controversey with the great controversy

[Adventist Heretic]

Page 23

Response: Criticism accepted, and wording changed to harmonize with the precision of demonstrable facts and authentic records.
1888 book read: "When France publicly prohibited the Bible, wicked men and spirits of darkness exulted in their attainment of the object so long desired," et cetera.
1911 edition reads: On page 286: "When France publicly rejected God and set aside the Bible, wicked men and spirits of darkness exulted in their attainment of the object so long desired,--" et cetera.
C. C. Crisler's General Observation on the Chapter, "The Bible and the French Revolution:"[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE] (Discussed in points 56 to 63.)
In all this historical work, we are eager to have the MSS that may be submitted, given the most searching tests. We need never be afraid of historical truth. However, we would do well to avoid accepting the conclusions of some of the more modern historians who are attempting to rewrite history so as to shape it up in harmony with their philosophical viewpoint. We find it necessary to exercise constant vigilance in this respect; and this leads us to set considerable store by the original sources, or fountain heads of history. . . .
The more closely we examine the use of historical extracts in Controversy, and the historical extracts themselves, the more profoundly are we impressed with the fact that Sister White had special guidance in tracing the story from the time of the Destruction of Jerusalem, down through the centuries until the End. No mortal man could have done the work that she has done in shaping up some of these chapters, including, we believe, the chapter on the French Revolution, which is a very remarkable chapter, in more ways than one.
And the more we go into these matters, the more profound is our conviction that the Lord has helped not only Sister White in the presentation of truth, but that He has overruled in the work of other writers, to the praise of His name and the advancement of present truth. Our brethren in years past have used many quotations, and as a general rule, the Lord surely must have helped them to avoid making use of many extracts that would have led them astray.

​

Page 24

Of course there is still a great deal of room for improvement, even in a book like Elder U. Smith's Daniel and Revelation. But not so much needs to be done, as might have had to be done if the Lord had not given special help to these various writers.--C. C. Crisler to Guy Dail, January 3, 1911.
64. Page 288: The statement that Adoniram Judson was sent as a missionary to Burma under the auspices of the American Board of Foreign Missions, does not seem warranted, as I understand the facts. Judson sailed under the auspices of the American Board, but on the voyage changed his views on baptism, and became a representative of the Baptists. His going to Burma was not a direct design on the part of anyone. On account of trouble which he got into in India, he was obliged to leave the country suddenly, and, going to the harbor, sought to find some ship sailing to any other country. Finding one going to Burma, he took passage. It would not seem that he was sent to Burma by anyone, but that he merely went there to get away from India.
Response: Criticism accepted, and the two sentences ealing with Carey and Judson were deleted to avoid what seemed to be a technical error and then a one-page Appendix note was prepared reviewing the point of a surge in mission advance. Ellen White had introduced in her 1888 book only a quick survey naming two men illustrating the point made. The Appendix note gave opportunity to elaborate.
1888 book, on pages 287 and 288, read: "The devoted Carey, who in 1793 became the first English missionary to India, kindled anew the flame of missionary effort in England. In America, twenty years later, the zeal of a society of students, among whom was Adoniram Judson, resulted in the formation of the American Board of Foreign Missions, under whose auspices Judson went as a missionary from the United States to Burmah. From this time the work of foreign missions attained an unprecedented growth."
The 1911 edition reads: "From this time the work of foreign missions attained an unprecedented growth. (See Appendix.) "
65. Page 292: Of the Pilgrim fathers it is stated: "The freedom which they sacrificed so much to secure for themselves, they were not equally ready to grant to others."
But on page 441, it says: "The Christian exiles who first fled to America, sought an asylum from royal oppression and priestly intolerance, and they determined to establish a government upon the broad foundation of civil and religious liberty.
Response: Criticism considered, and no change was made on page 292. A word was added on page 441, modifying the statement.
1888 book, (page 441) read: "The Christian exiles who first fled

​

Page 25

to America, sought an asylum from royal oppression and priestly intolerance, and they determined to establish a government upon the broad foundation of civil and religious liberty."
1911 edition reads, with the addition of the word "Among:" "Among the Christian exiles who first fled to America, and sought an asylum from royal oppression and priestly intolerance, were many who determined to establish a government upon the broad foundation of civil and religious liberty."
66. Page 306: It is here again stated that the 1260 years terminated in 1798. And the express "In those days," found in the text, "In those days, after the tribulation," is made to refer to the 1260 days. On this basis the statement is made: "Between these two dates [1773-1798] according to the words of Christ, the sun was to be darkened."
This interpretation involves the necessity of explaining why all the other signs mentioned in Matthew 24 come outside this period, and this is a difficult matter to establish satisfactorily. It seems to me a much more consistent interpretation of this passage to regard the expression "In those days, after that tribulation," to refer to the indefinite period beginning with the close of the period of tribulation and extending to the time of the second advent, thus taking in all those events mentioned in Matthew 24: 29, 30.
Response: Criticism considered and the phrase: "following this persecution" was substituted for "Between these two dates."
1888 book read: "Between these two dates, according to the words of Christ, the sun was to be darkened. On the 19th of May, 1780, this prophecy was fulfilled."
1911 edition wording reads: "Following this persecution, according to the words of Christ, the sun was to be darkened. On the 19th of May, 1780, this prophecy was fulfilled."
67. Page 304: A quotation is here credited to "Herschel the astronomer." I have spent some time in running down this quotation, and find no basis upon which it can be stated that these words were uttered by Herschel, the astronomer. On the contrary, there is good ground for inferring that he never did make such an expression. This statement is here quoted as found in a book entitled Our First Century, by R. M. Devens, being used as a sort of "text" at the beginning of his article on the "Dark Day," where it is attributed simply to "Herschel." No one seems to know who this "Herschel" is, although it has been suggested that it was Dr. Herschel, a converted Jew, who believed in the near coming of Christ, and preached on this subject in this country in 1845.
Response: Criticism accepted, and the point of issue was cared for by the

​

Page 26

deletion of reference to Herschel the astronomer, and the substitution of another quotation describing the dark day.
68. Page 325: In connecting the prophecy of Daniel 9 with that of Daniel 8, it is said: "There was only one point in the vision of chapter eight which had been left unexplained, namely, that relating to time."
It seems to me, however, that there are several points in the vision of Daniel 8 which were not explained by the angel, as recorded in that chapter; namely the daily, the transgression of the desolation, the sanctuary and the time period.
Response: Criticism accepted, and wording changed to read, "one important point."
1888 book read: "There was only one point in the vision of chapter eight which had been left unexplained, namely, that relating to time,--the period of the 2300 days."
1911 edition: "There was one important point in the vision of chapter eight which had been left unexplained, namely, that relating to time,--the period of the 2300 days."
69. Page 326: Of the decree releasing the Jews from Babylon, it is said: "In its completest form it was issued by Artaxerxes," et cetera. Does not Ezra 6:14 regard the decrees of Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes as really one decree, all of which went to make up the full decree?
Response : Negative, no change made.
70. Page 327: In dealing with the decree of Artaxerxes, it is stated that it went into effect in the autumn of B.C. 457."
On the basis of this interpretation the 483 years are made to extend to the autumn of A.D. 27, when, it is stated on the same page, that: "Christ was baptized by John."
Further interpreting "the midst of the week" to mean the middle of the week, it is stated, on the same page, that: "In A. D. 31, three and a half years after His baptism, our Lord was crucified."
The same method of beginning the 2300 days in the autumn of B. C. 457 is used in the argument on pages 398, 400, and 410; and the time of the baptism is definitely fixed as the autumn of A. D. 27, and the crucifixion as the spring of A.D. 31. No proof is given, except the claim that the 2300 years commenced in the autumn of B.C. 457. But the Scripture statement is very plain; it says: "Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and three score and two weeks," et cetera.
It is very difficult for me to see how the expression "From the going forth of the commandment," can be made to mean from the time that Ezra commenced to build the city, at least six months after the

​

Page 27

commandment went forth.
Furthermore, in my investigation of this subject, I find much good argument for placing the baptism in 27, either the spring or the summer of 27; and for placing the crucifixion either in A.D. 29 or 30; but I find no authority for making it as late as 31, except the marginal chronology of the Authorized Version of the Bible, which is Usher's chronology. This chronology has been accepted by our writers to establish the baptism in A.D. 27, but has been rejected so far as it relates to the crucifixion, which is placed by it in A.D. 33.
It seems to me abundantly evident from the Scripture and history that the 2300 days commenced in the spring of B.C. 457; that the baptism was not later than the early part of A.D. 27; that the crucifixion was not later than the early part of A.D. 30; and that the 2300 days must end in the spring of 1844. This interpretation appears to me to be in harmony both with Scripture and history.
And this was the original interpretation of William Miller, as stated on page 328: "Miller and his associates at first believed that the 2300 days would terminate in the spring of 1844 whereas the prophecy points to the autumn of that year."
I am unable to see that the prophecy does point to the autumn of that year. The diagram inserted between pages 328 and 329 places the crucifixion in A.D. 31, the setting up of the papacy in 538, the ending of the 1260 years in 1798, and the ending of the 2300 years in the autumn of 1844."
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
Observation: W. C. White in describing Ellen White's work and its relation to the visions declared: "The framework of the great temple of truth sustained by her writings was presented to her clearly in vision. In some features of this work, information was given in detail. Regarding some features of the revelation, such as the features of prophetic chronology, as regards the ministration in the sanctuary and the changes that took place in 1844, the matter was presented to her many times and in detail many times, and this enabled her to speak clearly and very positively regarding the foundation pillars of our faith."--W. C. White to L. E. Froom, January 8, 1928 (Published in 3SM 462).
71. Page 334: A quotation given in the first paragraph is credited to Henry Dana Ward. I have looked up the original article from which this quotation is taken, as found in the NEW YORK JOURNAL OF COMMERCE, of November 14, 1833, and find a long article to which no name is appended, and it appears that Henry Dana Ward was not one of the editors of the paper. If he wrote this article, there is no proof of it in the paper itself.
Response: Criticism accepted, and text changed to delete the name. The quotation retained.

​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Page 28

1888 book read: "On the day following its appearance, [the falling of the stars] Henry Dana Ward wrote thus of the wonderful phenomenon: 'No philosopher or scholar has told or recorded an event, I suppose, like that of yesterday morning.'" Et cetera.
1911 edition reads: "In the New York Journal of Commerceof November 14, 1833, appeared a long article regarding this wonderful phenomenon, containing this statement: 'No philosopher or scholar,'" et cetera.
72. Page 334: The statement is made that Josiah Litch, in interpreting the prophecy of Revelation 9, specified "not only the year but the very day on which" the Ottoman empire would fall. It appears from one of Litch's pamphlets which is preserved in the General Conference Library that he did not name the definite day until after the event, but simply claimed that the prophecy would be fulfilled "in August, 1840."
Response: Criticism considered, and a review of sources led to a change in the text.
1888 book read: "In the year 1840, another remarkable fulfillment of prophecy excited widespread interest. Two years before, Josiah Litch, one of the leading ministers preaching the second advent, published an exposition of Revelation 9, predicting the fall of the Ottoman empire, and specifying not only the year but the very day on which this would take place. According to the exposition, which was purely a matter of calculation on the prophetic periods of Scripture, the Turkish government would surrender its independence on the eleventh day of August, 1840. The prediction was widely published, and thousands watched the course of events with eager interest."
1911 edition changed to read: "In the year 1840, another remarkable fulfillment of prophecy excited wide-spread interest. Two years before, Josiah Litch, one of the leading ministers preaching the second advent, published an exposition of Revelation 9, predicting the fall of the Ottoman empire. According to his calculations, this power was to be overthrown 'in A. D. 1840, sometime in the month of August;' and only a few days previous to its accomplishment he wrote: 'Allowing the first period, 150 years, to have been exactly fulfilled before Deacozes ascended the throne by permission of the Turks, and that the 391 years, fifteen days, commenced at the close of the first period, it will end on the 11th of August, 1840, when the Ottoman power in Constantinople may be expected to be broken. And this, I believe, will be found to be the case.'"
73. Page 334: At the bottom of the page, referring to the 11th day of August, 1840, it states: "At the very time specified, Turkey, through her ambassadors, accepted the protection of the allied powers of

​

Page 29

Europe, and thus placed herself under the control of Christian nations. The event exactly fulfilled the prediction."
The history of this period shows that on that date the demand of the allied powers was placed in the hands of the Pasha of Egypt, this being some time after these powers had assumed the control of Turkey. The explanation as here given does not harmonize with that which is found in other books which we have published.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
74. Page 340: The general statement that "the papal church withholds the Bible from the people," seems to need modifying, in view of the fact that the Roman Catholic Church now prints its own translation of the Bible, and a recent pope has recommended the reading of it to the people.
Response: Criticism considered an Appendix note giving references to attitudes in different countries was added.
75. Page 356: The 1260 years are made to end in 1798.
Response: Negative. No change made.
76. Page 368: The statement: "The testimony of the prophecies which seemed to point to the coming of Christ in the spring of 1844 took deep hold of the minds of the people," seems strictly in harmony with the Scripture statement, rather than the claim that the 2300 days extended to the fall of 1844.
Response: Negative. No change made.
77. Page 376: Barnes' commentary is spoken of as one "so widely used." But at the present time all these old commentaries have been discredited and thrown aside by the more liberal theologians.
Response: Criticism accepted and text changed by deletion of the word "so."
1888 book read: "At a meeting of the presbytery of Philadelphia, Mr. Barnes, author of the commentary so widely used," et cetera.
1911 edition reads: "At a meeting of the presbytery of Philadelphia, Mr. Barnes, author of a commentary widely used."
78. Page 380: The "worldliness, backsliding, and spiritual death which existed in the churches in 1844" is made very prominent; but the condition of the chruches at the present time seems much worse than then. In view of these more recent developments, should the matter not be

​

Page 30

handled a little differently?
Response: Negative. No change in text.
79. Page 381: It is stated that the term Babylon "is employed in Scripture to designate the various forms of false or apostate religion."
This raises the question of whether the Babylon of Revelation 14 is different from the Babylon of Revelation 17 and 18. In this connection read pages 382, 383.
Response: Criticism considered, and no change was made on page 381.
On page 383, the wording was changed to harmonize with the many statements in the book regarding Rome and the Catholic Church, and also to comport with the theme of the chapter as a whole. This was done by adding the word "alone."
1888 book read: "The message of Revelation 14 announcing the fall of Babylon, must apply to religious bodies that were once pure and have become corrupt. Since this message follows the warning of the Judgment, it must be given in the last days, therefore it cannot refer to the Romish Church, for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries."
1911 edition wording reads: The message of Revelation 14, announcing the fall of Babylon, must apply to religious bodies that were once pure and have become corrupt. Since this message follows the warning of the judgment, it must be given in the last days; therefore it cannot refer to the Roman Church alone, for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries."
80. Page 410: In the edition which I use it states that the command of Artaxerxes went into effect in the autumn of A.D. 457." Of course this should be "B.C. 457." (WWP had the first printing.)
Response: Neutral. Correction made in the second printing in the 1890s.
81. Pages 412, 413: The argument on pages 412 and 413, concerning the covenants and the sanctuary seems to follow the lines laid down by Elder Smith in his argument, in which he makes the Old covenant to run from Sinai to Christ, and the worldly sanctuary to stand with it. He claims that the new covenant and the heavenly sanctuary superseded them.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
82. Page 413: An argument is based upon the word "also" in Hebrews 9:1.

​

Page 31

This is the argument made by Elder Smith in "Looking unto Jesus," pages 109, 110. But the Revised Version destroys the force of this argument by rendering the verse thus: "Now even the first covenant had ordinances of divine service," et cetera.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
83. Page 415: I am unable to find any direct statement in the epistle to the Hebrews which would warrant the claim that: "Paul declares that that pattern was the true sanctuary which is in heaven. This seems to me to be rather an inference than a direct statement.
Response: Affirmative, with a change of wording in the text,--substituting "teaches" for "declares."
1888 book read: "Moses made the earthly sanctuary after a pattern which was shown him. Paul declares that that pattern was the true sanctuary which is in Heaven."
1911 edition wording reads: "Paul teaches that that pattern was the true sanctuary which is in Heaven."
84. Page 438: At the bottom of the page it is stated that "the dragon, primarily, represents Satan." But at the top of page 439 it declares that the papacy "succeeded to the power and seat and authority once possessed by the ancient Roman Empire." This would seem to suggest, at least, as Elder Smith directly states, that it was the Roman Empire, and not Satan, which gave to the beast "his power, and his seat, and great authority." A little change in the wording here would make the interpretation more harmonious.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
85. Page 439: The 1260 days are again stated to begin with the establishment of the papacy in 538 and continue to 1798.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
86. Page 440: Beginning with page 440 there are references at the bottom of some of the pages to various publications as to authority for the quotations. This would seem to indicate that there was no objection to introducing such references, and it would seem proper to do so in the other parts of the book as well.
Response: Prescott was only one of a number who called for references in connection with the materials quoted, and from the first in planning for the 1911 edition this became the policy to follow. Looking up these quotations, verifying them, and finding substitutions, with Mrs. White's approval, was the major part of the task in dealing with the text.

​

Page 32

87. Page 447: It states that the papacy's first resort to the power of the state "was to compel the observance of Sunday as 'the Lord's day.'" Very soon after A. D. 538 Pope Vibilius appealed to Narses, the representative of Justinian, to use force in putting down the heretics; but no reference is made in that connection to the observance of Sunday. In connection with the statement made on page 447, it seems that some reference should be made to the first instance of such use of the power of the state.
Response: Negative. No change in the text made.
88. Page 453: Referring to the Sabbath and other special truths it says: "These truths, as presented in Revelation 14, in connection with the 'everlasting gospel,' will distinguish the church of Christ at the time of His appearing."
This would suggest that these truths were something separate from the everlasting gospel; but it seems to me that they are the essential part of that gospel.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
89. Page 457: It is here declared that: "The computation of the prophetic periods on which that message was based, placing the close of the 2300 days in the autumn of 1844, stands without impeachment."
If this should state "in the spring of 1844," it would seem better to me.
Response: Negative. No change in text.
90. Page 524: The denial of the divinity of Christ is spoken of as a dangerous error, and it is apparently made synonomyous with the denial of the pre-existence of Christ. In the present theological controversy it is the deity of Christ which is denied, while His divinity--using the term in a modern sense--is acknowledged. It would seem necessary to change this language on page 325, in order to make it in harmony with the present situation.
Response: Criticism accepted, and text changed by using the word "deity" in place of "divinity."
1888 book read: "Another dangerous error, is the doctrine that denies the divinity of Christ, claiming that He had no existence before His advent to this world."
1911 edition reads: "Another dangerous error is the doctrine that denies the deity of Christ, claiming that He had no existence before His advent to this world."

​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Page 33

91. Page 549: In the quotation from Martin Luther, to which no reference is appended, the word "prodigies" is used, where it seems to me the word "progeny" would be more appropriate. At all events it does not seem that the word "prodigies" is the right word.
Response: Criticism accepted and the text changed, quoting from an author which could be credited:
1888 book read: "Martin Luther classed it with 'the numberless prodigies of the Romish dunghill of decretals.'"
1911 edition reads: "Martin Luther classed it with the 'monstrous fables that form part of the Roman dunghill of decretals.'" Footnote reference given.
92. Page 557: At the bottom of the page it is stated that: "Believers in spiritual manifestations try to make it appear that there is nothing miraculous in the circumstances of our Saviour's life."
According to present-day teaching, the advanced theologians, who are not classed as Spiritualists, deny the miracles of Christ altogether.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
93. Page 563: At the bottom is the quotation, "Never erred, and never can err," to which reference is made on page 57 as one of the propositions put forth by Gregory VII. The original proposition as put forth in Latin, when properly translated reads:
"The Roman Church never has erred, nor, according to the testimony of Scripture, will it ever err."
This is somewhat different from the statement that it "never can err."
Response: Criticism accepted, and text changed to agree with the wording in Mosheim.
1888 book read: "As Rome asserts that she 'never erred, and never can err,' how can she renounce the principles which governed her course in past ages?"
1911 edition changed to read: "As Rome asserts that the church 'never erred; nor will it, according to the Scriptures, ever err,' how can she renounce the principles which governed her course in past ages?" (Footnote reference given.)
94. Page 565. A quotation is made from the oath of allegiance to the pope, which does not agree with the words of this oath as found in the original Latin, and given in Delineation of Roman Catholicism, by Reverend Charles Elliott, D. D., pages 3 and 4. His translation of this sentence runs thus: "Heretics, schismatics, and rebels, to our said Lord, or His foresaid successors, I will, to my power, persecute and oppose."

​

Page 34

Response: Criticism considered and wording maintained except the phrase "the pope" is put in curves in the 1911 edition, and reference to source given.
95. Pages 567 and 569: Some of the statements on pages 567 (middle of the page) and 569 seem very severe, in view of the caution which has been given us to say nothing harsh about the papacy, as we shall later be called to meet these same statements.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
96. Page 575: The references to "an ecclesiastical council," and also to "a synod held in Rome," seem very indefinite. Should not the time when these meetings were held be stated definitely?
Response: Criticism accepted. Footnote reference given.
97. Page 577: Reference is made to "an edict from the king of Scotland." But neither the time when the edict was made nor the name of the king is given.
Response: Criticism accepted and footnote reference given.
97a. Page 577: On the same page reference is made to "a papal council held in the sixteenth century." But the definite date is not given, and there is no reference for the quotation.
Response: Criticism accepted, and footnote reference given.
97b. Page 577: On the same page reference is made to "an edict. . . forbidding the observance of the Sabbath." But it is not stated what edict is referred to.
Response: Criticism accepted and footnote reference given.
98. Page 579: The expression "the abolition of the papacy in 1798," seems likely to be misunderstood, in view of the fact that the papacy still exists.
Response: Criticism accepted, and in the interest of precision of wording, the word "downfall" was substituted for "abolition."
1888 book read: "The infliction of the deadly wound points to the abolition of the papacy in 1798."
1911 edition wording reads: "The infliction of the deadly wound points to the downfall of the papacy in 1798."

​

Page 35

99. Page 580: Reference is made to the claim that the pope: "Can pronounce sentences and judgments in contradiction to the right of nations, to the law of God and man."
And as authority for this quotation, a reference is made to "The Decretalia.'"!"' If a brief sentence should be quoted, and the authority should be stated to be "the Encyclopedia Britannica," it would be just as valuable and just as definite a reference as this one, inasmuch as the "Decretalia" cover centuries of time and many volumes.
Furthermore, I have been utterly unable thus far to locate this quotation. It is evidently taken from The Facts for the Times, where it is also credited to the "Decretalia."
Response: Criticism accepted; and a substitute paragraph, making the point, and one that could be supported with available references took its place.
1888 book read: "Protestants little know what they are doing when they propose to accept the aid of Rome in the work of Sunday exaltation. While they are bent upon the accomplishment of their purpose, Rome is aiming to re-establish re-establish her power, to recover her lost supremacy. Let hi story history testify of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people. Romanism openly puts forth the claim that the pope 'can pronounce sentences and judgments in contradiction to the ri~)ht 'can pronounce sentences and judgments in contradiction to the right of nations, to the law of God and man.'"
1911 edition carries a substitute paragraph reading: "History testifies of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people. In the year 1204, Pope Innocent III extracted from Peter II.,king II, king of Arragon, the following extraordinary oath: 'I, 'I, Peter, king of Arragonians, profess and promise to be ever faithful and obedient to my lord, Pope Innocent, to his Catholic successors, and the Roman Church, and faithfully to preserve my kingdom in his obedience, defending the Catholic faith, and persecuting heretical pravity.' This is in harmony with the claims regarding the power of the Roman pontiff, that ~t 'it is lawful for him to depose emperors,' and that 'he 'he can absolve subjects from their allegiance to unrighteous rulers.'" (Footnote reference to quotations are given.) (Substitution of quotations was approved by Ellen G. White.)
100. Page 587: Not all the "popular teachers" who substitute Sunday for the Sabbath: "Declare that the law of God is no longer binding." Some of them attempt to base Sunday-observance Sunday-observance upon the fourth commandment.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
101. Page 681: (General Notes) In Note 3 the argument is made at length

​

Page 36

concerning the 2300 days, and the conclusion is drawn at the bottom of the page that these days--"must extend to the autumn of 1844 A. D."
Response: None. The General Notes in the 1888 book were not written by Ellen G. White and in place of the note on prophetic dates, filling a little more than a page, a shorter Appendix note was used in the 1911 edition on page 687. It does not carry the chronological reckoning through to 1844, but does open with words affirming the 457 beginning of the 2300 day prophecy.
1888 edition Appendix note: "Page 329. Prophetic Dates.--
The historical and chronological facts connected with the prophetic periods of Daniel 8 and 9, including many references pointed unmistakably to the year 457 B. C. as the proper time from which to begin reckoning these periods, have been clearly outlined by many students of prophecy. See and then follow ten lines of references.
102. Page 685: (General Notes) The statement is made in the first paragraph that: "One class who relinquished the view that 'the door of mercy was shut,' were led to do this because they discovered that other messages were to be proclaimed," et cetera.
Is there not danger that this statement may be used to show that the early believers in this message did teach that there was no longer salvation for sinners after 1844?
Response: Criticism considered. The 1911 edition carries no note to the reference to the "shut door" explained in the text on pages 429 and 430.
103. Page 686: (General Notes) In Note 10, attention is called to the rapid growth of the influence of the papacy in Europe; but since this note was written, quite a change has taken place in this respect, and the papacy has lost much ground, notably in France.
In this same note, on page 687, statements are made on the authority of the Converted Catholic concerning former members of the President's cabinet, which seem out of date at the present time. The same is true on statements on pages 688 and 689.
Response: Criticism observed, but as the decision was to eliminate most of the General Notes, none of the material referred to was included in the 1911 edition.
104. Page 690: (General Notes) In Note 13, it is stated that the terms "mark" and "sign" "are used in the Scriptures as synonymous with seal, as in Romans 4:11."
I am unable to see that "sign" and "seal" are used synonymously

​

Page 37

in Romans 4:11. It is true that the sign of circumcision is called a seal of righteousness, but that does not make the two words synonymous.
Response: Criticism observed. The decision to eliminate the General Notes, removes these from consideration in the 1911 edition.
105. General Observation: Throughout the book in dealing with Roman Catholics the word "Romish" is used very frequently. Roman Catholics reagard this term as an insult. It is true that various Protestant writers of good standing use the word Romish; but it is a question whether we ought to follow their example.
Response: Criticism accepted and in the E. G. White text of the 1911 edition, other terms were used. No change made in the use of the word "Romish" in quoted materials.
106. General Criticism: As an indication of the number of instances in which quotations are used in this book without any reference, I submit herewith, in a separate sheet, a long list of pages where such quotations are found.
Response: The decision reached early to include references to materials quoted, cared for this observation.
W. W. Prescott closing remarks:
"Allow me to say in closing, that it has been quite a shock to me to find in this book so many loose and inaccurate statements; and what I have submitted for our consideration will indicate how much of an undertaking it will be to revise this book so that it will be in harmony with historical facts, and with the interpretation of the prophecy concerning the 1260 days which we are now adopting.
"If I can be of any assistance in locating any of the quotations, I will be willing to do what I can in this matter.
Yours faithfully,"
Compiler's Remarks:

More, of course, was involved than dealing with the items suggested above. Work on the 1911 edition of The Great Controversy stretched from late January, 1910, to May, 1911. Time references were dealt with, checking the quotations was a large task. C. C. Crisler, at the Elmshaven office followed through on this with the help of D. E. Robinson in the office, and teachers, librarians, and ministers in the East, and in England, and the continent, with a great deal of work done in the excellent libraries in northern California. Most of the quotations used by Ellen White in the 1888 book were found, but some could not be traced,​

​

Page 38

​

and with Ellen White's approval, quotations making the same point were substituted. There were refinements beyond the suggestions made by W. W. Prescott which were made in the interests of precision of expression. Appendix notes, devoted mostly to giving references supporting various critical or sensitive areas of the book were developed and added. The Index was enlarged, and new illustrations were introduced. When the book came from the press, Ellen White was well pleased with it, and was often found readings its pages.​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

C. C. CRISLER'S EXPRESSIONS OF APPROVAL AND SATISFACTION with the 1888 EDITION of THE GREAT CONTROVERSY

[Top of Document]

The historical work connected with the resetting of The Great Controversy is nearly finished. We are finding nearly all the quoted matter, and proper references are being given in the margins at the foot of the pages. The quotations are all being verified. When we learn from you what translation of D'Aubigne should be followed in the quotations taken from his History of the Reformation, we will act accordingly. . . .
The Great Controversy will bear the severest tests. When it was prepared years ago, thorough work was done. This is more and more evident, the more the book is examined.
It would have been better, of course, if the historical references had been given in the first editions: but this is a minor matter that can easily be adjusted at the present time, when new plates are being made. We are copying our historical extracts to file away with our various publishing houses who are publishing The Great Controversy, so that if anyone should ever question statements that you have made in The Great Controversy, our brethren at these publishing houses will have matter to place before others, demonstrating that the positions you have taken in The Great Controversy and the historical statements you have made, are in harmony with the best historical records.
The Great Controversy has already had a great sale; and our bookmen who have much to do with pushing its sale into new fields, feel as if the new edition, giving proper credits to the historical extracts that are quoted in the book, will be all the better and stronger, and will meet with the full approval of all concerned. They rejoice to learn that the historical statements you have made in the book are in harmony with the best histories, and can be fully vindicated.--C. C. Crisler to E. G. White, August 1, 1910.

Page 39

​

A POSTSCRIPT--AN OBSERVATION ON W. W. PRESCOTT"S
USE OF THE WRITINGS OF OTHERS

[Top of Document]

W. W. Prescott in his April 26, 1910, letter to W. C. White in which he offered suggestions regarding The Great Controversy, observed in both his first and last suggestions the absence of references, to materials quoted. He says:

There is one general feature of the book to which I will call attention without attempting to refer definitely to each case, as this would require much space, and involve much repetition. Throughout the book there are very many quotations, both from other writers and from verbal conversations which ought to be accurate, and which I think ought to have in nearly all cases suitable references. It is very difficult now, however, to locate these quotations, as oftentimes there is no hint which would enable one to look them up. I shall call attention to some which I have been able to locate, and suggest the need of much work in this direction.​

Ten years later, in 1920, the Review and Herald published a 300-page college textbook prepared by W. W. Prescott, titled The Doctrine of Christ. Each lesson is supported by materials drawn in from other authors. Notes taken from the Spirit of Prophecy writings are fully credited. Notes from other authors are in quotation marks, but carry no source references. In his "Introductory Note" Prescott explains:

All quotations in the notes taken from the Spirit of Prophecy are duly credited to book and page. The other quotations have been selected from many sources, but as they are not cited as authority, but are used merely for the expression of the thought, no credit has been given.​

There are over 500 notes without credit, but in quotation marks. There is no way of identifying the sources or the authors of the materials thus brought into the Prescott book.

Footnotes

[Top of Document]

1) While president of Battle Creek College in the 1890s, Prescott had espoused the views in regard to inspiration of Professor Francois Gaussen, a Swiss theologian. Of this, W. C. White commented: "The acceptance of that view by the students in the Battle Creek College and many others, including Elder Haskell, has resulted in bringing into our work questions and perplexities without end, and always increasing. Sister White never accepted the Gaussen theory regarding verbal inspiration, either as applied to her own work or as applied to the Bible. W. C. White to L. E. Froom, January 8, 1928, published in the Appendix of Selected Messages, book 3, 454, 455.
While Prescott at the 1919 conference denied holding verbal inspiration views, we do not know precisely what his views were at that time.
2) Note: Written after a very thorough investigation of sources relating to the subject in several libraries and soliciting the assistance of scholars in Europe and America, and having personally dug into literally mountains of historical records. This task extended over a period of five months, but of course not with his full time given to it during that period.--Arthur L. White.

Arthur L. White
Ellen G. White Estate
Washington, D. C.
February 3, 1981

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Prescott Letter to W.C. White

Takoma Park, D.C., April 6, 1915.

Elder W. C. White
Sanitarium, Napa County
California Dear Brother White:
I appreciated your letter of March 12 and I thank you for your message of sympathy concerning my father's death.
I have noted what you have said about your mother s condition, although you neglected to enclose the statement which you mentioned. When I see these early believers, like your mother, my father, and Elder Olsen passing away so rapidly, and then think of how little has really been accomplished in seriously warning the whole world of the impending second advent, I am led to wonder whether any of us now connected with this movement will, after all, live to see the consummation. It is a serious question.
It seems to me that a large responsibility rests upon those of us who know that there are serious errors in our authorized books and yet make no special effort to correct them. The people and our average ministers trust us to furnish them with reliable statements, and they use our books as sufficient authority in their sermons, but we let them go on year after year asserting things which we know to be untrue. I cannot feel that this is right. It seems to me that we are betraying our trust and deceiving the ministers and people. It appears to me that there is much more anxiety to prevent a possible shock to some trustful people than to correct error.
Your letter indicates a desire on your part to help me, but I fear that it is a little late. The experience of the last six or eight years, and especially the things concerning which I talked with you, have had their effect on me in several ways. I have had some hard shocks to get over, and after giving the best of my life to this movement, I have little peace and satisfaction in connection with it, and I am driven to the conclusion that the only thing for me to do is to do quietly what I can do conscientiously and leave the others to go on without me. Of course this [is] far from a happy ending to my life-work, but this seams to be the best adjustment that I am able to make. The way your mother's writings have been handled and the false impressions concerning them, which is still fostered among the people, have brought great perplexity and trial to me. It seems to me that what amounts to deception, though probably not intentional, has been practiced in making some of her books, and that no serious effort has been made to disabuse the minds of the people of what was known to be their wrong view concerning her writings.
But it is no use to go into these matters. I have talked with you for years about them but it brings no change. I think, however, that we are drifting toward a crisis which will come sooner or later and perhaps sooner. A very strong feeling of reaction has already set in.
It has been very quiet here for a few weeks, as many of the brethren are in the field. The weather has been quite cold and we had about five inches of snow last Sabbath, but it is more like spring today.
My mother is quite feeble, although she bears up full better than I really expected. She misses Father very much. They lived together more than 67 years.
The work of the office seems to be prospering, and we are all very busy trying to meet the demands upon us.
I should be glad to hear from you at any time. If you can properly do so, I would be glad to have you express to your mother my sympathies for her in her affliction.
Yours faithfully, W. W. Prescott

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Did Ellen White teach ‘A Different God’?

Dr. Verle Streifling

Recounting her vision of December, 1844, Ellen speaks of her and Jesus as "In a moment we were winging our way upward…" Seeing this, in the light of her calling Him "Michael the Archangel" (Desire of Ages pp. 99, 379; Spiritual Gifts Vol. 1, p. 158; Prophets & Kings p. 572) one is led to question if she did not, in fact, really view Him as just that—an angel! And if so, what of His deity and bodily resurrection?
Arian: The Son is not of the same substance as the Father but was created as an agent for creating the world.
Webster's Dictionary SDA Pioneers as Arians for over 50 years

It is well known that the early Adventist leaders and founders were Arians, who denied the deity of Christ, and the Trinity. Their article "The Doctrine of the Trinity Among Adventists" by Gerhard Pfandi, of their Biblical Research Institute (referred to as "Trinity" henceforth) tells us on page 1:

"Two of the principal founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Joseph Bates and James White, were originally members of the Christian Connection Church which rejected the doctrine of the Trinity…Other prominent Adventists who spoke out against the Trinity were J.N. Loughborough, R.F. Cottrell, J.N. Andrews, and Uriah Smith…"​

These SDA leaders denied Jesus’ deity and the Trinity. Joseph Bates, raised in the Congregational Church, repudiated the Trinity doctrine upon joining the Christian Connection Church. Bates learned the Sabbath doctrine from Rachel Oakes, a Seventh-day Baptist; however, Bates did not accept the Seventh-day Baptist doctrine of the Trinity. So, early Adventists had more in common with the Shakers, who not only kept the Sabbath and had prophets, but also believed in Arianism. Only by the turn of the century did Adventism begin to move out of Arianism to espousing Jesus’ deity, and subsequently, the Trinity. This was hard to do in light of Ellen White’s statements, spanning over 50 years, upholding Arianism.
Ellen White’s Arian Views

Ellen often called Jesus "The Son of God" at original creation. We read these words not seeing them as the Arian views they are, for they evoke the question " How was He ‘the Son of God?’" John 1:1-3 and Hebrews 1:10 show He was YHWH, the Word at creation, but became ‘Son of God’ and ‘Son of Man’ at His incarnation (Heb 1:5-6) when the Father said "I will become to Him a father, and He will become to me a Son" (cf Lk 1:35). Arians teach he was the ‘Son of God’ by being created or begotten by the Father, and then God created other things through him. So he was only a lesser deity, whose pre-eminence over the angels was conferred to him, by the Father. Ellen G White also held this Christ-debasing view:
Devolve: To transfer from one person to another: hand down.
Webster's Dictionary

"…yet, Jesus, God’s dear Son, had the pre-eminence over all the angelic host. He was one with the Father before the angels were created. Satan was envious of Christ and gradually assumed command which devolved on Christ alone. "The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his Son…The Father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ, his Son, should be equal with himself." (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, pp. 17,18, emphasis supplied)
​

The article "Trinity" acknowledges this implies that "he was not equal to the Father before that time", for Jesus’ command was only ‘devolved’ or handed-down from the Father, and his equality was ‘conferred’ or positional equality rather than being equal by nature, as necessary for True Deity. (Gal 4:8).
Moving to Deity of Christ and the Trinity

Walter Rea informs us that in 1896 W.W. Prescott identified Jesus as the "I AM" of John 8:58 & Exodus 3:14, beginning the move toward Christ’s true deity and the Trinity. (SDA Forum, Feb. 14, 1982) "Trinity" says:

"The breakthrough came with the publication of Ellen White’s article 'Christ the Life-giver' in Signs of the Times in 1897, and the book The Desire of Ages in 1898…she says 'In Him was life original, unborrowed, underived.' In Desire of Ages…she quotes Jesus’ answer to the Jews in John 8:58 'Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was I AM'… 'He was equal with God, infinite and omnipotent…He is the eternal self-existing Son.'" (ms 101, 1897)​

"Trinity" dubs these changing views "she received more light" and "increasing light leading to a clearer understanding" (page 3). On page 7 they say "Ellen White in 1905…unambiguously endorsed the Trinity doctrine" citing Evangelism, pages 614-615, where she calls the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit "the fullness of the God-head" individually, saying "There are three living persons of the heavenly trio…" Yet by 1919, SDA leaders had not united on Christ’s full deity or the Trinity (1919 Bible Conference, p. 57). Their 1915 Bible Readings for the Home only held Jesus "essential deity", limiting his equality with God to "proprietorship" of the angels, saints, etc. (p. 68); but failed to give any teaching of the Trinity at all! This had to be because Ellen’s 1897, 1898 and 1905 words were ambiguously modified by her other statements!
Dense Fog covering the ‘Light’

Walter Rea has shown many of the books and articles credited to Ellen were first written or assembled by her secretaries, Fanny Bolton and Marion Davis, who worked on Desire of Ages, using the work of other Christian writers as their sources. Thus those statements may not accurately portray Ellen’s own view of Christ. This becomes more apparent from some of her other statements written in that time period:

• 1897 Rev 8:3 "The ministry of the angel at the altar of incense is representative of Christ's intercession…" (ms 15, 1897).
  
• 1900 "The mighty angel who instructed John (Rev. 1:1) was no less than the person of Christ" (ms 59, 1900).
• 1903 "The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (ms 150, SDA Bible Commentary Vol. 5, p. 1129)
• 1904 "To Christ had been given an exalted position. He has been made equal with the Father" (Testimonies vol. 8, p. 268)
• 1905 "The instruction…was so important that Christ came…to give it to his servant…" (ms 129; Bible Commentary vol. 7, p. 971)
• 1905 Rev 10:6 "In swearing by the creator, the angel who is Christ, swore by himself" (ibid., p. 798)

These statements, along with her 1844 vision of Jesus with wings, and her repeated calling Him the Archangel in Desire of Ages and other books, certainly befog her 1897 and 1898 statements regarding Jesus’ Deity. In Daniel and Revelation, page 341, Uriah Smith identified the angel of Rev 1:1, etc., as Gabriel. But Ellen made it to be Jesus Himself! Her error is manifest in the context of Rev 1:1; furthermore, the Greek word ‘allos’, used in Rev. 8:3, shows this angel the same kind as the seven angels of verse 2. In addition, in Rev. 19 the angel rebukes John’s attempt to worship him. "Trinity" quotes W.W. Prescott: "For a long time we believed…that Christ was created, in spite of what the Scripture says" (1919 Bible Conference p.62)
D.M. Canright showed how Ellen synthesized the risen Jesus with her view of him as the angel Michael. In Life of Mrs. E.G. White, chapter 17, page 31, he tells of Dr. Kellogg’s theory that the dead body would not be raised, but all that was left of a person at death was a record of his life kept in heaven, and a new body of new matter was raised and made to think that it was the same person as the old one. When asked if she had light on this, Ellen declared the Lord shew her not a particle of the old body would ever be raised, but a new body of new material would be formed. Canright asked "How about Christ’s body which was raised?" She responded "He dropped it all when he ascended". She failed to recognize him as ‘the man Christ Jesus’ (1 Tim 2:5 & Heb 7:24-25); and that ‘in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead in bodily form’ (Col 2:9).
Was the Father also Human?

This questions her 1905 "unambiguous" view of the Trinity, which "Trinity" tells of. It is also self-indicting, for she starts by saying "The Father is the fullness of the Godhead Bodily…" (Evangelism, p. 614; The Faith I Live By, p. 39; Testimonies…warning p.62; Bible Training School, Mar 1, 1906). Jesus said "God is Spirit" (John 4:24) and "a spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see I have" (Luke 24:39). So the Father cannot be the fullness of the Godhead bodily, which only Christ is, and Christ cannot be an angel, for He’s not a spirit, but ‘the man Christ Jesus’ risen ‘bodily’.
Ellen White: Satan has a body "I was then shown Satan as he was, a happy, exalted angel. Then I was shown him as he now is. He still bears a kingly form. His features are still noble, for he is an angel fallen. But the expression of his countenance is full of anxiety, care, unhappiness, malice, hate, mischief, deceit, and every evil. That brow which was once so noble, I particularly noticed. His forehead commenced from his eyes to recede backward. I saw that he had demeaned himself so long, that every good quality was debased, and every evil trait was developed. His eyes were cunning, sly, and showed great penetration. His frame was large, but the flesh hung loosely about his hands and face. As I beheld him, his chin was resting upon his left hand. He appeared to be in deep thought. A smile was upon his countenance, which made me tremble, it was so full of evil, and Satanic slyness." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 27) Maybe Ellen was affected by both the Jehovah’s Witness (who began as Adventists) and the Mormons who wrote and prophesied in her day. The Witness predicted Jesus’ return in the early 1870s with the SDAs, then denied Jesus’ bodily resurrection to allow his spiritual presence. Joseph Smith widely published his visitation, by God and Christ, where God was not a spirit being, but a person of flesh and bones. This teaching was the basis of their "progression of God" doctrine, where Adam became God, and Jesus who was a man became God. In 1898, even SDAs such as Uriah Smith held this view, to a degree. In his book Looking Unto Jesus, Smith wrote "With the Son, the evolution of deity, as deity, ceased" (p. 13; op cit "Trinity " p. 2). From all the above, Ellen’s view of God was unbiblical. It was ‘a different Godhead’ with a ‘different Jesus’ and a ‘different Father’ from the real Jesus Christ and real Father found in the Scriptures.
Worse yet, her calling Christ an angel, namely Michael the Archangel, and affirming his body dropped off at his ascension, denies He is returning ‘in the flesh’. The SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 4, p. 860 and vol. 7, p. 706, holds her view that Christ is the Archangel who comes from heaven for his saints. Here we must note 2nd John 7:

"For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who deny Christ is coming in the flesh, this is the deceiver and the antichrist". ​

Scripture attests Jesus’ bodily resurrection and ascension, that He will return ‘in like manner’, He is the fullness of the Godhead bodily;, He is ‘the man Christ Jesus’ in heaven today; we are ‘bone of His bone and flesh of His flesh’; and when ‘he returns we will be like him’; receiving glorified resurrection bodies. Ellen’s making Him an angel, makes him to be a spirit, and denies He is coming in the flesh, which makes her both a false prophet, and anti-Christ against Christ Himself. Obviously the light did not get brighter for Ellen. SDAs largely took the Trinity doctrine because it was Biblical, despite Ellen’s anti-Trinitarian statements over the years. Yet, for almost 2000 years the Orthodox church has held to the Trinity, while combating heresies in every century—-especially in this end of the Church age, when apostasy is so rampant. The Biblical view is so plain, that since 1931 it became the official position of the SDA Church, though the Arian views were not expunged from their books, and Ellen’s writings. Her vision that Satan was in full possession of the churches, all their prayers and professions are an abomination to God has been upheld, though her words are categorical indictment of the Trinity!




[SIZE=-1] [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1] [/SIZE]

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Seventh-day Adventist Anti-Trinitarians

"Trinity?" (page 5) tells that in recent years a number of anti-Trinitarian publications have appeared in the SDA church, contending that "the church as a whole rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, and it was not until many years after the death of Ellen G. White that the Adventist church changed their position in regards to the Trinity". By the evidence above it was more than 15 years after she died before a Trinity statement of faith is seen. Yet the SDA denomination upholds Arian members, and has been heavily promoting their reversion to Arianism, by two means in these last two decades.
They have been strongly advocating Ellen White as their ‘canonical’ and ‘divinely inspired’ interpreter of the Bible. Thus, her views have become more authoritative than Scripture itself. This was more subtly effected in their 1958 Bible Commentary, which upheld her positions and supplied her quotes as the authority that established them. So, they defended Jesus being Michael the Archangel, and upheld him as the angel of Revelation 1:1, 8:3, & 10:6, etc.
Also their Clear Word Bible1, has been heavily promoted since 1994. In America today, nearly half of the Adventist homes are already using this Adventist Bible, for regular reading and Bible study—many even for Sabbath School lesson study! The SDA Church has promoted this Bible because their unorthodox positions have been translated right into the text, including positions which came from Ellen White’s endorsements. But the sweet scroll that becomes bitter in the stomach, is that this ‘Bible’ upholds and promotes her Arianism as well: Gen 1:26; 3:22 God is speaking with His Son of making man; then of man’s fall into sin
Gen 1:28 "Then God and His Son blessed them and said "We have given you…"
Gen 1:31 "Then God looked at everything He had created (adds) through His Son
Rev 10:1 "Next I saw a mighty angel come down from heaven…(adds) Then I knew it was the Lord Jesus"
Rev 10:5 "Then this mighty angel (adds) the Lord Jesus…"
Rev 10:8+9 "…Go and take the little open book out of the hand of the mighty angel…so I went up to the Son of God …"
1 Ths 4:16 "When Christ descends from heaven, (adds) He as Michael the Archangel will give a shout…"
Rev 12:7 "…(adds) God’s Son Michael and the loyal angels fought against the dragon…"
Jude 9 "…(adds) the Lord Jesus Christ, also called Michael the Archangel…"
John 8:58 "…before Abraham was I AM" changed to "I existed before Abraham was born"
Col 1:16 "…By Him all things were created" changed to "…through him the Father created"
Col 1:15 "He is the firstborn over all creation" changed "He has the right to be placed over all creation"
Col 1:18 ".that in all things He might have pre-eminence" changed "…therefore He is worthy to be given first place."
Col 1:18 "He is the Beginning" changed to "He existed from the beginning"
Col 1:19 "The Father acknowledged Him as fully God, (adds) in spite of his human nature"
Heb 1:10 "You, O Yhwh, in the beginning laid the foundations of the earth…" is changed to "You existed before the beginning of time. You carried out our plan and created…"
Jn 20:28 "My Lord and My God" changed "Lord, you’re alive! They were right! I believe! You are the Son of God".
Acts 2:25 "I foresaw Yhwh always before my face" changed "I have seen the presence of God in all my life"
Tit 1:3,4; 3:4-6; 2:13; 2 Pet 1:1 Takes identity of ‘God’ from Jesus Christ, sometimes gives it to the Father!
John 10:30 "I and My Father are One" changed "I and my Father are so close we’re One"
Rev 3:14 "…the beginning (source) of the creation of God" changed to "who is in charge of God’s creation"
Rom 10:9,10 omits "that Jesus is LORD (Yhwh)"; "you shall be saved" changed: "you have the relation you need"
With SDAs heavily promoting Ellen’s infallible and canonical interpretive gift, and with such a gross perversion of the Bible, that so freely and heavily rewrites it to include Ellen’s unorthodox views, including her denial of Jesus’ absolute deity and the Trinity, and with SDAs yet upholding as members those who deny these essential articles from their statement of faith, actively destroying them, to support Ellen’s false views, it is only a matter of time before the whole denomination will revert to the Christ debasing positions they once held for 60 years!

NOTES [SIZE=-1] 1. It should be noted that while half of the SDA homes in the United States have The Clear Word Bible, the vast majority of SDAs worldwide do not own or use the book. It is a paraphrased Bible and not a translation. For an in-depth analysis of The Clear Word Bible, see the article Deliberate Distortions in the SDA's "Clear Word Bible" by Dr. Verle Streifling (258K PDF format). [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]The following is found in the first two paragraphs of the Clear Word's preface: [/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1] "This is not a new translation but a paraphrase of the Scriptures. It is not intended for in-depth study or for public reading in churches. Those who are better qualified have given readers of the Holy Scriptures excellent translations for such purposes and undoubtedly will continue to do so as additional manuscripts come to light.[/SIZE] [SIZE=-1] This paraphrase is intended to provide the reader with fresh insights into the gracious character of God, the living ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ and the struggles of the early Christian church to survive. It is written in hope that the Holy Spirit may use it as an agency to stimulate a new experience of faith and spiritual growth." (The Clear Word Bible, Copyright 1994 by Jack Blanco, Review and Herald Publishing Association, 55 West Oak Ridge Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740) [/SIZE]
​

[SIZE=-1] [/SIZE] [SIZE=-1] [/SIZE]

 

[Adventist Heretic]

this is particually hard to take because i like this prophecy





Errors in the Great Controversy
Josiah Litch's Predictions about Turkey

Compiled by D. Anderson


In 1838, Millerite leader Josiah Litch made a prediction based upon his understanding of a prophecy found in Revelation 9:15. He predicted the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) would fall on August 11, 1840. Ellen White gives a glowing endorsement of Litch's prediction in the Great Controversy:

"In the year 1840 another remarkable fulfillment of prophecy excited widespread interest. Two years before, Josiah Litch, one of the leading ministers preaching the second advent, published an exposition of Revelation 9, predicting the fall of the Ottoman Empire. According to his calculations, this power was to be overthrown "in A.D. 1840, sometime in the month of August;" and only a few days previous to its accomplishment he wrote: "Allowing the first period, 150 years, to have been exactly fulfilled before Deacozes ascended the throne by permission of the Turks, and that the 391 years, fifteen days, commenced at the close of the first period, it will end on the 11th of August, 1840, when the Ottoman power in Constantinople may be expected to be broken. And this, I believe, will be found to be the case."--Josiah Litch, in Signs of the Times, and Expositor of Prophecy, Aug. 1, 1840. "At the very time specified, Turkey, through her ambassadors, accepted the protection of the allied powers of Europe, and thus placed herself under the control of Christian nations. The event exactly fulfilled the prediction. When it became known, multitudes were convinced of the correctness of the principles of prophetic interpretation adopted by Miller and his associates, and a wonderful impetus was given to the advent movement."1
​

Litch's Embarrassing Failure

The truth of the matter is that the month of August, 1840, came and passed without any evidence of Turkey falling. This placed Litch in a quandary. He waited until November, and then came out with a statement saying that Turkey's rejection of a European peace offer on August 15, 1840, assured war with Europe, and doomed the Ottomon Empire. However, by early 1841, it became evident that war was not going to happen. So, Litch came up with a new story, arguing that the fulfillment of prophecy had occurred exactly on August 11, 1840, as predicted. The "fall" of Turkey consisted of a "voluntary surrender of Turkish supremacy in Constantinople to Christian influence." He claimed the Turkish ruler was now a puppet "of the great Christian powers of Europe."
Many Christians questioned Litch's new story. In 1840 the Ottoman Empire covered a vast territory, including a large part of North Africa, Arabia, Palestine, Iraq, southern Russia, and most of the European Balkan states. The Millerite critic Reverend O.E. Daggett argued that Turkey did not "fall" in August of 1840. James Hazen, a Massachusetts clergyman, said the European intervention had kept Turkey from falling. Hazen said the argument that in accepting European aid Turkey fell was "ridiculous."2

When Did Turkey Really Fall?

The Russians defeated the Ottoman Empire in 1829, and in 1833 they signed a treaty establishing a protectorate over the Ottoman Empire. The other European nations were displeased with this arrangement, and in 1841, the powers of Austria, Britain, and France, replaced this treaty with a general European protectorate. If the signing of a protectorate agreement did indeed signal the fall of the Ottoman Empire, then the agreement with Russia in 1833 would have marked the "fall" of Turkey. If the signing of a protectorate marks the fall of an empire, then Turkey fell in 1833, not 1841. The 1841 treaty was simply a replacement of the existing 1833 treaty! Furthermore, the treaty was signed in 1841, not 1840.
In actuality, the Ottoman Empire did not fall in either 1833 or 1841. In fact, in part because of the 1841 treaty, Britain and France later came to the aid of Turkey in 1853, and defeated Russia in the Crimean War. Despite this victory, the Ottoman Empire gradually weakened and lost territory until World War I, when it sided with Germany. Early in the war, Turkey won a dramatic victory over the invading British and French armies at Gallipoli, resulting in over 250,000 allied casualties. However, Turkey eventually succumbed to the invading armies and sued for peace in 1918. It was at this point that the Turkish government was placed under control of the allied powers. It could be argued that this was the real "fall" of Turkey. Under the ensuing treaty, large parts of Turkey were occupied by Greek, British, French, and Italian soldiers. However, Turkey soon rebelled against the treaty and attacked the occupying troops. They drove the Greeks out of Asia Minor, and expelled the British, French, and Italian occupation forces by 1923. After regaining independence, the Ottoman Empire officially came to an end in 1923, with the establishment of a new form of government called the Turkish Republic.

Did Litch's prediction convince multitudes?

Ellen White claimed that "multitudes were convinced of the correctness" of Miller's calculations because of Litch's successful prediction. But is that truly the case? It has already been noted that clergyman quickly refuted Litch's claim that Turkey had fallen. Litch himself lamented the lack of acceptance of his teaching:

"There are few persons, in New England at least, whose minds were not arrested and turned to the 11th of August; and vast multitudes were ready to say, ay, did say, If this event takes place according to the calculation, at the time specified, we will believe the doctrine of the advent near. But how is it with them now? Why, just as it was with the old Jews in the days of Christ; when he was every day performing the most stupendous miracles in their sight, they said to him, "Master, we would see a sign of thee." So now: men desire a sign from heaven. But let them be assured, they can never have a more convincing one than this..."3​

Here we find Litch complaining about the widespread rejection of his prediction. This is quite different from the picture painted by Ellen White! From Litch's point of view it is evident the multitudes were not convinced that Turkey had fallen, nor were they convinced that prophecy had been fulfilled. And who would be in a better position to judge whether the people were convinced? Litch himself? Or the 14-year-old Ellen Harmon? You decide!
Later in life, Litch abandons earlier views

The older and wiser Josiah Litch abandoned the views held by the younger and brasher Litch. In 1867, he published a rejection of the prophetic year-day rule as a general principle of hermeneutics. For example, he concluded the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were literal days4. In 1873, Litch wrote on the 6th trumpet of Revelation 9:15:

"The exact hour for [the angels] to be loosed was fixed. They were prepared unto an hour, day, month, and year. That is, the exact time for their loosing was fixed, to a year, a month, a day, and an hour; it is not an exact period during which they should act."5​

This commentary is more profound for what it does not say rather than what it says. Gone are the claims that the events of August 11, 1840, fulfilled the prophecy of Revelation 9:15.
Prescott finds errors in Great Controversy6

Before preparing the new edition of Great Controversy Prescott wrote a lengthy list of errors he felt needed correcting. Among these were the historical positions taken by it on the French Revolution and the sixth trumpet. Prescott pointed out that there was no evidence the Bible had been banned in France for three and a half years, and that since Litch's prediction regarding August 11 had not only been given after the fact (contrary to a statement in Great Controversy, which said it was given before), it was also quite invalid.
When Daniel and Revelation 7 came in for revision in the 1940s, Prescott's criticisms were revived and confirmed. The fruitless scouring of libraries in Europe and America that took place before the 1911 edition of Great Controversy now witnessed a replay. We quote the official statement of the revising committee on the matter of the trumpets.

"It is interesting to note that when James White and later Uriah Smith came to the seven trumpets they did not attempt an original interpretation but frankly appropriated an interpretation by Josiah Litch--one that Litch himself had already repudiated. Like them your committee has found nothing better to recommend. We therefore--
Recommend, That the interpretation of the Seven Trumpets remain as it is."​

During the work of the committee we find such comments as the following exchanged in letters:

"I am still struggling with the problem of atheism and the French Revolution, and do not know yet just how we will come out.
​

"I especially looked up Item Number 7 to find some quotations to take the place of these old ones, but I cannot find any good material
​

"The date Aug. 26, 1792, should not be used. I can find nothing in any history of the French Revolution to show cause why this should be an outstanding day against Christianity."​

Such comments only echo ones made years earlier by Prescott and Spicer. We offer typical instances.

"I notice that in the issue of the Signs for Nov.21, you have let loose the Turk--and some other things besides. I had known for some time that the date, August 11, 1840, would not stand examination. Two years ago we presented full information on this at the Fall Council, but nothing has been done and in the meantime our books and publications are repeating the old unwarranted statements ...​

"If the Emperor John, who died in 1448, "never forgot that he was a vassal of the Ottoman Empire," how can we assert that the Byzantine Empire did not become subject to Turkey until 1449?" (W.W. Prescott letter)​

Here is W. A Spicer (Nov. 30, 1914)--

"I will also enclose some material on the dates of the prophetic periods of Rev. 9. Some time ago, Professor Prescott and I went to the Library of Congress. He looked up the history of Pachymeris, translated into Latin by Possinus. It is from this book that Gibbon got his date, July 27, 1299. 1 looked up Von Hammer, who is the heaviest German author on Ottoman history, and it is clear that Gibbon made an error which Von Hammer and others have corrected. The way Gibbon arrived at his mistake is easily seen by looking at the Possinus translation of Pachymeris. Gibbon saw July 27 at the opening of chapter 25, and then over in the chronological tables given by Possinus he saw the date 1299. Combining these he got July 27, 1299. But he failed to note that the chapter began with July 27, but then went back and dealt with earlier events. These earlier events were the events of 1299. [Thus the 1299 date in the table given by Possinus.] It was not until 1301that the battle of July 27 took place.​

"About this time Professor Benson received documents showing conclusively that the ultimatum of the Powers was not delivered to the Pasha of Egypt on Aug. 11, 1840. Then we began to look the thing up a bit, and presented some of these features to the recent council. You may well understand that the brethren had to sit up and take notice. It is remarkable how loath people are to look at facts, or to correct anything."​

The August 11 prediction, supposedly fulfilled "to the very day," is worthless:

• Litch began with an erroneous date from Gibbon
• In counting the number of days he forgot about the omission of ten days in the replacement of the Julian with the Gregorian calendar
• He seriously misstated events in the 1840s
• He displayed ignorance of the meaning of Rev. 9:15 in the original Greek.

Conclusion

It is obvious the August 11 date was wrong, as even Litch himself later admitted. And yet, Mrs. White endorsed this date and claimed that this erroneous prediction "convinced multitudes" that Miller's calculations were correct. This is in spite of the fact that Litch himself complained very few accepted his prediction. If Mrs. White was wrong about the prophecies of Revelation 9, what about the other prophecies in the Great Controversy concerning future events? Can you really trust the accuracy of the Great Controversy?


NOTES 1. Ellen White, Great Controversy, p. 335.
2. Eric Anderson, The Disappointed, "The Millerite Use of Prophecy", p. 87.
3. Ibid., p. 86.
4. See Prophetic Significance of Eastern and European Movements, pp. 15-16.
5. Josiah Litch, A Complete Harmony of Daniel and the Apocalypse, p. 170.
6. Section taken from Daniel 8:14, by Desmond Ford, Ph.D.
7. Daniel and Revelation by Uriah Smith is said to be one of Mrs. White's sources of "inspiration" in writing the Great Controversy. Large parts of Smith's book were incorporated into the Great Controversy.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Famous Quotes

"Christ did not make the atonement when he shed his blood upon the cross. Let this fact be fixed forever in the mind."
--Uriah Smith, Looking Unto Jesus, p. 237.
"I begged them to show me my error from the Word alone, as I could not offer the writings of Mrs. White to the general public as authority in support of any position. It was finally agreed to use the scriptures only in dealing with the matter. But notwithstanding this solemn agreement, the first man to reply, Eld. S.N. Haskell, commenced, and continued unrebuked, to quote the writings of Mrs. White against me."
--Albion Ballenger describes his trial for heresy, "The Bible in the Reformation", p. 2.
"I can truly say that never have I known a man of a kinder heart or more tender spirit than he, nor one who more genuinely and devoutly feared the Lord, or was more deeply devoted to His service and His worship."
--A.T. Jones writing on the death of Albion Ballenger, Gathering Call, Sep./Oct. 1921, p. 3.
"Jesus saw it coming. He warned us 2,000 years ago. He said false prophets would arise who appear so much like true prophets that even the very elect would be in danger of being duped! That is why it is so important that we test the prophets. The line has become so blurred, so fuzzy, that we must use the Bible tests. We cannot depend on our own feelings! The Bible helps us determine who is a true prophet and who is a false prophet. It gives us seven specific tests that blow away the myths and expose the true character. To my utter surprise, when I applied these seven tests to Ellen White, I discovered she failed six out of the seven tests."
--Dirk Anderson, 2005. See "Does Mrs. White Pass the Test of a Prophet?"
"A lesser light pointing to a greater light? Why would anyone need a flashlight to find the sun?"
--Ray Pitts, 2000
"There is no other light than the Word of God..."
--H.L. Hastings in his book Great Controversy, published before Ellen White's Great Controversy, p. 15, 1858
"Apparently her heavenly communications with angels were not enough to convince Mrs. White to give up meat. It took a Catholic woman begging her to give up meat on the basis that it was wrong to take the lives of animals! It makes one wonder how much confidence she had in her own visions!"
--Max Chugg, "Oysters and Herrings", 2001
“If any prophet teaches the truth, yet does not practice what he teaches, he is a false prophet.”
--Didache 11:10, 50 A.D.
"If every paragraph in the book Great Controversy, written by Ellen White, was properly footnoted, then every paragraph would have to be footnoted."
--Dr. Donald McAdams at the special 1980 meeting of SDA leaders in Glendale, California
"Ellen White was using the thoughts, words and structure of other writers for her ‘I was shown’ [statements]. From the beginning with the ‘vision’ of William Foy to the end of her life she used the ‘inspiration’ of others to promote Adventism and her concept of its life style that was ‘necessary’ to please her God."
--Walter Rea, "How the SDA Spirit of Prophecy was Born", 1988
"This strong self-image as an inspired writer may have inhibited her [Ellen White's] ability to realize how much her writings depended on other authors. She could scarcely have sensed the degree to which her visions and dreams were shaped by her reading, and thus she came to believe that her revelations were the original sources of what she wrote."
--Ronald Graybill, Ph.D., associate director of the White Estate in his doctoral thesis, "The Power of Prophecy", 1983
"As the 'prophet,' she was given the heavy responsibility of passing the word of the Lord to the people; and with her education and background, she did not have the resources to meet the high expectations of her community. So what did she do? She did a very resourceful thing, and she did it quite surreptitiously. She went to the very sources that this cultic movement had unsparingly condemned as Babylon, gathered the best spiritual food she could find, and made it suitable for her community's consumption."
--Robert Brinsmead, Ph.D., Adventist Currents, Feb., 1984, p. 17
"Seizure disorder often develops from a severe head injury such as that suffered by young Ellen. ... There is an astonishing similarity between Mrs. White's 'visions' and a type of seizure called 'psychomotor' or 'partial-complex' seizure. ... Unaware that her 'visions' were part of a seizure, Ellen shared them with others who labeled her as a 'prophet' and made her the center of the developing Seventh-day Adventist church."
-- Delbert H. Hodder, M.D., Evangelica, Nov. 1981
"Had you, a contemporary of Mrs. White, behaved as she did, and had suffered the poor standard of health of which she constantly complains, she would have rebuked you and refused to pray for you because you would be seen as the author of your own problems. Yet in her case the causes of her health problems were either "attacks of Satan" or the result of being grossly overworked. When she had problems, someone else was always at fault. Ellen White was always the victim."
--Max Chugg, The Ailing Health Instructor, 2003
"No scholar seriously believes that Jesus Christ is sitting in heaven turning pages to investigate Christian lives".
--Desmond Ford, Ph.D., Newsweek, Jan. 19, 1981
"A row of graves in Africa mark the site of the first SDA missionaries. They were told by authorities to take quinine, but as Adventists they got their marching orders from a higher source. They knew that quinine was valueless: they trusted Mrs. White that she had been shown this by God, and as a result they died."
--Gregory Hunt, M.D., Beware this Cult, chapter 4, "Ellen White and Medicine", 1981
"Adventists insist it will be a 'final test' even though it is impossible to believe Jesus and the apostles would be silent on such a profound issue. If the final climatic battle between good and evil, the war to end all wars, is to be fought over the Sabbath, then why did Jesus and the apostles ignore the issue entirely?"
--Dirk Anderson, "National Sunday Law: Fact or Fiction?", 2001
"The way your mother's writings have been handled and the false impressions concerning them, which is still fostered among the people, have brought great perplexity and trial to me. It seems to me that what amounts to deception, though probably not intentional, has been practiced in making some of her books, and that no serious effort has been made to disabuse the minds of the people of what was known to be their wrong view concerning her writings."
--W.W. Prescott, letter to Willie White, 1915
"She [Fannie Bolton] said Mrs. White was in the habit of doing this, copying from various other books, so that she and Marian Davis had to go over the material and transpose sentences and change paragraphs and in other wise endeavor to hide the piracy. She spoke to Mrs. White about it and objected to having her own manuscript used without credit. Mrs. White was very angry and slapped her face."
--J.H. Kellogg, M.D., letter to Ballenger, 1936
"It seems to me that the testimonies, practically, have come into that shape, that it is not of any use to try to defend the erroneous claims that are now put forth for them."
--Uriah Smith, letter to D.M. Canright, 1883
"He [Joseph Bates] told me that the gifts were realized among them, that they had the gift of prophecy and the gift of healing the sick. But as long as I was with them I never knew of any being healed. I have known them to try but they always failed. In this I was disappointed. I also found the spirit of prophecy, with them, was confined wholly to a woman. By this time I became suspicious that I had gotten on board the wrong ship. I then commenced to giving her visions a thorough investigation. I found they contradicted themselves, and that they contradicted the Bible."
--Gilbert Cranmer, founder of the Church of God (seventh day), Hope of Israel, Aug. 10, 1863
"Most Adventists who learn of it will probably be able to accommodate the revised image of Ellen Harmon as a shrill-voiced, lounging, shouting, kissing, condemning, fainting, and footwashing, postdisappointment, Millerite fanatic. It may take some Adventists a little longer to assimilate the implications of Mrs. White's inability to remember her early ministry the way it actually took place. They will either have to assume that she possessed a particularly fecund delusional system...or that she consciously distorted the past for her own purposes."
--Bruce Weaver, INCIDENT IN ATKINSON: The Arrest and Trial of Israel Dammon, 1988
"I have a Bible that is about a 1-1/2 inches thick and can find my duty towards God as most Christians do. I do not need six feet of EGW books that contradict the Bible."
--Robert Sanders, 2003
"I have shown here that these trances were part of the enthusiastic worship experience of Adventism. They gained credibility not because they were unique but because they resembled the spiritual exaltations of other believers. Once Adventist worship grew sedate, Ellen's trances ceased, and her early visions acquired a miraculous aura."
--Ronald Graybill, Ph.D., associate director of the White Estate in his doctoral thesis, "The Power of Prophecy", 1983
"Twenty-five years ago, the self-evident truth that sin is not an entity but a condition that can exist only in a person, made it clear to me that there could he no such thing as the transferring of sins to the sanctuary in heaven, thus defiling that place; and that there could consequently be, either in 1844 AD or at any other time, no such thing as the 'cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.'"
--E.J. Waggoner, Confession of Faith, 1916
"I should be recreant to God is I did not recognize the light that He has given me; I could never understand why it was given to me, except on the ground that His gifts are bestowed, not according to deserts, but according to need."--E.J. Waggoner, Confession of Faith, 1916
"After Ellen White's death, some of those seeking to defend this wonderful gift went too far, creating an edifice that was built on shaky pillars...that has now created many more problems than it has solved. Worse than not defending the gift is defending it with weak arguments. We'd have been better off keeping silent than speaking things that weren't correct."
--Clifford Goldstein, Graffiti in the Holy of Holies, 2003
"Eld. White had published several of Ellen's visions on small sheets for general distribution; but as time passed on the theology of her later visions was materially different from former ones, and they were suppressed... these visions as published now are greatly in conflict with those which acquaintances and witnesses in New England were accustomed to hear from her lips, after recovering from her clairvoyant state, or to read on sheets as published at first, by Eld. White."
--Isaac Wellcome, History of the Second Advent Message, 1874.
"After considering all the evidence obtainable...this writer is convinced that Ellen G. White was a highly impressionable woman, strongly influenced by her associates. That she sincerely believed the Lord spoke to her, none can fairly question, but the evidence set forth in this chapter gives good reason, we believe, to doubt the inspiration of her counsels, whether Seventh-day Adventists will concede this or not."
--Walter Martin in The Truth about Seventh-day Adventists, 1960, p. 111.
"Cognitive maturation is a process of mental growth from a primitive, subjective, piecemeal collage of facts and supposed facts, hopefully toward an ever more accurate, symmetrical understanding of objective reality. During this process additional relevant facts are discovered, irrelevant opinions are discarded, and a wise person learns to monitor his/her thought processes and to base conclusions on the weight of evidence."
--Dr. Raymond F. Cottrell, Adventist Today, 1999
"Acheiving objectivity requires the courage to critically examine cherished positions and to abandon those that no longer make sense, even though they may have been important sources of our security in the past."
--Dr. Reuven Bar-Levav, Thinking in the Shadow of Feelings, p. 113.
"...It is not right that the spirit of prophecy is the only safe interpreter of the Bible. That is a false doctrine, a false view that is false, it is error. It is positively dangerous."
--A.G. Daniells, 1919 Bible Conference
"Evidence also shows that the record of Ellen White's accomplishments have been greatly exagerated. Perhaps it was to raise her public image for the sake of institutional prestige, but fostering an unreal image of her will only undo her real usefulness among those who discover those exagerations."
--Edmund Rogol, You and I, and Ellen White

 

[djconklin]

Sample quote:

"...It is not right that the spirit of prophecy is the only safe interpreter of the Bible. That is a false doctrine, a false view that is false, it is error. It is positively dangerous."
--A.G. Daniells, 1919 Bible Conference

One amongst many of an "appeal to authority." It is one of the lowest forms an argument can take. Which is why we are told to never, ever let other men do your thinking for you. God will not ask "What did so-and-so say about such-and-such?" The question will be "Did you live up to the light I gave you or did you cavil and quibble?"

Have you noticed that the critics who cannot defend the plagiarism claim shift their ground to new claims rather than admit that they were in error? Did you notice that none of theses alleged authorities (no evidence is produced as to why we should listen to them.) produced any evidence to support any of their claims (note especially the bolded stuff)? Here's a choice one:

"A row of graves in Africa mark the site of the first SDA missionaries. They were told by authorities to take quinine, but as Adventists they got their marching orders from a higher source. They knew that quinine was valueless: they trusted Mrs. White that she had been shown this by God, and as a result they died."
--Gregory Hunt, M.D., Beware this Cult, chapter 4, "Ellen White and Medicine", 1981

Did he tell you where you could see these "row of graves" all of people whom died because they didn't take guinine? No? So, how do you know that they even exist?

Now goto http://www.whiteestate.org/ and type in quinine and then hit "search site" and see what you find. Note the context.

 

[djconklin]

"If every paragraph in the book Great Controversy, written by Ellen White, was properly footnoted, then every paragraph would have to be footnoted."
--Dr. Donald McAdams at the special 1980 meeting of SDA leaders in Glendale, California

Another quote that is bandied about on the web without people asking to see the evidence to support such a claim. In fact, no evidence is ever produced that Dr. McAdams ever said such a thing. One should also note that Dr. McAdams did not look at all of the book Great Controversy; he only examined a couple of historical chapters.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Another quote that is bandied about on the web without people asking to see the evidence to support such a claim. In fact, no evidence is ever produced that Dr. McAdams ever said such a thing. One should also note that Dr. McAdams did not look at all of the book Great Controversy; he only examined a couple of historical chapters.

could you prouduce your source or back up your claim to authority. You also ignored the 100 suggested changes by w.w. prescott written by aurther L white.

 

[djconklin]

McAdam's study is available from the White estate; from my bibliography:
"Ellen G. White and the Protestant Historians: A Study of the Treatment of John Huss in <u>Great Controversy</u>, Chapter Six, "Huss and Jerome"," the Appendix deals with Chapter 14, "Later English Reformers," (Ellen G. White Estate, 1977).

[This study was fascinating to read because I found several significant facts within it that contradict some of the claims made by Kasperson.]

You do not need to be an "authority" (and no specific qualification is given as necessary) to be able to READ his study.

I did not ignore Prescott's suggested changes. I have read all of them and in some cases I agreed with him vs. the estate. Again from my bibliography:
"W. W. Prescott and the 1911 Edition of Great Controversy," online at http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/gc-prescott.html

 

[Jon0388g]

Icedragon, may I ask what is your aim with this thread? To expose Ellen White as a false prophet?

These are not your opinions backed up by sources you have confirmed by your own research. It would have saved a lot pages if you had just given us a link to ellenwhite.org. We all know what that site is about.

Jon

 

[Adventist Heretic]

"A row of graves in Africa mark the site of the first SDA missionaries. They were told by authorities to take quinine, but as Adventists they got their marching orders from a higher source. They knew that quinine was valueless: they trusted Mrs. White that she had been shown this by God, and as a result they died."
--Gregory Hunt, M.D., Beware this Cult, chapter 4, "Ellen White and Medicine", 1981

Now goto http://www.whiteestate.org/ and type in quinine and then hit "search site" and see what you find. Note the context

[/quote] i did what you said and this is what I got exactly how dose this contradice the quote you gave?
Ingredients of the Otsego Health Vision

[Top of Document]​

What was so electrifying, so sweeping, so full of promise in the Otsego health vision?44 The core principles were:
· Those who do not control their appetite in eating are guilty of intemperance.
· Swine&#8217;s flesh is not to be eaten under any circumstance.
· Tobacco in any form is a slow poison.
· Strict cleanliness of the body and home premises is important.
· Tea and coffee, similar to tobacco, are slow poisons.
· Rich cake, pies, and puddings are injurious.
· Eating between meals injures the stomach and digestive process.
· Adequate time must be allowed between meals, giving the stomach time to rest.
· If a third meal is taken, it should be light and several hours before bedtime.
· People used to meat, gravies, and pastries do not immediately relish a plain, wholesome diet.
· Gluttonous appetite contributes to indulgence of corrupt passions.
· Turning to a plain, nutritious diet may overcome the physical damage caused by a wrong diet.
· Reforms in eating will save expense and labor.
· Children eating flesh meat and spicy foods have strong tendencies toward sexual indulgences.
· Poisonous drugs used as medical prescriptions kill more people than all other causes of death combined.
· Pure water should be used freely in maintaining health and curing illnesses.
· Nature alone has curative powers.
· Common medicines, such as strychnine, opium, calomel, mercury, and quinine, are poisons.
· Parents transmit their weaknesses to their children; prenatal influences are enormous.
· Obeying the laws of health will prevent many illnesses.
· God is too often blamed for deaths caused by violation of nature&#8217;s laws.
· Light and pure air are required, especially in the sleeping quarters.
· Bathing, even a sponge bath, will be beneficial on rising in the morning.
· God will not work healing miracles for those who continually violate the laws of health.
· Many invalids have no physical cause for their illness; they have a diseased imagination.
· Cheerful, physical labor will help to create a healthy, cheerful disposition.
· Willpower has much to do with resisting disease and soothing nerves.
· Outdoor exercise is very important to health of mind and body.
· Overwork breaks down both mind and body; routine daily rest is necessary.
· Many die of disease caused wholly by eating flesh food.
· Caring for health is a spiritual matter, reflecting a person&#8217;s commitment to God.
· A healthy mind and body directly affects one&#8217;s morals and one&#8217;s ability to discern truth.
· All God&#8217;s promises are given on condition of obedience.

 

[djconklin]

Note the context.

BTW, in your haste you skipped a paragraph.

And you failed to apologize for your post #32.

 

[djconklin]

Icedragon, may I ask what is your aim with this thread? To expose Ellen White as a false prophet?

These are not your opinions backed up by sources you have confirmed by your own research. It would have saved a lot pages if you had just given us a link to ellenwhite.org. We all know what that site is about.

Jon

Bingo, you've got it!

 

[Adventist Heretic]

[=Jon0388g;32620549]

Icedragon, may I ask what is your aim with this thread? To expose Ellen White as a false prophet?

if you read the first post you would know it was "for your consideration" these are legitimate issues facing SDA today and this is a fourm for SDA's to discuss. May I ask you why you seem to be uneasy and defensive about the information? if this information true? Are you unable to answer?

These are not your opinions backed up by sources you have confirmed by your own research. It would have saved a lot pages if you had just given us a link to ellenwhite.org. We all know what that site is about.

they don't have to be my opinoin, backed up by My research, althouth I have researched some of them.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Note the context.

BTW, in your haste you skipped a paragraph.

And you failed to apologize for your post #32.

and just what do i need to apoligize for? i asked you to produce a source and to back your opinon up with something other then your word alone. Since I can see no no wrong, either you will have to expline why you think you deserve an apology, or you will have to give me an apology for misrepresenting me. It look like you want to turn this into a fight. I don't I just want to discuss the info. If you don't want to discuss, don't post. it is simple as that.

 

[djconklin]

You claimed I ignored the suggestions made by Prescott. That was not true. You had no idea what work I had done. You simply assumed.

.