controversey with the great controversy

[Jon0388g]

[=Jon0388g;32620549] 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?

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

Jon[/quote] if you read the first post the link is right in there.[/quote]

Did I come across in my post as uneasy? Furthermore, did you answer my question? Why did you not just post a link to the site? It's not as if your copy and pasting is focussing on one topic.

In a word, no, I am not able to answer. You know why? I haven't got the time to sit and wade through the vast volumes of text you have just dumped at the screen. It does not come across as someone who is genuinely concerned about a specific issue he has come across. Rather, someone who has a biased agenda.

The blatant absence of any evidence from the other side of the coin makes it clear what your purposes are. There are always two sides to the story.

Jon

 

[djconklin]

There are always two sides to the story.

Hmmm, yes and no.

 

[BonnieBee]

That website says a lot of scetchy things about E.G.White...

 

[Adventist Heretic]

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.

conklin, you are comming at this from the wrong angle, You have have never established you credintials. I dis not assume anything about you. Just exactly are you credientials? you finde any thing and every thing to avoid discussing the issues. I have not attacked you ever. please point out any attack. I personally think you don't want to discuss, if you did you would. you keep making this about me and you. You are going to have t realize that Not all Adventist Agree that EGW is a prophet, It is not my burden to prove she is. I have posted why I think there is a problem whit the GC and I have yet to here a response that is more then 3rd grade fighting. Given the this evidence, why should I belive she is a divinely inspired prophet. Saying she is a prophet does not make her a prophet.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Jon

if you read the first post the link is right in there.[/quote]

Did I come across in my post as uneasy? Furthermore, did you answer my question?

Why did you not just post a link to the site? It's not as if your copy and pasting is focussing on one topic.

I already answered this question. In Post #1 www.ellenwhite.org is posted at the top of the post line 2, or 3

In a word, no, I am not able to answer. You know why? I haven't got the time to sit and wade through the vast volumes of text you have just dumped at the screen.

I did not dump anything I posted in a manner as to show evidence as to a problem. people on this site like to thing that every critic is just crazy or evil or ill willed, but there are real concerns and when people bring them they are ove looked and dismissed, my posting is so that people have to read the information. I am sorry this is not to your liking.

It does not come across as someone who is genuinely concerned about a specific issue he has come across. Rather, someone who has a biased agenda.

I thin you need to take your won advice. you respond with out reading ant that by your own admission. any thing that any one says about this issue will to you seem biased, so it is a moot point, you seem biased to me. I am not required to post in favor of EGW if I am trying to discuss the issues and the claims made on the critics side. just exactly how does posting direct quotes from a critics website, show I have an adjenda? I have questions, I want to discuss, I want to know what evidence contradicts the critics site. If you haven't the time to look at the evidence then you should not be responding. You also need to learn to not take it personally, this is not a personal attack. I do not hate you or wish you ill will, but I have questions and I want to talk about them, this is the place to tak about them. there are people on this site that claim to be able to answer all these questions, but when asked refuse to give a reaonable answer.

The blatant absence of any evidence from the other side of the coin makes it clear what your purposes are. There are always two sides to the story.

no that is not clear,if you can't handle it, then leave. you don't have to answer. no one is forcing you to read the information you do have a choice
I am critic, I am criticizing. that is what critics do. i am wanting to know why Should I or anyone believe given this info. if you a are supporter then you should be able to defend your postion. If you can not support your postion then you need to ask yourself why are supporting EGW in the first place? If you can defend EGW then why aren't you?

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Some question for EGW supporters"

1. In light of the Errors in the Great controversey, exactly how was it inspired?
2. In light of the errors ,How are we to take it as a spiritual authority?
3. do I quote the inaccurate parts as authoritiave and binding?
4. How exactly am I suppost to answer non believers questions about EGW's claim to inspration.
5. If a vision is inaccurate historically then was it God who messed up in showing or EGW in writing it down?
6. If it is EGW then how are we to gaguge her other writings? what standard are we to use to determine her truthfulness and trust worthiness?

 

[Adventist Heretic]

That website says a lot of scetchy things about E.G.White...

like what?

 

[BonnieBee]

They don't have very good bible-based answers to some of E.G.White's apparent 'errors', and they don't provide references to the information they have (such as the fact that certain people were not eyewitnesses etc).

Would God say He'd send out a prophet into the world, and then go back on His word? Certainly not!

What other prophets are around now (or have been around and have influenced a denomination), that are (or have) fullfilling (fulfilled) bible prophecy, and time prophecies? Any?!

 

[djconklin]

That website says a lot of scetchy things about E.G.White...

And most are wrong--at least, the one's I've been able to check on. Lots of hearsay is past along as if it was a fact.

 

[djconklin]

1. In light of the Errors in the Great controversey, exactly how was it inspired?

That assumes facts that aren't in evidence.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

They don't have very good bible-based answers to some of E.G.White's apparent 'errors', and they don't provide references to the information they have (such as the fact that certain people were not eyewitnesses etc).

I don't undersstand this question. could you revise it.

Would God say He'd send out a prophet into the world, and then go back on His word? Certainly not!

the problem is you assume EGW is a prophet. I do not. I am coming from the stand point of some one who unquestionly accepted her writings and now I have questions. I am not trying to prove or disprove what she has to say I would perfer to believe

What other prophets are around now (or have been around and have influenced a denomination), that are (or have) fullfilling (fulfilled) bible prophecy, and time prophecies? Any?![/quote] well the mormon claim joseph, the shakers calim Anna lee, church of christ scientist claim Mary baker Eddy, Sweedenborgisim have Emanuel Sweeden borg, then there is this guy in south america that is claiming to be a prophet. so each and everyone of them have been tested and have failed, but there supporters will tell you no it not true. you've got it wrong. it's you who is wrong not us. The same applies with EGW.
you. there suporters will tell you you've got it wrong. you are bad how dare you question the prophet. but none of them will give you a strigt answer. See Djconkilins post or examples. W.W. prescott recommeded over 100 changes to the Great controversey., but when aksed to explain these errors and how we are to understand inspiration the supporters won't even answer. DjConklin "claims" to have studied and reviewed this information and is familure with the arguments, well then he sould be able to answer the question, but does he.....NO. he play games and says my facts are wrong, instead of producing evidence to show where where the information is wrong. He apeals to himself and says I've studied it.... trust me...wink,wink, nod nod. when you are expected to believe without sound reason. That is called being brain washed.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

dj konklin
here is a change to show that you have studied prescotts work . Aurther L White, admitted that there were errors, see post16-24 which you have not quoted. what is your response to the above quote.

 

[djconklin]

I have read all of Prescott's work (its in my files right now). As I remarked with tall73 on some points I agreed with Prescott vs. the White Estate and on others I felt he was pushing too far on too little support.

I do not "quote" people who are not experts in the field. Nor, do I make appeals to authority such as you did with Arthur White.

BTW, post #23 is a continuation of Prescott's suggestions. Post #24 is ab't Crisler's expressions (btw, "top of document" is an html link and has nothing to do with the actual text). Post #25 is a letter from White to Prescott (not in the document prepared by White) "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." Who's books do you think he is referring to? Post #26 is also not by White, nor is it in White's document ab't Prescott. BTW, you misspelled Pfandl's name. We now know that this remark: "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" is completely false and yet you repeated it, why? Posts #27-8 (and #29) also have no relevance to the Prescott document and yet you included them.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Djconklin, you have not responded to what I have posted about prescott or white or any of the criticism. show me what is wrong with the post's by aurther L white? what is wrong with the critics statments about chapter 7 of the Great controversy. they made charges that EGW was historically inaccrate about Luther's motives, i just happen have a copy of the GC here so i looked it up, sure enough what they said checked out, she was wrong and that is a major sceen in his life. why should i beleve EGW is a prophet when her visions don't even match with the known facts?

 

[Adventist Heretic]

I have read all of Prescott's work (its in my files right now). As I remarked with tall73 on some points I agreed with Prescott vs. the White Estate and on others I felt he was pushing too far on too little support.

I do not "quote" people

. that is true or facts

"

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" is completely false and yet you repeated it, why? Posts #27-8 (and #29) also have no relevance to the Prescott document and yet you included them.

prove they are false? you appeal to your self again without any soruce materal

 

[Adventist Heretic]

hey don't try to claim tall73 on this issue. He and his wife are someone of my best friends and the reason why I am here. As far as your previous conversation with Tall73. it does not apply . you are talking to me not him. I am not going to respond to you any more.

 

[djconklin]

I merely noted that tall73 and I have already discussed it. I didn't make any "claim" on him. If you are unwilling, or unable to read what we had to say on the subject that is your problem, not mine.

 

[christian73]

This thread is now reopen. I would just like to make a reminder to please be considerate of one another when posting. We know members will disagree with one another, but staff does ask that members respect each other.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

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.

.

I was not refereing to to your prior work. i was refereing to what I had posted.

 

[Jimlarmore]

Given the this evidence, why should I belive she is a divinely inspired prophet. Saying she is a prophet does not make her a prophet.

I've seen the same thing done to scriptures by many critics, especially on www. iidb.org. The problem with them is they don't discrimenate between apocraphal writings and the canonized scripture. But even laying that aside you can find many critics who nit pick the actual Bible to pieces in so many areas that it makes you sick to read it. What you have done reminds me so much of that very acitivity. The recommended areas of concern in the 100 recommendations given were like that. Clearly, Nit picking. Given the exhaustive treatise for what you expect then I would say inspired writings are a farse and don't exist at all.

God Bless
Jim Larmore