| Author | Message | ||
| Chris (Chris) |
Loneviking you may very well be right. However, once people see that EGW is a false prophet it gives them an opportunity to read the Bible through different lenses. Would the SDA denomination survive without Ellen, maybe, probably. Would it lose tons of members.....I think yes. Chris | ||
| Jerry (Jerry) |
I do not think that we are very far apart, Bill. To me, the flawed hermeneutic is the very essence of ěEllen White.î I put her name in quotes to denote that mostly I think of her as a doctrine rather than a historical person. So, yes, one could expunge every instance of ěEllen,î ěGould,î and ěWhiteî from the Adventist vocabulary and still have essentially the same denomination. If you remove the doctrine and flawed hermeneutics, you may still have a denomination, but it will not be Seventh-day Adventist. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
I agree. And I also believe that the SDA hermeneutic is the result of EGW's endorsements. If it hadn't been for her, the interpretations might have been different and the doctrines might have been different. That's why, I believe, that when people discover EGW was a false prophet, their doctrines almost invariably change. When they let go of the evil (yes, I called it evil) influence of a false prophet, even if they don't associate her with their doctrines, they usually begin to desire to know what is true. God always honors people's true desires to know the truth. I believe there is a big difference between not "believing" in EGW and in considering her a false prophet. If one merely dismesses her, that dismissal is not necessarily a quest for truth; it may be just unloading an uncomfortable or confusing appendage. If, on the other hand, a person realizes that she was completely deceptive and taught falsehood, that realization probably will cause them also to wonder what else about the denomination reflectgs that falsehood. Theoretically, I suppose the SDA church could get rid of Ellen, but unless it renounced her, admitted she was false, and repented of teaching heresy, nothing essential would change. Adventism would still be Adventism--it would just be that much harder to detect the basic corruption. It reminds me again that one of the marks of a cult is that they keep changing their beliefs to accommodate external pressure and societal changes! Colleen | ||
| Melissa (Melissa) |
One of the first books I went to when trying to understand where Adventism stood on the scale of orthodoxy was Kingdom of the Cults, revised edition by Walter Martin. Though he did not list SDA among the cults, he does provide an appendix with a fairly extensive analysis. In the end, he categorized EGW as a "confused Christian woman". He points to some "mistakes", but was pretty benign overall. I'm hardly in a position to analyze her spiritual condition, but when I look at the fruits in her life, her "testimonies" (or glorified gossip) which she claims came from God....I'm with Colleen. It is hard for me to hear someone minimize her influence in the church, but I do hear it from the SDAs I know. I wonder if they're ignorant or just don't recognize her fingerprints on their teachings. B holds onto her as a prophet because she was supposedly able to reveal people's secret sins. He won't hear anything of Canright as to how she got information. More recently, he says you don't have to believe in her to be a accepted part of his church (that change that Colleen mentions??). It says to me that at least some people don't even recognize the depth of her influence in the church's theology. Am I close? | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
I would like to have some comments about something I have been muling over that is on this topic. My elderly mother dicounts egw and says egw is of no matter to her and that she (my mom) only reads the Bible itself. And, this is true. I am 52 years old and never have seen my mom read an egw book. However, she does read the sabbath school quarterlies which seem to me to be quite infused with egw interpertation. Yet, when I talk with my mom she will tell me that she does not read egw yet she comes to all the same understanding from the Bible that the sda church holds on every topic. I just do not know how to discuss anything with her because she will continuselly tell me that she reads only her Bible. And, for some reason unknown to me when she reads only her Bible she understands it to be in total agreement with every sda doctrine. Whoa, that's really heaver-duty to me. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
The quarterly IS full of EGW quotes and intepretations. Of course the Adventist church uses EGW--your mother, Susan, doesn't want to give up her beliefs. When a person doesn't want to change her viewpoint, no amount of reading the Bible will change her ideas. Such a person is reading with a veil over his or her heart. And, as our pastor pointed out one time, that veil over the heart is a spiritual power that keeps one from seeing truth. The only--and the most powerful--thing we can do for our "unchanging" loved ones is to pray for them, and to pray for ourselves to know how God wants us to talk (or not talk) to them. Colleen | ||
| Melissa (Melissa) |
B uses that same "reasoning" as your mother. He only studies from the Bible, doesn't use SDA commentaries, study Bibles or any other denominational aides and still arrives at their doctrines. I pointed out how much EGW is in the quarterlies and in their church manual and comes from the pulpit itself. Though he acknowledges the quarterlies, he claims she doesn't influence what the pastor says (but I've heard him quote her myself, albeit without saying her name "We're told in Steps to Christ...."). I asked him if he knew whether his pastor studied EGW to come to his sermons? He didn't. I've also asked him if he really doesn't think that everyone who is around him who does quote egw really has no impact on him....no response. But he doesn't live in a vacuum. I'm sure he hears more of her than he realizes. He seems to really believe it is no different than a preacher I listen to quoting information from a commentary. He even went so far as to suggest those preachers teach new doctrine (I had said something about Paul warning against new doctrine...). I asked "WHO". He said Josh McDowell. He was talking about blah, blah, blah. I said that's not a doctrine! It's a cultural fact, hardly Biblically-equal revelation. It was quite amazing the stretch he was willing to make to equate the things his church has done with those of other evangelical preachers. Anyway, I have come to realize that because of the "dictionary" they use, when they read a word in scripture that we think means what it says, they've got this dictionary running in the background adding to or taking from the meaning of the words they read. For example: B quotes that the Bible says "the law is good..." Of course, he stops there and knows nothing else about what the passage says (especially the part that says "when it's used lawfully" or that it's for the unrighteous.). Sometimes he even adds another passage from another part of the Bible to that phrase as though they were one verse. Even if I pull out a Bible and show him how he's stringing together phrases that don't even exist in the same book, he will still quote it as though it were. As Colleen said, I had to eventually just realize the veil is so thick, until he is willing to open his dictionary to God, nothing I say will change his "independent" study conclusions. He sees what he has been told is in there. That "not talk" that Colleen mentions was the hardest thing I had to learn. Another friend told me he will only talk to his mother about things of "salvation" relevance. I have had to pray to God to undo the damage my mouth has done. And I too was "guided" by my prayer time to only be concerned with gospel-related issues. Occasionally, I get sucked into something I wish I had just left alone, but I chew my tongue a lot too. I hear your grief, and wish I had something encouraging to say. All I can do is empathize. | ||
| Loneviking (Loneviking) |
Melissa, you are right on that the veil is so thick that nothing will change their mind until and unless God intervenes. We can be there as a resource when that happens, but you just can't win arguments with folks whose definitions of what is the 'truth' keep changing and aren't based on the Word. I sat in on a Wed. night prayer meeting that a SDA pastor/friend of mine had. The conversation (it's a small, informal meeting because the church has only about 40 members) before the study got off on rules for Sabbath keeping. This friend of mine was reassuring the folks that the Old Covenant rules for Sabbath keeping such as not lighting a fire, a Sabbath days journey restriction..etc., these didn't apply anymore! The reasoning was that in that day and time such things were work. But today, they don't require any real time and labor. Instead, we should look at the broad principles that God was laying down. The truth that was right for them at that time is not necessarily the truth for us today........ After listening to this garbage for about ten minutes my blood pressure and anger were just too high to tolerate anymore and I left. You just cannot reason with these folks! They say some of the strangest things, much of which has no Biblical basis whatsoever............ | ||
| Cindy (Cindy) |
Loneviking...that "reasoning" out the Sabbath rules/behavior sounds SO familiar...heard it all my life... I am often amazed and ever grateful to God to have had the veil gradually lifted from my eyes! grace always, cindy | ||
| Chris (Chris) |
In retrospect, I find it just amazing how much time I and other SDAs spent on discusing rules and regulations for "Sabbath Keeping". How much time I spent rationalizing my particular style of "Sabbath keeping". It was always a hot topic at church, after church lunch, prayer meetings etc. etc. I know without a doubt that during my lifetime the word "Sabbath" has come out of my mouth infinately more times than the name of Jesus ever has. I feel like I will spend the rest of my life catching up after wasting 30 years in spiritual death. | ||
| Loneviking (Loneviking) |
Amen, Chris! I'm with you on this one and I would guess most of us on this forum are as well... Cindy, you are so right and I'm thankful as well that the veil is gone. How I escaped and others didn't is still something that puzzles me, but I'm still praying that folks I know will still manage to escape. | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
Do any of the members on this forum remember a long discussion in the Review around 10 years ago on the topic if or not it was alright for couples (married only, I assume) to be intiment during the Sabbath hours? The topic was a hot one with the Adventists (good pun, don't you think?). Finilly someone wrote in that Adam and Eve had their honeymoon over the Sabbath hours and we all know what happens on a honeymoon with two people in love and then the discussion ended. I thought the entire discussion was totally stupid. | ||
| Doug222 (Doug222) |
Susan, I'm lol, because I have heard sermons preached on this topic. Ironically, I have heard arguments from both sides given. I have heard it argued that since God created Adam and Eve on the 6th day, that it is proof that marital relations on the Sabbath is one of the best ways to enjoy the blessing of the Sabbath. I have also heard it argued that even Adam and Eve had to wait to consumate their marriage, because it was the Sabbath. One Pastor (who spent a whole summer series preaching on the topic of the Sabbath) even said that the standard for deciding what is acceptable on the Sabbath is to ask yourself "who is getting more enjoyment out of this, me or God. If the answer is us, then we probably shouldn't be doing it. The same Pastor said it was okay to have sex on the Sabbath. Hmm, is he saying that God was getting more enjoyment? The funy thing about this is that the Bible is totaly silent on the issue. Why was it such a big issue in Adventism? A friend of mine said that their Sabbath School class grew tired of going over the SS lesson this quarter (the book of Hebrews), so they put it aside, and instead discussed whether Adventists should regularly attend Sunday churches. Now, that was uplifting. I can't say it enough. Thiese things would totally outrage me were it not for the fact that I have top acknowledge that I participated in the same types of endless debates. Doug | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
Doug, I truly believe someone needs to have come from a totally indroctronated SDA background to see the pure stupidity of the topics that sda's agonize over. I have been attending the local Evangacal Lutheran church regurally now for four years and I can assure everyone that never has anything so stupid as if it is o.k. or not o.k. for Lutherans to be in a loving way with their spouses on Sundayus ever come up and frankly I doubt if it ever will. In fact, if it were to come into a Lutherans conversation I think the opinion would be to go for the love because the main source of bringing new Lutherans into the Lutheran denomination is from older Lutherans having little Lutheran babies. The Lutherans seem to have a very healthy attitude about most everything. I think a lot of the sda hang-ups stem from egw because she had hang-ups on most everything that would bring a person pleasure, even pleasure that God intended to be for two people in a loving marriage relationship. I also like to occassionally worship with a local Quaker group (Society of Friends is their official name) and I doubt if anything of this sort would even enter into their thought processes. It would be a non-issue, an idea never thought of. BTW, we have a very famous hotel nearby called the Madonna Inn. Alex and Phyllis Madonna own this motel. It's beautiful. They have a website for their inn. You can look it up on the Internet and see how awsome the rooms are. Anyway, Alex and Phyllis have an entire photo album of baby pictures that grandparents have sent to them showing off their little bundles of joy, their grandbabies who were conceived at the famous Madonna Inn. There are actually people who I have met who think it is somwehow wrong, sinful to even acknowledge the way little babies are conceived, as if the babies just are. But, personally I think it is very sweet that Alex and Phyllis take joy in knowing that their inn contributes to bringing new little bundles of joy into the world. | ||
| Colleentinker (Colleentinker) |
Once again I realize what an excellent deception the seventh-day Sabbath is on this side of the cross. In view of the reality of Jesus and his finished work, any talk of Sabbath simply leads to confusion. What exactly is it for, anyway? And how exactly do we keep it holy since the prarameters laid down in Exodus really don't make sense today? If, perhaps, the Sabbath is not ultimately about time or physical rest, then we have something we can say about the true meaning of Sabbath. But as long as Sabbath is seen to be related to time, it leads to confusion abnd it takes one's eyes off the gospel. Actually, Adventist's points about keeping the Sabbath and the fact that so many restrictions just don't make sense or "work" today underscores the real point of the law--it can't be kept! Only Jesus offers Sabbath rest. Sabbath doesn't offer "Sabbath" rest. There is such freedom in knowing Jesus and in knowing he is our rest! The Sabbath and its hook into keeping the law is truly a pure form of Galatianism, the heresy for which Paul chastised the Galatian church. In fact, he told them that if they returned to the law after knowing Jesus, they "have been alienated from Christ;" they "have fallen away from grace." (Gal. 5:4) He compared returning to the law to returning to paganism. (Gal. 4:8-11) The arguments over Sabbath-keeping really reveal the true nature of Adventist Sabbath. Praise God for Jesus! Colleen | ||
| Melissa (Melissa) |
I've said before how B has such contradictions to keeping the Sabbath (he can drive a tractor to have fun, but the blade can't come down to mow or it's work....). Based upon the reasoning above, washing dishes or clothes aren't work any more either. When I went to the baby shower that B's church gave him, I was listening to some of the different conversations going on. One lady was chastising her father that he could not call himself a vegetarian if he ate turkey on Thanskgiving. That same lady was talking to another gentleman later and he was asking if he was really going to die earlier if he occasionally ate meat. She wanted to know how often occasionally was. He replied once a week or so. Then during one of the "games", they had baby food jars with the labels removed and you were supposed to guess what they were from the smell and appearance...but she only got vegetarian things so she wouldn't confuse anyone. Two people while introducing themselves had stories about inadvertantly eating pork in their past. It's the same as the sabbath conversations described above sound. Who really talks about those things?? The one man was telling a story about eating at his neighbors house and how he had passed over the meat. After dinner, the neighbor commented his confusion that he wouldn't eat the meat, but would eat the pork gravy. He told the pastor (who hosted the shower) that he should do a sermon about it. I have come to realize these are truly "sacred" issues for them, but it just boggles my mind. I think it's like someone else said, that you have to be raised in it to understand the conversations. Just to weigh in on the "sex" conversation... One time I questioned B on a statement I had read from EGW that couples should not have sex very often, approximately once a month as I recall. And I compared it to Paul's statements that coupels should come together frequently so that they would not be tempted in their weakness. My question to B was how he could not consider that a contradiction of scripture...and he went on at some length on why EGW was not contradicting Paul, that someone might be sick and it would be good to refrain...any stretch to keep her right and in line with scripture. I guess if you want something to be right, you can justify anything. But I can't comprehend it. I don't even know what to liken it to anything in my experience. I wish I could because I know I sound very irreverent to B. | ||
| Cindy (Cindy) |
I couldn't agree more, Colleen! The emphasis on a segment of TIME being "holy" is really absurd in light of the reality of living with the Holy Spirit always! In the old way of relating to the Sabbath we were admonished that we must even "guard the edges". And then "sundown" worship...what exactly are we worshipping? A day? I know there's songs to the effect, "welcome, blessed Sabbath Day". Do you remember "sundown calendars"? Get it right to the minute!... Now in the reality of the NEW Covenant, I am clueless as to the exact "sundown" times either Friday or Saturday nights! I know the many Adventists would say the Sabbath is a delight...a special gift of "time" God has created for us. Like a beautiful park, it is an "oasis in time"... Sorry,,, but I have that "oasis" ALL THE TIME in JESUS, the "Living Water". He is my REST. I could never go back to that previous way of dealing with the "Sabbath"... grace always, cindy | ||
| Susan_2 (Susan_2) |
You spoke of guarding the edges of the Sabbath. Well, there is a verse somewhere in the Bible that mentions that men should not trim the corner of their beards. I remember the men folk when I was a child just agonizing over that text, wondering if they were committing sin by shaving all their whiskers off or should they leave the corners of their faces unshaven and then wondering where exactially the coreners of their beards were. I guess the men got over it because they all looked to be clean shaven to me. And, I had very long hair when I was a little girl. Then I read the verse that says women are not to have braided hair and my mother braided my hair every day before I went to school and she'd put pretty ribbons in my braides. Then I asked about that text and I was told that only ment that we are not to be vain about our beauty. It was very legalistic when they wanted something to be legalistic and then when some passages in the Bible were/are not ones that they want to be legalistic about they pass it off as being only written for the time that it actually was written or thay make up a totally different excuse as to how come it doesn't mean exactialy what it says as in the example I gave above about the braided hair. Honest, some stories I could share with you of religion conversations that I overheard the grown-ups discussing when I was a little girl would cause most children to suffer nightmares. I remember many discussions about the suffering we would have to endure in the last days because of our loyalty to the Sabbath. I immagine many of you others on here have the same memories. Yuck! Puke! Why couldn't us children rather have heard the grown-ups talking of the love of Jesus and the wonderful everlasting life that awaited His just and faithful servents? I don't remember as a child ever hearing postive religious discussions goping on from the adults in my life. | ||
| Chris (Chris) |
Cindy, LOL about the sundown calendars. Yes I remember these very well and also the weekly printing of sundown time in the bulletin in case you had misplaced your calendar. Sundown Fri. 7:58, sundown Sabbath 7:59, etc. Presumably this was necessary becasue how would you know if it was Sabbath if it was cloudy or there was a house, stand of trees, or more puzzeling a hill (part of the horizon) in your way. Does the Sabbath come earlier if you live near a large hill or in a valley? i'm so thankful that I no longer embrace the shadow, but now find myself embraced by the reality of Jesus Christ Himself. Chris | ||
| Another_Carol (Another_Carol) |
This Sabbath time has always been a red flag for me. I have asked the question on the CARM forum but of course no SDA's respond: If you left your area after sundown at the end of Sabbath and arrived half way across the world would you then keep the Sabbath on the time zone you left or would you keep it on the time zone you came from?? This has to all work for me or my God is stupid and of course He is much bigger than any of us give Him credit for. We cannot think in the box of "our" little minds we must think outside the box and trust that God, by what we see in His Word, had everything under control, knowing that some day we would travel at the speed of sound and arrive in other places where we would have to adjust our thinking of keeping the Sabbath, thus He did away with it as a means for life. Just wondered if any of you that have been SDA ever gave any thought to this. I do not ask to make a point of anything but only to try and understand the mindset of this religion which in my opinion has a manmade mentality rather than looking to a soverign God. Forgive me for asking questions that appear condemming but I have no way of understanding unless I ask questions. And again I say they are not meant to be condemning only to gain knowledge. I quess I would have to wonder that a person as intelligent as my son-in-law would not raise this question. What happens to a person that all logic is thrown to the wind and the only thing that matters is what "their" church says. I would also like to make mention of the fact this kind of thing does not only happen in the SDA church but like someone else said about the whiskers. This brought to mind the fact my church (Mennonite) has divisions broken from it which do adhere to that particular passage totally, thus the men do not shave their beards. I have no idea about the corners. I have relatives in this chruch so I know how legalistic it actulally is and could compare it to SDA very easily except for the Saturday/Sunday worship difference. Something that I always thought was interesting about these people was that they could not have radios, tv's or telephones but if they wanted to know what the weather was going to do so they could plan their planting they would go down to the neighbors who had radios and ask. Is there hipocrisy here or is there not? I just happened to be on a web site of their church and saw this statement: Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour, said "Go ye therfore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsover I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Some of the "all things" of scripture are love (John 13:34, 35), holiness (I Pet. 1:15, 16), loving your enemies (Matt. 5:39), overcome evil with good (Rom. 12:2), praying for them which despitefully use and persecute us (Matt. 5:44), telling the truth (Matt. 5:37), keeping Sunday as a day of rest and worship (Matt. 28:1; Acts 20:7; John 20:1; Mark 16:2), permanent marriages (no divorce and remarriage -- Matt 5:32; 19:9), church unity (John 17:11), simple life style (I John 2:15), none wearing of gold, modest dress (I Tim. 2:9; I Pet. 3:3), sisters wearing a veiling and having long hair (I Cor. 11:2-16), total abstinence from such things as are harmful or lead to evil (I Thess. 5:22.), not going to law, especially against our Christian brethren (I Cor. 6:1-9), not playing games of chance and sinful amusements (I Thess. 5:22; I Peter 2:11; Rom. 12:17), and carrying out the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19), etc. I sent an email Aug. 28 asking these questions: I wonder what you would tell someone who would come to you and ask you why you go to church on Sunday and then when you tell them because Jesus commanded it they would nail you to the wall and ask for scripture. I would also like to ask you what you would do if you were told that because you worhsip on Sunday you have the mark of the beast? I would also like to know if a person from another culture or religion came to your church would you counsel them to take off their wedding rings and if one did and the other didn't would it be a point of contention? Of course just like SDA's I have not heard any answer yet. Thanks, Carol |
