"Lay Sister White right to one side.."

[reddogs]

I find this rather amazing that Ellen White specifically told the church not to use her as their source of truth, but learn from the truths from the Bible. Amen.

Ellen White herself said: "Let all prove their positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim from the revealed Word of God."397 To the delegates of the General Conference in 1901, she said, "Lay Sister White right to one side: lay her to one side. Don't you never [sic] quote my words again as long as you live, until you can obey the Bible. When you take the Bible and make that your food, and your meat, and your drink, and you make that the elements of your character, when you can do that you will know better how to receive some counsel from God. But here is the Word, the precious Word, exalted before you today. And don't you give a rap any more what 'Sister White Said' [sic]—'Sister White said this,' and 'Sister White said that,' and 'Sister White said the other thing'. But say, 'Thus saith the Lord God of Israel.'398 ..."

"...The final court of appeal must always be the Bible.
This was the strong conviction of her husband James White who wrote: "There is a class of persons who are determined to have it that the Review and its conductors make the views of Mrs. White a test of doctrine and Christian fellowship. . . . What has the Review to do with Mrs. White's views? The sentiments published in its columns are all drawn form the Holy Scriptures.
No writer of the Review has ever referred to them as authority on any point. . . . It's motto has been, 'The Bible, and the Bible alone, the only rule of faith and duty.'. . .

206​

"Every Christian is therefore duty bound to take the Bible as the perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say that the very moment he does, he places the gifts in a wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position."395
He could see that, very early in Adventism, some were inclined to give her writings an authority over and above the Scriptural authority for the work of a prophet. "They conclude that if it be true that God is reviving some of the gifts, 'for the comfort of his people, and correct those who err from Bible truth.' That all errors would at once be corrected by these gifts, and the church be saved the trouble of searching the Word for truth to expose error. . . . They would put the gifts where they do not belong. . . . The revival of any, or all of the gifts, will never supersede the necessity of searching the Word to learn the truth."396 ...."

"...the Bible is its own interpreter and every Christian is free to study the Bible (guided by the Holy Spirit) to find truth for themselves. The following points support James White in his stand:
1. Jesus left a promise to His Church. "All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." ( John 14:25-26)
2. Recognising this point and practicing it is part of being Protestant. The Catholic Church tried to impose upon Christians the role of the pope as the infallible interpreter of Scripture. This concept was rejected by Protestants, because it violated the principle of sola Scriptures. Besides, once you have any external authority telling you what the Bible means, you make that authority more powerful than the Bible itself.

​

3.The Bible is a completed book. Hebrews 1:1 gives the reason for this, "In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son. . . . " The generation of Jesus' day were taught by Christ and individuals wrote down what they had learned. Jesus was the fullest, most complete revelation of God. Nothing that comes after Him will ever add to or eclipse the revelation of God in Him. All that comes after will be but a reflection of the light that shone through Him. Therefore the work of prophets is to call people back to study and obey that final, complete, revelation in Jesus. The work of prophets is to point out duties already revealed and neglected...."excerpted from MORE THAN A PROPHET ... by Graeme Bradford.

 

[Jimlarmore]

Recognising this point and practicing it is part of being Protestant. The Catholic Church tried to impose upon Christians the role of the pope as the infallible interpreter of Scripture. This concept was rejected by Protestants, because it violated the principle of sola Scriptures. Besides, once you have any external authority telling you what the Bible means, you make that authority more powerful than the Bible itself.

I think this is the bottom line for any controversy in the way we should treat the SOP.


Thanks Reddogs and God Bless you brother,

Jim Larmore

 

[Sophia7]

"...The final court of appeal must always be the Bible.
This was the strong conviction of her husband James White who wrote: "There is a class of persons who are determined to have it that the Review and its conductors make the views of Mrs. White a test of doctrine and Christian fellowship. . . . What has the Review to do with Mrs. White's views? The sentiments published in its columns are all drawn form the Holy Scriptures.
No writer of the Review has ever referred to them as authority on any point. . . . It's motto has been, 'The Bible, and the Bible alone, the only rule of faith and duty.'. . .

So if Ellen White's views were never intended to be a test of doctrine and fellowship, and the Review writers were never supposed to refer to her writings as authority on any point, I wonder what James would think of the church's current fundamental-belief statement regarding his wife:

18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)
​

Perhaps James couldn't be a traditional Adventist either if he were alive today.

 

[TrustAndObey]

This might seem like I'm getting off-topic, but it all ties in (if you'll bear with me).

I belong to a different message board about health issues and there are several atheists on the board. I'd have to say that Christians are far-outnumbered if you counted up all the members.

One day a topic got started about religion and the OP said "For Christians ONLY" in her thread title. That was an open invitation for debate, and of course Christians weren't the only ones that went in there, and the OP knew that would be the case.

I read through posts and never commented because I was doing some online research for a college abstract paper.

What I saw was pretty disheartening, because people that had been friends up until that thread were suddenly bitter enemies.

The moderator on that forum closed the thread and the very last post in that thread, before it was locked said, "THERE WAS NO JESUS CHRIST AND ANYONE THAT BELIEVES THERE WAS IS AN IDIOT AND CAN NEVER PROVE IT."

The same person that wrote that came back and started a thread a couple of months later about the Da Vinci Code when it first came out. The title of her thread was "WHAT DO YOU THINK OF YOUR JESUS NOW?!!!"

In the midst of the first thread I referred to, there were atheists saying "don't you dare throw scripture at me, it's from a fictional book!" but when they wanted to argue FOR the idea of a non-celibate Christ, suddenly they were the ones quoting scripture in the new thread (and scripture that was WAY out of context).

It was a fictional book to them until they felt like it cast a dark shadow on Christ or that it might totally blow some people's perceptions of the perfect Son of God.

As an outsider on this issue (because like I've mentioned a lot, I have yet to read an Ellen White book to date), I see this same sort of thing happening with EGW, on both sides of the debate.

 

[djconklin]

a

Please note the word! Words have meaning!

 

[reddogs]

So if Ellen White's views were never intended to be a test of doctrine and fellowship, and the Review writers were never supposed to refer to her writings as authority on any point, I wonder what James would think of the church's current fundamental-belief statement regarding his wife:

18. The Gift of Prophecy:​

One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)​

​

Perhaps James couldn't be a traditional Adventist either if he were alive today.

Sophia, truth is truth but scripture is to be our first and primary source so then "we can identify what is truth" as we continue the journey and as the Holy Spirit guides us and we compare. Thus in most believers perspective in the church, the statement "her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth " is correct. Unless you have a solid base of mathematics you will never be Nasa engineer, so it is with truth. You must introspectively review your own thoughts and let go of this antogonistic view almost to the point of hatred and be careful of what you speak against, of a loving and pious woman to say the least and a holy instrument of truth and inspiration as I believe.

Matthew 12:31
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

reddog wrote:

You must introspectively review your own thoughts and let go of this antogonistic view almost to the point of hatred and be careful of what you speak against, of a loving and pious woman to say the least and a holy instrument of truth and inspiration as I believe.

Where did Sophia speak against EGW? This is a real problem with many Adventists, they cannot tolerate any differences with what they have determined to be truth, and even a statement by the denomination made 75 years after her death is taken to be an antagonistic statement against the person of Ellen White.

It is an appeal to emotion and nothing else.

As for her comments about the Bible, we could show equally as many quotes that inform people to read the testimonies and spread her works throughout the world. In the opening Quote posted it is very likely she was declaring that if people would only hold to the Bible then they would know to accept her works. It is a method which insinuates that when you understand the Bible correctly you will see the additional counsel of Ellen White but until you understand the Bible right lay sister White aside because you can't handle her counsel.

When you take the Bible and make that your food, and your meat, and your drink, and you make that the elements of your character, when you can do that you will know better how to receive some counsel from God.

Now as far as I know this was never published in her lifetime, it first came to light in the Spalding and Magans Unpublished Manuscript Testimonies of Ellen G. White 1985 collection

Her concluding line at the conference was:

But don't you quote Sister White. I don't want you ever to quote Sister White until you get your vantage ground where you know where you are. Quote the Bible. Talk the Bible. It is full of meat, full of fatness. Carry it right out in your life, and you will know more Bible than you know now. You will have fresh matter - O, you will have precious matter; you won't be going over and over the same ground, and you will see a world saved. You will see souls for whom Christ has died. And I ask you to put on the armor, every piece of it, and be sure that your feet are shod with the preparation of the gospel.

Which would be good advice unfortuantely most Adventist will quote EGW because they think they already have the vantage ground of the Bible covered. And the only reason they think that is because they have followed EGW's interpretations of the Bible. And when the Bible is different from what EGW says, for instance Adam offered Sacrifices the EGW interpretation will take precedence over what the Bible actually says.

So in truth the vantage ground of the Bible is no longer even known by many Adventists only the view from EGW and that is assumed to be the real Biblical meaning. This is why in so many of my arguments here the counter argument is very rarely produced from the Bible, classic recent examples are the Scapegoat and Paul's statement that he dies daily.

 

[reddogs]

reddog wrote:
Where did Sophia speak against EGW? This is a real problem with many Adventists, they cannot tolerate any differences with what they have determined to be truth, and even a statement by the denomination made 75 years after her death is taken to be an antagonistic statement against the person of Ellen White.

It is an appeal to emotion and nothing else.

As for her comments about the Bible, we could show equally as many quotes that inform people to read the testimonies and spread her works throughout the world. In the opening Quote posted it is very likely she was declaring that if people would only hold to the Bible then they would know to accept her works. It is a method which insinuates that when you understand the Bible correctly you will see the additional counsel of Ellen White but until you understand the Bible right lay sister White aside because you can't handle her counsel.

Now as far as I know this was never published in her lifetime, it first came to light in the Spalding and Magans Unpublished Manuscript Testimonies of Ellen G. White 1985 collection

Her concluding line at the conference was:
Which would be good advice unfortuantely most Adventist will quote EGW because they think they already have the vantage ground of the Bible covered. And the only reason they think that is because they have followed EGW's interpretations of the Bible. And when the Bible is different from what EGW says, for instance Adam offered Sacrifices the EGW interpretation will take precedence over what the Bible actually says.

So in truth the vantage ground of the Bible is no longer even known by many Adventists only the view from EGW and that is assumed to be the real Biblical meaning. This is why in so many of my arguments here the counter argument is very rarely produced from the Bible, classic recent examples are the Scapegoat and Paul's statement that he dies daily.

I will give her the benefit of doubt as I love her dearly as a christian sister but there were numerous posts on Ellen White that were more than just a answer or question to the point where it crossed the line and seems to demean or ridicule a good christian and beloved pioneer of the church, to say nothing if you speak against the Spirit. Either way it is not necessary and at worse could be testing the divine and fighting against what is from God.

 

[Sophia7]

I will give her the benefit of doubt as I love her dearly as a christian sister but there were numerous posts on Ellen White that were more than just a answer or question to the point where it crossed the line and seems to demean or ridicule a good christian and beloved pioneer of the church, to say nothing if you speak against the Spirit. Either way it is not necessary and at worse could be testing the divine and fighting against what is from God.

I have never ridiculed her, and I do not hate her. I just do not accept her writings as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth."

 

[reddogs]

That is fine but there is no need to throw in uneeded slights to 'traditionlists'..
"Perhaps James couldn't be a traditional Adventist either if he were alive today. "

There are many ways to subtly attack and put down, when I was in the political world we learned how to attack directly the opponent with labels such as "Left-wing anarchist", "Castro sympathizer" or to subtly shift the sand under them quietly by saying "perhaps FDR couldn't be in the Democratic party if he were alive today" ('with this bunch of Left-wing anarchist' is left unsaid).....

 

[djconklin]

I just do not accept her writings as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth."

And what is wrong with "a" source of truth? Especially in the light of the whoppers that have been told ab't her and exposed?

 

[Sophia7]

"Perhaps James couldn't be a traditional Adventist either if he were alive today. "

There are many ways to subtly attack and put down, when I was in the political world we learned how to attack directly the opponent with labels such as "Left-wing anarchist", "Castro sympathizer" or to subtly shift the sand under them quietly by saying "perhaps FDR couldn't be in the Democratic party if he were alive today" ('with this bunch of Left-wing anarchist' is left unsaid).....

What I am criticizing is the current wording of the official belief statement on EGW.

 

[Sophia7]

And what is wrong with "a" source of truth? Especially in the light of the whoppers that have been told ab't her and exposed?

See this thread in Denomination-specific Theology. I believe that her sanctuary teachings contradict the Bible. Thus, I have to go by what the Bible says, and I cannot view her as a source of truth or as authoritative. This is not a personal vendetta against her.

 

[djconklin]

I'm sorry I don't have the time to go view a thread; especially when it isn't even on this subject.

I didn't say, or even imply that you have some sort of vendetta against EGW. All I know for certain is that I have examined more than a few claims that have been made agaisnt her and the critics have failed everytime. This leads me to doubt anything that could possibly be construed as an attack on her. So, why should I believe anything that is said against her--especially when no proof is offered that she isn't what she said she was, or even what the church said she is?

 

[reddogs]

What I am criticizing is the current wording of the official belief statement on EGW.

That is fair game and I have no quarrel with that, but James or Ellen White as people who loved the church and its beliefs are not, and it was a unneeded slight and has happened before and that was my point......

 

[reddogs]

See this thread in Denomination-specific Theology. I believe that her sanctuary teachings contradict the Bible. Thus, I have to go by what the Bible says, and I cannot view her as a source of truth or as authoritative. This is not a personal vendetta against her.

Then you would have to throw out Jonah as he preached the destruction of Ninevah and all the other prophets where there was prophecy that was changed, incomplete or not completely clear........ Just because you disagree with a one point does not invalidate the whole work of a prophet....

 

[Sophia7]

I'm sorry I don't have the time to go view a thread; especially when it isn't even on this subject.

I didn't say, or even imply that you have some sort of vendetta against EGW. All I know for certain is that I have examined more than a few claims that have been made agaisnt her and the critics have failed everytime. This leads me to doubt anything that could possibly be construed as an attack on her. So, why should I believe anything that is said against her--especially when no proof is offered that she isn't what she said she was, or even what the church said she is?

As you say, it is not on this subject (although it is related; my first post there explains some of my problems with EGW's interpretations), which is why I won't discuss it here. Anyone who is interested can read the other thread. These are more important issues to me than some of you may realize because my husband may soon have to leave the ministry over them. You don't have to believe anything that is said against Ellen White, but please understand that my only standard for testing her writings is the Bible, not what other people say, and my only motive is to follow God's leading, no matter what the cost.

 

[Sophia7]

That is fair game and I have no quarrel with that, but James or Ellen White as people who loved the church and its beliefs are not, and it was a uneeded slight and has happened before and that was my point......

My point was that the church has changed its teaching on this to be something that I don't think James and Ellen themselves would have approved of. I was not making a slight against James.

 

[reddogs]

As you say, it is not on this subject (although it is related; my first post there explains some of my problems with EGW's interpretations), which is why I won't discuss it here. Anyone who is interested can read the other thread. These are more important issues to me than some of you may realize because my husband may soon have to leave the ministry over them. You don't have to believe anything that is said against Ellen White, but please understand that my only standard for testing her writings is the Bible, not what other people say, and my only motive is to follow God's leading, no matter what the cost.

Sophia, I will tell you what I have seen as many of my freethinkers are at the crossroads on this issue. Once they give up the light on the end times given by Ellen White they go look at many churches and their views on the end times. These churches have limited understanding on end time prophecies or veiws that are supportable biblically. So my freethinkers end up with a Godian Knot, pick up doctrines that are not biblical or a views against the Spirit of Prophecy that leave them spiritually blind and that Daniel and the Relevation's prophecies dont use the day-year method so they lose the bulk of what was given in them.

The end result being that they are blinded to what Satan will try in the last days to ensnare the very elect and pick up doctrines or ideas which leave them suceptible to his appearing as a "false Christ".The Spirit of Prophecy message and light would not give them salvation but it would be a guide to ensure that they didn't lose their salvation in the time just before the close of probation when there would be deceptions so well crafted that it would deceive if possible the very elect.

If I am wrong on the light given by the Spirit of Prophecy, I am sure God in his infinite
mercy will allow for it. If I am right then we are at the falling away as Spirit of Prophecy plainly showed would happen, and it breaks my heart as I see those I care and love go down a path that will leave them unprepare if not totally blind to the snares and deceptions of the Evil one as he presents himself as a "false christ".

I follow no man or 'mans wisdom or traditions' but God's truth and I will not budge off that mark till Jesus comes and tells me either "well done" or "I knew you not" and I have done my all for Christ so have nothing to fear..

 

[Cliff2]

Graham Bradford and Jon Paulien are now writing a series on Reveleation which is coming out soon.

I am sure it will upset a few of the old established views on the end time.

It will be interesting to see just what is it in or better what is not in it.

Bradford has not so long ago wrote on EGW. It would be good if you all could get a copy and see waht he has come up with.

He does not throw EGW out but is very honest about her. Much more than the Church has been over the last 100 plus years.