| Author | Message | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 52 Registered: 7-2005  |
Catalyst wrote: "...we do not need to claim that she was from or of the devil - merely a misguided over zealous person." I agree with you, Catalyst. I think we Christians are way too eager to give glory to the devil for oh so many things. I believe there are three spirits (or categories of spirits): the Holy spirit, the Evil spirit, and the human spirit. Just because the human spirit makes grave errors, doesn't mean we are witnessing demon possession. We are simply witnessing error, of which any and all of us can be guilty. God allows error to go unchecked for a while, but eventually leads us to the truth. EGW had a very serious head injury, which caused her to manifest very unusual behavior. Some of the people in her day recognized her error and kept themselves from falling for the deception. Other people were looking for the sensationalism or the religious fervor of following her teachings and either failed to see or refused to see the error. But I really hesitate to call EGW or the people who follow(ed) her demonic or satanic. I'd rather find a more positive-sounding terminology, like misguided. Even SERIOUSLY misguided. My husband is completely devoted to the SDA church, and I just can't bring myself to swallow the idea that he's involved with something demonic. To me, the demonic religion is the one that teaches its adherents to commit suicide bombings so they can earn points with God. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3617 Registered: 12-2003  |
I am not equating being a false prophet with demon possession. I don't believe one needs to be possessed to be deceived or deceiving. We are, after all, all born "by nature objects of wrath" (Ephesians 2:4). The Bible, though, asks us to be discerning and to be willing to clearly know what we're facing. "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth" (1 Timothy 4:1-3). "But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought themóbringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping" (2 Peter 2:1-3). "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world, and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil come, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand" (Ephesians 6:12-13). Many sincere people are deceived by doctrines of demons and deceiving spiritsóbut God is in the business of calling all of us from deception. He asks us to be willing to know truth and what is real. Colleen | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 95 Registered: 6-2005 |
Colleen - No one is voting for NOT finding deception/error/incorrect teachings here. We are all in favor of finding them - my point would be that once you find someting that you feel is a false teaching, pointing out that you find the teaching to be incorrect or false is sufficient without deriding or making derogatory remarks about the deluded preacher. It is not necessary to pull down another person (no matter how misguided they are) since it does not make us any more worthy or righteous. It was a big relief to me to be able to come out from under Ellen's accusing finger. When I could recognize her statements for what they really are, her opinion (or the opinion of others restated by her <grin>). I also have frustration that she claimed to be talking for God and used huge amounts of guilt to make people comply with her teachings. But - in my opinion she was like the Fox sisters - even if she did it knowingly and on purpose for money it does not mean that she was demonic - merely greedy. The thing that is now foremost in my mind when this comes up is the parable of the man that was forgiven everything and when he saw someone who owed him little, he had him thrown in prison. How can I - the benefactor of such unbelieveable grace - throw stones at another person and even intimate they they are not worthy of the very same grace? Love the sinner - hate the sin. Thanks for listening, Bill | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 96 Registered: 6-2005 |
Colleen - regarding Ephesians 6:12-13 Let me give you a parable: A lady comes to church just as the parishioners are getting out and shaking the pastor's hand. She says - Pastor - I am so sorry I am late - but the devil placed a nail at the end of my driveway and I got a flat tire on the way to church. He does not want me to hear your wonderful sermons. An elder overheard the woman and said - no - there was a huge accident just down your street that you would have been involved in if you had not had that flat tire. It was GOD that put that nail at the end of your driveway so that you COULD continue to hear the sermons. Well - I put it to you that not everything is CAUSED by either the devil or God. This nail was dropped of the back of some carpenter's truck accidentally as they drove. In our struggles with what we believe is right or wrong we must keep open the idea that we still may be wrong in our interpretation of what is true. (You were wrong once before weren't you? - what makes you think that you have a lock on correctness now?) It is easy to bolster ones arguement with the idea that everything is black and white/right or wrong and that since I must be right (how could anything else be possible <grin>) anything else must be wrong/demonic (yeah - that's the ticket - everything else is of the devil!) IMHO Thanks Bill | ||
| Violet Registered user Username: Violet Post Number: 352 Registered: 2-2001 |
Bill, I think that one of the assumptions on this board is that what is said is just someone's opinion. Yes, we have all been down the road of taking words at their face only and not really understanding them by the Holy Spirit. Maybe at times we just forget to add the qualifier IMHO. Violet PS the terms I use are purley Okie | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2179 Registered: 11-2002 |
I used to think EGW was such a nut case because of the head injury she suffered as a child. And, I still do think that was the start of it all. I read on Dirk's site about that sort of head injury and it fits her to a "T". I believe if she had that sort of injury now with medicine being so much more sophisficated than it was then her outcome would be far different than she experienced. Having said that I also believe as time progressed and she realized people were actually falling for her delusions the lust of power over peoples lives took hold. And, as a progression it did lead eventually to demon possession and I don't have this opinion lightly. I have this position because EGW said herself shat she had demons in her bedroom and that after her husband died she sought his advice. It was a progression, a downward progression. | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1328 Registered: 7-2003 |
Is there no difference in quality if someone is deceiving/deceived themselves compared to taking a whole host of others with you? If it wasn't EGW that was the point, but maybe Benny Hinn or the Catholic pope, or David Koresh or ... Muhammed....? Do we think the religions of any of these leaders can be discredited without ultimately speaking harshly of its leader as well? EGW and SDA are personal for most here and it's hard to look at it objectively, but imagine what you're proposing when considering a religion absent personal connection. Are these all accidents that Satan had nothing to do with, just individuals' personal error that was propogated on and on through generations? Because if it applies to all heretical teachings/groups/leaders, it has to apply EGW and adventism. Ultimately what is not of truth is from satan, he is the father of all lies. Yes, we all have a sin nature, but that doesn't change the fact scripture calls satan the father of lies. John 8:44 So even if I am believing something in error, that lie came from somewhere ... and somehow the Holy Spirit brings truth to us in his timing, in his way...and maybe if we're uninterested in hearing it. John 16:13"But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come." I realize the issue of truth is not in question, the issue of where error comes from is, and determining the motives of the leader, whether error or intentional deception.... Regardless of how one interprets EGW, if you look at the 1919 Conference notes, it is clear there were problems with her in the eyes of her contemporaries, but they were too weak to stand the heat of exposing the truth. How many others tried to speak the truth about scripture and the gospel and were shot down? Is that really just error run amuck .... or is there a greater delusion involved here? The lengths EGW went to to hide her sources, discrediting honest men (mostly) for their attempts to bring truth to light... These are not insignificant issues and are not acts of mere error. Frankly, given her mental health, it seems impossible for her to have "accidentally" created this religion. I have no doubt that those involved in the religion buy into it sincerely. I'm sure they think they are following their conscious, not realizing they've been taught wrong things, which gives them guilt about wrong things and keeps them bound to wrong thinking/actions and ultimately hinders personal relationships and their relationship with God. BUT, are we wrong to call a spade a spade? None of us can really judge her motives purely, completely, but to say there aren't indications in her actions, writings would be a real stretch. She lied about copying things, she admits she was embarrassed and humiliated by the 1844 events, she seems to have had incredible timing in regards to visions and the need to persuade certain people...with status and money that could give her credibility. We are all learning, but if we go light on EGW, then are we encouraging others to sit under her teaching? Are essentials wrong or not? Many of her stuff is wholly around disputable matters, but much is an attack on the gospel. Seems we would need to apply the same terminology to her and the religion as we would to other leaders of "erroneous" religions. It's easy for me to say, I don't have any emotional connections, but we're not talking about someone who just misled in non-essentials, disputable matters. Scripture clearly calls her teachings "teachings of demons" and I think we have to be honest to the text regardless of discomfort. It's like the man who built his house on the sand....EGW and her contemporaries did not build that religion based upon Jesus Christ and his saving grace and the heart of the gospel. They built it on date-setting, then face-saving. No matter how you try to shore it up, it's foundation is still sand at it's base. And that is IMHO.  (Message edited by melissa on March 24, 2006) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3620 Registered: 12-2003 |
Melissa, you always explain things so clearly. I know from personal experience how much difference there is inside an Adventist between calling Ellen "brain damaged", "misguided", misused", "not a prophet", "quirky", etcóand calling her a "false prophet". I still remember the nearly electric jot I experienced the first time I squarely faced the facts and realized I couldn't excuse her any longer. She claimed inspiration, she claimed her writing was all of God or not of God, and I had to evaluate her as a prophet, not as a "victim" of her time. Even more, I'll never forget the overwhelming physical shock of admitting that if she claimed lies were from God, I had no choice, biblically, but to see her "revelations" as from Satan. Lies are not from God, and they are not neutral. They are from what the Bible calls "the father of lies". The bottom line here is whether or not we are going to base our world view on the Bible or on human reason. Either the Bible is completely reliable as the word of God, or there is no reliable ground of truth. Postmodernism would have us believe that there is no absolute truth; what we experience is our truth, and for us, there is no other. If the Bible is what it claims to be, however, two things will be true: first, if we choose to act on the assumption that it is God's vehicle of presenting the essence of absolute truth to us, God will reveal Himself and authenticate His Word. Second, living as if its words are absolute truth will introduce us personally to Jesus and will change our lives completely. Our view of Scripture, ultimately, is what shapes the way we see life. If Scripture is not inspired fully for us today, than all religion is relative. But if we're wrong in thinking Scripture is relative, we will be in for a very concrete disappointment. The Holy Spirit confirms without a doubt the reality of Jesus and the validity of His word when we decide to act by faith in Jesus and find out whether or not the Bible is completely the word of God. Colleen (Message edited by Colleentinker on March 24, 2006) | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 97 Registered: 6-2005 |
Well - we will have to agree to disagree then - I believe that MANY of the preachers that stand in pulpits each week say things like "God has shown me" and I will bet that you disagree with MANY of these preachers theology's but I am QUITE sure that they are not possessed by Satan nor are they from Satan - just well meaning preachers using the vernacular. I have no problem with "false prophet" - she FELT like and I believe that SHE believed (at least for a while) that she was a prophet. I believe that her message was tainted and in many cases false - but I do not need to make the judgement that she was from satan or satanic or from the father of lies. | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2180 Registered: 11-2002 |
There is a difference between being wrong on turth and being demon possessed. Even though all religions that don't teach pure Bibical Chriastian truth are wrong they are not necessarilly possessed by demons. Jesus went out and taught thruth to those who needed to hear and learn it. He also cast out demons. Although all false religion is from the father of lies that does not in the least imply demon possession. Frankly I believe most of what one hears on "Christian" T.V or radio is wrong but I don't believe the folks teaching those inaccuracies are demon possessed. I do however believe EGW was demon possessed. I have read that Joseph Smith communicated with demons. I have no clue about if that is true or not but there sure is a lot of similarities between him and EGW, the LDS religion and the SDA religion. I do though try to get to listen to Unshackled nightly on the radio. In fact, it comes on the SDA radio station. It is my favorite Christian radio program. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 99 Registered: 6-2005 |
Let me ask you Susan - If EGW and the SDA church are indeed satan posessed as you state - can you afford to listen to their radio station? I agree with you that there is a difference between being wrong on truth and being demon possessed - Martin Luther was certainly not correct in all his "truth" but I am sure that no one here would say he was demon posessed. <g> | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 1330 Registered: 7-2003 |
Martin Luther did not claim night visions from an "angel". I don't know that I think EGW was demon possessed, but there is a huge difference in possession and influence. I think she propogated demonically influenced teachings. That is very different than being "possessed". She claims to have been guided by a special angel...and unless you are going to say her "angel" was from God, isn't the alternative that her "angel" was a demon? She could have made up all her nightly visitors just to give credibility to her lies, but that doesn't change the fact her fables are contrary to the word of God in many, many areas. Let's not forget that even Satan quoted scripture when tempting Jesus. So, it wouldn't surprise me to have EGW misrepresent it as well. We give far less benefit-of-the-doubt to far less "wrong" individuals than is being proposed for EGW. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 104 Registered: 6-2005 |
I believe that I am not to judge - so at this point I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt as to being misguided - she will have to answer as to WHY she did what she did and said what she said - I found/find her message invalid and fraudulent for me But - I do not need her to be of Satan or demonic to disbelieve her. Benny Hinn said that the Lord showed him that women originally had babies out of their side and that only after sin were they to be born vaginally. Yup - RIGHT! Is he demonic? In my opinion - naw - deluded, crazy, power hungry, bad hairdo, bad accent etc? Sure - but demonic - naw. But - your call - go with what you feel is right. Bill | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 2186 Registered: 11-2002 |
I think I was very clear in trying to explain what I ment but I will try again maybe trying using different words. I do not think for even a nano-second that that EGW started out bad or wrong or in total error or demon possessed. She got hit on the head with a rock. Then she lay in a coma for several weeks. If a little girl was to have that happen in this country now the little girls medical treetment would be much different than what EGW got. I believe EGW started out truly wanting to please Jesus and live for Him. As a result of her head injury she got these hullicanations (visions) and vivid delusions. It was a progression. She realized she had power over people that they were totally believing her 'visions'. She was also seeing dollar signs in this and you can read that for yourself in her letter to her husband where she writes there is still yet a lot of money to be made from her books. Do you realize she is the only fully ordained woman the SDA church has ever ordained? That was so they could put her on the payroll. Even though satan is the father of all deception and of all lies that does not imply in the least that everyone who believes something wrong is possessed. Demon possession is an extremely serious subject and I do not mean this lightly. The Bible speeks very strongly about demons, possession, fortune tellers, witches, and do on. I won't even be in a room if I am aware an oujoque board is being used. Having said all that I want you to read it for yourself where EGW says she had dwemons in her bedroom (parlor?) and also where she consulted the advice of her dead husband. I do not believe the SDA church as an institutation is demon possessed, it's an oerganization. Individuals get possessed, not corporations. I also have never met a SDA person that I have thought was demon possessed. But, I do think EGW let herself get to that state. I have no problem listening to the local SDA radio station. I doubt if a radio station could be possessed, as I said it's a corporation, a company, not a person who has sold out to the evil powers. Besides that, I personally know the folks who run and manage the local SDA radio station and even though I think they are misguided I do not in the least think they are possessed. There is a big, big, big difference between being wrong and misguided and being possessed. I have never listened to Benny Hinn, I don't particurally like James Dobson, Pat Robertson (although I really like Pat Buchannan a lot), Jerry Fallwell or most of the others mentioned. most the so-called Christian t.v. and radio just irritates me so I don't watch it or listen to it. I like watching the old reruns of Billy Graham and I like listening to his son, Franklin Graham. I like Jim Wallis and my favorite Christen program is Unshackled. I like watching EWTN. I try to get a lot of the geography and the early Christian history on that station. I honestly do believe in powerful demon spirits just as I totally believe in even more powerful Godly angles as well as other spirits of God. I won't let myself even get to being too courious about that stuff. It's not my place. It's there. I want all Gods help from whatever sources I can get it and any part of satan and his cast out former angels turned demons I want no part of. I will not have my palm read, I will not have taroit cards read for me. Thatr stuff is not to be messed with. It is real and it leads to only bad things in this life and life eternally. I am usually a very mild mannered person however I am very worked up over this subject. Do not entertain evil spirits. One more thing, I had never heard of Benny Hinn until I started reading this forum but I can say from what I've read of him on here I have no interest in learning more about him or anything from him. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 105 Registered: 6-2005 |
Thanks Susan - By the way the SDA church has ordained MANY women. Leah Jordache for example at the Loma Linda church. The EGW consulting advice from her dead husband is something that you referenced that I have never seen, and would like to - could you show me that reference please? Again - I do not believe that I can judge whether or not she was "posessed" by Satan. I do not need to state that to disbelieve her writings. Thank you again for your opinion, Bill | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 398 Registered: 7-2004  |
A person can be a false prophet without being literally demon-possessed. The Bible expects us to judge whether or not someone who claims prophetic messages is of God or not, and gives several ways to test that. Ellen White fails miserably and for that reason her messsage should be rejected and she can be judged a false prophet. That has nothing to with demon-possession, and I don't believe the Bible gives us instruction to test for that, but we ARE admonished to test the spirit and test the prophet. | ||
| Riverfonz Registered user Username: Riverfonz Post Number: 1456 Registered: 3-2005 |
Bill, I really liked your reference above to what Benny Hinn said--wow! That guy is not only a nut-case, but he is clearly one of the most gross of false prophets around today. I have to be honest--I think I would take Ellen White over Benny Hinn. But, I say this for another reason. I was a weekly Bible student of the late Dr. Walter Martin. I know what he said of those teachers like Benny Hinn (who came on the scene after Martin's death), but the generic faith teachers was Martin's passion to attack. He considered attacking Adventism less worthy of his time in light of the harm the faith teachers were currently doing to the body of Christ. I still don't understand however, how a man of Walter Martin's scholarly stature admit that he read most of what Ellen White ever wrote, and he had to come to the conclusion that even though she was wrong about many things, and even prophesied falsely at times, that in his opinion, she was truly born again. Now, I am not in the business of determining someone's eternal destiny. I did not then, or now, agree with his assessment. There may have been writings that the SDA leadership hid from Martin's view. Jeremy has done a splendid job of exposing what EGW wrote, that probably Martin didn't read. However, Bill, you make another point that is at least worth considering. And that is this matter of calling Adventism a Satanic cult, or something similar, or calling EGW demon possessed, which might be a very dangerous thing to do. I agree with what Melissa said above about all lies coming from the father of lies. All false gospels, whether it be SDA, Mormonism, RCC, WCG, JWs, New Age etc etc. all come from the same pit of deception. However, if I would have approached my dad (see my recent tribute to him on the Happy Birthday Dad thread) by saying that Adventism is a cult, and EGW was inspired by a demonic spirit (which now he does believe), then he would have likely turned off, and not listened to more reasoned discourse from Desmond Ford, about the Biblical validity of the Investigative Judgment. Calling Adventism, Mormonism, etc cults in this day in age--which conjures up images of strange UFO groups, or Jim Jones groups--may be quite counterproductive when trying to reach people still in false gospels. I have heard anecdotal stories by email, and by phone, of people coming to this forum, and seeing talk of EGW demon possession, and SDA being a Satanic cult etc., and then they becoming turned off and not listening to anything else we have to say. But that is anecdotal, and it is only my opinion. So, possibly, by elevating the discourse to objective theological and social issues regarding transitioning out of Adventism, and by continuing to emphasize God's grace in getting out of this system of bondage and legalism, will be our best witness to the loved ones we are trying to reach. That is what I love about this forum overall, is by and large, people have a lot of positive experiences of the grace of God working in their own lives, for which we can be ever thankful. So many post great quotes from great authors, as well as so many great praise songs and hymns, that I am always blessed by. Stan | ||
| Wolfgang Registered user Username: Wolfgang Post Number: 70 Registered: 10-2005 |
I think Dirk's site has info on the dead husband talking to her or at truth and fables. I too agree tha she was not demon led,misguided for sure. I'm at crossroads myself,as I'm walking away from the SDA church my inlaws are walking back into it. Although they are not EGW advocates,thier focus is on Jesus,I have chosen to keep quiet until asked. | ||
| Catalyst Registered user Username: Catalyst Post Number: 109 Registered: 6-2005 |
Stan - I could not have put that better - Thank you. Again - my point is WHAT GOOD will it do to label her as Satanic? 1. you cannot PROOVE it 2. you have the potential of doing harm 3. you do not need "satanic" to ignore what she said. Bill | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 3632 Registered: 12-2003 |
I admit I hate to persist in this dialogue because it focuses a lot of energy on this subject, but I have to clarify a couple of things. Frist, I want to remind all of us of the purpose of this forum. It exists to provide a place where people who are questioning Adventism or have left it can find support, ask questions, and share their experiences with others who have found Jesus to be their Sabbath rest. This forum is not for the purpose of convincing Adventists they are "wrong"; rather, it is for those who already have serious questions or have left. In other words, the targeted audience is NOT Adventists, although they are more than welcome to read and learn. Because this forum is for former and questioning Adventists, it must be a place where people in these categories can share their experiences and insightsóincluding their visceral and objective responses to the denomination, its practices, and its underlying foundation. This forum is also a place for which many people pray regularly. It is a place dedicated to the Lord Jesus, and He is invited to be here, ministering to each person who participates and also the unknown people who merely lurk, Adventist or not. This is a place dedicated to "truth as it is in Jesus" (Ephesians 4:21), and we ask Him daily (if not oftener!) to make this a place of truth, support, prayer, and spiritual growth in Him. With this identity as a backdrop, the forum must be a place where people in their journey through or out of Adventism can speak of their spiritual battles and of their inisghts into the deception and darkness which becomes increasingly clear as one submits to the word of God and to being taught by the Holy Spirit. We need to be able to describe the danger and evil we discover in Adventism regardless of how people might feel about these things. The fact is, countless people have come to the same realization: deception is at the core of Adventism, and that deception has been promulgated primarily through Ellen White, the "mouthpiece" of the founders and the continuing and authoritative source of instruction, according to their own fundamental beliefs. Further, we cannot neutralize deception. There is no possible way we can call deception innocent; it was, after all, the first sin in the world. We cannot fail to identify evil in the source of deception. I know that many people cringe at these words; it is extremely difficult to admit to oneself that one has been committed to a deception; we prize our intellects too highly to want to think we can be taken in by evil. But we are all born into evil, and we should not be surprised that we can or have been blinded by a deception which originated with the father of lies. Every human on earth has to face the unique ways they have been blinded by evil. This reality is why we need Jesus. Just because people who are still close to Adventism become angry or defensive when they hear others referring to the evil at work in Ellen White's "visions" and writings or when they hear those who are awakening to the gospel and the startling difference between Biblical truth and Adventism refer to that church as a cult, should not be a reason not to speak of it. We are not directing our comments at Adventists; we are speaking to each other and receiving support. If others disagree or feel defensive, that's OK--and our discussion can handle this tension Finally, if we feel free to post our concerns with heresies creeping into Christianity at large and with specific groups in particular, we should by no means feel less free to discuss our experiences with Ellen and Adventismóespecially here. Adventism is different from "regular" Christianity in that it continues to endorse an extra-biblical authority, incomplete salvation, and Sabbath as an ultimate test of salvation. This endorsement is cultic by any Christian standardóand it deserves to be so named. That being said, our job is not to belittle Adventists or to condemn them personally. After all, we all have been or still are Adventists or closely associated with them! God awakens us in His time, and I would guess that many of us resented what we heard about Adventism before God opened our eyes, too. We are not here to "bash", but we are here to be able to speak truthfully to each other about our experiences and discoveries. We are here to provide information, support, and prayer for each other. If what we say offends some, that is to be expected. But all of us need to remember that God is calling us to a life of submission to Him. He seeks to glorify Himself through us, and He wants to love others through us. Our first loyalty is to be submitted to Him. He, then, can communicate truth through usóand He is able to handle the hearts of all those who read and react. Colleen |
