Seventh-day Adventist General Conference Statement

[tall73]

Well since you bring up Galatians ---

Do you have a different example of Ellen White's writings correcting inaccurate interpretations?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Thank God that is not true and the Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations on BOTH sides of the Sabbath Commandment topic admit to it.

Moral law of God defines what sin is "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

Hence we have Paul contrasting ceremonial law with moral law of God in 1 Cor 7:19 -- the very distinction your post claims - cannot exist.

1 Cor 7:19
19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.

There we have a clear example of contrasting ceremonial law with moral law of God.

Where the Commandments of God include the TEN having "'honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

In none of your quotes do I see the adjective "moral". The Law is the undivided and complete Law. it is not divided into the "moral Law" or the "civil Law" etc. As you noted, large numbers of individuals have sliced and diced the Law to fit their preconceptions.

 

[BobRyan]

“The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24). In this scripture, the Holy Spirit through the apostle is speaking especially of the moral law. The law reveals sin to us, and causes us to feel our need of Christ and to flee unto Him for pardon and peace by exercising repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ". {1SM 234.5}

In a secondary sense one might think of the ceremonial law that points to Christ - through shadows and types - also leading us to Christ - but I think the moral law fits better in Gal 3

Yes, Uriah Smith, George Butler, and most of the prominent folks in the early Advent movement thought Galatians referred to the ceremonial law.

They objected when E.J. Waggoner published the view in the Signs of the Times that it was speaking of the moral law.

So then at some point Smith and Butler might view the 1 SM 234 statement as an opportunity to "pause for reflection".

As for unpublished letters and who remembered what and when after 20 years - that is the kind of skimpy nickle-dime I don't mess with because everyone admits that in those he-said-he-remembered-she-said non-published documents - no one has all the details.

I am fine with what was published at the time.

1. I came to the right view of Gal 3 without even looking into the disputes that Butler had with Waggoner over Gal 3.
2. I am fine with accepting the statement Ellen White made as actually quotable and published - as being her POV on this subject. As compared to a rumored statement that nobody has the document for. Those who prefer the unpublished undocumented material as "source" have free will and can choose that as they wish.

====================================
Fourth, we should search the Scriptures for ourselves and not allow others to do our thinking for us. At Minneapolis Ellen White could see that many of our ministers were simply following the lead of Elders Butler and Smith in their understanding of Scripture. They were not doing their own thinking Loyalty to Leadership—a commendable virtue—became a serious weakness when it led to following leadership blindly 88IOL 7.7

. On October 19 Ellen White cautioned the delegates: “Do not believe anything simply because others say it is truth. Take your Bibles, and search them for yourselves.” 88IOL 7.8

Again, on October 24, she entreated: “I want our young men to take a position, not because someone else takes it, but because they understand the truth for themselves.” 88IOL 7.9

 

[BobRyan]

Thank God that is not true and the Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations on BOTH sides of the Sabbath Commandment topic admit to it.

Moral law of God defines what sin is "Sin IS transgression of the LAW" 1 John 3:4

Hence we have Paul contrasting ceremonial law with moral law of God in 1 Cor 7:19 -- the very distinction your post claims - cannot exist.

1 Cor 7:19
19 Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.

There we have a clear example of contrasting ceremonial law with moral law of God.

Where the Commandments of God include the TEN having "'honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" Eph 6:2

In none of your quotes do I see the adjective "moral". The Law is the undivided and complete Law.

1 . until you read 1 Cor 7:19 which contrasts the two where one does not matter and the other does.

2. Until you read Heb 10:4-11 where we see animal sacrifice laws end - yet as we see in Eph 6:2 the TEN having "'honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" still applies to all mankind.

3. I don't mind having all Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations on both sides of the Sabbath topic admit to this Bible detail and yet you have the free will to reject all that you wish. That is also fine with me.

 

[BobRyan]

Do you have a different example of Ellen White's writings correcting inaccurate interpretations?

Gal 3 is such a great example of a published statement by Ellen White that unambiguously affirms a certain POV on the Law in Galatians such that no reader need be befuddled as to what she was thinking on that topic - I have a hard time not being ok with it as an example.

 

[BobRyan]

“The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24). In this scripture, the Holy Spirit through the apostle is speaking especially of the moral law. The law reveals sin to us, and causes us to feel our need of Christ and to flee unto Him for pardon and peace by exercising repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ". {1SM 234.5}

In a secondary sense one might think of the ceremonial law that points to Christ - through shadows and types - also leading us to Christ - but I think the moral law fits better in Gal 3

Moreover, Ellen White's latest statement regarding the crisis in Galatia was in Acts of the Apostles, and seemed to focus on the ceremonial again.

My own post ends with this -- " In a secondary sense one might think of the ceremonial law that points to Christ - through shadows and types - also leading us to Christ - but I think the moral law fits better in Gal 3"

I don't think there is a problem with her referencing both, or noting it particularly refers to the moral law. However, it is strange that her latest statement didn't put focus on the moral, since it was such a big issue earlier.

Context matters: in Acts of the Apostles that you reference - she was addressing the issue with Acts 15:1 and those that argued that gentiles could not be saved unless they kept the ceremonial law.

as you already pointed out here -

The Acts of the Apostles
Acts of the Apostles Published 1911

" While tarrying at Corinth, Paul had cause for serious apprehension concerning some of the churches already established. Through the influence of false teachers who had arisen among the believers in Jerusalem, division, heresy, and sensualism were rapidly gaining ground among the believers in Galatia. These false teachers were mingling Jewish traditions with the truths of the gospel. Ignoring the decision of the general council at Jerusalem, they urged upon the Gentile converts the observance of the ceremonial law. AA 383.1

The situation was critical. The evils that had been introduced threatened speedily to destroy the Galatian churches. AA 383.2
...
In the Galatian churches, open, unmasked error was supplanting the gospel message. Christ, the true foundation of the faith, was virtually renounced for the obsolete ceremonies of Judaism. The apostle saw that if the believers in Galatia were saved from the dangerous influences which threatened them, the most decisive measures must be taken, the sharpest warnings given. AA 385.2

Their religion was made up of a round of ceremonies, through the performance of which they expected to gain the favor of God. 386.2

Both issues get addressed in Paul's letter to the Galatians so I don't know how it is even a point of discussion to add "yes but which one of the two issues was mentioned last by Ellen White just before she died"... That sort of thing does not even register on my radar given that she affirms that the two valid aspects of that Law in Gal are indeed applicable.

 

[BobRyan]

Rom 2:
28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

Rom 9:6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; 7 nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: “through Isaac your descendants shall be named.” 8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

Do you really think that this is only agreed to by SDAs???

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

Rom 11:
19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 See then the kindness and severity of God: to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; for otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I do not want you, brothers and sisters, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so all Israel will be saved

At no time, before or after, did the disciples ever practice Ellen White's pseudo-Judaism.

Is it your position that the NT texts I just quoted and that you just responded to - were written by Ellen White??

 

[ozso]

Is it your position that the NT texts I just quoted and that you just responded to - were written by Ellen White??

You're mixing up posts.

 

[BobRyan]

You're mixing up posts.

you may need to click on your own post and note the post of mine you are quoting it - my last post to you was very accurate. Don't skip the details -- and then you will see.

If you need help with that - I will post the full text so you can see everything in it.

 

[tall73]

So then at some point Smith and Butler might view the 1 SM 234 statement as an opportunity to "pause for reflection"

I think that was the point as one of the two I quoted was, I believe, directed to Uriah Smith.

As for unpublished letters and who remembered what and when after 20 years - that is the kind of skimpy nickle-dime I don't mess with because everyone admits that in those he-said-he-remembered-she-said non-published documents - no one has all the details.

I am fine with what was published at the time.

Well it was more of Smith and Ellen White both thought that she corrected Waggoner, and we have his book which was taken out of print as a result to verify what he taught.

I am sure that doesn't bother you, but it certainly bothered Uriah Smith.

1. I came to the right view of Gal 3 without even looking into the disputes that Butler had with Waggoner over Gal 3.

Agreed, as did I. And I think, as with a lot of things, over time she came to the correct view.

Fourth, we should search the Scriptures for ourselves and not allow others to do our thinking for us. At Minneapolis Ellen White could see that many of our ministers were simply following the lead of Elders Butler and Smith in their understanding of Scripture. They were not doing their own thinking Loyalty to Leadership—a commendable virtue—became a serious weakness when it led to following leadership blindly 88IOL 7.7

. On October 19 Ellen White cautioned the delegates: “Do not believe anything simply because others say it is truth. Take your Bibles, and search them for yourselves.” 88IOL 7.8

Again, on October 24, she entreated: “I want our young men to take a position, not because someone else takes it, but because they understand the truth for themselves.” 88IOL 7.9

Which is why I indicated I don't think this is a good example of her writings correcting inaccurate interpretations. Her view was published after the issues were largely hashed out. But it did take both views and essentially combine them.

 

[tall73]

My own post ends with this -- " In a secondary sense one might think of the ceremonial law that points to Christ - through shadows and types - also leading us to Christ - but I think the moral law fits better in Gal 3"

Context matters: in Acts of the Apostles that you reference - she was addressing the issue with Acts 15:1 and those that argued that gentiles could not be saved unless they kept the ceremonial law.

as you already pointed out here -

Both issues get addressed in Paul's letter to the Galatians so I don't know how it is even a point of discussion to add "yes but which one of the two issues was mentioned last by Ellen White just before she died"... That sort of thing does not even register on my radar given that she affirms that the two valid aspects of that Law in Gal are indeed applicable.

The reason it is significant is because the other two were in the context of the debate, but Acts of the Apostles received a wide circulation, and it would have been a good time to reference the significance. Also, I tend to agree with Wagoner in that the moral law being indicated in Galatians 3 has direct relation to righteousness by faith, which is central to the message of Galatians, and the false teaching they were in danger of heeding.

In the long run, however, the 1888 material was published quite a bit as well, due to the historical role, so I am glad they all saw the light of day.

 

[tall73]

. On October 19 Ellen White cautioned the delegates: “Do not believe anything simply because others say it is truth. Take your Bibles, and search them for yourselves.” 88IOL 7.8

This statement, along with those I referenced in my previous thread on the fundamental, indicating to look to the Scriptures, are why I think the GC statement is quite ill-advised. If the Scriptures are the test of faith then they should not use her writings to correct inaccurate interpretations.

And if they pass the proposed statement for next time, that is even worse, in my view, for the claims of Adventists in their outreach.

http://excom.zcuc.adventist.org/wp-...-in-the-Writings-of-Ellen-G-White-in-EN-1.pdf

Rather than replacing Scripture, they uplift its normative character, safeguard the Church from “every wind of doctrine” (Eph 4:14), and offer an inspired guide to Bible passages without exhausting their meaning or preventing further study.

 

[bbbbbbb]

1 . until you read 1 Cor 7:19 which contrasts the two where one does not matter and the other does.

2. Until you read Heb 10:4-11 where we see animal sacrifice laws end - yet as we see in Eph 6:2 the TEN having "'honor your father and mother' as the first commandment with a promise" still applies to all mankind.

3. I don't mind having all Bible scholars in almost all Christian denominations on both sides of the Sabbath topic admit to this Bible detail and yet you have the free will to reject all that you wish. That is also fine with me.

Once again you have failed to provide a single Bible verse using the adjective "moral" with either law or commandment. The fact that you and a multitude of others have chosen to read that into the text is really not my problem. The fact that you and a multitude of others have willfully chosen to selectively pick and choose which commandments might fit into your personal theologies is, indeed, a significant problem.

 

[ozso]

Once again you have failed to provide a single Bible verse using the adjective "moral" with either law or commandment. The fact that you and a multitude of others have chosen to read that into the text is really not my problem. The fact that you and a multitude of others have willfully chosen to selectively pick and choose which commandments might fit into your personal theologies is, indeed, a significant problem.

This is always the plot hole. They say as Christians we are supposedly supposed to follow the law of the old covenant. But only the laws that Ellen White and others decided are applicable. So what exists in this concoction is a mixture of quasi-Christianity and pseudo-Judaism.

 

[bbbbbbb]

This is always the plot hole. They say as Christians we are supposedly supposed to follow the law of the old covenant. But only the laws that Ellen White and others decided are applicable. So what exists in this concoction is a mixture of quasi-Christianity and pseudo-Judaism.

Precisely.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I'm getting deja vu here...

 

[BobRyan]

The reason it is significant is because the other two were in the context of the debate, but Acts of the Apostles received a wide circulation, and it would have been a good time to reference the significance.

that sort of looks like hair-splitting

 

[tall73]

that sort of looks like hair-splitting

I would not call it such. But the point remains that Galatians is not the issue to illustrate Ellen White correcting inaccurate scripture teachings.

Why not mention GC president Wilson asking Ford to accept correction on the sanctuary by considering Ellen White an authority? Notice how he wants Ford to accept her as a doctrinal authority. And he wants Ford to see her as an inspired commenter on Scripture.

Events since Glacier View

Pastor Wilson commented that Dr. Ford did not appear really to accept this philosophy, that he required evidence before changing an opinion, and has set up his own criteria of what is acceptable evidence criteria that exclude the writings of Ellen G. White as being doctrinally authoritative.

and

The discussion turned to the matter of Ellen G. White and her role in doctrinal and theological matters. Her authority, in relation to Scripture, and the question of whether she could be considered a reliable, inspired commentary of Scripture was examined. In this area Dr. Ford set forth his viewpoint, and indicated that he cannot agree with what the church holds in this matter.

 

[BobRyan]

The reason it is significant is because the other two were in the context of the debate, but Acts of the Apostles received a wide circulation, and it would have been a good time to reference the significance.

that sort of looks like hair-splitting

I would not call it such.

Ok - well that sums our difference on that point pretty well.

 

[BobRyan]

But the point remains that Galatians is not the issue to illustrate Ellen White correcting inaccurate scripture teachings.

It demonstrates a well known (among SDAs) dispute about the Law in Galatians 3 - that you also admitted is part of SDA history -- where Ellen White did write about the correct view and specifically stated that the leading members of the church of her day should not get stuck on a wrong view that would exclude the role of the moral law of God or that would not allow the application of ceremonial law pointing mankind to the Messiah.