| Author | Message | ||
| Tracey Registered user Username: Tracey Post Number: 137 Registered: 9-2004 |
I just have to mention something that I noticed with references to EGW here. Most times that I read quotes of your commentaries afterwards, and for the most part, they are always present tense. It drives me nuts!! Example: EGW writes that she... or EGW refers to ... (present tense - writes and refers) I am not trying to be nit-picky but she is dead and I don't understand why references to her comments aren't noted in the past tense? Is this just a bad habit? I also noticed it in Proclamation! stories. It gives an undertone that she is alive or something. I don't understand this. I get this kind of itchy irritation physically when I notice the present tense expressions of EGW stuff. | ||
| Tracey Registered user Username: Tracey Post Number: 138 Registered: 9-2004 |
I apologize if I offend anyone and I certainly don't want to take anything from the wonderful testimonies in Proclamation! or on this site. The insight here is amazing and helpful about the SDA church and the EGW writings. | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 574 Registered: 7-2003 |
Tracey, no offense taken and I understand your concern. I am probably one of those that speaks in present tense in regards to EGW. I think there are at least two reasons for this: 1) Most of us here have spent our lives in SDA schools and Sabbath Schools where EGW is normally referenced in the present tense because her writings are considered to be an ongoing, authoritative source of instruction in a very present tense sense. So in one regard this probably is habit. 2) On the other hand. I sometimes deliberately choose to use present tense when speaking of the teachings of White as a way of highlighting the fact that her influence is not just part of the distant SDA past (as some would like to have us believe). I think it's important for us to be clear that EGW's influence still controls, shapes, and defines nearly every aspect of modern Adventism whether the youngest generation realizes it or not or want to admit it. In short, the teachings of EGW and her impact are a very present tense reality within Adventism. Chris | ||
| Ric_b Registered user Username: Ric_b Post Number: 180 Registered: 7-2004 |
Tracey, interesting observation, I hadn't thought much about it before. | ||
| Dd Registered user Username: Dd Post Number: 312 Registered: 7-2004 |
Tracey, I also think that the present tense usage reflects the darkness we feel. I don't know about the rest of the formers here on the forum but I can say for myself that EGW embodies all the pent-up anger and feelings of loss I experience when I reflect on where I have been. Maybe she is the SDA "scapegoat" so to speak. The further removed I become emotionally from the SDA church the more sinister it becomes in the reality of today. Chris is right on that her "spirit" lives on in Adventism no matter how hard the members deny her presence in their beliefs. I really appreciate all of you on the forum who are not formers but are in some way entangled in the mess of the SDA church. Your insight is very valuable. Please do not ever apologize for sharing your thoughts. God uses everyone in their walk with Him to bring His comfort, healing and joy to those who are learning to rest in His grace. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 1266 Registered: 12-2003 |
Tracey, I had never really thought much about the tense of our Ellen references, either. Without doubt the reason we use present tense is that her writings continue to exist and to influence people. We do the same with the Bible, i.e. "In Romans 8:28 Paul says..." If we were writing ABOUT Ellen or Paul or Shakespeare, as in a historical or biographical examination of them, we would refer to their writings in the past tense. For example, "When Jesus failed to appear as predicted, Ellen White said..." When we refer to our own lives and practice, though, we refer to Ellen's (or Paul's or C.S. Lewis's) influence on us in the present tense, because the effects of her writings are functioning NOW. For example, "Adventists don't eat unclean meat because Ellen says...In contrast, the Bible says..." The tense is a way of showing that her influence is present and still actively influencing Adventists (and indirectly even we who have left). It really is not giving her more credibitily than she is due; it's just a statement of what IS. Colleen | ||
| Belvalew Registered user Username: Belvalew Post Number: 101 Registered: 7-2004 |
Dear Tracey, Thank you, dear, for bringing this very important insight to our attention. I, for one, will endeavor to "lay her to rest" in all my future references. She's dead and gone. The Holy Spirit has given us all permission to walk away from her grave! Chris is right, though, we have been in a life-long habit of speaking of her as though she were right there in the room with us. Belva | ||
| Carol_2 Registered user Username: Carol_2 Post Number: 224 Registered: 2-2002 |
I thank you too Tracey, and also found your observation extremely interesting! I had never considered that, and again - it's one of those things a non-former would notice. I'm actually surprised my husabnd has never mentioned it....he catches a lot of quirks that I missed having been raised in it. | ||
| Tracey Registered user Username: Tracey Post Number: 139 Registered: 9-2004 |
I can understand the reasons why a little better! : ) Tracey | ||
| Susan_2 Registered user Username: Susan_2 Post Number: 1359 Registered: 11-2002 |
I would like to say that when quoting of and referring to egw in present tense is because to SDA's she is in the present tense. As long as the SDA has in it's statement of beliefs that EGW is a continuing and ongoing source of truth then that is present tense. Also, walk into any SDA church and you will hear EGW referred to as Sister White. That sounds present tense to me. On the local SDA church directory cover is a lovely scene in nature. It has some words in quotes under it about nature. And then says, Ellen. So, it is a given that to SDA's EGW is present tense. | ||
| Flyinglady Registered user Username: Flyinglady Post Number: 937 Registered: 3-2004 |
Tracey, I had never thought of that before you brought it up. EGW is not a present influence in my life so I will try to remember to use the past tense when talking of her. Thank God I am no longer under her influence. He is awesome. Diana | ||
| Tracey Registered user Username: Tracey Post Number: 140 Registered: 9-2004 |
I hear what you're saying Susan, and since no one here is SDA any longer, it leads me to the idea that it's just a habit now. Tracey | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 286 Registered: 4-2000 |
Oh yes, I repeatedly referred to Ellen White in my sermons by saying "From the pen of inspiration..." Apparently, the "inspired pen" belonged to the author that she plagiarized from. Dennis J. Fischer |
