Where is the justice?????????

[St Francis]

....at least they had the right attitude that when they were wrong...

OMG : LOL :-D
They were wrong, but at least they had the right attitude? Is that what SDA apologetics has sunk to?

 

[RND]

So, if I were to write ...say...Give me all your money THUS SAITH THE LORD, I should expect a check from you? C'mon, saying "thus saith the lord" means nothing coming from a heretic. NO, the Holy Spirit does not speak like that to ALL.

You're kidding right? The Holy Spirit speaks to everyone in some fashion, in some way or another. Read Romans 1 for goodness sake.

No, the Holy Spirit does not give visions to "all". Are you saying you personally experience "visions"?

The Holy Spirit doesn't give visions to all that is true. But obviously the Holy Spirit does give visions to some. The gifts of the spirit are not the same for everyone in the church and are given as needed.

This is YOUR church claiming INFALLIBILITY. Yes, this is how the Holy Spirit works, just not through a church He doesn't guide.

Actually, there is no "infallibility" claim made by the Adventist church.

"It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy (Mrs. White’s writings) that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words." G.A. Irwin, General Conference President, from the tract The Mark of the Beast, p. 1.

Isn't that how the Holy Spirit speaks to all?

Huh? This quote has nothing to do with the HS, It is saying that EGW is the "only infallible interpreter of Bible principles". ONE PERSON, so unless you think EGW is the HS, no, that's not how the HS works, that's how cults work.

Nope, it's saying that only the Holy Spirit is infallible. "...it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words"

You seem to be trying to minimize EGW's influence within the SDA church.

She was a great teacher and writer and used the Bible exclusively as her guide.

You seem to be claiming she is no different than anyone else, that your church did not call her a prophet and believe her "visions". That's not so.

There are certainly some in the church that call her a prophet, but then again it is always helpful to understand what that word means. It does not, as some mistakenly think, mean to be able to predict the future. It does mean that certain people can be given certain visions and understanding of the Bible and of God's word by God Himself.

Do you consider her a prophetess?

Not as one that can predict the future. As one that was given special visions and revelation by God, you bet.

 

[Rick W]

Please check those tempers and throttle back a bit.
thanks

 

[dadof10]

So, if I were to write ...say...Give me all your money THUS SAITH THE LORD, I should expect a check from you? C'mon, saying "thus saith the lord" means nothing coming from a heretic. NO, the Holy Spirit does not speak like that to ALL.

You're kidding right? The Holy Spirit speaks to everyone in some fashion, in some way or another. Read Romans 1 for goodness sake.

"In some fashion, in some way or another", yes, I agree. That's not what I was responding to, though, this is:

EGW wrote: "In my books, the truth is stated, barricaded by a ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ The Holy Spirit traced these truths upon my heart and mind as indelibly as the law was traced by the finger of God upon the tables of stone." Letter 90, 1906.

You wrote: "Isn't that how the Holy Spirit speaks to all?

That's what I was responding too, so no, I'm not kidding and I have read Romans 1. Have you read the definition of the term "Straw-man"?

The Holy Spirit doesn't give visions to all that is true. But obviously the Holy Spirit does give visions to some. The gifts of the spirit are not the same for everyone in the church and are given as needed.

And how are we to OBJECTIVELY know which "visions" are from God and which are lies? Do we look for the words "thus saith the Lord"? What is your criteria for discerning the truth or falsity of "visions" and what makes you think EGW lives up to this criteria?

Actually, there is no "infallibility" claim made by the Adventist church.

LOL...Then what does this mean???

"When the judgment of the General Conference, which is the highest authority that God has on earth, is exercised private independence and private judgment MUST NOT be maintained, but must be surrendered." Testimonies 3 p. 492."

Let me put it another way and you tell me if this is a claim of infallibility:

""When the judgment of the [Pope in union with the Bishops], which is the highest authority that God has on earth, is exercised private independence and private judgment MUST NOT be maintained, but must be surrendered." Testimonies 3 p. 492."

Just because the word "infallibility" is not in the sentence, doesn't mean the concept isn't being advanced, and it clearly is.

Nope, it's saying that only the Holy Spirit is infallible. "...it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words"

Nope. Read it again. It is saying "that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles:

"It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy (Mrs. White’s writings) that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words." G.A. Irwin, General Conference President, from the tract The Mark of the Beast, p. 1.

Through the agency of the "Spirit of Prophecy" Christ is "giving real meaning of his own words".

You can try to sugar-coat it if you want, but this is the history of your church.

She was a great teacher and writer and used the Bible exclusively as her guide.

EXCLUSIVELY!!! WOW, you must be kidding. What about her VISIONS AND PRIVATE PROPHECY??? She AND the entire SDA cult is based upon using her "visions" and "prophecy" as THEIR guide. Sheesh...

There are certainly some in the church that call her a prophet, but then again it is always helpful to understand what that word means. It does not, as some mistakenly think, mean to be able to predict the future. It does mean that certain people can be given certain visions and understanding of the Bible and of God's word by God Himself.

[quote:3k5iovyh]Do you consider her a prophetess?

Not as one that can predict the future. As one that was given special visions and revelation by God, you bet.[/quote:3k5iovyh]

So, what about her or her "visions" and "prophecies" gives them legitimacy in your mind? Was it her "closed door" vision then HER refutation of the doctrine? LOL...

 

[RND]

"In some fashion, in some way or another", yes, I agree. That's not what I was responding to, though, this is:

EGW wrote: "In my books, the truth is stated, barricaded by a ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ The Holy Spirit traced these truths upon my heart and mind as indelibly as the law was traced by the finger of God upon the tables of stone." Letter 90, 1906.

You wrote: "Isn't that how the Holy Spirit speaks to all?

That's what I was responding too, so no, I'm not kidding and I have read Romans 1. Have you read the definition of the term "Straw-man"?

Again, just exactly how does the Holy Spirit communicate with people? Leaving a note under one's pillow or communicating with one's heart by impressing upon that very heart? That's exactly what I read. No "strawman" there.

And how are we to OBJECTIVELY know which "visions" are from God and which are lies?

Isaiah 8:19-20

Do we look for the words "thus saith the Lord"?

Is there any other way?

What is your criteria for discerning the truth or falsity of "visions" and what makes you think EGW lives up to this criteria?

The Bible. She wites in harmony with the Bible, certainly not opoosed to it.

LOL...Then what does this mean???

"When the judgment of the General Conference, which is the highest authority that God has on earth, is exercised private independence and private judgment MUST NOT be maintained, but must be surrendered." Testimonies 3 p. 492."

Let me put it another way and you tell me if this is a claim of infallibility:

""When the judgment of the [Pope in union with the Bishops], which is the highest authority that God has on earth, is exercised private independence and private judgment MUST NOT be maintained, but must be surrendered." Testimonies 3 p. 492."

Just because the word "infallibility" is not in the sentence, doesn't mean the concept isn't being advanced, and it clearly is.

What does "this" mean? It means you need to read the entire chapter to fully appreciate what EGW is referring to. She was not saying the Adventist GC was "infallible" regarding what the Bible says or the doctrine of the Bible but regarding specific requirements of church activities. It's like a business that requires it's employees to be at work at 8:00am. That business is "infallible" in it's judgment.

Chap. 44 - Leadership

Brother A, your experience in reference to leadership two years ago was for your own benefit and was highly essential to you. You had very marked, decided views in regard to individual independence and right to private judgment. These views you carry to extremes. You reason that you must have light and evidence for yourself in reference to your duty. {3T 492.1}

I have been shown that no man's judgment should be surrendered to the judgment of any one man. But when the judgment of the General Conference, which is the highest authority that God has upon the earth, is exercised, private independence and private judgment must not be maintained, but be surrendered. Your error was in persistently maintaining your private judgment of your duty against the voice of the highest authority the Lord has upon the earth. After you had taken your own time, and after the work had been much hindered by your delay, you came to Battle Creek in answer to the repeated and urgent calls of the General Conference. You firmly maintained that you had done right in following your own convictions of duty. You considered it a virtue in you to persistently maintain your position of independence. You did not seem to have a true sense of the power that God has given to His church in the voice of the General Conference. You thought that in responding to the call made to you by the General Conference you were submitting to the judgment and mind of one man. You accordingly manifested an independence, a set, willful spirit, which was all wrong.
493
{3T 492.2}

God gave you a precious experience at that time which was of value to you, and which has greatly increased your success as a minister of Christ. Your proud, unyielding will was subdued. You had a genuine conversion. This led to reflection and to your position upon leadership. Your principles in regard to leadership are right, but you do not make the right application of them. If you should let the power in the church, the voice and judgment of the General Conference, stand in the place you have given my husband, there could then be no fault found with your position. But you greatly err in giving to one man's mind and judgment that authority and influence which God has invested in His church in the judgment and voice of the General Conference. {3T 493.1}

When this power which God has placed in the church is accredited to one man, and he is invested with the authority to be judgment for other minds, then the true Bible order is changed. Satan's efforts upon such a man's mind will be most subtle and sometimes overpowering, because through this mind he thinks he can affect many others. Your position on leadership is correct, if you give to the highest organized authority in the church what you have given to one man. God never designed that His work should bear the stamp of one man's mind and one man's judgment. {3T 493.2}

The great reason why Brethren B and C are at this time deficient in the experience they should now have is because they have not been self-reliant. They have shunned responsibilities because in assuming them their deficiencies would be brought to the light. They have been too willing to have my husband lead out and bear responsibilities, and have allowed him to be mind and judgment for them. These brethren are weak where they should be strong. They have not dared to follow their own independent judgment, lest they should make mistakes and be blamed for it, while they have stood ready to be tempted and to make my husband responsible if they thought they could see mistakes in his course. They have not lifted the burdens with him. They have referred continually to my husband, making him bear the responsibilities

Nope. Read it again. It is saying "that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles:

"It is from the standpoint of the light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy (Mrs. White’s writings) that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words." G.A. Irwin, General Conference President, from the tract The Mark of the Beast, p. 1.

Through the agency of the "Spirit of Prophecy" Christ is "giving real meaning of his own words".

You can try to sugar-coat it if you want, but this is the history of your church.

She was a great teacher and writer and used the Bible exclusively as her guide.

Unfortunately we will just have to agree to disagree on this point.

EXCLUSIVELY!!! WOW, you must be kidding. What about her VISIONS AND PRIVATE PROPHECY??? She AND the entire SDA cult is based upon using her "visions" and "prophecy" as THEIR guide. Sheesh...

If you can show me where EGW used any other resources other than the Bible to form her opinions or if any of her visions or interpretations are based one anything other than the Bible I appreciate seeing them.

So, what about her or her "visions" and "prophecies" gives them legitimacy in your mind?

Because they are solidly based on what the Bible says.

Was it her "closed door" vision then HER refutation of the doctrine? LOL...

Is it possible that you've changed your mind about what you believe scripture was at one time telling you that it's not currently telling you? I know I have. Honest people would say so. They understand that at one time what they thought scripture was telling them was true has now changed or been enhanced. To suggest any differently is dishonest. To suggest that the Holy Spirit doesn't work with people as they read scripture and seek it's understanding is equally dishonest.

EGW was at one time a "pork" eater as well and was convinced that no light had been shown to her regarding eating such a filthy animal. Later, after much persuasion of others she was convinced otherwise. What was that "force" that finally caused her to change her mind? According to the Bible it's the Holy Spirit.

Mat 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

 

[guibox]

How exactly did you guys turn a discussion on the injustice of eternal torment to the valdity of Ellen White?

Come on...get back on track as you know this discussion is going to go nowhere. I've seen so many blatant falsehoods already that rational discussion is never going to be attained on this subject.

 

[francisdesales]

How exactly did you guys turn a discussion on the injustice of eternal torment to the valdity of Ellen White?

Yea, that's a pretty good trick, huh...

I doubt anything can be added to the original topic.

Regards

 

[St Francis]

How exactly did you guys turn a discussion on the injustice of eternal torment to the valdity of Ellen White?

Yea, that's a pretty good trick, huh...

I doubt anything can be added to the original topic.

Regards

I think its a recipe:

Insert one SDA
mix with Catholic
bake for one day
end up with EGW and Pope controversy

 

[dadof10]

Again, just exactly how does the Holy Spirit communicate with people? Leaving a note under one's pillow or communicating with one's heart by impressing upon that very heart? That's exactly what I read. No "strawman" there.

The Holy Spirit personally guiding me in my daily walk through my FALLIBLE conscience is a far cry from what EGW said. The SDA elevates her writings and "prophecies" to being on par with Scripture "believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is the Christ, through this agency, giving real meaning of his own words." You can attempt to minimize your church's view of her and her "visions", but if you look at the history, it is a whitewash.

And how are we to OBJECTIVELY know which "visions" are from God and which are lies?

Isaiah 8:19-20

"And when they say to you, "Consult the mediums and the wizards who chirp and mutter," should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living?
20 To the teaching and to the testimony! Surely for this word which they speak there is no dawn. (Isaiah (RSV) 8)"

Could you please elaborate on how this passage gives the criteria for true visions, and how EGW's visions fulfill the criteria?

Do we look for the words "thus saith the Lord"?

Is there any other way?

So if I don't "chirp and mutter" and I DO claim "thus saith the Lord" after my "vision" you will believe what I say is a true vision from God, as long as I quote a verse or two??? This can't be what you truly think, there has GOT to be something else that would verify or debunk the "vision".

What is your criteria for discerning the truth or falsity of "visions" and what makes you think EGW lives up to this criteria?

The Bible. She wites in harmony with the Bible, certainly not opoosed to it.

You mean your INTERPRETATION of the Bible, that you are taught by the SDA, ignoring all other interpretations.

What does "this" mean? It means you need to read the entire chapter to fully appreciate what EGW is referring to. She was not saying the Adventist GC was "infallible" regarding what the Bible says or the doctrine of the Bible but regarding specific requirements of church activities. It's like a business that requires it's employees to be at work at 8:00am. That business is "infallible" in it's judgment.

My mistake. I didn't look at the context, I stand corrected.

If you can show me where EGW used any other resources other than the Bible to form her opinions or if any of her visions or interpretations are based one anything other than the Bible I appreciate seeing them.

Her visions and prophecies ARE other resources, and they not only formed HER opinions, but those of the entire SDA leadership.

"In 1858, EGW was attending a funeral and suddenly went into an alleged visionary state lasting two hours in which she claimed to receive an extensive revelation about the "great controversy" that had gone on between Christ and Satan throughout history. In September that year, the 219-page Spiritual Gifts, Volume I: The Great Controversy Between Christ and His Angels and Satan and His Angels, was published."

This was just a cursory look. If true, EGW was claiming to recieve something extra-Biblical, namely the "great controversy".

So, what about her or her "visions" and "prophecies" gives them legitimacy in your mind?

Because they are solidly based on what the Bible says.

Didn't Mrs. White's visions stray into Asrotonomy?

""At our conference in Topsham, Maine, last Nov., Ellen had a vision of the handy works of God. She was guided to the planets Jupiter, Saturn, and I think one more. After she came out of vision, she could give a clear description of their Moons, etc. It is well known, that she knew nothing of astronomy, and could not answer one question in relation to the planets, before she had this vision."

James White, A Word to the Little Flock, p. 22.

Many of her "visions" have nothing to do with Scripture, and have been debunked. This is not very "solidly based" on Scripture.

Was it her "closed door" vision then HER refutation of the doctrine? LOL...

Is it possible that you've changed your mind about what you believe scripture was at one time telling you that it's not currently telling you? I know I have. Honest people would say so. They understand that at one time what they thought scripture was telling them was true has now changed or been enhanced. To suggest any differently is dishonest. To suggest that the Holy Spirit doesn't work with people as they read scripture and seek it's understanding is equally dishonest.

EGW was at one time a "pork" eater as well and was convinced that no light had been shown to her regarding eating such a filthy animal. Later, after much persuasion of others she was convinced otherwise. What was that "force" that finally caused her to change her mind? According to the Bible it's the Holy Spirit.

Mat 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

People change their minds, God doesn't. She claimed to recieve this in VISIONS. She and your church leaders, clamed "prophetic" status for her. First, God allowed EGW to have prophecies and visions, then God changed His mind??? You really need to look into the roots of the SDA movement.

 

[dadof10]

How exactly did you guys turn a discussion on the injustice of eternal torment to the valdity of Ellen White?

It started with an attack on the Catholic Church. Go back and read it if you are curious.

Come on...get back on track as you know this discussion is going to go nowhere. I've seen so many blatant falsehoods already that rational discussion is never going to be attained on this subject.

Falsehoods concerning the Catholic Church, or only SDA?

 

[St Francis]

It started with an attack on the Catholic Church.....

That seems to be a regular occurence.

 

[Joshua]

This will make everyone feel better.
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=33976