood deleting our sins and not just covering them. Christ atonement was all sufficient!!! We can stand before the Lord totally clean and with a mediator, (I know that's not what EGW has said, but I'm a bible-only believer now!) "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men..." 1Tim.2:5,6a Praising God for my mediator, Christ Jesus!!! Susan | ||
| Breezy |
Hi Susan, My mistake about Paul. I hadn't heard the quote from Luther and I really appreciate it. That puts it all in a nutshell. I know that I am not the only SDA that understands this. I have been reading more stuff on EGW and am having a really hard time with it. So many of her writings are truly inspiring and beautiful, Steps to Christ being one of my favorites. It is hard to imagine that the same person who wrote that also wrote to people telling them they were out of favor with God because they committed the horrible sin of bearing children. I am at a real crossroads and hope to have a long talk with my dad and see what he thinks of all this evidence. He said at first that he didn't want to see all of it because he wants to believe in her. But then later he said he would go over it with me. I am so scared about this stuff because what if I share this with family and they leave EGW and the church and then I find out that I am wrong. I would be at fault for leading them astray. I am beginning to see what everyone was talking about when they said they shed many tears. Struggling, Wendy | ||
| Susan |
Wendy, I don't have time to say much now, but I wanted to let you know that I'm praying for you. God will lead you and I know you're here for a special reason. Your sister in Christ, Susan | ||
| Patti |
Wendy, John 16:12 "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14 He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you." You are God's. He will guide you into all Truth. Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. There is no other name under heaven (even Ellen's) whereby we must be saved. Rest in Him, Wendy; TRUST your salvation to Him. And the fears will eventually melt away. Grace and peace, Patti | ||
| Patti |
Hi, Sherry2! I am not ignoring your question; merely pressed for time. I will be on the road for 12 hours again today. I may or may not be able to get online for about a week. I will answer you if you will give me a chance. Thank you for your patience! Grace and peace, Patti | ||
| Cindy |
Patti, Absolutely wonderful study! I have copied it to share. It really shows clearly the difference between S.D.A.ism and the Eternal Gospel that is ONLY in JESUS' doing and dying for us! Sherry2, Hi! As far as the grace of God being both divine favor (Christ crucified for me), AND the regenerating power... The Grace that saves us completely and sufficiently is ALL in Jesus, not in ourselves! Yes, Comfort and Guidance is given us also in the promise of the Holy Spirit when we Believe this Good News; but again, this must remain SEPARATE as to our assurance in salvation, the proclaimation of Jesus' work alone! It is All about Jesus, not about us!! All we can do is humbly acknowledge our sinfulness and fall on His Mercy--acknowledging that He Alone is Worthy! The regenerating power is NOT part of the proclamation of the Gospel! Of course, I do not deny that the Holy spirit will be at work in us-- because we are sealed with Him when we believe the Gospel! But this may not be readily noticable to others or even ourselves at times... He is promised to be our Comfort and Guide, always focusing our attention back on the all-surpassing, all-sufficient Grace of God manifested in the message of the Cross!! The message of the Cross is totally Jesus' Finished Work For Us in which we can safely REST!! Yes, Sherry, there is a wonderful renewal we sense when we believe this wonderful good news. At the Cross, in Christ alone, all the Power and Wisdom of God has been manifested! Praise Him!! Always a debtor to His Grace Alone, Cindy | ||
| Colleentinker |
Wendy, I'm praying for you. I understand the fearófear of losing what you've always known and loved, and simultaneous fear that if you lose it, you did the wrong thing. Many times I had to pray for God to give me confidence and faith in Him and to verify the truth to me. Satan knows how to make us doubt and how to invoke fear in us. Fear, I think, is one of his most potent weapons. Remember, "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." (I John 4:18) But also remember, "the truth will set you free." (John 8:32) God is with you, and he reminded you of that in a powerful way on Monday. He wants you to know that even if you walk through soul-shaking uncertainty, he is with you, and he will bring you into "that place just rightóthe valley of love and delight." (Shaker hymn "Simple Gifts") He is always with youóeven in the grief. With prayers, Colleen | ||
| Breezy |
Thank you Colleen, An interesting thing happened tonight when I spoke with my mom. I told her how much EGW was shaking me up right now and even though at this point she still supports EGW (not having read anything contrary) she stated, "well you don't have to believe EGW to be saved". Well, if that didn't take the wind out of my sails. I said, well maybe I won't. And she said well good, don't let the focus on her distract you from what's important. Wow. What a shock. I am sending her and my dad the info I have and both have promised to faithfully review it. So I am in a holding pattern to see what happens. And having quite the gutwrench in the meantime. Still not sure if I'm right, but just trying to stay in tune with the Holy Spirit so He can warn me if I'm wrong. Thanks for your loving support. Your sister in Christ, Wendy | ||
| Steve |
Wendy, Your mom is right. Even if EGW is right you shouldn't let her get between you and the Lord. For me, I don't think she was right doctrinally. And when she did write beautiful things, it appears that most of that was taken from other writers anyway. But all that aside, even if EGW was right, then we can simply follow her counsel, put her writings down, and go to the Greater Light, the Bible. It's all we need for faith and practice. Many of us e-people are with you right now. Steve | ||
| Breezy |
It's funny, when I talk to my husband about this stuff he just smiles and says"I've just been waiting for you to catch up" :) And me being born into the church just now understanding true salvation and him fresh getting it right off the bat! I'm surprised he doesn't get exasperated with me. Oh yeah, he loves me the way Christ loves the church! Praise the Lord! Steve and everyone, I really appreciate having a christian family out there who I feel already loves and supports me. Someday I would love to start my own group. FYI- My dad pastored Berthoud Colorado and Longmont Colorado in the mid-eighties. I like to think that his focus on Righteousness by Faith created a hunger in those people that eventually led down the road to the foundation of Grace Place. We built our own house right there in Berthoud and some of my fondest memories are there. Praise God for such a beautiful ministry! God Bless, Wendy hvnlybrz@netscape.net if anyone wants to write. :) | ||
| Ritchie |
Hi, Patti! You've got a newcomer here as of 10 minutes ago. It was a thrill reading your 3-part study -- as if you summarized the conclusions my wife and I have arrived at over the last few years! Thank you for sharing. Having mingled with both Adventists and non-Adventists (oooh--I hate that term!) there seems to be a consistent trait that I've been able to observe among many Adventist pastors and church leaders. There is this attitude of 'I'm right and you're wrong' or 'Since we are the right church our doctrines are correct and the Bible has got to support them'. I believe it is this attitude that spawns the use of the Bible as you describe it. It is not too difficult to trace this attitude all the way back to the 'correct' interpretation of prophecy in 1843 (oops! -- make that 1844!). I am beginning to believe that the Adventist church is the offspring of a movement trying to justify a glaring error. Present bibliology is simply an extension of this activity. | ||
| Cindy |
Wendy, Interesting comment from your mom about EGW. I pray she-and us ALL!-will continue to put JESUS FIRST in our lives! I agree with Steve that EGW says she's the lesser light; at least she begins this way... "The Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light." EGW Colporteur Evangelist, p. 37. "You are not familiar with the Scriptures. If you had made God's Word your study, with a desire to reach the Bible standard and attain to Christian perfection, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE NEEDED THE TESTIMONIES" EGW, Testimonies vol. 5, p. 664. (Emphasis supplied) Sounds good, huh? (Though again, the emphasis is not on JESUS, but on attaining Christian perfection...) But then, as happens over and over and over again in her writings!!, she says completely contradictory statements! Check out Testimonies Vol 5 further along...she stresses the importance of her Testimonies and that you will drift away from Bible truth if you lose confidence in them. Many times I"ve heard how the very last deception of Satan will be to make of 'none effect' her Testimonies...that there is a satanic hatred kindled against her Testimonies... As I've said before, so much 'doublespeak' is enough to cause schizophrenia!! Through the years we have constantly tried to decifer just what she meant, how we can reconcile her messages to the message of free Grace at the Cross of Christ. It just doesn't work... Especially when she says all her testimonies came from God! Grace Always, Cindy | ||
| Cindy |
Ritchie, WELCOME to you, and your wife! Glad you are joining in our discussions. I like what you wrote: "It is not too difficult to trace this attitude all the way back to the 'correct' interpretation of prophecy in 1843 (oops! -- make that 1844!)." I posted these comments below just recently on another thread of July 9, but think it applies here also to your comment of the correct interpretation and dates. I remember reading years ago how EGW said God placed a hand over the calculations and then later removed it. I thought at the time that there was something very wrong about this, but for years tried to give EGW the benefit of the doubt. Recently, I've read how she says that God showed her that William Miller had a "perfect chain of truth' in his calculations of 1843. Read and examine them from Scripture everyone!! They are unbelievable (literally!). And she said God revealed to her that Miller had the truth... To read this information you can read Chapter 3 and 4 of Dale Ratzlaf's book 'Cultic Doctrine' from his web site at www.ratzlaf.com Or you can order the whole book from this site. I notice in the book it has the refences from EGW for this endorsement of Miller's views, ranging from 'Early Writings', 'Spiritual Gifts', Testimonies Volume 1, and 'The Great Controversy'. Blessings to you, Ritchie! A debtor to His Mercy and Grace always, Cindy |
