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?
I understand the counsel well, I just do not accept it as some kind of evidence that eating flesh today is ok. I am not insinuating anything. I do not have to. What I am saying is that you are comparing Jesus eating fish with eating meat today and you claim that it I own a bike today I am inconsistent because I am not following counsel. That is kindergarten silly, Daniel.
One thing is entirely consistent. Anytime an SDA brings up the bicycle quote they are trying to excuse something in their own lives.
No, I am trying to have you see, as Yashua tried to have everyone see, the spirit behind the law. Would you be one of the Pharisees condemning Him for what He did on the Sabbath and taught others to do?
Further, Ellen White's counsels are not law. But, you treat them as such, and you take them literally without understanding the spirit behind them.
There you go again, Aquila. The third time in just a few days. You said you did not wish to argue about this topic but you keep bringing it up unsolicited. Therefore you are not being honest. I will not argue with you about it. I believe that Jesus was able to take the nature we have after the fall and live a sinless life. The 144,000 will prove something you apparently do not believe that being that one can have a fallen nature and through the power of God not sin.
The fact that you keep being this topic up in threads where it is not the subject matter reveals that you simply like to argue.
You brought up three times that which you said you did not wish to discuss the first time. This only diverts from the subject of the thread. There are threads on the nature of Christ and rather than hijacking threads like this why not go there and post ? This was another cheap shot, Aquila. How about if often when you post I reply, " you haven't leaned anything and are not credible as long as you will not take the Bible as it reads regarding WO and the headship role ?" I have not done that and do not intend to. My point is that you keep playing the referee with everyone else on the forum in terms of what is right and ethical and then you violate the same. Do you just wish to argue about other matters ?
Aquila, you like to often claim that others are violating forum rules. Howe about the one about hijacking threads ? On 3 occasions you have done this with the nature of Christ topic. We were not even remotely talking about the nature of Christ or man. You are very selective when you use the "you are breaking rules" method of quieting opposition.
Aquila, I did not set before the people anything regarding this topic. You brought it up out of the blue.... 3 times. I think you should accept her warning that silence is golden when it comes to debating this topic.
Let me see if I understand you correctly. What Jesus shares with you in dreams and visions through EGW is not to be taken seriously ?
It is ironic that you would ask if I would condemn what Jesus did while you disregard and therefore condemn what Jesus said through the Testimony of Jesus as given through the work, writing, and speaking of EGW.
yes some member use Ellen White to make SDA a cult but we are not a cult, all our doctrines are from the bible and the bible only.
So does this mean that it is blasphemous to write about God ? In that case Max your post is riddled with blasphemy.
Max is simply fulfilling prophecy. Revelation 12:17 " And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."
Woe is he, like Judas, that plays the part.
Actually, the work of EGW is one of the identifying points of the remnant church. Rather than prove the church is a cult, the work/visions etc.. of EGW proves that the church is the true remnant church.
All I can say as I recently told my Elder does he realizes that he quotes Ellen White more than the bible?
And that to me is wrong. My concept is that when ever I talk about Jesus to an unbeliever or a fellow SDA I must quote the Bible. If I have to quote Ellen White to prove a point I am missing the standard.
Recently the Holy Spirit I believe impressed on me to read more of his word the Bible that the writings of men. I read a lot of religious books but did not take time to read the Bible. It is time we stop fussing about EGW. One can be saved if they believe in EGW and one can be saved if they do not believe in EGW but in the Bible ONLY.
As far as I read the not eating of flesh is not a doctrine from the SDA Church. It is a choice. We must distinguish doctrines from counsels and allow the Holy Spirit to guide us in following the counsels.
If we cannot quote the SOP with an SDA then that SDA is an unbeliever. If one does not believe in the writings of EGW as an SDA they do not believe the Bible either.
Everything is a choice and choices have consequences.
Talk about reverse engineering. That is like the Catholic version of saying you have to worship Mary to get intercession from Christ.