Why segregation? Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Former Adventist Fellowship Forum » ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS 1 » Why segregation? « Previous Next »

  Thread Last Poster Posts Pages Last Post
Archive through August 4, 1999Lydell8-04-99  5:33 am
  ClosedClosed: New threads not accepted on this page        

Author Message
maggieb
Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 1999 - 6:15 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Yes, Lydell, I'm sure you're right. I live here in the Bible Belt, and the church readerboards alone are enough to scare you away.

Here's a good one:
Jesus is Lord: Bow or Burn!
(See what I mean?)

Actually, after my fourth baby was born, the Adventist church people brought us wonderful food for a month, which is pretty swell, when I think of it!

Baby steps, baby steps....

Maggie
Lynn W
Posted on Thursday, August 05, 1999 - 4:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Racism should come as no surprise. It was Ellen White who said, ìEvery species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men.î Spiritual Gifts, Volume 3, pg. 75.
Regardless of who the phrase, ìcertain races of menî refers to, it's certainly a racial statement.

Here's another statement from the same book. ìBut if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere. God purposed to destroy by a flood that powerful, long-lived race that had corrupted their ways before him.î Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, pg. 64.

In "defence" of EGW, FD Nichol wrote a book in 1951 called "Ellen G. White and Her Critics." On pg. 308, in the footnote, he quotes "The Century Dictionary" definition as, "The mixing or blending of different things, especially of races." Then he adds from "Funk & Wagnalls," "Used specifically, in the southern United States, of marriage between white and black persons."
The whole purpose of this chapter in his book is to establish that Ellen White meant this definition of amalgamation. And as you can see from her quote above, she certainly thought it was a sin and "base crime" "which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere." A few pages later follows the previous statement.
On pg. 315 in his book, FD Nicol writes about "the most degraded races of men..."
What races do you think he means? In the footnote on the same page he writes, "Needless to say, now that all the savage races are fairly well known, the testimony of those who have come in contact with them is that though they may be depraved, they are exceedingly human in every respect, [how generous] and need only the opportunity to acquire the white man's habits and vices!" You can tell from this quote which races he is not referring to when he says, degraded or savage races. This is a book put out by "Review and Herald Publishing Association" which was "Prepared Under the Direction and Sponsorship of the Defense Literature Committee."
WDYT?
Lynn
maggieb
Posted on Friday, August 06, 1999 - 4:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lynn, when I said EGW came out against racism, I had forgotten those pesky little amalgamation quotes that will forever haunt SDAism. Thanks for the research!

Ellen White is nothing, if not a paradox.

Maggie
Gary Mayo
Posted on Saturday, September 04, 1999 - 11:51 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I am new to this forum, but I see a lack of EGW supporters. Does anyone here think EGW is a prophet of God? (I must admit, even asking this question makes me chuckle a bit)
Allenette
Posted on Saturday, September 04, 1999 - 3:04 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Gary: As you KNOW, I DONT :-) I DO think she was an SDA profit, tho.

Cheers, Allenette
Pat Darnell
Posted on Friday, October 15, 1999 - 10:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Gary, the list-name is "former SDAs" I can't fathom former SDAs believing EGW to be a genuine prophet...in which case they would be "current SDAs", - yes?

Refreshing, isn't it, after all those other lists??

Pat
Geneva
Posted on Saturday, October 16, 1999 - 2:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Gary: I want to echo Pat's response about former SDAs. One of the main things that lead us to be "former SDAs" is that we discovered that EGW contradicts Scripture, thus making her a false prophet. What freedom to be out from under her condemnation and to base our faith on Scripture alone and Christ alone.
Resting in Him, Geneva
Geneva
Posted on Saturday, October 16, 1999 - 2:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Gary: I want to echo Pat's response about former SDAs. One of the main things that lead us to be "former SDAs" is that we discovered that EGW contradicts Scripture, thus making her a false prophet. What freedom to be out from under her condemnation and to base our faith on Scripture alone and Christ alone.
Resting in Him, Geneva

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