Yes, you missed something. I stated I was not posting it to test Ellen White, per se. And I never stated that she does not at times agree with others, or she is the only reason to take that position on Matthew 13. In fact, I have mentioned several times she integrates other people's material. Again, Luke used sources as well, so that in itself is not disqualifying regarding inspiration.
ok
The point of our exercise was to see how you relate to the Scriptures.
I don't see how my first post on Matt 13 wheat and tares (or any of my posts since) varies in any significant way from what Bible commentaries that address the details have said about it.
And the point was to see how you relate to Ellen White's comments.
My only comment there is that her reference to wheat and tares applying to christ's church in the world is very closely in line with what other Bible commentaries have said about wheat and tares in the church when addressing Matt 13.
The point of the exercise is not that you need Ellen White to get a particular position. She rarely took a novel position.
Then how is this significant? I agree that there are areas that Adventists hold in common with many other denominations - but there are also distinctives in Adventist doctrine (And I am sure you would agree to this).
. If she is inspired, how do you avoid her being an inspired commentary. Yet she claims she should not be used that way....except then she also says some things that could go the other way.
In a number of places she has what I call "signature Ellen White" contribution where only an eye-witnesses would know that detail or in some cases only a mind-reader -- and other places are just connecting history detail
that is not there as "God's correction of history" they are just there as well-known history to build context and transition to the next part of the text.
So then "signature Ellen White" example - would be this -
Now, priests and rulers, where is the power of your guard? Brave soldiers that have never been afraid of human power are now as captives taken without sword or spear.
The face they look upon is not the face of mortal warrior; it is the face of the mightiest of the Lord’s host. This messenger is he who fills the position from which Satan fell. It is he who on the hills of Bethlehem proclaimed Christ’s birth. The earth trembles at his approach, the hosts of darkness flee, and as he rolls away the stone, heaven seems to come down to the earth.
The soldiers see him removing the stone as he would a pebble, and hear him cry, Son of God, come forth; Thy Father calls Thee. They see Jesus come forth from the grave, and hear Him proclaim over the rent sepulcher, “
I am the resurrection, and the life.” As He comes forth in majesty and glory, the angel host bow low in adoration before the Redeemer, and welcome Him with songs of praise. {DA 779.3}
At sight of the angels and the glorified Saviour the Roman guard had fainted and become as dead men. When the heavenly train was hidden from their view, they arose to their feet, and as quickly as their trembling limbs could carry them, made their way to the gate of the garden.
Staggering like drunken men, they hurried on to the city, telling those whom they met the wonderful news. They were making their way to Pilate, but their report had been carried to the Jewish authorities, and the chief priests and rulers sent for them to be brought first into their presence. A strange appearance those soldiers presented.
Trembling with fear, their faces colorless, they bore testimony to the resurrection of Christ. The soldiers told all, just as they had seen it; they had not had time to think or speak anything but the truth. With painful utterance they said, It was the Son of God who was crucified; we have heard an angel proclaiming Him as the Majesty of heaven, the King of glory. {DA 781.1}
The faces of the priests were as those of the dead. Caiaphas tried to speak.
His lips moved, but they uttered no sound. The soldiers were about to leave the council room, when a voice stayed them. Caiaphas had at last found speech. Wait, wait, he said. Tell no one the things you have seen. {DA 781.2}
A lying report was then given to the soldiers. “Say ye,” said the priests, “His disciples came by night, and stole Him away while we slept.” Here the priests overreached themselves. How could the soldiers say that the disciples had stolen the body while they slept? If they were asleep, how could they know? And if the disciples had been proved guilty of stealing Christ’s body, would not the priests have been first to condemn them? Or if the sentinels had slept at the tomb, would not the priests have been foremost in accusing them to Pilate? {DA 781.3}