| Author | Message | ||
| Chyna |
And Investigative Judgement isn't even biblical! Colleen, it seems like many Adventists think that EGW is some great spiritual benefactoress to aid them in their devotional studies. *sigh* it's really in the devotional studies that you are hoping to seek out the truth in your personal life too ... in Him, Chyna | ||
| Violet |
Okay, I would love your comments on this quote: January 2, 1872 Beware of the Spare Bed. - In our itinerant life we have suffered much by sleeping in beds that were not daily used. Beds that are not daily exposed to the air and sunlight, will gather dampness. And there are but very few who understand the necessity of having the sun and air come freely into their sleeping rooms, that bed and bedding may be kept perfectly dry and free from impurities. {RH, January 2, 1872 par. 1} Beds that have been left unused for days, and even weeks, in the damp season of the year are dangerous to the health and life of those who sleep in them. When visitors are expected, the parlor stove may be for the first time set up, and a fire kindled in it, and the parlor bedroom opened. And this is considered sufficient preparation to make the friends comfortable. But the bed and bedding, if not carefully separated and aired, are not safe for any one to use. {RH, January 2, 1872 par. 2} I have had a very afflicting experience in sleeping in damp beds. I slept with my infant two months old in a north bedroom. The bed had not been used for two weeks. A fire was kindled in the room, and this was considered all that was necessary. Next morning, I felt that I had taken cold. My babe seemed to be in great pain when moved. His face began to swell, and he was afflicted with erysipelas of the most aggravating form. My dear babe was a great sufferer for four weeks, and finally died, a martyr to the damp bed. {RH, January 2, 1872 par. 3} How many of you have slept in a "damp bed" at campmeeting in a tent? She leaves no room for other interpratation for the cause of death, just a damp bed. | ||
| Christianbiker |
I have enjoyed the comments as to what caused one to finally give up on EGWhite. For me, as an ex SDA pastor, I had serious questions for years about her. It has bothered me so much the way the SS quarterly was written, with a question followed by the answer given in a EGW quote. I have refused to use the quarterly for the last 5-6 years as I believed it did not encourage good honest bible study. When I read "White Washed" my Sydney Cleveland and "White Out" by Dirk Anderson as well as "Cultic Doctrines" by Ratzlaff, that was the final straw. I packed up all the 'red books' and put them away in my basement. When I move again I will throw them out. The cover-up that I feel has taken place in the denomination over EGW has been very disturbing to me.The 1919 GC committee to decide what to do with the EGW errors, and the GC President's decision to lock away the minutes of the committee for 50 years, because they could not come to agreement on what to tell the SDA people regarding the mistakes and errors was the SDA "watergate". If you have not read Cleveland's book, you need to read it. Its well written an researched. I can only say that I rejoice in the freedom to be able to read God's word without relying on EGW to be the final interpreter of it. The bible has come alive to me as I now read it without my SDA glasses on. | ||
| Violet |
We also threw out the "Ellen white Quarterly" several years ago. My Whitewashed copy needs to be replaced as the pages are dog eared from using is as reference material. My husband and I are in a debate with my Br-in-law over the IJ. We just now put together Matthew 27:50-54 with the IJ. How could those saints be raised from the grave if the IJ did not start until 1844. It is kinda funny because a retired SDA pastor, several years ago casually mentioned this passage to my husband. Until today we did not put it together. The Lord works in mysterious ways. VI | ||
| Sherry2 |
Your quote about damp beds could have warrent, depending on the beds made by chance. As we've learned lately, some molds will kill people, so I don't know...just a thought. | ||
| Colleentinker |
We just got back from a class on the Holy Spirit (5th or 6th in a series) by our pastor Gary Inrig. He was talking about the gift of prophecy and specifically mentioned EGW (there are several of us formers in the class). He pointed out that prophets are to be TESTED rather than TRUSTED, and he asked Richard to comment on the fact that he had been raised never to question EGW but to trust her. Richard confirmed the fact. Then he said something to which all of us formers reacted, but the conversation moved, and it wasn't appropriate to pursue it. He said that Mormon's differed from Adventists in that Mormons held doctrines that were more divergent from the Bible than did Adventists, and Mormons said Joseph Smith was on an equal plane with the Bible while Adventists clearly say EGW is not canonical. Technically, of course, he is right. I realized with new clarity how much deception is in the Adventists public explanation of their beliefs. In reality, Adventists say one thing but practice/teach another. The SAY EGW is not on an equal par with the Bible, but the 27 Fundamentals say she is a continuing and authoritative source of truth. They also say she was inspired the same way the Bible writers were, and they say the Bible has errors and contradictions that we must explain away the same way we rationalize and explain away Ellen's mistakes. After all, she was inspired the same way they were. I realized with a sense of frustration how cleverly the Adventists have presented their case publicly. True, believing, intellingent, educated Christians believe the public line. I recently had a conversation with a Christian school administrator about the subject of Adventism, and they just don't internalize the truth about the deception. They continue to believe that what the church says it believes is really what it believes. The truth is that EGW is the kingpin of Adventism; without her, the church falls. Nothing has changed in Adventism; they've just polished and updated what they tell the public. They also are more careful what they teach the kids in elementary school. They don't really hear about the IJ until academy. Further, many church officials don't believe the Adventist doctrines. But they don't admit their unbelief to the laity. Adventism hasn't changed its doctrines, and it hasn't repented for the deception and the lies. It hides within its fold a huge diversity of people from those who believe every word of EGW and live in stubborn and unyielding loyalty to "The Truth", to those who hold positions of influence and authority and don't believe in Adventist distinctives or even, in many cases, in Jesus. They are not Christian. Dale Ratzlaff has said there are only two kinds of Adventists: the deceived and the dishonest. I believe he is right. I also believe that the Christian community needs to know the truth about Adventism. It is a very clever deception. It is not an orthodox evangelical church. In fact, its doctrines are dangerous and lead people into a natural life of works instead of a born-again life of faith. Praising God for grace and freedom in Him, Colleen | ||
| Sherry2 |
Yea, that would've made me shudder when he said that too. The Pastor of the Baptist church I have been attending was pretty blunt about it - SDA's are a cult...though they may not look quite like JW or M, they are still a cult. His grandmother had been converted to SDA, and later came out of it, and spent the rest of her years helping people out of cults, SDA or other. She died while reading the Bible. Now that's the way to go! I have a friend who's brother just was converted to SDA. His wife had been SDA for years. In fact she had attended the church I had been a part of. The sick thing is when he got a Revelation Brings Hope brochure in the mail, he asked his wife if it was SDA and she said she didn't know. Later she is asking him if he wants to go....what SDA will want to go to any other Revelation study but their own. His brother-in-law, an SDA also, played ignorant to whether the brochure was SDA or not when he was asked. So the man goes, with his enthusiastic wife. Now when we got the MI memo,he writes how it is a miracle that his wife didn't know it was SDA material so that he could find the Truth!!! The thing is, Colleen, it seems to me we get taught that this deception is ok (just like not putting our name on the brochures), and we are raised in this "slight-of-hand" that we honest to God think there isn't anything wrong with it. And that is so subtle and so slowly killing to a person's spiritual health. Just like with EGW, when I showed my hubby all the stuff she plagerized from his response is "Well how do you know God didn't just inspire her to take those portions because they were accurate and He was pleased with that?" Knock, Knock! Hello!!! But yet, because we were brought up in this "slight-of-hand" I can understand how people rationalize it. When I was talking to a church friend about my leaving and she told me she understood, but she didn't think it was right for me to leave. I mentioned the stuff I had learned about EGW. Her response was, "Oh, I don't want to hear it." Not that she thought it might be deception. It was she didn't want to hear it because it would put her spiritual identity in a tailspin. Gosh, it takes some time to detox from this stuff, doesn't it? Writing this, I feel angry, sick, wondering how I ever got here, and how I'll manage with all this. And I'm sure you all relate to that. One day at a time, and by God's Grace! | ||
| Chuckiej |
Hey everyone I am by no means an apologist for EGW, and I really hate when people point out contradictions in the Bible to try to justify hers. I have had a nagging question with respect to the use of uninspired sources, and was looking for insight. Many of you probably know that Jude quotes the apocryphal (hence, uninspired) Book of Enoch (Jude 14). I guess the difference is that Jude isn't composed 90% uninspired material. Also, the concept of intellectual property didn't exist back then. That's how I've always thought of it. Any other ideas? | ||
| Colleentinker |
Sherry, I do understand what you're saying! You're right about the sleight-of-hand desensitising us to the nature of deception. How sad that your sis-in-law "didn't know"! The fact that the name isn't printed on the brochure gives them the right to have that .02% doubt--maybe it really is something else! You're right; we rationalize all sorts of lies for the sake of what we perceive to be the good of others. Chuck, You're right about Jude quoting Enoch. Enoch was completely well-known to everyone. It wasn't until the canon was formed that Enoch was left out of the accepted religious writings. People reading Jude recognized the quotes as being from Enoch. It's sort of the like Biblical allusions in great literature. They're in there without credit because everyone is supposed to recognize them--and probably did when the authors wrote! Another example is allusions to Shakespeare which we all use without giving credit, i.e. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet", or "To be or not to be; that is the question." Jude didn't use Enoch as source material for the main ideas he was making. He used Enoch to help make the points he was making, not as the unacknowledged source of the main concept. Colleen | ||
| Chyna |
Chuck, whether intellectual property existed back then is skirting around the issue. Plain and simple, SDAs hold EGW on par with Scripture, and most of EGW's writings were not inspired directly by God but rather culled from other spiritual writings and some prophecy, when tested, is wrong. Chyna | ||
| Chuckiej |
Chyna, I agree with you. My reference to IP was with regards to Jude. The fact that EGW essentially stole the material in question is a serious character flaw and further evidence against her inspiration. | ||
| Dirk |
Some Adventists dismiss the plagiarism charge against EGW without thorough consideration by simply saying, "Bible authors also plagiarized!" While Mrs. White differs from Bible authors in the massive extent of her plagiarism, perhaps the more significant dilemma for Adventists is that she DENIED the plagiarism. Dr. Fred Veltman summed up this dilemma quite well in his research summary which appeared in Ministry magazine in 1990: "I must admit at the start that in my judgment this is the most serious problem to be faced in connection with Ellen White's literary dependence [copying]. It strikes at the heart of her honesty, her integrity, and therefore her trustworthiness." It is her denial of literary dependence that causes the greatest concern. Contrast that with what she wrote in Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 309: "All intentional overstatement, every hint or insinuation calculated to convey an erroneous or exaggerated impression, even the statement of facts in such a manner as to mislead, is falsehood." One more difference: Mrs. White claimed the "Holy Ghost is the Author" of her books (3SM 30). Contrast that with the Bible, where very few Biblical authors ever claimed their writings were inspired. Bible authors did not need to claim divine inspiration...their works were self-authenticating. | ||
| Sherry2 |
It is interesting to see how often the Scriptures are torn down to build EGW up. Over and over I've heard stories of that happening, as well as lived them. How sad indeed! | ||
| Tree077 |
Hi guys, This is my first time posting. I hope I do this right. At any rate, does anyone know where to get an original copy of An Appeal To Women, and "Word To the Little Flock? I am currently studying with two SDA Pastors, (they brought in the big hitters) :o) I've seen lots of stuff on the web with lots of quotes of EGW but I want to judge her by what she wrote and not what others say she said. If you guys can help I'd really appreciate it. Thanks. Theresa Ü | ||
| Violet |
Welcome, if you are looking for a different side of Ellen White you have come to the right place. We do not have jobs on the line if we agree or disagree with her writings. We are here to search for the truth. I also looked for those books, but they seem to be very scarce. I have the complete writitngs on CD-ROM if you want to e-mail me I would be glad to send you what you are looking for if it is on the CD I'm at Robtami@prodigy.net I have found out that there is some good and some bad on the internet about White. But I did find enough to discount her as a true prophet. My prayers are with you as you search for the truth. Remember the best rule of Bible study. Never read a text in isolation, always read before and after at least a chapter, maybe more. This keeps is all in context. Vi | ||
| Sherry2 |
What resources of EGW do you have available, Theresa? And how did you get hooked up with two SDA pastors approaching you. Are you a former SDA, or an SDA now, or a never but they are trying to get you to become one? Just wondering. I think the original copies that you mentioned are few and far between. I know they are as scarce as can be. Don't know who has them. However as far as I can see, dealing with the Investigative Judgment, it was just plain to me that over and over again the New Testament states that Jesus sat at the right hand of God making righteous those forever who are being perfected. The only time he stood up is at Stephen's stoning (which should stir our hearts - Jesus takes notice when His children are persecuted in His name). If you have Spiritual Gifts Vol. 1-3 or the other one too, this plainly taught that EGW saw Jesus as having been doing ministry in the Holy Place since His ascension. It is only recently that SDA's have tried to change that and say that he ascended to the Most Holy and then reentered the Holy Place to continue ministry there. However EGW very plainly taught otherwise, and plainly stated that those who weren't accepting William Miller's timetable would be left without an intercessor. You don't need those two rare books to prove this. The Spiritual Gifts books are still available through the ABC. I noticed when I studied Hebrews that Heb. 9 divides up the location of the Holy and Most Holy items. Check this out FAFers. I was stunned to learn this. Vs. 1-4 "Then indeed, even the first covenant had ordiances of divine service and the earthly sanctuary. For a tabernacle was prepared: the first part, in wich was the lampstand, the table, and the showbread, which is called the sanctuary (or holy place);and behind the second veil, the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All, which had the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which were the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron's rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant;"....Now notice where the golden censer was (or as we call it - the alter of incense). It was in the Most Holy. The alter of incense is directly related to prayers ascending and Christ's intercession. Now if you study this through Lev., etc. it's location was the Holy Place as we were taught but it was in it's service inseperable from the Most Holy Place for its symbolism and function. I found that most fascinating. Again, that would blow out the SDA theory of moving from Most Holy to Holy in order to intercede for His children (the movable throne theory as well). I showed this to an SDA pastor once. He was a little shocked and didn't know what to say. Of course, when he could say something, what do you think he said? "What version is that?" Ha-ha! Oh I had to laugh. So I showed him in several versions how it said the same thing!!! :) What a hoot! It is so neat to study these things out for ourselves with no fear, and absolute confidence that our Father in heaven is big enough to teach us from His Word without the extra writings of EGW!!! Most astounding! Happy studying friend. :) | ||
| Violet |
If you read Matthew 27:52 it tells us that many holy men were released from their tombs when Jesus died. How could this be if the investagative judgement did not start until 1844? It does not add up. | ||
| Tree077 |
To answer your first question. Two SDA folks came to my door about 2 months ago. They were very persistant about getting me to attend one of their "revivals." They were so persistant I finally gave in and went to one. Halfway through the meeting I got up and walked out. I knew that what was being taught was heretical to the Scripture. The day following this incident, my regular visitor came by with this pastor. During that visit I raised a lot of hard hitting questions. Instead of dealing with foundational issues I let them talk me into doing a study on prophecy (Daniel 9). Since that time (for about the last 3 weeks) two pastors have been at my house a couple days a week. Since the odds are unfair (2 against 1, little ole me lol) my husband has jumped into the discussion. He is afraid I'm being sucked in. We have been researching the SDA on line for the past week. I didn't realize how controversial their history is... At any rate, I'm hungry for information, the more you can throw my way the better :o) I would really appreciate it. | ||
| Tree077 |
Update, I finally got a response letter back from the Ellen White Estate. William Fagal gave me the name of some company that I can order photocopies of An Appeal To Women and A Word To The Little Flock. However the "Word To a Little Flock," will be a photocopy of the revised "Word To a Little Flock." I guess the original is to threating? | ||
| Jtree |
From one TREE to another :-) I have a LINK to some REFRESHING information. http://www.sdaoutreach.org I HOPE YOU HAVE REALAUDIO, I want you to CHALLENGE your visitor's to LISTEN with you to the REALAUDIO on this web site. Another helpful site is http://www.ellenwhite.org Though this site is still Sabbatarian, they have extensive information pertaining to EGW. With links to her writings. |
