| Author | Message | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 577 Registered: 7-2005 |
This post is in line with Ric's initiative in disclosing lessons learned through interactions with adventists on forums that cleaned me from similar rationalizations Ric had. Gary Inrig's attention given to Jude's epistle brought and AHA moment that made sense of seemingly irrational feelings and experiences. Before dealing with the change, it's important defining what didn't change in my perspective of adventism. It was not a change of opinion regarding the orthodoxy of adventism or of its core gospel message. I didn't fight with questions regarding the authenticity of the adventist gospel or it's orthodoxy. I interacted with Adventists under the (often) unstated assumption that their gospel is irreconcilable with the biblical gospel. My problem came from another direction. It was generated by the gross inconsistency visible manifested in the adventists I interacted with. I did my best to use consistency as a tool in trying to push them toward biblical truth, but to no avail. They felt tricked, trapped, and didn't once feel any obligation to act in a consistent manner, rather they dodged the issue, equivocated, lied, sent me on innumerable rabbit trails, etc. Walter Martin's attempts to persuade William Johnson act consistently with his claims and with QOD is the clearest example of the way these interactions went. Remember Martin's question "Are your sins washed?" and Johnson's reply "If I'm in Jesus" followed by Martin's second question, "Are you in Jesus?" Johnson's quick (and foolish reply) "Yes" followed by "Are your sin's washed?" that ended with a nervous laughter from Johnson. He felt tricked, unjustly trapped, he felt justified in not assuming responsibility for his own claims. These are not isolated cases, being inconsistent is almost a way of life for adventists. They can't bear the yoke of the law, consequently they make it bearable, make it a wax nose which can be adapted to any situation. They ignore a lot of Ellen White's "counsels" which bear witness against them and send them straight to hell. They do everything they can to evade being pushed toward the logical conclusions toward which their doctrine push them. At least, this is the only point where they manifested consistency: in being inconsistent. Once it became clear that adventists are consistently pushing away from the bad consequences and conclusions of their system, the question that plagued me for a long time was related with the way in which the adventist relate with their gospel. I knew that their gospel was not a gospel at all, I could not call a false gospel anything else than what it truly was. No doubt, no question, it was entirely false and damnable. The adventist system could not be defended, and in my interactions with adventists I had no problem in exposing their gospel as false. The real problem was in relating with adventists on one-to-one personal basis. Apparently this is an easy task: a false gospel doesn't make true believers, true Christians. But given the way in which adventists act in an inconsistent way with their stated beliefs, ignoring a lot of bad things, it's plausible that they don't live consistently with their gospel too. Especially when they strongly affirm belief in a finished atonement and criticize those from the lunatic-fringe, historic adventists, it seems, the chances seems pretty high that they are pushing away from their stated beliefs regarding the gospel. Did you get the dilemma? I think this was also Walter Martin&'s basic dilemma that made him reluctant in reclassifying adventism as a cult. He was no stupid, he knew very well that the unfinished atonement and the investigative judgment are sufficient enough to send the adventist church into the kingdom of the cults. What stopped him short of classifying adventists as cultists was the apparent rejection of the unfinished atonement found in the QOD. Here is what he writes in the Kingdom of the Cults:
Basically Martin classified adventism as evangelical based on what he himself called a paradoxical situation, on alleged inconsistency with the adventists system of belief. He has no problem of seeing the adventist system in a true light, he has issues with the effect this system produced. Witnessing the inconsistency of adventists, he was reluctant in putting them in the same place with mormons, etc. Even William Johnson's lack of consistency on the Ankerberg enforced this reluctance, it seems. I don&'t see for the moment a better explanation for his lack of reaction after the encounter with Johnson. Johnson's glaring inconsistencies didn't move him toward re-writing his assessment of adventism. Sure, being inconsistent on a large scale doesn't endorse confidence, rather doubt. On a one side, as former adventists, we rejoice when some of our adventist friends doesn't act consistently with their system of beliefs. We are glad when they don't write us off as apostates and still think we are true believers. But this inconsistency creates the problem: should we consider them to be true believers, brothers in Christ? If not, on what basis? See, the situation is generated by their inconsistency with the adventist gospel. It would be easy to point toward their gospel, contrast it with our gospel, and agree that we believe different gospels. But what did you do when the person insist that he or she's in basic agreement with your gospel, that she doesn't believe the adventist gospel as you described it, or says that the differences are in minor points, in details? I found people on forums that, when confronted with the clear teachings of IJ detached themselves from them and stuck with those grace-sounding aspects of the adventist message. It will be easy if we can classify all these declarations as false testimony, as a direct attempt toward deceiving others. Indeed there are many situations in which sooner or later you can detect the lack of sincerity. Still there are those cases in which the sincerity is real and the person before you doesn't consciously attempt to dupe you. They are people who seems to escape the bad teachings of adventism. Given the fact that inconsistency with the system of beliefs seems to be a way of life for the majority of adventists, how can you tell such a person that she's lost? Is she, since out there is enough proof that she rejects a lot of the adventist baggage? These unresolved questions gave me enough headaches and tormented my conscience for a time. What if I'm condemning innocent people thinking that they trust in a gospel they don't truly believe? What if I involuntarily contribute to the hostility which I encounter from adventists? I had also former adventist friends who thought I'm not gracious enough with adventists in allowing them room for error and inconsistency, judging them too strictly. If you have patience enough to follow me until this moment, you'll see the rationality behind the way I felt, the rational behind the reluctance and guilt I experienced. What it's less rational was the activation of another fear with it's associated guilt: the fear that I'm lost and damned for departing adventism. Irrational fear, because I saw clearly enough that if I had remained adventist, I would not believe the gospel. As I discovered later, this fear is not as irrational as it seems. I'll move toward the change in my tomorrow's post. Thanks again, Ric, for the initiative in talking about these things. Hope that what I had wrote will make sense for others. Your post certainly did it for me. Gabriel. | ||
| Asurprise Registered user Username: Asurprise Post Number: 1842 Registered: 7-2007 |
Gabriel; your description of Adventists fit me perfectly back when I was an Adventist. So perfectly, that it's creepy! I couldn't be consistent because if I tried to do all that Ellen White said, I'd be miserable which would mean that I was a legalist which I knew was wrong. On the other hand, I had to do enough to feel I was in right standing with God. I couldn't let myself see that I was being inconsistent, because that would have led to the proverbial place between a rock and a hard place. And at the same time, I tried to convince myself that salvation was really a free gift and that once a person accepts Christ, they "have been saved" (Ephesians 2:8-9). I couldn't really do that because Ellen White taught that no-one should say they are saved and also that a person isn't "saved" until their life is over or Jesus comes back - if they've "done the right things" or "something." I would try and try to get some sort of assurance of salvation, but I couldn't quite succeed. Ellen White made sure that people couldn't accept Jesus' finished work, because, according to her, it wasn't finished! It really took a series of miracles by God to get me out! | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 578 Registered: 7-2005 |
Wow, Asurprise, you brought to my attention another connection I didn't make until this point: that I was in the same situation and did the same things. I was leaning toward grace, still never fully able to do so until I got rid of the adventist mantle. Nevertheless I wondered if by God's grace those sincere adventists who seemed to lean toward grace and shun the poisonous theological baggage had not this experience in a different manner than mine. I didn't want to use my own experience as a measuring stick. Gabriel | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12483 Registered: 12-2003  |
Gabriel, very, very interesting and insightful post. I'm eager for your conclusion... Yes, I also went through a period of time when I had those doubts you described. It really made me feel quite crazy, and I'd have doubts then about having left Adventism. Looking forward to your continuation... Colleen | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 579 Registered: 7-2005 |
The first step toward assessing the situation is related to Ellen White and her claims of being inspired by God. While I was sure her claims were false, I wondered the practical effects a false prophet had on its own congregation. Were her visions genuine in the sense that they were supernatural? Many things pointed toward this direction, still her massive plagiarism raised a question regarding the authenticity of her supernatural abilities. In the past adventists pointed toward her written works as proof that she acted beyond her natural ability. This sounds less convincing today when people know very well that a lot of material found in her writings was stolen by her secretaries from other authors. If she was supernaturally endowed to write, either by God or by Satan, why did she need to obtain material in a natural way, as every one of us who never claimed supernatural encounters do? Why use other people's ideas when you have either God or Satan to disclose this to you? In her case, as a false prophet, was the devil short on words? Also, her medical condition added proof against the idea of the supernaturalness of her visions. The visions stopped when she got to menopause, as the doctors who diagnosticated her with hysteria anticipated. This seemed to confirm the fact that she had no supernatural visions. Apparently her visions were proofs of her self-delusion, nothing more than the babble of a sick woman. This leads to the conclusion that believing in her inspiration is nothing more than a stupid conclusion than an issue of being influenced by evil. But when I studied more about Bible's inspiration I discovered that the majority of the material found in the Bible is not the product of direct, immediate, supernatural encounters with God. "This says the Lord" is rather a minority report. The great part of the Bible doesn't resemble this kind of supernatural direct intervention of God. Rather, God supervised in a special way the biblical writers to the degree that their process of writing was very natural. They draw on their experiences, research (like Luke in composing his gospel), and their humanness pervades the entire Scripture. In fact, the evidence of this apparent lack of supernatural intervention from God's part is the source of liberal criticism of inspiration. Nevertheless, God used a very natural process to produce a supernatural effect, His word is alive, raising up people dead in their sins, correcting, rebuking, and healing. His sovereign will supervised the natural process of writing the biblical material that the final product was free from error and His word, as He Himself uttered the very words of Scripture. While the means were for the most part natural, the source and the effect was supernatural. This brought me a very good solution for seeing so much of natural process in Ellen White's writings. Despite the natural processes involved in the writing of her "inspired" writings, the effect was supernatural in kind. Spiritual slavery with long-time effects even in people who for a long time rejected her claims of prophecy was an effect that it can hardly be explained on exclusively natural grounds. As God uses the natural workings of his prophets to produce a supernatural effect, salvation, Satan uses the natural works of his prophets in order to produce a supernatural effect, perdition. It doesn't matter finally if her visions were of supernatural origins or she faked them, the effect is pretty the same, deadly bad fruit. She put an indelible stamp on her followers. One more post and I'll finish. Gabriel | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 580 Registered: 7-2005 |
The final connection I made is related with Gary Inrig's exposition of the epistle of Jude. He brought to attention an epistle that seemed to fly under the radar for most of us. The structure of the epistle seems odd. Jude explicitly expresses his goal: persuade his listeners to fight for the faith once delivered for the saints. While he certainly tells them how to fight, his instructions occupy a relatively minor part in the epistle. They came at the beginning and at the end, but the great part of the epistle focuses on the false teachers that posed as true believers in the midst of them. Jude describes their wicked character, and using a lot of biblical examples he describes their awful fate,
As you can see, Jude insists on the final fate of those false teachers who passed as genuine believers. It was essential for him to establish two clear facts in the minds of the believers: a) false teachers are not true believers b) their destruction is sure. His insistence on these themes shows that for him fighting for the faith once delivered to the saints rests on these factual truth. He talks later about saving people from the influence of these false teachers, but he roots the motivation of this fight in the truth about these false teachers: they are enemies of the faith, for whom the judgment is sure, who are from a long time designated for this fate. The believers must fight for the faith because there are true enemies of the faith that will remain enemies until their last breath, and they need to save others from the influence of these enemies. Notice that he stops at some point and says "Woe to them!" That's a curse, and he expects the believers to embrace his perspective and curse these false teachers also. The strangest thing is that our Lord's Jesus instructions in the Sermon on the Mount are directed toward blessing those who curse us, turning the other cheek, being ministers of blessings, not returning the evil. Jude's attitude seems to go against Jesus' own words, cursing some people instead of blessing. For me as a former adventist it seems to be a no-win situation: I was fully persuaded that Ellen White's claims are bogus, she was no doubt a false prophet, and hardly if ever a false prophet could be a true believer. She deserved the curse, the "Woe" of Jude. But putting a curse on her was not easy. First, it seems to go against our Lord's instructions. He clearly spelled the fact that, when we are cursed by others, we should bless instead, not answering with the same deed. Ellen White cursed all those who left adventism and rejected her claims and her message. She clearly said that those who kept the sabbath and abandoned it are lost forever. What's the proper response to this curse? Shall we bear it in humility and respond in a different manner by refraining from judging Ellen's eternal destiny? This seemed to be a no-win situation: if I put the curse back on her shoulders, I was consistent with my own firm belief about her status as a false prophet. But in the light of Jesus instruction, how this is a manifestation of His spirit? You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. No win. For a time, I used the following approach when questioned about Ellen White. I was asked repeatedly by adventists who knew my position what I believe about her, if she was a true Christian or not. My answer was that she made false prophecies and preached a false gospel and if she truly believed in her heart what she claimed to believe and didn't repent even on her deathbed, she is lost. I declined to pronounce myself about her heart, but restrained myself to the external proofs I had. Here Jude's epistle is very helpful. He puts the curse where it belongs. He gives to the believers the freedom to fight for the gospel by making clear that the false teachers are damned, cursed and will suffer eternal darkness forever, as the wicked angels are suffering for the moment, the same fate. Not for a moment he leaves open the possibility that these enemies of the faith are to be considered true believers, deluded weak brothers. He directs believers toward saving other peoples who are under the influence of them, but not toward saving those false teachers, rescuing those who are doubting. This attitude of showing mercy toward them is in stark contrast with the curse he put on the false teachers. What I come to realize is that I need to have no doubts that Ellen White deserves the curse she put on those who rejected the adventist teachings. It was essential to put the curse where it belongs, otherwise her curse will haunt us. No qualifications, no hesitation. The kind of spiritual war we are in requires this, as much we are reluctant to do this: it's either us or her. We will be plagued by guilt and doubts about our salvation due to her curse if we don't put the curse where it belongs, on her shoulders. Either we should be hesitant and will fail victims of a guilt trip on which adventists will put us, or we should be clear that we are justified, we are blessed, and we are blessed forever. These things go together: we must fight for the gospel and for our own personal benefit from it by affirming strongly that we are justified, blessed, saved forever and there is no doubt about this. That's the first part, but in order to sustain it, there is also necessary to affirm the reverse of the coin: Ellen White is condemned, cursed, lost forever and there is no doubt about this. If adventists ask for our assessment of Ellen White, we should not refrain from expressing this view, otherwise we will indirectly give them license to hold on her false gospel. I discovered that it's not sufficient to strongly define the adventist gospel as false, it's necessary to clearly spell out the practical implications of this fact. According to Jude, the doubters need to be saved. Asurprise wrote about the fight to fully trust in grace and the impossibility to got assurance. This is a situation from which people need to be saved. Adventists under the influence of Ellen White need rescue, need mercy, need to be saved from the fire because they are under the spell of a false gospel.
I guess that here I may preach to the choir, nevertheless hope that those who struggled with the same questions I did will benefit from what I posted. Perhaps others had encountered this kind of guilt and different types of doubts while interacting with their friends or with other adventists online. Gabriel | ||
| Raven Registered user Username: Raven Post Number: 1177 Registered: 7-2004  |
Very insightful thoughts, Gabriel - Thanks for posting this! You make excellent points and an accurate conclusion. | ||
| Grace1958_f Registered user Username: Grace1958_f Post Number: 15 Registered: 3-2011 |
In reference to a paragraph in your post #577:*These unresolved questions gave me enough headaches and tormented my conscience for a time. What if I'm condemning innocent people thinking that they trust in a gospel they don't truly believe? What if I involuntarily contribute to the hostility which I encounter from adventists? I had also former adventist friends who thought I'm not gracious enough with adventists in allowing them room for error and inconsistency, judging them too strictly.* Those are the exact thoughts echoing in my mind at this very moment, as I continue email dialogue with my SDA step-son & DIL about their biblical interpretations of the bible as they view it through their EGW filter. My husband (fka SDA and Mormon, now born-again-christian) and I (born-again-christian) are actually doing a bible study on Galatians via email correspondence with the kids - at their request. I really appreciate your insight as we prayerfully move forward in our studies, asking that God’s truth would be able to pierce through the darkness of their EGW/SDA paradigm. | ||
| Wiredog Registered user Username: Wiredog Post Number: 154 Registered: 8-2010  |
Here Here Gabriel! Amen. I believe this in one, if not the main purpose former adherents of Cults were called to Christianity. To do precisely what you speak, to earnestly (epagonizomai) contend for The Faith. What you described are the scars from where we came. I AM currently battling that spiritual question and wondering are we or are we not to speak out and how. Or should we just leave our friends and family, who are sincere in their belief but are being misled, alone and trust they have enough faith. The search for the clear answer to that question has me spiritually feeling like I did in Adventism-reticent and bitter when I speak. Your postings have helped me, and I will contemplate on them more. For too long many of use where held in bondage to the law, thanks to Adventism. We all were one of them till He chose each of us by name. So if what we do fuels the feet of those in the pews who have been looking to exit, if it dissuades those who are curious and prone to dabble in Adventism, if arms those who are now poised to rescue or protect the weak (mikros) in faith, or if it strengthens the resolve and speeds to health those who are now healing--like some here, it has served its purpose. We are to encourage and build up the true body of believers--His Church, with Truth. (Message edited by wiredog on April 09, 2011) | ||
| Gcfrankie Registered user Username: Gcfrankie Post Number: 794 Registered: 1-2007 |
I wish churches would teach more on Jude about false teachers and teachings as sometimes it is hard to tell the difference. We have to remember that Satan and his minions teach darn near word for word what Jesus taught and sometimes it is hard to tell the difference. We know as we have been in it but for outsiders they don't understand the differences. For us older ones we can look way back and see the changes that have taken place over many years of sdaism. Back then people could really tell the difference from sda teachings and christian teaching but today it is more difficult for outsiders to see as they now use the same language christians use but without the same meaning so that it does not make them look like a cult. We have to stay very diligent into God's word as the bible teaches us that in the end there will be many false teaches and some so suttle that they will be hard to distinguish the truth from false teachings. I pray everyday asking the Lord to keep me from falling into another false teaching trap and there are many out there. Gabriel, thank-you for your insightful thoughts. Grace I am praying for you as you have a bible study with your family in the book of Galatians. It is my favorite book as it put the final nail in the coffin so to speak where sda was concerned. Gail | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12485 Registered: 12-2003 |
Gabriel, that is so true. Very clear and well-said. If we don't fully embrace the fact that EGW was a FALSE prophet (not just a well-intentioned but misguided "not-a-prophet"), we remain bound to her and confused. We can't clearly speak the gospel or witness to our Adventist loved ones if we stay doubtful about EGW. The Bible is extremely clear about false prophets and teachers and what their outcomes are. We have to embrace what Scripture says and believe it's true. I really like your point, Gabriel, that she cursed us, and we have to see that the Bible tells us that she as a false prophet actually is the one who carries a curse...unless she had a death-bed repentance...and we have no evidence of that. But we can know that what she did during her lifetime was condemned in Scripture. We have to see her for what she actually was and repent...turn away...and embrace the gospel and the Lord Jesus without any modern interpreter or prophet telling us what Scripture means. Colleen | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 876 Registered: 7-2004  |
Colleen, In your statement you have included the key for responding to any SDA trying to make you look or feel bad by asking you if you think EGW is saved or will ultimately be in heaven. Ask them if they think EGW repented of the errors she taught and renounced her own writings. They can give their own answer. This only works for the progressive SDAs who are trying to pass themselves off as evangelical Christians. | ||
| Bb Registered user Username: Bb Post Number: 908 Registered: 7-2004 |
The only other explanation for her behavior is that she was completely delusional, staying up all hours of the night secretly copying writings of other people, being encouraged in her claims that she was hearing from God. I don't know what God will do with mentally delusional people. She was either evil or delusional. I do know that her influence has destroyed many lives and cost countless innocent people the ability to live in the peace and security of believing in the gospel of Jesus Christ. C.S. Lewis said that Jesus was either crazy or evil or the Son of God, because that's who He claimed to be. If you are not what you claim to be (i.e. a prophet of God) then you are one of the other two. My first hesitant step toward searching for the truth had me in a Christian book shop where I came upon this huge book called "Kingdom of the Cults". I had never heard of Walter Martin or any of the problems in the 80's with Desmond Ford, etc. and skimmed through to see if SDA's were there. When I saw his chapter entitled "The Puzzle of Seventh Day Adventism" I was curious. I saw that there were many other interesting chapters on other cults, and I thought it would be a good study for me. It was intriguing to think that he hadn't officially noted "us" as cults and I wanted to see why. Maybe if he had put us in with the cults I would have put it down thinking it was from the devil. I don't know. But I read it, didn't understand too much of it, but it was the beginning. Then a preacher came to the local Baptist church named Ron Carlson, who speaks against cults, and I spoke to him after the service, asking him about the Sabbath. I remember him telling me (I thought very flippantly) "We can keep Sabbath every day!!" Still, I watched the video he recommended called "The Spirit behind the Church" and went on the websites he showed me (though I thought I was treading on the devil's ground to disbelieve egw)and I found the Former Adventist Fellowship and my journey out began. It didn't happen overnight because unraveling the indoctrination is a looooong process. | ||
| Philharris Registered user Username: Philharris Post Number: 2436 Registered: 5-2007  |
To quote Bb:
You are so right, it has been a process of a lifetime for me. Over fifty years ago I departed the SDA church out of despair and intended to be nothing more than an official sinner. This lasted for about ten years before I surrendered my life to our Lord and Savior. At that time I was introduced to real Holy Spirit led bible study and the real gospel. This led to researching my theological roots in Adventism. Once I realized that the Scapegoat of the Old Testament had to be Jesus Christ I knew the sanctuary doctrine and the IJ had to be false. Immediately then I realized Ellen White was a false prophet. What has taken much longer is to unravel, understand and remove false concepts that affect how I live. There is far more to daily righteous living than the good theology I have been introduced to. Not so obvious is how the false has been rooted deep in my subconscious thinking. I praise God that he views me righteous because the righteousness of Jesus Christ has been imputed into my life. As I grow in sanctification I still sin, sometimes very badly. Even as I ‘see’ spiritual grow in my life it is never something of personal merit. It is totally the working of the Holy Spirit. As Dale Ratzlaff points out in his article on sanctification in the latest issue of Proclamation, my spiritual growth never contributes to the perfect sanctification imputed by our Savior. And Gabriel, Thank you for so effectively delving into a topic I have been bothered by but just didn’t know how to put into words. PS I could never be ‘fearless’ by my own merit. It is all about Jesus. Praise God! Fearless Phil | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 583 Registered: 7-2005 |
@Ric Colleen Repentance on the deathbed was THE factor that made me hesitant regarding Ellen's final state. Despite no visible, public, verifiable proof of repentance in her life, I was afraid in passing judgment because of lack of sufficient information. Since I didn't have access to the heart, there was theoretically the possibility of repentance and change of mind internally without external manifestation. When questioned by adventists, I responded that if she didn't repent, her gospel is powerless to save her. Which is a true statement, although a little distracting. The distraction in my view comes from the fact that unfortunately leaves the impression that God may trick us regarding such important figures as false teachers and false prophets. Here is how I modified my views. Since man is dead in trespasses and sins, he cannot believe and repent apart from a supernatural intervention of God's grace, a spiritual resurrection of a dead soul. No matter how the external circumstances may evolve, a sinner will never be able to repent apart from this radical intervention. A proper illustration I think is hell. One the most persuasive arguments regarding it's eternal duration is the fact that hell's horrors will not result in the wicked repentance, rather in further rebellion. As the plagues from Revelation 16 leads to people cursing God more because of the increasing suffering (Revelation 16:9, 11, 21), hell's punishment will make people sin more against God, sins that will necessitate future punishment. Even if sin deserves limited punishment in time (according to annihilationism), the ongoing sinning will keep the punishment alive. Man's sinful nature doesn't change apart from God's operating in sovereign grace. For a false prophet to repent, it will require God bringing him or her alive spiritually, since she cannot, even under the fear of death, truly repent. What I learned about God in these years is that God works salvation in such a way to bring glory to Himself alone, to magnify his grace. He does this in a visible manner, in a public setting, so all will be able to give glory to Him. What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory; even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? Romans 9:22-24 God's works are on display: He will magnify His justice through inflicting wrath on the vessels of dishonor and, by contrast, He will magnify His grace more by saving people from the depths of sin. Either his justice or his grace are magnified. This means that if Ellen White repented, God will not receive glory for His grace manifested to her. Rather, innumerable people who trusted her as a vessel of mercy will suffer as vessels of wrath while she will be in heaven. How is this honoring to God? How God's name can be magnified by a display of grace about which nobody ever saw a hint? Remember Canright. He is a clear picture of the way in which God operates. Canright was the leading apologist of the SDA Church, creme de la creme, cream of the cream, the very best. God rescued him and Canright's repentance was the hardest blow that could happened to the SDA Church. That didn't happen into a corner, it was public, visible, and even today we owe a lot of Canright for what he disclosed. God's sovereign grace picked up the greatest apologist, and, paralleling Paul's conversion, transformed an enemy of the faith into its greatest ally. If God had chosen to lavish his grace on Ellen White, we would have a second Canright. Bringing her to life in a corner, on her deathbed, without anybody knowing, can this grace give glory to God? Would not God tricked millions in thinking that they are saved for following Ellen's gospel, just to discover she's in heaven while they are in hell? If I missed something, I'm open to correction. For me it was liberating to know that I don't have to fear that her public position doesn't match her internal, real situation. Gabriel | ||
| Honestwitness Registered user Username: Honestwitness Post Number: 1153 Registered: 7-2005  |
Gabriel, your words are profound and I'm pondering them deeply. I'm in a precarious situation, because I'm married to a really wonderful man, who also happens to be an ardent Adventist elder, who is very actively involved in SDA evangelistic efforts. I pray God will show me how He wants me to contend for the faith in my relationship with my husband. | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3653 Registered: 10-2004  |
Gabriel, Thanks for posting those excellent points. Also, I think that in looking at everything Scripture says about false prophets, it is pretty clear that God does not save false prophets. Rather, He condemns them throughout Scripture. I don't think there is any instance of a false prophet being saved in the Bible. Also, we do have evidence that Ellen did not repent on her deathbed, from what her last words were:
(By the way, her words were actually a misquote, which she also wrote multiple times in her writings, of the apostle Paul's words in 2 Timothy 1:12 KJV: "For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.") So even at the end of her life, she was still stubbornly clinging to the false "jesus" that she taught her entire life and who visited her throughout her life (accompanied by occultic phenomenon) and who gave her messages. She refused to repent and trust in the true Jesus Christ, but instead trusted what she had experienced and the demon who called himself "Jesus" who had visited her throughout her life. Jeremy | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3654 Registered: 10-2004 |
To clarify what I was saying above, Scripture makes it clear that false prophets are condemned, and are not part of the elect. They do not have the ability to repent, and God does not give them the ability. But for those of you who don't believe in Calvinism, think of it this way: false prophets have chosen to reject Jesus Christ, they have "sold their souls" to the devil, they have blasphemed the Holy Spirit and have claimed that the devil's work in their lives as false prophets, is actually the Holy Spirit, "the Spirit of prophecy." They are beyond hope and can never be forgiven, either in this age or the age to come: "but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin" (Mark 3:29 NASB). Nowhere in Scripture are we told to try to convert false prophets, and the only examples given are of the opposite of that. In other words, to sum up what I've written, false prophets don't have deathbed conversions. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 10, 2011) | ||
| Hec Registered user Username: Hec Post Number: 1717 Registered: 3-2009 |
This forum is scaring me with so many judges. I thought that (Jn. 5:22) For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: Hec | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3655 Registered: 10-2004 |
Hec, In the same passage (Matthew 7) that Jesus says "do not judge" (a verse taken out of context by many), He says that we are to judge false prophets:
Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on April 10, 2011) |
