An Ellen White Reality Check..., something long overdue... Options

[Green Cochoa]

Now I understand even less. In what way is anything that has to do with Ellen essential to the existence of a Gospel preached and shared for 1800 years before Ellen was born?

Well, to state it plainly, as no one has volunteered an answer to the question about what the "lesser light" or the "greater light" means, Ellen White may be a part of the lesser light, but the Bible is not the greater light. That was the heresy I referred to. The greater light is none other than Christ Himself. The scriptures are the lesser light, and I will freely include, along with most of Adventism, Ellen White's writings in this category as well, however, she is not the sum and total of the "lesser light" but only a part of it.

This, to me, is fundamental to an understanding of the Gospel. It is the very premise put forward in John 5:39, pointing us to eternal life, not through the scriptures, but through Christ of whom they testify.

"Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light. O, how much good would be accomplished if the books containing this light were read with a determination to carry out the principles they contain!" -EGW

"Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." -- John 5:39

To see the parallel between these two statements a little more easily, allow me to shorten them slightly:
"Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light." -EGW
"Search the scriptures; ...and they are they which testify of me." -- John 5:39

And the lesser light is that which leads to the greater light. There can be no greater than Christ Himself.

John, in the Bible, spoke this plainly:
"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." John 1:6-9

And now, Ellen White on the same point:
"The prophet John was the connecting link between the two dispensations. As God's representative he stood forth to show the relation of the law and the prophets to the Christian dispensation. He was the lesser light, which was to be followed by a greater. The mind of John was illuminated by the Holy Spirit, that he might shed light upon his people; but no other light ever has shone or ever will shine so clearly upon fallen man as that which emanated from the teaching and example of Jesus. Christ and His mission had been but dimly understood as typified in the shadowy sacrifices. Even John had not fully comprehended the future, immortal life through the Saviour." {DA 220.2}

And perhaps we need just a little more context to the previously quoted Ellen White statement, as to take it out of its context is to invite a misinterpretation of it.

"The Lord has sent His people much instruction, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, and there a little. Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light. Oh, how much good would be accomplished if the books containing this light were read with a determination to carry out the principles they contain! There would be a thousandfold greater vigilance, a thousandfold more self-denial and resolute effort. And many more would now be rejoicing in the light of present truth." {YRP 232.3}

Which reminds me of Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little..."

Now, where's the Bible-reading smiley?

[Clay]

Greenie (can I call you that?), I like that thought, the bible is not the greater light, Christ himself is..... I am gonna have to borrow that..... thanks for sharing that....

[västergötland]

Well, to state it plainly, as no one has volunteered an answer to the question about what the "lesser light" or the "greater light" means, Ellen White may be a part of the lesser light, but the Bible is not the greater light. That was the heresy I referred to. The greater light is none other than Christ Himself. The scriptures are the lesser light, and I will freely include, along with most of Adventism, Ellen White's writings in this category as well, however, she is not the sum and total of the "lesser light" but only a part of it.

I could see Jesus rather than the bible being the light. But this use of "lesser ligth"? Im undecided as for now.

This, to me, is fundamental to an understanding of the Gospel. It is the very premise put forward in John 5:39, pointing us to eternal life, not through the scriptures, but through Christ of whom they testify.


To see the parallel between these two statements a little more easily, allow me to shorten them slightly:
"Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light." -EGW
"Search the scriptures; ...and they are they which testify of me." -- John 5:39

And the lesser light is that which leads to the greater light. There can be no greater than Christ Himself.

John, in the Bible, spoke this plainly:
"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." John 1:6-9

And now, Ellen White on the same point:
"The prophet John was the connecting link between the two dispensations. As God's representative he stood forth to show the relation of the law and the prophets to the Christian dispensation. He was the lesser light, which was to be followed by a greater. The mind of John was illuminated by the Holy Spirit, that he might shed light upon his people; but no other light ever has shone or ever will shine so clearly upon fallen man as that which emanated from the teaching and example of Jesus. Christ and His mission had been but dimly understood as typified in the shadowy sacrifices. Even John had not fully comprehended the future, immortal life through the Saviour." {DA 220.2}

Jhn 5:33Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth.

Jhn 5:34But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved.

Jhn 5:35He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light.

Jhn 5:36But I have greater witness than [that] of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

The apostle writes that the Baptist was not the ligth, Jesus said he was a burning and shining light and Ellen writes that he was the 'lesser' light. Must be some context missing here somewhere. Did anyone find any context laying around somewhere?

And perhaps we need just a little more context to the previously quoted Ellen White statement, as to take it out of its context is to invite a misinterpretation of it.

"The Lord has sent His people much instruction, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, and there a little. Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light. Oh, how much good would be accomplished if the books containing this light were read with a determination to carry out the principles they contain! There would be a thousandfold greater vigilance, a thousandfold more self-denial and resolute effort. And many more would now be rejoicing in the light of present truth." {YRP 232.3}

Which reminds me of Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little..."

Now, where's the Bible-reading smiley?

Upon looking at the context of Isaiah 28:13 it appears a bit more complicated than that. It starts with Isaiah prophecying Gods judgement upon "the drunkards of Ephraim". They have crowned themselves with pride but God will be the "crown of glory" for His people. Apparently everyone from peasant to priest and prophet is drunk and mocks God and Isaiah by "precept upon precept, line upon line". That which was meant to be a rest for them they see as a burden. So God trough Isaiah tells them (v14 and forward), "~you think you can hide behind self delusion and lies? think again and think right!"

Somewhat loosely paraphrased, may have missed even further context in the neighbouring chapters. (now would be the time to bring out the chainsaw if I am wrong )

[Green Cochoa]

Jesus is THE LIGHT. In the Bible, this light is variously represented as "the greater light" (the sun), "the bright and morning star", the "Sun of righteousness", etc. Revelation describes Him as having eyes as a flame of fire, His countenance "was as the sun shineth in his strength."

All other "lights" are secondary, and we might even think of them as reflections of the True Light. Just as the "greater light" of creation week (the sun) is the source of light, and the "lesser light" (the moon) merely reflects that light, so also have the prophets spoken only as they have received from God. Thus, the scriptures are, and can only be, a lesser light to that of Christ, the source of all light.

And, Clay, no problem! "Greenie" is fine by me.

1 John 1:5 "This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all."

[awesumtenor]

When I said "imply to me", I meant just that. That's how it came across. You cannot refute a personal testimony, which is what that was, though of course it is possible to misunderstand it. Perhaps I misunderstood you. Or perhaps you would like to express it more clearly.

If you are referring to your own perception of what I said, you are inferring, not implying. You can only imply when you are the speaker, not the hearer. As the hearer, you infer... but your inferring does not mean that I have actually implied; more often than not it simply means the hearer has inferred incorrectly, reading something into a statement that the speaker never meant to convey.

Surely you would have come across this concept a time or two in all of your extensive studies of language...

In His service,
Mr. J

[awesumtenor]

Jesus is THE LIGHT. In the Bible, this light is variously represented as "the greater light" (the sun), "the bright and morning star", the "Sun of righteousness", etc. Revelation describes Him as having eyes as a flame of fire, His countenance "was as the sun shineth in his strength."

All other "lights" are secondary, and we might even think of them as reflections of the True Light. Just as the "greater light" of creation week (the sun) is the source of light, and the "lesser light" (the moon) merely reflects that light, so also have the prophets spoken only as they have received from God. Thus, the scriptures are, and can only be, a lesser light to that of Christ, the source of all light.

And, Clay, no problem! "Greenie" is fine by me.

1 John 1:5 "This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all."

The problem with this is that it is not relevant to what EGW is speaking of in the R&H from Jan 20, 1903. In that she is talking about the testimonies versus the bible, to which many have paid little heed thus making the testimonies necessary.

FWIW, I see the analogy thusly... EGW is a flashlight, which can help one find the spotlight which is scripture...which can lead one into the light of the sun of righteousness. If one is in the fullness of the light of the sun, neither the flashlight nor the spotlight make that light any greater.

Jesus is indeed the light... but in the statement at hand, in context she is not talking about Jesus; she is talking about the complementary relationship between her writings and the bible.

In His service,
Mr. J

[watchbird]

Jesus is THE LIGHT. In the Bible, this light is variously represented as "the greater light" (the sun), "the bright and morning star", the "Sun of righteousness", etc. Revelation describes Him as having eyes as a flame of fire, His countenance "was as the sun shineth in his strength."

All other "lights" are secondary, and we might even think of them as reflections of the True Light. Just as the "greater light" of creation week (the sun) is the source of light, and the "lesser light" (the moon) merely reflects that light, so also have the prophets spoken only as they have received from God. Thus, the scriptures are, and can only be, a lesser light to that of Christ, the source of all light.

And, Clay, no problem! "Greenie" is fine by me.

1 John 1:5 "This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all."

And the scriptures are the written record of that Light, and when comparing the writings of scripture with the writings of Ellen White..... which is what the whole context of the passage you have been tearing in pieces was all about..... the writings of scripture are the GREATER witness to and record of that Light.... thus are called the "greater light".... and the writings of Ellen White are the LESSER witness that points to the scriptures as "the greater light" and through them to the same "Greater Light", that of God and His Christ which are the subject of scripture.

If you don't like calling the writings of Ellen White a "lesser light" and don't like calling the scriptures a "greater light".... so be it. That is your privilege. But if the purpose of the discussion is to determine what Ellen herself meant by the use of this symbolic language, then it is only fair to make the determination of what she meant and your judgement of what she meant as two different issues and statements. And it CERTAINLY is not appropriate for you to label those of us who accept her own definition of her use of her symbols as "heretics".

The facts are that symbols, by their very nature, can have multiple meanings and uses.... and that very often they can hold those different meanings all at the same time. That is one reason why symbols are used. They add a richness to the statements that would be lost if those multiple shades of meaning were not present.

I realize there are those who are incapable of understanding and using symbols as anything other than one more set of literal words, so bound to one dictionary meaning that all other shades of meanings... or even other definitions and connotations are considered to be wrong. I accept those who have those limitations. I do not grant them the right to claim that theirs is the only correct way to view the world of communication.

[simplysaved]

Preach on, Preacha!!!!

Well, to state it plainly, as no one has volunteered an answer to the question about what the "lesser light" or the "greater light" means, Ellen White may be a part of the lesser light, but the Bible is not the greater light. That was the heresy I referred to. The greater light is none other than Christ Himself. The scriptures are the lesser light, and I will freely include, along with most of Adventism, Ellen White's writings in this category as well, however, she is not the sum and total of the "lesser light" but only a part of it.

This, to me, is fundamental to an understanding of the Gospel. It is the very premise put forward in John 5:39, pointing us to eternal life, not through the scriptures, but through Christ of whom they testify.
To see the parallel between these two statements a little more easily, allow me to shorten them slightly:
"Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light." -EGW
"Search the scriptures; ...and they are they which testify of me." -- John 5:39

And the lesser light is that which leads to the greater light. There can be no greater than Christ Himself.

John, in the Bible, spoke this plainly:
"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world." John 1:6-9

And now, Ellen White on the same point:
"The prophet John was the connecting link between the two dispensations. As God's representative he stood forth to show the relation of the law and the prophets to the Christian dispensation. He was the lesser light, which was to be followed by a greater. The mind of John was illuminated by the Holy Spirit, that he might shed light upon his people; but no other light ever has shone or ever will shine so clearly upon fallen man as that which emanated from the teaching and example of Jesus. Christ and His mission had been but dimly understood as typified in the shadowy sacrifices. Even John had not fully comprehended the future, immortal life through the Saviour." {DA 220.2}

And perhaps we need just a little more context to the previously quoted Ellen White statement, as to take it out of its context is to invite a misinterpretation of it.

"The Lord has sent His people much instruction, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, and there a little. Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light. Oh, how much good would be accomplished if the books containing this light were read with a determination to carry out the principles they contain! There would be a thousandfold greater vigilance, a thousandfold more self-denial and resolute effort. And many more would now be rejoicing in the light of present truth." {YRP 232.3}

Which reminds me of Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little..."

Now, where's the Bible-reading smiley?

[Green Cochoa]

Surely you would have come across this concept a time or two in all of your extensive studies of language...

Perhaps. Therefore, absolve my faux pas at parrying perceived querulousness, s'il vous plaît, for I be no loquacious backfisch flush with pasigraphy.

[awesumtenor]

Perhaps. Therefore, absolve my faux pas at parrying perceived querulousness, s'il vous plaît, for I be no loquacious backfisch flush with pasigraphy.

Wait a sec... *rummage*... where's that pointy hat I got on victrola fellas day...

In His service,
Mr. J

[Green Cochoa]

If you don't like calling the writings of Ellen White a "lesser light" ...And it CERTAINLY is not appropriate for you to label those of us who accept her own definition of her use of her symbols as "heretics".

Watchbird, are you addressing me? These statements seem out of character to anything I have said. I honestly am shocked you would say this. If you perceived that I called you, or anyone else, a heretic, forgive me, and I did not mean to say, imply, or infer any such thing. ??Did I get those right now?? To say that the Bible is the greater light leaves Christ out of the picture. I called that concept heresy. I never used the word you did. And there's a big difference in my mind.

[Nuggie]

Perhaps. Therefore, absolve my faux pas at parrying perceived querulousness, s'il vous plaît, for I be no loquacious backfisch flush with pasigraphy.

Greenie, you're funny...

[awesumtenor]

To say that the Bible is the greater light leaves Christ out of the picture. I called that concept heresy.

Actually, it only leaves Christ out of the picture if one is speaking of greater vs lesser in absolute, rather than relative terms... and we all know only a Sith deals in absolutes.

The passage refers to the testimonies relative to the bible... and in that relative relationship the bible is indeed the greater light of the 2...

In His service,
Mr. J

[Green Cochoa]

Actually, it only leaves Christ out of the picture if one is speaking of greater vs lesser in absolute, rather than relative terms... and we all know only a Sith deals in absolutes.

The passage refers to the testimonies relative to the bible... and in that relative relationship the bible is indeed the greater light of the 2...

In His service,
Mr. J

To say that the Bible is the greater light, sort of sounds like you've arrived, though, doesn't it?

Nuggie, I like your signature line...nice quote!

[awesumtenor]

To say that the Bible is the greater light, sort of sounds like you've arrived, though, doesn't it?

Only if we're going back to the whole inferred/implied thing... dunno if it's just human nature... but folk seem to have an inherent need to interpret what they read and see something beyond what is on the page...

Problem with that is it tends to miss the fact that sometimes a cigar is *just* a cigar... going back to the flashlight:spotlight:sun analogy... relative to the flashlight, the spotlight is a 'greater' light... relative to the sun, that same light is lesser to the point of insignificance...to view it as either greater or lesser it has to be juxtaposed against something else and comparison made and such comparison can be made accurately and without error as long that the relational basis of the comparison is kept in view... but perhaps that's another topic for another time...

DISCLAIMER: The above was made while standing on my general observation soapbox... while your statement brought it to mind I was not replying specifically to you in saying the above... just felt I needed to throw it out there...

As for arriving... umm... I was already there when you showed up

In His service,
Mr. J