Anyway, one thing that continues to eat at me regarding Christianity as a whole is, basically, what are we still doing here, as in, on earth? John 14 of course talks about Jesus’ needing to go away (1) to prepare a place for us and (2) so that the Holy Spirit would come to us and lead us into all truth. 1 Corinthians 15 suggests that the “delay” if I may call it that in His return is related to the “putting all His enemies underneath his footstool”. I’m not sure exactly what this means, whether it alludes to a “great controversy” type spiritual or actual warfare going on between the forces of light and the forces of darkness, or whether it refers to something else.
Sometimes the problem is not the lack of answer, but that we’re asking the wrong question. C.S. Lewis summed up this problem saying that often some of our questions to God must sound to Him like this: “Is ‘yellow’ square or round?”
The “why are we still here” question is one that Adventists have been asking since 1843, but that most Christians (I think) are not worried about. Have you noticed this? Have you noticed that it is kind of an ‘Adventist’ question? Think about that.
I suggest that there is a reason for that, mainly which springs from two sources: 1) It comes from the date-setting which began Adventism, and 2) it comes from a works-oriented understanding of God’s plans. Respectively, these represent two deeper problems: 1) Rebellion against submission to God’s sovereignty, and 2) belief in a human-centered sovereignty.
For a moment, enter into the feelings that our spiritual forefathers had back in 1843 and 1844 after Jesus did not return according to Miller’s predictions. How would they have felt?
“Why didn’t He come?”
“We had the dates right...”
“Why are we still here?”
In the years following the disappointment, the early Adventists lived in continual expectation that Christ would return in their days—in so much expectation that they often believed that “probation” had been closed for the world and that the “investigative judgment” was almost finished. When they adopted new beliefs, such as “Sabbath” and “soul sleep”, these were seen as the missing pieces (so to speak). Particularly Sabbath. It was, they believed, what they had been missing and thus the reason that Christ could not have returned back in 1843/44.
Ever since then, succeeding generations of Adventists have subconsciously felt like if we accumulate all the truth, then Christ will come. “Christ’s righteousness—okay, got it. So now we have it complete, right? Now we can preach it and He’ll come soon.” This has been the feeling and continues to be the motivation of many more conservative Adventists (especially the 1888 enthusiasts).
It started when Miller and his followers rejected God’s sovereignty. I know that sounds strong, but basically God said “Don’t do this, don’t try and figure out the date.” But they did it anyway. They rejected what was clearly written in Scripture for a chain-link of “proofs” that Scripture did not advocate. Essentially this amounts to saying, “Well, God, I know You didn’t mean that when You said it.”
This led to looking for what was missing—what we didn’t have, which must have been the reason that He didn’t come. This is basically “works"-oriented. It believes that God will come if we have all the right stuff. If we know all the right stuff. Even if we preach all the right stuff. It is human-centered, not God-centered. It makes us the controllers of when Jesus comes.
Righteousness-by-works operates in the same way—it believes that if we fulfill the correct works (usually of the Law), then God must save us. In the same way, the idea that puts us at the center of the timing of His coming suggests that if we get all the right truths (etc.), then He must come.
Scripture, however, calls us to submit to God’s sovereign timing. He knows when is best, and He has it planned. He has said that we do not know, and not to worry ourselves figuring it out. It means we need to say, “Okay God, Your timing, not mine. I will submit to what You know is best—not what I can see, not what I think, but what You think.”
Ever since rejecting that, successive generations of Adventists have been living in a kind of prophetic expectation (not a Holy Spirit-inspired prophetic expectation)—that since we are the remnant, we have more of the truth, etc., and if we just get what was missing, then ... then...! Then He will come. In short, we’ve felt like it depended on us. We didn’t know that He refused to tell us the date for our benefit, and that we will find His peace and rest when we trust in His decision on the matter, resting in His sovereignty. Having ourselves at the center has been too much of a burden for us, don’t you think? It is a burden which Jesus came to set us free from, a burden which He desires to give Adventists rest from.
Beyond this, I would suggest that God “tarries” for the end because He loves us all so much. It’s wound up in that intercessory cry of the book of Revelation—the Spirit and the bride say ‘Come!’ to him who is thirsty.
I somewhat disagree with your reasoning here, Ramone.
I believe that this question is asked by many more than just Adventists and even in Paul’s time it was asked. I believe Paul’s words were prophetic for all those down the ages of all faiths.
I think your view might be applicable to 19th century Adventism for the great disappointment was still fresh in their minds. However, I think apathy towards it is more prevelant today. Adventists have accepted the fact that ‘no man knows the hour or day’. We get excited about the eschatological signs( or what we view as them)that signal the nearness of it, but I don’t believe we think ‘oh, if we can just have all the truth, He will come!’
That is a shallow view of looking for the second coming, in my opinion.
I think what I originally had in my mind were a couple of different ideas.
The first relates to the fact that the Bible itself, and the New Testament writers in particular, encourage our expectations, our hope, for this event. So I think it’s natural to wonder about the delay.
A second related issue is what did Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, and ascension accomplish in changing the order of things here on earth? That it gave people a hope, an assurance, a peace with God, they hadn’t had previously? That God intervened in history, became one of us? I think this is all true. But sin continues. If sin is to be done away with, a new creation, a new order of things instituted, than that would seem to require the second coming. What would explain, or help to explain, the reason for two advents?
(I want to add that I am not suggesting here any support for the traditional SDA teaching that the delay is all about the need to reach the end of the 2300 day/year prophesy--I think Des Ford, among others, adequately make the case that the Bible itself stresses the soonness of Jesus’ return, thus not requiring a two thousand year interim between advents. I do think that the idea of a great controversy, however one views it, offers at least a partial explanation, but I am not necessarily interested in defending that idea either. My questions here are really offered irregardless of any SDA teaching on the matter.)
John 3:16
When I think of Jesus coming I think of 2 Peter 3:8,9 where it reads “But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”
In other words, for me, I do not understands God’s timing.
He will come when He sees fit to come.
Diana
How about quoting some Scripture instead of your extra-biblical authority?
Greg
It was in answer to what Ellen White teaches. See below ... by Glennspring #2 post
I want to add that I am not suggesting here any support for the traditional SDA teaching that the delay is all about the need to reach the end of the 2300 day/year prophesy
SDA teaching as evidenced by Ellen White at least ... says that there is no haste and no DELAY.
Hope that’s OK Greg. Let me know though if it is not.
How about quoting some Scripture instead of your extra-biblical authority?
Greg
My goodness Greg, I am surprised/shocked to read your comment as it strikes me as condescending and judgmental. You say you want to reach out to adventists but your spirit of contention shows. You imply that EGW belongs to GH. Isn’t this is a subject that we can all agree on? Surely those that love their Savior will long for His appearing. I have seen you posting extensive quotes from authors that you respect and I didn’t see anyone ridiculing you.
GH, I was impressed by your response.
I think FlyingLady has the traditional adventist view in 2 Peter 3:8,9 which, as GH points out is consistent with EGW’s comment on the subject.
For me, the point is not that He appears to delay, but to watch and be ready. Matt 24:44, “Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect”. And Mark 13:37, “what I say to you, I say to all: Watch!”.
Is not true that Spirit of Prophecy, aka EGW, belongs only to Adventists? And is not the SDA Church the Remnant Church especially because the Adventists have a prophet and the rest of us, second class Christians who are not prepared for the Second Coming in spite of our faith in Jesus’ blood, don’t have this special blessing and the illumination which comes from EGW in our organized churches? Rhetorical questions…
My goodness Greg, I am surprised/shocked to read your comment as it strikes me as condescending and judgmental. You say you want to reach out to adventists but your spirit of contention shows.
Anyone who makes truth claims is open to the criticism of sounding judgmental. Ellen White sure sounded judgmental when she wrote about the “apostate Protestants” who attended church on the wrong day. The apostle Paul surely sounded judgmental when he told the Galatians, “You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.” (Galatians 5:4 ESV) Jesus was absolutely judgmental when he compared the Pharisees to a “brood of vipers” (Matthew 12:34).
The easiest thing in the world is to level the criticism that someone sounds judgmental, but in itself, this is a judgmental statement!
Bill - 06 April 2008 01:47 PM
You imply that EGW belongs to GH. Isn’t this is a subject that we can all agree on? Surely those that love their Savior will long for His appearing. I have seen you posting extensive quotes from authors that you respect and I didn’t see anyone ridiculing you.
I’d like to hear you answer Gabriel’s rhetorical questions above, because they refute your point.
Furthermore, the authors I’ve quoted elsewhere did not claim to be “more than a prophet” as Ellen White did. The Adventist church singularly holds up Ellen White as evidence for being God’s remnant church. When high claims like this are made, a high level of discernment is required. If our exercise of Christian discernment here comes across as “ridicule”, consider that your reaction may be due to your belief that Ellen White is a prophet. For example, I’m fairly certain you wouldn’t shy away from pointing out the errors of Joseph Smith to a Mormon. If you did this effectively, surely you would be labeled as “judgmental” by the Mormon and he would easily dismiss your words as “ridicule”.
The only reason I spend any time discussing these things is not to win an argument, but out of concern for my Adventist friends. If my concern doesn’t always come through in what I write, I take full responsibility, however I know that much of what is labeled “judgmental” is simply a visceral reaction to arguments opposed to ideas we desperately want to believe.
Bill - 06 April 2008 01:47 PM
GH, I was impressed by your response.
Glorify Him quoted yet another Ellen White quote to assert there is “no delay” when it comes to the return of Jesus, yet he neglected to mention the 1844-year delay where Jesus, according to Ellen White, was unable to enter the Most Holy Place to begin the investigative judgment.
EGW belongs to anyone who wants to read her. Members of the SDA church have been blessed with her writings for the most part. EGW writings do not belong to GH as Greg implied.
I was impressed by GH’s response to Greg’s ridicule, although his original post also impressed me.
OK Greg, I’ll take the bait. Show me EGW’s quote where she says I am “more than a prophet”.
There was nothing productive or truthful in saying how about quoting the Bible instead of your extra biblical authority. That is a statement of preference for you and as far as I know this website is not banned from quoting EGW. Therefore, your statement was unnecessary and judgmental.
You say that you take full responsibility if your concern doesn’t come through in what you write, and I believe you, just in this case your concern did not appear to be for GH and you offended me if not GH.
Show me EGW’s quote where she says I am “more than a prophet”.
Thank you Bill for challenging the myths that are so abundant here. Ellen White never called herself a prophet ... so this one may prove difficult for Greg to come up with.The truth is she described her writings as a lesser light pointing to the greater light..
I have tried on occasion to address all the mis-characterizations of the church here on this forum .... but there are so many ... and then they want to quote unofficial sources as proof. There is one proof of our beliefs .... and that is the 28 fundamentals. Any other source is just mere opinion. But, I do appreciate your assistance in pointing out the myths and misquotes.
Then Bill ... what they do is claim that I must not be a ‘real’ SDA because I do not go along with the beliefs that they have created for the SDA church. So, I welcome your help.
OK Greg, I’ll take the bait. Show me EGW’s quote where she says I am “more than a prophet”.
“My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend.” -Letter 244, 1906. (Addressed to elders of Battle Creek church.) {1SM 36.2}
“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 which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.” (From SDA Fundamental Belief Statement #18).
Glorify Him - 07 April 2008 06:43 AM
Thank you Bill for challenging the myths that are so abundant here. Ellen White never called herself a prophet ... so this one may prove difficult for Greg to come up with.The truth is she described her writings as a lesser light pointing to the greater light..
I have tried on occasion to address all the mis-characterizations of the church here on this forum .... but there are so many ... and then they want to quote unofficial sources as proof. There is one proof of our beliefs .... and that is the 28 fundamentals. Any other source is just mere opinion. But, I do appreciate your assistance in pointing out the myths and misquotes.
The only myths I see here are from Adventists who boldly deny the words of Ellen White and their own fundamental belief statements.
Show me EGW’s quote where she says I am “more than a prophet”.
Thank you Bill for challenging the myths that are so abundant here. Ellen White never called herself a prophet ... so this one may prove difficult for Greg to come up with.The truth is she described her writings as a lesser light pointing to the greater light..
it seems that your professors at Andrews quote selectively from Ellen White, being able in this way to present a “clean” image of Ellen White, otherwise you’re knowingly promoting something which is not true, at best, partially true, and a half truth is very good in sustaining a lie.
Yes, Ellen White affirmed that in spite of the fact that other people called her a prophet, she never made that claim. What is interesting is WHY she did not claimed to a be a prophet, the motivation and reason.
She would rather use the title “God’s messenger” because of two reasons.
1.The title “prophet” was in her day associated with people who give a bad name to this title, which in Ellen’s view was compromised, so she had not wanted to be associated with the name. This leaves open the door to the possibility of using the title in better circumstances.
2. Her work, according to her explicit statements “includes much more than the word “prophet” signifies”. Not only she was a prophet, she was more than a prophet.
Early in my youth I was asked several times, Are you a prophet? I have ever responded, I am the Lord’s messenger. I know that many have called me a prophet, but I have made no claim to this title. My Saviour declared me to be his messenger. “Your work,” he instructed me, “is to bear my word. Strange things will arise, and in your youth I set you apart to bear the message to the erring ones, to carry the word before unbelievers, and with pen and voice to reprove from the Word actions that are not right. Exhort from the Word. I will make my Word open to you. It shall not be as a strange language. In the true eloquence of simplicity, with voice and pen, the messages that I give shall be heard from one who has never learned in the schools. My Spirit and my power shall be with you. {RH, July 26, 1906 par. 5}
“Be not afraid of man, for my shield shall protect you. It is not you that speaketh: it is the Lord that giveth the messages of warning and reproof. Never deviate from the truth under any circumstances. Give the light I shall give you. The messages for these last days shall be written in books, and shall stand immortalized, to testify against those who have once rejoiced in the light, but who have been led to give it up because of the seductive influences of evil.” {RH, July 26, 1906 par. 6}
Why have I not claimed to be a prophet?--Because in these days many who boldly claim that they are prophets are a reproach to the cause of Christ; and because my work includes much more than the word “prophet” signifies. {RH, July 26, 1906 par. 7}
That’s a sure sign of false humility, apparently not claiming to be a prophet, but at the same time claiming to do “much more”, not “a little more” than a prophet.
I am now instructed that I am not to be hindered in my work by those who engage in suppositions regarding its nature, whose minds are struggling with so many intricate problems connected with the supposed work of a prophet. My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend.--Letter 244, 1906. (Addressed to elders of Battle Creek church.) {1SM 36.2}
the following quote shows that Ellen White claimed to have a unique position, a privilege that was bestowed on her alone, no other member of the SDA Church having the right to do what she was doing, because God communicated in vision with her through an angel. That is a claim that she was above others, she had the right to criticize people but they had not the right to criticize her work.
Some are ready to inquire: Who told Sister White these things? They have even put the question to me: Did anyone tell you these things? I could answer them: Yes; yes, the angel of God has spoken to me. But what they mean is: Have the brethren and sisters been exposing their faults? For the future, I shall not belittle the testimonies that God has given me, to make explanations to try to satisfy such narrow minds, but shall treat all such questions as an insult to the Spirit of God. God has seen fit to thrust me into positions in which He has not placed any other one in our ranks. He has laid upon me burdens of reproof that He has not given to any other one.{3T 314.2}
She placed herself above the evaluation of her work by mundane people, their questions being from the star considered “an insult to the Spirit of God”, not some questions, all, without discrimination: “But shall treat all such questions as an insult”. Those who dared to ask questions as “Who told Sister White these things?” are “narrow mind”, and Ellen White refused to give an explanation, because she thought that she “would belittle the testimonies that God has given me” by explaining them.
My professor from SDA Seminary who taught me Church history told us that people become aware of how strong are their traditions only when they will try to swim against the current. The same is true with Ellen White. Her abuse of authority, her claims of being above the others, and her refusal of being accountable to them, at the same time trying to cover her behavior with pious language, all these become apparent when people tried to go against the current, against what she wanted at that moment.
The 1888 episode is a good example of the fact that she had not been willing to submit even to her own writings. Being decided to support Jones and Waggoner, she started a character assassination of those who dared to oppose the message she wanted to endorse at the moment. Interesting is that the opposition had her writings on its side, and they thought that they stood with her at that moment. They saw the contradiction between what she endorsed at the 1888 Conference and her previous position. She either was wrong when she wrote that the law in Galatians was not the moral law but the ceremonial law, or at the 1888 Conference when she endorsed the position of Jones and Waggoner who argued that the law in Galatians was especially the moral law. Logically only this two options were available, but instead of recognizing her previous position as wrong, she started a vicious attack, employing character assassination of the opposing leaders. In this way she was able to put the blame entirely on those leaders she wanted to subdue to her authority, masking the problem raised by her writings, under the guise of Sola Scriptura, Bible alone, principle.
In the end she won, because she was able to silence the opposition in the entire church. This showed her real power, which she also exercised mercilessly in the case of Albion Ballenger. She did not permit her authority to be questioned.
I’m still waiting for you to show me where Ellen White said I am “more than a prophet”. When you say someone said something and put it in quotes, I expect that you will come up with what was in the quotes, if asked. Is that unfair? Why don’t you just quote what EGW did say concerning herself, (you were right there in 1SM36) and we can move on.
Greg, who inspires your messages? Is what you write from you or do you believe that the Holy Spirit is guiding you? Do you believe the HS guides people to write a lie or to misrepresent the truth? Are you upset that I want you to be held accountable? I see enough of this kind of avoidance and misrepresentation from evolutionists but did not expect to see it in someone who professes to love a humble and lowly Jesus.
Why are you unwilling to take responsibility for the rude comment you made to GH that offended me? You say you are willing to take responsibility, but your action bears the truth. What am I to think? I want to believe that in your heart you want to lift up Jesus and encourage the saints… I am reasonable, understanding and gracious if it was a mistake and not your intent. I do not want to offend you but I would like a response. If silence is going to be your response, then I’ll accept that as where you are at and leave you alone in this regard.
I’m still waiting for you to show me where Ellen White said I am “more than a prophet”. When you say someone said something and put it in quotes, I expect that you will come up with what was in the quotes, if asked. Is that unfair? Why don’t you just quote what EGW did say concerning herself, (you were right there in 1SM36) and we can move on.
You’ve been shown, but you don’t want to see.
Bill - 07 April 2008 09:50 AM
Greg, who inspires your messages? Is what you write from you or do you believe that the Holy Spirit is guiding you? Do you believe the HS guides people to write a lie or to misrepresent the truth? Are you upset that I want you to be held accountable? I see enough of this kind of avoidance and misrepresentation from evolutionists but did not expect to see it in someone who professes to love a humble and lowly Jesus.
I have not claimed to be a prophet, God’s messenger or “more than a prophet” as Ellen White claimed. I don’t have the backing of a church that claims remnant status for itself based on any claim I’ve made. Bill, you are making a false comparison when you try to compare me to Ellen White. I’m not upset at anything you have said. So far your attempts at holding me accountable have only served to reinforce the problems many of us have seen in Adventism. Ellen White is beyond criticism, and whoever dares to examine her claims is seen as the enemy.
Bill - 07 April 2008 09:50 AM
Why are you unwilling to take responsibility for the rude comment you made to GH that offended me? You say you are willing to take responsibility, but your action bears the truth. What am I to think?
I don’t think the comment is rude, because according to the official Adventist beliefs, Ellen White is specifically identified as a “continuing and authoritative source of truth”. Glorify Him, an Adventist, has quoted Ellen White on numerous occasions here, so it is not rude to ask him to quote Scripture. It is certainly not rude to consider Ellen White an “extra-biblical authority” for any Adventist, since she is identified as authoritative in the SDA fundamental belief statement. Per Glorify Him’s own criteria, this is the “official” Adventist belief.
Bill - 07 April 2008 09:50 AM
I want to believe that in your heart you want to lift up Jesus and encourage the saints… I am reasonable, understanding and gracious if it was a mistake and not your intent. I do not want to offend you but I would like a response. If silence is going to be your response, then I’ll accept that as where you are at and leave you alone in this regard.
