| Author | Message | ||
| Bb Registered user Username: Bb Post Number: 35 Registered: 7-2004 |
I have some questions regarding the origin of the IJ doctrine. From what I was taught, the early millerites that couldn't get over their disappointment became the adventists. A man was walking through a cornfield and either had a thought or a vision? that it meant that Jesus had moved from one apartment to the next and thus began going over the names. But did this man later recant this or did he stay with the adventists? Did EGW then have a vision to support this? I am just a little confused on the particulars of this story. (By the way, this must have been one of the scariest doctrines of all SDA's. I remember sermons of "You never know when your name is going to come up!") It's like "You better watch out, you better not cry, you better not pout, I'm telling you why", so if you are a bad little girl you won't get rewarded! Anyway, I know you all have the answers I need! Bb | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 927 Registered: 11-2002 |
Dear Bb, The IJ doctrine never made sense to me. And, I doubt it makes sense to many SDA's. I know if I ask my SDA relatives they just tell me they never understood it either but since the SDA church has the truth about Sabbath, clean and unclean meats and the state of the dead they just put up with the SDA teachings that they can't make sense of. They say this same line about Michael the Archangel being Jesus. Also, some of of the other doctrines peculiar to the SDA. The IJ doctrine is a "saving face" doctrine. The early SDA's were wrong about the dates they'd set for Jesus to return. So, when that man (Edson?) had a vision in his cornfield the SDA's to save face admitted the'd been wrong about understanding the date to be for Jesus to return but really Jesus was relocating from one apartment to another apartment in heaven. They also teach that the curtin was torn at this time when the Bible clearly teaches it happened at the cruisifiction. Truly though, the entire IJ doctrine was made up to save face about being wrong about the visible and physical return of Jesus that was to take place on Oct. 22 (?), 1844. | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 38 Registered: 7-2004 |
I have a memory of being a small child (I'm 58 now) and overhearing my parents discussing the IJ issue with another couple they knew at church. We had just completed a series of meetings sponsored by our local church so the subject was fresh on everyone's minds. My father made the observation that it was peculiar that if the doctrine was biblical, why had all other denominations failed to see it. He was eventuall shouted down by everyone else. I went to SDA church school and we spent months learning about denominational history so I was well-schooled on that one. The story is that Hiram Edson and a friend were walking through a corn field shortly after The Great Dissappointment when Hiram seemed to see heaven opened in front of him and he saw Jesus dressed as a High Priest passing through the separating veil between the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place and he was carrying his own blood in to make atonement. Hiram was supposed to bring this information before the body of the church but didn't. Then he was told that if he didn't reveal what he was shown the Lord would remove the vision and take it to "the weakest of the weak." (Translation -- women were the weaker sex, and Ellen White was the weakest of women.) She was then given the light of the vision and ran with it. What really happened, I think, is that Ellen overheard someone talking about what they had heard Hiram talking about and she got it into print before he could. If you have read "The White Lie" and a few of the other exposee books on Ellen you will know that she was very good at having visions to cement into place the doctrines that she and James wanted to be a part of their messages to The Little Flock. She also might not have finished school past the third grade, at least in organized school, but she was a very bright (though maleable) woman. She had some successes with notariety with her first "visions" and liked the notice she received. After that there was no stopping her. Her husband was the puppeteer, however, and noticed how her visions took place and made every effort to put her in touch with individuals and information that he wanted her to "validate." This appears to be the way the current SDA church still operates. They still use edicts and revelation to control the leity. Most people want to believe that God is guiding their leaders and that is what makes them vulnerable to that kind of mind control. I thoroughly believed that every doctrine within SDAism was scriptural until I tried to prove IJ to a non-SDA friend and fell flat on my face. The moment I realized that my proof came from two 19th century men walking through a corn field, and not in the book of Daniel, I started panicking about how much else I'd been swallowing whole without question. I praise God that so many courageous ministers have come out of SDAism and been willing to lead the disillusioned and deceived to Christ directly, without "the lesser light." Who needs a flashlight anyway, when they have the sun to read by. | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 929 Registered: 11-2002 |
Wow, and to think LSD wasn't even invented for another hundred years! | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 559 Registered: 3-2004 |
Belvalew, Like you I went to SDA schools 1st grade through LLU. I would study for the class, especially the ones about the IJ, got a good grade and God in His mercy, had me forget almost everything. Every once in a while something comes back as I read what people have written. The IJ was something that never made sense to me. I, too, am so thankful that there are former SDA ministers who have written about the IJ and all the doctrines. And as you said, who needs the lesser light, when they have the SON to read by. God is awesome in taking all of us out of Adventism. Diana | ||
| Tealeaves Registered user Username: Tealeaves Post Number: 177 Registered: 5-2004 |
I never understand that "lesser light" thing either. Why do you need a flashlight to point you to the sun? | ||
| Cindy Registered user Username: Cindy Post Number: 666 Registered: 7-2000 |
Yes, Tealeaves, it is ridiculous, isn't it? Apparently, the propaganda preached was that basic, mere Christianity had apostasized to such a large degree--neglecting the main truth of the Bible (the 7th-day Sabbath as a continuing test of loyalty to God)--that they needed a "lesser light" to get them back on track... And this all (new prophet on the scene!) happened at just the right prophetic time (1844!) to validate their claim to be Gods' special remnant church, called to proclaim a return to keeping "the commandments of God" while having right in their midst the "testimony of Jesus" which is "the Spirit of Prophecy" (Ellen White) It's all so sad, really... grace always, cindy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 690 Registered: 12-2003 |
That's a good point, Cindy. I remember in the past being unimpressed by the fact that Christians as a whole had not come up with the Adventist distinctives. The belief that Adventism was a special revelation of God for the last times was so compelling that it really did eclipse the significance of the fact that God's church had existed for 2,000 years. In fact, Jude wrote to urge Christians "to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints." (Jude 3) All we need was revealed to the apostles through Jesus, and it was given and entrusted to the church. We are to contend for it! Somehow that fact was never internalized. The deception that REAL truth came in 1844 is seductive, because it makes Adventists feel special. Yet the Bible says the gospel was entrusted to the saints once for all, and we are to contend for it. Our legacy as Christians is 2,000 years old now. It's amazing how little regard I (and those I knew) gave to the central, core tenets of the gospel. Somehow the tradition of the church and teachings of Scripture were not enough, were not convincing. I remember being sure that apostasy came through the medium of God's true people (Adventists) being educated at "outside" universities from learning from apostate Protestants. Amazing. Praise God for forgiving us and calling us to Himself! Colleen | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 563 Registered: 3-2004 |
I am amazed by how much I thought I knew just because I was SDA. I remember thinking as I saw people getting out of church on Sunday and going to the store, "Well, they do not keep their Sabbath very well. How can they love God? I have the truth." I wanted to go to a public school, but was afraid to do so because I wanted to go where God wanted me to go, so I want to La Sierra College. I was not taught anything of what the gospel is in the SDA institutions. What I learned there is the Sabbath (you see I put that first), tithing, vegetarianism and Jesus died for us. What a revelation I have had coming out of Adventism. It has been exciting and thought provoking. I have never done as much studying, on my own, as I have done since I decided to give up Adventism and accept Jesus. He is truly awesome. Diana | ||
| Pw Registered user Username: Pw Post Number: 137 Registered: 6-2004 |
Notice how all these so-called prophets came about during the same time period? EGW, Miller, Joseph Smith, Charles Russell, etc. All claim they received "new" visions of the gospel, yet each conflicted with each other as far as beliefs and structure. Our God is not a God of confusion! | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 111 Registered: 2-2003 |
We came across a great verse in our Bible study last week: 1 Cor 4: 6. According to the Hungarian translation we were using, it is something like: "All these things, brothers, for your sakes I have applied to myself and Apollos, so you should learn from our example: a person should stick to what is written, and no-one should become proud by boasting about one teacher as opposed to another." The NIV is a bit different, but the essence is the same. All these so-called prophets taught many things in addition to what is written in the Bible, and their followers are still arguing about it. I thought that verse was most illuminating. God bless, Adrian | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 695 Registered: 12-2003 |
So true, Adrian--"a person should stick to what is written." That's exactly IT! Colleen |
