Where Is John Osborne?, Are his talents not appreciated? Options

[Skyhook]

While I do not own a copy of More Than a Prophet, quite early in the piece I had a quick read through somebody else's copy.

Nice to know "we agree we're all trying to do the right thing!"

There is an extensive 8 part review and theological critique of Graeme Bradford's books "More Than A Prophet" and "Prophets are Human" by Kevin Paulsen at www.greatcontroversy.org. Just scroll down a little way to it from the top of the home page.

[YogusBearus]

There is an extensive 8 part review and theological critique of Graeme Bradford's books "More Than A Prophet" and "Prophets are Human" by Kevin Paulsen at www.greatcontroversy.org. Just scroll down a little way to it from the top of the home page.

If you choose to wade through Mr. Paulsen's treatment of the book, it might be wise to consider the agenda he is bringing to the table.

-bear

[watchbird]

If you choose to wade through Mr. Paulsen's treatment of the book, it might be wise to consider the agenda he is bringing to the table.

-bear

A good way to put it Yogus.... And better put on deep muck chest high "waders" before tackling the job. Frankly, after trying to read around the ad hominem attacks in the introduction.... I gave up. I already know that he and I are on different planets when it comes to theology... so why would I expect that he would say anything about Graeme Bradford that I agreed with.

Good-luck all ye who try it... I'll be awaiting your comments on what you find there. But please.... if you quote him against something Bradford says, also bring page and paragraph where Bradford says it.... and how Bradford says it, for so far, I don't think that Kevin is even reporting on what he says accurately.

Happy Sabbath all.....

......... .............

[Ozzie]

I agree so much with the principles stated above, WB, but it seems we would disagree at times with their application.

I have a copy of Graeme Bradford's book, Prophets are Human, have read it, appreciate much of what is said, hold questions and reservations in other areas, and note some of the fruitage of these teachings. I'm waiting to see the full report promised by the White Estate.

Why would you be waiting for the report from the White Estate Brick Step? They are not 'God', nor are they prophets. Their reports are not gospel. Are we not to study for ourselves?

I am very pleased to see see that Bradford has been open-minded enough to examine the issues he has.

I am looking forward to the Revelation study series that Graeme has been working on, which will be released early next year, I understand.

[Brick Step]

[b]Why would you be waiting for the report from the White Estate Brick Step? They are not 'God', nor are they prophets. Their reports are not gospel. Are we not to study for ourselves?

Waiting upon a report from the White Estate might mean that I am equating them with God, regard them as prophets, their reports as gospel, and do no study for myself. Or it might not mean any of those things at all. I have in fact become exceedingly wary of equating ANY mere earthly voice with that of God. Graeme Bradford is not God, either, nor a prophet, nor his report gospel, and I do not say that in disrespect. I trust the promises of God to guide us into the truth, and I do not wish to be guilty of shutting my ears to His voice, through whatever persons, circumstance or means He might choose to speak. I have learned that it is wisdom to hear through both sides in a dispute, and be careful of pushing others too hard into a position of agreement with ourselves, as though we were always infallibly right in our judgments. It is the Holy Spirit ultimately who convicts of the truth. He can be trusted to shape circumstances to guide us each one into the Light.

[watchbird]

I am looking forward to the Revelation study series that Graeme has been working on, which will be released early next year, I understand.

Just want to clarify on this one.... that while it is true that Graeme has been working on these, his main role in the Revelation series is that of putting the presentations together and doing the production work necessary. The study series itself is done by Jon Paulien... Revelation scholar who until recently was Chair of New Testament at the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University, and is now Dean of the School of Religion at Loma Linda University. He and Graeme have been working on this series together for some time now. Hopefully it will be finished and released soon.

Waiting upon a report from the White Estate might mean that I am equating them with God, regard them as prophets, their reports as gospel, and do no study for myself. Or it might not mean any of those things at all. I have in fact become exceedingly wary of equating ANY mere earthly voice with that of God. Graeme Bradford is not God, either, nor a prophet, nor his report gospel, and I do not say that in disrespect. I trust the promises of God to guide us into the truth, and I do not wish to be guilty of shutting my ears to His voice, through whatever persons, circumstance or means He might choose to speak. I have learned that it is wisdom to hear through both sides in a dispute, and be careful of pushing others too hard into a position of agreement with ourselves, as though we were always infallibly right in our judgments. It is the Holy Spirit ultimately who convicts of the truth. He can be trusted to shape circumstances to guide us each one into the Light.

This sounds like a good postition to take, Brick... and you are not the only one who is "waiting on a report from the White Estate". There are many of us in that position... including Graeme himself. The thing that many of us think is odd is why the Estate rushed to put up a quick "blurb" that cast aspersions on the book, rather than putting together a reasoned review of it from the beginning. I've been told now, by someone who spoke personally with the person who seems to be the one responsible for putting that up, that this person has said that he "regrets" having done so. But that doesn't help matters any, since he only leaves it tantalizingly hanging there, with promises of a "full review" later, rather than just quietly removing it thus leaving the book to be judged on its own merits by those who read.

I have spent hours in dialogues attempting to find out just what it is that causes the official church persons who object to it to do so. And I'm still not entirely sure what it is... and there is, of course, some variance between those who have some objection. Judging entirely from those I have personally talked with, I would say that one basic problem is that they do not understand the problems that those of us out here "in the trenches" who face the accusations against Ellen White on a frequent basis have to deal with. Some are totally unaware of the problems with "prophets" in general that churches other than SDA are having to face. Thus they do not couch their defenses of Ellen White as being a "true prophet" in terms that would serve to eliminate the "false prophets" that are beseiging the Christian church at large today.

Similar to this is the fact that some do not read his book and take into consideration his target audience... which is those who have genuine questions as to what to believe about how the gift of prophecy is manifested and how church members should relate to it. Since the various critics have all these problems settled in their own minds, they think in terms of "these are not problems" just "explain that" and get on with life.

But there are some genuine differences in convictions regarding both Biblical prophets and the prophetic gift as promised to the church in the New Testament. And these will remain the sticking points, even with the most serious and thorough analysis of the book that will eventually come from such as White Estate, BRI, and the Seminary at Andrews. Personally, I think Bradford's position on this topic is much more Biblical and consistent than are the positions taken by his critics. Bradford's position is that while in the Old Testament, the prophets served as the voice of authority to the chosen people... in the New Testament, this type of authority is limited to the Apostles... and that these, by definition, were limited to the first generation of those who were Christ's associates while He was here on earth physically. And that in the New Testament, the gift of prophecy was for the benefit of the church, but at the same time, subservient to the church as to how each message was applied.

It is my understanding that from the very beginning, we have understood Ellen's call, function, and role, to be based on the 1 Cor 14 promise of the prophetic gift as one of the on-going gifts of the Spirit to the church. Thus it seems to me to be inconsistent at best for the critics to say that Bradford "robs" Ellen of something when he does not accord her the status of an Old Testament prophet, but "only" that of a "New Testament prophet"... one who demonstrates that she has been given the "gift of prophecy" as promised in 1 Cor 14.

Another difference between Bradford and his critics has to do with what seems to be their push to "protect the Bible AND Ellen White" by surrounding them with the veil of "inerrancy". This gets very close to being a Fundamentalist position of verbal inspiration.... which is next door to verbal dictation... positions which as a church led by Ellen's view of scripture, we have from the beginning denied. Though this is not to say that there has not always been those among us who clung to a belief in such inerrant verbal inspiration... both for scripture and for Ellen White's writings.

These, I think, are the most important issues.... though these are somewhat obscured at times in a plethora of objections to details and/or ad hominem attacks on the man himself... including his motives and qualifications for writing.

But those official personalities who disagree with him are not all bad, and there ARE many points that need more dialogue and further clarification. I cannot, however, be so charitable to such as Kevin Paulson who starts out by likening Graeme Bradford to Bishop Pike and Bishop Sprong... IMO, that discredits KP from the beginning, and makes any legitimate gripes that he might have not worth the effort of wading through his muck to dig them out.

I do think that the first step in any evaluation of Bradford should be a careful and thorough reading of what he actually says. For much of the material which makes objections base them upon interpretations of what he has said which are in themselves faulty... (whether this comes from misreading, misunderstanding, or misusing varies from person to person and instance to instance). But if one has read it for himself FIRST, then one is more liable to recognize such distortions in the critical material. If one first reads the misinterpretation one is more likely to read that into Graeme's work once one gets there.

Again, the whole book is available for reading on-line HERE<<<, where you also have the option of ordering a book on-line, or printing out the material so you can have it in hard copy the better to compare one part with another, and have it in hand while you read other critiques of it. Both the on-line edition and the print edition have been thoroughly proof read and corrected now, so the original charges of the lack of final copy editing are no longer true.

Something else to keep in mind is that there is essentially, nothing new in Bradford's book. His is more a gathering together of what other SDA Ellen White scholars have been saying for many years now. Which is another thing that makes the Estate opposition quite mystifying.... at least to me.

[Ozzie]

Just want to clarify on this one.... that while it is true that Graeme has been working on these, his main role in the Revelation series is that of putting the presentations together and doing the production work necessary. The study series itself is done by Jon Paulien... Revelation scholar who until recently was Chair of New Testament at the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University, and is now Dean of the School of Religion at Loma Linda University. He and Graeme have been working on this series together for some time now. Hopefully it will be finished and released soon.

Thank you for pointing that out WB. I omitted that unintentionally, but as an extension of a conversation regarding "getting Graeme to take a series of meetings from the new Revelation series". Graeme does not leave out acknowledging Paulien's contribution. That was my mistake.

This sounds like a good postition to take, Brick... and you are not the only one who is "waiting on a report from the White Estate". There are many of us in that position... including Graeme himself. The thing that many of us think is odd is why the Estate rushed to put up a quick "blurb" that cast aspersions on the book, rather than putting together a reasoned review of it from the beginning. I've been told now, by someone who spoke personally with the person who seems to be the one responsible for putting that up, that this person has said that he "regrets" having done so. But that doesn't help matters any, since he only leaves it tantalizingly hanging there, with promises of a "full review" later, rather than just quietly removing it thus leaving the book to be judged on its own merits by those who read.

I have spent hours in dialogues attempting to find out just what it is that causes the official church persons who object to it to do so. And I'm still not entirely sure what it is... and there is, of course, some variance between those who have some objection. Judging entirely from those I have personally talked with, I would say that one basic problem is that they do not understand the problems that those of us out here "in the trenches" who face the accusations against Ellen White on a frequent basis have to deal with. Some are totally unaware of the problems with "prophets" in general that churches other than SDA are having to face. Thus they do not couch their defenses of Ellen White as being a "true prophet" in terms that would serve to eliminate the "false prophets" that are beseiging the Christian church at large today.

Similar to this is the fact that some do not read his book and take into consideration his target audience... which is those who have genuine questions as to what to believe about how the gift of prophecy is manifested and how church members should relate to it. Since the various critics have all these problems settled in their own minds, they think in terms of "these are not problems" just "explain that" and get on with life.

But there are some genuine differences in convictions regarding both Biblical prophets and the prophetic gift as promised to the church in the New Testament. And these will remain the sticking points, even with the most serious and thorough analysis of the book that will eventually come from such as White Estate, BRI, and the Seminary at Andrews. Personally, I think Bradford's position on this topic is much more Biblical and consistent than are the positions taken by his critics. Bradford's position is that while in the Old Testament, the prophets served as the voice of authority to the chosen people... in the New Testament, this type of authority is limited to the Apostles... and that these, by definition, were limited to the first generation of those who were Christ's associates while He was here on earth physically. And that in the New Testament, the gift of prophecy was for the benefit of the church, but at the same time, subservient to the church as to how each message was applied.

It is my understanding that from the very beginning, we have understood Ellen's call, function, and role, to be based on the 1 Cor 14 promise of the prophetic gift as one of the on-going gifts of the Spirit to the church. Thus it seems to me to be inconsistent at best for the critics to say that Bradford "robs" Ellen of something when he does not accord her the status of an Old Testament prophet, but "only" that of a "New Testament prophet"... one who demonstrates that she has been given the "gift of prophecy" as promised in 1 Cor 14.

Another difference between Bradford and his critics has to do with what seems to be their push to "protect the Bible AND Ellen White" by surrounding them with the veil of "inerrancy". This gets very close to being a Fundamentalist position of verbal inspiration.... which is next door to verbal dictation... positions which as a church led by Ellen's view of scripture, we have from the beginning denied. Though this is not to say that there has not always been those among us who clung to a belief in such inerrant verbal inspiration... both for scripture and for Ellen White's writings.

These, I think, are the most important issues.... though these are somewhat obscured at times in a plethora of objections to details and/or ad hominem attacks on the man himself... including his motives and qualifications for writing.

But those official personalities who disagree with him are not all bad, and there ARE many points that need more dialogue and further clarification. I cannot, however, be so charitable to such as Kevin Paulson who starts out by likening Graeme Bradford to Bishop Pike and Bishop Sprong... IMO, that discredits KP from the beginning, and makes any legitimate gripes that he might have not worth the effort of wading through his muck to dig them out.

I do think that the first step in any evaluation of Bradford should be a careful and thorough reading of what he actually says. For much of the material which makes objections base them upon interpretations of what he has said which are in themselves faulty... (whether this comes from misreading, misunderstanding, or misusing varies from person to person and instance to instance). But if one has read it for himself FIRST, then one is more liable to recognize such distortions in the critical material. If one first reads the misinterpretation one is more likely to read that into Graeme's work once one gets there.

Again, the whole book is available for reading on-line HERE<<<, where you also have the option of ordering a book on-line, or printing out the material so you can have it in hard copy the better to compare one part with another, and have it in hand while you read other critiques of it. Both the on-line edition and the print edition have been thoroughly proof read and corrected now, so the original charges of the lack of final copy editing are no longer true.

Something else to keep in mind is that there is essentially, nothing new in Bradford's book. His is more a gathering together of what other SDA Ellen White scholars have been saying for many years now. Which is another thing that makes the Estate opposition quite mystifying.... at least to me.

Yes. My objections to the "White Estate report" is that it initally hinted that this was not 'kosher' and the tone of their reaction, appeared to try to turn people away from the book, instead of waiting and giving a reasoned account of their deliberations. I believe that was their big mistake at the beginning.

[SoulEspresso]

Yes. My objections to the "White Estate report" is that it initally hinted that this was not 'kosher' and the tone of their reaction, appeared to try to turn people away from the book, instead of waiting and giving a reasoned account of their deliberations. I believe that was their big mistake at the beginning.

Our church has a long history of shooting people who are only trying to be helpful.

[YogusBearus]

Our church has a long history of shooting people who are only trying to be helpful.

...say nothing of the wounded.

-bear

[Brick Step]

“The minister who throws himself on any Conference committee for direction, takes himself out of the hands of Christ. May God preserve to us our organization and form of church discipline in its original form.” James White, Review and Herald, Jan 4, 1881.

“At no time during His public ministry does Christ intimate that any one of His disciples should be designated as their leader… And there is no intimation that the apostles of Christ designated one of their number above another as leader… Christ, then, is the leader of His people in all ages… Christ will lead is people, if they will be led.” Ibid., Dec 1, 1874. See also Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 477-480.

One very good reason why the New Testament does not envisage a world church under the control of anyone but Christ, is obviously that it is impossible for one mere fallible human being, out of his own limited experience, to even understand how his words and judgments are interpreted by persons on the other side of the world who are living under quite different circumstances. I think we often see this point illustrated even here on BSDA.

Many persons passionately allege errors in the Bible. Many make similar allegations against the writings of Ellen White. Many allege that the White Estate is guilty of tampering with Ellen White's writings. Not always, but too often, in our experience, we look and see dust on the Bibles of these critics, and discover they maybe have not even read Desire of Ages through once. This creates thunder in our ears so we cannot hear what they say.

“Give us this day our daily bread.” We are hungry for the voice of God to our souls, and there is only so much time in the day. There is just so much information out there clamouring for our attention. Help us to get our priorities right. Writings about the Bible and Ellen White’s works have their place, we know. Not to have read or closely studied such writings might be our loss. The even greater loss is not every day to have read something from the primary sources—firstly the Bible, and then Ellen White’s writings. How many of us are inclined to cry with the psalmist, “Oh, how I love Your law! It is my meditation all the day.” Psalm 119:97.

[SoulEspresso]

Many persons passionately allege errors in the Bible. Many make similar allegations against the writings of Ellen White. Many allege that the White Estate is guilty of tampering with Ellen White's writings. Not always, but too often, in our experience, we look and see dust on the Bibles of these critics, and discover they maybe have not even read Desire of Ages through once. This creates thunder in our ears so we cannot hear what they say.

Where's this coming from?

[awesumtenor]

Many persons passionately allege errors in the Bible. Many make similar allegations against the writings of Ellen White. Many allege that the White Estate is guilty of tampering with Ellen White's writings. Not always, but too often, in our experience, we look and see dust on the Bibles of these critics, and discover they maybe have not even read Desire of Ages through once. This creates thunder in our ears so we cannot hear what they say.

Are you implying that there are no errors in Desire of Ages?

In His service,
Mr. J

[Ralph]

Are you implying that there are no errors in Desire of Ages?

In His service,
Mr. J

I judge a book by the taste that it leaves in my mouth after I have read it. Whether there are errors or not really doesn't change the good impression that comes from reading The Desire of Ages. It draws me closer to God, and what more can I ask of any book -- or author?

[awesumtenor]

I judge a book by the taste that it leaves in my mouth after I have read it. Whether there are errors or not really doesn't change the good impression that comes from reading The Desire of Ages. It draws me closer to God, and what more can I ask of any book -- or author?

That's nice Ralph... but you're not Brick Step nor did you make the statements in his last post. This question was one seeking clarification from him regarding said post.

Your position is noted... but not really relevant to this particular branch of the thread.

In His service,
Mr. J

[Brick Step]

I am speaking more from experience in the grassroots level of church life. Praise His name, God condescends to visit and guide His needy children wherever they might be worshipping! Often people have no time for or interest in long arguments. Either a book is God-blessed and worth reading and sharing, or it is not. But yes, mistaken views of how inspiration works need to be addressed. Ellen White does this herself, if people would read her works enough. Others of course may be called to address this issue today. God help them, and show His guiding hand, for not all agree even here, and there's a great deceiver ready to intrude into this exercise.

I used Desire of Ages only as a symbol of all Ellen White’s writings. It’s the book so many like to share first, with new interests, of course.

I do not see the Bible as verbally inspired. I certainly accept that in both the Bible and Ellen White’s writings there is a mingling of the human with the divine. But sometimes, even if I can’t always explain, I feel the line between the human and the divine is drawn too far to the right or to the left. I know that God will guide us on all these issues, if we let Him guide. I have at times had to change my mind on some points. (Happy days, who hasn’t!) I believe that part of being a Christian is to stand firm for the right, but to always give each other time and space to grow.

One illustration in regard to an alleged error in Ellen White’s writings: I don’t remember if this is an “error” addressed at all by Pr Bradford, but I refer to Desire of Ages, p. 830. “Upon its summit His feet will rest when He shall come again.” We have heard more than one person argue or teach that this is an error preparing us to be deceived by the antichrist, for Jesus’ feet do not touch the earth at His second coming. “The White Estate must have tampered with the writings,” it was argued, “because her earlier works do not use these words.”

I was thrown a bit at first. “How come I had never noticed this before?” I thought. Then I did some homework and discovered there is no error here at all. The whole paragraph must be read, starting from the previous page.

“As the place of His ascension, Jesus chose the spot so often hallowed by His presence while He dwelt among men. Not Mount Zion, the place of David’s city, not Mount Moriah, the temple site, was to be thus honoured. There Christ had been mocked and rejected. There the waves of mercy, still returning in a stronger tide of love, had been beaten back by hearts as hard as rock. Thence Jesus, weary and heart-burdened, had gone forth to find rest in the Mount of Olives. The holy Shekinah, in departing from the first temple, had stood upon the eastern mountain, as if loath to forsake the chosen city [an allusion to Eze 11:23]; so Christ stood upon Olivet, with yearning heart overlooking Jerusalem. The groves and glens of the mountain had been consecrated by His prayers and tears. Its steeps had echoed the triumphant shouts of the multitude that proclaimed Him king. On its sloping descent He had found a home with Lazarus at Bethany. In the garden of Gethsemane at its foot He had prayed and agonized alone. From this mountain He was to ascend to heaven. Upon its summit His feet will rest when He shall come again. Not as a man of sorrows, but as a glorious and triumphant king He will stand upon Olivet, while Hebrew hallelujahs mingle with Gentile hosannas, and the voices of the redeemed as a mighty host shall swell the acclamation, Crown Him Lord of all!” Desire of Ages, pp. 829-830.

If you can allow for a voice to speak from the grassroots, these are the points I noted:-

1. The subject under discussion is Jesus’ deliberate selection of the place of His ascension.

2. Because it has rejected Him, Jesus is rejecting Jerusalem, the city He chose and nurtured for centuries, to be the metropolis of His church or kingdom on earth. This paragraph is about Christ’s kingdom.

3. The Mount of Olives is mentioned at the beginning as well as at the end of this paragraph. Jesus choice of the Mount of Olives as the site from which to ascend to heaven was not just a matter of chance. He previously consecrated it by actions symbolizing His reign as King in the New Jerusalem upon this earth (just as He consecrated the site of the earthly Jerusalem temple by there calling Abraham to offer Isaac as a sacrifice).

4. The spot from which Jesus was to ascend to heaven—the Mount of Olives—was the spot to which He would return as King of the eternal kingdom of which the New Jerusalem would be the metropolis (see Zech 14:4).

5. In this paragraph Ellen White alludes to the vision of Ezekiel 8-11, where in chapter 10 the Shekinah presence moves out of the temple built by Solomon, and finally “the glory of the LORD went up from the midst of the city, and stood upon the mountain which is on the east side of the city.” Eze 11:23. That is the Mount of Olives. Here in a parallel situation in the Old Testament, Israel and Judah had rejected Christ, so He was rejecting Jerusalem, for destruction, and moving to the Mount of Olives.

6. In both the Old and the New Testaments, when Jerusalem rejected its King, and He rejected Jerusalem, Satan was free to destroy the city. With destruction came fear in the hearts of the remnant of Israel and Judah, that God’s covenant to set up His kingdom on this earth, would not be fulfilled. The Shekinah presence resting upon the Mount of Olives in the OT, as Jesus’ decision to consecrate and ascend from this place in the NT, is a statement to the people of the earth of the certainty of the fact that His New Jerusalem kingdom will be established upon this earth.

7. The DA 829-830 paragraph ends with a description of Christ as “king” and the redeemed hosts singing, “Crown Him Lord of all!” The ultimate step in Jesus’ coronation as king occurs at his third coming, not His second. “It is at the close of the one thousand years that Jesus stands upon the Mount of Olives, and the mount parts asunder and becomes a mighty plain.” Early Writings, p. 53.

8. When Jesus ascended as Conqueror, it was not merely the thought of His second coming to take spiritual New Jerusalem home to heaven, that filled His mind with gladness, but that by His perfect sacrifice on the cross, as accepted by the Father, He had ransomed this world and repentant sinners could hope for eternal life in His kingdom. He knew of a surety that He would return with all power and authority, the second time, and then the third time to place His feet upon this very spot he had consecrated. Here on the Mount of Olives He would reign for ever as King of the literal New Jerusalem kingdom. He wanted us also to rejoice in this hope, the climax of the Jubilee, the consummation of all things, when we shall inherit the land, according to His promise.

The alleged dangerous error on DA 830 is simply no error at all. Other similar experiences with other alleged problems with or errors in Ellen White’s writings have done nothing but deepen my confidence in her as a prophet of God, and lead me to focus rather upon looking for the wonderful blessings to be gained from reading and sharing Desire of Ages and others of her works.