| Author | Message | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 266 Registered: 5-2009 |
I briefly tried to search the forum for this topic but did not find anything specific to these books. I know there has been a discussion in recent months that touched on SDA children's books. However I wanted to share what I found today. I just read the Genesis account of the flood in the bible. Some questions came to my mind, so I hunted up my BS books - which are the few SDA books I did not destroy last spring because my husband is not yet ready to let go of them. Here is what I found, & what I wrote to a friend this morning: But I also went to the BS books to read about Noah & the flood. Now THERE are some things of concern. For example, where in the Genesis account does it say that Noah preached 120 years? Or that God wanted to save everyone (or anyone other than Noah & his family) on earth & bring them into that boat? I reread enough this am to realize there is a good deal of editorializing & imagining - or else mingling EGW into the storytelling - to render the story NOT strictly Biblical. Does that constitute 'adding unto' God's word?? I also read the FOREWARD to the series: "The overall purpose has been to provide what might be called a BIBLE (emphasis mine) for children by retelling all the old familiar stories in language that modern boys and girls can both understand and enjoy" Hmmnn isn't that called a 'paraphrase'?? which SDAs warn about such as Peterson's The Message?? because it might reflect the bias of one man? And get this: "All of these retold stories are original. No paragraph or sentence has been borrowed from the work of any other author. In this sense it is an altogether new work, adapted to the needs and desires of the children of today." My body is recoiling from just retyping these sentences. What do you make of that?? Seems to me he is fending off the ideas of 'copying' or 'borrowing' without giving credit. . . . . This is well before Des Ford, & Walter Rea et all - so does that take us back to the 1919 Conference where EGWs 'borrowing' was discussed to no conclusion?? He certainly seems defensive or pre-emptive here. THEN there's this: "In the telling of these stories the Bible narrative has been carefully adhered to without any addition of fanciful speculations." I cannot agree with this!! I just read Genesis 6-11; then read the BS (!!) in vol 1. . . . . What do you think, comparing the BIBLE with the BS of Arthur Maxwell?! I cannot help but compare these books to The Clear Word. Again we have an SDA version of the scripture with EGW mingled right into the bible stories. It is the FOREWARD in these books that is my BIG CONCERN here. Have any of you been aware the that before? J9 | ||
| Indy4now Registered user Username: Indy4now Post Number: 1010 Registered: 2-2008  |
I can't help but chuckle that you've been calling it "BS"  | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 267 Registered: 5-2009 |
Indy, I realized that after I typed it to my friend, & decided that it was more than a 'freudian slip'! I laughed & left it that way!! | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 333 Registered: 5-2009  |
This is one of my pet topics. I do believe it constitutes adding to the Word because children are being taught that this is what the Bible says. There is absolutely NO indication that anyone else could have been saved in the ark, had they heeded Noah's warnings. 1 Peter 2:5 And God did not spare the ancient world—except for Noah and the seven others in his family. Noah warned the world of God’s righteous judgment. So God protected Noah when he destroyed the world of ungodly people with a vast flood. Bottom line: These books are used to indoctrinate children and breed Adventists. This story is used later in life, when the child grows up and hears evangelistic sermons and is exposed to Amazing Facts. It's used to drive home the doctrine stating that Adventists are the remnant church. Take a look at this Revelation Seminar material: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:65qrlPz-xDYJ:battlecryministry.netadvent.org/RevelationSeminarLessons/Lesson%252018%2520Revelation%2520Seminar%2520-%2520Gods%2520Church%2520Revealed.ppt+revelation+seminars+noah&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com and this video by Doug Batchelor: Start at minute marker 20:50. http://vodpod.com/watch/3565058-amazing-facts-presents-the-days-of-noah-and-lot Also read the account in Patriarchs and Prophets (if you can stomach it). Is there any question that they are indoctrinating children from BIRTH? It infuriates me. | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 268 Registered: 5-2009 |
I am sure the BS books are following the script of Great Controversy more than the biblical account. The Foreward lies & denies & contradicts itself as to what these books really are. Based on the statements there I believe those who take a strong position against The Clear Word need to make just as strong a campaign against the Bible Story Books. No matter how much the official denomination denies it, these 2 things are the SDA bible versions for adults & children, chosen & preferred by devout SDAs everywhere over any other version out there. No other cult has such a blatantly perverted 'bible'. Above I said my body recoiled from what I had just typed, but maybe it is my spirit that is enraged at this travesty & blasphemy. J9 | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12267 Registered: 12-2003  |
I'm totally with you, J9 and Delina. And even more blatant that the BS series (!) is the set of books called Forever Stories by Caroyn Byers. Published in 1989, they are more recent than Maxwell's, and they are even more directly derived from the Great Controversy. I picked up this set at the local ABC store last year when I wrote on which "jesus" the Adventists teach to their children. While I was there, a young couple in their early 20s was looking at that set. I spoke to them and they told me they were returning to "their roots", and the young man said he LOVED that series, that he had grown up on them, and he was pretty emotional about them. I'm not exaggerating to say he was rhapsodic about them. Those books evoked such "warm fuzzies" and good memories...I was distraught internally. Adventists are now raising children with overtly SDA worldviews without actually teaching them EGW. It's even more subtle and dangerous than teaching them EGW. They learn the Bible means what EGW says it means, and they're never told those meanings come from her. They think it's "Bible only". They are also selling children's books on EGW. So yes, some are overtly teaching EGW, and with the new President Wilson, this trend my strengthen. Colleen | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 269 Registered: 5-2009 |
I just emailed 2 of my friends in servant leadership in our women's community bible study whose husbands are MDs in our town. I asked if any of these books are in their waiting rooms, & if so, could I share with them some major concerns I have about them? I will let you know what comes of this. They are both very committed & sincere Christians. | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 723 Registered: 5-2009 |
Wait a minute, since no one has disagreed...doesn't it say somewhere in the Bible that Noah preached 120 years? Somewhere in the NT? Doesn't it? "The BS of Arthur Maxwell"...I thank you, J9, for the best laugh of the evening!! | ||
| Helovesme2 Registered user Username: Helovesme2 Post Number: 2738 Registered: 8-2004  |
The 120 years idea comes from Genesis 6:3 "And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years." Some have taken this to mean that people's lives were shortened to just 120 years, but most, I believe, have understood that it was 120 years from the time God said this till the time of the flood. | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 343 Registered: 5-2009 |
Helovesme is right. But please note that it doesn't say that he PREACHED during that time (or asked the people to repent and enter the ark so they would be saved from the flood). | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 270 Registered: 5-2009 |
I checked out Gen 6:3 in various translations yesterday & most translate it as human lifespan. I agree with Cloudwatcher - we can't ADD to what the biblical account clearly tells us. That's my problem with Uncle Arthur & the FOREWARD where he makes his statements: "In the telling of these stories the Bible narrative has been carefully adhered to without any addition of fanciful speculations." AND the OFFICIAL SDA denomination approves & prints. Here again - the cash cow. Unwitting Christians are taken in & believe these stories are biblically accurate. They DO NOT COMPARE with the Bible. J9 | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3587 Registered: 10-2004  |
Nowisee, The Bible nowhere says that Noah preached for 120 years. The only reference to Noah being a "preacher" is found in 2 Peter:
As Cloudwatcher said, there is nowhere any indication that Noah invited anyone to come into the ark. In fact, the opposite is indicated by what God told Noah in Genesis 6--that He wanted to destroy everyone and save only Noah and his family:
It does not say that God commanded him to preach to those God wanted to destroy or to invite them into the ark. God told Noah that only he and his family were allowed to enter into the ark. "By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith." (Hebrews 11:7 NASB.) Noah prepared the ark for the salvation of his household and not for the rest of the world--in fact, it was only to "condemn the world." Also, how could he invite the entire world to enter the ark, when it was only 300 cubits by 50 cubits by 30 cubits, and could not even fit everyone in it? Also, remember being taught that Noah and his family waited in the ark for seven days before the flood came? Genesis 7 says that they entered after the seven days, when the flood started. Jesus also affirms this in Luke 17:27. And remember being taught that the wicked were pounding on the door of the ark, begging to be let in, after the flood started? That's not in the Bible, either! Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on February 22, 2011) | ||
| 1john2v27nlt Registered user Username: 1john2v27nlt Post Number: 274 Registered: 5-2009 |
Jeremy, ALL of what you said is what I came to yesterday before I started this thread. The bible story in Genesis is clear. We MUST get into the Word for OURSELVES. Read the WHOLE counsel of God. Know the REAL; instantly know the COUNTERFEIT. J9 | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1622 Registered: 3-2009 |
Genesis 7:1-12 The Flood 1 Then the LORD said to Noah, “Enter the ark, you and all your household, for you [alone] I have seen [to be] righteous before Me in this 1 time. 2 “You shall take 2 with you of every clean animal 3 by sevens, a male and his female; and of the animals that are not clean two, a male and his female; 3 also of the birds of the 4 sky, 5 by sevens, male and female, to keep 6 offspring alive on the face of all the earth. 4 “For after seven more days, I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the face of the land every living thing that I have made.” 5 Noah did according to all that the LORD had commanded him. 6 Now Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of water 7 came upon the earth. 7 Then Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him entered the ark because of the water of the flood. 8 Of clean animals and animals that are not clean and birds and everything that creeps on the ground, 9 there went into the ark to Noah 8 by twos, male and female, as God had commanded Noah. 10 It came about after the seven days, that the water of the flood 9 came upon the earth. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open, and the 10 floodgates of the sky were opened. 12 The rain 11 fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights. Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3588 Registered: 10-2004 |
13On the very same day Noah and Shem and Ham and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark, 14they and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, all sorts of birds. 15So they went into the ark to Noah, by twos of all flesh in which was the breath of life. 16Those that entered, male and female of all flesh, entered as God had commanded him; and the LORD closed it behind him. 17Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 346 Registered: 5-2009 |
Hec-- I'm lost. What are you pointing out with the parts you put in bold? | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1623 Registered: 3-2009 |
Cloud, what I'm saying is: God told them to enter the ark and after seven days He will send the rain. Then Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him entered the ark and It came about after the seven days, that the water of the flood 9 came upon the earth. Jer. "On the very same day ... entered the ark... Then the flood came upon the earth." The "then" could have been after the seven days. Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3590 Registered: 10-2004 |
But the "On the very same day" seems to refer back to "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month" in verse 11. One explanation I read is that it took 7 days to get all of the animals into the ark. Jeremy | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 350 Registered: 5-2009 |
I just read the Patriarchs and Prophets version ... I was thinking she said something stupid like they observed the Sabbath before the flood came. ha! But i found it interesting that not only is her account used to preach the remnant, but it's used to keep Adventists from taking seriously any one who is "bashing" or ridiculing the SDA church. It talks about the law (OF COURSE) and how few people are going to heed the warnings of the last days. It even talks about us formers! It's no wonder why we have such a hard time reasoning with Adventists. These altered fables (passed off as Biblical truth) and their implications are embedded in their brains. We are the embodiment and fulfillment of EGW's prophesies. What.a.mess. Lord, fix it. Amen. | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 351 Registered: 5-2009 |
Btw, I agree with Jeremy. The text doesn't reflect that they were all shut in the ark for 7 days before the rain started. (EGW said they were in the ark for 7 days, while people still doubted and ridiculed, with no signs of rain, ....please SEE how her alterations and conclusions are self-serving.) | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 735 Registered: 5-2009 |
Wow, everyone, another Ellenism that I really thought was in the Bible! I can't believe it! (Well, I can...but I thought for sure it was Biblical.) | ||
| Cloudwatcher Registered user Username: Cloudwatcher Post Number: 362 Registered: 5-2009 |
is anyone keeping a running tab of Ellenisms? | ||
| Michaelmiller Registered user Username: Michaelmiller Post Number: 249 Registered: 7-2010  |
No... never have kept a running tab. I do have a folder in the cabinet from my study out which happens to contain several Ellenisms in it, but that wasn't/isn't the specific purpose of the folder. Michael | ||
| Surfy Registered user Username: Surfy Post Number: 725 Registered: 11-2007 |
I wonder if the clean and unclean animals were the same as the ones the Isrealites were forbidden to eat? Seems adventists make a big deal out of this but I don't see any restrictions on the clean/unclean amimals before the Isrealites. They automaitcally assume that the unclean animals were the same....but were they? Surfy | ||
| Nowisee Registered user Username: Nowisee Post Number: 738 Registered: 5-2009 |
Good question, Surfy. | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 1724 Registered: 7-2007 |
I think so, because people offered sacrifices at the time of the flood and they would of course offer only "clean" animals. Later when Israel was given the law to not eat "unclean" animals, it was to show SEPARATION from the Gentiles - notice Leviticus 20:24-26. |
