The statement as found in article 18 of the book “Seventh-day Adventists Believe” in in fact a blasphemy.
It states that “Her (Ellen White’s) writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction”. According to the New Testament, especially the Gospel of John chapter 14 and 16, and an in context study of Revelation, Jesus Christ is God. He alone is the truth , the way and the light. Not any writings of any person. What Jesus said and did while on earth are for our guidance, instruction and correction. The Holy Spirit is promised to dwell within all the individual believers to be our comfort. Not just one person. The Holy Spirit is also God. So to say that a person’s writings are thus, actually places that person as an equal with God. Such a statement is blasphemy. By making such a belief a part of the fundamental beliefs of the denomination, it turn the organisation into a cult. By teaching something contrary to what Jesus said, the denomination can no longer claim to be Christian.
What do you think?
True, and is still so according to some Islamic sects. Another word for cult is "sect." The Catholic church itself refers to its "cult of Mary." Both meanings apply there but they consider this no more than the "sect of Mary."
Today the label "cult" is often used as a wrench to try to tighten down and change a group or a lever to get rid of them.
Absolutely Vincent, and to allow threats that we are a cult to change our convictions is a show of weakness.
The problem is when we go and try to convert the world in the name of Mrs. White, how else can we be conceived. She herself admonishes against this, and with good cause. We need to reach the world through the Gospel of Yashua. Then, perhaps we can be taken more seriously.
What i have found is that those of the world that go through conversion and come into the church typically have less issue with EGW's work than dyed in the wool lifelong SDAs Yet it is the lifelong SDAs that complain in favor of new converts.
There are two definitions of cult and no matter how well deal with this we will necessarily be accused of being a cult (in the negative sense) as long as we accept the writings of EGW and as long as we hold different views on the Sabbath, State of the Dead, etc.etc.. I will move on none of them.
The first definition of "cult" from Webster's New World College Dictionary is #1 " a system of religious worship or ritual."
#2 "devoted attachment to, or extravagant admiration for,a person or principle."
Did you read my first line Less ? "What i have found is that those of the world that go through conversion and come into the church typically have less issue with EGW's work than dyed in the wool lifelong SDAs Yet it is the lifelong SDAs that complain in favor of new converts."
As far as being uninspired, that is a term that is used loosely here and please present any quote regarding the convert being inspired or uninspired.
Would you suggest the colporteur not sell or give away door to door the Desire of Ages and the Great Controversy ?
I think you are correct Kevin, I am a lifelong SDA and I'm one of those arguing to not expand White's role. If a convert felt White was fallible then he would probably just not join.
Aquila, I had to look up inertia. I don't think so. I do want change, I think we need to focus on the gospel like a laser, there are millions who have not accepted Christ's gift of salvation. I'd also like to see us make more of an effort for social justice and protecting the environment. The type of change I'm against is high level directives to restrict drama or praise music in church, issues that some people on this site are pushing for. I'd like to leave those issues to the local church.
Kevin, I joyful over SOP as well, I'm just afraid that there is a push to make everything she said Ex Cathedra. The Catholics have a purgatory doctrine that is not based on the Bible, LDS baptize the deceased, again not based on the Bible; but each have a prophetic source to justify the doctrine. I'm fine with them doing that, but I want to be in a church that is 100% sola scriptura.
Kevin, Well yes, I have trouble reconciling number 22 on unclean foods with Romans 14 - I know some of you would fight to the death to defend number 22 though. I can support all the other doctrine. You're right on what I think of amalgamation of man and beast, I think we should get as far away from that as we possibly can.
Aquila, I see what you mean now by inertia, at first I thought you were objecting to people who refuse to let new light into the church by either wanting no change or steady change at the same pace. No, I'm not staying only due to inertia. Its my church, there is a long history of SDAs trying to keep White from being treated like a Pope from A.G. Daniells, the Questions on Doctrine authors, her husband. If someone wants to make White Pope they should start their own church and do so.
You are correct Aquila and I meant to address the reply to you, sorry. Number 22 is my only objection, all other doctrine is from the Bible. I do not think that White was overused by the authors of the Dallas statement, I actually think they did an exceptional job.
Aquila, Do you support the SDA beliefs as delineated in "Questions on Doctrine"?