| Author | Message | ||
| Ray |
The President of the Iowa Conference and his secretary wrote a book about Ellen White. In this book "The Visions of Ellen White Not of God" he states that Elder Ingraham was told by James White, who got this information from his wife Ellen G. White, that Ellen had stated that "God never made the DARKEY! ELLEN AS WELL AS URIAH SMITH BELIEVED THAT THE BLACK RACE WAS THE RESULT OF AMALGAMATION OF MAN WITH BEASTS! Smith even wrote a book and Ellen carried 5000 copies of it to their camp meeting to sell and prove her vision was from God that this was so. How unscientific and stupid such an argument. | ||
| Questioner |
I am surprised at the confusion that appears to be presented as proof positive and as appropriate rebuttal, and I also notice how some people like to jump from one topic to another, rather than addressing the issue at hand. Please allow me to mention a few items. First off, instead of a simple, truthful agreement that we all are in imperfect churches and follow some form of heresy, regardless of how little it may be, Patti attempts to shift the focus by claiming no church membership while still being a Christian. It should be pointed out that those who claim some "universal" church have a church. If they say that there should be no organization, they then disagree with the apostles in the New Testament. I can be just as unfairly generalistic in my response by pointing out that faith of universalism has its own set of huge problems. She goes further by showing no Biblical proof for her assertion that the SDAs contradict the Gospel. Bmorgan fails to identify himself as a black person, and doesn't tell us about W. W. Fordham. Is he black? Is he an SDA? What exactly does he say and offer as proof? There is precious little reason to go further in commenting on his response, except to say that the implication that someone can have a personal agenda forcing them to defend their family ëism doesnít sound very nice and begs the question of why he says what he does. The Christianism of the writer can be held up to scrutiny just as easily. It is just as likely that most commentators here are writing because of some perceived wrong that was committed against the writer by someone or some process in the SDA church, and because that feeling has been transferred to the church organization and everyone in it. I do also want to respond to one of Bmorganís particular and inflammatory points; you asked if I had heard of one of your stories, but I would ask you if you've ever heard other's allegations that those stories were simply not true? I say this for the sake of fairness and giving equal time to opposing views. Above all else, the Christian must be fair-minded. Is the real purpose of this forum to make unfounded accusations against one denomination while not mentioning others to the same degree? Or is the real purpose for any Christian forum to seriously consider a Biblical concept and its appropriate application for our lives? There may be some excellent reasons why people are no longer associated with one denomination or another. Those are the ones we can and should build upon, and those are the ones we should seriously consider. I think that everyone has a right to their own opinions, but we need to remember that they are just that; opinions. I could go on, but I believe you begin to see the problem. Dear fellow Christian, it is imperative that we comport ourselves in a manner that is reflective of Christ. We need to stick to the issue at hand and not paint everyone with the same broad brush of disdain. Getting back to the issue, I have never ever seen any policy or doctrine of the SDA church which has been or can be quoted that in even some remote manner denigrates any race into something less than equal to all other people or, God forbid, to some less than human status. Further, I go back to my earlier point that all churches have had the same kind of race relations problems because the issue has to do with people and not churches. As a white, ex-SDA who has worshiped in black and white churches across the United States and has spent over thirty-five years in that denomination, I know what I am talking about. Not once has any of my black brothers and sisters ever brought any comment to me about a problem in that denomination regarding race relations. Not once. Is anyone still surprised to find that there may be many blacks who do not trust whites? I should hope that we are past that point of ignorance. For all you who still don't know, it is a fact. There has historically been a very good reason for that viewpoint. Because of that, I believe that black congregations have a God-given right to meet separately and have separate church divisions within any denomination, if they so desire. It is not right that any, including those here, should be taking exception with that practice and implying something about it that is totally untrue. | ||
| Patti |
Questioner: First off, instead of a simple, truthful agreement that we all are in imperfect churches and follow some form of heresy, regardless of how little it may be, Patti attempts to shift the focus by claiming no church membership while still being a Christian. Patti: No, that is the conclusion to which you are jumping. I never said I did not belong to any church. Questioner: It should be pointed out that those who claim some "universal" church have a church. If they say that there should be no organization, they then disagree with the apostles in the New Testament. Patti: I never made that claim either. Questioner: I can be just as unfairly generalistic in my response by pointing out that faith of universalism has its own set of huge problems. Patti: Nor did I ever endorse universalism. Perhaps you should re-read my words and address them, not what you speculate that I believe. I did not support my claims with Scripture for two reasons: 1. because I have done so repeatedly on this forum. The posts are still available in the archives. I hate to bore everyone to tears with my redundancy. 2. I am "on the road" right now, hundreds of miles from home, on someone else's internet access and do not wish to ungratefully usurp their access time. Perhaps you could do a little research right here on this forum, and address the things that have already been addressed repeatedly. Then we could dialog more intelligently, with a better understanding of our mutual positions. Questioner: Is anyone still surprised to find that there may be many blacks who do not trust whites? I should hope that we are past that point of ignorance. For all you who still don't know, it is a fact. There has historically been a very good reason for that viewpoint. Because of that, I believe that black congregations have a God-given right to meet separately and have separate church divisions within any denomination, if they so desire. It is not right that any, including those here, should be taking exception with that practice and implying something about it that is totally untrue. Patti: I simply cannot accept divisions based upon "mistrust" of other Christians, as you defend. As a member of a mainline Christian church in the South whose congregations are invariably multi-racial, I am always a bit uncomfortable at entering a church in which only one race is represented. I just cannot understand how Christians can justify such divisiveness. | ||
| Breezy |
Dear Questioner, Very good job! You are exactly right. You will find in this forum that there is not alot of scriptural backup for any of these positions. Simply alot of stories that everyone has blindly accepted as fact. Also you will find that this is a feel good forum-as long as you agree with their position. You receive a nice pat on the back, unless you take an opposing position. No one here follows the rules of debate because none are interested in debate, just confirming that they are right, adventist are wrong. Always claiming a lack of scriptural backing in the Adventist church, yet failing to convince with their own scripture. Sorry Colleen, but it is getting to be too much for me. It's enough of a problem that most likely I will be leaving this forum now. As far as racial problems go, you are correct. It is not a church problem, it is a people problem. My dad preached in black churches nationwide and we never once felt any racial bias. In fact my dad was received as a brother and every bit as good as a black preacher. He got as many preach it brother's, and talk to me's as any black preacher. It is a people problem and a christian problem. For any true christian, race will not be an issue. As far as EGW's supposed racial indiscretions, I do not put much stock in a disgruntles persons stories that were obviously designed to discredit someone and not uplift in the Lord. Most likely this will be my last post as the boundaries of common sense tell me that my intellect goes beyond the scope of this forum. I think you all are trying to do a good thing, and it is starting to disintegrate from a ministry into a bash party. Funny enough there are only a few people that make it that way, but it sure does spoil the punch. Thanks for all the kind help Colleen and others. You know who you are. God bless you in your spiritual journey. Take care, Wendy PS BMorgan is a lady not a man. The story she meant was about losing her baby which was extremely tragic and broke my heart. | ||
| Breezy |
Patti, How can you say that you did not claim to have a church? Read your post above. I quote: <"My"church? I have no church, except the invisible and indivisible universal church of Jesus Christ.> I'm sorry but questioner is right. You adressed both the no church issue and universalism in your above post. Maybe you should be more careful. Also, if you claim to not want to take up your friend's access time as your excuse for no proper response, then why are you able to spend so much time reading posts and typing what you do. You have several lengthy posts above that could easily include scriptural backup but you choose not to do so. It is also a cop out to say read the archives for your answers to current questions. Not everyone has been around as long as you and if you engage in conversation with them, it is only respectful to give them proper responses, not dodging the issues. If you can't, then don't engage in conversation. If you can only accuse but not back things up you are not following the rules of this forum. Not to mention the gospel which you claim to spread. We are to build our fellow christians up, not spend all our time attacking the faults of the Adventist church or any other church for that matter. I'm sorry if this is harsh, but considering what I see going on in this forum, it is necessary. I am leaving this forum because I know that these problems won't change because those involved do not see a need. But I will pray that you all will see that instead of a healing ministry, you are propigating pain and picking at the scabs of others experiences. So I will go on and you all will go on. And hopefully we will all meet in the middle. Wendy | ||
| Patti |
Wendy, I am not sure where I offended you, but I am indeed sorry. I am very confused as to where the hostility came from; I am truly sorry for whatever I said that you think I meant personally against you. I can assure you that I meant nothing personal toward you or anyone else. I believe we must be able to discuss our beliefs objectively, letting go of those things that are not in harmony with the Gospel of our Lord and the written word of the Scriptures, in that order. You wrote: How can you say that you did not claim to have a church? Read your post above. I quote: <"My"church? I have no church, except the invisible and indivisible universal church of Jesus Christ.> Patti: And I still maintain the above. My membership in a church denomination has no more to do with my salvation than my membership in the YMCA. It is only by being a member of Christ's eternal and triumphant church that we are saved. Wendy: I'm sorry but questioner is right. You adressed both the no church issue and universalism in your above post. Maybe you should be more careful. Patti: Now I am truly confused. What did I say that made you believe that I think that God will save all people universally and indiscriminately? Wendy: Also, if you claim to not want to take up your friend's access time as your excuse for no proper response, then why are you able to spend so much time reading posts and typing what you do. You have several lengthy posts above that could easily include scriptural backup but you choose not to do so. Patti: You are truly not playing fair, here, Wendy. You are coming just shy of doubting my truthfulness. I have only posted a couple of posts here at my mother's house. The lengthy ones were either from my home or were cut and pasted. I see no problem in asking Questioner to research the archives. I have PLENTY of stuff there. Unless you particularly want me to cut and paste them all over again. If you do, I will be glad to oblige--just let me know which topic you wish for me to discuss with you. Wendy: But I will pray that you all will see that instead of a healing ministry, you are propigating pain and picking at the scabs of others experiences. So I will go on and you all will go on. And hopefully we will all meet in the middle. Patti: I am truly sorry you feel this way. But may God go with you and lead you into all Truth in Jesus Christ, our full salvation, our Substitute and Surety. Grace and peace, Patti | ||
| Breezy |
You did not offend me personally Patti. I hold no animosity against you. I like you, and I love the story of your mother's life etc. I believe that I am seeing alot of discussions on the forum that are not holding true to fair debate. I repeat, it is not you personally. When I see things that are very inconsistent and unfair on this forum I usually let them go. I really just can't do that anymore. I do not see any proof of all the anti adventist stuff you guys talk about. Just hearsay. As I tend to be very logistic and a "show me" person, I can no longer sit back and read this stuff that has no biblical proof of it's own, just hearsay from questionable sources. I do not see anywhere, and I have lived all over the country, the stuff that you and others say is "Official church doctrine". I do not share your experience, I have literally tried to look for common ground in it, and have come up with nothing. Every valid arguement I can come up with regarding Adventist beliefs comes up against a brick wall. I honestly see where the Bible says that God will cause them to believe a lie because they refused to see truth. There is a spiritual fixation as well as blindness here that I simply cannot stomach anymore. This has nothing to do with anyone here personally. I care about you all. I just do not approve of your methodology. So I withdraw although I am sure I will lurk in here occasionally. I probably won't post. The only reason I do so now is because I don't want you to think that I am angry with you. Take care and God bless, Wendy | ||
| Patti |
Wendy, I have found the discussion on this forum to be very well documented. And even among us formers, when someone makes a statement that is not substantiated, others will either ask for the substantiation or provide it themselves. Since I have no idea exactly which topic you are speaking about, I can provide no specific documentation. If you would like to deal in specifics, then I am sure either I or some other former on here can provide you with scriptural and research support. I see you did not accept my quoting an entire chapter of Romans below as scriptural support, so even if the documentation is provided, even if it is scriptural and factual, that is no guarantee that the persons reading it will accept it as such. Preconceived ideas can hold our judgment very tightly. We must pray that the Holy Spirit will truly lead us into all Truth, no matter where that path may lead. Grace and peace, Patti | ||
| Questioner |
Patti wrote: ""MY" church? I have no church, except the invisible and indivisible universal church of Jesus Christ, comprised of all peoples of all ages who have believed in the saving work of Jesus Christ. The Truth of Jesus Christ can never be organized into a "true church" denomination; it is much broader and wider and fuller than any human organization could ever contain. Not only that, any human organization becomes tainted with the selfish opinions of sinful humans, by definition. The true church of Jesus Christ is alive and well and thriving in all denominations, as well as outside of them. Having said this, there are churches who, as a denomination, officially contradict the Gospel of Jesus Christ. SDAism is one of them. " Obviously I jumped to no conclusions. Now lets go back over this: You said you have no church, and that is a direct response to the question of church membership. Now you say you never said you don't belong to a church. Well which is it? I never wrote that you claimed to disagree with the apostles in the New Testament, if that's what you meant. What I implied was that your statement makes that automatic, which it most certainly does. You wrote that your church is the universal church of Jesus Christ. Once again, by so stating your allegiance to that church, you do endorse it. Perhaps you could serve the greater good by writing what you mean. We must all live by the words we use. I did not defend "mistrust" as you wrote. Please be more careful. In any case, your lack of comfort in churches which separate in no ways justifies your judgement upon them. As Christians we must allow people the freedom to grow at their own pace. No one need agree that it is the ideal, but it may be for the best at some point in time. (By the way, I too am somewhat uncomfortable, but it isn't my place to cause trouble over it nor to judge the motives of others in so doing. Rather I will continue to worship and fellowship with my Christian brothers and sisters of all races.) | ||
| Questioner |
Breezy, I understand. May God continue to bless you. Q | ||
| Sally |
Probably we've all heard the saying "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still". This forum is mainly focused at former adventists and I have found it to be a place of information and support. For people happy and satisfied with adventism and Ellen White they may find themselves feeling defensive. God leads each person individually. I study for myself and so I don't require someone to "prove" to me that what I believe is right or wrong. But I appreciate reading others ideas and studies. I checked out Ellen White for myself and am convinced God has shown me the truth not anyone else. God promises to lead us into all truth and we can count on it and let Him lead each in His own way. Praise Him for that and for this forum of enlightenment and comfort. Blessings,Sally | ||
| George |
Questioner and Breezy I am real sorry to see that you want to ingage in personal atacks on other members of this forum. This forum is here to give people a chance to air out their thoughts and feelings about a religion that in many cases has been very detrimental to them, and to see if there is something else out there for them to believe in. If you don't like what is said here or the way things are "debated" you don't have to visit any more, it is juat that easy. Although I think I speek for most when I say that you are welcome anytime. I for one do not quote the bible much or tell you where to find what I believe in because it is for the most part my own inturpritation, it comes from the way I remember what the bible says (With a little help from my friends) and may be a lot different than what yu believe. But that is ok with me you can believe what ever you want. Questioner, How dare you chide BMorgan for not telling us if she is black!!! It is none of my business and it sure is none of yours eather. "Race" is a thing of the past, It just does not matter. Grow up. George | ||
| Bmorgan |
Questioner, I am opting out of this discussion. It is not profitable and serves no good purpose. However, I suggest you read the two books I recommended. Debert Barker and W. W. Fordham, speak to the issue in a charitable manner. They are authentic SDAs. I have spent too many years in the environment where modus operandi involved defending and modifying doctrinal teachings. I am now at variance with the teachings. The life I have always wanted is "to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him in his death. Phil 3:10. I agree with Bill Twisse, thanks Bill, for the observation: <> But even here it is difficult to shed the SDA mentality and discuss the real issues of our time. The SDA issues affect only a small portion the 'big picture' involved in the crisis of our times.<> Grace and Peace to All. Oh! Questioner, here is the ISBN # for the book, "Righteous Rebel" ISBN 0-8280-0594-X. Always In Christ Alone BMorgan | ||
| Breezy |
George, You are mistaken when you accuse us of attacking simply because we disagree with some issues. And then to follow up with an attack of you're own? Very suspect... Wendy And no matter how much people say we are welcome here, what it boils down to is, if you don't agree you will be reprimanded. | ||
| Bmorgan |
Hey George, Where have you been? Glad to see your name up on a post. Thanks for responding to Questioner's remark about wanting me to state whether or not, I am BLack. To me that is not important information but, I will tell you. I am NOT African American. I agree with you and Sally. This is a place where those of us surviving trauma to the Soul find needed respite. Many of us crawled around for years with dead spirit and empty souls. We sadly lacked Grace and peace, faith, love and hope in Christ. It seems odd to me, that people who are comfortable and satisfied with what they find in and with SDAism, want to make the rules for Former Adventists. We've been in the system and found it lacking. Each person define his/her turmoil, grief, joy, painful discoveries and the identity crisis as they have experienced it. This is an open forum and we should be courteous to everyone. I pray we give grace especially to those who strongly disagree with us. May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God and the fellowship of his Holy Spirit be with us ALL That I may know Him Alone, BMorgan | ||
| Patti |
Wendy, Your words today to me (and to George) have really taken me aback. I am frankly surprised. I think you are confusing discussing ISSUES with attacking PERSONALITIES. Ellen White, the self-proclaimed "much more than a prophet," is fair game as she has formulated doctrine that she claims is God-inspired and "truth." Not only CAN we objectively criticize her words, we are COMPELLED to by the Scriptures. But pointing out her error is not the same as personally criticizing someone (as she is dead and beyond suffering from any of our words). If I claim to be a prophet inspired by God, then I would expect you to do the same, to critically examine my words. What I find lacking in many SDAs (and defenders of other sectarian groups) is the ability to examine the beliefs and doctrine of a person without becoming defensive or personally critical. You wrote: And no matter how much people say we are welcome here, what it boils down to is, if you don't agree you will be reprimanded. Patti: I just do not understand where you come up with this notion. I know of no one who has been "reprimanded." Certainly we will call each other up on issues that are not supported by Scripture, but this should be expected on a Christian forum. Do you not agree that all things must be proven from the Scripture and the Gospel of our Lord (to the law and the testimony)? As for George's words being an "attack," they were a defense of those individuals present whom he felt had been treated unfairly. You and Questioner seem to think that pointing out error in a human organization (ie the SDA church) is worse than treating individuals unfairly. I maintain that the way we treat individuals is much more important than anything we could say or do for or against a manmade institution. No one here wants you to leave. As George indicated, you are welcome here; but if we are going to dialog rationally, we must also do so objectively. What I think about Ellen White is no personal reflection upon you. What you think about Robert Brinsmead or Martin Luther or Jean Cauvin is no personal reflection upon me. If we can discuss terms unemotionally, we might even find some common ground on which to build a relationship. One does not have to agree with another totally to live in harmony with him. As I said, I am frankly surprised and puzzled at your posts, as I have not posted for several weeks, and all of a sudden, it seems that you are angry at me. What did I say or do that frustrated you? I apologize if I were abrasive or rude; I have reread my posts several times trying to pinpoint the problem. At any rate, stay if you wish or go if you must. But nothing is gained by becoming emotional about those who disagree with us. (Although I experience the same every so often.) Especially when the other side (I guess that would be me) is totally confused as to exactly what they are disagreeing over! :) One word about universalism and I will drop it. I mentioned the great church of God universal. I am confused where you and Q got the idea that I believed in universalism. Do you not believe in the universal church of God consisting of saints from all ages, all parts of the world? Universal only means that it is from all times and places. It does not mean that all it includes all people who ever lived. I could have used the phrase "the holy catholic church" (which means the same thing) but then I know that there would have been a great ruckus over the use of that perfectly legitimate word. Anyway, I hope this clarifies a bit. And I hope that you can give us a bit of the benefit of the doubt. There are good peoples here. I have received a great blessing from being here, and, up until this afternoon, I thought you had also. I find a great deal of comfort knowing that many people that I have never met or had any previous contact with, have come to the same conclusions about the Gospel (Salvation in Jesus Christ alone) and other issues from Bible study and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit that I did. Independently of each other. This is not a conspiracy, Wendy; this is a fellowship, just as the title claims, of those who have accidently found each other, those of a common background who have found their way free of the entanglement of legalism through the liberating power of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. And I am very grateful that Colleen and Richard set this up as a support group for those who have had similar experiences. Leaving the SDA church is like going through a divorce--it is painful, there is doubt, insecurity, and isolation. It is good to feel the warmth and comfort of those who have traveled the same road. May God richly bless you, Patti | ||
| George |
Breezy, You are mistaken when you think I "attacked" you for disagreeing with others. I don't even know what the argument was about and don't care. It is when you don't agree with someone and then make the attack personal that I take exception. The two cases are very different. You are very right. I did chide you for making personal attacks and then did the same thing. Shame on me. George | ||
| George |
BMorgan, We have never talked very much but I have really enjoyed your posts. Isn't it nice to be happy? For the last six months or so I have been happy, it is the longest stretch of happiness I have ever had, and I love it!! I have a very dear friend that has been in AA for almost 30 years. Her body is always giving her a lot of pain etc. in general her life has not been easy. But she has a saying I like very much--- I have worked to d----d hard for my happines, and no one is going to take it away from me!!!! The beat to you always---George | ||
| Patti |
George, There is a talk-radio host down here in Houston that always ends his program with: Don't let anyone steal your joy! Thank you for your words. I have missed talking with you. Hopefully I will be home and situated in a week or so, so I don't have to wait up to all hours to spend any time online! God bless! Patti | ||
| Questioner |
George, I believe that any attorney would tell you that an argument is often flavored by a person's own viewpoint. It should be apparent to anyone that there is a very real difference between the same viewpoint about a black person if it comes from a white person or another black. I shouldn't have to tell you this, and you do me a disservice by not understanding that subtle distinction. Perhaps you didn't notice this quotation from her post: "I had membership in black conferences, and race relations is a big issue to them" I didn't view her demeanor as conducive to a frank discussion. I don't think that most would have thought that this is your's or her's or anyone else's personal forum to use to be disingenuous or to be insulting to other religions. You may wish to read the forum rules before making accusations. Further, the race issue is certainly not a thing of the past. This is quite evident by that fact that it is all around us every day, that you took exception to the question, and that the issue was important to someone in the first place. I'm afraid that you couldn't be further from the truth. We must deal with it, and not try to sweep it under the rug or deny its existence. At least BMorgan was more honest than that. Oh, and let me point out another thing. I didn't engage in any personal attack. That is what you just did. I simply tried to defend myself from such unwarranted attack, and I believe I have the right. I also have the right to call to account those who publish unwarranted and false garbage. |
