Adventist Online

Shalom to all the saints

I have a question maybe has been addressed before, can one be an Adventist and not believe in the writings of Ellen White.commonly called the Spirit of Prophecy. I ask this because , there are facts that have been hidden from ordinary saints such as

1.) that Ellen White made false prophecies and plagiarized most of her works that even the things written as the inspired word of God were plagiarize. she also  made false prophecies. 

google the Bible Conference 1919" 

2.)  that the writings of Ellen white are the Spirit of Prophecy mentioned Rev 19:10 this is very unbiblical

3.) that the Investigative Judgement teaching does no hold water

4.) what are the implications on our baptism that have a condition that we accept EGW as being a prophet.

I have met and discussed with many fellow Adventists some who know about this, others who do not and amongst all these grouping are a section that will say they do not believe in the works of EGW. Thus may heading that can we be adventists that do not believe in Ellen White.

Views: 20144

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

No, I didn't accuse him of being an agent of Satan. He accuses others all day long without any case, but I've put a case without accusing, but he persists. I mentioned Satan, because that is the spirit in which he's exercising - accusation - to stop him accusing me and others of many unproven unsubstantiated character motivations, which i don't see you opposing. The proper way is (1) Prove a case (1 Th. 5.21), (2) without partiality to tradition (Jam 3.17, 1 Ti. 5.21), (3) with proper evidence (Act 18.28, 17.2-3), (4) not entertaining speculative accusations, and baseless theories (1 Ti. 4.7). I've done my best to adhere to those Biblical principles despite the accusations. I don't see anyone for the traditional side do that. So why those bringing Truth?

Look, it seems like every time I raise some evidence, we get accused of rebellion. What about Jesus - wasn't he accused? What about the Reformers? Were they towing the line? Why can't we just look at the evidence?

 

There is an Adventist Truth Revolution coming - world events won't wait for tradition to catch up. So I'm urgently pressing the case. But if traditionalists don't wake up now and join the Adventist Truth Revolution, there will be a lot of misery later when the truth does break free. And it will. Truth always does. Reformer Jan Huss from Bohemia (Czech Republic) who burnt under the stake has a statue commemorated to him in Prague and under it says "Pravda Vitezi" which means "Truth Prevails". Truth will prevail. I've made my choice. It's time for you to make yours. I urge you to join the Adventist Truth Revolution. It's not meant to insult or hurt - it is to warn. Time is running out. I hope you do. I pray you do. There's no other choice.

Strangely you have no issue with Paul: Elijah was taken up into heaven alive - and Paul said that all sinned and the wages of sin was death?!

In fact, I understand Alfredo's point and the one you're trying to make very well - but obviously your point is invalid since you ignore that Ellen White herself endorsed investigative judgement and stated that there were resurrections of humans to everlasting life before 1844. You are looking to create a contradiction where both items can well stand side by side. Maybe you need to look into the purpose of the investigative judgement to understand how this can be :)

This is exactly the point Marko. You're actually revealing that the IJ is inherently a contradiction. You said "Ellen White herself endorsed IJ while stating that there were resurrection of humans to everlasting life before 1844." Exactly! There's the contradiction. Here's the inherent breakdown in the contradiction.

 

Premise 1: From 1844 IJ investigates all believers throughout the ages from Adam until the present time.

Premise 2: There have been believers who were raised thousands of years ago before 1844.

Conclusion: Therefore, not all believers were investigated from 1844, and IJ false.

 

So in the end you're proving EGW's falsehood by reaffirming EGW's endorsement of contradictory position that she herself could not even see.

Jose, by the same line of argument you would be proving Paul (or the OT) wrong:

Premise 1: Elijah must have been a sinner (Ro. 3:23)

Premise 2: The wages of sin is death (Ro 6:23)

Therefor, Paul (or the OT) must be wrong, since Elijah never died (2 Kings 2) - or he never sinned.

 

Isaiah 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

 

If you study this issue to find out more about God's saving grace and his truthful character - or in the words of the prophet "my ways and my thoughts" you will, I'm certain. But if you only seek to find fault and flaw, well, your reward is yours already.

 

But about your premise 1: Who says all believers in fat print and underlined? Do you find it far stretched to interpret "from Adam to the living saints" as a temporal reference? Maybe. Also keep in mind, there was an exception from the rule "all must die" that Paul stated. Was he a false teacher teaching false doctrine? There are people who claim so for "contradictions" like this. Again, you will find what you seek. But make sure that the right Spirit is guiding you.

I think you're really not getting the point Marko. You're trying to apply a different topic to the one at hand. I mean, this again disproves IJ! If Elijah was a sinner but the IJ only began in 1844 then IJ is false! I don't know why you can't see what is being clearly said.

 

And the working of your premises are wrong. Death is referring to Eternal Death, not temporal death - this was the charge against Adam and he surely did not understand death to be temporal, it didn't exist. It is only because of the Atoning Sacrifice and Faith in it that Eternal Death was put back and temporal death entered in. And this is very thing that your premises do not take into account: Faith in the Atoning Sacrifice which actually saves. Your premises should read:

Premise 1: All have Sinned (Rom. 3.23) inc. Elijah

Premise 2: The Wages of Sin is Eternal Death (Rom. 6.23)

Premise 3: But Faith in the Atoning Sacrifice Saves.

Conclusion: Therefore Elijah and Moses could be brought into Heaven on that basis.

 

Yes, Is. 55.9 is an excellent passage for you to read, because it says His ways are higher than ours. He is not bound by time or space, He is omniscient, all-knowing, but that is exactly what IJ speaks against - it limits His understandings as if He didn't know who had faith in Him so He had to investigate them - truly a human-bound idea.

 

So all in all, this contradiction of IJ still stands. Many present and former Adventists have already seen this clearly, from the lay to the learned. It seems to me that for some people, like yourself, it's not really a question of whether IJ is true or false, but really a question of whether you want to believe it's true. In other words, It's not a question of fact but a question of preference. I'm sad that preference you have chosen.

@Marco,You have mentioned in Mrs.White interpretation that the many saints are the co-laborers with God, this a general statement, it could be Jewish saints or Gentile saints or both. What I understand that the"Holy City" in Matt. 27 is the heavenly City as EW interpreted(no question about this). The only question is who are those saints? as far as what I know Jerusalem is famous as a place were prophets and Kings live during their time and it is also place were they were buried and provably those were the saints Matt. referring w/c is also co-laborers of God. If it is in new testament only John the Baptist the co-laborer of God who is dead at Christ death in the cross. Considering that the ministry of Jesus is just for 3 years,majority or all co-laborers of God are still alive on that day.So it could not be the Christian saints, it is the Jewish saints in the old. If it is from the old, that could be provably the 144,000 saints coming from the 12 tribes of Israel so there is a special resurrection(first fruits) w/c is also contradicts the Adventist teaching were in gentiles are included? Why would God show a vision to her that IJ is in 1844, while He has already resurrected many saints from the old, so IJ of Christ has no effect?. Granting that the saints are Christian saints are they exempted in the IJ of Christ?I don't think so! If Jesus blood is shed for all humanity starting from Adam and in the future,then all saints must pass through Christ IJ no exemptions, if that is true. The problem is, no IJ in the the words of God.There is IJ in human interpretations.

So are you saying Investigative judgment is not biblical. What does the bible mean then in 1 Thessalonians 4:16,17 that the dead in Christ will rise first and those who are alive believing in Christ will be caught up with them and meet Jesus in the clouds. So this means at the coming of Jesus for the second time everyone's fate will have been decided. What else do you want to know other than this self explanation of the investigative judgment. Already at His coming Jesus will have sifted through everyone and quantified whether that person is fit for heaven or not.

The bible says Jesus is our advocate and He is pleading for us so that our sins are forgiven. But the same advocate is the one who is going to execute judgment on the earth at the end. That is why in revelation it is said His garment will be written King of kings and LORD of lords. He is coming to execute the judgment. So this makes Him a judge as well.

If the issue of investigative judgment is not biblical, why then does Hebrews compare Jesus as the High Priest, and how shall the cleansing of the temple going to be since all the ceremonies that were done by the Israelites were a shadow of things to come. How is the day of atonement going to be fulfilled or how was it fulfilled?

Yes, I'm pretty much saying IJ is not biblical. 1 Th. 4.16-17 doesn't prove IJ. What I don't understand is that if you believe in IJ, why aren't you standing by the traditional SDA interpretation, which classically uses Dan 7, 8 and 9 as the absolute foundational basis of IJ? As I've said prior the classic best arguments are summarized in 1844 Made Simple by Clifford Goldstein (current Sabbath School editor), who is in favor of IJ. I've also suggested Desmond Ford's For the Sake of the Gospel for the other side. I'm trying to be fair so everyone can be fully informed.

 

I tried to summarize the problems in 6 points before (click here), I'll try and squeeze it into 3:

1) Dan. 7 doesn't speak about an Investigation of the Saints.

2) Dan. 8.14 doesn't speak of 2300 years but 2300 evening and morning sacrificial services, based on the context, which equals 1150 days (2 sacrificial services for 1 day).

3) Dan. 9.25 refers not to Ezra 7 (457 BC) as a start date (the date which calculates 2300 years up until 1844) but actually in Neh 2 (445 BC).

You've mentioned the High Priest in Hebrews, but actually that has been argued by many Adventist scholars to be against IJ. The High Priest is exclusively focussed on the Holiest Place ministry according to Heb. 9.7. Since Jesus became High Priest upon His Ascension and sat at the right hand of the Father, He therefore became minister of the Holiest Place or Most Holy Place, not an alleged Holy Place. The fact that He sat down at the right hand of the father, and the Throne in the Sanctuary is only in the Holiest Place, puts Jesus in the Holiest Place upon His Ascension too. Therefore, this disproves that Jesus moved into the Holiest Place in 1844 since He already did so in the first century. 

 

I'm not inventing these things, these things have been argued by scholars for decades culminating in 1980 with the massive Desmond Ford Glacier View trial, which was actually reported by Time Magazine. Try and deal with the main issues, and see that the Truth has been suppressed by administrators within Adventism for decades, and has never got down to the average person in the pew. Therefore it is time these things got out to ignite a New Adventist Truth Revolution. Join it brother. There's no other choice if you want to stand for God.

Your 'Adventist Truth Revolution' is nothing more than the 'New Theology' from the 1980's and the celebration movement.

If God knows everything as you say (and He does) why did He come down to speak with Adam and Eve, why did He come down to see what was going on at the tower of Babel, why did He stop in and see Abraham on the way to destroying Sodom and Gomorrah? No, He doesn't use the word 'investigation' but does that mean it wasn't. God was doing what He has to do, be open and fair AND show the world that He doesn't just dish out arbitrary judgement without letting the people see what His reason's are.

You may wish to skip around it anyway you want, but He 'investigated' before He delivered judgement. Your argument that because God didn't called it at investigation is nothing more than a straw man.

If your argument about the 2300 days being literal 2300 and years, must then stand to reason for the 1260 day prophecy as well, that it was then a literal 1260 days. In your studies has this prophecy been fulfilled nearly 1500 years go or is it still to be fulfilled?

What is your stand on the antichrist, do you believe the Sabbath to be a literal day or any day you chose to worship on, what's your stance on the state of the dead, do you believe on a literal 2nd coming or are you a rapturist?

I would say brother Gordon that your two cents is worth $100.00..... conservatively speaking. 

 This is the kind of pablem that ought not be permitted on an SDA forum. Those angry former SDA people will not answer questions they just keep asking them and when you answer them they move on to another question as though asking question that implies doubt the question itself is proof.There is more hope for Sodom and Gomorrah than for them To talk to them is equivalent to Eve standing talking to the serpent in the garden of Eden. They are set in rejecting truth and would rather die than accept the truths in Scriptures that would cause them to deny self, take up their crosses and following Jesus.

Pray for them but to parlay with them is to embolden them in their mission to lead God's people to perdition. It is not just the SOP they attack but they attack and nail Jesus to the cross daily by their rejection of God's Word.

Hebrews 6:4-6

New International Version (NIV)

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen[a] away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.

RSS

Site Sponsors

 

Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free


USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:
Amazon.com

 

© 2021   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service