| Author |
Message |
Max
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 22, 2000 - 3:24 pm: |     |
Dr. Tazz and Ken come to mind. |
Max
| | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2000 - 2:17 am: | |
And Gary Mayo. |
Allenette
| | Posted on Thursday, November 23, 2000 - 7:32 pm: | |
I dont think Gary would call himself SDA. Maybe give him a few points for that? He's just another seeker, really. :-) |
Max
| | Posted on Friday, November 24, 2000 - 12:34 am: | |
First, Gary said that he was still a member of
the SDA church, that he fully intended to
remain as such, and that the reason he
should remain a member was so that he
could work for positive change from within the
ranks.(He did, however, admit that he never
attends church.)
Second, argued in favor of everyone else
doing the same thing.
Third, he argued powerfully and at great length
against the anti-SDA "kingdom of heaven is
within you" position and in favor of the
orthodox EGW-SDA "the kingdom isn't here"
eschatological position.
Fourth, to me at least he comes across as
"one who has already found the truth" more
than as a "seeker of truth."
But this is just my take, and I have no quarrel
with yours. |
Lorinc
| | Posted on Sunday, November 26, 2000 - 8:35 am: | |
Hi Denise, Max, et.al,
I'd like to share a couple of thoughts about EGW's "Vine" vision that was discussed just before Thanksgiving, if I may. (By the way, I hope everyone had a nice holiday!)
First, let me clarify that I do *not* believe in EG White's so-called prophetic gift. She has given us abundant proof of her lack of prophetic credentials. In that context, her "You are this vine" vision is as false as all of her other visions.
That said, I don't think that the angel's statement, "Thou art this vine", is a mis-use, mis-quote, or contradiction of scripture. The angel didn't say, "Thou art THE vine"; he said,"Thou art THIS vine", i.e., the one Ellen talked about in her vision. It has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus' statement, "I am THE Vine, you are the branches." It just happens to use the same symbol.
For example, Nebuchadnezzar saw that infamous statue in his dream. When Daniel interpreted it, he said, "You, oh King, are the head of gold." Now, by the vine=vine logic, Daniel contradicted the apostle Paul, who said that *Christ* is the head !! [of the church] Of course, there is really no contradiction there, because the same symbol (a head) was used in two different applications. Ellen's "vine" vision is the same thing. I don't see any reasonable grammatical or contextual way to get from Ellen's narrative to "Ellen G White is claiming a title that Christ claimed for Himself."
Again, this vision is as false as any of her visions, but I wouldn't try to use this inferred "vine" connection to prove it to an SDA friend. I don't think a disinterested, neutral third party would see a connection between this vision and John 15:5.
Just as EGW's supporters over the decades have claimed too much *for* her, let's not fall into the trap of claiming too much *against* her.
Just my $0.02, offered in a humble and helpful spirit!
- Lorin |
Valm
| | Posted on Sunday, November 26, 2000 - 9:13 am: | |
Lorin, I thought the same thing but just didn't know how to articulate it in such a nice way. So ditto. Val |
Denisegilmore
| | Posted on Sunday, November 26, 2000 - 9:44 pm: | |
All I can say to this is that I wasn't looking for anything to criticize egw over while reading. The fact is, I wanted to get to know more about her and her life so I was reading more of her material. Up to this point my intent was to find out more about her. Infact, truth be known, I really feel sorry for her in many ways. I even read her last days and found that my eyes teared up. However, when I ran across this vision and the line of her being the 'vine', this stuck in my gut and I found it nagging me to the point that I had to get some feedback. It actually angered me to read it, if you want truth. So, while I give egw credit where credit is due, I cannot feel the way you may feel on this vision. To me it was a subtle teaching to her followers and with that I must stand my ground. It seems that in many of her writings there is this subtle teaching that somehow she is 'like the messiah' as far as knowing what is right, wrong etc. I don't buy it and never will. Do keep it in mind that I have stated that credit is given where credit is due but in my best opinion, I will say that this was just another way of subtly teaching her infallibility.
God Bless,
Denise |
Lorinc
| | Posted on Monday, November 27, 2000 - 7:06 am: | |
Hi Denise,
I can appreciate your viewpoint, too, and I have no problem "agreeing to disagree" about this one. :-) Sometimes those nagging "gut reactions" that you mentioned are the Holy Spirit impressing us with some subtle point that we need to hear. Heaven knows *I* could do a better job of listening to Him than I often do....
I also like your approach of actually *reading* her writings, to form your own opinion, rather than relying on brief quotes and "sound bites" from either position. Sometimes it's amazing how enlightening that "unmentioned paragraph that came right before the quote" can be... in ANY material, not just EGW. :-)
God Bless,
Lorin |
Lorinc
| | Posted on Monday, November 27, 2000 - 7:13 am: | |
I guess one other question about this "Vine" vision (and others?) would be:
Why did the angel feel compelled to converse with Ellen in the 1611 English of the King James Bible -- "All this thou wilt experience", etc. ? (See Max's quote, above).
:-)
- Lorin |
Max
| | Posted on Monday, November 27, 2000 - 12:32 pm: | |
The "vine vision" must be taken in the context
of EGW's entire life -- as Denise has already
suggested.
I now see EGW's entire life as an attack on
Jesus Christ. For her he was less than fully
God. He:
* Was only an archangel (Michael).
* Was more an Example showing us how to
be saved by our own good works than a Savior
saving us totally apart from our good works.
* Had a sinful nature.
* Was inferior rather than superior to the law.
In view of this rather damning evidence -- and
much much more (such as adding to
Scripture) -- it is small wonder that her lifelong
attack on Jesus Christ resulted in a view that
has Adventists "standing before God
WITHOUT a Mediator." Without the one who
said, "I will never leave you or forsake you."
Do you understand what that means? To me it
means nothing less than the destruction of
Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior.
Therefore, in my view at least, the "vine vision"
must mean that Ellen G. White is the vine and
her followers are the branches.
Sorry if this sounds harsh -- but I think
Denise's "gut reaction" was right straight on
target.
Max of the Cross |
|
