The Interview with Dr. Kellogg

[rainbowinthesky]

Very well sir but if you cannot prove that
the Interview is not authentic, then I do
not have to prove that it is. The reader
will have to judge for himself. Thats all
I am asking. You are entitled to disagree
with what is being posted but I would
ask that you show more compassion in
your rebuttals, if that is possible.

sky

*The evidence speaks for itself in the
Interview and in the Appeal and in
Some History, Experience, and Facrs
and from the bulk of Mrs. White's
writings that there have been fraud
and guile, fabrications on the part of the
leaders of the General Conference involving
W.C. White. These had rejected the light sent
from heaven. Remember how the Lord said,

"God gave them clear light as to what they
should do and what they should not do, but
they departed from that light." E.G.
White, 1901 G.C. Bulletin, p.23.

 

[Castaway57]

Very well sir but if you cannot prove that
the Interview is not authentic, then I do
not have to prove that it is.
sky

Of course; you dont have to provide a reference; but your response is more than a little mysterious and evasive, and people naturally would wonder about the source of said material. It is not wrong to want to know what source a writer has used for a post, and this is not even a matter of whether or not the interview is right or wrong, it is a matter of providing people with all the available tools to do their own research. You have no good reason to object to that.

As to the accuracy of the material posted on the alleged interview, and it is going to be alleged only, not proven, unless we have references, I have posted what EGW said in condemnation of Kellogg, & Jones & Waggoner.

 

[rainbowinthesky]

If you are asking if the document has the "imprint" of
the General Conference, of course it does not, and it
does not need any. Have you not read that it is "following
in the track of Romanism" to demand that the members of
the church read nothing unless it has the "imprint"
(approval) of the leaders of the church?

 

[Castaway57]

If you are asking if the document has the "imprint" of
the General Conference, of course it does not, and it
does not need to. Have you not read that it is followiing
in the track of Romanism to demand that the members of
the church read nothing unless it has the "imprint"
(approval) of the leaders of the church?

Yes, I understand that this is how Kellogg and yourself sees the church, but this is not what I am asking about at all. I am not sure how much simpler I can make my question. I dont really care where it came from; I just want to know, period.

 

[rainbowinthesky]

I have no doubt whatsoever that the "testimonies" that
are alleged to be from Mrs. White denouncing Dr. Kellogg
as a pantheist did not come from God but from W.C. White,
Prescott, and A.G. Daniells. The Interview and the Appeal
prove this beyond any shadow of a doubt. Now I do not
expect that even a minority of people will ever come to
understand this for the leaders of the church, working under
Satan's dictation (T.M.366) have already done their nefarious
work. I am only hoping that a few will take the time to read
this material and pray to God for guidance. It could mean
the difference between eternal life and eternal death.

As to the source of the Interview, just google it and you will
find it. I got a copy of it many years ago from a friend but
I dont remember who it was. Over the years I lost the copy
and last year I decided to google it and that is how I was
able to read it again but this time I was able to appreciate
it for what it is really worth: an eye opener.

 

[Castaway57]

I have no doubt whatsoever that the "testimonies" that
are alleged to be from Mrs. White denouncing Dr. Kellogg
as a pantheist did not come from God but from W.C. White,
Prescott, and A.G. Daniells. The Interview and the Appeal
prove this beyond any shadow orf a doubt. Now I do not
expext that even a minority of people will ever come to
understand this for the leaders of the church, wokring under
Satan's dictation (T.M.366) have already done their nefarious
work. I am only hoping that a few will take the time to read
this material and pray to God for guidance. It could mean
the difference between eternal life and eternal death.

Well; I guess you are not going to supply any specific or verifiable reference, but I suppose some progress has been made in that you have just admitted that the material is indeed anti-Adventist.

The quotes I provided earlier in this topic were not WC White quotes, they were quotes by EGW herself. Anyone can verify said quotes by looking them up in her books for themselves. The contrast between what you present, as an alleged interview, and what I have posted as evidence of Ellen White's views on Kellogg remains. One has references, the other one doesn't.

 

[rainbowinthesky]

Now we are doing exactly what I feared,
distracting from the subject of the merits
and righteousness of Christ, the truth
that the enemy is fighting against all
the time.

You do not believe Mrs. White when speaking
of the leaders of the General Conference,
saying, "God gave them clear light as to what
they should do and what they should not do,
but they departed from that light."
1901 G.C. Bulletin, 23.

But somehow you believe every statement publlished
about Dr. Kellogg. Why is that?

sky

 

[rainbowinthesky]

The Interview and the Appeal reveal
that W.C. White had become "amenable"
to the men of the General Conference who
had "put God aside and accepted the
devisings of men." T.M.481.

Mrs. White warned them: "Unless you cease the
work of making man amenable to man... the
Lord will divorce you from His work." Idem, 481.

These documents (The Interview with Dr. Kellogg
and The Appeal and Some History, Experience,
and Facts, by A.T. Jones) reveal that W.C. White
resorted to using the rubber stamp that had Mrs.
White's signature in the fabrications of "testimonies"
(fraud and guile) especially in regard to A.T.
Jones and Dr. Kellogg or any man standing in
the way of the 1903 order of things.

These men whom they were fighting against
were presenting the third angel's message.

"They were determined to bring the individuals
to their terms. They would rule or ruin. There
will be no material change until there is a decided
movement to bring in a different order of things."
T.M.360.

Do these words mean anything to us today?

 

[rainbowinthesky]

Originally Posted by rainbowinthesky

If you are asking if the document has the "imprint" of
the General Conference, of course it does not, and it
does not need to. Have you not read that it is "followiing
in the track of Romanism" (T.M.362-363) to demand that
the members of the church read nothing unless it has the
"imprint" (approval) of the leaders of the church?
________________________________
​

Yes, I understand that this is how Kellogg and yourself sees the church...

Castaway
___________________

No, it has nothing to do with how I see the church but how the Lord says what happened. It needs to be said that the reason why A.T. Jones stated that his appeal had not the "imprimatur" of any ecclesiastical official superior, nor the "imprint"' of any "regular" publishing house was due to the fact that the General Conference had passed a resolution in regard to the publishing work. Our people were told not to read anything unless it had the "imprimatur" of any ecclesiastical official superior or the "imprint" of any of our "regular" publishing house.

But a warning was sent to them:

"While engaged in earnest prayer, I was lost to everything around me; the room was filled with light, and I was bearing a message to an assembly that seemed to be the General Conference. I was moved by the Spirit of God to make a most earnest appeal; for I was impressed that great danger was before us at the heart of the work. I had been, and still was, bowed down with distress of mind and body, burdened with the thought that I must bear a message to our people at Battle Creek to warn them against a line of action that would separate God from the publishing house." Testimonies to Ministers,461.

"If you lay your hand upon the publishing work, this great instrumentality of God, to place your mold and superscription upon it, you will find that it will be dangerous to your own souls, and disastrous to the work of God. It will be as great a sin in the sight of God as was the sin of Uzzah when he put forth his hand to steady the ark... You cannot do this." Idem,462.

But they did it anyway.

"In the weakness of human judgment, men were gathering into their finite hands the lines of control, while God's will, God's way and counsel, were not sought as indispensable. Men of stubborn, ironlike will, both in and out of the office, were confederating together, determined to drive certain measures through in accordance with their own judgment." Idem,461,462.

It was with this kind of attitude that they started their campaign against Dr. kellogg and later against A.T. Jones who refused to join in with them against Dr. Kellogg.

sky

 

[Castaway57]

"They were determined to bring the individuals
to their terms. They would rule or ruin. There
will be no material change until there is a decided
movement to bring in a different order of things."
T.M.360.

Do these words mean anything to us today?

Yes; it seems to me that this is what you are determined to do here on the forum. History is repeating itself right before our eyes.

 

[Castaway57]

These documents (The Interview with Dr. Kellogg
and The Appeal and Some History, Experience,
and Facts, by A.T. Jones) reveal that W.C. White
resorted to using the stamp with Mrs. White's
signature in the fabrications of "testimonies"
(fraud and guile) especially in regard to A.T.
Jones and Dr. Kellogg or any man standing in
the way of the new order of things.

The documents reveal nothing, for several reasons. You wont supply references, and in what you posted here on the subject, there are only adamant claims, without any proof whatsoever.

WC White did not write the materials I posted from 1 SM, Ellen White did. Everything I quoted was her writing it, no one else.

Again, here we are, with you, essentially asking us to accept what you say, just because you say it, or the so called "interview" says it, and neither of these can be called proof by any stretch of the imagination.

Nice try, but you need to go back to the drawing board on this one.

I think we need a recap on a couple items:

If you truly believed, and desired to follow this counsel of Ellen White yourself, then you would do atleast three things:

1/ You would give us references for where you got the materials for this alleged "Kellogg interview." We have a right to view and study for ourselves any material posted here that is anti-Adventist in nature, and we should not have to be asked by you or anyone to just believe because you say it, as this is an Adventist forum, not an anti-Adventist one.

2/ You would not post partial or false views of Kellogg and his doctrines, or of the church's opinions thereof. You would accept any and all counsel by Ellen White on this man and his teachings, not just the limited portions which you are posting.

3/ You would stop using Ellen White's writings in ways she said not to; especially to try to turn them against the church, the way you keep doing here, and make it look as though she no longer supports it. If you are so opposed to our church, you should not even be quoting her.

The fact remains that you have been secretive about your source for the alleged Kellogg interview, and you have been very selective in what you posted, for it is clear that Ellen White condemned in no uncertain terms Kellogg and his apostate beliefs:

Beware

Washington, D.C., August 7, 1904

My Dear Brother:

I am given a message to bear to you and the rest of our physicians who are connected with the Medical Missionary Association. Separate from the influence exerted by the book Living Temple; [A 568-PAGE BOOK ISSUED IN 1903 BY DR. J. H. KELLOGG IN WHICH PANTHEISTIC PHILOSOPHIES WERE PROMULGATED.--COMPILERS.] for it contains specious sentiments. There are in it sentiments that are entirely true, but these are mingled with error. Scriptures are taken out of their connection, and are used to uphold erroneous theories. {1SM 199.1}

The thought of the errors contained in this book has given me great distress, and the experience that I have passed through in connection with the matter has nearly cost me my life. {1SM 199.2}

It will be said that Living Temple has been revised. But the Lord has shown me that the writer has not changed, and that there can be no unity between him and the ministers of the gospel while he continues to cherish his present sentiments. I am bidden to lift my voice in warning to our people, saying, "Be not deceived; God is not mocked" (Galatians 6:7). {1SM 199.3}

You have had access to Testimonies for the Church, volumes 7 and 8. In these Testimonies the danger signal is raised. But the light so clear and plain to minds that have not been influenced by deceptive theories, has not been discerned by some. While the misleading theories of this book are entertained by our physicians, there cannot be union between them and the ministers who are bearing the gospel message. There should be no union until there is a change. {1SM 199.4}

When medical missionaries make their practice and example harmonize with the name they bear, when they feel their need of uniting firmly with the ministers of the gospel, then there can be harmonious action. But we must firmly refuse to be drawn away from the platform of eternal truth, which since 1844 has stood the test. {1SM 199.5}

Alpha Presented in "Living Temple"

I am instructed to speak plainly. "Meet it," is the word spoken to me. "Meet it firmly, and without delay." But it is not to be met by our taking our working forces from the field to investigate doctrines and points of difference. We have no such investigation to make. In the book Living Temple there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given. {1SM 200.1}

Our physicians, upon whom important responsibilities rest, should have clear spiritual discernment. They are to stand constantly on guard. Dangers that we do not now discern will soon break upon us, and I greatly desire that they shall not be deceived. I have an intense longing to see them standing free in the Lord. I pray that they may have courage to stand firm for the truth as it is in Jesus, holding fast the beginning of their confidence unto the end.--Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, pp. 49, 50. {1SM 200.2}

Unfortunately, sky, what you are posting here would come under the following criteria:

There are in it sentiments that are entirely true, but these are mingled with error. Scriptures are taken out of their connection, and are used to uphold erroneous theories. {1SM 199.1}

 

[Castaway57]

So let us be very careful here how we treat this most precious
message. Let us take off the shoes from off our feet for we
are on holy ground

sky

Did you have your shoes off when you posted this?

 

[rainbowinthesky]

The documents clearly show that there was a conspiracy
against Dr. Kellogg involving W.C. White fabricating and
manipulating "testimonies" to bring men under the control
of men. These documents also show that Presscott, in a
meeting, quoted profusely from pantheistic authors and
then declared that this was what Dr. Kellogg was teaching
in The Living Temple and yet he could not quote anything
from the book itself to make his case.

But of course in order to show me wrong and you right
you only use the quotes in reference to Dr. Kellogg and
yet you have no use for the statements in regard to
the leaders of the General Conference having put God
aside and having accepted the devisings of men. (T.M.481)

Unless one can show from the book The Living Temple
that Dr. Kellogg was a pantheist we cannot blindly
accept what is passed off as Testimonies from the
Lord declaring him to be a pantheist especially when
the ring leaders in apostasy were bent on hurting
or destroying this brother.

sky

 

[Castaway57]

The documents clearly show that there was a conspiracy
against Dr. Kellogg involving W.C. White fabricating and
manipulating "testimonies" to bring men under the control
of men. These documents also show that Presscott, in a
meeting, quoted profusely from pantheistic authors and
then declared that this was what Dr. Kellogg was teaching
in The Living Temple and yet he could not quote anything
from the book itself to make his case.

What documents show this? The alleged interview for which you refuse to give references for? Now you are just going around in circles. The three volumes of the books, Selected Messages, were written by Ellen White. It doesnt get any simpler than that. All I did is show people what she said.

 

[rainbowinthesky]

I am not going around in circles at all.

Here is a perfect example of a "fabrication" (by those who had put God aside and accepted the devisings of men) of a letter allegedly written by Mrs White to A.T. Jones as a testimony from the Lord and published in the first volume of Selected Messages, p.377 which states that at the 1893 General Conference brother Jones' presentations on the subject of faith and works were confusing to the minds. In the same volume, page 130, Mrs. White there says the very opposite, that the messages given at the 1893 G.C. were from Heaven and states that the reason why there was confusion in many minds was because they did not live up to the blessings received.

Both testimonies can't be from the Lord. One of them has to be a fabrication.

Brother Jones' lectures in March of 1893 were a repeat of 1888 "in special measure" from the Lord as stated in the G.C. Bulletin, p.494.

I will post some excerpts from the 1893 Bulletin and everyone interested and desiring to know the truth should be able to see that brother Jones' lectures, far from being confusing, were, as Mrs. White stated on page 130 of vol.1 of Selected Messages, the "ministrations of the Holy Spirit."

sky

 

[rainbowinthesky]

First excerpt:

"Don't you see then how that the works take care of themselves in him who has faith in Jesus Christ,--I do not mean that satanic belief; I mean the man who has faith. Then don't you see what those people miss who get their minds on works, more than on Christ? They miss the very incentive and the very power that alone can do the things that are good, to reach and minister to the sick in the right spirit, to visit the poor and minister to them in the right spirit. Have you not seen people that have ministered to the poor and the sick, in a way that makes those people feel worse than if they had not gone there at all? That is not the kind of ministering Jesus Christ does. No, sir. It is Christ in you. And when He goes with you and in you there stands the testimony, 'It will win even from wordlings the statement, They are like Jesus.'

Did not Paul strive, says one, and does not the Savior say, 'Strive to enter in at the strait gate'? Yes. But how can I strive when I have nothing to strive with? 'Without Me you can do nothing.'--how much? (Congregation: 'Nothing.') Is that so? (Congregation: 'Yes.') Then without Christ I want to know how you are going to strive. Paul says, "I also labor, striving according to His working, which worketh in me mightily." Col.1:29. I want you to think of that. 'Without Me ye can do nothing.' 'Dead in trespasses and sins.' Is that so? How can a dead man strive? 'When we were without strength." Rom.5:6. Were we without strength? (Congregation: 'Yes.') That is so. Then how can a man strive who has no strength? Don't you see, then, that it is an utter satanic perversion of the divine idea, to go to striving and working and wearing the life out in order to get to Christ to obtain this gift of justification. No; it is the free gift of God to every man, and every man who receives it, receives Jesus Christ Himself indeed.

Then where does the striving come in? To find the Lord? or to be used by the power which the Lord gives, which He puts into us? Which is it? 'The love of Christ constraineth us.' 2 Cor.5:14. Constrains, impels, drives on with an irresistible force. That is the idea that is in the word striving. Other translations give it, 'agonize' to enter into the strait gate. And they do really and bodily agonize and wear themselves out, doing penance, just like any other Catholic--and they will do it all in order to move the Lord, so that He will have pity on them. That is not the thought.

It is agonizing; but everybody who is acquainted with it, knows that the word is taken from the Greek games, the Greek races. One who entered the games was an agonistes. They started out to run a race. Now what does he do? He just strains every nerve to win the race; every faculty of his being is devoted to the object before him, isn't it? (Congregation: 'Yes, sir.') Now that is bodily exercise; that is bodily striving, agonizing. Is this that kind that Christ is talking about? (Congregation: 'No.') What kind is this? Spiritual. Yes, of course. Then carrying that thought from bodily exercise, that bodily straining of every nerve,--carrying that into the spiritual realm, what does it signify? Doesn't it signify that complete surrender of the will to Christ, that surrender of the heart, and the affections to Him, that makes no reserve? Then His power moving in us, His divine power urging us on, don't you see? I say again, that in all cases he who believes in Jesus Christ most fully will work most for Him.

Now let us have this word, and that will be the best close I could make to the whole thing to-night. 'Steps to Christ,' page 71. 'The heart that rests most fully upon Christ will be the most earnest and active in labor for Him.' Amen. (Congregation: 'Amen.') Do not forget that now. Do not think that the man who says that he rests wholly upon Jesus Christ is either a physical or spiritual loafer. If he shows this loafing in his life, he is not resting on Christ at all, but on his own self.

No, sir; the heart that rests most fully upon Christ will be most active in labor for Him. That is what real faith is. That is the faith that will bring to you the outpouring of the latter rain; that is the faith that will bring to you and me the teaching of righteousness according to righteousness-- the living presence of Jesus Christ--to prepare us for the loud cry and the carrying of the third angel's message in the only way in which it can be carried from this Conference." A.T. Jones, 1893 G.C. Bulletin, p.310,302.

 

[rainbowinthesky]

Second excerpt from the 1893 G.C. Bulletin:

"The man that is so anxious and so dreadfully afraid that you will not let him have any works to do, and that you are going to destroy all his works--if Christ is dwelling in the heart, he will find works to do. Brethren, don't be so anxious about works; find the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will find work, more than you can do. (Congregation: 'Amen!') But the difficulty is, when the people get their minds on works, and works, and works, instead of upon Jesus Christ in order to work, they pervert the whole thing. Satan does not care how much a man professes justification by faith, and righteousness by faith, so long as he keeps his mind on works. That is just the thought that is before us here in this definition of faith that we read the other night. Let me read it again. Page 63, Steps to Christ: 'When we speak of faith there is a distinction that should be borne in mind. There is a kind of belief that is wholly different from faith. The existence and power of God, the truth of His word, are facts that even Satan and his hosts cannot at heart deny."

They believe that, but what power does their believing it bring to them to make them righteous, or to enable them to do good works? What power is there in their belief? What power does that give to them? (Congregation: 'None.') No, it is away off there, simply a theory, held off to look at, held as a theory, held as a creed; and so, a spirit even, can believe in the existence and power of God; he can believe the truth of the Bible; he can believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, the holy One of God, and be a devil. Many can believe all this in this way and profess justification by faith at the same time; and they can be great sticklers for what they call 'good works' at the same time. Yes they can work the very skin off their bones in order to do good, in order to be righteous, in order to move God, as we read the other night. You know they do it. You know they make pilgrimages, and do penances, and fairly wear themselves out; and in addition to these things they will shut themselves off from every earthly comfort.

But who is doing the work? Who in these things does the work? Self does the work in order to be righteous, in order to have that treasure of merit that will give an increase of grace in this world and an increase of glory in Heaven. That is what it is for, is it not? (Congregation: 'Yes.') Who is doing this then? (Congregation: 'Self.') Yes sir. Has the mind, has the heart been yielded to God? Are the affections fixed upon Him? Is the surrender of all to Him? No. And therefore it is still self in all. Who then is to do the work in order that it may be good works always? Let us read it: 'If Christ is dwelling in our hearts, He will work in us 'both to will and to do of His good pleasure.'" A.T. Jones, 1893 G.C. Bulletin, p.298.

Nothing confusing to the minds here. It is the message of God "in special measure" through the man of His own choosing. As Mrs. White stated on page 130 of Selected Messages, vol.1, the only reason why there was confusion in many minds was because these blessings were not lived up to, not appreciated.

 

[rainbowinthesky]

But here is what she had to say about the reception of the message:

"Here was evidence, that all might discern whom the Lord recognized as His servants. But there were those who despised the men and the message they bore. They have taunted them with being fanatics, extremists, and enthusiasts. Let me prophesy unto you: Unless you speedily humble your hearts before God, and confess your sins, which are many, you will, when it is too late, see that you have been fighting against God. Through the conviction of the Holy Spirit, no longer unto reformation and pardon, you will see that these men whom you have spoken against have been as signs in the world, as witnesses for God. Then you would give the whole world if you could redeem the past, and be just such zealous men, moved by the Spirit of God to lift your voice in solemn warning to the world; and like them, to be in principle firm as a rock. Your turning things upside down in known of the Lord. Go on a little longer, as you have gone, in rejection of the light from Heaven, and you are lost... I have no smooth message to bear to those who have been so long as false guideposts, pointing the wrong way. If you reject Christ's delegated messengers, you reject Christ. Neglect this great salvation, kept before you for years, despise this glorious offer of justification through (the merits) of the blood of Christ and sanctification through the cleansing power of the Holy Spirit, and there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation. I entreat you now to humble yourselves and cease your stubborn resistance to light and evidence." T.M.97,98. *parenthesis supplied (1896)

 

[rainbowinthesky]

The letter inserted on page 377 of 1 S.M. is dated April 9,1893 (New Zealand) shortly after the 1893 General Conference which ended on March 26, at which he spoke on the matter of faith and works so eloquently. In this letter it is said about brother Jones that "After you have expressed your mind radically in regard to works, when questions are asked you upon this every subject, it is not lying out in so very clear lines, in your own mind, and you cannot define the correct principles to other minds, and you are yourself unable to make your statement harmonize with your own principles and faith." p.378.

Now when you study what he taught on faith and works just a few days before this letter was allegedly written to him, the only conclusion you can come to is that this has to be a fraud. There was nothing "radical" about brother Jones' teaching on faith and works at those meetings. It just simply doesn't make any sense at all to say that he was radical. On page 377, we read, "The matter was presented in that light that I knew minds would be confused, and would not receive the correct impression in reference to faith and works, and I decided to write to you."

On top of that, a little further down, we read these very words: "I Know your meaning, but you leave a wrong impression upon many minds. While good works will not save even one soul, yet it is impossible for even one soul to be save without good works."

Days before this alleged letter was sent to brother Jones, he had spoken so eloquently on this matter stating the very same things. But one won't know this unless he takes the time to study his lectures. I just shared a few excerpts going back a few posts, some of the best from the 1893 Bulletin and to me they are sufficient to show that the statement from page 130 is authentic but the one on page 377 cannot be otherwise it would make Mrs. White contradict herself.

I have read and carefully studied Wieland and Short's 1888 Re-Examined over the years and in their book they make it obvious that they too fell into the trap of thinking that there was fanaticism at the 1893 General Conference on the part of Jones. They too were deceived by the alledged letter found on page 377 of Selected Messages, vol.1. But Mrs. White is clear on that. There was no fanaticism at all on the part of brother Jones. On the contrary it was "heavenly illumination."

So how could Mrs. White, after the conference, decide to write a letter of warning to brother Jones, to confirm the fears of those who had refused to walk in the light given? Here is what she said about the studies given at the 1893 G.C. and that would be especially regarding those of Prescott and Jones. (Prescott was totally in tune with Jones. I have read all of Prescott's studies and they are excellent, just as excellent as those of brother Jones)

"There have been things written to me in regard to the movings of the Spirit of God at the last conference (1893) and at the college, which clearly indicate that because these blessings were not lived up to, minds have been confused, and that which was light from Heaven has been called excitement. I have been made sad to have this matter viewed in this light. We must be very careful not to grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in pronouncing the ministration of His Holy Spirit a species of fanaticism. How shall we understand the workings of the Spirit of God if it was not revealed in clear and unmistakable lines, not only in Battle Creek but in many places?" 1 S.M.130.

Mrs. White had warned that if the leading brethren were not kept by the power of God, that they would work under Satan's dictation to bring men under the control of men and that fraud and guile would bear the semblance of zeal for truth and for the advancement of the kingdom of God! (T.M.366)

So should we be surprised at anything?

sky

 

[Castaway57]

I am not going around in circles at all.

Here is a perfect example of a "fabrication" (by those who had put God aside and accepted the devisings of men) of a letter allegedly written by Mrs White to A.T. Jones as a testimony from the Lord and published in the first volume of Selected Messages, p.377 which states that at the 1893 General Conference brother Jones' presentations on the subject of faith and works were confusing to the minds. In the same volume, page 130, Mrs. White there says the very opposite, that the messages given at the 1893 G.C. were from Heaven and states that the reason why there was confusion in many minds was because they did not live up to the blessings received.

Both testimonies can't be from the Lord. One of them has to be a fabrication.

Well; this clears one thing up. I have seen this sentiment on anti-Adventist web sites, and it is extra odd coming from you who accuses me of "hating the testimonies" to be making your own personal interpretations as to which of Ellen White's writings are "real" and which are not. Our church has seen this before, many times.