The Dreams & Visions Concerning 3abn, A short letter from Barbara Kerr Options

[justme]

Am I missing something?
Does this belong in a NEW Topic?

1. What is the "R" and what does all this have to do with the "Dreams" or "Visions", or "Nightmares" at 3ABN? Not saying it doesn't belong here, just need help understanding ..

2. Is someone suggestion that there is some "inter-marriage" or "inner- marriage" going on at the compound?

2. According to the story of "The Contributor" are we to understand that "The Contributor" is insisting to the church president that the world church remain "closely-linked" to "the evangelist" or lose those millions of dollars?

3. I guess that the loss of millions of dollars for the world missions would create some questions about the evangelist. maybe it's time ... to stand up and be counted ...

[Clay]

To be honest, I wouldn't consider those examples that you mentioned as "inconsistencies". You said it perfectly yourself, she "fills in the blanks where the Bible is silent". I don't have any problem with this statement, actually I would be very surprised if a true prophet would NOT give some new additonal information that cannot be found in the Bible but doesn't contradict any biblical principles and statements. Everything else would just be a mere repetition of the biblical text and message, and for that we don't need a prophet.
snip.....

you are comfortable with that.... I am not.... in essence her words then become equal to the bible... and in adventism that has happened.... the story of the fall is told from the perspective of egw and not of the bible... that was/is my point....

[Hersheys99]

People who are in a healthy relationship have difficulty in wrapping their minds around the thought that any woman would stay in an abusive home.

BUT for the woman who is in this kind of a home, it is far different. We call it "Battered Wife Syndrome" -- and that doesn't necessarily mean that the woman has been physically battered. But psychologically, her value of herself is lowered. She is not sure of herself and often believes the negative things that her husband has pounded into her over the years. A woman who comes from a well-to-do home has a far harder time of leaving than a woman who lives in a chicken coop.

Think of all that Linda had to lose if she left. -- her husband, her home, the work that she loved and the knowledge that family members (and friends from around the world) may not believe her. That is tough. Probably only women who have gone through such an experience have the slightest idea of what I am talking about.

I have seen women go back time after time, and it makes me so frustrated although I intellectually understand why they do it. Fortunately for Linda, there was no coming back.

EXACTLY until you have been in that type of relationship you have no clue how hard it is to finally leave. I was in one in my first marriage which lasted for 11 years---10 TOO LONG! I left at least 3 times I can remember before finally making it a final break & it took someone else to give me the courage that I could do it. The sad thing is that if you don't get counseling which I didn't you have a tendency to get back into that same kind of relationship maybe not as bad as the one before or in the same areas but it happens. It really stinks too & then you start it all over again. Maybe it will go longer & you think you have found the "right" one this time but unless you get HELP the cycle starts all over again.

[meadbd]

you are comfortable with that.... I am not.... in essence her words then become equal to the bible... and in adventism that has happened.... the story of the fall is told from the perspective of egw and not of the bible... that was/is my point....

=======================================================
For the Christian the Bible is the final (or only) authority! But for many Adventists, this is clearly NOT the case.

Bill

[PrincessDrRe]

That's as creative as some of the stories Dan puts out!
I've not run across that one by the Ellen I've read. Perhaps you can supply the source?

(All I've read is that pepper and other strong spices inflame the delicate linings of the stomach and desensitize the taste buds so that one is unable to appreciate more delicate flavors -- the latter not difficult to verify by casual observation.)

I will search. I may be wrong - (and can admit if I am wrong) but I will search for my source....

BTW: Inga - That statement about "pepper" that you made is actually wrong. The stomach contains ACID. How would something that actually "breaks down pepper" - not "inflame the delicate linings of the stomach"...more than the ACID that/which sits there continually? Mind you ACID (when thrown up-[Bulimics]) burns the esophagus and rots the teeth - however pepper doesn't burn the esophagus and rot the teeth when eaten & swallowed w/ food.

I'm sure you can see where (by deduction) this makes no sense.

Dear Princess
In these three "inconsistencies" that you mentioned, I cannot see any real inconsistency with the Bible, all three don't have anything to do with the Bible, only with your own personal perception, preference and prejudice.

The "inconsistency" that I spoke of pertaining to "spirituality and diet" is in direct conflict with the Bible. Of course many don't want to see it or discuss it (as two previous threads have shown) - and this statement is also in direct conflict w/ the life that JESUS himself led.

As for the consistency w/ "amalgamation" - Denny broke that down below.....

"Her second "amalgamation of man and [of] beast" statement (there are only two), about "amalgamation" taking place after the flood until today, refers most probably and even more clearly in a similar sense to the "amalgamation" through marriages between persons of different human races (which, by the way, is not considered a sin in that second statement, contrary to the first one where it refered to marriages between believers and unbelievers resulting in apostasy and sin), and "amalgamation" among different species of animals."

There are no 'different human races'. Such thinking keeps the R word alive and happy

I was going to say it - but you beat me to it....

Am I missing something?
Does this belong in a NEW Topic?

1. What is the "R" and what does all this have to do with the "Dreams" or "Visions", or "Nightmares" at 3ABN? Not saying it doesn't belong here, just need help understanding ..

2. Is someone suggestion that there is some "inter-marriage" or "inner- marriage" going on at the compound?

2. According to the story of "The Contributor" are we to understand that "The Contributor" is insisting to the church president that the world church remain "closely-linked" to "the evangelist" or lose those millions of dollars?

3. I guess that the loss of millions of dollars for the world missions would create some questions about the evangelist. maybe it's time ... to stand up and be counted ...

Actually you are right JustMe - the topic kinda went off when folks started discussing the dream/vision and how EGW had dreams and the conflict between EGW and thus it has went a bit off....

New topic? Yeah - I agree...but it has been discussed I believe....
As for the what the "R" is - it's stands for "Racist"/"Racism"

Sorry - we are a bit - but all that aside.... there are "inconsistencies" within EGW's writings with the BIBLE and even with HERSELF.

Okay....
Lurking again....



This post has been edited by PrincessDrRe: Aug 22 2006, 11:04 AM

[msraccoon]

Yes 'justme' and 'PrincessDrRe'. This thread has gotten so off topic(s) from the original letter from Barbara Kerr. I noticed this awhile back. I was hoping to hear more discussion on her comments. I am still contemplating a reply to it.

I was elated at Barbara's first letter, now pinned, about Linda. However this one has given me pause and I have now have mixed feelings about Barbara's credibility.

Can we get back to topic?

msraccoon

[inga]

Thanks, Saharafan, for this excellent explanation.

And, Clay, I have no problem with accepting a prophet as having the same kind of inspiration as those prophets who went before as well as the same authority -- after the prophet has been tested and proven to be a genuine prophet who speaks in harmony with all God revealed before. That, of course, would put Ellen White in a similar categor as the Bible and it would also mean that we would study the Bible more than her writings, because that's what she counseled us to do. Ellen clearly instructed that we were not to use her writings as "authority," and she continually points her hearers and readers back to the Scriptures.

Of course, if you believe that the gift of prophecy stopped when the biblical canon was complete, you cannot accept Ellen White as a prophet and therefore cannot accept her authority.

By the way, I agree that her writings have been abused/misused. However, that is not her fault, but the fault of those who love to use her writings for their own purposes -- usually of "correcting" others, a practice she specifically condemned.

I have found that her writings have helped me appreciate the Bible more, and they have given me a clearer picture of Jesus and thus made it easier for me to develop a relationship with Him. I have had the experience of lending out such books as Steps to Christ and Desire of Ages to those not of our faith and have them conclude that "that woman must have been inspired."

I find it sad when some of our own people miss the blessings God intended us to have by giving us very personal and specific counsel through His gift of prophecy in the person of Ellen White. But it really mystifies me when those who will not accept Ellen as a true prophet of God are quite willing to accept visions and dreams currently related by various individuals as revelations from God. How does that compute?

Most of this topic is relevant to the original post because it deals with genuine vs. counterfeit revelations from God.

Dear Princess
In these three "inconsistencies" that you mentioned, I cannot see any real inconsistency with the Bible, all three don't have anything to do with the Bible, only with your own personal perception, preference and prejudice.

1) Concerning the "Amalgamation" issue: Please read the statements on the following website:
http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/faq-unus...sual-section-c1
or even better explained and more in dept: http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/amalg.html
In short: It has nothing to do with amalgamation between man and beast, but "amalgamation of man and [of] beast". Before the flood, the "amalgamation of man" that she most probably refers to was the mingling in unholy marriages of the "sons of God" with the "daughters of man" (Genesis 6:1-2), the intermarriages of the children of Seth with those of Cain. This is the most probable and reasonable explanation of her first statement.
Her second "amalgamation of man and [of] beast" statement (there are only two), about "amalgamation" taking place after the flood until today, refers most probably and even more clearly in a similar sense to the "amalgamation" through marriages between persons of different human races (which, by the way, is not considered a sin in that second statement, contrary to the first one where it refered to marriages between believers and unbelievers resulting in apostasy and sin), and "amalgamation" among different species of animals.

Certainly, it is also possible to understand these two references in a different, much more problematic way, but the same principles that we use for interpreting the Scripture should also be used when interpreting other extra-canonical inspired writings like those of Ellen White. We need to interprete "problematic" passages, wether in the Bible or in Ellen White's writings, in the light of, and in harmony with, other related passages on the same basic subject that are clear and more easily understood, and also with logical reasoning where applicable.
Otherwise, you could find similar difficult statements in the Bible, a famous one for example, related to those amalgamation statements from sister White, the reference to the "sons of God" marrying the "daughters of men"; many evangelicals still believe this is about angels marrying human women. Or take Jesus' statement to the thief on the cross in Luke 23:43, "Today you will be with me in paradise"; Paul's difficult statements concerning the law and the Sabbath in Galatians 3:24-25; Colossians 2:14-16 etc. All these texts have several ways how they can be interpreted and understood, and it depends on our hermeneutic principles AND on our willingness to approach the text neutraly but with the desire to harmonize seeming contradictions with other clear passages on the same subject, if this is possible without twisting and squeezing the text. Our approach to the writings of Ellen White should be the same.

By the way, if that picture you use in this forum is an accurate picture of yourself, maybe your problem is perhaps that you yourself are a product of an "amalgamation of man and beast"?

2) and 3) I would need to know the exact reference to those statements you indicated that bother you so much. It would be difficult for me to deal with them without being able to read what she actually said, within its context. Also, I am not a medical doctor or nutritionist, who could certainly iluminate us on those statements, especially concerning the "pepper".
However, I think that your real problem simply is that you just love to eat pepper and meat (as Ellen White herself did by the way, an it was really difficult for her to give it up after she had received the health reform vision!). But I can comfort you, you are not alone; all throughout history many people were upset when prophets of God called upon them to give up certain things or sins they loved and to undergo reformation... Many prophets even died an early death because of that.

[justme]

Yes 'justme' and 'PrincessDrRe'. This thread has gotten so off topic(s) from the original letter from Barbara Kerr. I noticed this awhile back. I was hoping to hear more discussion on her comments. I am still contemplating a reply to it.

I was elated at Barbara's first letter, now pinned, about Linda. However this one has given me pause and I have now have mixed feelings about Barbara's credibility.

Can we get back to topic?

msraccoon

Thanks, "PrincessDrRe" and "msracoon",

The second "Barbara" letter. Here is an example of how we selectively[i][u] believe. The first letter "Pinned" by Barbara bears witness to much of what is already known about the compound and it's inhabitants.
The second letter was related to her by another individual. That makes it "second hand". The first, "Pinned", letter is a first-hand experience. When we hear something that may please us we tend easily to acceptit even if the content is sad. If we hear something of "what???" was that about? we tend to raise an eyebrow. It is as we should do.

Barbara's credibility should not be questioned for passing along the "DREAM/VISION? letter any more than the rest of the "posters"'s credibility.
We trust first hand reports more than second had and we think nothing of it. We question the validity of the "DreamVision", not that it was passed along. It really does fit into this issue of what is going on at 3ABN and what the future may hold.
Has anyone else had a dream of what might become of Danny or 3ABN? or was it more of a nightmare?

[västergötland]

BTW: Inga - That statement about "pepper" that you made is actually wrong. The stomach contains ACID. How would something that actually "breaks down pepper" - not "inflame the delicate linings of the stomach"...more than the ACID that/which sits there continually? Mind you ACID (when thrown up-[Bulimics]) burns the esophagus and rots the teeth - however pepper doesn't burn the esophagus and rot the teeth when eaten & swallowed w/ food.

I'm sure you can see where (by deduction) this makes no sense.

The stomach dealing with acid while not dealing with other some other substances is comparable with a fur coat being great to wear when in a snowfall but quite useless if fighting a fire in a house.

[beartrap]

Yes 'justme' and 'PrincessDrRe'. This thread has gotten so off topic(s) from the original letter from Barbara Kerr. I noticed this awhile back. I was hoping to hear more discussion on her comments. I am still contemplating a reply to it.

I was elated at Barbara's first letter, now pinned, about Linda. However this one has given me pause and I have now have mixed feelings about Barbara's credibility.

Can we get back to topic?

msraccoon

Whether it is something just being passed along, or whether it reflects her theological beliefs, Barbara's "Dreams & Visions Concerning 3ABN" post has nothing to do with her credibility as a witness. What happened, happened, she witnessed it, and thats all there is to it.

[Clay]

Thanks, Saharafan, for this excellent explanation.

And, Clay, I have no problem with accepting a prophet as having the same kind of inspiration as those prophets who went before as well as the same authority -- after the prophet has been tested and proven to be a genuine prophet who speaks in harmony with all God revealed before. That, of course, would put Ellen White in a similar categor as the Bible and it would also mean that we would study the Bible more than her writings, because that's what she counseled us to do. Ellen clearly instructed that we were not to use her writings as "authority," and she continually points her hearers and readers back to the Scriptures.

Of course, if you believe that the gift of prophecy stopped when the biblical canon was complete, you cannot accept Ellen White as a prophet and therefore cannot accept her authority.

By the way, I agree that her writings have been abused/misused. However, that is not her fault, but the fault of those who love to use her writings for their own purposes -- usually of "correcting" others, a practice she specifically condemned.

I have found that her writings have helped me appreciate the Bible more, and they have given me a clearer picture of Jesus and thus made it easier for me to develop a relationship with Him. I have had the experience of lending out such books as Steps to Christ and Desire of Ages to those not of our faith and have them conclude that "that woman must have been inspired."

I find it sad when some of our own people miss the blessings God intended us to have by giving us very personal and specific counsel through His gift of prophecy in the person of Ellen White. But it really mystifies me when those who will not accept Ellen as a true prophet of God are quite willing to accept visions and dreams currently related by various individuals as revelations from God. How does that compute?

Most of this topic is relevant to the original post because it deals with genuine vs. counterfeit revelations from God.

there is one authority, that would be God... not the bible, not egw, not the church...

[saharafan]

Whether it is something just being passed along, or whether it reflects her theological beliefs, Barbara's "Dreams & Visions Concerning 3ABN" post has nothing to do with her credibility as a witness. What happened, happened, she witnessed it, and thats all there is to it.

What was expressed by beartrap and others is definitely true; we need to make a difference between her witnessing her own personal factual experiences with 3ABN in her pinned letter and her reporting the dreams of her friend. Her "credibility" certainly is not at all touched by her statements about those dreams. I want to add that I really appreciate that she wrote that letter and was even willing to identify and expose herself by doing so. That propably took a lot of courage, and this should be recognized. I also am thankful for her reporting that dream although I personally don't agree with her interpretation of it.

[PrincessDrRe]

The stomach dealing with acid while not dealing with other some other substances is comparable with a fur coat being great to wear when in a snowfall but quite useless if fighting a fire in a house.

I don't think you're seeing what I'm saying...... I get what you're saying...but I've been told - this is

[inga]

there is one authority, that would be God... not the bible, not egw, not the church...

How do you recognize that it is God speaking?

I know that the work of the Holy Spirit has been mentioned, but the question remains: How do you know of the Holy Spirit?

Is all "spirituality" (i.e. Hinduism, Vodooism, Scientology, Mormonism, Islam, Shintoism, etc.) a way of experiencing/hearing God?

Does the Holy Spirit ever contradict what has been revealed and recorded in the Scriptures?

[inga]

BTW: Inga - That statement about "pepper" that you made is actually wrong. The stomach contains ACID. How would something that actually "breaks down pepper" - not "inflame the delicate linings of the stomach"...more than the ACID that/which sits there continually?

H'mm, DrRe, are you also working on a PhD in Physiology that you write with such authority on the subject? (I.e. why should I believe you rather than Ellen White?)

This post has been edited by inga: Aug 23 2006, 12:47 AM