Adding to the Word?

mva1985 said:

Well, my conversation at the time was with RC and he has not answered the question. I don't consider it answered by him. Fine if someone else wants to share their opinion.

I tire of this whole "popery" thing. Find me a trad that buys into that.

Again, the phrase "I was shown" was used by EGW to refer to times that she had been shown things by God.

Click to expand...

Avonia said:

Come on! Do you really think it's in his best interest to openly entertain all the issues discussed here, all at once? Each of us must go through our own learning process. Pushing too much is counter productive. We all have our comfort zone outside of which we panic. There are many circles where everyone on this forum would pull in and defend.

Click to expand...

NightEternal said:

Well, it looks like the Trads are contentedly pacifying themselves with the soother of thier alternate, spin-doctored explanation of the 'amalgamation' statement.

http://christianforums.com/t6617742-the-amalgamation-statement.html

They don't have a clue that even some SDA ministers know very well what she meant by it.

Anything to keep the 'infallible prophetess' dream alive I guess.

Click to expand...

honorthesabbath said:

Also--about 10 yrs ago--I was a a church members home for our regular Friday evening bible studies, when this topic came up. All that read her statement came to the same conclusion--she was NOT referring to man procreating WITH animals; but as this article states.

Click to expand...

RC_NewProtestants said:

Well if he would accept that he did actually receive an answer rather than claiming he did not receive an answer it would be easier to allow him time to digest material at his own speed. Is it in his interest to entertain all the issues in this thread? Yes it is rather like learning on your algebra test that you don't know enough to pass the final test. There is reality in the world and those who don't acknowledge the reality don't add much to society.

Of course in this case I don't like someone who lives in a fantasy world telling me in effect that I am lying to him when I say I answered his question. So I admit this is a little more personal.

Click to expand...

First, it is more than just opinion that EGW did not receive the same gift of prophecy as the authors of both Testaments. Period.

Click to expand...

Secondly, the popery thing will always enter into it when individuals like you hold those quotes up that state that any who reject the Testimones of EGW are "not right"! That is popery, plain and simple.

Click to expand...

Thirdly, I did not deny that White was shown things from Yah, as were other individuals like Spurgeon, but her fidelity to that inspiration was below perfection, as was Spurgeon’s.

Click to expand...

Finally, and most significant, the institution of the SDA's is riding the two-horned beast by incorporation as seeking its aid to enforce its trademark name. Consequently, I see nothing in the contemporary institution that would warrant continued fellowship; it has left the foundation and become like so many other denominations, the Sabbath issue notwithstanding.

Michael

Click to expand...

NightEternal said:

Just as an FYI-I did not post the Mormon connection links as irrefutable fact. If I that was my intention, I would have said as much in my post.

Rather, I posted them as a springboard for discussion, asking if anyone had heard about the Smith/White connection. I WAS ASKING A QUESTION because I have no definitive answers on the matter. It's the first time I was made aware of the matter.

So, the point of the links was to have reference sources to analyze and discuss, not as material that I am contending is absolute truth, which I was obviously (should have been obvious anyhow) not.

Read it for yourself and you decide.

Click to expand...

NightEternal said:

Wow, did I call that one or what?

Might as well forget it RC. They will deny your evidence and cling to the sinking ship right until it hits the bottom of the ocean.

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41839348&postcount=129

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41839935&postcount=8

DEE-NY-ALL!!

Click to expand...

NightEternal said:

Face it MVA. She meant man and beast. It is common knowledge amongst informed SDA's and has been for the last 50 years. It was the understanding of the 1800's to explain why certain races looked different than European whites.

But you and Honor are welcome to keep sailing down Denial River. I'm just trying to save you guys some embarassment when you actually try to pass off that silly 'scientific cross-breeding' explanation to those in the church who know better.

That explanation was recently concocted as a last ditch, desperate attempt on the part of the apologists to save face on yet another one of her outrageous claims. You guys swallowed it hook line and sinker. Uriah Smith knew exactly what she was talking about and neither Ellen or James corrected him. Indeed, they heartily endorsed it and backed his claims.

Don't say you have not been duly warned by both Free and myself:

How could 'human to human' relationships be considered 'base crimes'?

How could sexual relations between married human beings be considered 'base crimes'?

How could 'beast to beast' relationships be considered 'base crimes'?

EGW used the 'base crime' phrase in only one other instance, and it was to describe Potiphar's wife's advances on Joseph.

How could 'beast to beast' relationships 'deface the image of God'?

Why did Uriah Smith, in an attempt to defend EGW's statements, say that her amalgamation statements referred to "such cases as the wild Bushmen of Africa, some tribes of the Hottentots, and perhaps the Digger Indians of our own country"?

If this is NOT what EGW meant, then where did she make the correction? Instead the Whites promoted Smith's publication at campmeetings!!!

Sometimes the desire to be right blinds one from the truth!

In Christ alone...

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=41811035&postcount=91

While I do take some pleasure in manking Honor look ignorant, I do not necessarily desire that for you.

Click to expand...

mva1985 said:

Regardless of what is written about me here, and whether you believe it or not I do check out things that are written here.

For example, Night quoted some website that put forward the idea that even EGW wrote that the tower of Babel was built before the flood. So I go and check it out and of course it is not true. I did not take the time to respond someone else did.

So for those of you here that think I am afraid to think for myself or come to my own conclusions - well you are just plain wrong. You continue to say that I am just spouting the traditional viewpoints. Well, for the most part I believe in the traditional viewpoints.

I am what I like to call a "double-checker." It irritates some people, but I have no problem when it comes to double checking facts and figures or doctrine for that matter.

Click to expand...

OBJECTION 40. - BABEL BEFORE THE FLOOD.
URS VISIONS THE VISIONS: OBJECTIONS ANSWERED page 0105 paragraph 1 A point occurs on p. 301 of Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, concerning which several good brethren have written, not as the objector, to find fault and pick flaws, but for information. The language is concerning the system of sacrificial offerings which was established with Adam after the fall, and reads as follows: "This system was corrupted before the flood by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel." An unfortunate typographical error which has crept in here, makes the language place the building of the tower of Babel before the flood. After the word "flood," a comma and the word "and," have been left out. It should read thus: "This system was corrupted before the flood, and by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God, and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel [after the flood, of course, understood]. It is a statement simply, that both before and after the flood, the system of sacrifices was corrupted by mankind.

Click to expand...

{3SG 301.3} The Lord first established the system of sacrificial offerings with Adam after his fall, which he taught to his descendants. This system was corrupted before the flood by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God, and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel. They sacrificed to gods of their own [making] instead of the God of Heaven.

http://egwdatabase.whiteestate.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates$fn=default.htm$vid=default

Click to expand...