Again, I really do encourage you to access the online version of ‘More Than a Prophet’. It makes things much clearer and logical than the utter confusion and abuse of ‘either or’ that have riddled everyone’s understanding of EGW.
Bradford’s book is self-refuting when he destroys Bible’s infallibility by claiming that the Bible has mistakes. It is like saying that God makes mistakes, and leave us in confusion not knowing what to reject from the Bible and what to keep intact.It leaves us with no objective standard of truth, letting the reader to decide if he or she will accept something from the Bible as truth and something as not truth. That’s confusion at best, and blasphemy at worst.
guibox - 14 February 2008 04:36 PM
My friend, the truth is not found in an infallible prophetess or a deluded false prophet. Evidence of her life and writings disprove both stances.
What her life and writings tell me is that she lied all her life about stealing other’s people words, which is not helping her case. But interesting is what Walter Martin said in the interview in Currents about those who use what they think is good in Ellen’s ministry in order to give her a pass.
But the gentleman [Spangler] said he had seen so much good, in Seventh-day Adventism, come out of the movement, he didn’t think there was anything that could be shown to him that would shake his faith in the inspiration of Mrs. White! now, this is the perfect cultic mentality - circular, selfauthenticating, experiential, no basis in objective fact. If that’s going to be the party line, my brothers, kiss it good-bye with the evangelical world. They will descend on this.
Now, here is the question that Walter Martin asked William Johnson at the Ankerberg Show..
“What kind of evidence would you accept to prove that Ellen White is a false prophet?” If there is an evidence which possibly indict her, what would be that evidence. What, in your view, will be the litmus test according to which, if somebody can prove Ellen White wrong, you’ll acknowledge her as a false prophet?
If there is no evidence which will prove you that Ellen White is wrong, you’re involved in the same cultic, selfauthenticating, experiential, no basis in objective faith mentality about which Walter Martin speaks above. Tell us what kind of evidence will be for you sufficient in order to acknowledge Ellen White as a false prophet.
As far as I’m aware, there is nothing that can convince you or Bradford that Ellen White is a false prophet, because any evidence presenting until now that goes against Ellen’s claims of inspiration was simply dismissed as error due to her humanity which does not imperil her inspiration because there is room for growth, and from now on, anything we can bring on the table can be looked in the same way: simply nothing bad can destroy the good you had seen in Ellen. And if this is the case, “Kiss it good-bye with the evangelical world”, join the Kingdom of the Cults.
Here are Ellen White’s own words describing her claim to verbal inspiration: “When writing these precious books, if I hesitated, the very word I wanted to express the idea was given to me.” (Selected Messages, Vol. 3, pp. 51, 52 1907; Emphasis supplied) Obviously, this clear statement doesn’t support so-called “thought inspiration” as the White Estate now wants us to believe.
Dennis Fischer
Dennis, even though the quote you provided is troublesome, Ellen White probably said the opposite elsewhere. Since she couldn’t have possibly contradicted herself, the burden falls upon us to figure out which parts of her counsel still matter and which can be discarded. The problem is, which words do we heed? Which of her words are still “present truth” for this day, as opposed to “past truth” for the 19th century? Oh, I almost forgot...Bradford and Bacchiocchi can help us there too...yes, that’s the answer.
Did it also occur to you that what was considered good counsel could be realized as incorrect later on? Is there no room for growth? If EGW were infallible we would have expected her to get everything right from the very beginning. If she is not infallible and God didn’t reveal everything that ever would be in 100% correctness, than we MUST expect error and room for growth and correction. To not do so is to be unreasonable and illogical.
Could this ever be considered good counsel?
The state of our world was presented before me, and my attention was especially called to the youth of our time. Everywhere I looked, I saw imbecility, dwarfed forms, crippled limbs, misshapen heads, and deformity of every description. Sins and crimes, and the violation of nature’s laws, were shown me as the causes of this accumulation of human woe and suffering. I saw such degradation and vile practices, such defiance of God, and I heard such words of blasphemy, that my soul sickened. From what was shown me, a large share of the youth now living are worthless. Corrupt habits are wasting their energies, and bringing upon them loathsome and complicated diseases. Unsuspecting parents will try the skill of one physician after another, who prescribe drugs, when they generally know the real cause of the failing health, but for fear of offending and losing their fees, they keep silent, when as faithful physicians they should expose the real cause. Their drugs only add a second great burden for abused nature to struggle against, which often breaks down in her efforts and the victim dies. And the friends look upon the death as a mysterious dispensation of providence, when the most mysterious part of the matter is, that nature bore up as long as she did against her violated laws. Health, reason, and life, were sacrificed to depraved lusts. {ApM 17.1}
I have been shown that children who practice self-indulgence previous to puberty, or the period of merging into manhood and womanhood, must pay the penalty of nature’s violated laws at that critical period. {ApM 18.1}
Many sink into an early grave, while others have sufficient force of constitution to pass this ordeal. If the practice is continued from the ages of fifteen and upward, nature will protest against the abuse she has suffered, and continues to suffer, and will make them pay the penalty for the transgression of her laws, especially from the ages of thirty to forty-five, by numerous pains in the system, and various diseases, such as affection of the liver and lungs, neuralgia, rheumatism, affection of the spine, diseased kidneys, and cancerous humors. Some of nature’s fine machinery gives way, leaving a heavier task for the remaining to perform, which disorders nature’s fine arrangement, and there is often a sudden breaking down of the constitution, and death is the result. {ApM 18.2}
Guibox,
These maladies were supposedly revealed to her in vision by God and she is clearly speaking as an authority here as a result. Where is there room here for personal “growth and correction”? At any time in history should this ever be considered “good counsel”? Either God really did show her these things or she is prophesying falsely. Which is it?
Gabriel, anybody who looks at the gospel’s alone will see ‘errors’. Bradford doesn’t tear down the scriptures but simply shows the human element that in no way takes away from the infallibility of the scriptures. The simple fact that one apostle says there was only one angel at the tomb and another says there was two, and the fact that in one instance only Mary was there and in another the disciples and other Mary’s were there shows that the two seem contradictory. Bradford’s point is that the reality of the resurrection and angel visitation is true but was told from different perspectives and is not contradictory.
Don’t make this another ‘SDAs tear down the scriptures’ nonsense argument that so many like to use against us. It doesn’t fly and it isn’t true.
I see I am fighting an uphill battle and no amount of discussion will change opinions. The problem is that we are approaching things from a different viewpoint.
Dennis, if you look at the 1919 GC minutes, Daniells et.al made it quite clear that there was not verbal inspiration of the testimonies. A man who knew EGW intimately for 30 years. Apparently he didn’t know what he was talking about and made up his own version of EGW that contradicted the reality despite his being there by her side. I will take his words and understanding of EGW over anybody today, thanks.
..and your quote (again) is being used as a blanket statement for everything that was revealed. Simply because one word was given to her in that instance, doesn’t mean that everything she ‘was shown’ was revealed in a vision or dream as verbal inspiration.
The bottom line is this and I will leave this discussion with a quote from A.G Daniells This is the crux of the matter and from which this issue should be approached. Not from an infallible prophetess or a ‘true or false prophet’ perspective. Such stances have already determined outcomes when the evidence is presented. Can you have errors and inspiration at the same time? This is the answer I have already answered in my mind.
Mr. Daniells?..
“A. G. Daniells: ‘Now on infallibility. ... When you take the position that she was not infallible, and that her writings were not verbally inspired, isn’t there a chance for the manifestation of the human? ... And should we be surprised when we know that the instrument was fallible, and that the general truths, as she says, were revealed, then aren’t we prepared to see mistakes?’”
Yup...sadly neither former Adventists or SDA EGW apologists have understood this logical truth. All or nothing.
Thank you gentlemen for your discussion on this matter. However, I do not see this as fruitful at best and getting ugly at worst. I shall bow out now taking your comments into consideration and thought.
“A. G. Daniells: ‘Now on infallibility. ... When you take the position that she was not infallible, and that her writings were not verbally inspired, isn’t there a chance for the manifestation of the human? ... And should we be surprised when we know that the instrument was fallible, and that the general truths, as she says, were revealed, then aren’t we prepared to see mistakes?’”
Yup...sadly neither former Adventists or SDA EGW apologists have understood this logical truth. All or nothing.
Guibox, when someone claims to receive a vision from God about how masturbation will cause “imbecility, dwarfed forms, crippled limbs, misshapen heads, and deformity of every description”, the “all or nothing” tends to emerge. It is illogical to blame Ellen White’s readers for taking her seriously when she makes these claims. Even if A.G. Daniells tried to soften her claims after she died and behind closed doors (very brave of him), he does not overturn the logical truth that either Ellen White heard this message from God or she did not. Which is it, Guibox?
EGW admitted she didn’t understand all she was shown. did it ever occur to you that EGW may have misinterpreted the cause of these health problems according to the limited knowledge and cultural influence she had? It seems that she attributed alot of those maladies because of sinful lifestyle as opposed to specifically masturbation.
Drugs, STDs, intrafamily sexual relations, unhealthy lifestyles, all of these can to some degree create physical malformities or physiological maladies that can manifest themselves out of psychological sicknesses.
Again, you are assuming that the message was 100% correct from inspiration to interpretation.
Again, you are assuming that the message was 100% correct from inspiration to interpretation.
No, I am assuming that when someone says “I was shown”, they were, in fact “shown”. Your argument implies that God cannot show anything with clarity to His prophets, implying that God has a communication problem.
The most illogical response is to blame the reader for taking Ellen White seriously, but this is what you are doing, Guibox.
At this time, in this thread, and in the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, I feel the need to offer a portion of Paul’s letter to the saints in Ephesus:
Ephesians 1:15-23 (NIV) 15For this reason, ever since I heard about your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16I have not stopped giving thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers. 17I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. 18I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is like the working of his mighty strength, 20which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.
As we search, may we all find His truth, His peace, and His love… Amen
Have you completely read Ellen White’s two books on masturbation and marital excesses; namely, “An Appeal to Mothers” (1864) and “Solemn Appeal (1870)? One thing that comes across very strongly when reading these two books is that Ellen White had a thorough understanding of this subject. Furthermore, in Victorian America, her anti-masturbation stance actually made her look very good and highly moralistic in the public eye. Interestingly, in the introductory remarks of Ellen White’s anti-masturbation book, “An Appeal to Mothers,” is found the following recommendation by the Trustees of the S. D. A. Publishing Association: “It would perhaps be well for every member of the family to possess a copy for his or her own personal possession.” Wow, what a recommendation that “every member of the family” should have their own personal copy! It is important to note that no other book of Ellen White ever had such a lucrative and powerful recommendation. Not even the Adventist Book Centers are recommending that their current books should be owned by every member of the family. All the case histories cited in these two anti-masturbation books went into “Christless graves” according to Ellen White. Not one person cited ever overcame their practice of solo sex.
Here is a humorous description of a chronic masturbator according to Ellen White’s personal observation: “A Mr. ___ professed to be a devoted follower of Christ. He was in very feeble health. Our feelings of sympathy were called out in his behalf. He could not hold his head steady. His eyes had a glassy appearance, his hands trembled, and when he walked, his knees shook; he staggered like a drunken man, and often seemed ready to fall. He was obliged to fix his eyes upon an object in the distance before him, and then make for that object. He would thus gain force enough to reach the place he desired. His case was shown me in vision. I saw that he was deceived in regard to himself, that he was not in favor with God. He had practiced self-abuse until he was a mere wreck of humanity.” All in all, Ellen White’s conclusion about those who masturbate was that “Such are just as surely self-murderers as though they pointed a pistol to their own breast, and destroyed their life instantly.”
Amazingly, Ellen White further added: “My misfortune, which occurred when I was about nine years old, ruined my health. I looked upon this as a great calamity, and murmured because of it. In a few years I viewed the matter differently. I then looked upon it in the light of a blessing. I regard it thus now. Because of my sickness I was kept from society which preserved me in blissful ignorance of the secret vices of the young. After I was a mother, by private death-bed confessions of some females, who had completed the work of ruin, I first learned that such vices existed. But I had no just conception of the extend of this vice, and the injury the health sustained by it, until a still later period.” By the way, authors who write two books on a single topic are generally considered very knowledgeable about it and even have some firsthand experience of what they are talking about. Obviously, one who authors two books on any given topic thinks it is very important--sometimes even salvific.
Thanks Dan for bringing back the focus from Ellen White to the scriptures.
I would just appeal to my friend Guibox, and any others reading this who still want to keep some form of authority for Ellen White, to accept the following challenge:
Just leave your Ellen White books on a shelf for six months. During this time, do a very careful prayerful reading of the scriptures alone starting with the book of John, and then 1 John, and then Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and Colossians. Then see if you really need the Ellen White writings for any better spiritual edification?
Here is a humorous description of a chronic masturbator according to Ellen White’s personal observation: “A Mr. ___ professed to be a devoted follower of Christ. He was in very feeble health. Our feelings of sympathy were called out in his behalf. He could not hold his head steady. His eyes had a glassy appearance, his hands trembled, and when he walked, his knees shook; he staggered like a drunken man, and often seemed ready to fall. He was obliged to fix his eyes upon an object in the distance before him, and then make for that object. He would thus gain force enough to reach the place he desired. His case was shown me in vision. I saw that he was deceived in regard to himself, that he was not in favor with God. He had practiced self-abuse until he was a mere wreck of humanity.” All in all, Ellen White’s conclusion about those who masturbate was that “Such are just as surely self-murderers as though they pointed a pistol to their own breast, and destroyed their life instantly.”
This sounds like about half of the patients I have on my caseload right now. I guess Ellen wasn’t “shown” anything about Parkinson’s or any other possible neurological pathology that may result in ataxia, weakness, tremors, decreased motor control, etc.
You have to feel bad for this poor, disabled guy who found himself in the crosshairs of Ellen’s poison pen, declared responsible for his own condition because he just couldn’t keep his hands where they belonged when in reality it had nothing to do with it. You might be able to blame it for golfer’s elbow or wrist tendinitis but not for what she’s describing with these symptoms.
