Was Ellen White Really a False Prophet?

[woobadooba]

My only contention with Ellen White is that she had misinterpreted certain passages in the Bible.

But in all fairness to these misinterpretations, I want to point something out that I came across some time ago.

Peter said, "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."(Act 2:16-21 KJV)

But is this what Joel had really said?

Let's take a look:

"And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.
(Joe 2:28-32 KJV)

Now then, Peter used the expression: "And it shall come to pass in the last days"

And Joel said, "it shall come to pass afterward"

Thus it appears that Peter is interpreting this passage in its totality as referring to the "last days", when Joel doesn't appear to be designating it as such. For, he didn't use the words "last days", but "afterword".

Now we know that it has been almost 2000 years since Peter referred to this passage in this way.

So could it be possible that he misunderstood it to some degree?

If so, then we would have evidence that a prophet can misinterpret a passage from the Bible and still be a prophet of God. If not, what could this then mean?

For, Peter obviously didn't quote Joel word for word. Thus this indicates that he superimposed meaning on the passage which reflected his current belief that he was living in the "last days".

Now then, those who accuse Ellen White of not having the gift of prophecy because she misinterpreted certain passages in the Bible would have to do the same with Peter in order to be consistent with their own belief. Of course, this isn't necessary, because all one has to do is admit that a prophet is still human, and therefore subject to error.

I think it's best to look at the core message that a prophet inculcates, as well as the lifestyle that that person promotes, before ruling out that that person doesn't have the gift of prophecy. If we look at the core message of Ellen White, as well as the lifestyle that she demonstrated, it is quite evident that she had the gift, even though she made mistakes at times.

[Eila]

My only contention with Ellen White is that she had misinterpreted certain passages in the Bible.

But in all fairness to these misinterpretations, I want to point something out that I came across some time ago.

Peter said, "But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy: And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke: The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come: And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."(Act 2:16-21 KJV)

But is this what Joel had really said?

Let's take a look:

"And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.
(Joe 2:28-32 KJV)

Now then, Peter used the expression: "And it shall come to pass in the last days"

And Joel said, "it shall come to pass afterward"

Thus it appears that Peter is interpreting this passage in its totality as referring to the "last days", when Joel doesn't appear to be designating it as such. For, he didn't use the words "last days", but "afterword".

Now we know that it has been almost 2000 years since Peter referred to this passage in this way.

So could it be possible that he misunderstood it to some degree?

The afterward were the last days. There is nothing incorrect here.


If so, then we would have evidence that a prophet can misinterpret a passage from the Bible and still be a prophet of God. If not, what could this then mean?

For, Peter obviously didn't quote Joel word for word. Thus this indicates that he superimposed meaning on the passage which reflected his current belief that he was living in the "last days".


What makes you think that it was his belief? He was filled with the Spirit speaking to a crowd where 3000 were saved.

The afterward were the last days.

Look at these other verses:

Hebrews 1 "1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; "

1 Peter 1 " 20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you 21 who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God."


Now then, those who accuse Ellen White of not having the gift of prophecy because she misinterpreted certain passages in the Bible would have to do the same with Peter in order to be consistent with their own belief. Of course, this isn't necessary, because all one has to do is admit that a prophet is still human, and therefore subject to error.

I think it's best to look at the core message that a prophet inculcates, as well as the lifestyle that that person promotes, before ruling out that that person doesn't have the gift of prophecy. If we look at the core message of Ellen White, as well as the lifestyle that she demonstrated, it is quite evident that she had the gift, even though she made mistakes at times.

I do have a problem with this idea, but I do understand that one needs to discredit the inspiration of the Bible to make EGW's inspiration work.

[woobadooba]

The afterward were the last days. There is nothing incorrect here.



What makes you think that it was his belief? He was filled with the Spirit speaking to a crowd where 3000 were saved.

The afterward were the last days.

Look at these other verses:

Hebrews 1 "1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; "

1 Peter 1 " 20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you 21 who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God."



I do have a problem with this idea, but I do understand that one needs to discredit the inspiration of the Bible to make EGW's inspiration work.

You totally missed the point.

Peter believed that he was living in the last days, that Jesus would return during his time. In fact, even Paul believed this.

Yet, here we are almost 2000 years later, and Jesus hasn't returned.

Now, if you would read what I had read more closely you wouldn't have made this mistake!

[woobadooba]

Eila,

One more thing...

Do NOT ever accuse me of discrediting the inspiration of the Bible. I will not tolerate such comments.

Do you understand me!

I find what you said to be highly offensive.

I love the Word of God, and believe that it is fully inspired.

Just because you don't understand what that means, that doesn't give you the right to accuse others of trying to discredit its inspiration.

Truth is, I'm trying to open your eyes to something about inspiration that most people fail to see, but instead of being open to this teaching you are by manner of implication accusing me of blasphemy.

[Eila]

You totally missed the point.

Peter believed that he was living in the last days, that Jesus would return during his time. In fact, even Paul believed this.

Yet, here we are almost 2000 years later, and Jesus hasn't returned.

Now, if you would read what I had read more closely you wouldn't have made this mistake!

I read what you wrote - I just don't agree with it. Last days don't equal the days just before Jesus comes. The last days started with the birth of the church and have continued ever since. I believe Peter and Paul were living in the last days. Peter and Paul were not incorrect. In the history of the earth the resurrection changed everything and the last days started when the church was born. The church age is the last days. I think when we look at the Bible we have to start with the assumption that it is correct and maybe our interpretion is not. If you discount the inspiration of the Bible then how do you know if anything is correct?

[Eila]

Eila,

One more thing...

Do NOT ever accuse me of discrediting the inspiration of the Bible. I will not tolerate such comments.

Do you understand me!

I find what you said to be highly offensive.

I didn't mean to offend you. I'm not sure I understand your position then. If someone believes that an apostle was incorrect in what he said - isn't that discrediting the inspired Word? How can you say Peter was incorrect in what he said and believe the Bible is infallible?

[woobadooba]

If someone believes that an apostle was incorrect in what he said - isn't that discrediting the inspired Word? How can you say Peter was incorrect in what he said and believe the Bible is infallible?

I can say this because the interpretation did not agree with what Joel fully meant.

It is a fact that Peter believed that he literally was living in the last days. Even Paul, up to a certain point believed that Jesus was going to return during his time.

Do you think it is impossible for a prophet of God to not fully understand something from the Holy Scriptures?

You should understand that only God is infallible. Even prophets can make mistakes, as I have already shown you.

If you refuse to see this, then there is nothing I can do to make you see it. Hopefully one day you will see it though, and realize that you made a terrible mistake in accusing Ellen White of being a false prophet, simply because she made some theological errors in her interpretation of certain passages.

[Eila]

Because the interpretation did not agree with what Joel fully meant.

Joel was prophecying. How do you not know that the full meaning was not what Peter said the day he was filled with the Spirit?


And it is a fact that Peter believed that he literally was living in the last days. Even Paul, up to a certain pont believed that Jesus was going to return during his time.

I believe they were living in the last days too. The return of Christ has been imminent since the time of the apostles.


Do you think it is impossible for a prophet of God to not fully understand something from the Holy Scriptures?

Yes, but the inspired Word does not show error. A prophet is human, but under inspiration everything is correct.


You should understand that only God is infallible. Even prophets can make mistakes, as I have already shown you.

Yes, only God is infallible, but the Bible is the Word of God. It is not the word of the prophets.


If you refuse to see this, then there is nothing I can do to make you see it. Hopefully one day you will see it though, and realize that you made a terrible mistake in accusing Ellen White of being a false prophet.

Where did I say EGW was a false prophet? I think my position would be more along the lines that EGW was never a prophet at all.

[woobadooba]

Joel was prophecying. How do you not know that the full meaning was not what Peter said the day he was filled with the Spirit?


I believe they were living in the last days too. The return of Christ has been imminent since the time of the apostles.


Can you prove that Peter didn't really believe that Jesus was going to return during his time when he had referenced what was prophesied in Joel?

[Eila]

Can you prove that Peter didn't really believe that Jesus was going to return during his time when he had referenced what was prophesied in Joel?

Why would I need to prove one way or another? The last days referenced in Acts 2 are referring to the church age.

I take the words of the Bible as inspired and infallible in their original languages. I think we may differ in that belief.

[woobadooba]

Why would I need to prove one way or another? The last days referenced in Acts 2 are referring to the church age.

I take the words of the Bible as inspired and infallible in their original languages. I think we may different in that belief.


You need to prove it because you are saying Peter did not literally believe that he was living in the last days, as in believing that Jesus would return during his time.

[Eila]

You need to prove it because you are saying Peter did not literally believe that he was living in the last days, as in believing that Jesus would return during his time.

I didn't say that Peter didn't believe he was literally living in the last days. The church age is the last days. The return of Christ has been imminent since the apostles.

The Bible settles the issue for me. It contains no mistakes. Do I need to know what Peter believed exactly? No, because the words written in Acts 2 are the Word of God, not the beliefs of Peter.

[woobadooba]

I didn't say that Peter didn't believe he was literally living in the last days. The church age is the last days. The return of Christ has been imminent since the apostles.

The Bible settles the issue for me. It contains no mistakes. Do I need to know what Peter believed exactly? No, because the words written in Acts 2 are the Word of God, not the beliefs of Peter.

I was just like you when this stuff was first brought to my attention. I wouldn't accept it.

Anyway, I'm just trying to show you something about the nature of inspiration.

[woobadooba]

I didn't say that Peter didn't believe he was literally living in the last days. The church age is the last days. The return of Christ has been imminent since the apostles.

The Bible settles the issue for me. It contains no mistakes. Do I need to know what Peter believed exactly? No, because the words written in Acts 2 are the Word of God, not the beliefs of Peter.

I said, "as in believing that Jesus would return during his time".

Can you prove that Peter didn't believe that Jesus was going to return during his time when he referred to the prophecy of joel?

This is an important question, because if he believed this, that would mean that his understanding of this prophecy was subject to such a belief to a certain extent. Hence explaining what appears to be a misinterpretation of it.

In other words, it appears to me that he didn't fully understand the prophecy.

[Eila]

I said, "as in believing that Jesus would return during his time".

Can you prove that Peter didn't believe that Jesus was going to return during his time when he referred to the prophecy of joel?

This is an important question, because if he believed this, that would mean that his understanding of this prophecy was based on such a belief. Hence a misinterpretation of it.

It appears to me that he didn't fully understand the prophecy.

My position is that Acts 2 is the Word of God, not the word of Peter so it doesn't matter what Peter thought.

[woobadooba]

My position is that Acts 2 is the Word of God, not the word of Peter so it doesn't matter what Peter thought.

This doesn't answer the question.

The question is: Did Peter believe that Jesus was going to return during his time when he referred to the prophecy of Joel? If so, this most certainly would have affected the way he looked at the prophecy, and would thus explain why he used the words "last days" when Joel used the word "afterword". Peter did not quote Joel correctly. Why is that?

[Adventtruth]

How did she make such a wrong mistake here?

"God determined to purify the world by a flood; but in mercy and love He gave the antediluvians a probation of one hundred and twenty years. During this time, while the ark was in building, the voices of Noah, Enoch, and many others were heard in warning and entreaty. And every blow struck on the ark was a warning message." Australasian Union Conference Record, Sep. 15, 1902

"Enoch's translation to Heaven just before the destruction of the world by a flood, represents the translation of all the living righteous from the earth previous to its destruction by fire." (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 59) "Enoch first received instruction from Noah, and he observed the law of God, and served him with singleness of heart." Review and Herald, Apr. 29, 1875 How do you understand this seeing that Enoch was translated in 987 and Noah was born in 1056 ?Adventtruth:)

[woobadooba]

How did she make such a wrong mistake here?

"God determined to purify the world by a flood; but in mercy and love He gave the antediluvians a probation of one hundred and twenty years. During this time, while the ark was in building, the voices of Noah, Enoch, and many others were heard in warning and entreaty. And every blow struck on the ark was a warning message." Australasian Union Conference Record, Sep. 15, 1902 "Enoch's translation to Heaven just before the destruction of the world by a flood, represents the translation of all the living righteous from the earth previous to its destruction by fire." (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 59) "Enoch first received instruction from Noah, and he observed the law of God, and served him with singleness of heart." Review and Herald, Apr. 29, 1875 How do you understand this seeing that Enoch was translated in 987 and Noah was born in 1056 ?Adventtruth:)

If you intend to turn this into another Ellen White bashing thread, then pleas go away. You are not welcome here.

This thread has nothing to do with pointing out all of Ellen White's faults. It has to do with the fact that prophets can err on matters of truth, and still be genuine prophets of God.

Just out of curiosity, where in the Bible do you find the dates of when Enoch was translated, and Noah was born?

[Adventtruth]

If you intend to turn this into another Ellen White bashing thread, then pleas go away. You are not welcome here.

This thread has nothing to do with pointing out all of Ellen White's faults. It has to do with the fact that prophets can err on matters of truth, and still be genuine prophets of God.

Just out of curiosity, where in the Bible do you find the dates of when Enoch was translated, and Noah was born?

Kindly don't assume i want to bash your prophet. You said she misinterpreted scripture in your op. I kindly asked how she could go wrong here. In your opening op you said nothing of how many faults we could point out. I suggest you kindly get your intentions out front so that we can understand your ideas.

If you do the math you will see she was way off. Enoch was translated 69 years before Noah was born...EGW lied...this is one of many.

AT:)

[woobadooba]

Kindly don't assume i want to bash your prophet.

My prophet?

Did I inspire her?

Why do you speak to me with such hostility?

You said she misinterpreted scripture in your op. I kindly asked how she could go wrong here. In your opening op you said nothing of how many faults we could point out. I suggest you kindly get your intentions out front so that we can understand your ideas.

I made my purpose for this thread very clear in several places. It is to suggest that even a prophet of God could err on matters of truth, without nullifying his prophetic gift.

Hence those who use the argument that Ellen White was a false prophet because she erred at times on certain matters of truth, must also reject any such prophet that has erred thus.

Having said that, it is evident (as I have shown in this thread) that even Biblical prophets erred at times on matters of discerning God's will, and interpreting the Holy Scriptures with 100% accuracy. Yet, these people that use such arguments against Ellen White have no problem accepting the errors of Biblical prophets without rejecting their prophetic gift. This, in my opinion, is a double standard.

What I think it really comes down to is that these people just don't like what Ellen White had to say, because she had a strong message, and thus called sin by its rightful name. Most people find such expressions of thought to be offensive, especially today!

So rather than dealing with the truth about sin in a productive manner, they look for reasons to find fault with the one that has spoken words that have cut at their hearts, in an attempt to reject that person's claims, because that's the only way they can excuse themselves from answering to a message of conviction about themselves that they really don't want to acknowledge. But hasn't it always been this way?

"Blessed are they who have been persecuted for righteousness sake! For theirs is the kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are you when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for your reward in Heaven is great. For so they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (Mat 5:10-12)


If you do the math you will see she was way off. Enoch was translated 69 years before Noah was born...EGW lied...this is one of many.

Again, where in the Bible can you find the date that Enoch was translated, and the year when Noah was born?

[Adventtruth]

My prophet?

Did I inspire her?

Hi woob.

You asked that we pray for you...and I did. I think its only polite to respond to my question of how you are doing now. But if you don't feel that way, its ok. I understand.

No you did not inspire her. But I call her your prophet as in the prophet to the Adventist church, nothing personal. I don't think she was inspire of God...Most Advenstist do.

Why do you speak to me with such hostility?

I apologise. I did not mean too. I did not know that you would be affended. Sorry.



I made my purpose for this thread very clear in several places. It is to suggest that even a prophet of God could err on matters of truth, without nullifying his prophetic gift.

Hence those who use the argument that Ellen White was a false prophet because she erred at times on certain matters of truth, must also reject any such prophet that has erred thus.

Having said that, it is evident (as I have shown in this thread) that even Biblical prophets erred at times on matters of discerning God's will, and interpreting the Holy Scriptures with 100% accuracy. Yet, these people that use such arguments against Ellen White have no problem accepting the errors of Biblical prophets without rejecting their prophetic gift. This, in my opinion, is a double standard.

It comes down to more than a mistake in discerning the will of God. It comes down to much more than that. Its about all the lies about what she was shown in vision that was not from God and all the pages of others writtings and claiming them as her own.

What I think it really comes down to is that these people just don't like what Ellen White had to say, because she had a strong message, and thus called sin by its rightful name. Most people find such expressions of thought to be offensive, especially today!

Well I don't. I know what sin is and its what we where born in. Christ has freed us from sins bondage.

So rather than dealing with the truth about sin in a productive manner, they look for reasons to find fault with the one that has spoken words that have cut at their hearts, in an attempt to reject that person's claims, because that's the only way they can excuse themselves from answering to a message of conviction about themselves that they really don't want to acknowledge. But hasn't it always been this way?

Its not about us, EGW or our sin. Its about Christ and His glory! EGW does not convict me or you...Thats the Holy Spirits job.

"Blessed are they who have been persecuted for righteousness sake! For theirs is the kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are you when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for your reward in Heaven is great. For so they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (Mat 5:10-12)

AMEN!




Again, where in the Bible can you find the date that Enoch was translated, and the year when Noah was born?

If you look at the geneology in Gen 5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=NASB&passage=Gen+5) we see that Adam lived until the age of 930 years. So we can say this is the year 930 seeing he was the first. IF you continue on through the calculations you will see that Enoch was born in the year 622 or 622 years after Adam was first created. So its possible that Enoch did know Adam. Verse 23 tells us that all the days of Enoch was 365 years then God took him. Well If Enoch lived on this planet for 365 years after being born in the year 622 and translated 365 years later, that brings us to the year 987. If you continue in the calculations you will see that Noah was born in the year 1056. If He was born in 1056 and Enoch translated in 987 Then Enoch was translated 69 years before Noah was born. Do the calculations yourself and get back with me. I could be wrong on this but I've checked it more than once. You will have to do a lot of math. So this is only one of the many times EGW lied.

AT:)

[djconklin]

But I call her your prophet as in the prophet to the Adventist church, nothing personal. I don't think she was inspire of God...

Two totally different things.

If you look at the geneology in Gen 5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=NASB&passage=Gen+5) we see that Adam lived until the age of 930 years. So we can say this is the year 930 seeing he was the first. IF you continue on through the calculations you will see that Enoch was born in the year 622 or 622 years after Adam was first created. So its possible that Enoch did know Adam. Verse 23 tells us that all the days of Enoch was 365 years then God took him. Well If Enoch lived on this planet for 365 years after being born in the year 622 and translated 365 years later, that brings us to the year 987. If you continue in the calculations you will see that Noah was born in the year 1056. If He was born in 1056 and Enoch translated in 987 Then Enoch was translated 69 years before Noah was born. Do the calculations yourself and get back with me. I could be wrong on this but I've checked it more than once. You will have to do a lot of math. So this is only one of the many times EGW lied.

And where is the lie?

[Adventtruth]

Two totally different things.

[quote]If you look at the geneology in Gen 5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=NASB&passage=Gen+5) we see that Adam lived until the age of 930 years. So we can say this is the year 930 seeing he was the first. IF you continue on through the calculations you will see that Enoch was born in the year 622 or 622 years after Adam was first created. So its possible that Enoch did know Adam. Verse 23 tells us that all the days of Enoch was 365 years then God took him. Well If Enoch lived on this planet for 365 years after being born in the year 622 and translated 365 years later, that brings us to the year 987. If you continue in the calculations you will see that Noah was born in the year 1056. If He was born in 1056 and Enoch translated in 987 Then Enoch was translated 69 years before Noah was born. Do the calculations yourself and get back with me. I could be wrong on this but I've checked it more than once. You will have to do a lot of math. So this is only one of the many times EGW lied.[/quuote]

And where is the lie?

How did Enoch help Noah?

AT:)

[djconklin]

Where's the lie? What did EGW say that make you think there's a lie? While we wait for AT to prove that EGW lied we can look at this chart: http://www.blueletterbible.org/study/parallel/timeline/index.html

[annie1speed]

dj, what is your point? The graphic you referenced shows exactly what AT has been saying. At no time according to his calculations and also according to the graphic was Enoch living on earth with Noah. I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

[PROPHECYKID]

So no examples of Mrs. White misinterpretations of the bible. Can you guys post some of her misinterpretations so i can see.

[DrBubbaLove]

So no examples of Mrs. White misinterpretations of the bible. Can you guys post some of her misinterpretations so i can see.
Would you settle for two examples?

EGW
“The pope has changed the day of rest from the seventh to the first day. He has thought to change the very commandment that was given to cause man to remember his Creator. He has thought to change the greatest commandment in the decalogue and thus make himself equal with God, or even exalt himself above God (Early Writings, p. 65).”

Jesus
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart and with thy whole soul and with thy whole mind.

EGW
Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law. Evangelism, p. 598.
Bible 1 Tim 2.14
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.