Question for Seventh Day Adventist members

[BobRyan]

• It does not matter, because Ellen White made errors in her works, which means she is an interesting theologian but not an inspired prophet.

It is somewhat pointless to test someone to see if they are a prophet when the person you are "testing" has already stated positions on Bible doctrine that do not match your own POV - because one of the tests of a prophet is whether their doctrine is in harmony with what you currently believe the Bible teaches.

So we don't even have the context to start with when discussing this with non-SDAs that is of the form
1. Ok fine the doctrine is all correct - now lets see if some sort of technical detail was out of place or has a good explanation..

2. Adventists don't base Bible doctrine on statements from Ellen White.

Let's talk scripture please. The bible does not teach women prophets cannot speak Gods' Word.

That is true... in fact in 1 Cor 14 "EACH ONE" has a revelation... not "just men"

That same chapter says -- "35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home" - and even the most extremists who are skimming over the details in that chapter - "allow women to learn something in church", showing that even they need to apply at least some reasonable level of "context" before jumping to the extremist positions.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Hello, sometimes someone have to understand scriptures in order to give credits to someone who teach or preach the Word...

I don't know who has the spiritual knowledge or authority to say E G White has the truth to teach the Word...Maybe only her congregation..

"God has given us the Spirit of Truth to teach us into All Truth..."

Also, there false teachers and false prophets has gone out to the world, teaching things they ought not qualify to teach and as a result they deceive many...

...."A tiny yeast leavens the whole batch"...

We get our scripture from the Bible and you do not need to be a Prophet or Theologian to understand God's 4th commandment. I think an eight-year old could interpret it pretty clearly.

Exodus
20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Maybe you don't know a lot about EGW, but she said all things must be tested by scripture. A false prophet thinks they are above scripture.

We are told in Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

You are obviously not familiar with EGW writings.

God bless

 

[The Liturgist]

It is somewhat pointless to test someone to see if they are a prophet when the person you are "testing" has already stated positions on Bible doctrine that do not match your own POV - because one of the tests of a prophet is whether their doctrine is in harmony with what you currently believe the Bible teaches.

So we don't even have the context to start with when discussing this with non-SDAs that is of the form
1. Ok fine the doctrine is all correct - now lets see if some sort of technical detail was out of place or has a good explanation..

2. Adventists don't base Bible doctrine on statements from Ellen White.




That is true... in fact in 1 Cor 14 "EACH ONE" has a revelation... not "just men"

That same chapter says -- "35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home" - and even the most extremists who are skimming over the details in that chapter - "allow women to learn something in church", showing that even they need to apply at least some reasonable level of "context" before jumping to the extremist positions.

If the prophecies of LGW appeared accurate, I would be inclined to adjust my doctrine accordingly. In a more subtle way, much interactions with monastics caused me to become somewhat Byzantinized through what I would call spiritual osmosis; while still a Congregationalist, I altered my theology on some issues to be closer to the Christian East.

 

[BobRyan]

If the prophecies of LGW appeared accurate, I would be inclined to adjust my doctrine accordingly.

So then if I claim God told me that all garbage service in my state will fail in the month of June - and I also claim that God said the Trinity doctrine is false - you would wait to see what happens with the garbage service next month and depending on what happened you would re-evaluate your belief on the Trinity?

What Bible text leads you to select that particular method?

===============================

My point is that offering a reasonable solution to a technicality like "was Jonah a false prophet since Nineveh was not destroyed in 40 days" -- is very different from "did God really tell someone the Trinity is a false doctrine".

Gal 1: 6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel, 7 which is not just another account; but there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

Paul does not say that the doctrinal test can be put on hold depending on how the prediction about sanitation services pans out.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

It is somewhat pointless to test someone to see if they are a prophet when the person you are "testing" has already stated positions on Bible doctrine that do not match your own POV - because one of the tests of a prophet is whether their doctrine is in harmony with what you currently believe the Bible teaches.

So we don't even have the context to start with when discussing this with non-SDAs that is of the form
1. Ok fine the doctrine is all correct - now lets see if some sort of technical detail was out of place or has a good explanation..

2. Adventists don't base Bible doctrine on statements from Ellen White.




That is true... in fact in 1 Cor 14 "EACH ONE" has a revelation... not "just men"

That same chapter says -- "35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home" - and even the most extremists who are skimming over the details in that chapter - "allow women to learn something in church", showing that even they need to apply at least some reasonable level of "context" before jumping to the extremist positions.

why was mrs white was the tie maker?

 

[The Liturgist]

So then if I claim God told me that all garbage service in my state will fail in the month of June - and I also claim that God said the Trinity doctrine is false - you would wait to see what happens with the garbage service next month and depending on what happened you would re-evaluate your belief on the Trinity?

What Bible text leads you to select that particular method?

===============================

My point is that offering a reasonable solution to a technicality like "was Jonah a false prophet since Nineveh was not destroyed in 40 days" -- is very different from "did God really tell someone the Trinity is a false doctrine".

Gal 1: 6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel, 7 which is not just another account; but there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!

Paul does not say that the doctrinal test can be put on hold depending on how the prediction about sanitation services pans out.

I think I failed to make myself clear. There are limits to the extent valid prophecy could affect my beliefs.

The doctrinal test is based on the apostolic faith. We do not precisely know, because scripture can be interpreted in different ways, what the apostolic faith was on certain issues. On other issues, we can be absolutely certain because of the Patristic record and the Ecumenical Councils.

However, regarding one of the points of uncertainty, for example, Calvinism vs. Arminianism, if an inspired prophet appeared and prophesied correctly in a manner that met the standards that was not in my particular camp, but still within the realm of apostolic faith, I would consider that I was in the wrong camp. To a certain extent, the existence of obviously inspired prophets in some of the Eastern churches and other examples of the miraculous, have convinced me of the need to break out of the endless infighting of Reformed theology (specifically, Federal Vision theology and the controversy surrounding it, which I had an interest in), and immerse myself more in the mystical theology of the Eastern churches.

Now, in the case of Ellen White, I am in a bit of a pickle because other than her support of the Trinity, I find myself disagreeing with most of what she said. I don’t believe her soteriology is compatible with the Pauline epistles, and in other places it seems to me that she is at war with the early church based on the false dichotomy of Roman Catholicism vs. Protestantism, and this leads to the historical errors in The Great Controversy I mentioned earlier. If her soteriology was more Pauline and more sola fide, and if her works like The Great Controversy did not have the errors that they have, and if she engaged with the pre-Nicene fathers and took the logically consistent step of embracing the council of Nicea, which defended against the anti-Trinitarian heresy of Arianism, and if her timeline made more sense, an if she did not adhere to an eschatology we can’t even discuss except in Controversial Christian Theology, I could conceivably accept her idea on the Investigative Judgement, which is strange, but frankly, the concepts used by mystical theologians to explain the Last Judgement often are strange and frightening, moreso in Eastern Christianity than in Western Christianity.

 

[BobRyan]

why was mrs white was the tie maker?

What is the Bible doctrine on the gift of prophecy? Once that is answered from the Bible then the question is not "what was Mrs. White's opinion on some topic" but rather "Did God give any information on that topic to Mrs. White".

 

[BobRyan]

However, regarding one of the points of uncertainty, for example, Calvinism vs. Arminianism, if an inspired prophet appeared and prophesied correctly in a manner that met the standards that was not in my particular camp, but still within the realm of apostolic faith, I would consider that I was in the wrong camp.

Taking that example above - if someone (Person-A) claimed God had spoken to them and said that on that specific point Calvinism is correct and the free will doctrine in Arminianism is not - I would reject that person as being a real prophet. But if a regular person (Person-B) said they agreed with Person-A I would not hold them to be a "false prophet" but rather "just mistaken".

At that point - all the nickle-and-diming in the world about whether Jonah's prophecy of "40 days and Ninevah will be destroyed" - is a pointless conversation regarding person-A's gift of prophecy - the decision is already made, in that case.

 

[BobRyan]

Now, in the case of Ellen White, I am in a bit of a pickle because other than her support of the Trinity, I find myself disagreeing with most of what she said. I don’t believe her soteriology is compatible with the Pauline epistles

Which is why I find that discussion more interesting.

, and in other places it seems to me that she is at war with the early church based on the false dichotomy of Roman Catholicism vs. Protestantism,

Trading historic sources just then would be fun - but not sure it gets anywhere.

But I think Mark 7:6-12 is pretty useful in that part of the discussion dealing with a post-first century "early church".

 

[The Liturgist]

Taking that example above - if someone (Person-A) claimed God had spoken to them and said that on that specific point Calvinism is correct and the free will doctrine in Arminianism is not - I would reject that person as being a real prophet. But if a regular person (Person-B) said they agreed with Person-A I would not hold them to be a "false prophet" but rather "just mistaken".

At that point - all the nickle-and-diming in the world about whether Jonah's prophecy of "40 days and Ninevah will be destroyed" - is a pointless conversation regarding person-A's gift of prophecy - the decision is already made, in that case.

There is an obvious distinction and that is that the prophecy of Nineveh is a Christological prophecy through and through, and whilst the events prophesized did not take place owing to an extraordinary act of divine grace, prefiguring the eventual salvation of the entire human race, Jonah was the most flawed Old Testament prophet and portions of the story are typological-Christological allegory (the three days in the whale).

If a prophet with established credibility prophesied disaster however, which was usually the case in the Old Testament, metanoia, that is repentance and a change of mind, could avert the disaster, and this is still surely the case. But there are two key words: established credibility. Ellen White lacks this, because she writes a work that is apparently prophetic, and yet which has historical errors. This is a disqualifier. And that other events foretold by her have not happened, but that the reverse is happening (blue laws and Sunday trading laws are being repealed all over the world, many in just the past decade), she would not have the credibility to cause me to listen to her and then engage in metanoia specifically to avert what she warns of. And this is also in part due to a doctrine concerning the final disposition of souls that can only be discussed in Controversial Christian Theology, which she clearly taught and which most Christians disagree with, for what I regard to be sound reasons. And she taught and exercised authority over men, which violates the instructions of the same Apostle Paul whose commands concerning the Gospel have been of some interest in this discussion.

 

[The Liturgist]

Which is why I find that discussion more interesting.



Trading historic sources just then would be fun - but not sure it gets anywhere.

But I think Mark 7:6-12 is pretty useful in that part of the discussion dealing with a post-first century "early church".

The idea that the Great Apostasy occurred when you said it did is one of those historically falsifiable ideas. It also means the Church did not exist from antiquity until Ellen White, and that the instructions our Lord gave to various churches in Asia Minor are in vain, and, here’s the rub, we have no Bible, because these 27 New Testament books were not complete until the early 2nd century according to scholarly consensus, and it was not until the 4th century that Athanasius rejected the people who wanted to leave out Revelations and the Epistles of John, James, Jude, Hebrews, Timothy, Titus and Philemon, and at the same time rejected the people who wanted to include the Shepherd of Hermas, 1 Barnabas and other books which frankly I don’t want in my Bible.

So this issue of what I call Athanasian Trust - the fact there was no canon that corresponds with our current Bible until the 360s, is one of the innumerable problems of an early Great Apostasy.

In fact, almost every bit of data we have suggests the Great Apostasy is a process more likely than not happening now, and is not a past event. Personally I hope this is a Little Apostasy like with the rise of Communism, and the comeback of the Orthodox Church in Russia and other former Soviet domains suggests this may be the case. But, there is much more that is indicative of apostasy now than in the second century, which were glorious years for the Church as thousands and thousands of Christians faced martyrdom without fear and received crowns of eternal glory in Heaven.

 

[BobRyan]

The idea that the Great Apostasy occurred when you said it did is one of those historically falsifiable ideas. It also means the Church did not exist from antiquity until Ellen White,

"When I said it did"?

Why do you claim the Church did not exist in the first century? Why deny that all during that 1260 years of dark ages that we see in Rev 12 - there is a Church in persecution hiding in the wilderness? Where does your "no church until Ellen White" doctrine come from?

===============

Notice that in Dan 7 that 1260 year period of dark ages starts after the divide of the pagan Roman empire into 10 - and then the "11th" horn is raised up.

 

[BobRyan]

So this issue of what I call Athanasian Trust - the fact there was no canon that corresponds with our current Bible until the 360s, is one of the innumerable problems of an early Great Apostasy.
.

There are enough references in the NT to "all of scripture" to inform the reader that NT saints were not thinking "we need to wait 300+ years to find out what scripture is"

 

[The Liturgist]

There are enough references in the NT to "all of scripture" to inform the reader that NT saints were not thinking "we need to wait 300+ years to find out what scripture is"

Old Testament references.

"When I said it did"?

Why do you claim the Church did not exist in the first century? Why deny that all during that 1260 years of dark ages that we see in Rev 12 - there is a Church in persecution hiding in the wilderness? Where does your "no church until Ellen White" doctrine come from?

===============

Notice that in Dan 7 that 1260 year period of dark ages starts after the divide of the pagan Roman empire into 10 - and then the "11th" horn is raised up.

Ironically, the errors made in an attempting to argue for a continuity of Sabbatarianism had the effect of fully discrediting the notion. For example, because the Waldensians wore wooden shoes, and the French word Sabot vaguely resembles sabbath, beliefs utterly alien to them were falsely attributed them, and Gnostic heretics who believed that sexual reproduction was evil were made out to be proto-Protestant martyrs.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
There are enough references in the NT to "all of scripture" to inform the reader that NT saints were not thinking "we need to wait 300+ years to find out what scripture is"

Old Testament references.

I think we both agree that there are no OT references to NT saints using the term "All of scripture".

In the NT saints used that term to refer to scripture without ever calling it "in all of Old Testament scripture".

The point remains that the NT Bible writers never give the reader the idea "we still don't know what scripture is yet - we will have to wait a few centuries to know".

I think this point is irrefutable.

And also Peter refers to Paul's writing as being included along with "the rest of scripture" - so it is not like they were waiting a few centuries for someone to inform them of that.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
"When I said it did"?

Why do you claim the Church did not exist in the first century?

Why deny that all during that 1260 years of dark ages that we see in Rev 12 - there is a Church in persecution hiding in the wilderness? Where does your "no church until Ellen White" doctrine come from?

===============

Notice that in Dan 7 that 1260 year period of dark ages starts after the divide of the pagan Roman empire into 10 - and then the "11th" horn is raised up.

Ironically, the errors made in an attempting to argue for a continuity of Sabbatarianism had the effect of fully discrediting the notion.

The above quotes of mine were in response to your suggestion that for Seventh-day Adventists no Christian church existing before the time of Ellen White - So then I show just how actual Adventists view a "continued" Christian church from the NT period onward.

I would add --

In the book "The Great Controversy" a long line of Christian linkage is shown including the time of the Protestant Reformers - where not everyone is keeping the Bible Sabbath (though most of those reformers themselves would have argued that they WERE keeping the Sabbath Commandment obligation and thatt it is still binding on all mankind just as the "Westminster Confession of Faith" Section 19 points out and so all the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 points out)

 

[BobRyan]

For example, because the Waldensians wore wooden shoes, and the French word Sabot vaguely resembles sabbath, beliefs utterly alien to them were falsely attributed them, and Gnostic heretics who believed that sexual reproduction was evil were made out to be proto-Protestant martyrs.

From: Were Waldensians Sabbath-keepers? | Adventist World

One of the primary sources of evidence of Waldensian Sabbathkeeping during the first half of the thirteenth century comes from a collection of five books written against the Cathars and Waldensians about 1241-1244 by Dominican inquisitor Father Moneta of Cremona in northern Italy.

Moneta passionately defended himself against criticism from Waldensians and Cathars that Catholics were transgressors of the Sabbath commandment. In the chapter De Sabbato, et De Die Dominico he discussed the significance of the seventh-day Sabbath of Exodus 20:8, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,” and contrasted it with the value of the Lord’s day, his term for the first day of the week.5
...
Moneta’s treatise clearly shows that a sizable group of Waldensians and Cathars in northern Italy and southern France during the thirteenth century were worshipping on a day other than Sunday, namely, the seventh-day Sabbath.

"because the Waldensians wore wooden shoes..." arguments not withstanding

 

[The Liturgist]

From: Were Waldensians Sabbath-keepers? | Adventist World



"because the Waldensians wore wooden shoes..." arguments not withstanding

In my extensive research on the Waldensians and the Albigensians, and, for different reasons, the Dominican Order (the history of the Order of Preachers fascinates me) come across any credible, scholarly, ecumenical references to the above.

The above quotes of mine were in response to your suggestion that for Seventh-day Adventists no Christian church existing before the time of Ellen White - So then I show just how actual Adventists view a "continued" Christian church from the NT period onward.

I would add --

In the book "The Great Controversy" a long line of Christian linkage is shown including the time of the Protestant Reformers - where not everyone is keeping the Bible Sabbath (though most of those reformers themselves would have argued that they WERE keeping the Sabbath Commandment obligation and thatt it is still binding on all mankind just as the "Westminster Confession of Faith" Section 19 points out and so all the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 points out)

And they would simultaneously have denied that one would face an eschatological outcome which cannot be discussed outside of Controversial Christian Theology for failing to adhere to it. The mainstream Reformers like Calvin, Luther and Cranmer were big on total depravity, Sola Fide and Sola Deo Gratia, and also on Sola Fide. By making Ellen White an infallible authority on the interpretation of scripture and accepting the doctrines it does about eschatology, I would argue that the SDA church violates these solas.

 

[BobRyan]

In my extensive research on the Waldensians and the Albigensians, and, for different reasons, the Dominican Order (the history of the Order of Preachers fascinates me) come across any credible, scholarly, ecumenical references to the above.

I highly recommend

From: Were Waldensians Sabbath-keepers? | Adventist World

One of the primary sources of evidence of Waldensian Sabbathkeeping during the first half of the thirteenth century comes from a collection of five books written against the Cathars and Waldensians about 1241-1244 by Dominican inquisitor Father Moneta of Cremona in northern Italy.

Moneta passionately defended himself against criticism from Waldensians and Cathars that Catholics were transgressors of the Sabbath commandment. In the chapter De Sabbato, et De Die Dominico he discussed the significance of the seventh-day Sabbath of Exodus 20:8, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,” and contrasted it with the value of the Lord’s day, his term for the first day of the week.5
...
Moneta’s treatise clearly shows that a sizable group of Waldensians and Cathars in northern Italy and southern France during the thirteenth century were worshipping on a day other than Sunday, namely, the seventh-day Sabbath.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said: ↑
"When I said it did"?

Why do you claim the Church did not exist in the first century?

Why deny that all during that 1260 years of dark ages that we see in Rev 12 - there is a Church in persecution hiding in the wilderness? Where does your "no church until Ellen White" doctrine come from?

===============

Notice that in Dan 7 that 1260 year period of dark ages starts after the divide of the pagan Roman empire into 10 - and then the "11th" horn is raised up.

Ironically, the errors made in an attempting to argue for a continuity of Sabbatarianism had the effect of fully discrediting the notion.

The above quotes of mine were in response to your suggestion that for Seventh-day Adventists no Christian church existing before the time of Ellen White - So then I show just how actual Adventists view a "continued" Christian church from the NT period onward.

I would add --

In the book "The Great Controversy" a long line of Christian linkage is shown including the time of the Protestant Reformers - where not everyone is keeping the Bible Sabbath (though most of those reformers themselves would have argued that they WERE keeping the Sabbath Commandment obligation and thatt it is still binding on all mankind just as the "Westminster Confession of Faith" Section 19 points out and so all the "Baptist Confession of Faith" section 19 points out)

And they would simultaneously have denied that one would face an eschatological outcome which cannot be discussed outside of Controversial Christian Theology

Is that some sort of "Bible argument" or Bible proof of something??

If so, it is not one I am familiar with.

The point I made above - which you did not respond to - was demonstrating with proof that your allegation that "for SDAs there should be no Christian church before Ellen White" was something of your own invention and does not survive a review of the facts available to the reader.

The mainstream Reformers like Calvin, Luther and Cranmer were big on total depravity, Sola Fide and Sola Deo Gratia, and also on Sola Fide.

I think you have by faith lone in there twice. "Saved by Grace through Faith and that not of works lest anyone should boast" is the primary way SDAs affirm it when they speak of it.

I assume you know that "by faith alone" is a phrase found in the Bible (have to use the NASB to find it).

By making Ellen White an infallible authority on the interpretation of scripture and accepting the doctrines it does about eschatology, I would argue that the SDA church violates these solas.

It is not logical to avoid the entire doctrinal discussion and argue that doctrine fails "based on who ELSE agrees with it". Obviously using that flawed model the Christian church could never have been correct and the Protestant Reformation could never have been correct.

It would be even more absurd to have it rest on "if Ellen White agrees with it then that doctrine must be wrong".

I prefer "sola scriptura" testing of doctrine instead.