Ellen White on photographs

BobRyan said:

There is a popular term TDS, where some people seem to be stuck with one person living in their head rent free.

The All Ellen White All the Time threads, are interesting to me in that same category where I see someone that seems to be stuck

The innocent passer by then gets drawn in with a kind of "yeah lets chase this rabbit for a while" and I can see how it would be entertaining for a while.

I make my case from scripture

Click to expand...

As a member of a traditional church, I have to say I wouldn’t be commenting at all on the SDA were it not for the continual and relentless criticism of my denomination by a vocal minority of the members of your denomination on this forum. Most of the Adventist members I’ve never had any issue with and one of them I regard as a friend.

I don’t see why you can’t simply stop criticizing our churches.

As far as Ellen G. White is concerned, obviously you are welcome to regard her as an inspired prophet within the context of your denomination. My only concern is the criticism of traditional churches - the allegation that we are disobeying Scripture, because we disagree with an interpretation of scripture that is informed heavily by early Adventists, including but not limited to Ellen G. White.

It might surprise you to learn that among early Adventists Ellen G. White I regard as one of the most interesting theologically; while I regard some of her statements to be problematic, I disagree with her far less than with most other early Adventists, such as Kellogg, Andrew and Miller, and far less than I disagree with leader of other major denominations, such as Knox, Calvin, Zwingli and especially Increase Mather and Cotton Mather.

It should also be stated that simply because we disagree with her theology and find it to be technically problematic, we do not necessarily lack respect for Ellen G. White as a person.

I suspect the main reason why Ellen G. White becomes an issue is because your denomination regards her writings as inspired and infallible prophecy, which actually puts them on a par with the ex cathedra declarations allowed under the doctrine of Papal Infallibility introduced by the RCC at Vatican II.

Disagreeing with someone’s theology is not an ad hominem attack against their character - if I rejected everything EGW said because of who she was, that would be the ad hominem fallacy, which I am opposed to - I do not believe the source of a statement should be of primary consideration when evaluating it (for the same reason its important to reject the appeal to unqualified authority fallacy, which is why I do not accept the statements of Josephus and Philo as doctrinally relevant to Christianity, because they were not, as far as we know, Christians, and Jews who persisted in Judaism after the Passion and Resurrection of Christ and the spread of the Gospel by the Holy Apostles, into the late first century, had definitely made their choice, and that choice was one in opposition to Christianity. Thus while he might be a source of historical information about Judaism, his opinion about what Old Testament books are canonical cannot be accepted on the basis of his status, but rather have to be weighed against the interpretations of the early church and also on what books and what versions of those books are quoted and referenced in the New Testament.

By the way, specifically, regarding icons, they are not spiritually forbidden as long as they are not worshipped, which as @prodromos @Jipsah @MarkRohfrietsch @chevyontheriver @Xeno.of.athens @jas3 and @Michie can confirm, is not something that is done by correctly practicing members of the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, confessional Lutheran or Anglican churches (and also I can personally attest the Oriental Orthodox do not do it either) - indeed worshipping icons is prohibited as idolatry by the canonical legislation of the traditional churches.

We Eastern Orthodox in particular get accused of idolatry because we prostrate ourselves before, and kiss, icons, but this is not worship, but rather veneration, the difference being that worship requires sacrifice. Furthermore, when we kiss an icon, all icons either contain a depiction of Christ our True God, the incarnate Logos, or a Gospel Book (Evangelion) - a book containing the four Gospels, essentially the Bible, the written Word, which is a verbal icon of Christ, and that is what we kiss.

We are worshipping Christ by venerating images of those who put on Christ through baptism or martyrdom or through devotion to him, before and after His incarnation (thus we venerate but do not worship the prophets of the ancient Hebrew religion such as St. Elijah, St. Isaiah, St. Daniel, St. Moses, St. Abraham and St. Solomon, among others). St. Elijah and St. Isaiah are particularly venerated within Holy Orthodoxy, both Eastern and Oriental.

The rationale for the veneration of icons can be found in the Ark, which featured sculpted depictions of winged cherubim, and other related religious objects which depicted various things, and in the person of Christ himself, who is the image of the Father, so that anyone who sees Him sees the Father - thus specifically in the Incarnation, the prohibition against attempting to depict the Invisible God ceased because God became visible, and it is proper to depict Him in His incarnation - and also visual manifestations of the Holy Spirit. However we Orthodox are divided on the issue as to whether or not depicting the Father is permitted since we are not sure that anyone has ever seen the Father - the prevailing explanation for the Ancient of Days seen by St. Isaiah is that this was Christ and not the Father, to reconcile it with the statement of St. John that no one has seen God at any time.

The basis for iconography and its legitimacy can be found in the doctrinal explanations of the Second Council of Nicaea, the Seventh Ecumenical Synod, held in 787 AD at a time when Iconoclasts were in control of the Byzantine Empire and were actively destroying icons and persecuting iconodules (which is why so few icons from before that period survive, but thanks to those which did, for example in the house church and nearby synagogue destroyed by ISIS in Dura Europos, Syria, and other things, such as various ancient icons found in catacombs and the icon of Christ Pantocrator and of the Ladder of Divine Ascent at St. Catharine’s Monastery in Sinai, we have proof they existed, and we can assert with confidence that the view of a total prohibition on imagery, which Ellen G. White does not appear to have subscribed to, was unknown prior to the 7th century - it appears to have arrived with Islam, and it was definitely the conviction of Byzantine generals that the Muslims must be winning because of their iconoclasm, which led to Byzantine iconoclasm (it is also a troubling fact that the generals attributed their defeat to divine disfavor rather than to their own incompetence and/or the Empire’s alienation of the Oriental Orthodox Christians through an absurd and unwarranted violent persecution that started in the latter stages of the reign of Justinian, although given that his wife St. Theodora assisted the Syriac Orthodox bishop St. Jacob bar Addai escape this persecution I’m not entirely convinced that the persecution was Justinians idea - palace coups and intrigues were a thing in the Empire).

In the event iconoclasm did not give the Byzantine military what it sought - rather, it recovered militarily for a time after the end of iconoclasm mainly thanks to the medieval superweapon that was Greek Fire, a pyrophoric chemical that could be sprayed onto enemy ships in battle catching them on fire, which was difficult to extinguish - this gave the Byzantines a huge advantage in naval engagements and the formula was a secret known only to the Emperor regarded as a gift from God - Greek fire also was useful as an infantry weapon. Additionally the Empire was able to prolong itself through an alliance with the Armenians, ending the pointless feud with fellow Orthodox Christians whose disagreement only extended to the specific wording used to describe in what way Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man without change, confusion, separation or division (the OO were uncomfortable with the Tome of Leo and preferred the exact words of St. Cyril, “from two natures” as opposed to “in two natures” while agreeing with everything else including hypostatic union and, with the exception of a brief period in the Armenian church, the OOs championed Theopaschitism and Communicatio Idiomatum which came to be the dominant view across all the traditional churches in time, especially the Eastern Orthodox and confessional Lutherans (to the extent that like the Oriental Orthodox, the confessional Lutherans were falsely accused of Monophysitism).

The actual monophysites degenerated into tritheism (which is what happens when one commingles the humanity and deity of Christ - he becomes sufficiently unlike the Father and the Holy Spirit, since if he has a compounded nature he cannot be of one essence with the Father, thus the Nicene proposition of One God, the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, who are of same essence (homoousios) collapses and one either is forced into Arianism or Tritheism, which is what happened with the original Monophysites - the Tritheists being led by John Philoponus in the sixth century in Egypt, after which the sect disappears from view. The Mormons therefore are the modern day heirs to Monophysitism, not the Oriental Orthodox.

Also I would add as proof of OO Orthodoxy the OOs never had a church taken over by iconoclasts - there was an outbreak in Eastern Armenia which the bishops were able to quickly defeat through expeditious preaching.

tall73 said:

It won't stop. The vocal minority are the ones actually following Adventist doctrine.

Ellen White in Great Controversy says:

The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White. Chapter 21: A Warning Rejected​

​

Babylon is said to be "the mother of harlots." By her daughters must be symbolized churches that cling to her doctrines and traditions, and follow her example of sacrificing the truth and the approval of God, in order to form an unlawful alliance with the world. 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. Furthermore, in the eighteenth chapter of the Revelation the people of God are called upon to come out of Babylon. According to this scripture, many of God's people must still be in Babylon. And in what religious bodies are the greater part of the followers of Christ now to be found? Without doubt, in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.​

As you can see, Rome is the harlot, and protestant churches her daughters.

Eastern Orthodox, of course, since you were with Rome for a 1000 years are lumped in with them, from their perspective.

So there could be people of God in those churches. But if one of them hears the last day message of warning, they must come out of Babylon, join the remnant, or they will be opposed to God. There will be no quarter. They will continue criticizing.


Ellen White is part of Adventist doctrine. But she is also indispensable to their remnant status:

From the Fundamental Belief:

The Gift of Prophecy 18​

The Scriptures testify that one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and we believe it was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. Her writings speak with prophetic authority and provide comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction to the church. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Num. 12:6; 2 Chron. 20:20; Amos 3:7; Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10; 22:8, 9.)​

​

Note the texts listed:

Revelation 12:17​

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. (KJV)​

Revelation 19:10​

10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. (KJV)​

​

That is why for some Adventists, finding that Ellen White contradicts Scripture, or does not meet the tests of a prophet, is the beginning of leaving the remnant concept, and criticism of other churches, and sometimes the SDA church completely.

Of course, some don't leave, but just decide that they can pick and choose from what she says, even though she counseled against that. Or some drop Ellen White all together, but still support the general biblical framework, minus Ellen White. But without Ellen White, you undercut the remnant.

The truth is, it is those who need to defend this remnant concept who are stuck in these threads. They are stuck defending it because to do otherwise is to concede the remnant theology.

And that is why they tend to show up in every one of them, claim they don't like these threads, but always keep coming back.

And of course, I am speaking only of the Adventist concept of the remnant, with Ellen White, etc.. Scripture still speaks of the remnant.

Click to expand...

And their persistent, spam-like posting habits will soon have CF converted into the SDA forum. It is accelerating, and I am sure that those whom are doing this are wearing it like a badge of honor, and a source of works righteous merits to lay at the feet of Ellen White.

It is exhausting.

The Liturgist said:

As a member of a traditional church, I have to say I wouldn’t be commenting at all on the SDA were it not for the continual and relentless criticism of my denomination

Click to expand...

Ok I am curious. Which Orthodox denomination is yours?

The Liturgist said:

I don’t see why you can’t simply stop criticizing our churches.

Click to expand...

I am not the author of this thread, but as far as I can tell , the thread never mentions any of the Orthodox groups

BobRyan said:

Ok I am curious. Which Orthodox denomination is yours?

Click to expand...

Why do you ask?

To be clear, I was using the term denomination to refer to the Orthodox externally in relationship to the other traditional denominations such as the Lutherans, Assyrians, Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Congregationalists (I have worked as a liturgical Congregationalist minister) and so on, with which we have warm relations, and other denominations such as the Baptists, Reformed and Restorationist that are less liturgical and more removed from our experience, with some exceptions, such as the Real Presence baptists like that of my friend @tall73 whose views are remarkably close to Orthodoxy (I did not expect to find a Baptist who held such a view).

Internally, within Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy, our understanding is the Church can’t be divided in terms of denominations, the EO communion and OO communion are unified communions we have canonical jurisdictions established by the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople and later jurisdictions which were added as more people were converted to Christianity in the East, since rather than grouping them together under one pope as in the west, we created different autocephalous (ecclesiastically independent) jurisidictions for each one. These jurisdictions are not equivalent to denominations, rather they’re like Anglican provinces - part of the same denomination, but different geographical location.

In so far as ecumenical reconciliation between the EO and OO is in progress, I also reject a denominational distinction between them (and for different reasons those who oppose immediate reunion (although some do desire it eventually) would likely also not use the term ‘denomination’ to refer to the other party but for different reasons.

If you would like to know which jurisdiction I’m under at the moment and what jurisdictions I have been under since joining the Orthodox church I can tell you that, but its a different question and it must be understood a jurisdiction is not a denomination - rather I am using the word denomination in an external ecumenical way to refer to the EO and the OO jointly (although they are not entirely united, but not entirely disunited, but rather in the process of reunification) in contrast to other

Admittedly not as frustrating as having people deny the historical existence of the Orthodox as independent and separate and not under the control of the Roman Catholic Church (most Catholics don’t even make that claim, the only groups I’ve ever seen make that allegation are Restorationists and fundamentalist Calvinists and some ultra hardline Catholics, although interestingly the latter group does not necessarily consist of those who favor the Traditional Latin Mass, indeed of those who have expressed such a view on CF.com i don’t think any favored the TLM).

MarkRohfrietsch said:

those whom are doing this are wearing it like a badge of honor, and a source of works righteous merits to lay at the feet of Ellen White.

It is exhausting.

Click to expand...

admittedly these "all Ellen White all the time " threads are a bit tedious. But typically it is not Adventists that come out to the general forum areas and do that sort of thing

tall73 said:

It won't stop. The vocal minority are the ones actually following Adventist doctrine.

Click to expand...

vocal minority of 'What".

The minority of the 24 million Adventists?

tall73 said:

Ellen White in Great Controversy says:

The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White. Chapter 21: A Warning Rejected​

Click to expand...

OK the "Ellen White quote game" you keep trying to insert..

Here is a snap shot of GC text from your same volume above

The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White.

"The Waldenses longed to break to these starving souls the bread of life, to open to them the messages of peace in the promises of God, and to point them to Christ as their only hope of salvation. The doctrine that good works can atone for the transgression of God’s law they held to be based upon falsehood. Reliance upon human merit intercepts the view of Christ’s infinite love. Jesus died as a sacrifice for man because the fallen race can do nothing to recommend themselves to God. The merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are the foundation of the Christian’s faith. The dependence of the soul upon Christ is as real, and its connection with Him must be as close, as that of a limb to the body, or of a branch to the vine. GC 73.1

"The teachings of popes and priests had led men to look upon the character of God, and even of Christ, as stern, gloomy, and forbidding. The Saviour was represented as so far devoid of sympathy with man in his fallen state that the mediation of priests and saints must be invoked. Those whose minds had been enlightened by the word of God longed to point these souls to Jesus as their compassionate, loving Saviour, standing with outstretched arms, inviting all to come to Him with their burden of sin, their care and weariness. They longed to clear away the obstructions which Satan had piled up that men might not see the promises, and come directly to God, confessing their sins, and obtaining pardon and peace.
GC 73.2

"Eagerly did the Vaudois missionary unfold to the inquiring mind the precious truths of the gospel. Cautiously he produced the carefully written portions of the Holy Scriptures. It was his greatest joy to give hope to the conscientious, sin-stricken soul, who could see only a God of vengeance, waiting to execute justice. With quivering lip and tearful eye did he, often on bended knees, open to his brethren the precious promises that reveal the sinner’s only hope. Thus the light of truth penetrated many a darkened mind, rolling back the cloud of gloom, until the Sun of Righteousness shone into the heart with healing in His beams. It was often the case that some portion of Scripture was read again and again, the hearer desiring it to be repeated, as if he would assure himself that he had heard aright. Especially was the repetition of these words eagerly desired: “The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.” 1 John 1:7. “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.” John 3:14, 15. GC 73.3

BobRyan said:

vocal minority of 'What".

The minority of the 24 million Adventists?

Click to expand...

Vocal minority of members on Christian forums. I thought it was obvious

BobRyan said:

OK the "Ellen White quote game" you keep trying to insert..

Here is a snap shot of GC text from your same volume above

The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White.

"The Waldenses longed to break to these starving souls the bread of life, to open to them the messages of peace in the promises of God, and to point them to Christ as their only hope of salvation. The doctrine that good works can atone for the transgression of God’s law they held to be based upon falsehood. Reliance upon human merit intercepts the view of Christ’s infinite love. Jesus died as a sacrifice for man because the fallen race can do nothing to recommend themselves to God. The merits of a crucified and risen Saviour are the foundation of the Christian’s faith. The dependence of the soul upon Christ is as real, and its connection with Him must be as close, as that of a limb to the body, or of a branch to the vine. GC 73.1

"The teachings of popes and priests had led men to look upon the character of God, and even of Christ, as stern, gloomy, and forbidding. The Saviour was represented as so far devoid of sympathy with man in his fallen state that the mediation of priests and saints must be invoked. Those whose minds had been enlightened by the word of God longed to point these souls to Jesus as their compassionate, loving Saviour, standing with outstretched arms, inviting all to come to Him with their burden of sin, their care and weariness. They longed to clear away the obstructions which Satan had piled up that men might not see the promises, and come directly to God, confessing their sins, and obtaining pardon and peace.
GC 73.2

"Eagerly did the Vaudois missionary unfold to the inquiring mind the precious truths of the gospel. Cautiously he produced the carefully written portions of the Holy Scriptures. It was his greatest joy to give hope to the conscientious, sin-stricken soul, who could see only a God of vengeance, waiting to execute justice. With quivering lip and tearful eye did he, often on bended knees, open to his brethren the precious promises that reveal the sinner’s only hope. Thus the light of truth penetrated many a darkened mind, rolling back the cloud of gloom, until the Sun of Righteousness shone into the heart with healing in His beams. It was often the case that some portion of Scripture was read again and again, the hearer desiring it to be repeated, as if he would assure himself that he had heard aright. Especially was the repetition of these words eagerly desired: “The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us from all sin.” 1 John 1:7. “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.” John 3:14, 15. GC 73.3

Click to expand...

So in your opinion is Ellen White being contradictory?