| Author | Message | ||
     J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2603 Registered: 8-2004 |
Tom Just curious, how do you respond to the following artical "WHITE ESTATE RESPONDS TO TOM NORRIS ALLEGATIONS | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2604 Registered: 8-2004 |
FWIW Tom......Herb Douglass wasted the time to reply to you.... (darn, he had the most beautiful daughter I used to know!) I would have died for that gal! "Herb Douglass said... | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4639 Registered: 5-2006 |
Johnny Workentine wrote on that site: "I 100% agree with Dr. Burt. Its sometimes amusing to see the lengths that enemies of Ellen White will go to." I do read some of Tom's posts, even, at times, the longer ones. I have been impressed with his overall support of Ellen White, if not the White Estate. | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8452 Registered: 1-2005 |
Why attack her, just call her DEVOTIONAL. Desire of Ages is beautiful, whether copied or not. But let's not give her godly/saintly status. | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4640 Registered: 5-2006 |
But let's not give her godly/saintly status. I agree. I don't think Ellen White ever promoted a godly/saintly image of herself. If someone has read such, it would be useful to see the quotes posted. She certainly promoted the divine origin of her presentations, written or spoken. But, as we have seen, even Bible writers did not have to have saintly/godly status to be considered inspired of God. Wasn't it Peter who said, "Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." That is saintly status for the Bible writer. What made them holy? Intrinsic holiness? I don't think so. They were holy because God had chosen them for a task. I doubt that the writers claimed holy status for themselves. This is "Peter" speaking long after the fact. For the church, Ellen White provides plenty of devotional thoughts to contemplate. Add to spiritually devotional, church management theory, practical health tips, family and social theory, practical guidance for teachers, pastors, and administrators, plus specific counsels focused on particular individuals in time and place. | ||
| bill sorensen (Billsorensen) member Username: Billsorensen Post Number: 2351 Registered: 9-2004 |
"For the church, Ellen White provides plenty of devotional thoughts to contemplate. Add to spiritually devotional, church management theory, practical health tips, family and social theory, practical guidance for teachers, pastors, and administrators, plus specific counsels focused on particular individuals in time and place." And plently of eschatological theology...... Sorensen | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4641 Registered: 5-2006 |
And plently of eschatological theology...... Yes, that too.  | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2608 Registered: 8-2004 |
Sorry Don....but didn't she claime that her "Testimonies" were directly from God? | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4643 Registered: 5-2006 |
Sorry Don....but didn't she claime that her "Testimonies" were directly from God? Yes, she certainly promoted the divine origin of her presentations, written or spoken. | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 2 Registered: 7-2008 |
J. R. Layman asked: Tom, Just curious, how do you respond to the following article "WHITE ESTATE RESPONDS TO TOM NORRIS ALLEGATIONS. Answer: Slowly. I started a reply some time ago, but have not had the time to finish it. But don't worry I will. In fact, shortly after his response was posted, I called up Dr. Burt and we had a spirited conversation about his reply, as well as about some details of SDA history. I wanted to make sure that we both understood each other's position before I made my reply. In the meantime, Herb Douglas also came online and tried to pile on. But I quickly replied and made the point that neither Douglas nor Burt had even addressed the issues, much less defended the White Estate from the charges of fraud. J. R. Layman said: FWIW Tom......Herb Douglass wasted the time to reply to you.... If you read my reply back to him, I think you would agree that he did waste his time. I don't think many people knew that he is such a bad guy in this story. But they do now. Here is my reply to him; he has yet to make another. No doubt he will slink away like all these wolves do that support this massive fraud in the White Estate. Tom Norris said in Response to Herb Douglas: Herb Douglas, like all of those associated with the White Estate, is part of the problem. While he is sorry to have read the Norris Interview, he is not sorry for the right reasons. Douglas, a long time supporter of the White Estate, is not being honest with the issues or the facts. His 1998 apologetic about Ellen White, Messenger of the Lord, does not deal with the massive suppression and manipulation of Ellen White's writings that was the point of the Tom Norris Interview. Nor does it correct the many misconceptions and myths about 1888 that the White Estate and others have foisted on the Adventist community. So no one should buy this self-serving claim of innocence by Douglas that is calculated to avoid the real issues. Moreover, this idea that Douglas book has somehow met all the charges "thrown" at the White Estate is laughable. He has failed to explain why the White Estate was hiding THOUSANDS of key documents until long after the RBF debates had ended, and the church had exiled Dr. Ford and entered into deep schism. This is one of the primary points articulated in the Interview. Why did he ignore it? But as usual, this question was ignored, as if no discovery of hidden documents occurred. However, the question remains? Why were the White Estate and the General Conference hiding thousands of historical documents about 1888? And why have they failed to explain what was contained in these documents? Douglas has also failed to admit, much less address, why the White Estate has so grossly misrepresented Ellen White's views about the law and the Gospel that were so hotly debated in 1888 and again during the 1970's. The White Estate needs to address these issues; not pretend that they are innocent and above investigation. They need to stop with the diversions and denials and tell the truth. Douglas has also failed to deal with the charges that the church has not correctly explained Ellen Whites view of eschatology, including how the IJ relates to the Three Angels Messages. While all SDA's today have been instructed to believe that the IJ is part of the 1st Angels Message, Ellen White never taught any such view. And neither did Uriah Smith or any 19th century SDA. So why does the White Estate teach a patiently false view about Ellen White's position about the IJ and the 1st Angels Message? And why did Glacier View also endorse this same false view about Ellen White and the IJ? Avoiding this point will not save the White Estate. It is clear that nothing contained in the Norris Interview has been refuted in the least by Mr. Douglas or anyone else. His statement that the "these charges are based on different understandings of the New Testament gospel" is absurd. Perhaps, Mr. Douglas needs to read the Interview again, because he has conveniently missed the very points that must be addressed by the White Estate. Pay attention Mr. Douglas: The basis for my charges against the White Estate has zero to do with my personal views of theology. Rather, the basis for my criticism is the discovery of thousands of documents that were hidden in both the White Estate and the GC Archives. These historical documents contain a very different story from the official version of 1888 that has been endorsed and promoted by the White Estate and the General Conference. Thus the historical facts are the basis for what I am saying. When one understands the historical record, it becomes clear that the White Estate and the General Conference have not been honest whatsoever. They have deliberately and willfully deceived the Adventist people about the very fundamentals of the Advent Movement, including how Ellen White views the Gospel and the Judgment. These are serious charges, and they need to be addressed, not avoided. It is time that the White Estate is held accountable for what they have done and for what they are still trying to do. They have not been honest and they are not being honest now. I suggest that if the church wants to be viewed as credible, they must deal openly and honestly with the issues raised and stop pretending that there has been no wrongdoing in the White Estate. The White Estate has betrayed Ellen White as well as the Advent people. They have hidden, suppressed, and manipulated Ellen White's writings to the point where the real Ellen White, and the true fundamentals of Historic Adventism, is confused and virtually unknown. But the facts have been discovered and the White Estate has been caught. The historical record is clear and unambiguous. The White Estate, as well as the General Conference and the Review are guilty of perpetrating a massive fraud about Ellen White and church history on the Advent community. They must be investigated and held accountable. Then the record must be corrected. This is what Ellen White would want to take place, and so too the Advent people. I look forward to the day when the White Estate will repent and tell the truth. Because unless the record is corrected, and the full story told, the SDA church will continue to self-destruct because they misunderstand Ellen White as well as the very fundamentals that define and empower the Advent Movement. Tom Norris for Adventist Reform http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com/2008/04/white-estate-responds-to-tom-norris.html So JR, I am waiting for Mr. Douglas to reply if he dares. Or for that matter, where is Dr. Burt? Douglas tried to help him, why does not Dr. Burt try and help Douglas in his time of need? But what can either of these men say? Those that have made a career out of promoting the fraud of Traditional Adventism are being exposed as incompetent wolves for all to see. They are not real scholars, theologians, or historians; rather they are paid Apologists and Public Relations men who are paid to promote cultic propaganda for the Hierarchy. Shame on these wolves! While you referenced some confused lemming that blindly defended the White Estate, there is a growing awareness that something is seriously wrong in the White Estate. For the record, here is a post that is becoming more typical. Too bad for the White Estate. It looks like people are going to finally understand what they have done, even if they can't seem to figure out how to repent: Herb said: I have now learned that in 1988 the EGW Estate quietly released never-before-seen EGW documents relating to 1888 and surrounding issues. (4 Volume set headed '1888 Materials' - 2000 pages). I say 'quietly' because many people I have spoken to about this did not know about these documents. Can the EGW Estate please explain why the 100-year delay? I understand that EGW requested (in her Will) that her documents be made freely and readily available to the church and the world. Blessings, Herb Kersten Evangelist HKEA Good question Herb. Why was the White Estate hiding all these documents and what do they contain? Why can't Dr. Burt or Douglas face up to this repeated question and answer it? The longer the White Estate runs from this and other questions the guiltier they appear. Why? Because they are guilty. They run for a reason. To answer the questions is to incriminate themselves. So this is why they are hiding from this discussion about Adventist Reform. Here is another poster that has caught on to the White Estate's double talk, stonewalling, and diversions: Marshall said: Tom, I think that you are correct to push for a greater understanding of the issues surrounding the 1888 conference in Minneapolis. I have recently discovered that the issue surrounding the RBF issue is more serious then most people realize... (The White Estate has) expressed a very dangerous attitude. Assuming that Tom should be pleasant and polite as though that were Christ manner at all times. Christ Called things as they were, the Pharisees he called brood of vipers and white washed tombs, Herod he called a fox and to the people who were exploiting people in the temple he took a whip and drove them out; not exactly friendly. Tom's attitude is appropriate for someone who believes we are being lied to and is concerned with finding the truth. Lies hurt people and we should be angry and have an attitude when people are being hurt. I see nothing in the life of Christ that says other wise. 7/24/2008 09:51:00 PM http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com/2008/04/white-estate-responds-to-tom-norris.html I agree that the SDA Community should be livid about what the White Estate has done. No matter what side of the debate a person stands, there is no excuse for this institution to suppress, manipulate, and distort Ellen White's writings. There is no excuse for them to fabricate history, invent doctrines, and suppress what Ellen White really believed about the Gospel and the Judgment, as well as hermeneutics and eschatology. This is so outrageous, --and so criminal and paradigm changing, --that this issue about fraud must be seen through to its proper conclusion. Which means the White Estate must be forced to explain and confess what they have done. They must tell the truth and admit that Glacier View was a farce, even as they must be required to make restitution for this massive fraud that has touched millions. This is almost beyond belief. But it is true nonetheless. Don Sands said: I do read some of Tom's posts, even, at times, the longer ones. I have been impressed with his overall support of Ellen White, if not the White Estate. Good for you to understand that I am a defender of the real Ellen White, as well as a champion for the genuine and historic version of the Three Angels Messages. The one that does NOT, not, not, have the IJ in the 1st Angels Message. The one that most people have never heard about. The White Estate, and the Review have foisted a massive fraud on the Adventist Community. Ellen White does not support Traditional Adventism as all post Battle Creek SDA's have been taught. She does not support what all have been led to believe about the law and the Gospel, nor did she ever teach this fundamental point about the IJ being a Pillar within the Three Angels Messages, much less that she has doctrinal authority. The White Estate has been an agent of deception, and it is time to put a stop their massive fraud. Ellen White must be better understood if the Advent Movement is to survive and prosper, and this means that the White Estate must CONFESS what they have done and set the record straight. Bob Sands said: Why attack her, just call her DEVOTIONAL. Desire of Ages is beautiful, whether copied or not. But let's not give her godly/saintly status. While it is true that Ellen White NEVER claimed to have any doctrinal authority when she was alive, it is a mistake to reduce her to "devotional status." Why? Because she is a FOUNDER of the SDA church. Thus, she has a specific authority, insight, and experience that cannot be replaced or duplicated by anyone else. She knows better than most all others about what is fundamental and what is not. What will work and what will not. Having such knowledge and experience places her well above a "devotional" writer. Rather, she deserves a place at the table where policy, doctrine, and the mission of the church are discussed and implemented. She is a perpetual, posthumous board member, whose views and counsel must be taken into consideration. Not necessarily because she had Spiritual Gifts, but because she is forever part of the management team that developed the 3rd Angels Message. Thus Ellen Whites point of view is critical for the church to understand. Too bad that the White Estate hid the real Ellen White and foisted a fraud on the church. This is why everyone is confused about Adventism--because the White Estate has been fabricating and suppressing history so badly that they no longer know the facts or the fundamental doctrines that form the basis for unity and mission, and neither does anyone else. The White Estate has been the problem and they are still the problem. Don Sands said: But let's not give her godly/saintly status. I agree. I don't think Ellen White ever promoted a godly/saintly image of herself. If someone has read such, it would be useful to see the quotes posted. Don, the church has given her doctrinal authority. If that is not "promoting a godly and saintly image" I don’t what would be. To place her so high on the hermeneutical pedestal is to say she is like an Old Testament prophet or a New Testament Apostle. But she is neither and thus this propaganda from the White Estate must be repudiated. Don said: She certainly promoted the divine origin of her presentations, written or spoken. But, as we have seen, even Bible writers did not have to have saintly/godly status to be considered inspired of God. You are missing the point. She is NOT to be compared with the Bible writers, regardless of her Spiritual Gifts. So STOP IT! http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/test-Ellen-White-true.htm Don said: Wasn't it Peter who said, "Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." That is saintly status for the Bible writer. What made them holy? Intrinsic holiness? I don't think so. They were holy because God had chosen them for a task. Stop the Doubletalk. Stop comparing Ellen White to Peter or the OT Prophets. This is all wrong. She was not one of them. She is not a PROPHET as the SDA church has taught all these years. She was not holy nor is any of her writings on the same level as the Bible. PERIOD. http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2008/2/EGW-Prophet.htm http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/Ellen-White-5.htm Don said: For the church, Ellen White provides plenty of devotional thoughts to contemplate. Add to spiritually devotional, church management theory, practical health tips, family and social theory, practical guidance for teachers, pastors, and administrators, plus specific counsels focused on particular individuals in time and place. Don, you are too funny. Have you not been paying attention? First off, forget this popular idea that Ellen is primarily a "devotional writer." That was not her Spiritual Gift, nor the primary purpose for her gifts. Those in Battle Creek knew this fact. Second, this idea that the church today pays attention to Ellen White is total myth. Not only have they not paid any attention to her on any level,they have especially ignored her when it comes to doctrine. They have hidden what she really taught and beleived so that they could manipulate her to say what they wanted her to say. So forget that idea that the church has honestly transmitted her writings to the Community, or that they are paying any attention to what she has to say. J. R. Layman asked: Sorry Don....but didn't she claim that her "Testimonies" were directly from God? She did indeed make this claim. But such a claim does not mean, or include doctrinal authority, much less infallibility. And neither James White or Ellen White or Uriah Smith ever said otherwise. The fact that the White Estate started promoting this fraud is a great problem that needs to be corrected. But don’t blame Ellen White for the sins of her delusional grandson. Thus the WHITE ESTATE is the source for most all the problems associated with Ellen White. They are the problem, and until the record gets corrected, and the Adventist people are informed that Ellen White does NOT support Traditional Adventism, the SDA church is doomed. And so too is Ellen White's reputation. I hope this helps. Tom Norris, who knows what the White Estate has done, | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2622 Registered: 8-2004 |
FWIW---Herb Douglass had the most beautiful and pleasent daughter I've ever had the joy of knowing!  re:". R. Layman asked: Sorry Don....but didn't she claim that her "Testimonies" were directly from God?" Sheeeesh Tom, she can't have it both ways! She did indeed make this claim. But such a claim does not mean, or include doctrinal authority, much less infallibility" Then exactly what the HE double toothpick does it mean! Your talking double....IF, as she claimed, her "testimonies" were directly from God.....then they HAD to be "infallible." God does NOT make useless statements! OTOH....maybe she was DELUDED and wasn’t even receiving "I was SHOWNs" from God....but it was just her imagination! FWIW Tom, have you ever read the "Kellogg File?" Seems that her "I was Showns" were by very fallible and political church leaders and NOT from God! Re:Not only have they not paid any attention to her on any level,they have especially ignored her when it comes to doctrine…………………… But such a claim does not mean, or include doctrinal authority Tom, Tom, Tom,…..PLEASE try to be consistant!!!!! | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4246 Registered: 8-2004 |
Tom, did you change the settings for your section? That was a looong post, even for you! 2,856 words! Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4247 Registered: 8-2004 |
Yeah, JR, how can you have a message straight from God that doesn't have doctrinal authority? And "clear, straight, unalterable truth" sure do sound infallible ta me. That don't make no sense, Tom.  Maggie | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4671 Registered: 5-2006 |
how can you have a message straight from God that doesn't have doctrinal authority? Those within the church, such as Alden Thompson, et al, contend that the inspiration process is not so simplistic. The church's decision, including Ellen White's, is to not view her writings as doctrinal. How can this be done? By simply not using her writings to establish doctrine. If God, working through the human agent as He does, does not seek to establish doctrine, that's enough, no official doctrine is intended. Psalm 137 presents the Word of the LORD and yet the violent wish against baby Babylonians is included. Obviously, Holy men of God spoke some problematic stuff. Also, it is to the church's advantage to have a closed canon. In so doing, she can test new ideas and discard "heresy". Thus, EGW's writings remain outside the canon. They remain a blessing to the church but are not the ultimate authority relied upon by the SDA church. | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2627 Registered: 8-2004 |
Don Re:"Thus, EGW's writings remain outside the canon. They remain a blessing to the church but are not the ultimate authority relied upon by the SDA church." If only that were true....but I was raised on a great big red book, titled "Ellen G. White Says." And she was the "ultimate Authority" in my families house, by my preacher father! In the 1950's Saint Ellen WAS the ultimate Authority in the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination.......you simply can't dispute that FACT.... It wasn't till I read about the OYSTERS she loved so much, 30 years after her "health vision" that I realized what a FRAUD she was! FWIW Elder Daniels states how much she loved venison (the BLOODY flesh of a wild Deer!) on her table! Personally I prefer "pulse" as my food! As enjoyed by Danial and his three friends. | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4249 Registered: 8-2004 |
You have to redefine a lot of things:
But you still can't get rid of the apocalyptic Great Controversy theme, unfortunately, IMO. And all the dangerous, cultic EGW statements that have caused people to go down the tubes for 100+ years are still being published and are still a danger to people. I personally don't think Ellen White can be rehabilitated, and I think the more convoluted SDA thinking becomes in the effort, the more SDAs are unavoidably outside the stream of life and relevance, and the more a danger to mental and emotional health they are, because they are making it nearly impossible to think straightforwardly about her. We must keep our critical thinking intact, and not sacrifice it on the altar of EGW apologetics! The safest thing to do is repudiate her, I believe. This thing is way past the point of no return. I know, I know, I used to quote her a lot, and I still think "she" (or whomever) penned some lovely quotable things. But I'm not going to quote her anymore, because I think she's addictive and dangerous, and I don't think SDAs need her--I think they're just addicted to her, at best, or use her to keep people in line paying tithe, or whatever, at worst. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but that's really how it seems to me. Her stuff is so iffy and inconsistent on any given topic, as is the Bible's, that I think the move of Spirit/evolution is taking us out into deep waters beyond all that. The genocidal God of the Bible is so scary and offensive that one must rely on unconscious mechanisms to deal with the cognitive dissonance in order to feel some sort of 'love' for God, it seems to me. A person who remained fully conscious of all the Bible says about God would feel more horrified than worshipful, it seems to me. I'm saying that as a person who has had deep, unexplainable experiences with the Bible and Ellen White. I think that spirituality is innate, and that we are just addicted to personalities and ancient manuscripts, but that we don't need them to find God. I really don't think we do. Maggie | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4677 Registered: 5-2006 |
I personally don't think Ellen White can be rehabilitated, and I think the more convoluted SDA thinking becomes in the effort, the more SDAs are unavoidably outside the stream of life and relevance, and the more a danger to mental and emotional health they are, because they are making it nearly impossible to think straightforwardly about her. As I read in order to respond to posts, I find it very enlightening to read whole documents instead of snippets here and there. Ellen White was not the monster she is portrayed to be. At least not usually. The safest thing to do is repudiate her, I believe. This thing is way past the point of no return. Obviously, I don't agree with doing so. You have convinced me that you must do so. Thus far, my task seems to be to get better acquainted with the historical EGW and then relay what I learn to others. | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4250 Registered: 8-2004 |
I assume, (perhaps incorrectly) that you are comfortable discussing these matters in a public forum. Never comfortable, Glen, and especially in the context of someone who would like to use that information for the purpose of discrediting my line of reasoning via ad hominem. I take the risk of letting you know where I'm coming from, but if you disagree with my reasoning, deal with that directly, if you please. Thanks. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4253 Registered: 8-2004 |
Maggie, How can your line of reasoning be refuted? Your post consists of various ideas you hold. You then justify them by describing yourself as "one who has had deep, unexplainable experiences with the Bible and EGW." Oh, you misunderstood me, Glen, and reading the above, I see how I could have come across that way, but I didn't mean it in that sense at all. I'm not using "deep experiences with the Bible & EGW" as proof for anything--quite the opposite. In fact, I recently posted Mormon "testimonies" of deep experiences as an example that deep experiences don't prove anything. See my post here, if you want to take the trouble to read it and watch the YouTube Mormon testimony: http://www.atomorrow.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?tpc=1780&post=83736#POST83736 Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4254 Registered: 8-2004 |
Few would describe the God of the Bible as you have.... I surmise that that is due to the benumbing effect of cognitive dissonance. Please see the following: Wrath: http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/12977.html?1196314275 As for Ellen White being consistent, a number of us have been at pains to point these things out for the past several years on this site. If you have read our comments and still see consistency in EGW, then I will agree to disagree with you. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4258 Registered: 8-2004 |
Ellen White was not the monster she is portrayed to be. At least not usually. Please quote where I have portrayed Ellen White as a monster, Don. Do you really believe it promotes clear thinking to imply that I portray Ellen White as a monster? I've been quite frank, but I don't believe I've been that intemperate as to portray her as a monster. People we usually think of as 'monsters' are people like Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, etc. Are you trying to discredit me by implying that I lump Ellen White with the people in history who have perpetrated monstrous evil? If so, I don't appreciate that, for the record. Quote me, Don. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4259 Registered: 8-2004 |
Toad hopped back, JR. The devil supposedly inspired Thomas Paine to renounce slavery, while the Holy Spirit supposedly inspired Ellen White to renounce slavery. I'll split the difference and say that their own hearts told them that slavery is a monstrous evil. You're certainly free to dismiss my views as "confused, shallow, largely to be dismissed as worthless," but I do not respond in kind to you, if you'll notice. I try to deal with the issues. Luther simply was antisemitic, his own words betray him. Adventists simply did collaborate with Hitler. It just happened. I think the time is here to think about why the bridge collapsed, not demonize the people who point out the obvious. My views are just my views. They are not "clear, straight, unalterable truth." I don't have a hot line to heaven. People can always disagree with me. If they commence with ad hominem stuff, I'm sorely tempted to believe they can't deal with the issues I bring up. Peace. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4260 Registered: 8-2004 |
Snorting, fire breathing, sounds like a monster to me. I see that you've misunderstood me again. Maybe Don did too. I'm just saying that the real EGW threatened people with hellfire in no uncertain terms if they questioned her writings, whereas the "reworked" EGW is so tame as to be a mere wraith. Yes, I do think Ellen White is dangerous and addictive, but that doesn't mean dangerous on the scale of people in history who perpetrate monstrous evil, and I don't impute their motives to her either. I don't think any amount of reworking EGW is going to help because that involves putting our critical faculties into the service of defending something I consider indefensible. Just my opinion--not "unalterable truth." But this is offtopic, I agree. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4261 Registered: 8-2004 |
Hitler gradually came to see that the problem was the Jews also. He called it THE JEWISH PROBLEM. Hitler, as you put it, "became antisemitic. He was not always that way." Here is the story of how he gradually "saw the light" about the Jews: Perhaps Hitler's change of heart echoed Luther's? Perhaps the SDAs were just in collaborating with Hitler? Maybe the problem wasn't Hitler, it was the Jews??? God forbid. Tom, I'm outta here.... Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4262 Registered: 8-2004 |
I don't think you followed my reasoning, Glen. Glen, it is very dangerous, and I say this confidently, to justify antisemitism for ANY reason. Peace. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4265 Registered: 8-2004 |
Well, peace to Glen, and thank you for deleting that post, JR. I appreciate it. I'm glad to know, though, that my "snorting, firebreathing" remark came across as calling EGW a monster. I thought since it was contrasted to "Caspar Milquetoast," it would be seen in the context of caricatures of both ends of the spectrum, but apparently not. If I called the real EGW a "ring-tailed tooter" do you think people would say I was calling her a monster too? She was a ring-tailed tooter, that woman.... Maggie | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2635 Registered: 8-2004 |
Mags re:"Well, peace to Glen, and thank you for deleting that post, JR. I appreciate it." I think I may have grown up a bit over the years....but I'm so hopping mad about what he said to you.......I won't tolerate that type of nonsense around here! FWIW I still lob's you, even if your a Molly Ivans (shudders) Wannabe!  | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4267 Registered: 8-2004 |
I lobs U2. No need to get mad on my account, but I do appreciate your nuking the hurtful post. Peace, peace to Glen and all of us. Maggie | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4684 Registered: 5-2006 |
Are you trying to discredit me by implying that I lump Ellen White with the people in history No. I am overreacting to what I see as a persistent attack on a fellow human being. You have convinced me that my use of the term "monster" is hugely incorrect when describing how you relate to EGW. | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4685 Registered: 5-2006 |
Hello Glen. It has been quite a while. Anyway to be part of the discussions here? J.R. When a person gets banned what can be done to get unbanned? | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2638 Registered: 8-2004 |
After what he said to Maggsey.......it's close to impossible to get unbanned.....I've never had to deal with a nastier hateful/hurtful posting then that one! | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 3 Registered: 7-2008 |
J. R. Layman thundered: I think I may have grown up a bit over the years....but I'm so hopping mad about what he (Glenn) said to you (Maggie).......I won't tolerate that type of nonsense around here! We need to take a deep breath, and realize we are all grown ups. No need to over react or take any actions based on emotions. I did see the post and wondered if perhaps it should have been deleted, but I don't think I had figured out how to do that as yet. But it's gone now, and I suggest that Maggie and Glen work out this little issue by themselves. I know they can do it. No need to burn up the board on such matters. Besides, I have a hard time thinking that Glen would say something hurtful on purpose. But which one of us has never said something we wish we had not? None of us. Not even JR. So we are all guilty of the same offense. So here is how the practical application of the Gospel comes into our lives. We must not hold grudges against those who have wronged others, or us even as we must be quick to apologize for our blunders and forgive those that have done us wrong. This is a fundamental point that forms the core of our interrelations within the church. The Gospel is worth nothing if those that embrace it cannot get along. None of us are close to perfect and thus mercy must be extended to all, all the time, because this is the great need of mankind. Without it, there is no hope for any of us. So let the two of them work it out, and let the discussion move forward with both of them happily involved. Tom the Moderator | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2640 Registered: 8-2004 |
Tom, have you figured out how to use your "moderator" status yet? And please put your E-mail address on your profile! FWIW, Like Bob2, you can open up and create various "threads" in your section. (although I'm wondering if I've given him too much freedom here?) Anyway, "emotional" or not.....Glen is BANNED....what he said to Maggsey was beneath contemptible.....what he said was just plain MEAN and NASTY! Even I, on my worst days wouldn't have said that. And I freely admit I say a lot of things I shouldn't! J.R. | ||
| Elaine Nelson (Elaine) member Username: Elaine Post Number: 5308 Registered: 8-2004 |
Ellen White was not the monster she is portrayed to be. At least not usually. Exactly how can someone be a "monster" only occasionally? Or, is someone either a monster or not a monster? Can't make up your mind? I feel a case of cognitive dissonance there. Maybe you should see an MD, preferably one that practices in Neuropsychiatry? | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4688 Registered: 5-2006 |
Exactly how can someone be a "monster" only occasionally? Or, is someone either a monster or not a monster?... Maybe you should see an MD, preferably one that practices in Neuropsychiatry? Elaine you are a very unkind person, occasionally.  Exactly how can someone be unkind only occasionally? Or, is someone either unkind or not unkind? Humans are very complex and contradictory. I have seen it in you with your mean-spirited comments. In all my reading of EGW not once have I read the kind of acidic comments that you make. | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8536 Registered: 1-2005 |
Exactly how can someone be a "monster" only occasionally? Or, is someone either a monster or not a monster? Can't make up your mind? What an uninformed remark, there are schizos abuntantly in American society, in case you haven't noticed or are one, Respectfully submitted while not in my role as the "Incredible Hulk".  | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4278 Registered: 8-2004 |
What an uninformed remark, there are schizos abuntantly in American society....
Maggie | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2646 Registered: 8-2004 |
Elaine and Don RE:"Exactly how can someone be a "monster" only occasionally? Or, is someone either a monster or not a monster? Can't make up your mind? I feel a case of cognitive dissonance there. Maybe you should see an MD, preferably one that practices in Neuropsychiatry" "cognitive dissonance "..........maybe she shouldn't have been eating OYSTERS 28 years after receiving her "Health Vision!" And telling everyone else how and what to eat! | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8540 Registered: 1-2005 |
OK "smarty pants" Maggs, note:
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/57427 You win, you and "Gamma radiation". | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4285 Registered: 8-2004 |
I know you didn't mean to be offensive, Bob2--just trying to raise general awareness about mental illness. People with devastating mental illnesses have enough problems without having derogatory names attached to them and being the butt of jokes, as I'm sure you can empathize with. As I said, I'm sure you didn't mean to be hurtful. Peace. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4286 Registered: 8-2004 |
...as I'm sure you can empathize with.... Open mouth, insert keyboard. That sounded like I meant you are mentally ill, Bob2--sorry--I didn't mean for it to come out thataway!!!  Maggie | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4698 Registered: 5-2006 |
Is there a Neuropsychiatrist in the House? Back to Elaine's comment about my need of a Neuropsychiatrist. I have never seen one before, but it sounds like quite a fun time. I believe we all need such a friend. One of my friends from way back was a psychologist. He offered some free counselling; a very insightful fellow. Also, Elaine is knowledgeable enough to know that you don't say something like that to someone who really needs such therapy. I find strange solace in such an observation. | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2652 Registered: 8-2004 |
FWIW, my little brother-in-law (OK, he wasn't so little....he went into body building!.....but he was only 12 when I first met him).....was, as a Resident Physician... the President of the American Psychiatrist Association!...And is now the chief psychiatrist for the California Penal System! Only problem....is you can never get him one the phone......"just leave a message" Sheeeesh FWIW we got him to get into Rotties (3 now) ...instead of mastifs......as one of his "clients" once showed up at his house | ||
| Elaine Nelson (Elaine) member Username: Elaine Post Number: 5318 Registered: 8-2004 |
Sorry, Don, it sounded too offensive. I only meant it as a discussion point for the affect it seems of those who appear indecisive in reaching a conclusion. Nothing other meant: Is she, or isn't she? | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4709 Registered: 5-2006 |
I only meant it as a discussion point Thanks for explaining your thinking on this. | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 4 Registered: 7-2008 |
J. R. Layman sighed and said: FWIW---Herb Douglass had the most beautiful and pleasant daughter I've ever had the joy of knowing! Calm down JR; this is a site about theology and church history. Please try and focus… J. R. Layman said: Sheeeesh Tom, she can't have it both ways! (Because Tom said: She did indeed make this claim. But such a claim does not mean, or include doctrinal authority, much less infallibility.") JR said: Then exactly what the HE double toothpick does it mean! Ellen White is not claiming doctrinal authority when she says that she has a message or a dream for the church. These are apples and oranges, even though the White Estate has blended them together for a deadly smoothie of false doctrine. You can't pay any attention to what the White Estate has said about all this. They have taken positions about Ellen White's spiritual gifts that they have no right to take because the NT does not support their views, and neither does Ellen White. In fact, Paul stayed in the house that had four young women who all had spiritual gifts. So here was a household of young Ellen's mentioned in the NT. Who knew? But did any of them warn Paul about the danger ahead? No. It took another more experienced "prophet" to deal with Paul, and even then, this dramatic testimony to Paul and the church was ignored. So there is a lot of this type of activity taking place in the apostolic church. Which means there is a record about how these Gifts functioned in the church. Which also means that we can figure out how to define Ellen White and how to understand her gifts. Here is the correct place to look for answers about Ellen White--NOT THE WHITE ESTATE. The NT speaks directly about those that had the same gifts as Ellen White. And we should look to the NT to understand how such Spiritual Testimonies worked in the apostolic church. One question about all this is why 4 prophetesses could not get a message to Paul, when he was staying in their home? Why did it take another, from far away, to do the job? And even then he did not get it fully correct. Were the young female prophetesses too immature and weak in their faith to understand the situation? Apparently, because a more mature and pedigreed NT "prophet" enters the picture, one with a dire testimony for Paul. But guess what? Paul rejected this testimony and refused the point of his message. Even though the entire church embraced the "testimony" and tried to convince Paul to listen, he does not. He rejects the warning and walks into harms way with a smile. Here is the story: Acts 21:7 When we had finished the voyage from Tyre, we arrived at Ptolemais, and after greeting the brethren, we stayed with them for a day. Acts 21:8 On the next day we left and came to Caesarea, and entering the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, we stayed with him. Acts 21:9 Now this man had four virgin daughters who were prophetesses. Acts 21:10 As we were staying there for some days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. Acts 21:11 And coming to us, he took Paul’s belt and bound his own feet and hands, and said, “This is what the Holy Spirit says: ‘In this way the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’” Acts 21:12 When we had heard this, we as well as the local residents began begging him not to go up to Jerusalem. Acts 21:13 Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but even to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” Acts 21:14 And since he would not be persuaded, we fell silent, remarking, “The will of the Lord be done!” Acts 21:15 After these days we got ready and started on our way up to Jerusalem. There is a lot to learn from this account. Including the fact that Agabus thought he had the right understanding of his message for Paul. But he did not fully understand his own message, which is why Paul refused his counsel and went on to Jerusalem anyway. Proving that those with Spiritual Gifts do not, and are not, infallible or fully correct. And that they are subordinate to the Apostles at all times. Even though this NT "prophet" had a track record, he apparently gave the wrong advice to Paul. Which is why Paul did not listen to the point of his public testimony. But did this make Agabus a fraud or an imposter? Did it ruin his name in the church? Hardly. The church was edified because there was a lot of truth in this sad testimony. Paul was in great danger, that part was true, and they showed him love and encouragement even as he refused to allow this testimony to change his plans. So here is an example of a mature NT prophet that had a "message from God," but yet it was not fully correct or understood by the NT prophet that gave it. Although this testimony of Agabus was partly correct, it was not fully correct because Agabus thought that Paul should change his plans and not go. But this is the very point that Paul disregarded. In fact, the entire point of the testimony was rejected. Thus Paul was not fazed by this message to the church, even though Paul had previously acted on this very same mans Spiritual advice. Acts 11:27 Now at this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. Acts 11:28 One of them named Agabus stood up and began to indicate by the Spirit that there would certainly be a great famine all over the world. And this took place in the reign of Claudius. Acts 11:29 And in the proportion that any of the disciples had means, each of them determined to send a contribution for the relief of the brethren living in Judea. Acts 11:30 And this they did, sending it in charge of Barnabas and Saul to the elders. Those who were NT prophets --or prophetesses, did not have doctrinal authority. They missed things, even as they got things wrong. Which is why Paul can so easily dismiss a sincere and dramatic testimony from a well-known NT prophet. Such an account proves that while the NT prophet serves a purpose in the church, they are not infallible or authorized to start formulating doctrine. They were not like either the OT prophets or the NT apostles. Thus Ellen White cannot be defined the way the White Estate has done. She is not a prophet as they have described. By definition, her "inspiration" is not like those that wrote scripture, and thus she is forever subordinated to the OT prophets and NT apostles. Which explains why the early church never published the works of Agabus the Prophet. Nor are there any books in the NT about the visions and dreams of Agabus or any other NT prophet. But there are plenty of books about Ellen White the prophet. Most of it manipulated and contaminated by fraud. Those that had spiritual gifts had no authority to publicize these gifts for their own benefit or profit, much less to challenge the authority or doctrines of the apostles. Which is why we should not expect to see the top ten visions of Agabus, much less an account of life and prophecies. But yet, this is what the SDA's have done with Ellen White. They have made her out to be something she was not and could never be, even as they falsified her record and suppressed her real viewpoints. The White Estate turned her gifts into a dishonest and profit making scheme, even as they held her up like an apostle and made her into a cultic celebrity. Could the White Estate be more evil? How could they be more corrupt? The White Estate is guilty of promoting a great historical and theological fraud. They have promoted Ellen White in a blasphemous and untrue manner and now they need to be confronted for what they have done. The SDA church has much to unlearn and relearn about Spiritual Gifts in the church. Thanks to the White Estate, they misunderstand most everything. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 5 Registered: 7-2008 |
Spiritual Gifts in the Church To understand Ellen White, one must first look IN THE NEW TESTEMENT, to see how she can be defined and understood. While it is clear that Paul, who has doctrinal authority, discusses her gifts, we CANNOT turn to the White Estate, as they are blind men that do not know what they are talking about. They have no authority, much less honesty or theological competence. Thus Paul is the best one to define how Ellen White functions in the church and how she is to be understood--NOT THE WHITE ESTATE. So you have to unlearn most all of what you have been brainwashed to believe about Ellen White. Starting with this idea that she had doctrinal authority. A position that James White called "extremely dangerous." Now we know why. Listen to James White: "Every Christian is therefore duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say the very moment he does, he places the gifts in a wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position." James White, Review & Herald, October 3, 1854 The Pioneers never believed that Ellen White had doctrinal authority, or that her writings were equal to, or above the Bible. They never even allowed her writings to be quoted from the Pulpit. In fact, there were even a few years when Ellen White was not allowed to be published in the Review by order of James White. http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/test-Ellen-White-true.htm Regardless of the incompetent claims of the White Estate, those that have Spiritual Gifts of prophesy in the church do not inherit doctrinal authority. They are not like the OT prophets or the NT apostles; which is why Paul says that their words must be interpreted, and judged BY THE CHURCH. And not just by one person, but by a number. The Apostles make it clear that there are rules about prophets in the church; they are not given doctrinal authority, but rather, their message must be judged by the church to see if it is correct. Thus, a NT prophet is not authorized to invent doctrine, write scripture, or to be independent of the apostles or above them. Which is why there is a "judgment process" within the church, which filters any non-apostolic prophetic message. 1Cor. 14:29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. 1Cor. 14:30 But if a revelation is made to another who is seated, the first one must keep silent. 1Cor. 14:31 For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all may be exhorted; 1Cor. 14:32 and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets; But the SDA's made the White Estate the singular authorized interrupter of Ellen White's Spiritual Gifts. They had the first and the last word on every point, even as they saw fit to hide thousands of documents and manipulate the others as they saw fit. They were all powerful, and they made it clear that Ellen White was like an OT Prophet and the White Estate was her sole representative. They alone would speak for Ellen White, even as they gave her the same doctrinal authority as those that wrote the Scriptures. Then they published scores of books, in her name, and have made millions of dollars promoting this manufactured and manipulated SDA PROPHET. But Paul does not allow or promote the development of a cottage industry around those with Spiritual Gifts of Prophecy. Nor does he suggest that someone with such gifts has any doctrinal authority or that they can be properly understood by any one person--like Arthur White--much less a self-serving institution that wants to cash in on the latest religious scam about prophets. This is against the Word for a reason. 1Cor. 14:29 Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment. 1Cor. 14:3 But one who prophesies speaks to men for edification and exhortation and consolation. The SDA church did not present Ellen White's writings to the church and then "let others pass judgment." No. A handful of men prejudged every point and determined what they wanted Ellen White to say. Then Arthur White manipulated the record to get the pre-determined outcome. Thus the church leaders incorrectly interposed themselves between Ellen White and the church, even as they misinterpreted most everything possible. Consequently, the church members were made to feel guilty, hurt, and angry by her (manipulated and legalistic) messages. Which led to debate, division, and great schism. This is the opposite of what genuine Spiritual Gifts are meant to accomplish in the church. But what else could come out this massive fraud? Did the church leaders really think that by controlling, hiding, and falsifying the Spiritual Gifts of Ellen White that they could control the church and build a religious Empire on fraud? God and his Spirit are not so easily mocked, nor can the facts of history be hidden forever. So it is not that Ellen White did not have legitimate and genuine Spiritual Gifts of prophecy as articulated in the NT, --she did. But the Takoma Park SDA leaders misrepresented her role and her authority as well as her writings and beliefs. The result has been catastrophic for the Advent Movement. In short, the White Estate, and others, like the Review, has perpetrated a massive fraud upon the church about Ellen White. And now it is time for this long running farce to be exposed for all to see. This is serious business and the Adventist Community needs to wake up and understand what has taken place. This is the scandal of all SDA scandals, and it will change the paradigm for the self-destructing denomination. Moreover, few understand that James White was the official "interpreter" for Ellen White. He was her manger, editor, publisher, and printer. And he did a pretty good job. But he died in 1881; before the 1888 fiasco ruined his wife's reputation in the eyes of the leaders. This resulted in the exile of Ellen White, along with and her Spiritual Gifts to Australia for a decade. You can be sure this would not have happened had James White been around. And neither would this massive suppression and fraud in the White Estate have taken place either. James White would have thrown Arthur White out the door. But the point here is to understand that the Spiritual Gifts of Ellen White have been horribly misunderstood, censored, and distorted by the White Estate. The Pioneers do not support what the White Estate has taught about Ellen White. Traditional Adventism does not, not, not have the support of Ellen White, which is why she would never have approved of what happened to Dr. Ford at Glacier View. Dr. Ford's position about the Gospel and the Judgment in the 1st Angel's message, as well as hermeneutics, is what Ellen White supports. The White Estate was lying when they said otherwise. And now they are caught for all to see. The modern SDA church experienced great debate and schism because the White Estate refused to tell the truth and divulge the thousands of hidden documents that were in their vault. And now it is time to expose this massive crime that ruined the credibility of the Advent Movement. Shame, shame on the White Estate. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 6 Registered: 7-2008 |
JR said: Your talking double....IF, as she claimed, her "testimonies" were directly from God.....then they HAD to be "infallible." Stop! Where did you get this information? Not from the Bible. This is how the White Estate reasoned about Ellen White. But it is all wrong. Why? Because Paul does not teach this position about the Gift of Prophecy in the church. And neither does Ellen White. Listen to her make this point. The testimonies of Sister White should not be carried to the front. God's Word is the unerring standard. The Testimonies are not to take the place of the Word.... Let all prove the positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim as truth from the revealed Word of God. (Evangelism, p. 256) When God's Word is studied, comprehended, and obeyed, a bright light will be reflected to the world; new truths, received and acted upon, will bind us in strong bonds to Jesus. The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this Holy Word will be in harmony. Our own views and ideas must not control our efforts. Man is fallible, but God's Word is infallible. Instead of wrangling with one another, let men exalt the Lord. Let us meet all opposition, as did our Master, saying, It is written. Let us lift up the banner on which is inscribed; The Bible our rule of faith and discipline. Ellen White, Review and Herald, Dec. 15, 1885. When Ellen White says that "man is fallible," she is including herself. She is saying that she is not fallible. So why did the White Estate claim otherwise? Listen to her again: As we take up the study of God's word, we should do so with humble hearts. All selfishness, all love of originality, should be laid aside. Long-cherished opinions must not be regarded as infallible. It was the unwillingness of the Jews to give up their long-established traditions that proved their ruin. They were determined not to see any flaw in their own opinions or in their expositions of the Scriptures; but however long men may have entertained certain views, if they are not clearly sustained by the written word, they should be discarded. Those who sincerely desire truth will not be reluctant to lay open their positions for investigation and criticism, and will not be annoyed if their opinions and ideas are crossed. This was the spirit cherished among us forty years ago. . . . We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed. Ellen White, Counsels to Writers and Editors, pages 33-42. So Ellen White does not agree with how the White Estate views her or her inspiration. She refutes what they teach about her. JR said: God does NOT make useless statements! OTOH....maybe she was DELUDED and wasn’t even receiving "I was SHOWNs" from God....but it was just her imagination! There can be little doubt that Ellen White had genuine Spiritual Gifts, as many others have also had over the long history of the church. In fact, dreams and visions, as well as speaking in tongues were common in America during this time period, even as this phenomenon was more common in the apostolic era. Although it is certain that Ellen White had some gifts of the Spirit, it is also just as certain that the White Estate does not understand how this gift works or what Ellen White is really saying. So here is the source of the problem. The White Estate has not correctly or honestly understood Ellen White's writings or her beliefs. The fact that we all grew up in a very different time period from Ellen White does not make her Spiritual Gifts invalid. Such gifts are meant to be part of the church until the end of the world. No doubt there is something very wrong with any church today that is not manifesting such gifts in real time. So the absence of any contemporary activity of this type is sad, and underscores how devoid the church is of the Spirit and the Gospel. Today, the Laodicean Church is spiritually bankrupt and thus not able to understand how such Spiritual Gifts operate or what they mean. Such blindness will be fatal to the SDA's if they do not repent. The SDA's, who should be experts on the topic of Spiritual Gifts, but they have things all wrong. There is no reason for this. Not only were the Pioneers clear about Ellen White's gift; the NT is full of this type of activity, even as there were many male and female "prophets" in the church. But they were all subject to Paul's Gospel and the authority of the Apostles. None of them were given any doctrinal authority. Which is why the apostles are listed before prophets in the church. Which means that the prophetic gift, as well as all the others, is subordinate to the doctrinal authority of the apostles. 1Cor. 12:28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. 1Cor. 14:37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment. So being a NT "prophet" does not confer doctrinal authority, or infallibility about anything, much less give that gifted person the right to write scripture or speak with the authority of an OT prophet or NT apostle. Hear the Word of Paul to Ellen White: If she is a true NT prophet, then she will embrace Paul's Gospel and his authority. Which means that she has no doctrinal authority, nor are her words, however spiritual, like scripture in any way shape or form. Another test is this: Does the NT prophet claim to have all the answers and fully understand the future? If the answer is yes, then this is a false prophet because Paul clearly teaches the opposite. 1Cor. 13:9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part; Does Ellen White claim infallibility and all knowledge? Does she have every answer as if she were a doctrinal wizard? Is she the answer woman the White Estate made her out to be, never changing her views about doctrine? No, no, and no. The White Estate's version of Ellen White was not only fabricated, embellished, and manipulated, it was also incorrect as a matter of theological and historical definition. Which is why neither Ellen White nor any of the Pioneers embrace what the White Estate teaches about Ellen White and hermeneutics. Another test of a NT prophet is that that they exercise their prophetic gifts in proportionate to their faith. In other words, there can be variations and fluctuations of their gift. They can even be wrong like everyone else. Rom. 12:6 Since we have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, each of us is to exercise them accordingly: if prophecy, according to the proportion of his faith; As one grows in faith, so too can their prophetic senses. But this is very different from how the SDA's define their version of a prophet. http://www.whiteestate.org/books/bhp/bhpc06.html http://www.nonsda.org/study10.shtml http://www.nonsda.org/egw/index.html http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/test-Ellen-White-true.htm Thus, if Paul is correct, we should expect to see a more mature, and spiritually correct Ellen White at the end of her life then in the beginning. Why? Because the prophetic gift of prophecy in the church is PROPORTIONATE to the personal faith of the gifted one. This is a very different picture from how the White Estate portrayed Ellen White. In fact, they have suppressed her mature and later writings so that they could feature and promote her much earlier material, when she was young, legalistic, and naive in her faith. This is all wrong. Before 1888 her understanding of the Gospel was incomplete and hazy. Afterwards, her corrected view of the Two Covenants improved her understanding of theology and morphed her into a Gospel Reformer,-- for which she was denounced and exiled by the leaders. Thus when the mature Ellen White exercised her Spiritual Gifts during the 1888 debates, the Battle Creek leaders preferred her earlier viewpoints and rejected her most profound and clear messages about doctrine. Then they exiled her far away to a place where they thought she could do no harm to their growing organization. They did not like her Testimonies any more. She came back from exile just in time to see the Denomination self-destruct and retreat to Takoma Park. Then her work was over. She had preserved the Three Angels Messages for future generations, as well as the record of why the Battle Creek Empire collapsed. Too bad that the Takoma Park leaders would become as corrupt and stubborn as those in Battle Creek. Too bad that they would hide Ellen White's record of the 1888 fiasco and misrepresent her fundamental beliefs. Once in Takoma Park the leaders covered up the fact that Ellen White had repudiated Uriah Smith's legalism. They hid her very detailed record about the 1888 debates and promoted her earlier, pre-1888 writings at the cost of her later and more mature viewpoints. Arthur White fooled the church into believing many false things about Ellen White, including the fabrication that Ellen White supported Uriah Smith's legalism, when the opposite was the case. Thus, he hid and suppressed her most clear and doctrinally significant writings from the church, --and few today know what has taken place until these public discussion about Adventist Reform went online. Now that this fraud is being explained and exposed, it is easy to understand what the White Estate has been doing. For example, when the White Estate speaks about the "visions" of Ellen White, they will feature the earlier ones, taking great care to avoid the 1888 debates where she had some stunning visions about doctrine, the church leaders, and eschatology. (See "The Great Visions of Ellen White," Roger Coon, published by the White Estate in 1992) Even though the hidden 1888 materials collection had been published by the White Estate in 1987, one would never know it by reading anything published from the White Estate after that time. Which is why the first 7 visions of Ellen White's "Top Ten" are dated from 1844 to 1863. The 8th vision is dated 1897, and then one 1904 and 1913. None of them have anything to do with the 1888 debacle that destroyed the Battle Creek Empire. Could this possibly be true? Did Ellen White lose her Spiritual Gifts during the 1888 era? Uriah Smith thought so. And apparently the White Estate thought the same because they kept her writings (of this period), secret and hidden. But is it true? Did Ellen White lose her standing with heaven as a NT prophet for the SDA church? Is that why things went so bad in Battle Creek? Because Ellen White was asleep at her post? Or maybe the Spirit had nothing to say to the SDA church during this time period? According to the White Estate, there were no significant visions or dreams by Ellen White that need to be related to the church during this period. But is this true? IT IS NOT TRUE. During the 1888 period, the prophetic gifts of Ellen White were very active and in display to those around her. In fact, she had numerous dreams and visions that were placed in letters and testimonies to the leaders. And she left no doubt about which side of the debate heaven was on. And it was not Uriah Smith's. But the White Estate did not like what the Spirit was saying to Ellen White during those debates. So they hid this huge collection of her writings and made up a false story about 1888. Which is why to this day they are such huge gaps in the record about Ellen White. Thus the church has tried, and succeeded so far, to manipulate and control the Spiritual Gifts of Ellen White by dishonestly suppressing and controlling her writings; pretending that she is saying A, B, C, when she is really saying X, Y, and Z. Such bold and arrogant blasphemy against the Spirit is one major reason why the Advent Movement is self-destructing. They have repudiated the Apostles as well as the Spirit of the prophets that was so obviously manifested in the life and writings of Ellen White. Unless the leaders confess what they have done, and correct the record, they are doomed. They are guilty of turning Ellen White into a fictional person, even as they have falsified church history in order to interpose themselves between the Gifts of the Spirit that God has given to the Adventist church. Thus the SDA's have manipulated not only the facts of church history, and hidden thousands of Ellen White documents in the process, they have also taught false doctrines about those that have Spiritual Gifts in the church. The fact of the matter is that a person may have all the Prophetic Gifts possible, but no such gift, or combination of gifts, can turn any Christian into an Old Testament Prophet or an Apostle, much less confer upon them doctrinal authority or infallibility. There is a reason why Ellen White never claimed to be like Jeremiah or Peter, nor did she ever pretend that her writings were like scripture. The White Estate and the Review did this evil work and now they must come clean and repent. 1Cor. 12:8 For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; 1Cor. 12:9 to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 1Cor. 12:10 and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. 1Cor. 12:11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 7 Registered: 7-2008 |
JR asked: FWIW Tom, have you ever read the "Kellogg File?" Seems that her "I was Showns" were by very fallible and political church leaders and NOT from God! Well, this is the risk of giving faulty humans Spiritual Gifts. They misunderstand and make mistakes. This is a point that the White Estate never understood. They think a "prophet" has to be perfectly and fully correct and so forth, but this is utter nonsense. Agabus gave Paul the WRONG TESTIMONY. While he got some of the message correct, he failed to get the conclusion correct. But Paul knew this, and thus he DISREGARDED the message from this famous NT "prophet." So I have no doubt that she got some things wrong. So what? She was correct to know that Kellogg was trying to remove the Three Angels Messages and turn the SDA church into a humanitarin enterprise that had nothing to do with eschatology. That part she had fully correct, and thus the rest of the details are irrelevant. And so too the complaints that she was being misled by those around here. She was 100% correct to understand the result if Kellogg took over the Denomination. So she allowed the witch-hunt of Kellogg (over pantheism) to take place by those that wanted to push him out of the Denomination because she knew the real danger of his views. It was pluralism that she feared, not pantheism. Kellogg was not really committed to the Three Angels Messages, even though he was a strong Sabbatarian and a great humanitarian. If he had his way, the church would soon discard its eschatological mission and message for a supposedly higher and nobler calling. While the name would still remain, and so too the Sabbath and Health Reform in an even bigger way; this would be the end of the Advent Movement. There would be no judgment hour message to prepare the church for the Second Coming. There would be no loud Cry of the 4th Angels Message to complete the Gospel Commission as the SDA's interpreted Rev 18. This was the real issue for Ellen White. Yes, I have read that interview. It is very informative. Note how Kellogg was going to have someone edit Living Temple and even change the name to "The Miracle of Life." But Daniels, who greatly distrusted and feared Kellogg, prevented him from doing this. Also note that Kellogg is not denouncing Ellen White's spiritual gifts or calling her a fraud whatsoever. In fact, he quotes from her and agrees with much of what she says, even as he blames others for trying to manipulate her against him: Listen to this interview: Kellogg said: I want to tell you another thing you do not know about, a testimony I have from Sister White that she has not published, and that none of them have published, that these men have frequently cut out large chunks of things that Sister White had written, that put things in a light that was not the most favorable of them, or did not suit their campaigns that way, that they felt at liberty to cut them out and so change the effect and the tenor of the whole thing; sending it out over Sister White’s name. I happen to know that, and I think you know it, too. But I have got a testimony that is on record, and Sister White has got it, but they haven’t printed it, and I don’t think they will. Kellogg continued: Sister White said, -- it was since these troubles began, a long time after this thing started up, -- not so very long ago, -- she said, "I saw a boat out in the storm in the sea, and the waves were rolling high, and there were men in the boat, and they pushed you overboard, and you were hanging onto the edge of the boat with your fingers, and they were beating you off." Now that is exactly what they have tried to do. I propose to hang onto all the truth that I know, and all that I have ever known, and keep right straight along the track I have been traveling all these years, just as near as I can; and (See page- 30 -) http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/kelloggfile.htm Kellogg didn't have any problem agreeing with Ellen White's dream did he? Kellogg owed everything to James and Ellen White, and he knew this fact and thus he could not really attack her, so he goes after those around her. But the fact is that Ellen White was an old woman at this point. And she did rely on those around her for information. So what does any of this prove? This idea of infallibility is wrong and Kellogg was correct to understand this fact. But nonetheless, during all the turmoil, he still defended and praised Ellen White. He did not think she was a fraud, nor that anyone should be attacking an old woman of her good and proven character. Kellogg said: I do not believe in her infallibility and never did. I told her eight years ago to her face that some of the things she had sent to me as testimonies were not the truth, that they were not in harmony with the facts; and she herself found it out. I have a letter from her in which she explains how she came to send me some things. She charged me with things I never had done at all, and I got a letter from her in which she explains that she thought I had done it, she drew an inference that I had, and she was worried about it. I never made a public matter of that thing. I held that thing in my private drawer, in my own heart, for years and years, and never should have made it public if these folks had not begun a campaign against me, and I have not made it public, and am not going to do it. Just think of it, -- a man who has got as much business as I have, to pursue a feeble old lady, to try to show up that she is a fraud when she is not a fraud; to try to show up that she is dishonorable, and really an immoral woman when I know she is not. Anybody that knows anything about Sister White’s career knows that she has been a woman who has worked for truth and righteousness, and if you can find a flaw here and there, or some plagiarism here and there, that is a mistake and a blunder, and a slip and never ought to have been done; but now that does not invalidate the good that she has done, and I don’t feel that I want my name connected with anything that does that thing. (p 32). ------------------ How interesting? Here Kellogg is defending Ellen White, refusing to call her a fraud, in spite of the fact that there are errors and mistakes involved. Good for him. Let all the Ellen White critics take note. Kellogg is not a D. M. Canright. JR said: Tom, Tom, Tom,…..PLEASE try to be consistent!!!!! All SDA's have been confused and misled by the White Estate. This is the problem. Their definition of Ellen White's ministry and spiritual gifts are in great error, not mine. What the White Estate has consistently taught about Ellen White is WRONG, false and absurd on most every level. Period. No wonder Adventism is so full of incoherent double-talk. It all starts in the White Estate--here is the problem that is destroying the SDA church. This place is a criminal enterprise that must be brought to justice. While it might sound correct for the White Estate to make all these claims for her, these "tests" they invented have no credibility or validity. Ellen White was not an OT prophet or a NT apostle. She was a young Christian woman when she received the gift of prophesy as articulated in the NT. But under no circumstances does that gift give her doctrinal authority or allow her writings to become elevated to the same level as the Scriptures. The White Estate's view is heretical and blasphemous, and all SDA's should repudiate this garbage. The White Estate has zero authority to change the rules of the Christian Faith. And they have no right or business to be trying to pretend that the Pioneers support their views when they do not. And neither does the apostles or the reformers. It is time for all SDA's to condemn the White Estate and repudiate what they have been teaching for generations. It is time for the Advent Community to confront the White Estate and hold it accountable for the great damage that they have done to millions of people. They are the problem. They are the sin in the camp that must be addressed and repudiated if the SDA church wants to move forward with the blessing of heaven. Right now they are operating under the curse of Heaven. Maggie Bockmann asked: Tom, did you change the settings for your section? That was a looong post, even for you! I didn't do anything, but I did notice that it allowed for one long post instead of 4 or 5. That is the way this site should be set up because it saves time for all. But I have no idea how this works as yet. (I think it takes 2O K now instead of only 7 K per post.) However, I would like to help fix this site up. While is has some paradigm shifting content, the graphics and layout are not on the same level. This is what I would like to see corrected. This open and free site is critical for the Adventist Community. It is the primary place where the real issues can be openly discussed and debated without the typical censorship from the corrupt hierarchy. Doesn't such a place deserve a logo and good-looking landing page? I think the site design should reflect and facilitate the paradigm changing nature of Adventist Reform. Right now it does not. Maggie said: 2,856 words! That is not very large. Some posts have been 10,000 words, and this one is 14,000. Besides, you need to understand what the words mean, not how many there are. Feel free to go back and read them until you can understand what they mean. Maggie Bockmann said: Yeah, JR, how can you have a message straight from God that doesn't have doctrinal authority? Very easy. Just read the story of Paul and Agabus. Here was a "message straight from God" through a famous NT prophet; but yet Paul was free to ignore it, and he did. Why? Because those with the Spiritual Gifts of Prophecy do not create doctrine when they give their messages. If that were the case, then Paul was disobeying heaven. But that is not the case, and Paul was free to disregard this testimony because he had a more clear and correct message about what he should do. He did have doctrinal authority. But not Agabus, and not Ellen White. Stop and think: The Apostles obviously had multiple spiritual gifts; they could heal and have dreams and visions as well as speak in tongues, etc. They had the full range of Gifts, even the gift of preaching the Gospel and administrating and organizing the church. With genuine "inspiration" they spoke for God and Jesus in a very clear and authoritative manner. But all the while; they were wrong about some points of doctrine. And it took many years for them to understand this point about the Gentiles being part of the church. In fact, it was through the use of visions and dreams that Peter finally understood that the church had been wrong on this very important issue. But the point here to understand is that even the super gifted Apostles held doctrinal error-- in spite of their genuine Spiritual Gifts and apostolic stature. In fact, some of them, like Peter and James even became legalists, which was a great doctrinal error that had to be confronted by Paul in Galatians. This proves, proves, proves, that one can have Spiritual Gifts and still be wrong about doctrine and others things as well. So this White Estate idea that inspiration is the equivalent of doctrinal authority and correctness is flat out wrong. Only those that lived in the 1st century can qualify as an apostle and thus have doctrinal authority. Ellen White's inspiration gave her no doctrinal authority or infallibility. It did not make her into an OT prophet or a NT apostle. It gave her writings no doctrinal authority when compared to the apostles, nor was the church authorized to publish such writings as if they were authoritative for doctrine. While the Pioneers understood this correct Protestant hermeneutic, the White Estate did not. Thus they need to repent for a long list of errors and sins starting with how they have defined Ellen White. Maggie said: And "clear, straight, unalterable truth" sure does sound infallible to me. Agabus also thought he had the "clear, unalterable truth." He too knew that he had the Gift of the Spirit and that he was supposed to exercise that gift by first declaring the source of his testimony. Thus he prefaces his message by stating: “This is what the Holy Spirit says!" Not only that; he stopped Paul --in public --and took off his belt. He gave a dramatic demonstration of what he had been shown; convincing the entire church that Paul should listen and obey his very public testimony. But he got in a little wrong. Which is why Paul ignored this testimony. He did not consider it doctrinal or infallible. Acts 21:14 And since he would not be persuaded, we fell silent, remarking, “The will of the Lord be done!” So what do you have to say now? To understand Ellen White, the SDA's need to first understand the Bible, and especially the NT. The White Estate knows not the Gospel or the Scriptures. They are incapable of telling the truth about Ellen White because they have been living a lie for so long that they don't know what truth looks like. They are blind, and they have led the SDA church into disaster. It is amazing how easy it is to study the Bible and see what it teaches. If the SDA's would pay more attention to the NT, and far less to the incompetent White Estate, none of this confusion would have taken place. The White Estate is the root cause for the crisis that has overtaken the Advent Movement. Only when this cesspool of deception is cleaned up can the SDA church go forward. This process has begun for all to see. It is only a matter of time before the entire world comes to understand what has taken place. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 8 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie said: That don't make no sense, Tom. It is the White Estates version about Ellen White and church history that makes no sense. She is NOT a prophet like they taught,--even though she did have legitimate spiritual gifts as articulated in the NT. Moreover, she did not support this doctrine that the IJ is part of the 1st Angels Message as all SDA's have been programmed to believe. Nor does she support last day perfectionism as the leaders also claimed. In short, the post 1888 Ellen White DOES NOT support Traditional Adventism or the outcome of Glacier View. Period. Which means we have all been greatly deceived by the church. In fact, the General Conference, the Review, and the White Estate are guilty of perpetuating a massive fraud on the public. The White Estate especially is a criminal enterprise that has violated their charter. They are guilty of promoting non-stop consumer fraud for generations. The Adventist Community has been horribly manipulated, controlled, and deceived about most everything. The White Estate is the center of this pre-meditated and long running fraud that is destroying the mission and the message of the SDA church. This crime in the White Estate should not continue for another day. It is a great offence to both heaven and earth. It is an insult to Ellen White and the Advent Movement. It will not stand. Don Sands: Those within the church, such as Alden Thompson, et al, contend that the inspiration process is not so simplistic. Ha! This is what false religion is all about. It makes what is simple into something very complex and mind numbing. It takes the simplicity and assurance of the Gospel and turns it into a complex PROCESS of rules, regulations, and double-talk. This is the way of all SDA's now. So I don't care what any of them say anymore. They minds have grown so dull that everything is hard to figure out for these consummate double-talkers. But this point, like all others is very simplistic. Ellen White has zero doctrinal authority. (And she does not support Traditional Adventism as the leaders have claimed all these years.) What could be more simple? ZERO. Just like Agabus. The SDA church is so full of double-talk and fraud about Ellen White that it is destroying them. They had better clean this mess up or they are doomed. At some point their scholars need to stop pretending and pandering. They are making fools of themselves and the Advent Movement. The books sold in the Adventist Book Stores are garbage, wrapped up with pretty graphics. Thus while the White Estate claims to explain the "Great Visions of Ellen White that have charted the course of the Adventist church"; they were hiding many of her writings that contained specific visions and testimonies about the 1888 debates. What a bunch of liars and hypocrites they are! They were really hiding the most significant dreams and visions of Ellen White from the church, even as they promoting the opposite of what she really said. Moreover, the White Estate today has little honesty or credibility, and it is only going to get worse for them as this massive fraud becomes exposed for all to see and marvel at. They have made things so complicated and distorted that it takes legions of books and double-talk from the church's theologians to try and make sense of it all. And what have they concluded? Not much. In fact, the game they are playing now is let's "avoid" Tom Norris. Let's pretend that he has nothing to say and that there is nothing wrong in the White Estate. Besides, they say that this is all so very complex and hard to figure out, what is the point of trying? Who knows what really happened in Battle Creek so long ago? My, my, after 100 years of study, the church still can't deal with the issues. Like I said; until the White Estate confesses what they have done and corrects the record the SDA church will continue its downward spiral into cultic irrelevance and fragmentation. Don said: The church's decision, including Ellen White's, is to not view her writings as doctrinal. Don, what are you saying? Have you lost your ability to understand reality? Why are you saying that the modern SDA church does not view Ellen White's writings as doctrinal when that is exactly what they have taught for generations? This is also what they made official at Glacier View? That is why one of the 28 Fundamentals references her authority. Why would you try to put forth such a blatant deception and falsehood? Do you think the SDA Community can be so easily fooled? Don said: How can this be done? By simply not using her writings to establish doctrine. Too late! This is what the church has been doing for the last 80 years. What kind of game are you playing here? Did you forget about Arthur White and the fundamentals of TA? Besides, things are not what they seem with Ellen White. While all the TSDA's think they are following Ellen White about the IJ and the Gospel, etc, they are doing no such thing. How ironic that anyone who claims to believe in the IJ as a Pillar in the 1st Angels Message does so in a manner that Ellen White never embraced. So on whose authority has the IJ become a pillar in the 1st Angels Message? The Bible doesn't teach this, but many think Ellen White does. But the fact of the matter she does not, and she never did at anytime in her life. The SDA's have painted themselves into a corner and there is no way out except to confess to a mind-boggling and massive fraud that has deceived MILLIONS into misunderstanding the nature, role, and theology of Ellen White. The SDA church needs to stop all the double-talk and repent about Ellen White. Don said: If God, working through the human agent as He does, does not seek to establish doctrine, that's enough, no official doctrine is intended. Only the Apostles can "establish doctrine" for the church. That excludes all others--including Ellen White. Which means the White Estate is dead wrong about how they represent her. However, the errors in the White Estate do not mean that Ellen White did not have genuine spiritual gifts-- as articulated in the NT. She did. Nor does it mean that she does not have a message from God. She does. The problem is that the SDA's have suppressed, censored, and abused Ellen White so much--that the church has very little idea of what she was trying to say. After Ellen White was dead, the Denomination took full control of her writings and turned them into propaganda for marketing purposes. They were very successful for a time, and the White Estate brought in significant sums of money through her manipulated writings that were also used to control the behavior of the members. In other words, Ellen White's gifts became a useful tool for church growth and income, even as the leaders hid the true content of her messages and manipulated her to say what they wanted her to say. But the Gifts of the Spirit are not for sale, nor are they to be misused in order to grow the church or bring in money. Acts 8:17 Then they began laying their hands on them, and they were receiving the Holy Spirit. Acts 8:18 Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, Acts 8:19 saying, “Give this authority to me as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” Acts 8:20 But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! Acts 8:21 “You have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Acts 8:22 “Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you. It is a very wicked thing to toy with the gifts God employees in the church. This is what the White Estate has done with the full permission of the GC and the Review. They have mis-used Ellen White's genuine Spiritual Gifts in order to give themselves doctrinal authority-- in her name. They have manipulated her writings in such a manner as to make her say the opposite of what she really meant. They have placed their own words in her mouth, even as they have repudiated and blocked her prophetic message that was meant for the Advent people. Such blasphemy is the root cause for the demise of the SDA church. The White Estate needs to be held accountable for what they have done. Even as the Adventist Community demands that the truth be told about Ellen White and her true beliefs. Don said: Psalm 137 presents the Word of the LORD and yet the violent wish against baby Babylonians is included. Obviously, Holy men of God spoke some problematic stuff. First of all, what is this nonsense about killing in the OT being problematic? How many children and little babies will be killed in the NT era; at the Second Coming? How many people, pets, and wild animals? The earth will be ruined and BILLIONS killed by the direct action of God. So what is problematic? The Bible teaches that this is the fate of mankind, even as the church is tasked to proclaim this upcoming event. In fact, the J/C paradigm is focused on a Judgment at the end of the world. This is the point, and it is not a problem for those that are paying attention to the Word. Second, Ellen White is not to be compared with anyone in the OT. She lived only at the end of the NT era. Thus she cannot be like those in the OT or like those apostles that had doctrinal authority in the 1st century. Her NT inspiration confers on her neither doctrinal authority or infallibility. And she never claimed to have any. But the White Estate fabricated this nonsense, and promoted it as if it were truth from heaven when it was not. They are the problem. Don said: Also, it is to the church's advantage to have a closed canon. In so doing, she can test new ideas and discard "heresy". The SDA church is full of heresy and much false doctrine. In fact, they have invented a number of new doctrines and declared them to be orthodox when they are theological nonsense. So the SDA's aren’t using the Bible to test anything. Rather, they are ignoring the proper use of both the New and Old Testaments so that they can promote the most absurd and untrue things --all in the name of Ellen White. The doctrines of the SDA church are an abomination, and so too their fraudulent version of church history. This is why there must be Adventist Reform. The SDA apologists have invented doctrines in the name of Ellen White that do not exist, like the IJ in the 1st Angels Message. Not only did she never take that position, neither did anyone else in Battle Creek. The White Estate has fooled everyone into thinking that Ellen White is a die hard Traditional Adventist when the opposite was true. They were tampering with the record and deceiving the church. The fact of the matter is that Ellen White did not believe in the same theology, or church history, as Arthur White or those that were victorious at Glacier View. Thus her views were miles apart from what all modern SDA's have been taught. Traditional Adventism is based on a very false and heretical view of hermeneutics; one that Ellen White never supported. This is one of many problems that must be corrected Moreover, any discussion about the cannon has long been over. So the SDA's don't have a chance for their warped views to ever become credible. They must either repent and embrace proper Protestant doctrine or continue o their present course as a confused and corrupt cult. It is one or the other. There is no in-between in this matter. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 9 Registered: 7-2008 |
Don said: Thus, EGW's writings remain outside the canon. They remain a blessing to the church but are not the ultimate authority relied upon by the SDA church. Ellen White's writings have become a curse to the church as evidenced by the fact that the denomination has melted down twice because they church could not understand her. So while they may have "blessed many", they have also been the source of many leaving the church, both in Battle Creek and in Takoma Park, as well as Today. One could make a better case that her writings have ruined the SDA church, even as they are now the greatest stumbling block to the credibility of SDA theology. So Don, you are being very dishonest to claim that the SDA's have not given EGW doctrinal authority, or that they only use only the bible to sustain doctrine. That is so untruthful and misleading that you should be ashamed of yourself. Goldstein tried this same trick when he tried to tell everyone that they had misunderstood what the church was teaching all these years about the IJ. But he wasn't even around when all this took place. I see you are also trying to revise church history to also make your employers look good. Sorry, but such games no longer work. The SDA church needs to tell the truth and repent for all their many errors and false doctrines and reform, but they refuse to deal with the issues or admit they have done anything wrong. This is why people get so disgusted with the SDA leaders and pastors. They are so dishonest and full of double talk that it is repulsive. I am disappointed that you would think you could get away with such a great distortion on this site. Amazing. But then again, this is what you and Goldstein are paid to do: To place the church in the best light, regardless of the truth? Very sad. J. R. Layman said: If only that were true....but I was raised on a great big red book, titled "Ellen G. White Says." And she was the "ultimate Authority" in my families house, by my preacher father! JR, you were not the only one whose life was ruled by Ellen White. This cultic nonsense overwhelmed the entire SDA church. This is what the church taught to everyone. Arthur White had essentially taken over the control and interpretation of all doctrine and church history, and thus the White Estate was able to promote one of the greatest frauds in the history of the Protestant Church. The White Estate knew that this massive hoax could only work if they hid thousands of documents and kept everyone away from the vaults. And that is what they did. Only by keeping the real Ellen White hidden could the White Estate make their case for TA. But the facts have been discovered and a clear case of premeditated fraud and massive deception is being exposed for all to see. JR correctly observed: In the 1950's Saint Ellen WAS the ultimate Authority in the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination.......you simply can't dispute that FACT.... I agree. This is the way it was, and it is too late for anyone to pretend otherwise. However, this statement is not exactly true. Why? Because Arthur White was really the "ultimate authority." The real Ellen White was long dead. So she was not really speaking at all, much less approving of all this suppression, censorship, and misrepresentation that was so routine in the White Estate. So instead of Ellen White being in charge, it was Arthur White pulling all the strings and operating Ellen White as if she were a puppet. He became her official interpreter. When she spoke and thundered in compilation after compilation; it was really Arthur White manipulating her words and misrepresenting her theology. HE was the "ultimate authority" behind the White Estate, not Ellen White. HE was pretending to be Ellen White, even as HE was deliberately changing her words and censuring her point of view. This is the point that I have been making for years now. The White Estate has not honestly or correctly represented Ellen White to the post Battle Creek church. THIS is the problem. They must be held accountable for what they have done. The record must be corrected. JR said: It wasn't till I read about the OYSTERS she loved so much, 30 years after her "health vision" that I realized what a FRAUD she was! FWIW Elder Daniels states how much she loved venison (the BLOODY flesh of a wild Deer!) on her table! Everyone has a personal story about when they realized that the church was deceiving them about Ellen White. Walter Rea wrote a book that explained how his discovery of fraud in the White Estate changed his life and led him to repudaite TA. So many, even millions, have come to the place where they realized that they had been misled about Ellen White. For me, it was when I read that Uriah Smith had been terminated from the Review in 1902 for legalism. When I read that little known fact that had accidentally slipped into the book Crisis To Victory, I knew that something was very wrong with how the church was teaching history. If Uriah Smith's theology had been repudiated by Ellen White in Battle Creek, then why was Traditional Adventism being promoted in Takoma Park in the name of Ellen White so many years later? Moreover, this discovery from published sources meant that the claims by the White Estate, Froom, and others that Ellen White and Uriah Smith had reconciled after 1888 is totally false. They did not. They remained theological enemies, even as Ellen White agreed that the great Uriah Smith had to be terminated from the Review, and humiliated in front of all Battle Creek in 1902. Then I went on to find the documents that proved the White Estate has been promoting a massive fraud on the Adventist people. But don't blame Ellen White for what her incompetent and delusional grandson did. This is a great mistaken and a colossal injustice. The real Ellen White has not been presented to the church, and there is no sense in pretending otherwise. The record must be corrected, and this massive fraud repudiated. Then the real Ellen White can emerge for all to see. Maggie Bockmann said: You have to redefine a lot of things: There is a whole new world of Adventist history and theology to explore and understand. When the record is corrected about Ellen White, a number of major corrections will have to follow; the first change must be the repudiation of TA. Why? Because Ellen White never believed that the IJ is a Pillar in the Three Angels Messages. Nor does she support any of the major points about hermeneutics or the Gospel that define TA. So the first change is the largest change, because the post Battle Creek SDA's have been promoting a false version of the Three Angels Messages that Ellen White never supported. This first point overturns everything that the SDA's have been teaching for generations, even as it proves they have been following a wrong and dishonest course about Ellen White for many years. Then a long list of additional corrections must take place with every doctrine. Why? Because the SDA's have most everything WRONG. Including eschatology and hermeneutics. Maggie said: By the time you get done, as I said earlier, you end up with an unconvincing, confusing, toothless, Caspar Milquetoast version of Ellen White who bears no resemblance to her snorting, fire-breathing printed self, IMO. The real Ellen White is a fearless Gospel Reformer that will stand up and repudiate Glacier View, condemn the White Estate, and demand Gospel Reform the moment she is able to speak freely. But the White Estate refuses to comply with their legal obligation to honestly explain Ellen White to the public. Thus many are left to either embrace Arthur White's version of Ellen White or their own imaginations about her when the historical record will settle any and all issues. I suggest that you wait before you make any final judgments about Ellen White or Adventist doctrine. Because things are not as they seem. Maggie said: But you still can't get rid of the apocalyptic Great Controversy theme, unfortunately, IMO. And all the dangerous, cultic EGW statements that have caused people to go down the tubes for 100+ years are still being published and are still a danger to people. Ellen White was an apocalyptic minded person, even as Adventism is an eschatological movement. This is not wrong. At the end of time the church should be focused on such things. Besides the GC theme comes from the Reformers, Ellen White did not invent it. Maggie said: I personally don't think Ellen White can be rehabilitated, WRONG. She can be easily "rehabilitated". How? By telling the truth about what she really believed and taught. How hard can that be? Apparently it is an impossible task for the SDA church leaders. The rehabilitation of Ellen White will do the opposite for Arthur White. It will turn him into a most evil and wicked man, even as it brings down the reputation of all those zealots that have promoted TA in the name of Ellen White. But the modern day White Estate is more concerned with their own reputation than how Ellen White is viewed. Thus they will resist confession, choosing to continue on with the status quo, even if it means the ruin of Ellen White and the Adventist Movement. The fraud in the White Estate must not be allowed to stand. It must be confessed and the record corrected. THAT is how you save the reputation of Ellen White and the Advent Movement. Then the Advent people in the 21st century can be introduced to a very different version of the Three Angels Messages, one that is opposed to TA, as well as its legion of errors. Maggie said: and I think the more convoluted SDA thinking becomes in the effort, the more SDA's are unavoidably outside the stream of life and relevance, and the more a danger to mental and emotional health they are, because they are making it nearly impossible to think straightforwardly about her. Things are convoluted and self-destructing because the leaders have made things this way. It is the unintentional consequences of such a monstrous fraud. The General Conference, which owns the White Estate, has encouraged and allowed the White Estate to develop and promote one of the greatest scams in the history of the Protestant Church. It is almost beyond belief what has taken place. All these generations of suppression, manipulation, and double-talk takes a toll on the very soul of the church. There is only so much cognitive dissonance that the Adventist Community can take before they reach the breaking point, and that point started in 1980 and continues to this very day. Which is why there are far, far more ex-SDA's than present ones. The Adventist Community has given up on all this doctrinal confusion and gross mismanagement, and who can blame them. It is time for the White Estate to explain and confess what they have done. This is the only way to sort out this horrible crime that has taken place. This is the only way to save the corrupt and self-destructing SDA church. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 10 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie said: We must keep our critical thinking intact, and not sacrifice it on the altar of EGW apologetics! I strong agree. So why don't you scream at the White Estate to explain why they were hiding thousands of documents about Ellen White all these years? Ask them why they can't refute what Tom Norris is saying about these documents or the great fraud in the White Estate? Ask them why they print books about "The Great Visions of Ellen White" and then omit the visions she had about the 1888 debate? If the White Estate had a vision from Ellen White that settled the great dispute about the law and the Gospel, wouldn't you think they would share it with the church and the scholars and theologians? They had such a vision, but hid it, along with thousands of other Ellen White documents. They hid the real Ellen White from the church, even as they fabricated a fraud to take her place. But for years you have chosen to disregard my charges against them, thinking that such things could not possibly be true. Have you changed your mind? Or do you still think you were taught true and honest history from the White Estate? Maggie said: The safest thing to do is repudiate her, I believe. This thing is way past the point of no return. The "safest" think to do is tell the truth about church history and repudiate all this SDA propaganda from the White Estate. This is the only course that will save the church. Besides, what do you want to Repudiate? That Ellen White was a historical person and co-founder of the Denomination? Or that she is a Prophet like the White Estate defines her? Only the second point is wrong. The first cannot be "repudiated because she was a very real person of history that helped establish a very real Denomination. Maggie said: I know, I know, I used to quote her a lot, and I still think "she" (or whomever) penned some lovely quotable things. Unless one knows the context of her words, no one should quote her with confidence. Why? Because the White Estate is a propaganda machine; they cannot be trusted about history or doctrine. No one can trust their books or their representation of Ellen White's life or theology. They have most everything wrong. Which is why you will not see them joining this discussion. They cannot deal with the facts that prove them guilty. I have been in the White Estate and I know what I am talking about. Arthur White was not being honest with the writings of Ellen White and the Adventist Community must deal with this fact, because it is obvious that the White Estate is not going to cooperate or repent. They think they are above the law, and beyond justice, but they will find out otherwise. Maggie said: But I'm not going to quote her anymore, because I think she's addictive and dangerous, and I don't think SDA's need her--I think they're just addicted to her, at best, or use her to keep people in line paying tithe, or whatever, at worst. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but that's really how it seems to me. Ha! You can't live without thinking about Ellen White. This is the fate of all SDA's because of how we were raised. But everyone needs to understand that this Ellen White was the creation of Arthur White. The Ellen White of the 20th century was manipulated to the point of absurdity; she did not represent the genuine views or person of Ellen White. The only hope for the SDA community is for this evil hoax to be exposed for all to see. Then the real Ellen White can share her point of view with the church. And her point of view is very different from Traditional Adventism. Like I said, she is not the problem, it is the White Estate. They have foisted a fraudulent prophet on the modem SDA church. I say it is time for the real Ellen White to be let loose from her imprisonment in the basement of General Conference. Freedom for Ellen White should be the cry of every SDA. "Tell the truth" should be a chant directed towards the corrupt White Estate and the General Conference. The White Estate especially should be inundated with phone calls and letters from outraged SDA's demanding to know what has been going on in the White Estate all these years. Everyone should demand answers, and if none of them make any sense, (which they won't), then the repentance should be the order of the day. Maggie said: Her stuff is so iffy and inconsistent on any given topic, as is the Bible's, that I think the move of Spirit/evolution is taking us out into deep waters beyond all that. Your not paying attention; Her stuff is really Arthur White's "stuff." He has put his own spin on things to such an extent that few understand her mind or her theology. This is why we are having this public discussion, so that Ellen White can be better understood. And at this point, you, and JR, and many others, are relying far too much on what you have been taught by the church about Ellen White. But most all of what we were taught is turning out to be manipulated and outright wrong. Thus, point after major point about Ellen White has been overturned by the facts, but yet the church refuses to admit how badly they have misunderstood Ellen White. They refuse to admit that there were teaching false and incorrect positions about hermeneutics, and the Gospel, as well as the very definition of the Three Angels messages. So no one can have a confidence in any book published by the White Estate. The compilations do not represent the mature Ellen White and their very publication was a direct attempt to manipulate her words and place false doctrines in her mouth. Without the proper context, all her becomes worthless nonsense. Including such works as the Great Controversy, which has been misinterpreted by all legalistic SDA's to say things it never said about the IJ. So the record needs to be corrected, and her hidden and suppressed documents about 1888 need to be explained to the church. The SDA's of the 21st century need to understand that Ellen White was not a TSDA as we have all been indoctrinated to think; she would have stood by Dr. Ford at Glacier View and approved of his version of the Gospel and the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. The leaders were lying to say otherwise. Moreover, Ellen White was very consistent on a number of points. Thus she never wavered about the history or the definition of the Three Angels Messages. Nor did she ever embrace this popular (modern) view about the IJ being the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message. She would laugh at such a proposition, and direct anyone who thought such a thing to read the history of the Advent Movement contained in the Great Controversy. So Ellen White NEVER embraced this fundamental position of the TSDA's at any time in her life and I defy the White Estate to show otherwise. But yet this is what they teach. Thus the White Estate is being consistently incompetent and dishonest. They are the problem. They are the ones making things up and revising things as they see fit. There are other points as well, like hermeneutics, where they take the opposite position from Ellen White. Shame on them. Maggie said: The genocidal God of the Bible is so scary and offensive that one must rely on unconscious mechanisms to deal with the cognitive dissonance in order to feel some sort of 'love' for God, it seems to me. The same God of the OT is in control in the NT. Thus the Second Coming will be the greatest genocide of all time. And it will be done by the command of Jesus. So forget this idea about Jesus being like a kitten. At the Second Coming, he will roar like a Lion, killing billions at the Judgment. Which is why the Judgment is such a "scary" and powerful concept. Only those that embrace the Gospel will survive that great Day of mass execution. Is. 13:9 Behold, the day of the LORD is coming, Cruel, with fury and burning anger, To make the land a desolation; And He will exterminate its sinners from it. Matt. 25:31 “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. Matt. 25:32 “All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; Matt. 25:33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left. 2Pet. 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up. 2Pet. 3:11 Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, 2Pet. 3:12 looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning, and the elements will melt with intense heat! 2Pet. 3:13 But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells. 2Pet. 3:14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, Maggie said: A person who remained fully conscious of all the Bible says about God would feel more horrified than worshipful, it seems to me. This is true, except for those that understand the Gospel. This doctrine trumps even the Judgment of God,-- as it was designed to do. It is the only way to survive the Judgment and obtain Eternal Life. Without it, a person should feel guilty and horrified at his doomed fate. Thus true worship is our thanks to God for his merciful Gospel. Without it, what is there to be thankful for? The doom of Judgment? Maggie said: I think that spirituality is innate, and that we are just addicted to personalities and ancient manuscripts, but that we don't need them to find God. I really don't think we do. While all are given some spirituality, all are also born innately evil. So from the beginning, in every person, there is a battle between good and evil. It is the way of the world. It is the context within which we live. Those that embrace the Gospel can have peace now because they will prevail in the Day of Judgment, while those that don't, won't have either. Moreover, it is very dangerous and wrong to think that mankind does not need the Bible to understand God. Why must there be a written record? Because the J/ C religion is based on direct revelation; not on anything innate or intrinsic. And it is this specific revelation of God's will and character that are contained in the Bible. There is no substitute for this story that explains how the God of the Jews has chosen to interact with mankind. There is no other story like it on earth. What a pity that the SDA's have it so wrong. Don Sands said: As I read in order to respond to posts, I find it very enlightening to read whole documents instead of snippets here and there. Welcome to the real world! This is how life works. Everything needs a full and proper context in order to be understood correctly. But the White Estate deliberately and purposefully deceived the church about Ellen White. They even hid visions they did not like, thus interfering with Ellen White's Spiritual Gifts and defying her express wishes to have her writings explained to the church. For the Denominational leaders to interfere with what the Spirit is trying to communicate to the church through Ellen White is blasphemy as well as fraud. And until there is a full confession, and the record is corrected, you will never be truly enlightened about what Ellen White is really saying. In fact, you are not even close to understanding her. Which is why you think the IJ is the Judgment from Historic Adventism and Ellen White does not. So I repeat: the only reason why the context of Ellen White's writings was kept hidden from the church, is because the White Estate was deceiving everyone about what she was actually saying. Why else would they hide THOUSANDS of documents and redact the others so heavily? What was the point of such an exhausting process of systematic censorship? The White Estate has been manipulating church history as well as the writings and doctrines of Ellen White 24/ 7. They hid full documents and took statements out of context from those that were not hidden. They have even taken things out of context from her published works, such as the Great Controversy. Everywhere one turns; the White Estate has been dishonest and incompetent. So yes indeed, when the whole record is viewed in its correct historical context, it is a very "enlightening experience" for any SDA--even a stunning one if they are paying attention. I have seen the full record. And guess what? Ellen White does not support Traditional Adventism as all SDA's have been incorrectly taught. The White Estate has perpetrated a most spectacular hoax on the Advent people, even as they have failed Ellen White in the process. The discovery of the full record in the White Estate and the Archives changes everything for the Advent Community. It has been 30 years since this took place. That is long enough. It is time for all this to be exposed for all to see. Don said: Ellen White was not the monster she is portrayed to be. At least not usually. While this is true, there has been far too much smoke, fire and brimstone coming from the White Estate all these years to pretend that it was only some kittens making all this trouble. Surly there must be a snarling and wicked monster somewhere in the White Estate? Too many people have heard the roars coming from the White Estate. Too many people are bleeding and wounded. So is there a monster in the White Estate? There is. His name is Arthur White. He is the most dishonest and twisted of all 20th century SDA leaders. He was a cultic fool as well as a non-stop liar. And the SDA people need to understand that he is the MONSTER in the White Estate. He is responsible for promoting the fraud of Traditional Adventism by claiming that it had the full support of Ellen White when he had the documents all along which proved the opposite. This undetected and long running fraud is what has caused the demise of the modern Advent Movement. While Arthur White had plenty of help from a cultic cast of thousands, he has played such a central part in this crime that no mercy should be shown to this delusional and evil man. He must be posthumously condemned, vilified, and repudiated. And the false record corrected. Don said: Thus far, my task seems to be to get better acquainted with the historical EGW and then relay what I learn to others. I wonder how many SDA's really want to know the truth about the historical Ellen White? How many can even handle the truth about her? Most people are so steeped in Ellen White propaganda, that they can't comprehend what has been discovered. This idea that TA has no support from Ellen White is a stunner. It is almost beyond belief. The TSDA's especially have the most difficulty because the very first point about Ellen White's real view of eschatology overturns everything they have ever been taught. And so too does the second one about hermeneutics, and the third one about the Gospel. So Don, how many people have you informed that Ellen White does not support TA? How many people have you told to forget about the IJ being a pillar from Historic Adventism because it was never true? You have not told anyone about these facts that have been placed on the table for all to see. Why? Because you can't bring yourself to deal with these issues or process the paradigm shifting nature of this discussion. You don't want to believe the real facts about Ellen White or Arthur White. And until you do, don't think you are qualified to tell anyone anything about Ellen White. For example, you can’t process or embrace this first fundamental point about Ellen White and the Judgment? When will you replace your false version of the 1st Angels Message with the one that Ellen White taught? The one WITHOUT the IJ as the Judgment Pillar in Rev 14:7 ? Until you can do this, you and Ellen White are doctrinal strangers and enemies. All those that think the IJ is the Judgment referenced in Rev 14: 7 are not paying any attention to Ellen White. In fact, they are repudiating her fundamental view of eschatology, even as they have embraced the fraud of Arthur White with both hands. So here is the first test that all must pass in order to understand Ellen White. They must grasp what she is saying about the Judgment in the 1st Angels Message. They must comprehend how she views the doctrine of the Judgment in Adventist history and eschatology, and stop confusing the words of Arthur White with those of Ellen White. Today, thanks to the incompetent and corrupt White Estate, Ellen White's views, as well as her role, and her message, has been kept from the Advent people. Her Spiritual Gifts have been misrepresented, abused, and censored so badly that the genuine Ellen White of history is virtually unknown and unappreciated. This wicked fraud has to stop. One way or another, it is going to stop because the facts have been discovered and there is no doubt about what the White Estate has done-- and what they are still trying to do. There is no escape for the White Estate-- but to confess. All those in the Adventist Community should demand that the White Estate confess what Arthur White has done. Then the record must be corrected so that Traditional Adventism can be repudiated and the original version of the Three Angels Messages can be restored to the Advent Community. I hope this helps those that still don't understand what has taken place in the White Estate. Tom Norris for Adventist Reform | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4554 Registered: 8-2004 |
I strong agree. So why don't you scream at the White Estate to explain why they were hiding thousands of documents about Ellen White all these years? Because if Ellen White couldn't say what she needed to say in upwards of 25,000,000 published words in 50+ years, then I suspect we don't really need to know about the other stuff, which is likely just as incoherent as the published stuff. That's more than several Bible's worth of material, isn't it? Who cares what is/was in that creepy old White Estate Vault? Cultic nonsense, IMO. Ask them why they can't refute what Tom Norris is saying about these documents or the great fraud in the White Estate? Likely for the same reason no one else can refute you either, Tom. You're so incoherent, you don't know when you've been effectively refuted. You get on the endless apologetic loops from hell, and no one can wake you from the trance. If they hid documents, it's just the same ol' same ol' Adventist subterfuge. The whole system reeks of it. Ellen White was a past master of it. And, BTW, it sounds like you're angling up to being our new Apostle--a step up from prophets, as you explained. Deal me out. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4555 Registered: 8-2004 |
...all are also born innately evil. That is the biggest load of horse pucky ever dumped upon the human race, IMO. And Tom, you can vilify Arthur White, if that suits you ends, but I've posted over and over and over EGW's threats of doom for questioning her writings. I personally got them from her published books, not Art White. Who reads Art White's "words" anyway. That's absurd. Or maybe you're talking about the evil compilations? I think EGW did just fine laying double binds on people before compilations came along. It's hard for me to imagine any good reasons why you are peddling this crazy mixed up tale. Over and over, for years, I've posted IJ quotes from Great Controversy. How you can continue with this fabrication is beyond me. Why I continue to bother with any of this is also beyond me. Walter Martin is rolling over in his grave. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4556 Registered: 8-2004 |
All those that think the IJ is the Judgment referenced in Rev 14: 7 are not paying any attention to Ellen White. In fact, they are repudiating her fundamental view of eschatology, even as they have embraced the fraud of Arthur White with both hands. Tom, several times I've posted direct quotes from GC where she connects the IJ with the Rev. 14 judgment. You blithely ignore that like it wasn't there. That's why no one can refute you. Unless one knows the context of her words, no one should quote her with confidence. Why? Because the White Estate is a propaganda machine; they cannot be trusted about history or doctrine. No one can trust their books or their representation of Ellen White's life or theology. They have most everything wrong. Well, as I said, the bridge collapsed several decades ago, IMO. Faulty materials, faulty construction. It is not worth the effort to pull the real EGW out of the rubble, IMO, because she's the main reason it collapsed in the first place. She's the incoherence on which it was built. I don't think any amount of demonizing Arthur White is going to mitigate that, but your desperation is obvious and understandable. The White Estate may have been hiding embarrassing stuff, but the reason they were hiding it was that it was, well, embarrassing. Whole thing stinks to high heavens. Maggie | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2727 Registered: 8-2004 |
re:"Doesn't such a place deserve a logo and good-looking landing page?" NOPE! | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8657 Registered: 1-2005 |
Tom's story in Acts 21, and his use of it to "justify" his emphasis on EGW, is not too strong a position. Christ also knew he was going to be sacrificed as propehesied. Paul wasn't going to avoid his itenerary because someone was warning he would be bond and put in prison. EGW does not have to be part of a Reformed SDA church, or at least no more than Devotional. Sorry, IMO, she is irrelevant. “I've come to think of what we do at Spectrum as setting the table for the great conversations of Adventism.” - Bonnie Dwyer, Editor, Spectrum | ||
| Pauli K.Heikkinen (Heipauli) member Username: Heipauli Post Number: 29 Registered: 8-2008 |
First I must admit that I've not follewed this discussion closely. So what I now am writing may contain things already stated. And irrelevant, too. But at any rate, my impression during the 40+ years in the fold has given me the idea that both EGW and her followers, the leadership and White Estate included, have admitted in general level, that even EGW was fallible. But when one tries to go to details, for example tries to give an example of her fallibility, then one hits the fan. Namely it has seemed to me, that the fallibility is not applicable to any spesific happening or any statement. Even the silliest utterances are vigorously defended. So saying ”she was fallible and only God is infallible” is mere lip service. At least here in Finland I've failed to meet even one ardent believer in EGW, who had the courage to tell an example of her fallibility. Maybe the situation is better in United States?? | ||
| Ryan Van Dolson (Ryanvandolson) member Username: Ryanvandolson Post Number: 2 Registered: 6-2008 |
J. R. Layman: "FWIW Tom......Herb Douglass wasted the time to reply to you.... (darn, he had the most beautiful daughter I used to know!) I would have died for that gal!" Out of curiosity, which daughter is this? One of them is my mother.  | ||
| Irene Longfellow (Renie) member Username: Renie Post Number: 76 Registered: 7-2008 |
Oh boy, JR. You'd better not answer that one. You will be in deep trouble no matter how you answer it.  renie | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8760 Registered: 1-2005 |
(BLEEPED Bob.....frankly the insinuation was a beneath the belt call, untrue, and disguisting.....don't do it again!.....or you really will get me PO'd!) These lurkers will get you refined afterall, maybe your only hope!! “We live in a world of skeptics, don't we? ... We didn't come into this to prove ourselves.” - Jack Sommer | ||
| J. R. Layman (Daneanderthal) Moderator Username: Daneanderthal Post Number: 2765 Registered: 8-2004 |
Oh brother, Bob GROW UP (frankly I don’t like your dirty little insinuations!).......she was just a neat girl, very kind, sweet and beautiful.....The only thing I ever did was walk back from the Lancaster Town Library with her a couple of times! Sheeeesh (after I faked out that rather STUPID boys dean at SLA [John Knowles....the village IDIOT], telling him I needed to do "research" during mandatory study hour in the dorm at Thayer Hall......they had novels....unlike the "research" materials at AUC's libary ) FWIW Ryan......it was Janelle....Just called my brother to get my facts right...and he mentioned that the year he went to PUC....he and his buddy rented a bungalow from a Van Dolson. (which is where I spent my first nights de-compressing from my Vietnam experience) .....which was of course, was before my Sabbath afternoon tasting expedition up the Napa Valley ( can’t recall how I can still remember that experience...It's sorta a foggy remembrance.….We did hit “Christian Brothers", and "Inglenook", as I recall….otherwise the memory sort fades out) ...... I'd just gotten off the Capital Airlines 707, Departing Binh Hoa Vietnam, and hitting Osaka Japan, and Anchorage (-7 degrees….and I was wearing only a jungle jacket…..sheeeeesh) Alaska, at Travis AFB....kissed the ground, and then called my brother at PUC.....said "THE KID IS BACK’ drive over the mountain and pick my royal rear end up!" @ 2 A.M. Dec. 13, 1969! Dang, I liked it so much there, Went to Denver, did some Skiing at Winter Park and A-Basin, then I flew to Detroit, and picked up the new car I'd ordered in Vietnam....I drove all the way back to St. Helena.....to spend a couple of more weeks, got in some Skiing at Heavenly Valley, before I had to report in to Ft. Sam Houston, in San Antonio! (picked up a Hippie Chick in San Francisco……who wanted a ride to Taos…..then the hippies at the “5 Star Commune” in Taos….tried to talk me out of reporting in to Ft. Sam) Hey, I had a car payment to make, so I told them no. Oh life is so interesting….now that I recall my younger and wilder daz. Was I really that wild and crazy? Guess I figured that if I made it through 365 days in Col. George S. Pattons, III, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment ….IN THE BOONIES…..as an Armored Recon Scout in/on a Mech. Flamethrower, ….then as a field trained Medic…..That anything was allowable! Naw Renie......I'm safe.....those where the days, like Alfke's, when we were saints!  We became "sinners" later on....when we gave up EGW! and NEVER read "Messages to Young People".......FWIW.....I'd still like to meet ONE PERSON, who ever read that book! ALL I'll ever say about my visit to Hong Kong, on R&R...was that I bought my Nikon Panotomic FTN....which is still my most treasured possesion to this day! Well I did have two handmade suits made, and a pair of dress shoes....but THAT'S ALL I'm ever going to say about my visit to Hong Kong (you could find a bar open 24/7 back then).....I swear that William Holden (AKA Robert Lomax) ......never visited Hong Kong, nor met Suzy Wong...(I tried to look her up in the phone book, but she wasn't listed) ..it was all fiction! | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8771 Registered: 1-2005 |
Sorry, J.R., and Ryan if I offended you too, or your family, won't happen again. “We live in a world of skeptics, don't we? ... We didn't come into this to prove ourselves.” - Jack Sommer | ||
| Irene Longfellow (Renie) member Username: Renie Post Number: 77 Registered: 7-2008 |
NOW I know why you are such a sweetheart, JR. Because you gave up 'Messages To Young People'. That book is called by some teens 'the dreaded book.' renie | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 13 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie Bockmann said that she doesn't want to ask the White Estate any questions "Because if Ellen White couldn't say what she needed to say in upwards of 25,000,000 published words in 50+ years, then I suspect we don't really need to know about the other stuff, which is likely just as incoherent as the published stuff. That's more than several Bible's worth of material, isn't it?" Sorry Mags, but you are the one being "incoherent" and irrational here. If what I am telling you is true--and it is--then you have a duty to confront the White Estate and demand answers. You need to hear the rest of what Ellen White was trying to say. Even as you will have to admit that you have misunderstood many things--thanks to the White Estate. All SDA's have the right to hear Ellen White-- unfiltered --from those that have controlled and manipulated her all these years. What has happened in the White Estate is a disgrace; no one should condone the hiding of documents and the dishonest revision of church history. Arthur White cannot be allowed to get away with this massive fraud about Ellen White. It is CRIMINAL. But thanks anyway for trying to protect the most dishonest SDA leader of the 20th century. This man needs to be scorned and repudiated by all, not defended or given a pass. But each to their own. Moreover, to assume that this suppressed material is of no value or interest to the church is absurd. You sound like Arthur White. This is what Arthur White also believed. He told me to my face that 1888 was no big deal. He said it was just one of many General Conferences and thus it is wrong to make seem more important than any of the other such meetings over the years. But he was taking that position because he was hiding this explosive meeting from the church. He took this diversionary position because it directed attention away from 1888. His position was a deliberate attempt to hide church history and the real Ellen White as well. So far, Arthur White has owned your mind, even as he has played you and many others like a banjo in a barn dance. But you need to break his spell over you and understand what has happened. Do not defend him or believe anything that has come from the White Estate, because things are not as they seem. This is the point that you are overlooking in this discussion. The White Estate cannot be trusted with Ellen White's writings. They have never told the truth from the beginning, and they are still are covering up this massive fraud that they know has taken place. This is why they are hiding from this public discussion. They are guilty and they know it. But enough is enough; the abuse of Ellen White and the Advent Community has to stop. It is criminal and against the charter of the White Estate. It an offense to Ellen White and the Pioneers, even as it is an insult to the Advent people who pay the bills and trusted the church leaders to be honest and true. So in spite of your willingness to give the White Estate a pass, I will do no such thing. This is a criminal situation and I will not be a party to any of this fraud and corruption. I say there must be an investigation. Why? Because Ellen White has not been able to speak her mind freely. Her true views have been suppressed and hidden from the Adventist people by Arthur White, even as a massive crime of non-stop consumer fraud has overwhelmed the White Estate. It is only a matter of time before the world comes to know about how gullible the SDA's have been when it comes to Ellen White. The Adventist Community deserves to get to the bottom of this Laodicean mess that has caused so much turmoil and angst within the SDA church. They deserve to know the facts, even if some are fine with this fraud. Maggie said: Who cares what is/was in that creepy old White Estate Vault? Cultic nonsense, IMO. Everyone that wants to get to the truth should care! If not, then why are you here? If the White Estate is irrelevant, then so too is Adventism for which Ellen White was such an advocate. So leave and stop paying any attention to Adventism. Walk away and don't look back. Many have done this and it is your right. Do it and be done with it. (Or just admit that you can't and try to help repair it). But there are others that have chosen to try and understand the issues so that the Advent Movement can--if possible-- go forward. For them, the White Estate is relevant, and so too Ellen White. Although I understand that the White Estate has caused nightmares and cold sweats for many, this is no reason to run away and cower in fear from the mention of Ellen White. The Adventist Community deserves to know the facts and the real Ellen White. I found the facts and went into the White Estate to confront Arthur White. Had I had your attitude, I would not have taken the trouble. And then he might have gotten away with this fraud and you would be forever trapped in your twisted world of Ellen White with no exit. But now there is a path of truth and sanity for you and all those that thought they had understood Ellen White. So Maggie, don't waste your time defending Arthur White or think that you must disown Ellen White and repudiate her. Rather you need to demand that the White Estate correct the record and give you the real Ellen White of 1888 fame. The real one that embraced Gospel Reform and repudiated Uriah Smith for his legalism. You will like her, even as your anger is properly re-directed at those--like Arthur White--that have deceived you for so long. I know what was going on in the White Estate and it is very important that the entire Adventist Community also understands what a den of corruption and propaganda that place became over the years. And now that they have been caught, they are running from this discussion that proves them guilty. Why would you defend them? The White Estate's version of Ellen White is a total and complete fraud. Period. So if all this has taken too much of a toll on your psyche, I understand. But life goes on, and so too the need to reform the corrupt and self-destructing SDA church. If you are too wounded to participate in this extended search for truth, then I understand, but don't try and get in the way of those who have a reform agenda. Both heaven and earth know that the SDA's need reform, so get out of the way if you no longer care. Why Maggie still refuses to blame the White Estate for misrepresenting church history is a mystery; she refuses to believe that such fraud took place. Although the White Estate has been unable to answer the charges from Tom Norris for many years now, she said: "Likely for the same reason no one else can refute you either, Tom." No one can refute what I am saying because I have the facts and am telling the truth. You can be sure that if the hierarchical apologists could make their case--they would. The church is quick to sue any that cross their path. But they run from Tom Norris for a reason. I plan to chase them and expose their crime to the world, even though you want to give them a free pass. Maggie said: You're so incoherent; you don't know when you've been effectively refuted. Those minds that have been programmed to embrace TA are having a difficult time with this discussion. That is to be expected. Their ability to reason and understand the evidence has been greatly compromised and damaged by so many years of propaganda and indoctrination. Thus it is TA that has become incoherent and delusional because the facts that both Dr. Ford and Tom Norris have put forward cannot be refuted in the slightest. TA is dead and so too the White Estate's credibility. If anyone has a paper that "effectively refutes" the many points that I have been making, please post it up so that we can all have a good laugh. Then all will see that the confused critics are shooting blanks… Besides, don't confuse me with Goldstein, he has been effectively refuted and silenced for all to see. He is unable to deal with this discussion because his positions are comical and unable to stand, and so too every position from the dishonest White Estate. They cannot speak to the issues either because they are wrong. Maggie said: If they hid documents, it's just the same ol' same ol' Adventist subterfuge. The whole system reeks of it. Ellen White was a past master of it. Ha! What is this "IF THEY HID DOCUMENTS?" There is no IF about it. It is a fact of record. I know because I was the one that found this stash of hidden documents in the GC archives, and then in the White Estate. I am a witness to a crime, and I am not going to play along or be silent. A crime has taken place, and it is still taking place in the White Estate-- and it needs to stop. While the SDA's have become a dishonest and double-talking cult, that is no reason to let it continue. The Advent Movement is a Protestant paradigm, and this is the theological foundation to which it must return. The church must return to the genuine version of the Three Angels Messages. And this can only be done when people find out what Ellen White was really saying about the law and the Gospel as well as the Three Angels Messages. As for your accusations that Ellen White is a "master of deceit," that is just flat out wrong and over the top. Perhaps you are not paying attention here? Arthur White was the "master of deceit." NOT ELLEN WHITE. Repeat this 10 times until your mind can grasp the concept. If not. Just leave. This conversation is way over your head. So I repeat; there is no ambiguity when it comes to the facts of this fraud and cover-up in the White Estate. There is no "if they hid documents." They hid thousands of documents, even the ones that contained many visions and dreams from Ellen White. So stop these games you play. You sound like you work for the White Estate, but yet you claim they damaged you so much that you had to leave the church. Then why give them a pass now? Glenn was correct; you are not being rational or coherent. You are all over the place-- as if you think this discussion needs a contrarian just for the fun of it. While I always appreciate those who promote the devils point of view, sometimes it gets old. Maggie said: And, BTW, it sounds like you're angling up to being our new Apostle--a step up from prophets, as you explained. You are not paying attention. No one today can be an apostle or an OT prophet. That is the point. Ellen White was born many, many years after such a possibility, which makes the claims of the White Estate for her impossible and absurd. How in the world could the SDA's by into this garbage from the White Estate? How could so many people get fooled into thinking that Ellen White was like the OT prophets or the NT apostles? How stupid can the SDA's be? Answer: Pretty Stupid. So I am not making any such absurd claim for myself, nor do I have the gift of prophecy, which Ellen White did have. So you need to pay much closer attention to this discussion. Maggie said: Deal me out. No problem. Many have done just that. So walk away. Do it! I dare you. Leave the room and stop trying to play the game from the sidelines. If you are out, then get out and stop trying to defend the White Estate and interfere with those that want genuine reform. But make a decision and stick with it. If you can. Either you are for or against TA? There is not a halfway point in this game. Either you are for or against Adventist Reform? At this point I can't follow what side you are playing for, so perhaps it would be better if you left the room to sort things out. I am against TA and for Adventist Reform. I have no idea what side you are on and I don't think you know at this point. So I hope you can work that out one day. Maggie Bockmann responded against the concept of original sin by saying: That is the biggest load of horse pucky ever dumped upon the human race, IMO. Those that reject the fundamental points of the Protestant Faith are no friends of Adventist Reform. Maggie, why not check out Scientology? This might work better for you? Maggie said: And Tom, you can vilify Arthur White, if that suits you ends, but I've posted over and over and over EGW's threats of doom for questioning her writings. Maggie, you can pretend Arthur White was an honest broker for Ellen White all you want, but this is an absurd position. Why you would take such a position is beyond me, but if you want to try and defend the White Estate, go for it, but for what point? They can't even enter this discussion because they are so wrong. Why would you try and help them out? I have found that many TSDA's don't want to admit that the White Estate has fooled and misled them so badly. It is painful for anyone to face the fact that someone they trusted has misled and taken advantage of them to such an extent. So the first reaction is denial. To believe the truth about this fraud in the White Estate is painful and embarrassing. Especially for those that have internalized the White Estates garbage over the years and made it a part of their lives. Maggie said: I personally got them from her published books, not Art White. Ha! This is too funny. Who do you think edited and published the Ellen White that you embraced in those books? It was Arthur White. He was in charge of all her writings, and thus he only let you have the words he wanted, the way he wanted. The same went for the scholars. They only saw what he wanted them to see; making certain that a large portion would remain secret. In fact, If Arthur White had not aged, he would still be in charge of the White Estate, and there would have been no release of the 1888 materials. I gained entrance into the White Estate because Arthur White was retiring --after 40 years. He didn't want to go, but he had to be replaced because he was too old. No one should trust anything published by the White Estate. Period. They are up to their eyeballs in a monumental fraud that is being exposed for all to see. Anyone that is foolish enough to defend them had better be ready to hire an attorney, because this is a criminal enterprise that will be brought to justice. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 14 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie said: Who reads Art White's "words" anyway. You do. And so too anyone that has ever read anything from the White Estate. All of Ellen White's words have the fingerprints of either James White or Arthur White on them. Ellen White was neither an editor nor a publisher. The latter has turned out to be a delusional criminal. Maggie said: Or maybe you're talking about the evil compilations? I think EGW did just fine laying double binds on people before compilations came along. The compilations were based on the fraud in the White Estate. Everything that the White Estate put out was contaminated and diversionary. There were NEVER telling the truth from day one. Thus all her words, books, and articles, must be understood in a different way from how the evil White Estate spun them. Until all this is sorted out by the scholars and made simple for the community, you need to back off and stop being so contrary. You are not a scholar or historian, nor have you ever done any research in the White Estate or anywhere as far as I can tell. So stop pretending that you are an expert about things you are not. You opinion is very limited because you don't have the facts, nor do you seem to care about them. Maggie said: It's hard for me to imagine any good reasons why you are peddling this crazy mixed up tale. Like I said, those that have embraced TA have been seriously damaged. Their ability to think, reason, and understand has been greatly compromised. This is the danger of TA, or of any cult. If this discussion is too much for you, then walk away. Stop dealing with things that cause you pain. Maggie said: Over and over, for years, I've posted IJ quotes from Great Controversy. How you can continue with this fabrication is beyond me. Why I continue to bother with any of this is also beyond me. Ha! This is too funny. If you think that you can show that Ellen White's definition of the Judgment in the 1st Angels message is the IJ, then go ahead and write such a paper. I will be happy to respond. But don't think for a second that you have refuted any points that I have made. Here is a paper that I wrote to educate Goldstein about the IJ. He was unable to respond, but you are welcome to try. http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/8/9651.html?1154462379 As for the charge against me of "fabrication;" let me make sure I understand you: While Tom Norris accuses the White Estate of suppression and fraud, Maggie, the ex-TSDA, claims that the White Estate is not the problem, but Tom Norris is. Did I get this correct? The White Estate is telling the truth--but Norris is not? Maggie, you may need to take a time out. This discussion may be more serious then you are prepared to handle. I agree that you should take a rest. Maggie Bockmann said: Tom, several times I've posted direct quotes from GC where she connects the IJ with the Rev. 14 judgment. Many SDA's are very confused about the Judgment. Here is a recent question about this very point. http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day-Adventists-2318/2008/8/First-Angel-Message-Pre.htm There are no such quotes where Ellen White defined the Judgment from Historical Adventism as being the IJ. Not in the GC or any other published or unpublished document. People that think otherwise are seeing what they were indoctrinated to see. But myths will never become facts regardless how many times they are repeated. So if you think you have found the place where Ellen White places the IJ in the 1st Angels Message, then you will win the grand prize and save TA and uphold Glacier View. Goldstein will praise you and Arthur White will give you thumbs up from the grave. But you can't do it and you have not done so. http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/13702.html http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/5853.html However, you can be sure that many TSDA's are cheering for you, because they have been unable to defend this key point that is the foundation for TA. Good Luck to you. Besides, this is the FIRST point of Adventist Reform. If you could disprove it, then no doubt all the remaining points can also be discredited. Good luck on your twisted mission to defend the confusion of the White Estate and dismiss genuine Adventist Reform. 12 Challenges to SDA Doctrine 1. Today the SDA church is teaching the wrong version of the Three Angels Messages. Only the Protestant Gospel and the Second Coming are featured and contained in the original version of the 1st Angels message. Thus "the hour of his Judgment has come" in Rev 14: 7 is ONLY a reference to the Second Coming, not to the IJ. This means that Traditional Adventism is wrong. It does not have the support of Ellen White or the Pioneers. http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/160/13721.html#POST80521 Maggie said: You blithely ignore that like it wasn't there. That's why no one can refute you. The problem is that the IJ is not there. The IJ is not the judgment in the 1st Angels Message. IT WAS NEVER THERE in Historic Adventism. Nor can it ever be the Judgment in Rev 14: 7. Ellen White never said otherwise. NEVER! The fact that you think she did is a tribute to the powerful propaganda of the White Estate and to the gullibility of the Adventist Community. While I understand that you have been programmed and indoctrinated to believe that the IJ is a great pillar from Historic Adventism; the facts are clear about this critical point of church HISTORY. Although the White Estate and the Review made it clear that the IJ was a core doctrine from Historic Adventist that had to be protected at all costs, they were dead wrong. Ellen White never taught that the IJ was a foundational doctrine from Historic Adventism as TA claims. And neither did Uriah Smith or anyone in Battle Creek. Such facts must control the discussion, not myths and false traditions from Takoma Park. Glacier View was based on pure and deliberate fraud. Dr. Ford was correct all along about the Three Angels Messages. Maggie said: Well, as I said, the bridge collapsed several decades ago, IMO. Faulty materials, faulty construction. If the bridge was so bad, and it was, why do you object to an investigation of the bridge builder? Why would you let the White Estate get away with such a massive and hurtful fraud, which has caused so much pain and sorrow? How many people have been killed and maimed for life because of this SDA collapse? Arthur White was in charge of the bridge building. He did an awful job and the bridge has collapsed, harming many in the process. So there must be an investigation to see why this tragedy took place, even as a new bridge must be correctly rebuilt so that the Adventist Movement can go forward. But wait a minute! You have been defending Arthur White. You refuse to hold anyone accountable for this tragic destruction? You refuse to demand that the White Estate answer the questions and co-operate with an investigation about why things have collapsed. This is all wrong and you must know it. There has been a collapse and there is a reason why it happened. This reason must be found and those responsible held accountable. But yet, you don't want the White Estate to be investigated? So who is being irrational and hypocritical? Those that want an investigation to find the truth or those that want to protect the guilty and do nothing? I think this point is clear for those that can think straight. Maggie said: It is not worth the effort to pull the real EGW out of the rubble, IMO, because she's the main reason it collapsed in the first place. Once again you are confusing Ellen White with Arthur White. They are two very different people. The former is worth saving, but not the latter. IMO, the Advent Movement is worth salvaging and saving. But to do this, there must be a through and detailed analysis of what went wrong. How do you know without an investigation? So there is good reason why Ellen White must be pulled out of the rubble that Arthur White made for the church. She was a legitimate NT prophet and the SDA church needs to better understand what she has been trying to say. They have horribly misunderstood most everything and this must be corrected. In fact, this is why the bridge fell in the first place. No one paid any attention to Ellen White's design of the foundation. Thus they made some great and fatal errors. To leave her in the rubble is a great mistake. Rather, this disaster must be cleaned up and another bridge built that follows the original and correct design. One that will safely allow the Advent Movement to cross over to proclaim the 4th Angels Message. Maggie said: She's the incoherence on which it was built. The Advent Movement is built on the proclamation of the Protestant Gospel and the Judgment of the Second Coming. This is the foundation for the Three Angels Messages. Ellen White is not a pillar. So let's stop the silly talk shall we? Just because we were all taught these silly myths is no reason to pretend that they were real. We need to grow up. For those deceived by the White Estate into embracing TA, Arthur White's version of Ellen White became central in their lives. Thanks to the White Estate's propaganda and indoctrination, this fraudulent version of Ellen White actually lived in people's minds and controlled their thoughts. But such head games have been very destructive and damaging, and do not reflect what Ellen White was all about or the Advent Movement. Nonetheless, we can't throw out the real Ellen White just because the White Estate went bad. In fact, the SDA church needs (the real) Ellen White more today than ever. Without her, they will continue to wander far away from the Fundamentals of Adventism and self-destruct. Maggie said: I don't think any amount of demonizing Arthur White is going to mitigate that, but your desperation is obvious and understandable. Arthur White must be demonized because he is the man that has arrogantly and repeatedly misled and deceived the Advent people about Ellen White and the very fundamentals that define and empower Adventism. He is so dishonest and so incompetent that his evil work in the White Estate must be exposed for all to see. Why? So that the record can be corrected and the real Ellen White released from her captivity in the basement of the General Conference. The mess in the White Estate will never be cleaned up if the church allows this massive fraud to remain hidden. Consequently, one way or another, the White Estate's guilt is going to become known to the world. I promise. Mark 4:22 “For nothing is hidden, except to be revealed; nor has anything been secret, but that it would come to light. Maggie said: The White Estate may have been hiding embarrassing stuff, but the reason they were hiding it was that it was, well, embarrassing. The reason Ellen White's 1888 position was so "embarrassing" to the leaders in Battle Creek is because they were hardcore legalists. So they rejected what the Gospel Reformers Waggoner and Jones were saying, as well as Ellen White that supported their new (for SDA's) position about the law and the Gospel. After the Battle Creek collapse, the Takoma Park leaders were determined to hide the 1888 debates for a number of reasons. And that is exactly what they did. Consequently, with this knowledge about Gospel Reform hidden from the church, the Takoma Park apologists focused once again on the law and the Sabbath. They too became flaming legalists as they promoted Uriah Smiths theology as well as the pre-1888 legalism of Ellen white. Thus the SDA's went deep into legalism once more. They were clueless about the Gospel as well as what happened in 1888. Then the RBF debates started up in the 1970's and the church was given a glimpse of the Gospel, which of course set off numerous debates that ended with the church declaring that TA, was the official doctrine of the church, and exiling Dr. Ford to underscore the point. The church essentially repeated the mistakes of the 1888 era all over again, and with the same results of schism and self-destruction. But Glacier View was a trumped up fraud thanks to the White Estate. Dr. Ford was telling the truth about the Gospel as well as Adventist eschatology and history. The IJ was NEVER part of the 1st Angels Message and the church leaders have made a huge and embarrassing error by saying otherwise. The SDA leaders have misled the entire church about Ellen White and the Fundamentals of SDA theology and now they don't want to talk about their fraud. Too bad for them. When the smoke settles, all will know what has taken place and the TSDA's are going to be most embarrassed and humiliated of all. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 15 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie said: Whole thing stinks to high heavens. I agree. This monumental fraud in the White Estate stinks and so too Glacier View. But guess what, I have been in the White Estate and the smell in there is almost unbearable. This fraud is so outrageous, wicked, and arrogant that it defies belief. But it is true nonetheless. How embarrassing for the Advent Movement. J. R. Layman said that Atomorrow does not deserve a logo. I disagree. The status quo must always be pushed forward. It is not good to rest on small accomplishments when larger opportunities abound. This place can be greatly improved-- along with Adventism. So why not do it? Bob Sands said: Tom's story in Acts 21, and his use of it to "justify" his emphasis on EGW, is not too strong a position. The point of the story was to show that there are such things as New Testament Prophets in the church. NTP's are DIFFERENT from both OT prophets and the apostles. So I was showing how Ellen White fits in all this. She is a NTP. And thus she is not what the White Estate taught all these years. They have it all wrong. If the SDA's only knew how to study the Bible and honestly deal with church history none of this confusion and heresy would have taken place. The fact of the matter is that Ellen White has spiritual gifts only to the extent that the NT teaches. This is the point. Her writings are always and forever subordinate to the Apostles, as well as to the OT prophets that did write scripture. Bob said: Christ also knew he was going to be sacrificed as prophesied. Paul wasn't going to avoid his itinerary because someone was warning he would be bond and put in prison. Remember, the interpretation of this message was that Paul should not go to Jerusalem. The bottom line of this Testimony to Paul and to the church was that he should not go. And the church begged Paul to listen to the Testimony from this well known NT "prophet." But he had the WRONG interpretation, even though much of the message was correct. Paul was supposed to go. That was his mission. Thus the Testimony was wrong. The point of the story is that those with the gifts of prophecy in the church, like Ellen White, do not fully understand their messages. Nor are they infallible. They don't even have doctrinal authority. Thus the White Estate has been wrong about their claims of Ellen White being a prophet like Nathan in the OT. She is not like him at all, and they need to confess and repent, as well as correct the record. Bob said: EGW does not have to be part of a Reformed SDA church, or at least no more than Devotional. Forget this idea that Ellen White should be shunned by the Adventist Community, or relegated to a devotional writer. She is a very rare and unique individual that dedicated her life to the Advent Movement. As a founder and the longest living of all the pioneers, she has earned a seat at the table as one of the perpetual board of directors, and so too has James White. In fact, they both built the table and supplied the chairs, who else can make such a claim? They both know how the Advent Movement is defined and how it is supposed to work. James White even knew how to make Health Reform work and it is tragic that the modern church has ignored the genius of these two founders. This is why the church is failing. It is because the leaders have taken the opposite position on most everything. No wonder nothing makes sense any more? Besides, the White Estate's version of Ellen White has no place in a Reformed SDA church. There can be no doubt about this. However, the real person of history must be part of a reformed Adventism because she is a founder and has much insight and wisdom for the Adventist Community. Remember, it is Ellen White who fought for and promoted the Gospel. It is Ellen White that fought for and preserved the Three Angels Messages, and it was Ellen White that chronicled the history of 1888 so that future generations of SDA's would understand what took place. Without Ellen White the Adventist Apocalyptic would not have survived into the 20th century. And unless the modern church pays closer attention to Ellen White, and repents, they will continue to self-destruct. Bob said: Sorry, IMO, she is irrelevant. Impossible. How can a founder be irrelevant? How can someone that gave their life to establish and promote the Three Angels Message become irrelevant? Especially at a time when the SDA's have lost their bearings and no longer understand their mission or message? This can only happen if the 3A's are removed from Adventist theology. In which case, who needs her? But if this were to happen--and it has to a great extent already--this is the end of the Advent Movement. She would never approve. Why? Because she understands that the mission of this church is all about the 3 A's. And I agree with this historical and theological fact. So she is relevant. Her point of view is not only correct, but also necessary and critically important. Why? Because the church is dying because no one is paying any attention to what she is saying. The day (the real) Ellen White is deemed irrelevant for SDA's, that day will be their doom. Such rebellion against the fundamentals of the Advent Faith cannot be allowed to take place. Bonnie Dwyer, Editor, of Spectrum said “I've come to think of what we do at Spectrum as setting the table for the great conversations of Adventism.” Ha! Spectrum is not independent, nor does it represent the Gospel or honest Adventist theology. While this elitist paper pretends to be thoughtful and wise they are actually Protestant Pretenders and Adventist frauds. Those that run Spectrum are so closely connected to the church that they are essentially propagandists for the church. Spectrum has sold out long ago. It is a controlled place that features liberal propaganda, much of it worthless drivel. They are part of the problem, not the solution. Pauli K.Heikkinen said: My impression during the 40+ years in the fold has given me the idea that both EGW and her followers, the leadership and White Estate included, have admitted in general level, that even EGW was fallible. But when one tries to go to details, for example tries to give an example of her fallibility, then one hits the fan. This is the typical SDA double -talk. Pauli said: Namely it has seemed to me, that the fallibility is not applicable to any specific happening or any statement. Even the silliest utterances are vigorously defended. Shame on the White Estate. They are the world's greatest liars. The fact of the matter is that JN Andrews became famous within the Battle Creek community because he proved Ellen White to be WRONG about the details of Sabbath observance. This is a fact of the record, but one that the White Estate downplayed and ignored. They also covered up the fact that Ellen White changed her mind about the law and the Gospel as well as the Two Covenants. This is why the leaders got so angry with Ellen White in 1888-- and the White Estate has deceived the church to hide such important information. To this very day they claim she did not change her views on the Gospel when the proof is irrefutable. Pauli said: So saying ”she was fallible and only God is infallible” is mere lip service. For the White Estate, yes. But not for Ellen White. She knew she was fallible and so too did everyone in Battle Creek. It was those fools in Takoma Park that made these wild claims for Ellen White. Pauli said: At least here in Finland I've failed to meet even one ardent believer in EGW, who had the courage to tell an example of her fallibility. This is because the White Estate has set up this false standard that claims all true prophets must be without error and fully correct all the time. Thus, Ellen White cannot be wrong about doctrine or history, much less about what she says about a vision or dream. Of course none of this was true, but the White Estate pressed this cultic foolishness to the point of absurdity anyway. Which is why even the most ardent followers of Ellen White, like Pastor Walter Rea ended up repudiating everything SDA. (He caught the White Estate in too many lies, for which they have never admitted or repented.) So the White Estate trapped themselves. They could never tell the truth about 1888 because it contradicted everything that they were teaching about Ellen White and the Gospel. Why? Because this is where she admitted that her views on the Two Covenants, and the law and the Gospel were wrong. This is where she accused Uriah Smith of being a legalist, even as she changed her views and repudiated the prevailing 19th century interpretation of Traditional Adventism. But the White Estate couldn't release this information because it overturns everything they were saying--not only about Ellen White--but also about the law and the Gospel. In other words, the White Estate had become a champion for URIAH SMITH'S LEGLASIM that Ellen White repudiated in 1888. If the church found out that the White Estate had been leading everyone in the wrong direction, what would happen? So to this very day, the White Estate has never admitted their great errors or the following cover up. Which is why that place should be scorned by all SDA's. It is a den of falsehood and deception, and you can be sure that Ellen White does not approve. She wants to tell the truth about what happened in 1888, and when she does, Arthur White will become the new Canright. This deluded and arrogant Pharisee will become the real culprit behind the demise of the Advent Movement. This is why the White Estate kept the story of 1888 hidden and covered up with a fraud. They could not bring themselves to admit that Ellen White had been wrong about the Gospel, nor could they admit that they too had made a serious doctrinal blunder. So they silenced Ellen White and deceived the SDA church. And here we sit. So the White Estate has made fools of themselves as well as Ellen White and the entire Adventist Community. The situation is not better in the US. In fact, the SDA church is self-destructing because of how the White Estate has portrayed Ellen White. Now they have lost so much credibility that many want nothing to do with her or SDA's. Let's all congratulate the White Estate for being the worst possible representative of Ellen White. Canright could not have done a worse job. No doubt there is a special place in hell for Arthur White and all those that helped him deceive the Adventist Community and misrepresent Ellen White and SDA theology to the world. I say it is time to expose this entire stinking mess and clean up the White Estate. The leaders have known about Arthur White's fraud for years, and they have decided to keep silent and pretend that all is well. However, I can assure you that Ellen White does not approve. Moreover, she is going to have the last laugh, because she does not support Traditional Adventism, or Glacier View, much less this outrageous fraud in the White Estate. It is time for the Adventist Community to demand that the leaders tell the truth about Ellen White and church history. Ellen White deserves to be heard; without the corrupt filter of Hierarchal Adventism manipulating her words. It is time. I hope this helps. Tom Norris for Adventist Reform | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4714 Registered: 8-2004 |
To this very day they claim she did not change her views on the Gospel when the proof is irrefutable. She herself said she had not changed anything for the last 45 years, Tom. If those were Arthur White's words, then there is absolutely no way to sort this thing out. Maybe you fancy yourself the 21st century Apostle to do the job, but Tom, your thinking is so incoherent as to be inpenetrable, and I'm not buyin' the Apostle bidness. Tom. She plagiarized stuff from other writers and said it came from God. Then she lied about it. I've never defended the creepy White Estate, but Ellen White was the fount of the creepiness, from which all the spiritual abuse and tortured logic flows. To switch metaphors, we need to lay the ax to the root of the tree. Cutting off the branches won't help. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4715 Registered: 8-2004 |
So the White Estate trapped themselves. They could never tell the truth about 1888 because it contradicted everything that they were teaching about Ellen White and the Gospel. Why? Because this is where she admitted that her views on the Two Covenants, and the law and the Gospel were wrong. This is where she accused Uriah Smith of being a legalist, even as she changed her views and repudiated the prevailing 19th century interpretation of Traditional Adventism. Tom, EGW lived until 1915, decades after 1888. The White Estate didn't exist until she died. If this stuff were so terribly important, why didn't she publish it? And I challenge you to give ONE EGW quote where she says she changed anything she believed. Why will you never give even one EGW quote to substantiate what you're merely asserting? Just one quote where she admitted she was wrong, much less that she changed anything, Tom. You can't do it, or you would have coughed it up years ago. I've called your bluff dozens of times. She never admitted changing. She obfuscated about the Law in Galatians. You have no credibility, Tom. Prove me wrong, and I'll gladly acknowledge it. You can't do it. All hat, no cows. Maggie | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4960 Registered: 5-2006 |
And I challenge you to give ONE EGW quote where she says she changed anything she believed. There is one, I recall. Ellen White didn't admit she changed? I don't find this too surprising. We looking on see obvious development. Alden Thompson presents this very idea of her developing as the thesis for his book Escape from the Flames. Ellen White did not, could not, see her own development? Probably so. My mother, as far as I can tell, never admitted her own development. She never said she was sorry for anything. Some personality types can't readily admit they are wrong. It happens here at atomorrow. Rarely, I know, but it does. | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4716 Registered: 8-2004 |
So we end up with a situation where Ellen White wouldn't admit she was wrong and projected evil on the people who were simply believing what she'd previously assured them was clear, straight, unalterable truth straight from the Throne of God, IOW, she was speaking ex cathedra, like the Pope. Why wouldn't they think she'd lost her marbles? To this day, it's going to be the people's fault who point out her incoherence and dishonesty, never her own responsibility. This has created a culture of dishonesty, projection, chicanery, and subterfuge, which must continue until some strong, painful steps are taken to detach from Ellen White. IMO. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4717 Registered: 8-2004 |
There is one, I recall. You mean 1844? Well, she was still on earth, not swooshing through the opening in Orion. What was she gonna say? But...she had to blame someone, so she blamed GOD for being dishonest...so she wasn't technically wrong, I mean... Who can outsmart GOD when He wants to deceive you? According to Ellen, God was the original 'Home of the Whopper,' hence the precedent of telling whoppers for the Cause of God. It's all downhill from there.... ...mutter, mutter.... Maggie | ||
| Don Sands (Don) member Username: Don Post Number: 4961 Registered: 5-2006 |
To this day, it's going to be the people's fault who point out her incoherence and dishonesty, never her own responsibility. Maggie, I don't recall ever blaming you for pointing out such things. Early on Ron Numbers and Walter Rae got severe reactions. Cliff Goldstein apparently still wants the unbelievers to leave, or believe. I believe that it is OK to admit that EGW did some hurtful things. I don't think she always dealt with her own children like I would, for example. I haven't studied the Fanny Bolton story very deeply, but I bet she could have dealt with Fanny far better than she did. Also, Ellen White demonstrated her willingness to improve. If she could have lived to see the problems created by her severe statements, I like to think that she would have continued to mellow. Meanwhile, we have to mellow. Adventism has to keep mellowing. This has created a culture of dishonesty, chicanery, and subterfuge, which must continue until some strong, painful steps are taken to detach from Ellen White. Most of the rank and file are not aware of EGW's denials and the White Estate's less than open policy. I don't see much of a trickle down effect. As a low-level spokesperson for the church, I have decided that I don't need to explain quite so much why EGW did what she did. I am still a self-proclaimed apologist for her. I don't know if she would like me looking at things like I do. I really don't know if my overseers like my views on these matters. Someday, I may find out. Ellen White taught that the church should move forward as a unit when dealing with new light. I think it is time for an EGW summit where we shift some of our official statements so that we have admission of errors in how we have viewed and used her writings. I don't think such a summit will happen tomorrow. Maggie, this seems to be your stance: Get rid of Ellen White and Adventism will be better for it. Obviously, I don't believe that is the best solution. For me:
| ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4723 Registered: 8-2004 |
Meanwhile, we have to mellow. Adventism has to keep mellowing. It's going to mellow itself into murky mental mush, Don. It needs to commit itself first to clear thinking, which it has not done, or the whole thing is going to sink into a swamp of confusion that is far worse than the one EGW created, that future generations will curse you for. You can' take her off her high horse, Don. You don't have the authority to decommission her authoritative statements. She consigns you to hell for even questioning her. It's going to take some really painful hard work to pull this thing out of the nosedive it's in. IMO. Maggie | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4724 Registered: 8-2004 |
Get rid of Ellen White and Adventism will be better for it. She leaves you nothing but black-and-white choices, Don. How do you "take her off her high horse" and retain some semblance of clear thinking, Don? Maggie | ||
| bill sorensen (Billsorensen) member Username: Billsorensen Post Number: 2385 Registered: 9-2004 |
"The games" will come to an end, Maggie. And it won't be "mellow" as Don hopes for. People can bicker and "be it ch" all they want. The issue is the IJ. Always has been in Adventism and always will be. If you think you can deny or alter the IJ as she has presented it, you just as well "hit the road" as Cliff and myself and some others know well. Tom should take his own advice. There is no "new" Adventism nor "new" Protestantism as Ron would try to advocate. The challenge is to "choose"...not change. Joshua, Elijah, John the Baptist, Luther.....etc, all called for the same conclusion. You can not "change" truth, nor can you "change" error. You can only choose. Tom needs to quit playing games like he accuses others of doing. Some day, he will realize this fact and "choose". Sorensen | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4727 Registered: 8-2004 |
Well, Sorensen, it seems we share enough assumptions to at least discuss this. Ellen White gives no leave for anyone to rework her project into a murky mellow mental mush. But...I'm taking my chances anyway and hitting the road. Cheers. Maggie | ||
| Bob Sands (Bob_2) member Username: Bob_2 Post Number: 8919 Registered: 1-2005 |
Maggie said: So we end up with a situation where Ellen White wouldn't admit she was wrong and projected evil on the people who were simply believing what she'd previously assured them was clear, straight, unalterable truth straight from the Throne of God, IOW, she was speaking ex cathedra, like the Pope. Maggs, every thing is so black and white for you, except where your definitions are off or can't be agreed on, that makes your statements flawed, alot of the time.  You allow progressive thought for yourself but... “I am not an Athiest... .”“I cannot believe that God plays dice with the world.” -- Albert Einstein | ||
| bill sorensen (Billsorensen) member Username: Billsorensen Post Number: 2387 Registered: 9-2004 |
Maggie said..... "But...I'm taking my chances anyway and hitting the road. Cheers." And part of me says, "Bravo". And I hope you "change your mind" and come back. You and I can't blame EGW for our "spiritual" problems. Nor can we blame the church. EGW pointed to the bible to validate her testimony. She believed she was scriptural. So do I and many others do as well. Those who think otherwise must act accordingly. The new testament church pointed to the old testament scriptures to validate their testimony about Jesus. Without that, their witness is worthless. Jesus concurred and did the same thing. If any of us are lost, there will be an "empty spot in heaven" that will never be filled. I truly hope we are both there and can talk of some things we did not understand now. Keep the faith Bill | ||
| Maggie Bockmann (Maggie) member Username: Maggie Post Number: 4730 Registered: 8-2004 |
Keep the faith. Thank you, I shall. Call it a fatal case of a species of drapetomania, if you wish. Keep faith, my friend. Maggie | ||
| bill sorensen (Billsorensen) member Username: Billsorensen Post Number: 2390 Registered: 9-2004 |
In addition to identifying drapetomania, Cartwright prescribed a remedy to cure the malady. His feeling was that with "proper medical advice, strictly followed, this troublesome practice that many Negroes have of running away can be almost entirely prevented."[4] In the case of slaves "sulky and dissatisfied without cause" — a warning sign of imminent flight — Cartwright prescribed "whipping the devil out of them" as a "preventative measure."[8][9][10] I am sure some people feel this way about "the church" and even EGW. And there is no doubt some viable application in a spiritual sense. After all..."The law is a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ......" "The law" should "whip out" any hope of meriting heaven by our own good works. But "the law" has a friendly and helpful function as well for those who "know" Jesus. When we love Jesus, the law tells us how to act and how to please Him. And unless we see this function of the law, we have never been "born again." People find release from condemnation of the law by simply claiming there is no law for a believer. In this, they imply Jesus came and did away with the law. And this is a "false gospel". The law does not need to be changed. The attitude of people needs to be changed. And it is not antagonism against the law. But people do not want an "attitude adjustment", they want to destroy the law. So, now they have no guilt. EGW's testimony is for an unbeliever and a believer as well. Like the bible, the law will show you if you are a believer or not. And this is a role EGW plays in her own ministry. She is a "whipping boy" to the carnal mind and chides our unbelief. So does the bible. She is not more demanding than the bible. See Matt. 5 and the sermon on the mount. Jesus is way more demanding than EGW. She does point out a few particulars that are not directly stated in the bible, but nothing she points out is more demanding than Jesus Himself. Paul rightly say, "The carnal mind is enmity against God (and His law) and not subject to it." Nothing shows more clearly the evil of man than his hatred of God's law. It is hatred of God Himself, isn't it? "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God." Some think this means the law is no longer in effect for a Christian. Not so. In fact, your attitude toward the law will show clearly if you have been "born again" or not. David was born again. He loved the law. The law was no longer his enemy, but his friend. We need to know the difference between the law as a "schoolmaster" and the law as our friend in Jesus. The second use of the law in our Protestant heritage is "a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ", but the third use of the law is a friendly guide to show us how to love God and His kingdom, and His people. If we confound these two functions of the law, we can not define bible Christanity nor a believer from an unbeliever. Sorensen | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 16 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie Bockmann said: She herself said she had not changed anything for the last 45 years, Tom. Is this what she really said and meant? Or are you reading what you want into such comments? How do you know what she meant by that remark without understanding the background? You are just making assumptions, even as you are relying on the incompetent spin from the White Estate for the context about all of this. For the record; when Ellen White talks this way she is often referring to the Three Angels Messages. These specific pillars were never changed or revised by Ellen White at any time in her lifetime. But notwithstanding her refusal to change any of the Three Angels Messages, she also understood that present truth was not future truth. And those doctrinal changes were inevitable. So she was very open to change so long as it did not violate the Three Angels Messages. She agreed with James White when he said in 1857 that “it has been impossible to make some see that present truth is present truth, and not future truth, and that the Word as a lamp shines brightly where we stand, and not so plainly on the path in the distance” (RH, Dec. 31 1857, 61.) In fact, this Ellen White statement you are referencing, is taken from a post 1888 sermon that reflected Ellen White's support for the Protestant Gospel that was emerging-- thanks to Waggoner and Jones. It was a public, partisan response to the Gospel debates that had engulfed the church. She was campaigning for their new position, and blasting the Review at the same time. “I have had the question asked, what do you think of this light that these men are presenting? Why, I have been presenting it to you for the last forty-five years--the matchless charms of Christ. This is what I have been trying to present before your minds." "When Brother Waggoner brought out these ideas in Minneapolis, it was the first clear teaching on this subject from any human lips I had heard, excepting the conversations between myself and my husband. I have said to myself, It is because God has presented it to me in vision that I see it so clearly, and they cannot see it because they have never had it presented to them as I have. And when another presented it, every fiber of my heart said, Amen.” --Ms 5, p. 10. (Sermon, Rome, New York, June 19, 1889.) {5MR 219.1} When you read the actual quote and understand the complex history that is the context for this public remark, it does not say what you think it says. Ellen White is not saying that she has never changed any doctrinal positions; rather she is saying that she supports the Gospel emphasis of W & J, and that she has always viewed Jesus as the center and point of the Gospel. In fact, if you do the math, 45 years from 1889 = 1844. Which means that she is making a remark back to the time when she was a single, Sunday keeping Adventist. Which also means she had gone through a number of changed positions about many things, the Sabbath being just one of them. You don't think she forgot about all those changes about the Sabbath that they all went through, did you? Of course not. She knew that she had switched from Sunday worship to being a Sabbath keeping Adventist, in 1846. And she also knew she still had it wrong for the next 9 years. This was far too big of a deal to forget. Which is why she was not saying what you claim she is saying. She had to revise her Sabbath position 3 times by 1855. Thus it is clear that she cannot be saying what you think she is saying. She is not claiming to have kept the same theology, unchanged, from 1844 to 1889. That is a ludicrous interpretation that is not possible. Moreover, a year later, in 1890, Ellen White was going to make another significant change in her theology. While she was in agreement about W & Jones doctrinal emphasis, this is not the same as agreeing on all their specific points in this theological debate. And she told this to Smith in order to give him some time to come to deal with this monumental change in doctrine. But her declared neutrality on certain key points only lasted for so long. And at this point, in June of 1889, the real 1888 debate, that is-- a specific debate to deal with Waggoner's views of the Two Covenants, had not yet been held. This would take place in 1890, in the Battle Creek Tabernacle, with Ellen White sitting on the front row. It was during this time that Ellen White embraced the theological details of Waggoner and repudiated Uriah Smiths long held, traditional position on the law and the Covenants. Here was the greatest doctrinal change in the life of Ellen White, AND THE WHITE ESTATE COVERED IT UP AND KEPT IT FROM THE CHURCH. So the June 1889 quote is BEFORE the big showdown in Battle Creek. It is before Ellen White would take a private and public position about the specific theology of Waggoner that was causing so much confusion, anger, and debate within the SDA church. In 1890, Ellen White would officially endorse a major change to the SDA view of the Two Covenants. In fact, she let Uriah Smith know that she had been shown that Waggoner correct and Smith very wrong, even in the dark. Which means that they were all wrong. Including her. But Smith would never agree. Smith and the majority refused to admit that they had been wrong about either the law or the Gospel, --or anything else, and thus they refused to embrace this doctrinal change regardless of Ellen White's pleas in both private and public testimonies. This is why Ellen White is speaking about "new light" in 1890. She was CHANGING HER VIEW OF THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL. Thus she was not only admitting that she had been wrong about the Two Covenants, she was telling the leaders, like Smith, that they were wrong and needed to change. But they would not accept her point or her change of doctrine. They would not see their error and repent. They thought they had all the truth and doctrine that the church needed. Which is why they sent Ellen White as far away as possible, for as long as possible, and Waggoner as well. But Ellen White never backed down. (And neither did Waggoner). She knew that she was correct to make this change of doctrine--even if it meant her exile, schism, and the self-destruction of the Battle Creek Empire. She knew that this "new light" must be followed no matter what Uriah Smith said. (What a tragedy that the White Estate hid this new light from the Advent people? What a disaster for them to have sided with Uriah Smith.) Listen to her response during this time of debate: "The question has been asked me, ‘Do you think that the Lord has any more light for us as a people?’ I answer that He has light that is new to us, and yet it is precious old light that is to shine forth from the Word of truth. WE HAVE ONLY THE GLIMMERINGS OF THE RAYS OF THE LIGHT THAT IS YET TO COME TO US." [Selected Messages Book I, p. 401 - June 3, 1890] This term "new light," as used by Ellen White, is code for DOCTRINAL CHANGE during the 1888 period. The term assumes that some "old light" was wrong and had to be revised. Thus the Old Covenant was trying to give way to the New Covenant within the SDA community. But Protestant Reform failed. The new light of the Gospel that Jones, Waggoner, and Ellen White were promoting, contradicted the traditional light that the Denomination had been teaching for generations. And the leaders knew this and they pushed back because they wanted to keep the status quo. They were legalists. But Ellen White was not afraid to admit error and change as you claim. She had done it before about the Sabbath and other things and she had no problem doing it again. In fact, here is her view about change. She refutes your view and declares that error and change are inevitable and normative. She declares that SDA's have many, many things wrong. And so they do… "We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity for which Christ prayed." This is the real Ellen White. She is an advocate for doctrinal change and reform within the SDA church. Here is some more: "Whenever the people of God are growing in grace, they will be constantly obtaining a clearer understanding of His word. They will discern new light and beauty in its sacred truths. This has been true in the history of the church in all ages, and thus it will continue to the end. But as real spiritual life declines, it has ever been the tendency to cease to advance in the knowledge of the truth. Men rest satisfied with the light already received from God's word, and discourage any further investigation of the Scriptures. They become conservative, and seek to avoid discussion. The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God's people, should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves, to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition, and worship they know not what. Ellen White; Counsels to Writers and Editors, pages 33-42] The White Estate has poisoned many, many minds about Ellen White. This idea that she never changed her positions is absurd and completely false. This is why the church self-destructed in Battle Creek. THIS IS WHY! She was an agent of unwanted change and doctrinal reform and so she will be again if only the church leaders will tell the truth about her. All of our minds have been contaminated with this great fraud that is just now beginning to be exposed. Don't protect the White Estate. They don't deserve it. They need to confess and tell the truth. Continued | ||
| Tom Norris (Tom_norris) Moderator Username: Tom_norris Post Number: 17 Registered: 7-2008 |
Maggie said: If those were Arthur White's words, then there is absolutely no way to sort this thing out. Speak for yourself. Others can sort it out just fine. Some can even read the above quotes from Ellen White and understand that she is promoting doctrinal change, not opposing it. You are obviously not in that category. Just because you are completely and totally confused does not mean everyone else must also be. The White Estate has so dishonestly defined Ellen White that the entire record must be corrected. The most fundamental points of Adventist history and theology have been buried under generations of propaganda from the White Estate. So a full and complete investigation of the White Estate must take place to examine the record and tell the truth about Ellen White, church history, and SDA theology. The record will prove Ellen White's true position, even as it condemns the White Estate for a massive fraud of fabrication and deceit. So it is an easy thing to do. The facts are what they are. Don't be afraid to look at them. Maggie said: Maybe you fancy yourself the 21st century Apostle to do the job, but Tom, your thinking is so incoherent as to be impenetrable, and I'm not buyin' the Apostle bidness. It is incoherent for the critics of Ellen White to try and stop an investigation of fraud |
