| Author | Message | ||
| Jtree |
Max, anyone..., I was just recently told. What is your take on this: "The SDA church has always taught the truth of justification by faith." What does Ellen G. White say about a statement such as this one? This is from one of her present day followers. What is the truth to this statement and what is false about it? Care to discuss this one? | ||
| Max |
Morning, Joshua, Yes, I think it's an excellent topic for discussion. I have one question before we begin: How does she know? | ||
| Maryann |
Hi jtree, "The SDA church has always taught the truth of justification by faith." That is VERY true! Notice they don't say that it is by "faith alone." Attachment of the Sabbath and other things like the dietary laws remove the "alone" feature. Maryann | ||
| Jtree |
Max, good morning and God Bless you. I'm here. When I read your most recent this morning, I busted out in a laughter. That answer is, I don't know actually! I'm not 100% familiar with her (yet). I'm learning. But it doesn't remove the fact, that I laughed, HARD to your question. PS..especially when a good laugh is needed. | ||
| Max |
A merry heart doeth good like a medicine. --Proverb 17:22 | ||
| Jtree |
Yes, and MUCH NEEDED, Praising the Lord for all He has given. Standing on the Rock, because I see the sandy foundations slipping all the day. | ||
| Max |
Bless you, Joshua of the Rock! | ||
| Max |
Jtree, About the assertion recently made to you: "The SDA church has always taught the truth of justification by faith." Three examples from "the flashlight" expose it as untruthful. 1. "From what was shown me, there is a great work to be accomplished for you before you can be accepted in the sight of God." --Ellen G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 84, written in 1868. 2. "You have a great work to do.... It is impossible for you to be saved as you are." --Ellen G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 316, written in 1869. 3. As you are, you would mar all heaven. You are uncultivated, unrefined, and unsanctified. there is no place in heaven for such a character as you now possess.... You're futher today from the standard of Christian perfection ... than you were a few months after you had received the truth." --Ellen G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 465, written in 1875. Under real grace alone, Max of the Cross Ps. Sometimes I feel more sorrow for EGW than anything else -- in these horrible statements she was probably talking more to HERSELF than anybody else. In so doing she demonstrated a common cultish phenomenon called "denial and projection." It means denial of a quality within one's self and projecting it ("sticking it") onto other people. By "denying and projecting" she could selfishly relieve the pain of her own guilty conscience. | ||
| Max |
Jtree, Ellen White was "dumping" on the Adventist pioneers, meaning that she was denying the pain of her own guilt feelings and unconsciously projecting ("sticking") it onto others. But those "others" were her own fellow SDAs -- husband James White, Uriah Smith, John Loughborough, John Kellogg, etc. But those were the very people who were using her to their own advantage. For example, to get her to "validate with vision" their own ideas of what Scripture means and thus gain denomination-wide acceptance of these ideas and turn them into official doctrine. Then to secure the positions of power, such as the General Conference Presidency and seats on the General Conference Committee. From these positions of power they could gain many "blessings." Thus they manipulated her. And, since any manipulated person feels anger toward her controllers, she may have been unconsciously retaliating against them by "dumping" her vicious "denial and projection" testimonies on them. What do you think? | ||
| Valm |
I think that there are many people who are trapped in a very toxic line of thinking started many years ago. I am not for sure what happened back then because I was not there. But I know it has builded on itself and now we have many people still within the walls of Adventism that need are sincere love and prayers. I used to be so angry that I was held under so much guilt and anxiety from the quotes similar to the ones you gave on Nov 15. Now I realize that the people who threw them at me didn't know a better way to help me grow up. Now I just feel real sorry they are still suffering and hope God will find me a way to witness his TRUE LOVE and GIFT OF GRACE to them. Valerie PS How do you remember all of that? I do think it is essential. "We remember so no one will forget". | ||
| Dan_2 |
Max if you ever would feel so led, your thoughts here concerning EGW and her "denial & projection" are thoughts I wish were in print. Having spent a number of hours in the EGW Research Center at Andrews University "after hours" (a friend of mine worked there and the the two of us would pour over letters, etc. that you don't see in print) I totally agree with your observations! She and James would get into big fights over theology, etc. and then EGW would have "a vision" that would settle the issue. This friend (who is still and SDA pastor) would point out to me these "convenient visions" that would settle the issue. And by the way, (and I'm not just taking shots at EGW/Adventism) he also should me a copy of EGW's certificate from a woman's Bible college. I was always taught that EGW didn't have more than a 3rd grade education, which was more "evidence" for her writings being from God. Thanks again Max. --Dan | ||
| Valm |
Boy oh boy Dan, I wished I could convince my husband that I had visions from God that would make my life alot more convenient!!!!! On the serious note, was your time pouring over these letters how you began to question Adventism? I often wonder if my family knew of these things if they would begin to question also. It sounds as two people you and your friend, read them together and drew different conclusions. Is there a point of readiness that gave you a different conclusion than your friend? Valerie | ||
| Bruceh |
MAX Could a SDA member sue in court to see all the writings of Ellen White, that the Church will not let them see. Bruce Heinrich | ||
| Max |
Don't think so, Bruce, but you should ask an attorney with experience in dealing with cults. | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Hello Max, What is your take on page 583, beginning with 'I was shown' towards bottom of page, in Testimonies to the Church Volume 1? The angel tells egw what she is on page 584. Would like to know if you read this as I do. I am just curious, that's all. God Bless, Denise | ||
| Max |
Denise, you wrote: ^^The angel tells egw what she is on page 584. Would like to know if you read this as I do. I am just curious, that's all.^^ Here is the passage in question from http://www.egwestate.andrews.edu ********* ^^ 1T 583 ìSketch of Experience,î p. 583 At this meeting my husband humbly confessed that he was wrong in several things of this nature, which he never should have done and never would have done but for fear of his brethren and a desire to be just right and in union with the church. This led those who were injuring him to apparently despise him. We were humbled into the very dust and distressed beyond expression. In this state of things we started to fill an appointment at Monterey. On the journey I suffered the keenest anguish of spirit. I tried to explain to myself why it was that our brethren did not understand in regard to our work. I had felt quite sure that when we should meet them they would know what spirit we were of, and that the Spirit of God in them would answer to the same in us, His humble servants, and there would be union of feeling and sentiment. Instead of this we were distrusted and suspiciously watched, which was a cause of the greatest perplexity I ever experienced. As I was thus thinking, a portion of the vision given me at Rochester, December 25, 1865, came like a flash of lightning to my mind, and I immediately related it to my husband: I WAS SHOWN a cluster of trees standing near together, forming a circle. Running up over these trees was a vine which covered them at the top and rested upon them, forming an arbor. Soon I saw the trees swaying to and fro, as though moved by a powerful wind. One branch after another of the vine was shaken from its support until the vine was shaken loose from the trees except a few tendrils which were left clinging to the lower branches. A person then came up and severed the remaining clinging tendrils of the vine, and it lay prostrated upon the earth. The distress and anguish of my mind as I saw the vine BEGIN PAGE 584 lying upon the ground was beyond description. Many passed and looked pityingly upon it, and I waited anxiously for a friendly hand to raise it; but no help was offered. I inquired why no hand raised the vine. Presently I saw an ANGEL come to the apparently deserted vine. He spread out his arms and placed them beneath the vine and raised it so that it stood upright, saying: "Stand toward heaven, and let thy tendrils entwine about God. Thou art shaken from human support. Thou canst stand, in the strength of God, and flourish without it. Lean upon God alone, and thou shalt never lean in vain, or be shaken therefrom." I felt inexpressible relief, amounting to joy, as I saw the neglected vine cared for. I turned to the ANGEL and inquired what these things meant. Said he: "THOU ART THIS VINE. All this thou wilt experience, and then, when these things occur, thou shalt fully understand the figure of the vine. God will be to thee a present help in time of trouble." From this time I was settled as to my duty and never more free in bearing my testimony to the people. If I ever felt the arm of the Lord holding me up, it was at that meeting. My husband was also free and clear in his preaching, and the testimony of all was: We have had an excellent meeting. ^^ ********* MY TAKE: Yes the angel told her that she was ìthe vine,î whereas Scripture says, ìI [Jesus] am the vine. This is wrong and it is evidence that the angel misspoke. However, the context reveals that EGW is talking about relying on God. And so the intent is not to contradict the intent of Scripture. However, the criticism that the angel MISUSED Scripture still stands and is damning in the sense that it is further evidence -- if any is needed -- that the angel probably was not from God. If he was he would have chosen his words more carefully. Blessings to you too, Denise. Max of the Cross Ps. That was a rough assignment, Denise, a lot of work. Next time go easier on me, okay? | ||
| Denisegilmore |
Thank you Max for verifying my thoughts on this as well. When I first came across this, I read the entire chapter to get the complete context. Still though, I kept coming up with that same conclusion. This angel has indeed misquoted Scripture and therefore cannot be an angel of our God. I kept having the 'knowing' within that our Lord is the Vine in all instances that I've come across when speaking in these terms. At least thus far in my reading of the Bible. Still I left room for correction just in case I may have missed something. Oh and btw, I did hang on to this for almost two weeks, in case I may have been too tired when I first read this statement by the angel. But it just stuck in my gut, something about this really nagged at me. And we all know how these nagging sensations can do us more harm than anything good. Thank you for confirming my reasoning abilities once again. Sorry about the work this put you through (snicker, snicker). :))) God bless you, Denise | ||
| Denisegilmore |
The angel mis-used Scripture, not necessarily misquoted. Although is it a misquote as well? Just wondering again. It's late and I'm off to bed. nite all. God Bless, Denise | ||
| Max |
Denise, I have to revise my "take" on EGW 1T 583-4 in which "the angel" tells EGW, "Thou art this vine. All this thou wilt experience, and then, when these things occur, thou shalt fully understand the figure of the vine. God will be to thee a present help in time of trouble." After sleeping on this passage I now believe that the intent of this vision WAS contrary to the intent of Scripture. Scripture: Christ is the vine and is "in control" because He Alone is Sovereign." EGW's Angel: Ellen G. white is the vine and is "in control" because She Alone is Sovereign." Although this "new take" may sound harsh, I believe it is warranted. Here's why: In all of EGW's writings she "controls" God. Here's one way (out of many): She's "not ready" for the Second Coming. She has "to do something" = "get ready" BEFORE Christ can come. Therefore she has the power to delay Christ's Second Coming by "failing to get ready." This is a clear contradiction of the Scripture which says if people to not proclaim Christ's coming THE VERY STONES WILL CRY OUT! This is nothing less than wresting sovereignty away from God -- the root of all sin. According to Scripture alone there is NOTHING we can do to speed or delay Christ's Second Coming. Period. Christ is the vine, not Max, who am but a branch. And anything contrary to this is anathema. Max of the Cross | ||
| Shereen |
Max, You seem to be on here alot. Could you tell me, do Adventists ever come here to debate? |
