Talk:Ellen G. White/Archive 1

Links changes

I've added some messages to some of the links to Ellen White's writings. In the interests of NPOV, I think it is neccesary to say that these sites either promote or demote EGW.

P.S. The article below by DC Mills and the response by B Holland are very interesting. It seems that argument between SDAs and former SDAs will continue for a very long time. What ever happened to Ephesians 4:4-6? -m0rt

First Paragraph

I wonder how neutral it is to say that [all] Seventh-day Adventists see Ellen G. White as a source of authority and so forth, when she herself stated otherwise? Something to the nature of "If ya'll'd been reading your bible, i wouldnt have been called to do this" and "im not the bible, i make mistakes." please note these arent actual quotes, but gievn the time i could find them for you. User:MilquetoastCJW

I do not think it is neutral. Personally I have always been aware that she was quoted as saying that, or wrote that, she was not an authority. I don't recall reading the particular statements about her lack of need to come if they had been more diligent. I think it would be quite relevant to have a quote to that effect on the page. Thanks, Ansell 22:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

The contradictory teachings of the Seventh-Day Adventist

By: David C. Mills

The Seventh Day Adventist trace their origin back to the early 1800's to William Miller. In 1860 the church adopted the name of Seventh-day Adventist, which underlies their belief that “the seventh-day Sabbath (Saturday) is given as a reminder of the God who both creates and saves, and is the day God invites all to come and worship him” . Mr. Miller promoted the idea that Christ was to return on October 22, 1844. On the day following the "Great Disappointment" of October 22, 1844, Mr. Hiram Edson claimed to have seen a vision. He said, “he saw Jesus standing at the altar of heaven” and concluded that Miller had been right about the time of Jesus’ coming, but wrong about the place. Shortly thereafter a man by the name of Joseph Bates, a retired sea captain and a convert to "Millerism" began to promote the idea that Jesus moved into a heavenly sanctuary, a new apartment in Heaven, on October 22, 1844. He published a pamphlet that greatly influenced James and Ellen White. It is these three who were the driving force behind the Seventh Day Adventist (SDA) movement. In 1986 the SDA membership hit 5 million , and today the church claims to have over 8 million members’ worldwide.

In my study of this organization, it appears as though one of two things have happened. Either there has been a great misunderstanding of the Seventh-day Adventist doctrine or they are unwilling to make a clear, concise statement as to their beliefs. At the least it has become apparent that they are inconsistent in their statements. Ironically enough, the SDA’s agree with me.

In the book “The Kingdom of the Cults”, the author seems to make it a point to refute the majority of the concerns that a “bible believing” Christian may have. However, resources from Christian Research Institute, Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry , and others bring the same condemnation without refutation.

Due to the variation of views as to whether or not this organization is indeed a cult, I will focus on establishing that fact by using their own statements as posted on their Internet site.

For reference purposes, I have included in the back of this report the following information:

• Appendix A – Their History Statement • Appendix B – Mission Statement • Appendix C - A Statement on the Holy Scriptures • Appendix D – A Statement of Confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy • Appendix E – A Statement of Tolerance • Appendix F – A Statement on the Peace Message to All People of Good Will • Appendix G – Their Views at a Glance • Appendix H - Christian Research Institute, Affirmations , Denials & Aberrant

To begin with, I would like to take a look at their History Statement in Appendix A. As I read through, there are two very distinctive statements made, which I found disturbing. The first, in paragraph 4, was made as they attempted to clear up the false prophecy of Christ’s return on October 22, 1844 made by William Miller. They make the statement that “indeed” the date had been correct, however “the wrong event” for that day was predicted. They go on to say that Jesus “would begin at that time a special ministry in heaven for His followers”. The SDA’s and Ellen G. White are not strangers to false prophecy; this was simply the beginning, as you will see.

Also, in paragraph 6 it is very clear as to their view of Ellen G. White. They state that she became and “remains the trusted spiritual counselor”, and she also “enjoyed God’s special guidance”. This was, and apparently still is, their view of Mrs. White as confirmed by John J. Robertson as he wrote in his book, The White Truth. In an effort to combat the recent discovery of Mrs. White’s plagiarism, he wrote "The influence of the spirit of prophecy is woven into the warp and woof of Adventist faith, life and organization. . . What we are as a church is a reflection of our faith in the divine authority evident in the writings of Ellen G. White." Additionally, Mrs. White claimed that future events were revealed to her. "As the Spirit of God has opened to my mind the great truths of His word, and the scenes of the past and the future, I have been bidden to make known to others that which has thus been revealed." She had also made it very clear that she regarded herself as a “messenger, entrusted by the Lord with messages for His people”. She continues, “My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but does not end there”.

Mr. Robertson and Mrs. White seem to agree in this area and their beliefs still stand unchanged according to their current History Statement. Unfortunately, as I stated earlier, Mrs. White has attempted to predict many things during her ministry that never seemed to prove true. For example Mrs. White prophesied that:

• Jerusalem's Future: Mrs. White will be alive when Jesus returns • England will attack the United States (1862) • The Civil War is a sign Jesus is about to return • In 1850's Mrs. White said Jesus will return "in a few months" • Adventists living in 1856 will be alive when Jesus returns • Mrs. White saw Enoch on Jupiter or Saturn

Many of these same principles sound somewhat similar to that of other cultic organizations. This, in combination with the church’s claims that the writings of Mrs. White are inspired commentary on the Bible, are not of human origin, have doctrinal authority, and are unquestionable, pose a very serious problem for the SDA’s.

We could very easily overlook the next section in Appendix B, their Mission Statement. However with close examination, I will take a look at two points that are made. Both, I believe relate to each other. In the opening statement, they state that their mission is to “proclaim to all peoples the everlasting gospel in the context of the three angels’ message in Revelation 14:6-12”. If we take a look at Revelations 14:12 it reads, “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.” Mrs. White, their spiritual guide, has made the following statement, “Too late they see that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is the seal of the living God”. We can see here that Mrs. White is clearly leaning towards a “faith plus works” view. Secondly, in their first point in Appendix B, labeled “Preaching”, they make reference to “the authority of His Ten Commandments law with its reminder of the seventh-day Sabbath”. It appears to me, that the SDA’s themselves reinforce our interpretation of Mrs. White’s faith plus works doctrine. I believe that to them, this passage takes on a whole different meaning. Mrs. White has also stated that “At the time appointed for the judgment . . . . All who have ever taken upon themselves the name of Christ must pass its searching scrutiny. Both the living and the dead are to be judged "out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." I’d like to suggest that Mrs. White and the SDA’s knew exactly what they believed. Although Mrs. White has been known to sound very evangelical and affirm a belief of some kind in salvation by grace, it has is also documented that she taught semi-pelagianism. This is the teaching that salvation is partly by grace and partly by works. This is also the doctrine of salvation taught by the Roman Catholic Church. On April 9, 1893, Mrs. White wrote a letter to a man by the name A. T. Jones, in an effort to correct his teaching that salvation was by grace through faith alone. In that letter she stated that “all your good works cannot save you; but it is nevertheless impossible for you to be saved without good works. In Romans 3:28, God’s word tells us, “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” I’ll believe the Bible.

As I read over Appendix C, A Statement of the Holy Scriptures, I could honestly find no fault with any statements made in this section.

Next, I would like to take a look at Appendix D, their Statement of Confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy. Simply by its title and the first paragraph statement we can clearly see inconsistency in that they do not believe that the “Biblical Canon” as they stated in paragraph 6, has truly been closed. This can also be seen by some of the statements made by Mrs. White, which added to the scriptures, such as:

• Satan was offered a pardon in heaven • Eve wandered from Adam's side • Angels communicated with Adam after the Fall • Some races are a mixture of man and beast • It takes seven days to get to heaven • Adam was crowned king of Eden • Angels would have died for man • Adam kept the Sabbath • Jesus died for angels • Angels have golden access cards

I would like to spend some time looking at paragraph 2 in this section. They refer to Revelation chapter 12, and identify that John here is speaking of SDA Church as being the “remnant” church in the last days. They go on the state that they “believe that in this brief prophetic picture the Revelator is describing the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which not only keeps "the commandments of God" but has "the testimony of Jesus Christ," which is "the spirit of prophecy"”. Among other things, one idea that appears prominent is that they believe that they alone, like many cultic groups, have the way to salvation. Mrs. White writes, “I saw that as the Jews crucified Jesus, so the nominal churches had crucified these messages [of the Investigative Judgment], and therefore they have no knowledge of the way into the most holy, and they cannot be benefited [sic] by the intercession of Jesus there. Like the Jews, who offered their useless sacrifices, they offer up their useless prayers to the apartment which Jesus has left; and Satan, pleased with the deception, assumes a religious character, and leads the minds of these professed Christians to himself.”

In their recommendations at the end of this section, recommendation number 1 states “That as a church we seek the power of the Holy Spirit to apply to our lives more fully the inspired counsel contained in the writings of Ellen G. White”. I would think that if Mrs. White’s writings were not an authoritative work that superceded the Bible, that they would seek the counsel of Mrs. White’s writings, to apply more fully the Holy Scriptures. Of course it is at least clear that they believe Mrs. White’s writings are at least of equal value as the Bible. They state that ”While men venture to criticize the Word of God, they venture on sacred, holy ground, and had better fear and tremble and hide their wisdom as foolishness. God sets no man to pronounce judgment on His word, selecting some things as inspired and discrediting others as uninspired. The Testimonies [Mrs. White’s writings] have been treated in the same way; but God is not in this.

The final point I would like to address is contained in Appendix F, Views at a Glance. In the “Life after Death and the Future” section they make the statement that, “Adventists follow Jesus in identifying those who die as sleeping. Those who have trusted God are raised to life when Jesus returns, and look forward to a wonderful future--eternal life in God’s presence.” In 2 Corinthians 5:6-8 we read, “Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.”

There are a host of problems with what this group teaches. I have attempted to address the obvious that lied within their own statements, which are in the public’s eye. Below is a list doctrines, some that we have discussed and more that we haven’t, that pose serious problems for this group.

• Our sins will ultimately be placed on Satan • Jesus is Michael the Archangel • Worship must be done on Saturday (the Sabbath). • On October 22, 1844 Jesus entered the second and last phase of his atoning work. • Investigative Judgment • The dead do not exist anymore -- soul sleep. • The wicked are annihilated – no hell. • Ellen G. White, the "founder" of Seventh Day Adventism, was a messenger from God gifted with the spirit of prophecy. • There is a sanctuary in heaven where Jesus carries out his mediatorial work.

I believe that the SDA’s have an unbiblical doctrine of Christ. They have stated that, “It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed.” I am only to believe that they do not feel that Christ was the propitiation for our sins. However, 1 John 2:2 is very clear as it reads, “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” Mrs. White, their spiritual guide, said: We are saved through grace plus works, however, the Bible says: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9” And finally, the SDA’s believe that “Those who are living upon the earth when the intercession of Christ shall cease in the sanctuary above are to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator.” The Bible is very clear that “there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus”, 1 Timothy 2:5.

Secondly, it appears to me thus far that they believe that those who do not worship on the Sabbath are not keeping the commands of God, and thus not a member of the saints. Martin would not agree with me, as he has made clear by his views , however, it seems to me during my studies that they believe that they have a least “a corner on the market” of salvation, as discussed earlier.

In the “Dallas Statement” is was stated by the SDA’s that, "One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth and provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. Although they stated in Statement 17 of the Dallas Statement, “that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested", it has not convinced me that they truly believe that. How can a “continuing of the truth” be tested? Mr. Martin has made the statement that Mrs. White was a “True Christian” , and was not a false profit. He even refutes her false prophesy as, false statements and even sinful, but not a biblical false prophet.

In closing, I must disagree with Mr. Martin and Mr. Hanegraff. As I began this study, I viewed the Seventh-day Adventist as a modern apostate church. However, my conclusion thus far leads me to believe that they are, in fact, a cult, and that Mrs. Ellen G. White was indeed a false profit. Matthew 7:15-18 says, “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.” At a minimum Mrs. White has made false predictions, contradicted the Bible, added to the Holy Scriptures, lied, cheated and stolen. I have to believe that’s more than just sinful. A prophet needs only one false prophecy to be disqualified. Deuteronomy 18:20-22 gives us the rule by which we are to judge prophets, as it states, “But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”

It is interesting to note that in the August 14, 1883 Review & Herald, the following statement appears: "Our position on the Testimonies [of Mrs. Ellen G. White] is like the keystone to the arch. Take that out, and there is no logical stopping place till all the special truths of the message are gone. . . . Nothing is surer than this, that this message and the visions belong together and stand or fall together." Yes, they stand and fall together, the SDA’s and Mrs. White.

---

---

I wanna see this guy's sources. Lol, and in context, geez. His misunderstanding on the Adventist beliefs concerning 1844 show his slanted logic and his inablity to speak neautrally. I'd suggest something unchristian for him to go do to himself, unfortuantely im not a member of a cult. Thus, under christian principles, i will not. User: MilquetoastCJW

Ellen White and her critics

By Brian Holland

There are several issues or accusations brought up in the previous posting:

1) Supposed false or unfulfilled prophecies made by Ellen White.

2) Supposed mixture of faith and works required for salvation rather than by faith alone.

3) The addition of information not included in the Biblical canon of scripture.

4) The accusation of denominational elitism. (“We only are going to be saved.” type of mentality.)

5) Placing the writings of Ellen White as an equal to the Bible.

6) Doctrines which are considered non-Biblical.

Unfortunately, many of the same issues or accusations could be made against the Bible itself. In fact, many bibilical detractors use these same arguments against the Bible.

1. Many prophecies made in the Bible have not been or seem to have not been fulfilled. (Rev. 1:3; 22:10, 12, 20; Luke 21:32; Matthew 16:28)

The author has forgotten the experience of Jonah in his prophesy about Nineveh and the what God had stated in Jeremiah 18:5-10

Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying,6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. 7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; 8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. 9 And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; 10 If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

Many of these issues are dealt with at [1] and are shown to be without merit.

2. The writer seems to ignore that the Bible, including Jesus and Paul, stress good works as necessary to salvation.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:17-20 (KJV)

And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. 18 Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery. Luke 16:17-18

He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. John 14:21 (KJV)

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. John 15:10 (KJV)

Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. John 15:14 (KJV)

Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Romans 3:31 (KJV)

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Romans 8:1-4 (KJV)

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

I wonder what the author of the previous posting does with the entire books of James and 1 John?

3. Three of the author’s arguments go together: 1) The argument against the addition of extra-biblical information, 2) the argument against placing the writings of Ellen White as equal to the Bible, and 3) the argument that the Seventh-day Adventist doctrines that are considered unbiblical.

Dealing with Argument #1: Would not a true extra-Biblical prophet give information that is not included in the regular canon, just as Paul gave us the names of the priests, Jannes and Jambres, who opposed Moses (2 Tim. 3:8) or Jude who quotes Enoch (Jude 1:14)?

Dealing with Argument #2: How should Christians relate to the writings and speeches of a God-sent prophet in the end times if God would/should send one as is predicted in the Bible (Joel 2:28 [this was only partially fulfilled at Pentecost]; Ephesians 4:11-13)? How much authority would that true prophet have?

A true prophet, as long as he/she passed the Biblical tests of a prophet, would have to be obeyed as the voice of God, for indeed a true prophet speaking is the voice of God speaking (1 Kings 13).

The Following are the Biblical Tests of a Prophet

Test #1 — A prophet must manifest a sign, miracle, or must foretell an event which actually occurs to give them their spiritual credentials. This shows that he/she is not speaking on their own accord, but that their message is from a supernatural source (but this does not necessarily mean that the prophet is from God though). Exodus 4:1-9; Number 24:4, 16; Deut. 18:21, 22; 1 Sam. 3:19, 20; Jeremiah 28:9; John 2:11, 23; John 20:30, 31; Daniel 10:1-17 Exceptions: Jer. 18:7-10 Jonah

There are reasons why the miracles do not continue once a prophet has been proven: Matt. 12:38, 39; Rev. 16:13, 14

Test #2 — A true prophet’s message who passes test #1 has to agree with all of the other tried and true prophets’ messages before him/her. They can add additional non contradictory details, but they cannot contradict or nullify previously substantiated messages. Deut. 13:1-3; Deut. 12:32; 1 Kings 13:1-32; Isaiah 8:20; 2 Peter 1:20; 1 John 4:1, 2; Rev. 22:18-19 It is this test that shows that Ellen White or any other contemporary true prophet whom God may choose to send cannot be equal or superior to the Bible. All true doctrines can come from the Bible and the Bible only. Later prophets can give additional details, fleshing it out, so to speak, but the doctrinal core, the skeleton, must come from the Bible and the Bible only.

Test #3 — The results of following a true prophet’s message must be righteousness. A true prophet’s life however can be very faulty and even sinful. Matt. 7:15-20 The above text in Matthew is referring to the results of the prophet’s message, and not necessarily to the actions of the prophet’s him or herself. However, a message from a corrupt prophet must have extra evidences inherently within the message or the surrounding events to validate it. Check out lives of the the following Bible prophets: Genesis chapter 20; Numbers chapters 22-24; 1 Sam. 19:18-24; 1 Kings 13:20-22; The book of Jonah

Test #4— A true prophet cannot choose to have a vision or a dream. 2 Peter 1:21

The copying of other people’s material is not a biblical test for a prophet. The Bible writers have been noted as copying freely from one another and from other non-Biblical writers without giving credit which wasn’t/isn’t a problem. If one condemns Ellen White for copying without giving credit, then one would condemn the Bible writers as well. Copying religious material without credit has been historically noted as being a common practice in Ellen White’s time and was considered acceptable and normal. (See [2] and [3] )

Dealing with argument #3 — I would submit that the problem is not that the doctrines are unbiblical, indeed all of the Seventh-day Adventist arguments for the doctrines come from the Bible and not from Ellen White, but rather that the problem is that author does not agree with the doctrines.

Many non-Adventist mainline Christians agree with Adventists on the following doctrines because of their biblical base:

Michael being the pre-advent manifestation of Jesus.

The dead sleep rather than having an immortal soul.

A sanctuary in Heaven (has the author of the above post read Hebrews 8 & 9?)

Saturday rather than Sunday sacredness

A temporary rather than eternal hell

The following doctrines are unique to Adventism:

The spiritual gift of prophecy given to Ellen White.

The scapegoat of the Day of Atonement being symbolic of Satan. (Which is described inaccurately by the author of the post, and in a most prejudicial way).

The significance of the October 22, 1844 date

However, these doctrines are not unbiblical, they are just not agreed with. All of their support is derived from the Bible, not from the writings of Ellen White. Ellen White is never cited for their support in any official church literature.

4. Dealing with Adventism elitism. You will never find Adventists saying that they as a people are better than other Christians (indeed sometimes you will find Adventist literature decrying that they are worse!), nor will you find Adventists saying that they will be the only ones saved, (indeed you will find mainline literature stating that the majority of God’s people are at this time are outside of the Adventist church.) What you will find is that Adventism have Biblical truths which are fundamentally important to Christianity world-wide to prepare people for the events before and at the 2nd Coming of Jesus. These truths are matters of spiritual life and death. Thus it is the truths that are important, and the Seventh-day Adventist church is important because of them.

The Name Truth and the critics.

The Name Truth and the critics are like David C. Mills and Brian Holland. Their are those that will give arguments on why the Names aren't important while "many of the same issues or accusations could be made against" the doctrines of the critics.

For instance, some critics of the Name Truth believe in the Sabbath Truth. The critics of the critics argue why the Sabbath is not important today and the critics of the Name Truth that believe the Sabbath Truth respond with reasons of why the Sabbath is still relevant. Then the same critics of the Name Truth dismiss the reasons of why the Name Truth and the Names are important.

Critics of the Sabbath might argue, "the Sabbath isn't important, and the day was changed to Sunday, and keeping any one day in seven is enough since the worship is important, and He knows who we worship."

Critics of the Names that believe the Sabbath would then respond, "the day was changed by men, and men cannot change the day and Jesus kept the Sabbath on the seventh day, and the seventh day was blessed, hallowed, and sanctified."

Critics of the Names that believe the Sabbath would then argue, "(the pronunciation of) the Name of Jesus isn't important, and any pronunciation is enough since the person we mean is important, and He knows who we mean."

Believers of the Name Truth could then respond similar to the critics responding to their critics, "the Messiah was never given (the pronunciation of) the Name of Jesus, and the pronunciation was changed by men, and men cannot change the Name, and the Messiah said Names truly, and the Names are Blessed, Holy, and Sanctified."

Amalgamation

I would like to see something here about Ellen G. White's teaching that blacks and Indians were a product of animal and human interspecies mating. She called it amalgamation. It should be mentioned here or on the main sda entry.

From Talk:Seventh-day Adventist Church Hello Fermion, and Cestusdei ? If you want to pursue this further, you might want to check the E.G. White Estate's webpage on the subject: http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/amalg.html If you are truly wanting to interpret the passages on "amalgamation" to be racist, you will have to make an airtight case and argue against the EGWEstate's position. Good luck! Emyth 23:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC) -Fermion 08:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I have read the quotes. They seem rather clear to me. Why else would they make sda's so nervous that they wished they would just disappear?

They make the SDAs nervous because so often people like yourself misread them. Not being born in the 1800's tends to change the way you understand literature written in that time period. By the very definition of the word amalgamation only like things can amalgamate. Metals with metals, animals with animals, comic book heroes with comic book heroes, and so on. So, as it is PLAIN to see, in her 1800's english she did not place an "of" where we would today because she did not need to. I might conjecture that if petitioned, further editions will be edited with "[Of]" inserted appropriately, because that's what she meant.

Please see also: Our Mission to the Colored People

User: MilquetoastCJW

Touching on this Quote

Here are the "amalgamation" quotes mentioned on this page, where this link is given: http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/amalg.html

"The only passages in Mrs. White's writings that are of interest in this connection are found in Spiritual Gifts, volume 3, already mentioned and republished in Spirit of Prophecy, volume 1, in 1870. The first, in chapter 6, "Crime Before the Flood," is this:

'But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere. God purposed to destroy by a flood that powerful, long-lived race that had corrupted their ways before him.'--Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 64. Chapter 7 is entitled "The Flood," and contains this statement:

'Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the Flood. Since the Flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men.'--Page 75. These are Mrs. White's only statements on the subject of the amalgamation of man and beast"

Maybe she was suggesting dinosaurs, and cavemen where the results of experimental breeding by men who had an average lifespan of around 900 years, and didn't have anything better to do with their time.

Who knows? But I wouldn't try to say Ellen White was racist, because she herself was half black, having a black father.

Interjection Actually, Robert Harmon was very white. Her nose, which is probably what you are citing, was caused by a full-frontal face assault, by a thrown rock. Her face was mostly shattered, and her nose was never narrow, or caucasian in structure, again. user:MilquetoastCJW

Maybe she was making this statment in a nuetral kind of way. Like to demonstrate something she believed happened in the past by something we can see today. For example: we have many races of dogs, that are the result of mankind "amalgamating", or breeding animals. There are also many races of mankind that are the result of inter-racial breeding.

--Rush4hire 15:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I can see Adventists running from their history.Cestusdei 04:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

All this Adventist hating is getting on my nerves and i may just have to give a full rebuttle, but for now I'll settle with destroying the Amalgamation crap. Didn't she say that the amalgamated creatures were destroyed in the flood? Yes. She did. She lived during the Civil War so she was very aware of the existence of Blacks living in those modern days. Therefore she couldn't have been referencing them.

If God had destroyed the world partly because of the blacks then why did she encourage the church to minister to them so much? Why did she encourage her son to go down personally into the south to help them? She is far from being a racist. Druidan 07:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Ellen G. White/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I read through the entire page and found it to be clear and accurate. I frowned when I read about the detractors but was glad to see the rebuttals allowed and present. I believe that gave it balance.Genifromalamp 15:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:44, 1 May 2016 (UTC)