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: 19970

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Correlation is clear.


If it has been proven then where's your proof? I see a lot of claims, but zero evidence at all since we started discussing this issue of Investigative Judgment. So I don't know why the only solution that you've thought of is to just keep on repeating a slogan that has no substance.


"Seek the truth, hear the truth, learn the truth, love the truth, speak the truth, hold the truth and defend the truth until death". "Pravda Vitezi" (Truth Prevails)

- Jan Hus, First Protestant Reformer.


What for? Debates rarely if ever change anyone's point of view. You can look up any of the information yourself.  I already done so for Des Ford.  I dissected every word from his testimony and his book with out any outside influence from other Adventist on the topic. 

In one instance he claimed that he turned up every stone and left nothing unturned in his research.  With such a bold statement from such an established theologian you would think every single claim in his writings was accurate.  I discovered just in the first chapter alone on is book written about the investigative judgement and 1844 that he  has construed the meaning of many Ellen White quotes, and it is plain and easy to spot if you pick up her books to read.  I also learned about his method of bible interpretation. I found it to lack any biblical foundation.  Just a man made idea on how to interpret scripture.  His credibility was shot just in that first chapter alone.  The rest of it is really the same deal.  He is crafty and he is manipulative and those who do not know better can easily be influenced by his dogma.

yes, thank you.

What for? You mean, you don't believe we should prove our positions by scripture? (Act 18.28) So we're supposed to believe blindly because someone just said so?


I shall repeat: a lot of claims but zero evidence.


Where is the proof for Investigative Judgment? You've tried to discredit Ford (which i don't think you were successful at doing anyway) and still, I have not seen you deal with the 6 points I laid out. Since every response is to do with everything else but the Bible texts, and that there is a strong unwillingness to actually read the Bible itself, I think it can be conclusively said that there is no such thing as Investigative Judgment, and therefore Ellen White's endorsement of it by vision disproves her as a prophet. Therefore it's time to wake up Adventists for a call to discover the Truth of the True Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Adventist Truth Revolution has prevailed. God show you the Truth.


"Seek the truth, hear the truth, learn the truth, love the truth, speak the truth, hold the truth and defend the truth until death". "Pravda Vitezi" (Truth Prevails)

- Jan Hus, First Protestant Reformer.

"And you shall know the truth. And the truth shall set you free."

- Jesus the Messiah, King of Israel.

Hi Aquila, and thanks for responding. I wanna just take a deeper look at each point.

  1. 1. So we agree then that it is the Beast and the Little Horn who are the ones condemned. When you say "it stands to reason that they [the saints] too are examined and vindicated", to me it doesn't stand to reason nor do I think should it. Firstly, the words "accused", "investigated", or any words to that effect are completely absent in the text. Therefore what you've said can only be categorized as speculation. Secondly, even this speculation cannot be harmonised reasonably with the context. The context is a Court Trial (vv.21, 25) that has a Judge - The Ancient of Days, Accused Defendants - The Beast & The Little Horn, and Victims of the Accused - The Saints (vv.21, 25). To say that the victims are to be investigated for being persecuted is like putting on trial a rape victim for being raped - it is surely contextually inconsistent and morally horrifying, to my mind at least. Therefore, it is much more contextually harmonious to say that the "Judgement given in favor of the Saints," (v.22) is in the form of an Award of Eternal Compensation (the Kingdom), and this is exactly what the text says, three times in fact:
    • "But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, forever and ever." (v.18); "The time came when the saints possessed the kingdom." (v.22); "And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High" (v.27)
  2. In Rev. 20.12 there is a clear distinction between the books (plural), and The Book of Life (singular). In all instances where the Book of Life is mentioned that I've been able to find, deeds are never mentioned, only Names. Rev. 20.12 is the only other mention than Dan. 7.10 where books are mentioned. And here they are exclusively concerned with the wicked. Book of Life for the Saints, books for the Wicked. Book of Life has Names, the books have deeds. Therefore, it would support the understanding that the books mentioned in Dan.7.10 are to do with the only wicked characters mentioned, The Beast and the Little Horn, and not the Saints.
  3. I don't think your comment here really addresses the Court Trial context: Judge, Accused, Victim, Execution of Accused, and Compensation for the Victim.
  4. I'm afraid it's true. I have read the Greek, and I know what you're referring to, but for those who don't, the traditional defence is that the Greek hagia hagion is the exclusive reference to the Most Holy Place of the Sanctuary. But this is simply not true. Other variations of hagia hagion, such as ton hagion and to hagion, are used in the Greek Old Testament that Jews used called the Septuagint, to substitute the Hebrew word kodesh or the Holiest Place (ton hagion in Lev. 16.17, 27 and to hagion in Lev. 16.2, 3, 16, 20,23). Furthermore, there are word associations used of Jesus' ministry that are exclusively of the Most Holy Place. One example is the High Priest who exclusively goes into the Most Holy Place according to Heb. 9.7 (compare vv.11-12, 25-26). Associate Editor of the Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary, Raymond Cottrell, is one of the most qualified and prominent scholars of Adventism who has ever addressed this issue. Here what he has to say:
    • "That one sacrifie qualified Him to serve as our great High Priest in heaven, perpetually. Having made that sacrifice, Christ entered the Most Holy Place-"heaven itself"-to appear in the presence of God on our behalf." 
  5. All I can say is, I cannot see it. Please quote the text in which it is. Again, Cottrell has this to say about it:
    • "The second contextual anomaly... essential ot the traditional interpretation is... the davar, "word"... that went out to restore and build Jersualem, as the decree of Artaxerxes Longimanus in 457 BC. But that decree says nothing about rebuilding either Jerusalem or the temple..."
  6. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding on the point I made so I'll just try and re-explain it better. Given the Earthly Sanctuary context of Daniel 8.11-14 the evenings and mornings spoken of in v.14 are referring to evening and morning sacrifices. Raymond Cottrell again agrees, "Wherever the words erev and boquer occur in a sanctuary context (as in 8.14), without exception they always refer to the evening and morning sacrificial worship services..." Therefore, the translation would be a total of 2300 evening sacrifices and morning sacrifices collectively. 2 sacrifices = 1 day. Therefore 2300 sacrifices = 1150 days.

You've raised Matthew 22 which is a bit puzzling since I can't see how you've dealt with all the above points adequately, which have been specifically used to support the Investigative Judgement position.

As to the view that discrediting Ellen White and SDA Church would mean everyone leaving, well, there are others who have another view, like Associate Editor for the SDA Commentary, Raymond Cottrell:

"To be in harmony with the sola Scriptura principle it [Investigative Judgment] should be deleted from the Fundamental Beliefs resume of Adventist beliefs and replaced by an amplification of Christ's ministry as set forth in the Book of Hebrews. The ephemeral umbilical cord is essential to life prior to birth, but totally irrelevant thereafter. May it be that the traditional sanctuary doctrine was a sort of spiritual umbilical cord God permitted as a means of reviving advent expectancy, but should be discarded once it had served its purpose?"

People may or may not agree with that, but that is not what I'm concerned about. I believe the highest priority is Truth. What happens after that, let us gather together in prayer and search for God's will. Ultimately, it is the Truth, and not denomination, that will set us free.

Alleluia there is a third alternative !

or maybe not,just a cleverly disguised falsehood to lead astray God's people.


The Question Stated - The Magnitude of the Work - Judged as Individuals - Time for this Work - The Righteous Judge the Wicked - A Judgment Message - Accounting Worthy - Record of Sins

"I said in mine heart, God shall judge the righteous and the wicked; for there is a time there for every purpose and for every work." Eccl.3:17 {1890 JNA, JEO 5.1}
THE judgment of the great day is an event certain to take place. "He hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained." Acts 17:31. What God hath appointed is sure to come in due time. The resurrection of Christ is an assurance to all men of the final judgment. It is not the fact of the judgment, however, but the order of its work, that at this time engages our attention. The work to be accomplished is of immense magnitude. The judgment relates (1) to all the righteous; (2) to all the wicked; (3) to all the evil angels. The number of cases, therefore, to be acted upon at this grand tribunal exceeds our powers of conception. We must not, however, suppose that there will be any difficulty on the part of the Judge in acting upon every case individually. Far from this, "there is a time there for every purpose and for every work." The judgment, indeed,
pertains to an immense number of beings; yet every one of them shall give account of himself to God. Rom.14:12. It will not relate to so vast a number as to make it otherwise than a strictly personal matter. Nor will there be aught of confusion or disorder in that final reckoning. God has plenty of time for the work, and he has no lack of agents to do his bidding. That he has order in this work, the Scriptures clearly teach. {1890 JNA, JEO 5.2}
1. The righteous are to judge the wicked; yet the righteous are themselves to pass the test of the judgment. Whence it follows that the judgment must pass upon the righteous before they can sit in judgment upon the wicked. {1890 JNA, JEO 6.1}
This is a very important proposition. That it is truthful we know from the express testimony of the Scriptures. {1890 JNA, JEO 6.2}
"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?" 1Cor.6:2,3. {1890 JNA, JEO 6.3}
"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them; and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshiped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." Rev.20:4. {1890 JNA, JEO 6.4}
"I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of Days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom." Dan.7:21. 22. {1890 JNA, JEO 6.5}
Here is the exalted work of the saints in the judgment. They are to take part in the examination of the cases of all wicked men and fallen angels. But this is not to be till they have been changed to immortality, and exalted to thrones of glory. They do not, therefore, have their cases decided at the same time with the wicked. We believe the reader will acknowledge the justice of this reasoning. Let us state another proposition:- {1890 JNA, JEO 7.1}
2. The trump of God sounds as the Saviour descends from heaven. When that trump is heard, all the righteous are, in the twinkling of an eye, changed to immortality. There can be no examination after this to determine whether they shall be counted worthy of eternal life, for they will then have already laid hold upon it. From this it follows that the examination and decision of the cases of the righteous takes place before the advent of Christ. The resurrection of the righteous to immortality is decisive proof that they have then already passed the test of the judgment, and have been accepted of the Judge. That they are thus raised to immortality the following texts plainly teach:- {1890 JNA, JEO 7.2}
"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body." "Behold, I show you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." 1Cor.14:42-44. 51,52. {1890 JNA, JEO 7.3}
These passages are certainly convincing. The resurrection of the saints is to immortal life, and they are made immortal in the very act of the resurrection. The decision of their cases is, therefore, passed before their resurrection, for the nature of their resurrection is declarative or eternal salvation. But the fact that the decision of the judgment in the case of the righteous precedes the advent is proved by another proposition, as follows:- {1890 JNA, JEO 8.1}
3. The righteous are to be raised before the wicked have their resurrection. This shows that the examination of their cases takes place before they are raised, for the final discrimination is made in the very act of raising the just and leaving the unjust to the resurrection of damnation. {1890 JNA, JEO 8.2}
"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." Rev.20:5,6. {1890 JNA, JEO 8.3}
"But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage; neither can they die any more; for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection." Luke 20:35,36. {1890 JNA, JEO 8.4}
"If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead." (Literally "the resurrection out from the dead ones.") Phil.3:11. {1890 JNA, JEO 8.5}
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order; Christ the first-fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." 1Cor.15:22,23. {1890 JNA, JEO 8.6}
There is a resurrection which bears the inspired designation of the "first resurrection." All who have part in this resurrection are pronounced "blessed and holy." On them "the second death hath no power." This resurrection is out from among the dead. Paul earnestly labored to attain unto it. It is to be at the coming of Christ. Only those who are Christ's shall have part in it. All that have part in it are the children of God because they are the children of the resurrection to life. These facts clearly prove that the examination of the cases of the righteous precedes their resurrection at the advent of Christ, that event being really declarative of their innocence in the sight of God, and of their eternal salvation. Such as are accepted of God are raised; the others sleep till the resurrection to damnation. These facts are decisive proof that the righteous are judged before they are raised. {1890 JNA, JEO 9.1}
But we have a still more explicit statement yet to notice. Says our Lord: "But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead," etc. Then it is certain that the act of accounting worthy to obtain the resurrection from among the dead, and a part in the world to come, does precede the resurrection of the righteous. But this act of accounting men worthy of a part in the kingdom of God is the very act of acquitting them in the judgment. The investigative judgment in the cases of the righteous is, therefore, past before their resurrection. As the resurrection of the just is at the advent of Christ, it follows that they pass their examination, and are counted worthy of a place in the
kingdom of God, before the Saviour returns to the earth to gather them to himself. {1890 JNA, JEO 9.2}
It is proved, therefore, that the resurrection of the saints to immortal life is declarative of their final acceptance before God. Whatever of investigation is requisite for the final decision of their cases, must take place before the Saviour in mid-heaven utters the word of command to his angels. "Gather my saints together unto me." Ps.50:5; Matt.24:31. The act of accounting them worthy must precede all this. The saints alone are to be caught up to meet Christ in the air. 1Thess.4:17. But the decision who these saints are, who shall thus be caught up, rests not with the angels who execute the work, but with the Judge, who gives them their commission. We cannot, therefore, avoid the conclusion that the investigation in the cases of the righteous precedes the coming of the Saviour. Let us now consider an important proposition. {1890 JNA, JEO 10.1}
1. This period of investigative judgment is ushered in by a solemn proclamation to the inhabitants of the earth; and this investigative work embraces the closing years of human probation. This is a very important statement. But it is susceptible of being clearly proved. {1890 JNA, JEO 10.2}
And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come; and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters." Rev.14:6,7. {1890 JNA, JEO 10.3}
The gospel of Christ is "the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth." Rom.1:16. No other gospel than this can be preached, not even by an angel from heaven. Gal.1:8. Whence it follows that the angel of Rev.14:6,7, preaching the everlasting gospel, represents some part of the great gospel proclamation. It is a part of that preaching which is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth. This fact alone is decisive that this proclamation concerning the hour of God's judgment must be made while human probation still lasts. Two other solemn announcements follows. And it is evident that the human family are still upon probation, when the third angel declares that "if any man worship the beast . . . the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God. . . . Here is the patience of the saints." This is a consecutive prophecy, as several expressions plainly indicate. And it is to be observed that the Son of man is seen upon the white cloud after all these solemn proclamations have been made. {1890 JNA, JEO 11.1}
That this announcement of the hour of God's judgment precedes the advent of Christ, and is addressed to men while yet in probation, the fourteenth chapter of Revelation clearly proves. That this is not some local judgment is proved by the fact that "every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people," are concerned in it. It is evidently that part of the judgment work which precedes the coming of Christ, and, as has been already shown, this is the work of determining who shall be accounted worthy to have part in the resurrection to immortal life, and, we may add,
who also of the living shall be accounted worthy to escape the troubles that shall come in the conclusion of this state of things, and to stand before the Son of man. Luke 20:35; 21:36. {1890 JNA, JEO 11.2}
2. When the sins of the righteous are blotted out they can be no more remembered. They are blotted out before Christ comes. There can be, therefore, no act of calling them to account for their sins after the advent of Christ. Thus we read:- {1890 JNA, JEO 12.1}
"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you." Acts 3:19,20. {1890 JNA, JEO 12.2}
Mr. Wesley, in his "Notes on the New Testament," gives a different translation, which may be more accurate:- {1890 JNA, JEO 12.3}
"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, that the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and he may send to you Jesus Christ, who was before appointed." {1890 JNA, JEO 12.4}
Albert Barnes, in his "Notes on the Acts," speaking of these two translations, says, "The grammatical construction will admit of either." One of these represents the blotting out to be when the times of refreshing arrive; the other makes it the cause of that refreshing. But neither of them gives the idea that this blotting out takes place when the sinner turns to God. Both of them throw it into the future. Each of them represents it as preceding the second coming of the Lord. But this is especially true of the latter translation, which follows the original in using a conditional verb respecting Christ's advent; not as though
that were a doubtful event, but rather as if his coming to the personal salvation of the ones addressed depended upon their having part in the refreshing, and as if that refreshing was to come in consequence of the blotting out of sins. {1890 JNA, JEO 12.5}
The sins of the righteous are blotted out before the coming of Christ. They cannot be called to give account of their sins after they have been blotted out; whence it follows that whatever account the righteous render to God for their sins must be before the advent of the Saviour, and not at, or after, that event. {1890 JNA, JEO 13.1}
3. The sins of men are written in the books of God's remembrance. The blotting out of the sins of the righteous does therefore involve the examination of these books for this very purpose. That the sins of men are thus written, is plainly revealed in the Scriptures. {1890 JNA, JEO 13.2}
"For though thou wash thee with niter, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord God." Jer.2:22. And thus the Lord speaks of the guilt of Israel: "Is not this laid up in store with me, and sealed up among my treasures?" Deut.32:34. And Paul speaks in the same manner: "But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasureth up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his deeds." Rom.2:5,6. These statements of wrath being treasured up can have reference only to the fact that God takes notice of men's sins, and that every sin is marked before him. To this fact all the texts which speak of the blotting out of sins must have
reference. Thus David prays that God would blot out his transgressions. Ps.51:1,9. And Nehemiah, and David, and Jeremiah, pray respecting certain persons, that their sin may not be blotted out. Neh.4:5; Ps.109:14; Jer.18:23. And Isaiah, in prophetic language, speaks of this blotting out as if it were a past event, just as in the next verse he speaks of the new creation, and the final redemption. Isa.44:22,23. And in the previous chapter he speaks in a similar manner of this blotting out as necessary in order that the sins of the people of God may be no more remembered. Isa.43:25. These texts plainly imply that the sins of men are upon record, and that there is a time when these are blotted out of the record of the righteous. {1890 JNA, JEO 13.3}



Hi Remnant1217. I appreciate the food for thought. But I think it must be remembered that Investigative Judgment, which is a specific kind of judgment, demands scripture for at least two primary propositions: (1) evidence for the specific date of 1844. (2) evidence that Jesus has not already yet entered into the Most Holy Place. (I've broken it down into small points for the purpose of not repeating myself). For point 1, the texts in Dan.8.14, 9.25, Ezra 7.12-26 are traditionally used. For point 2, the texts in Hebr 6, 9 and 10 have been contested. As I've pointed out above Adventist scholars already recognize the problems with these texts. There has been massive controversy surrounding it. And you can check them out for yourself through all the points above. But what I will do is inform of one chapter that led the Associate Editor of the Seventh-Day Adventist Commentary, Raymond Cottrell to discount it:


This time he formulated a list of six questions regarding the Hebrew text of Daniel 8:14 and its context and sent it to every Adventist college teacher versed in Hebrew and to every head of the religion department in all of the Adventist colleges in North America. Without exception, they replied that there is no linguistic or contextual basis for the traditional Adventist interpretation of Daniel 8:14. The surprising results of the survey got the attention of church administrators.” (Adventist Today Magazine)


“Adventist college Bible teachers in North America unanimously responded to a 1958 questionnaire acknowledging that there is no valid linguistic or contextual basis for the traditional interpretation of Daniel 8:14. These 27 teachers included every college Bible department head and everyone able to read the Bible in Hebrew. Bible scholars and 15 administrators were appointed by the General Conference to the Committee on Problems in the Book of Daniel as a result of the 1958 questionnaire... After five years of intense study, the committee acknowledged that it was unable to resolve any of the problems.” (Raymond Cottrell, Adventist Today Magazine, 1844 Revisionists Not New: President Indicts the Church’s Scholars, Issue 1, 1995, p.16)

Apparently there is Fidelis, you'll be pleased to hear!

I'm not sure why you think this is a poor forum for such purposes Aquila. It's seems a good place to share what many Adventists might not yet now about our history, and what many Adventist scholars already know about IJ, but never seems to get to the average person in the pew. So I feel that they need to know that this is not an outside issue, but an internal one that has been going on for decades.

  1. I don't think know if you meant that I'm making arguments from silence or are that you were. If you meant me, then that is puzzling because my argument is made from what is there: the Court, the Accused and their crimes (including persecuting the victims), the Victims and the Compensation Awarded to them. Makes perfect sense. Where are the words "accused", "investigated" etc.? Perhaps you are arguing from silence? I think raising Mat. 22 again is a bit strange, which I'll speak more about below. 
  2. Well, the point is that it doesn't deal with what I said. My point is that the Books (plural) are for the Wicked, explicitly indicated by Rev. 20.12, and The Book of Life (singular) are for the Saints (Dan. 12.1). But of those two, only the Books (plural) are mentioned in Daniel 7 (v.10). So if you want to say that the Saints are the ones being tried, only the Books are mentioned pointing to Judgment of the Wicked. Do you contest that these books (plural) are indicative of the Wicked being judged?
  3. If it were merely my personal perspectives, there shouldn't be a Court Trial, there shouldn't be Accused Defendants, there shouldn't be Victims of the Accused, there shouldn't be a Punishment for the Accused, and there shouldn't be Compensation for the Victims. Do you contest that all those elements aren't in the text?
  4. It's not complicated at all really. It's quite simple actually. The Greek allows for the Most Holy Place, as shown in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT that Jews used present at Jesus time). Also, the fact that Heb 9.7 explicitly states that the High Priest (as opposed to plural priests) is exclusively to do with the Most Holy Place, and that is exactly what Jesus is called, the High Priest, upon His Ascension. Do you contend that the High Priest is to do with the Most Holy Place according to Heb. 9.7?
  5. But where's the quote? I can understand your difficulty because it is just not there. It is actually in Nehemiah 2.6, which was a command given in 445 BC, the entire context is to do with the rebuilding of the walls of the city.
  6. But those reasons didn't deal with it at all. If one looks at the context of Daniel 8.11-14 its Sacrifice-orientated. Therefore the evenings are contextually indicative of the evening and morning sacrifice (Num. 28.4). Do you contend that the context is sacrifice-orientated?

I haven't ignored Mat. 22, I've suggested that it's a text that does not concern IJ explicitly. The above passages are, which are clearly laid out in the Sabbath School Editor Clifford Goldstein in his book 1844 Made Simple, and it does not include Matt 22.

With regards to Mt. 22 Jesus is not addressing IJ. If you read from 21 as well as 22, you'll see that Jesus is addressing the Pharisees, chief priests, elders, in other words the leadership  (Mat. 21.23, 45; 22.15). And of particular concern is their self-righteousness and hypocracy laid out quite vividly in Mt. 23. So the point of the wedding garments is, according to the Jewish custom at the time (Jewish New Testament Commentary, David Stern), that they were given to the guests by the King, not bought themselves. And this would be addressing their self-righteousness, whereas Jesus is only asking for "guests" to accept His righteousness. That is why in verse 10, just before the "garment" verse, he calls all, "good and bad", just as He says a chapter before "Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you." (Mt.21.31).


But like I said before, this is besides the point, because if the date 1844 is wrong (based on points 5 and 6), and if Jesus already went into the Most Holy Place as High Priest (point 4), even if you were to maintain that it was the Saints on Trial, the theory has already collapsed. And since you cannot disprove the above points, then bringing Matt 22 in still doesn't help IJ because it needs proof for a specific date (457BC and 2300 Days) and a specific event (Jesus moving to the Most Holy Place), which Matt 22 can't give. Therefore, IJ has no case.

I'm sorry to hear that. Well, I hope that at least you'll think about what I said. I would love to reconcile our views, that's my hope and dream generally. But I'm a bit puzzled at the same time because clearly you disagreed with the 6 points I presented in the first place, which is fair enough, but obviously if I believed that my 6 points are supported by evidence, then I would only naturally present the full case as best as I can, to the best of my knowledge, with no offence intended, using as few emotional words as possible, to keep the atmosphere amiable. I try my best, but it seems however I word it it will be seen to be being difficult. The points evidences are not my fault, they existed long before I was born and they will exist long after I die, so really it's those evidences that you and me and anybody else has to deal with. And we're not alone. As I said, there have been many before us, prominent Adventist figures like Desmond Ford and Raymond Cottrell and many others. But all I'd leave you with is just think about what I said and pray that God lead us all to find the truth, whatever it is. Because time is short, and we really need to get close to God, to find Him, and discover what His will is for us. That is my hope and prayer for all of us. God be with you.

That's a bit dishonest Aquila. You're the one who first simply listed the numbers and just simply denied my points - you didn't really show that you were "carefully and prayerfully considering the evidence". That's why I had to reply again more fully. So it's ok for you to reply and deny my points but not ok for me?


As far as I can see, the truth is undefeatable, whether it's you, me or any human being going against it. So instead of covering your withdrawal as if it was to do with methods not evidence, just embrace the evidence and join the Adventist Truth Revolution. It is well overdue, and nothing can stop God's Truth so why fight it? Join it brother. It is Time.


Site Sponsors


Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free

USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:


© 2021   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service