| Author | Message | ||
| Timmy Registered user Username: Timmy Post Number: 96 Registered: 8-2006  |
Sorry about that. I was feeling kind of feisty this morning and wondered if I could get anyones attention... did it work? Here are some things I have observed over the years... I have a relative who says that EGW is a true prophet. But in the next breath he complains that his parents don't like the fact that he sells life insurance because EGW says, "I was shown that Sabbathkeeping Adventists should not engage in life insurance. This is a commerce with the world which God does not approve." (Testimonies Vol. 1, p. 549) I have not been to a potluck yet that did not have a bunch of cheese based meat substitutes as well as a variety of cheeses avaiable. yet the messenger says, "Cheese should never be introduced into the stomachî Test, vol 2, p.68 I have a good friend that says his church is the remenant church because they have the 'Spirit of Prophecy.' All the while drinking a cup of coffee. Yet his prophet/messenger says, "I saw the stewards of the Lord have no duty to help those persons who persist in using tobacco, tea, coffee.î Test, vol 1, p. 20-24 I have been to game nights with the SDAs (which are fun by the way) and they have no problem playing chess, checkers and all the other fun games, but their messenger says, "There are amusements, such as dancing, card playing, chess, checkers, etc., which we cannot approve, because Heaven condemns them." Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 514 I know several SDA's, that when pushed, that will say, "I am saved" but their prophet says they cannot. "Those who accept the Savior, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or feel that they are saved.î Christ Object Lessons, p. 155 (Your probably tired of this one but...) Every SDA I know votes, with the exception of two pastors, but their beloved messenger says, "They are partakers with them of the sins which they commit while in office.î (Christian Education p.475) I could give a hundred more examples but I think this is enough to make my point. I get myself all frustrated and bothered because by their own actions they are admitting that they really don't believe that EGW was a prophet, but when you suggest such thing, you will get demonized and condemned to hell in a heartbeat. My question is, have any of you had any luck showing people that by their own actions they demonsrate a doubt of the devine authority in their prophet? How is it, that they are so ridged when it comes to prophecy and theology supported by their prophet, but they get very loose when it comes to counsil, diet, etc.? Does anyone have a suggestion or had any luck showing their SDA friends the inconsistancies here, and helped them realize that there is a problem??? How can we help set our friends free??? "It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery." Tim | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4855 Registered: 12-2003  |
Tim, I so share your frustration. I'm especially frustrated with this same issue because the church is beginning a systematic program to re-define Ellen to the membership to convince them that the pedestal she's been on was inappropriate. Instead, she's a normal human with normal flawsóand God USED her! They carefully avoid these odd and contradictory statements, and they are explaining her unscientific reasoning by saying that God inspired the advice but NOT the reason for the advice. Of course, the reason I've heard for her saying not to eat cheese is that "in her day" cheese wasn't as clean and pasteurized as now, and it carried much more bacteria. Yet the statements like never saying we're saved, etc.óthose stand all on their own. Yes, people ignore or explain them away, but there they are. And she spoke those things in her capacity as the church's messenger. There is deep cognitive dissonance and incredible rationalizing going on...actually, the way Adventism is dealing with Ellen convinces me that they do not believe in an unalterable ground of truth. They CANNOT believe the Bible is inerrant and rationalize their prophet. For her to be inspired as the Bible writers are, they have to believe that the Biblical writers wrote equally flawed material (or that they had better editors). There is no absolute truth, from their viewpoint, upon which they can stake all their beliefs. Colleen | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 161 Registered: 7-2005  |
Our employee assistance program at work sends out weekly emails on various topics relating to mental well-being. Here's a recent message that seems appropriate to this conversation. _____________________________________ To convince someone about priorities, change, tonight's movie pick, or anything else, you may have great results if you can help the other person get in touch with strong, positive feelings. How do you get that type of response? Try these five steps: 1. Get the person's attention. 2. Build on the foundation of previous experience. Provide reminders of past successes or past happy times. 3. Help the person think through the benefits of doing things your way. 4. Help the person think through the disadvantages of choosing a different way. 5. Give the person a chance to respond, which may involve time to "think out loud." Remember to listen without arguing! ________________________________ I've thought about this in relation to the only Adventist I still have contact with after leaving the denomination a year ago. That person is my spouse. Now that I've shaken the dust off my feet, so to speak, we rarely discuss things Adventist any more, and I sense a thick, high wall that keeps me out of sensitive areas in our relationship. But I want to be ready with the right words, spoken in love, if and when the Lord may ever want to use me as a conduit for His purposes. The points above seem like good advice to me. Honestwitness | ||
| Agapetos Registered user Username: Agapetos Post Number: 437 Registered: 10-2002  |
Tim, you're funny. Got my attention! | ||
| Timmy Registered user Username: Timmy Post Number: 97 Registered: 8-2006 |
Colleen, Very interesting. I thought I had heard all the excuses but the bacteria issue is a new one on me. It makes me wonder how much more can they twist and manipulate and not let go? It seems that there has to be a breaking point. Thanks witness, I can relate well to the thick high walls. I have lost count of how many people said they want to talk to me about these issues, So I bring up just a few things and they clam up. #5 in your list is the one that I look forward to, but never seem to get to that point. Here is another issue: Reading through Acts last night, we noticed vs.1:12 speaks of a "Sabbaths day journey." comparing several versions it appears that this "journey" was between 1/2 and 3/4 of a mile. It is not that they just happened to travel a 1/2 mile on the Sabbath, but rather, that is how far the law allowed them to travel on the Sabbath. SDAs put so much emphises on the fact that they keep the law, but how many of them realize that when they resurected the Sabbath in 1850(?) that they also re-engineered the requirements of it? Has any one had any luck presenting this fact to them? 99% of them break two or three Sabbath laws just driving to church. They kindle a fire, (Ex35:3) They exceed the "journey" requirements, (Ex16:29) (Acts1:12) Not mention that anyone caught breaking the Sabbath was to be put to death. (Ex31:15)(Ex35:2)(Nu15:35) They either say they keep the law to be saved or keep the law because they are saved, and any one who does not keep the law (like they do) will not be saved... How does it compute??? Being raised an SDA you would think I would know the answer to this but... Any ideas? | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2948 Registered: 3-2004  |
A sabbath day's journey has really changed because of our modern transportation. So what is it today?? On CARM Ric-b put up a thread for the former's favorite myths. You would like that one. Why not visit and read it. It address many of the things Timmy put up. Diana | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 361 Registered: 7-2005  |
Colleen, You said
From your knowledge, White Estate is promoting the official position of the church? I'm still trying to understand who is the church official spekesman. Seeing George Knight online arguing for a "human Ellen" and all attempts to make her look as a human propeht, it seems that he, and the others present at the Ellen White Summit are respresenting the church, leading a new approach and a new type of apology. the same type of apology is made by Graeme Bradford in his books "Prophets are Human" and the new and bigger book "More than a Prophet". But here comes White Estate and says on their webpage about "More than a Prophet"
And finally
From what I read here, they are endorsing the piedestal and are opposed to the new approach. my question: what is the position of the church? Who is going to spoke with authority in bahlf of the church? | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 2964 Registered: 3-2004 |
It sounds like there will be a "battle" between the GC and the White estate. A house divided against itself will not stand. Just my 2 cents worth. Diana | ||
| Susans Registered user Username: Susans Post Number: 70 Registered: 8-2006 |
The SDA organization is going to have to do what every former has had to do...decide exactly what to do with Ellen White. This is the bottom line issue as regards the future of the SDA church. I think I see God's hand working in this. The more controversy is stirred up, the more the SDA church sues those who question EGW, and with the internet the more public this contention from within as well as from without is seen, there will continue to be a polarization in the SDA church. The cognitive dissonance will increase for those members who are aware of what is going on, even though they might think that their church and their prophet is rightly being defended. Those who are not aware of what is going on will hopefully see the outgrowth of this at the local church level and begin to seriously ask what is going on here, really? I have confidence that Jesus is calling his sheep, and His sheep will hear His voice, and they will follow HIM. Susan | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 4876 Registered: 12-2003 |
Jackob, good question. I think the church will accept whatever apology for Ellen is used. I believe it's sort-of like the IJ and the Sabbathóyou can redefine it all you want, as long as you don't reject it. If you can find any way to satisfy people's "itching ears" and keep them loyal, the method can be excused. The church has certainly not tried to stop the dissemination of Graeme Bradford's book (it was sold and pushed at the Michigan Camp Meeting this summer), and church leaders gave that Ellen White Summit in Oregon a year ago. I agree with SusanóI believe there is great stress inside the church, and at the local levels, pastors are scrambling to keep members and make their churches attractive. You can believe just about any version of the doctrines you want to believe as long as you stay inside and stay loyal to the organization. Bottom lineóbelonging to the organization is more important than what you believe. Colleen | ||
| Randyg Registered user Username: Randyg Post Number: 303 Registered: 12-2004 |
Colleen, Thank-you for that post. Thats sums up my observation to a tee. Believe what you want,and if its too aberrant from the standard interpretation, thats okay, just don't tell anybody or raise questions. You are allowed to believe almost anything, as long as you don't leave the church. Well said. | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 362 Registered: 7-2005 |
This is a mystical belief, because people jump in irrational to maintain their position. Actually it reflects the spiritual bondage, they are unable to believe the gospel and be free. Let's pray without ceasing to God for granting them repentance and faith in the great salvation accomplished by our Lord Jesus Christ. | ||
| Timmy Registered user Username: Timmy Post Number: 106 Registered: 8-2006 |
Question: An SDA friend told me this last weekend that Ellen NEVER said that the GC was the "Highest Authority" on earth. I thought she did but I can't find it. Any Ideas? Thanks! Tim | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 597 Registered: 7-2004  |
From the Truth or Fables website at http://www.truthorfables.com/Gen_Conf_Highest_Aut.htm
I just looked it up at the White Estate website, and that is indeed an exact quote. | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 598 Registered: 7-2004 |
Also on the truth or fables link, here is the contradictory statement by EGW regarding GC authority (that's what the Yes, No are for in answer to "Is or isn't the General Conference the Highest Authority of God on Earth?").
Since the Yes is more verifiable being in Testimonies versus the No which is in a manuscript that won't be in someone's home, I'd think it would be more likely for SDA's to have come across the Yes statement, that EGW said the GC is God's highest authority on earth. Of course the No was said more recently than the Yes, so I guess EGW changed her mind, or maybe God did... Maybe the GC was, but then it got too corrupt and so wasn't anymore. | ||
| Timmy Registered user Username: Timmy Post Number: 107 Registered: 8-2006 |
Good grief! It is even worse than I thought. Thank you for the info Raven, this should make interesting conversation with my friend... ts | ||
| Susans Registered user Username: Susans Post Number: 79 Registered: 8-2006 |
Colleen, You are absolutely correct! It doesn't matter what you believe, or teach if it doesn't stir up too much controversy, just stay inside and stay loyal. "The church may appear to fall, but..(thankfully I can't remember it all)" Stay with the Ship till it's safely in the harbor...all sorts of things to keep you "on course" (in line and paying your tithe). Keep the faith in Ellen alive and sell those books! |
