Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If the Bible is "the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested," why did the pioneers need her writings to confirm what they had already gleaned from the Bible? Wouldn't that make her writings the standard for testing truth, rather than the Scriptures? If she had disagreed with the results of their Bible studies, whom would they have believed--her or the Bible?
Are you saying that Ellen White over ruled what is in the Scriptures?
If she did that and taught others to place her teaching above the Bible then she is the founder of a false cult.
I'm still waiting on some one to tell me were in the Bible this investagative judgment is clearly taught in the Bible. I mean I want book, chapter and verses.
Are you saying that Ellen White over ruled what is in the Scriptures?
If she did that and taught others to place her teaching above the Bible then she is the founder of a false cult.
I'm still waiting on some one to tell me were in the Bible this investagative judgment is clearly taught in the Bible. I mean I want book, chapter and verses.
Well since she never did that I guess we're safe. She even stated that if men paid attention to the word of God the way they ought to, they wouldn't need her writtings.Are you saying that Ellen White over ruled what is in the Scriptures?
If she did that and taught others to place her teaching above the Bible then she is the founder of a false cult.
I'm still waiting on some one to tell me were in the Bible this investagative judgment is clearly taught in the Bible. I mean I want book, chapter and verses.
No, had she given testimonies contrary to the plain biblical doctrines, they would have rejected her testimony.
This was in the mid 1800s. Imagine a group of grown men, a young 17 year old girl with no education, why would they accept her just because she said so???
There were others who claimed to have visions also. Why did they reject them and accept her?
If the Bible is "the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested," why did the pioneers need her writings to confirm what they had already gleaned from the Bible? Wouldn't that make her writings the standard for testing truth, rather than the Scriptures? If she had disagreed with the results of their Bible studies, whom would they have believed--her or the Bible?
Books such as Cliffs notes and "X" for dummies; do they replace the text books created for particular subjects, or do they make it easier to understand the material?
Do they confirm that what those books say is true?
Answer my question first then I'll answer yours. It's only fair.
Well since she never did that I guess we're safe. She even stated that if men paid attention to the word of God the way they ought to, they wouldn't need her writtings.
But they needed her to confirm their beliefs even after the extensive Bible study that the founders of Adventism had engaged in? That's what doesn't make sense to me. Why, since they were paying attention to the Bible, did they still need her?
WHat kills me is that people don't have a problem taking advice and explanations on scripture from their pastor, or friend, or spouse, or whoever. But somehow, God using Sr White is a strange thing?
There was much confusion during her time, and God used her to straighten some thing out. It's that simple.
Does anyone know if there exists in either Ellen White's prophetic utterances or SDA publications...
...A teaching which affirms that "an investigative judgment" was applied to Christ.
...Therefore the SDA I.J. is one of those; 'If it's good for the Goose it's good for the Gander" things?
Seems a good question. Since the SDAs believe Jesus could have failed it would be prudent to investigate whether He actually did or not. One sinful thought and it is all over right? How do we prove such a thing without an investigation?
You have an outstanding talent to mix things up, I will give you that!
But let me try explain the obvious to you.
Taking advice is one things, explanations are allright, you know why? Because they are not binding. EGW on the other hand claims something more than mere advice, she is something like the pope for catholics... with millions following her so called advice, I guess you are critical about the pope, arent you? why cant we be critical about egw? Do you believe her writings are infallible? I guess you do...
Not mixing anything up.
Someone claiming to be God on earth versus someone who claims to have a message from God are two different things in my book. Ellen's teachings hurt because they call out those selfish aspects of our life that we don't want to let go. It's really that simple. It's sad that people clamor after her as if her writings are the final word, I'll give you that. But that's not what I do. I understand everything Ellen taught, in light of the scripture, not vice-versa. Perhaps that's why I don't get all bothered when there's something she said that I may not totally get. So long as I'm following what God said do, then I'm in good shape.
So yeah, there's no mixup here.
Let'slets take a deeper look into that assumption
Depending on the issue, you may be right, but you'd be surprised at how often one reasons to not listen to someone's council because they just don't want to, thus selfishness.If your friend advises you to do or not to do a certain thing, and you dont comply will you ever think its because of selfishness? probably not because you friend, spouse, or even pastor is just a human being and his counsel is a human counsel which you can of course take into account but not necessarily need to follow... you might even get different kinds of counsel, your friend may tell you something different than your spouse or your pastor, you might choose which counsel to follow or disregard them completely, you might even take elements from each counsel, add something from you and create a new counsel based on all that different counsels. we are quite flexible here, common sense and reasong are allowed...
Hopefully you see the mistake in your reasoning here....
the pope might of course claim to be God on earth, but that can be easily explained away, wasnt Moses God on earth for Aaron (hopefully I am not mixing things up here, didnt have time to look it up, maybe he was God to Pharao, but he was God (in a sense, I guess that is), so his being God was something connected to authoriy, and I think the pope presents the highest authority for catholics on earth...
This is incorrect. Again, I've already stated that I agree that there is an issue with people elevating her writings too high. The final word is scripture.so do the writings of egw...
You'd be surprised.Selfishness, thats exactly what it is...
Faulty logic. God tells us that our bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost. He never gave us the right to self mutilate our bodies in an act of penance. The only thing "broken" God wants from us, is our heart, with a contrite spirit.You know catholic priests used to beat themselves up if they had sinned, I would say that was quite a harsh treatment of the body, which most of us will agree wasnt necessary, but still it was quite harsh, one that didnt want to undergo such treatment could as well be call selfish because he loved his body more than...
anyway
selfishness is quite a tough accusation and part of the religious manipulation behind egw and her claim to be authoritative...
a few examples, yep the favorite ones again...
EGW - no more meat
I will be selfish if I still eat meat because I care more for my animal passions than for my spiritual growth even though the bible itself doesnt condemn the eating of meat and even present an opposing view on it...
If you wantEGW - no wine
I think nuff has been said here, so lets overlook this one
EGW - no jewellery
Ok, this is a delicate topic, probably with no right and wrong here, fact is that she herself wore some jewellery....
the bible doesnt necessarily condemn wearing jewellery...
How much is too much? Temperance was her teaching on this. How one person understands this ought to be within the confines of what the bible says.EGW - sexual intercourse, not too much
is it selfish now if I have sex more than once a week?
Again, her teachings were about health. Some foods simply aren't good for us, and while I don't believe you're going to hell if you like pizza and cereal, I do believe that one should consider what they're putting into their bodies.EGW - no more cheese butter and many other things
Is it selfish if I dont wanna follow that?
It's the principle that needs to be understood. I played games growing up. I've also seen people get hurt while playing games, and I don't mean by accident. I mean, full fledged fights breaking out. Why? The spirit manifested while playing some games isn't always of God. I remember a "friend" of mine starting a fight with me because I beat him at Chess. Seriously, I'm talking, fighting stance, round-house kick, fight.EGW - no more games, not even chess or checkers
Is it selfish if I allow my children to play games in the kindergarden?
What am I gonna tell them if they wanna play football with their friends or at school? dont participate otherwise your selfishness will take over?
Perhaps what differentiates me from others is that I don't read her words and look at them the way others do. I factor in lifestyle for her time. I factor in cultural norms for her time. I take the principle of what she was teaching and apply it to my life now.EGW has presented many views that directly influence our lifestyle, if this is mere counsel than its up to us to decide, if she is a geniune messenger of the Lord than these rules are binding no matter how absurd they may sound. You cannot compare these to advices from your pastor, spouse or friend, they claim to be something more, besides as your rightly asserted, if you dont follow these 'counsels' than it is your selfishness that opposed those well meant counsels turned commands...
....ehhhhh...not so muchI guess the pope isnt much different here and if we just take into account the binding authority behind it, we can overlook his claim to be God on earth, and make a fair comparison betwenn him and egw...
Interestingly enough, whenever I talk to someone about spiritual matters, I find myself saying "The bible says..." as opposed to saying "EGW says..." Now can I explain what I believe in regards to her writings? I can. But she's not my first line of defense. She's not my go to person. The scripture is.Personally I see it this way, people tend to be called fools if they say nowadays that they believe in God, I think it has always been this way and will be so until the end, I dont have a problem with that. If somebody asked me to steal something with him I would tell me him I dont do that and if he asked why then I would tell him because the Lord doesnt want me to or something like that. In this regard I can easily open up the bible and show it to him if he is in disbelief. I cannot do this with egws so called counsel.
egw claims to be an authority, so it is more than counsel, and if somebody makes such a bold claim than it is only natural that we take a closer look at her so called counsel and check it with the bible in our hands, and if there is a discrepancy than we have to choose which way to go, but I see you have made your choice already...
Let's
Depending on the issue, you may be right, but you'd be surprised at how often one reasons to not listen to someone's council because they just don't want to, thus selfishness.
circumstancial
Are you comparing Moses to the Pope? Yes, God told Moses He would make him god to Pharaoh, and it was about authority. The words of Moses, however, came straight from the mouth of God to His ear. That's where the difference between him, and the pope comes in. The Pope's authority is self proclaimed.
assumption
This is incorrect. Again, I've already stated that I agree that there is an issue with people elevating her writings too high. The final word is scripture.
now where does that come from?
You'd be surprised.
Faulty logic. God tells us that our bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost. He never gave us the right to self mutilate our bodies in an act of penance. The only thing "broken" God wants from us, is our heart, with a contrite spirit.
it was just an example
Again, you'd be surprised.
God didn't create His animals to be food for us. Genesis tells us what God says was to be our food. Many a health issue is resolved by the removal of meat from the diet. People eat meat because they want to, not because they have to. It's cheaper, more convenient, and tasty. And fact is, most of us who eat meat, aren't even eating the right type of meat. We're suppose to abstain from blood...
We dont live in an ideal world
If you want
Her teachings were about being modest in apparel. Some people think it's ok. Others think it's not. No one should say anyone is going to hell if they wear it, and try to use her writings to say so. The bible does tell us, however, that because of the way the people got full of themselves, that God stripped them of there Jewelery, so that's something to consider.
yet they make a religion out of it
How much is too much? Temperance was her teaching on this. How one person understands this ought to be within the confines of what the bible says.
so why did she bother with the topic in the first place
Again, her teachings were about health. Some foods simply aren't good for us, and while I don't believe you're going to hell if you like pizza and cereal, I do believe that one should consider what they're putting into their bodies.
cereals are forbidden? didnt know that...
It's the principle that needs to be understood. I played games growing up. I've also seen people get hurt while playing games, and I don't mean by accident. I mean, full fledged fights breaking out. Why? The spirit manifested while playing some games isn't always of God. I remember a "friend" of mine starting a fight with me because I beat him at Chess. Seriously, I'm talking, fighting stance, round-house kick, fight.
There have been religious wars as well ,are we gonna forbid religion?
Perhaps what differentiates me from others is that I don't read her words and look at them the way others do. I factor in lifestyle for her time. I factor in cultural norms for her time. I take the principle of what she was teaching and apply it to my life now.
....ehhhhh...not so much
Interestingly enough, whenever I talk to someone about spiritual matters, I find myself saying "The bible says..." as opposed to saying "EGW says..." Now can I explain what I believe in regards to her writings? I can. But she's not my first line of defense. She's not my go to person. The scripture is.
You're right. I've made my choice. And it looks like you do to. So what's the issue? Interestingly enough, she also says her work is either of God or it's of Satan. So let me ask you, which is it? Since you've investigated and have found what you believe to be discrepancies, would you say, without shame, that her writings were inspired by the devil?
I dont know who inspired her, how can I know? Do you know?
If she was lying she might have also lied about this one...
Why so sheepish?
There's only two sides in this spiritual conflict. And if she's lying that makes it easier to know right?
Why so sheepish?
There's only two sides in this spiritual conflict. And if she's lying that makes it easier to know right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?