H
happilycatholic
Guest
How else would you take “from the easter bunny to the little serpent?” Tell me what she DOES mean.
- Status
D
djconklin
Guest
The Day of Atonement IS in Scripture. There’s no evidence that it is not.
And the point would be? We are acknowledging that not all SDA’s are actually Christians.
Actually, she was about 18 when Miller was preaching. She never left the Millerite movement. That, more or less, dissolved after 1844 into a number of movements. SDA church didn’t exist till about 1863. See how many lies you were told in two short sentences? See my tag line—please, stop trusting those who have lied to you.
D
djconklin
Guest
I can’t read minds–I leave that to the lying critics. They seem to think that they are able.
But, if she never called you an easter bunny, then it quite obviously wasn’t reference to you, personally.
H
happilycatholic
Guest
**Well, I’m not sure how to address this since you insist that I am taking my information from other people. **
**I’m telling you this: I’ve read some (not all) of her books. I’m not going on what “they” the liars say. I’m basing my opinion on what I’ve read from her own books. Mainly The Great Controversy. **
By the way, I do know that The Great Controversy has been edited (not by EGW) and republished under different titles. I think one would do well to get a copy of the originally published version of the book.
B
BibleTruth
Guest
That’s funny.
We all know that the Catholic church adopted the pagan practice of Sunday worship. History is filled with quotes where they’ve laid claim to doing so.
Daniel 7:25: He [the little horn power] will speak against the Most High and oppress his saints and try to change the set times and the laws.
Anyone who defends Sunday-worship, or specifically anyone who tries to say the Sabbath is no longer binding, simply does not want to submit themselves in full to God and they’ll come up with a million arguments to defend a hollow position. What I always find interesting is when other Protestant religions try to say that there’s biblical reference to the change of Sabbath observance from the seventh to the first day of the week but can produce none.
The wise man wrote in Ecclesiastes 12:13, “Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.” But this can’t be done if we don’t first love God and allow Christ in our hearts to give us the power over sin (and as we know from the Bible, sin is breaking God’s commandments - 1 John 3:4).
I’ve been praying for the lost individuals on this forum over the past couple days because it’s clear to me that they’re in bondage to evil forces in this world. Sabbath-keeping is to teach us how to be holy people, set apart (sanctified) for a holy purpose. It’s not about legalism or living one way for six days then putting on a front from Friday night to Saturday night…that would be “Saturday-keeping” and that’s not what it’s about at all. When anyone studies the truth of the Sabbath, from Genesis to Revelation, if they’re willing to submit themselves to God, they’ll recognize the truth and come out of Babylon and into God’s true church.
Andrew
D
djconklin
Guest
I have repeatedly run into people making wild claims about EGW. When pushed they have admitted that they got it from so-and-so web site or book. That gets them off the hook real fast and easy.
Now, if you are saying that you actually read the things you are saying, then the burden of proving that those things are actually so lies with you.
So, if you wish to show that EGW said “blank” then put the actual words in quotes, and tell us which book and page they came from. If you can’t remember the book or the page then I need the actual words. I can then search and see if she really, really said that.
I met one poster who made a claim about EGW and used some alleged “actual words.” I checked and found (using some of the words) that he had twisted the quote into something she did not say.
And what is the point here?
I have the current edition and the previous 1888 edition.
Side-bar: on GC one poster on this forum claimed that because of the plagiarisms involved the book wasn’t allowed in the Library of Congress. It took me about 5 minutes of work to find that they had 13 copies. Another guy made some plagiarism claims against EGW on this book and it turned out that he was using an “edition” created by Conradi.
A
andrea3710
Guest
I am sorry about what I will say next but I have to.If this is how you make conclusions in all this than you should not be discussing here at all.When did I even call you an easter bunny? When my friend? The way you make conclusions out of everything I write and the answers you give me it is all bunch of nothing.
I know very well that old strategy of people,when they have nothing else to say than they make the one who had a point a wolf,evil person and such,we that in politics very much. Someone said here that catholic read between the lines in the Bible,I suggest you, read lines first and maybe you will understand and not jump into false conclusions. I never meant that you were easter bunny but what I meant you will never understand. I am sure there are few here who do understand my figure of speech. I understand that with you my friend I have nothing more to discuss because all this discussion leads in something I do not want and what troubles my spirit. If person makes conclusions as such I have a reason to believe that such person has no clue. I have too much experience with people who make something out of nothing. Even history is full of such and unfortunately there are many innocent victims because of those who read something into nothing and where there was something they read nothing.
I know very well that old strategy of people,when they have nothing else to say than they make the one who had a point a wolf,evil person and such,we that in politics very much. Someone said here that catholic read between the lines in the Bible,I suggest you, read lines first and maybe you will understand and not jump into false conclusions. I never meant that you were easter bunny but what I meant you will never understand. I am sure there are few here who do understand my figure of speech. I understand that with you my friend I have nothing more to discuss because all this discussion leads in something I do not want and what troubles my spirit. If person makes conclusions as such I have a reason to believe that such person has no clue. I have too much experience with people who make something out of nothing. Even history is full of such and unfortunately there are many innocent victims because of those who read something into nothing and where there was something they read nothing.
A
andrea3710
Guest
If you do not understand me why do you reply on my posts at all then? There is no point that I repeat over and over again one subject and you keep saying one and the same thing and it is evident that you read only few words of all that I wrote. I think I was quite clear on the soul sleep in the post you replied but all I got from you is comment on the easter bunny.
H
happilycatholic
Guest
Yeah, so I’ve been told.
**Look, I don’t come on this forum to go back and forth with insults. I don’t particularly mind that you don’t like the way I answer (or don’t answer) your posts. Frankly, they are a little hard to follow. **
I can read Scriptural passage after Scriptural passage and I’m not going to see your point and you could do the same and not see mine.
**All I’m trying to do is defend my faith from your attacks. I can discuss anything, but I can’t do that when you bombarde me with rambling posts as you have. I’m not going to attempt to read through them because most of it doesn’t make sense. You go from Scriptue to the Easter Bunny and all over the place. If you want to discuss Investigative Judgement, then let’s. If you want to discuss Sabbath, then let’s. **
**But how about stopping with the instults. It’s ignorant and rude. And I apologize if I confused whatever you were trying to say with an insult. **
I’m being accused of not replying to something I couldn’t reply to if I wanted to because there’s too much rant and not enough discernable information.
H
happilycatholic
Guest
1. WAS THE PLAN OF SALVATION MADE AFTER THE FALL?
EGW: YES “The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race” (Great Controversy, p. 347).
BIBLE: NO “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you
were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the
precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake” (1 Peter 1:18-20).
BIBLE: NO “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in
his sight” (Ephesians 1:4).
Here D&D quote Ellen White saying that the “kingdom of grace” was instituted and the plan was “devised” immediately after the fall. What they failed to quote was Ellen White’s statements that the plan had actually existed long before that (see Desire of Ages, p. 22, third paragraph in particular): “The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam…” And this statement in the same book, p. 147: “…every act of Christ’s life on earth was in fulfillment of the plan that had existed from the days of eternity.” There are numerous statements like this in her writings. To get a balanced view of what Ellen White really said about this issue (and in its proper context) we recommend the chapter entitled “The Plan of Redemption” in the book Patriarchs and Prophets.
Oh my gosh! I went to YOUR recommended site and it explicitly shows EGW at the hight of inconsistency IF you interpret it the way the site recommends she intended!
**However, I would interpret it this way: Actually what she said was: **after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race" That’s taken from EGW on YOUR site. Meaning: When was the plan devised? AFTER the fall of man. Nowhere in this does she remotely incinuate that she meant anything but after the fall of man.
**It is impossible to read anything else into this. Except for if you consider the entirely separate statement in Desire of Ages where she ABSOLUTELY CONTRIDICTS HERSELF. **
And herein lies my personal problem with EGW. How can one call her a prophet? Where is she getting this from? It’s definitely NOT a devine source.
EGW: YES “The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race” (Great Controversy, p. 347).
BIBLE: NO “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you
were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the
precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake” (1 Peter 1:18-20).
BIBLE: NO “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in
his sight” (Ephesians 1:4).
Here D&D quote Ellen White saying that the “kingdom of grace” was instituted and the plan was “devised” immediately after the fall. What they failed to quote was Ellen White’s statements that the plan had actually existed long before that (see Desire of Ages, p. 22, third paragraph in particular): “The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam…” And this statement in the same book, p. 147: “…every act of Christ’s life on earth was in fulfillment of the plan that had existed from the days of eternity.” There are numerous statements like this in her writings. To get a balanced view of what Ellen White really said about this issue (and in its proper context) we recommend the chapter entitled “The Plan of Redemption” in the book Patriarchs and Prophets.
Oh my gosh! I went to YOUR recommended site and it explicitly shows EGW at the hight of inconsistency IF you interpret it the way the site recommends she intended!
**However, I would interpret it this way: Actually what she said was: **after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race" That’s taken from EGW on YOUR site. Meaning: When was the plan devised? AFTER the fall of man. Nowhere in this does she remotely incinuate that she meant anything but after the fall of man.
**It is impossible to read anything else into this. Except for if you consider the entirely separate statement in Desire of Ages where she ABSOLUTELY CONTRIDICTS HERSELF. **
And herein lies my personal problem with EGW. How can one call her a prophet? Where is she getting this from? It’s definitely NOT a devine source.
A
andrea3710
Guest
What insult??? My saying never had anything to do with you in person,can you understand that,how many times will I have to repeat myself? Do not falsely accuse me of something.Any person on this post is able to see that I never even insulted you and how you explain yourself things in your mind I can’t help. Thing is that you do not defend doctrines of your church but reveal that you cannot defend them rather find as I said something in nothing and then attack with nothing. I doubt you can follow what I mean in this very post at all as it has been already showed. From easter bunny to little serpent would mean what I already said in my posts before that behind the bunny lies a serpent/Satan that people worship without knowing it.Figure of speech. Are there any other insults I addressed to you? I have been called names because of my faith and not attending school on Sabbath,I was through troubles of all kinds I never responded by calling names to anyone although I was called all kind of names,why would I stain my character with you now? I do not want to give that pleasure to Satan (please do not read that I called you Satan here) .I am sorry I have to repeat it again …I addressed one of your questions and that is a soul sleep but you never gave any response but addressed me only on bunny ,that was all that you read and it seems as soon you saw bunny you stopped reading,so why bother with other subjects when this is one way discussion and not very challenging to me either or intelligent. If you are here to fight then again you represent yourself in some ill manner ( I hope you will not read ill-that I called you mentally challenged or something) it is sad that I should actually explain every word to you for you feel threat or insult in my words.
If you read my scripture verses and do not understand them I wonder how much Bible you understand at all for Scripture passages are clear-I guess you do not see the point in what I said here either. If you do not understand something why do you embarrass yourself and answer on my posts at all? To fight?
Do not accuse me of something I did not say to you because doing something like that is an a false attack and insult to me,you embarrass the ones you represent.
D
djconklin
Guest
Like when you said I didn’t have a clue, eh?
No, it is the other way around.
That is precisely how the critics read it. What she actually said was that the plan of salvation was “instituted” (i.e., it already existed and was ready to be put into action if man sinned) after the fall of man.
Try doing a sentence structure diagram.
On what page did she supposedly say this?
H
happilycatholic
Guest
You have absolutely insulted me by insulting my faith! The only two times I’ve accused you of a personal insult was the “serpent” thing and earlier when you referred to me as “you people”. Just because you don’t think yourself insulting doesn’t make it so. You won’t get another reply from me. Ever.What insult??? My saying never had anything to do with you in person,can you understand that,how many times will I have to repeat myself? Do not falsely accuse me of something.Any person on this post is able to see that I never even insulted you and how you explain yourself things in your mind I can’t help. Thing is that you do not defend doctrines of your church but reveal that you cannot defend them rather find as I said something in nothing and then attack with nothing. I doubt you can follow what I mean in this very post at all as it has been already showed. From easter bunny to little serpent would mean what I already said in my posts before that behind the bunny lies a serpent/Satan that people worship without knowing it.Figure of speech. Are there any other insults I addressed to you? I have been called names because of my faith and not attending school on Sabbath,I was through troubles of all kinds I never responded by calling names to anyone although I was called all kind of names,why would I stain my character with you now? I do not want to give that pleasure to Satan (please do not read that I called you Satan here) .I am sorry I have to repeat it again …I addressed one of your questions and that is a soul sleep but you never gave any response but addressed me only on bunny ,that was all that you read and it seems as soon you saw bunny you stopped reading,so why bother with other subjects when this is one way discussion and not very challenging to me either or intelligent. If you are here to fight then again you represent yourself in some ill manner ( I hope you will not read ill-that I called you mentally challenged or something) it is sad that I should actually explain every word to you for you feel threat or insult in my words.
If you read my scripture verses and do not understand them I wonder how much Bible you understand at all for Scripture passages are clear-I guess you do not see the point in what I said here either. If you do not understand something why do you embarrass yourself and answer on my posts at all? To fight?
Do not accuse me of something I did not say to you because doing something like that is an a false attack and insult to me,you embarrass the ones you represent.
Peace Be With You.
H
happilycatholic
Guest
A
andrea3710
Guest
Those who were teaching false doctrines were also insulted by apostles and by Jesus himself. I apologized for saying you people and I never thought it sounded insulting for in my language it is the way to address and English is not my mother tongue,anyway I apologized myself and I guess you were not ready to forgive and that is not Christian either. Serpent was not addressed to you at all but it is all just the way you want out of it for there is nothing else you can say,We are here to discuss things which is false and which is right but some have hard hearts and are not ready to discuss. Should not I be insulted by some things said against my denomination or how E.White or our doctrines were represented? You are not being fair.You never apologized for telling me I was silly. I forgave you but it did hurt me. You represent your church bad but I know there are many sincere people in your church who will eventually see through it all and are ready to discuss things in more healthy manner who will not accuse falsely. christian manner would be if you believed I called you little serpent to ask me what I meant not to attack me with accusations. Despite I explained you what I meant it you were not humble enough to apologize. Many will be lost because of the pride and because their ego is bigger than Jesus.
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
**Ellen G. White Estate
Early Writings (1882), page 36, paragraph 1
Chapter Title: Experience and Views
The Sealing
At the commencement of the holy Sabbath, January 5, 1849, we engaged in prayer with Brother Belden’s family at Rocky Hill, Connecticut, and the Holy Ghost fell upon us. I was taken off in vision to the most holy place, where I saw Jesus still interceding for Israel. On the bottom of His garment was a bell and a pomegranate. Then I saw that Jesus would not leave the most holy place until every case was decided either for salvation or destruction, and that the wrath of God could not come until Jesus had finished His work in the most holy place, laid off His priestly attire, and clothed Himself with the garments of vengeance. Then Jesus will step out from between the Father and man, and God will keep silence no longer, but pour out His wrath on those who have rejected His truth. I saw that the anger of the nations, the wrath of God, and the time to judge the dead were separate and distinct, one following the other, also that Michael had not stood up, and that the time of trouble, such as never was, had not yet commenced. The nations are now getting angry, but when our High Priest has finished His work in the sanctuary, He will stand up, put on the garments of vengeance, and then the seven last plagues will be poured out.
I saw that the four angels would hold the four winds until Jesus’ work was done in the sanctuary, and then will come the seven last plagues. These plagues enraged the wicked against the righteous; they thought that we had brought the judgments of God upon them, and that if they could rid the earth of us, the plagues would then be stayed. A decree went forth to slay
37
the saints, which caused them to cry day and night for deliverance. This was the time of Jacob’s trouble. Then all the saints cried out with anguish of spirit, and were delivered by the voice of God. The 144,000 triumphed. Their faces were lighted up with the glory of God. Then I was shown a company who were howling in agony. On their garments was written in large characters, “Thou art weighed in the balance, and found wanting.” I asked who this company were. The angel said, “These are they who have once kept the Sabbath and have given it up.” I heard them cry with a loud voice, “We have believed in Thy coming, and taught it with energy.” And while they were speaking, their eyes would fall upon their garments and see the writing, and then they would wail aloud. I saw that they had drunk of the deep waters, and fouled the residue with their feet–trodden the Sabbath underfoot-- and that was why they were weighed in the balance and found wanting.
The Sealing
Then my attending angel directed me to the city again, where I saw four angels winging their way to the gate of the city. They were just presenting the golden card to the angel at the gate when I saw another angel flying swiftly from the direction of the most excellent glory, and crying with a loud voice to the other angels, and waving something up and down in his hand. I asked my attending angel for an explanation of what I saw. He told me that I could see no more then, but he would shortly show me what those things that I then saw meant. **
God bless all!!!
[/quote]
H
happilycatholic
Guest
**I said I wouldn’t do this, but for the sake of my apology I will certainly respond. **
**I apologize for intrepreting your statements as insults. I apoligize for calling you silly. **
HC
D
djconklin
Guest
The word “instituted” is hers. As are “after the fall of man” which I didn’t put in quotes. You also ignored her other remarks on the same issue. Just as Bible texts can be pitted against each other when they are NOT read as a harmonious whole, so the same with EGW and any other writer.
I can only find exact quotes. You made the claim–you have the burden of proof.
Thank you Patrick for showing how claims are supposed to be made and it doesn’t say what we were told was said (what a surprise!).
P
Patrick_Murebil
Guest
Hi HC,
It is indeed difficult to discuss things when SDAs post volumes of different topic information in one post. But you did a good job of pointing out an instance where what Mrs. White says is different from what the Sacred Scriptures say. It is difficult to address an issue when so many topics arise out of one response, as well as for them to hear your response.
It is also difficult to provide references to Mrs. White’s writings when you have not spent the majority of your life studying her writings. And the search engine at the Ellen G. White Estate website is not the most user friendly. But I have read all of her books and spent a large portion of my life studying what she says. And it is knowing that which enabled me to find the quote in “Early Writings” to which you referred, and I quoted above.
Tomorrow I will address the sabbath/sunday issue again. I do feel that I owe DJ and Andrew a bit more explanation than just stating that I no longer observe Saturday.
But then, below is probably what they already think about me, adventistnomore, MarysRoses, SDA2RC, Marsha Adams, and all other former SDAs who have embraced Catholicism…and I provide title and page reference below:
**Ellen G. White Estate
The Great Controversy (1888), page 607
Chapter Title: Chapter XXXVIII - The Final Warning
As the controversy extends into new fields, and the minds of the people are called to God’s down-trodden law, Satan is astir. The power attending the message will only madden those who oppose it. The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light, lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command they will endeavor to suppress the discussion of these vital questions. The church appeals to the strong arm of civil power, and in this work, papists and Protestants unite. As the movement for Sunday enforcement becomes more bold and decided, the law will be invoked against commandment-keepers. They will be threatened with fines and imprisonment, and some will be offered positions of influence, and other rewards and advantages, as inducements to renounce their faith. But their steadfast answer is, “Show us from the Word of God our error,”–the same plea that was made by Luther under similar circumstances. Those who are arraigned before the courts make a strong vindication of the truth, and some who hear them are led to take their stand to keep all the commandments of God. Thus light will be brought before thousands who otherwise would know nothing of these truths.
Conscientious obedience to the Word of God will be treated as rebellion. Blinded by Satan, the parent will exercise harshness and severity toward the believing child; the master or mistress will oppress the commandment-keeping servant. Affection will be alienated; children will be disinherited, and driven from home. The words of Paul will be literally fulfilled, "All that will live godly in Christ Jesus
608
shall suffer persecution." [2 Timothy 3:12.] As the defenders of truth refuse to honor the Sunday-sabbath, some of them will be thrust into prison, some will be exiled, some will be treated as slaves. To human wisdom, all this now seems impossible; but as the restraining Spirit of God shall be withdrawn from men, and they shall be under the control of Satan, who hates the divine precepts, there will be strange developments. The heart can be very cruel when God’s fear and love are removed.
As the storm approaches, a large class who have professed faith in the third angel’s message, but have not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their position, and join the ranks of the opposition. By uniting with the world and partaking of its spirit, they have come to view matters in nearly the same light; and when the test is brought, they are prepared to choose the easy, popular side. Men of talent and pleasing address, who once rejoiced in the truth, employ their powers to deceive and mislead souls. They become the most bitter enemies of their former brethren. When Sabbath-keepers are brought before the courts to answer for their faith, these apostates are the most efficient agents of Satan to misrepresent and accuse them, and by false reports and insinuations to stir up the rulers against them. **
God bless all!!!
H
happilycatholic
Guest
Thanks Patrick. Yes it’s hard. But my biggest challenge is charity. I try, but I fail miserably.
As far as Ms. Ellen goes, it is a many-faceted problem. The most troubling is that she was found to have been dishonest by some of her own followers in some of her doctrines, like nutrition. In her own letters she claims to have eaten meat and unclean meat after her address to believers about her vision. The letters, of course are held in different places and can’t be accessed readily. On the other stuff, I’ve read a few of her books and I found out on my own.
At one time I was really troubled by resentment for SDAs and tried hard to understand them. But I’ve learned, just like here, they are hard-core and not to be swayed. If they admit that EGW is false, then where does that leave their faith?
But you can’t question someone’s faith without in some way questioning their integrity and that is where trouble starts.
As I stated, I failed.
Let’s just say, this will be visited in the reconciliation room.
I very much look forward to your posts. I will learn much I’m sure.
Peace,
HC
- Status