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

[PrincessDrRe]

And do you have a list of things that are "against" the Bible which Ellen White says?

I only need the one for now.....

EG White's "judgement" on people that eat meat having a "lesser spirituality" and "animalistic tendencies" and "passions" that are caused strictly by the eating of meat.

Since no where in the Bible does it say that someone eating meat is a "lower" CHRISTian I believe this is contradictory. (Also note that JESUS ate meat. So when EG White spoke this statement - she was also speaking about my LORD & SAVIOR JESUS).

...but nobody (except for one ) will address this.....

[awesumtenor]

I only need the one for now.....

EG White's "judgement" on people that eat meat having a "lesser spirituality" and "animalistic tendencies" and "passions" that are caused strictly by the eating of meat.

Since no where in the Bible does it say that someone eating meat is a "lower" CHRISTian I believe this is contradictory. (Also note that JESUS ate meat. So when EG White spoke this statement - she was also speaking about my LORD & SAVIOR JESUS).

...but nobody (except for one ) will address this.....

And she also perpetuates the lie that Mary Magdalene was a woman of ill-repute... not to mention commingling the woman of Nain in Luke 7, Mary Magdalene and Mary the sister of Martha and Lazarus as if they were one in the same person.... when it is clear in scripture that they are not...

In His service,
Mr. J

[alramwill]

I only need the one for now.....

EG White's "judgement" on people that eat meat having a "lesser spirituality" and "animalistic tendencies" and "passions" that are caused strictly by the eating of meat.

Since no where in the Bible does it say that someone eating meat is a "lower" CHRISTian I believe this is contradictory. (Also note that JESUS ate meat. So when EG White spoke this statement - she was also speaking about my LORD & SAVIOR JESUS).

...but nobody (except for one ) will address this.....

Good response....I was thinking the same thing.

[Green Cochoa]

I only need the one for now.....

EG White's "judgement" on people that eat meat having a "lesser spirituality" and "animalistic tendencies" and "passions" that are caused strictly by the eating of meat.

Since no where in the Bible does it say that someone eating meat is a "lower" CHRISTian I believe this is contradictory. (Also note that JESUS ate meat. So when EG White spoke this statement - she was also speaking about my LORD & SAVIOR JESUS).

...but nobody (except for one ) will address this.....

Perhaps it will ease your mind a little to know that Ellen White does not counter the Bible on this issue. The Bible itself recognizes that the eating of meat is not best. (It is one of the seven "gray issues" I have found in the Bible and posted in another thread.) For a start, consider that meat was not in the original diet, nor will it be eaten in heaven. We are trying to prepare for life in heaven, right? The children of Israel provide a clear example of the moral/spiritual decline which results from the use of flesh foods. The story of the quail is an appropriate study here. I grant you that God Himself has allowed the use of meat, but permission is not the same as recommendation. In the case of the Israelites, God had provided them something better, and they complained and wanted to go back to that which was worse. Because of their insistence, God gave them their way, "but sent leanness to their souls." This is always the case whenever we choose a lower standard, not just with meat, but with any other aspect of Christian life. God may permit certain things, but when we cling to that which is not best while at the same time have something better available, do you think He is happy and glorified?

"They soon forgat his works; they waited not for his counsel: But lusted exceedingly in the wilderness, and tempted God in the desert. And he gave them their request; but sent leanness into their soul." Psalm 106:13-15

Our bodies are the temple of God. We should take care of it as best we can. I am a lifelong vegetarian who almost made the difficult choice to commence the eating of meat while in a foreign country deprived of adequate protein in the diet. I had felt myself growing weaker over time, and perhaps, if I had not found a good source of imported beans, it would have been best for me to eat some meat (which is not even palatable to me!). We must take care of our bodies with the best that we have. If, however, one has something better than meat available, they accept a lower standard for their body temple to continue in its use.

The Bible may not always say what we like to hear--but that should serve to increase our respect for it.

[awesumtenor]

Perhaps it will ease your mind a little to know that Ellen White does not counter the Bible on this issue. The Bible itself recognizes that the eating of meat is not best. (It is one of the seven "gray issues" I have found in the Bible and posted in another thread.) For a start, consider that meat was not in the original diet, nor will it be eaten in heaven.

Grains and vegetables werent part of the original diet either and the entrance of sin caused the whole of creation on the earth to suffer under it's curse... yet you have no issue with their consumption; in fact you endorse and recommend it...

In His service,
Mr. J

[Green Cochoa]

Grains and vegetables werent part of the original diet either and the entrance of sin caused the whole of creation on the earth to suffer under it's curse... yet you have no issue with their consumption; in fact you endorse and recommend it...

In His service,
Mr. J

You sound defensive. Especially since I did not say would you say I said. Nor does the Bible say what you say it does. Read Genesis 1:29 carefully, and then tell me what part of that diet does NOT include grains and beans.

[Clay]

Greenie said:

For a start, consider that meat was not in the original diet, nor will it be eaten in heaven. We are trying to prepare for life in heaven, right? The children of Israel provide a clear example of the moral/spiritual decline which results from the use of flesh foods.

Well a couple of points... we are not the original people so consequently our bodies may not respond to the "original diet" like the original people's bodies did.... The original clothing was nakedness.... not endorsing that I see....

We are not preparing for heaven, we are being prepared for heaven... there is a significant difference...

The issue of quail and the COI used in this discussion is way off base... given that while in captivity they developed habits and tastes, and worship practices that God had to re-educate them, it was not moral decline... unless you are saying that the whole captive experience impacted them and they had to become reacquainted with what God wanted from them..... so it wasn't the food, it was the overall experience....

[Denny]

Greenie said: Well a couple of points... we are not the original people so consequently our bodies may not respond to the "original diet" like the original people's bodies did.... The original clothing was nakedness.... not endorsing that I see....

We are not preparing for heaven, we are being prepared for heaven... there is a significant difference...

The issue of quail and the COI used in this discussion is way off base... given that while in captivity they developed habits and tastes, and worship practices that God had to re-educate them, it was not moral decline... unless you are saying that the whole captive experience impacted them and they had to become reacquainted with what God wanted from them..... so it wasn't the food, it was the overall experience....

Plus if God thought that the COI eating meat contributed to their spiritual decline He would not have made it a part of their rituals e.g Passover.
Amazing how people who are so eager to endorse the original diet say very little or nothing about bringing back original gender relationships but seem to prefer the Paulian model.
And even if the whole of humanity became vegetarians we would still be a bunch of sinners who happened to be vegetarian; there would be no spiritual 'increase' or decline in immoral behaviour.

This post has been edited by Denny: Oct 2 2006, 05:34 AM

[Clay]

true..... folks want to adhere to the pre sin diet and the post sin relationship.... interesting what we pick and choose to make our practice.....

[Green Cochoa]

true..... folks want to adhere to the pre sin diet and the post sin relationship.... interesting what we pick and choose to make our practice.....

You won't hear me telling everyone to become vegetarian...certainly not for their own personal level, at least. I do, however, greatly appreciate our churches and institutions providing vegetarian cuisine, because it can appeal to everyone. Meat eaters can eat non-meat dishes, at least once in a while! I feel like it should be left to the Holy Spirit to convict each of us of the things in our lives that we need to change. God knows how much and how fast we can individually handle those changes in our lives, and I'm sure glad He is patient with me. I, for example, gave up milk a few years ago. The proverbial straw to break the camel's back for me was learning that a relative had died of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. I have been much more stable in physical and emotional health since I've been weaned.

[Green Cochoa]

Ok, so you missed the part of the story where Moses got mad at the COI down there worshipping the golden calf and broke the wone written by God, and he had to write the second set himself. So not only did God write them he also dictated them....

Did I now? I'm a little suprised that no one else answered this...so...may the Bible defend itself:

Deuteronomy
10:1 At that time the LORD said unto me, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first, and come up unto me into the mount, and make thee an ark of wood.
10:2 And I will write on the tables the words that were in the first tables which thou brakest, and thou shalt put them in the ark.
10:3 And I made an ark of shittim wood, and hewed two tables of stone like unto the first, and went up into the mount, having the two tables in mine hand.
10:4 And he wrote on the tables, according to the first writing, the ten commandments, which the LORD spake unto you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly: and the LORD gave them unto me.

Don't forget that not only did God write the commandments on two tables of stone TWICE, He also proclaimed them audibly to all the host of Israel, in their hearing. Hundreds of thousands of people witnessed this, and had Moses later misrepresented them in any way (of course God's own handwriting was stored in the ark), someone would have doubtless corrected him.

[Clay]

Did I now? I'm a little suprised that no one else answered this...so...may the Bible defend itself:

we knew you wanted to answer the question in your own unique way Greenie......

[awesumtenor]

You sound defensive. Especially since I did not say would you say I said. Nor does the Bible say what you say it does. Read Genesis 1:29 carefully, and then tell me what part of that diet does NOT include grains and beans.

LOL... *I* sound defensive? You've been nothing but since you opened your mouth... nevertheless...

Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

I was incorrect; grains were part of the original diet... 'every herb bearing seed' is more accurately rendered 'grass bearing ' or in modern english every grain.

Beans and other plants that require cultivation ( the sweat of man's brow ) did not become part of the diet until after sin.

In His service,
Mr. J

Greenie said: Well a couple of points... we are not the original people so consequently our bodies may not respond to the "original diet" like the original people's bodies did.... The original clothing was nakedness.... not endorsing that I see....

Not to mention these bodies we currently inhabit cannot enter heaven; this mortal must put on immortality and this corruptible must put on incorruption.

Bottom line the argument is thin... but not unexpected from one who by his own admission was culturally a vegetarian first and then later acquired the purported theological rationalization for that cultural stance. As one who has been a vegetarian all his life, GC has never seen meat eating objectively... and in all likelihood has never tried to; that is why he keeps standing up all the traditional strawmen and then patting himself on the back for a job well done when he has knocked them down...

In His service,
Mr. J

[LeePaDee]

GREEENCO WROTE:
For a start, consider that meat was not in the original diet, nor will it be eaten in heaven. We are trying to prepare for life in heaven, right?
------There will be no marriage in heaven ... are you advocating that we practice "no marriage" these days??

[Vada]

In another thread, Watchbird mentioned the articles and papers written by Dr. Arthur Patrick, a noted Adventist church historian/theologian and one time Director of the Ellen G White/Seventh-day Adventist Research Center that serves the South Pacific Division, on EGW, her writings and the necessary perspective we need to have today in order to properly understand and apply the counsel handed down to us through the Testimonies.

Dr. Patrick had a series of 4 interviews with the editor of the Record which were published in the South Pacific Division Record and which are available to be read at http://sdanet.org/atissue/white/patrick/egw-surfing.htm
and the editor of the Record wrote an editorial in the issue containing the first of the articles that carried the title of this thread.

I would encourage anyone interested to read them; I feel this is a dialog we need to have and while I recognize that some are unwilling and others are unable to deal with such a topic at this point in their walk with Christ, that cannot prevent the remainder of us from looking at this in an objective fashion, parking the preconceived notions of what we may have been taught in order to see EGW and her ministry as she saw it rather than how others chose to paint it after her death...

So... once more into the breach, dear friends...

In His service,
Mr. J

Dr Patrick’s assessment of Ellen White and her writings seems to be much the same as Dr Graeme Bradford’s. Someone has just directed us to this official statement by the White Estate.

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/more-prophet.asp
A NOTICE REGARDING MORE THAN A PROPHET
Dr. Graeme Bradford, retired professor from the Theology Department of Avondale College, recently authored a privately-published book entitled, More Than a Prophet: How We Lost and Found Again the Real Ellen White. The Foreword and advertising incorrectly state that the manuscript was evaluated favorably by officers of the Ellen G. White Estate. In actuality, while recognizing elements of the book on which we can agree, the White Estate staff has strong concerns regarding several of the viewpoints expressed in the book.
Included among these concerns are the following:
· The book expresses the view that prophets in the New Testament and beyond generally carry less authority than Old Testament prophets, and that the individual and/or congregation must separate the wheat from the chaff in the messages even of genuine prophets. Such a view confirms people in the human tendency to accept what they like in inspired writings and to reject as “chaff” the things with which they disagree.
· The book suggests that because Ellen White used sources in her writings relating to history, prophecy, health, or theology, the views she expressed may have originated more from her contemporaries than divine inspiration. Her depiction of end-time events, for example, as found in The Great Controversy, is portrayed as deriving primarily from the expectations of 19th century North American Adventists, having little application to today’s global society.
· While the White Estate staff recognizes that Ellen White was fallible and subject to human frailties—not unlike the biblical prophets—we maintain that certain positions taken in the book do not fairly reflect the understanding of Ellen White and her associates regarding her prophetic ministry, and fail to represent fully Ellen White’s prophetic contributions to the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
A review of More Than a Prophet will be offered at this site in the future. For a well-balanced discussion of God’s system of communication with human beings, we recommend The Voice of the Spirit, by the former director of the White Estate, Dr. Juan Carlos Viera, and Messenger of the Lord, by Dr. Herbert E. Douglass.