Doug Batchelor: His Catholic Church Attacks

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by djconklin
I never labeled an entire race “murderers.”

Then shows us which posts.

I never tell lies.

No, you only state the lies started by Ellen White, you have been deceived.

I don’t use EGW for my beliefs; I use Scripture.

 

[djconklin]

The Jews didn’t bring in pagan traditions into the Christian church.

You don’t think pagans and Jews alike were offering burnt sacrifices? It is what it is. It was common in those times for all “spiritually guided” groups to do things this that. Whether pagan or Jew or other. This is what people did as a sacrifice. People were doing this long before the Jews did as God commanded them to do. Simply calling something pagan does not make it of the devil. Paganism describes a belief, not an action.

So no, it wasn’t the Jews who brought sacrifices into the Christian Church, it ws God. Jesus is the ultimate sacrifice. Would you call that pagan?

The truth is we can all find pagan characteristics in our religions and this is just an uninformed, ignorant claim of all those who attack the catholic Church.

I wasn’t thinking about sacrifices–where you got that from I have no idea.

 

[djconklin]

If the people who told you that they were SDA’s have been telling you the things you have said about SDA’s on this forum, then I’m real glad I’m not one of them.

What?

In previous posts you made claims about what SDA’s believe–which weren’t true. I had assumed that they came formthings you had heard or read on the web. You then denied that you were getting it from the web. That leaves your friends who claimed to be SDA.

 

[happilycatholic]

Neat example! However, the Sabbath as a physical rest is a sign that we are resting in Him and not just being lazy. Secondly, since Jesus hasn’t come yet and taken us home, we cannot enter our heavenly home.

I’m not real sure how laziness got factored into that scenario or how my earthly dreamhome metaphor got mixed up with Heaven, but oh well.

Okay, you have your rest all figured out. Now what about your redemtion?

You still haven’t answered my three questions.

 

[djconklin]

SHE IS A FALSE PROPHET:

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).

NOTE: The Gospel of salvation through grace by faith in Jesus Christ was already in existence before the creation of this world. EGW contradicts the Bible by claiming the plan of salvation was devised after the fall of Adam and Eve.

**ROFL! ** We already dealt with this. The critics are playing a game with your head. See whiteestate.org/issues/contradictions.html for the rest of the story.

 

[josie_L]

Mrs. White said of her testimonies, "it is God and not an erring mortal who has spoken."1 In a testimony to Elder G.A. Irwin she states that “those who do not accept the light God has given on health reform…can not represent the truth to others”.2 From this statement it is clear by her own definition that Mrs. White could not represent the truth to others if she was not a vegetarian. We could take this one step further and ask the question: If she ignored the light of heaven on meat eating, and thus according to her own testimony could not “represent the truth to others,” then how could she hold the position of church prophet–a role whose sole responsibility is to represent the truth to others?

Mrs. White emphasized that eating meat would destroy not only physical health, but also spiritual life:

"Is it not time that all should aim to dispense with flesh foods? How can those who are seeking to become pure, refined, and holy, that they may have the companionship of heavenly angels, continue to use as food anything that has so harmful an effect on soul and body?"3

Mrs. White said eating meat had a “harmful” effect upon the “soul”. As you read on, you will discover that all the while Mrs. White was the prophetess of the Adventist church, she was secretly “harming her soul” by eating meat.
1869 - I’ve Stopped Eating Meat!

In 1869 Mrs. White wrote:

"I have not changed my course a particle since I adopted the health reform. I have not taken one step back since the light from heaven upon this subject first shone upon my pathway. I broke away from everything at once, from meat and butter, and from three meals. …I left off those things from principle. I took my stand on health reform from principle."4

Mrs. White said she had “not taken one step back”. Is that the honest truth? Let us examine the evidence to see just how many steps back she really took…
1873 - How about a little deer and some duck?

Mrs. White claimed to have taken her vegetarian stand prior to 1869, yet four years later we find her eating deer and duck on a trip in the mountains of Colorado:

"Our provisions have been very low for some days. Many of our supplies have gone. . . . We expected supplies three days ago certainly, but none has come. Willie went to the lake for water. We heard his gun and found he had shot two ducks. This is really a blessing, for we need something to live upon."5

Here we find Willie going down to the lake for water. It seems a little odd that he would be toting a rifle with him on his trip to fetch water. Perhaps he planned to fetch more than just water. Willie returned with two dead ducks. From this we can gather that it is okay to let the health reform principles slide a little when supplies are short. Here is another quote from the same trip:

"A young man from Nova Scotia had come in from hunting. He had a quarter of deer. He had traveled 20 miles with this deer upon his back. … He gave us a small piece of the meat, which we made into broth. Willie shot a duck which came in a time of need, for our supplies were rapidly diminishing."6

What happened to the stand she had made upon principle? Apparently there are exceptions to her health rules, at least for herself. Even though Mrs. White deplored the “laxness” of others when it came to obeying her health reforms, she broke the rules herself:

"I was at times placed where I was compelled to eat a little meat… When I could not obtain the food I needed, I have sometimes eaten a little meat…"7

**1878 - Venison for Christmas… **

"Those who digress occasionally to gratify the taste in eating a fattened turkey or other flesh meats, pervert their appetites, and are not the ones to judge of the benefits of the system of health reform. They are controlled by taste, not by principle. … The lack of stability in regard to the principles of health reform is a true index of their character and their spiritual strength. They are deficient in thoroughness in their Christian experience."8
Perhaps meals on Christmas day are excluded from the health restrictions. In 1878 we find Sister White enjoying some venison for Christmas…

"I suppose you will be interested to know how we spent Christmas… Christmas morning we all took breakfast together–James Cornell; Florence and Clara, their two girls; Brother and Sister Moore and their three children; Sister Bahler and Etta, a girl living with them; and Sister Daniells, our cook, Father, and myself. We had a quarter of venison cooked, and stuffing. It was as tender as a chicken. We all enjoyed it very much. There is plenty of venison in market."9

**1880 - Chicken to go, please… **

Mrs. White had still not given up eating meat by 1880. The following is an excerpt from a letter she wrote to her sister Elizabeth while traveling:

"Thursday morning we arose from our births refreshed with sleep. At eight o’clock we took a portion of the pressed chicken food liberally furnished us by the matron of the sanitarium, put the same in a two-quart pail, and placed it on the stove, and thus we had good hot chicken broth and enjoyed our breakfast. The morning was very cold and this hot dish was very palatable. … We have plenty of room, good food and plenty of it. Sister McComber scalded up the chicken. Will scald the meat tomorrow morning."10
There appears to have been ample food available at the Sanitarium, yet Sister White ate chicken that was furnished by the Matron of the Sanitarium. Then she took the pressed chicken with her on her trip and ate it in the train for breakfast: "We again made a nice hot broth of our pressed chicken."11

Certainly Mrs. White could have planned a vegetarian diet for this trip. This was her fifteenth trip on this route so she knew exactly what to expect. Yet while she indulged in meals of chicken, she advised Adventists contemplating this journey to “Take your lunch baskets with you, well filled with fruits and plainly cooked bread”.12 No, they were not permitted to violate the health reform principles and enjoy a little “palatable” chicken. They must follow the health reform and subsist on bread and fruit!

 

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by djconklin
Neat example! However, the Sabbath as a physical rest is a sign that we are resting in Him and not just being lazy. Secondly, since Jesus hasn’t come yet and taken us home, we cannot enter our heavenly home.

I’m not real sure how laziness got factored into that scenario or how my earthly dreamhome metaphor got mixed up with Heaven, but oh well.

Heaven should be your dream home, not this earth. People have accused sabbatarians of being lazy–but they miss the point: Jesus is our rest and as our Creator He has asked us to worship Him on the Sabbath.

Okay, you have your rest all figured out. Now what about your redemtion?

You still haven’t answered my three questions.

Jesus is your Creator and Redeemer. Not one or the other. The Bible gives us all the answer we need. All I have to do is read, nothing to figure out. We are to rest in Christ.

 

[happilycatholic]

In previous posts you made claims about what SDA’s believe–which weren’t true. I had assumed that they came formthings you had heard or read on the web. You then denied that you were getting it from the web. That leaves your friends who claimed to be SDA.

If I remember right, the only things I’ve gotten from the web is the site you referred me to and your conference website. I’ve never posted anything here that I’ve “heard” second-hand from anyone else about your faith.

And again to make this clear, I copied what I posted about Ellen White from the site you gave me and from your conference website.

Have you posted anything that you beleive the catholic Church believes from the Vatican website where you should be posting from? NO. You are the one getting your information by cutting and pasting from every know anti-catholic site out there and posting things you think you know.

And please tell me what I’ve posted about SDA beliefs that isn’t true. Wait, with the exception of you think you are keeping the Sabbath but you’re not. I’ve already proved you’re not.

 

[djconklin]

Mrs. White claimed to have taken her vegetarian stand prior to 1869, yet four years later we find her eating deer and duck on a trip in the mountains of Colorado:

"Our provisions have been very low for some days. Many of our supplies have gone. . . . We expected supplies three days ago certainly, but none has come. Willie went to the lake for water. We heard his gun and found he had shot two ducks. This is really a blessing, for we need something to live upon."5

Where’d you cut-and-paste this from? Same site that lied about the contradictions? What part of the underlined was hard to understand? Being a vegetarian doesn’t mean that you can never, ever eat meat. It is simply better for your health to not eat as much red meat.

 

[happilycatholic]

Heaven should be your dream home, not this earth. People have accused sabbatarians of being lazy–but they miss the point: Jesus is our rest and as our Creator He has asked us to worship Him on the Sabbath.

Petty.

Jesus is your Creator and Redeemer. Not one or the other. The Bible gives us all the answer we need. All I have to do is read, nothing to figure out. We are to rest in Christ.

Agreed, so why do you separate them? I didn’t you did. You just told me they were separate.

 

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by djconklin
In previous posts you made claims about what SDA’s believe–which weren’t true. I had assumed that they came formthings you had heard or read on the web. You then denied that you were getting it from the web. That leaves your friends who claimed to be SDA.

If I remember right, the only things I’ve gotten from the web is the site you referred me to and your conference website. I’ve never posted anything here that I’ve “heard” second-hand from anyone else about your faith.

Prior to me pointing you to the web site you had said things that no SDA’s believes. Where’d you get it from?

 

[josie_L]

**1882 - Oysters and Herrings? **

Mrs. White was still privately eating unclean meat a full 13 years after her public commitment! In this 1882 excerpt from a letter to her daughter-in-law, Mary Kelsey White, she expresses her fondness for herring and oysters:

Mary, if you can get me a good box of herrings - fresh ones - please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy cans, say (a) half dozen cans of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them.13
This letter gives credence to Fannie Bolton’s claim that Ellen White was discovered in a restaurant “very gratified in eating big white raw oysters with vinegar, pepper and salt”.14
Some find it difficult to believe that Sister White actually ate oysters because her testimonies tell Adventists they should refuse to eat them:

His stronghold seems to be giving way; his hitherto brave heart is growing weak. He is invited to accompany them for a walk, and they lead him to a saloon. Oysters or other refreshments are called for, and he is ashamed to draw away and refuse the treat.15

1887 - What’s a campmeeting without chicken?

According to Dr. John Kellogg, Mrs. White celebrated her return from Europe in 1887 with “a large baked fish.” When she visited the Battle Creek Sanitarium during the next several years, she “always called for meat and usually fried chicken,” much to the consternation of Kellogg and the cook who were both vegetarians.16

At the various camp meetings she attended, her lax dietary habits became common knowledge, thanks in no small part to her own children. Kellogg recalled once hearing Edson (J.E.) White standing in front of his mother’s tent calling out to a meat wagon that regularly visited the grounds:

“Say, hello there! Have you any fresh fish?”
“No,” was his reply.
“Have you got any fresh chicken?”
Again the answer was “no,” and J.E. bawled out in a very loud voice, "Mother wants some chicken. You had better get some quick."17
Years after his mother’s death Willie White told of his mother’s difficulty in giving up meat. He described the difficulty in finding vegetarian cooks, and of lunch baskets filled with turkey, chicken, and tinned tongue.18

**1890 - More Oysters! **

"What kinds of edibles command the highest price in the market? Those that stimulate this passion, and because they create impure desires. What mean those oyster stews, and crab parties, and terrapin soups, and squab suppers, wild fowls, cloves, and a host of other like things? Eaten, in many instances in high (?low) life, expressly to beget unhallowed desires! Oh! shame, where is thy blush! Do you want more proof? Behold the fertile South. But particulars are too revolting, both as regards the beastly indulgence of whites with blacks, and the number of rakes [immoral men] and harlots among the latter! Our world is literally FULL of sensuality!"20
James blasted those who ate oysters because of their supposed power to stimulate “sensual desires.” Yet surprisingly, his own wife fostered a love for these forbidden, unclean creatures. In 1907, Adventist physician Dr. Charles Stewart wrote a letter to Mrs. White questioning why she ate oysters:

"Three parties, all Seventh-day Adventists, two of them officially connected with the denomination, state for a number of years after you received the light on health reform, that you ate meat and oysters. Two of these persons within the past ninety days told me personally that you ate oysters in their own home, on one occasion as late as 1890. Another stated that he saw you eating oysters in a restaurant.
"If you deny that you ate oysters and state that the statements of these two men are false, I will make an affidavit to this statement and give you the names of the two persons referred to so that they can be asked for an explanation."21

Mrs. White never responded to Dr. Stewart’s letter, nor did she deny the statements of the two men who saw her eating oysters.
1894 - 25 years after her 1869 pledge…

It was not until 1894 that Mrs. White finally gave up meat eating at the insistence of a Catholic woman!

"I have a large family, which often numbers sixteen. In it there are men who work at the plough, and who fell trees. These have most vigorous exercise, but not a particle of the flesh of animals on our table. Meat has not been used by us since the Brighton (Australia) Campmeeting (January, 1894). It was not my purpose to have it on my table at any time, but urgent pleas were made that such a one was unable to eat this or that, and that his stomach could take care of meat better than it could anything else. Thus I was enticed to place it on my table. The use of cheese also began to creep in, because some like cheese; but I soon controlled that. But when the selfishness of taking the lives of animals to gratify a perverted taste was presented to me by a Catholic woman, kneeling at my feet, I felt ashamed and distressed. I saw it in a new light, and I said, I will no longer patronize the butchers. I will not have the flesh of corpses on my table."22
Apparently her heavenly communications with angels were not enough to convince Mrs. White to give up meat. It took a Catholic woman begging her to give up meat on the basis that it was wrong to take the lives of animals! It makes one wonder how much confidence she had in her own visions!

 

[djconklin]

Originally Posted by djconklin
Heaven should be your dream home, not this earth. People have accused sabbatarians of being lazy–but they miss the point: Jesus is our rest and as our Creator He has asked us to worship Him on the Sabbath.

Petty.

I’ll agree that the claim of the critics that sabbatarians are lazy is “petty.”

Jesus is your Creator and Redeemer. Not one or the other. The Bible gives us all the answer we need. All I have to do is read, nothing to figure out. We are to rest in Christ.

Agreed, so why do you separate them? I didn’t you did. You just told me they were separate.

The only thing I’ve made separate is remembering Jesus’ life of service from worshipping Him as our Creator (and thus our Lord). You are remembering the former (which is fine in and of itself, we do it too) while forgetting the latter. Noe what john said:

Revelation 14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

 

[josie_L]

**1894 - Switched to Eating Fish **

In 1896 Ellen White writes a letter indicating that 25 years after the angels told her it was wrong to eat meat, she finally came to the same conclusion. So what did she do? She switched over to eating fish!

"Two years ago [1894] I came to the conclusion that there was danger in using the flesh of dead animals, and since then I have not used meat at all. It is never placed on my table. I use fish when I can get it. We can get beautiful fish from the saltwater lake near here. I use neither tea nor coffee. As I labor against these things, I cannot but practice that which I know to be best for health, and my family are all in perfect harmony with me. You see, my dear niece, that I am telling you matters just as they are."23
Mrs. White and butter

We noted at the top of this page that Mrs. White said she gave up eating butter in 1869. In a letter to her son written May 25, 1869, Mrs. White encourages Edson to follow her “strict” example in giving up meat and butter:

"We have in diet been strict to follow the light the Lord has given us. You are acquainted with that light, and we trust you will have the fear of the Lord continually before you and will respect the light He has given and be no less strict than we have been. We have advised you not to eat butter or meat. We have not had it on our table. … All know that we do not put butter on our table. If they see you, our son, eat the things we have condemned, you weaken our influence and lower yourself in their estimation."24

She further stated in 1870:

"No butter or flesh-meats of any kind come on my table."25

In 1872 she bore postive testimony against it:

"We bear positive testimony against…butter…"26

In 1874, she wrote the following to her son Willie:

"Your father and I have dropped milk, cream, butter, sugar, and meat entirely since we came to California."27

But did she really drop it “entirely”? In 1895 she mentions that she uses butter “for cooking purposes”:

"We purchase butter for cooking purposes from dairies where the cows are in healthy condition, and have good pasture."28

By 1901 it seems that God had changed His mind on butter, because Sister White sent out a testimony taking butter off the banned list:

"When the time comes that it is no longer safe to use milk, cream, butter, and eggs, God will reveal this… No extremes in health reform are to be advocated. The question of using milk and butter and eggs will work out its own problem. At present we have no burden on this line."29

Perhaps that time came in 1903–34 years after she supposedly received instruction to stop eating butter–because Mrs. White claimed she had finally stopped eating butter:
"As for myself, I have settled the butter question. I do not use it."30

Despite that claim, it appears she was eating butter again the very next year in 1904. E.S. Ballenger, a former SDA minister, wrote of Mrs. White contradicting her 1872 testimony against butter:

"Mrs. White did not follow her own testimonies. She ate butter at my table 32 years after giving this definite instruction…"31

Seventh-day Adventist president A.G. Daniels, who knew Mrs. White for over 40 years, stated in 1919:

"I have eaten pounds of butter at her table myself, and dozens of eggs. I could not explain that in her own family if I believe that she believed those were the Lord’s own words to the world."32

**Did Mrs. White believe her own testimonies? **

After reviewing this evidence it is now painfully obvious Mrs. White failed to follow the very health principles that she claimed to have received from God and insisted others follow. Her health practices were clearly not in line with her health teachings. She either chose to disobey the instruction of God, or perhaps she did not follow her testimonies because they did not come from God at all, but from the writings of other health reformers.

There can be no doubt Mrs. White claimed her insight on meat came straight from her “visions”:

"It was at the house of Brother A. Hilliard, at Otsego, Michigan, June 6, 1863, that the great subject of health reform was opened before me in vision."33

The following statements leave no doubt about her stance on meat-eating:

"I do not preach one thing and practice another. I do not present to my hearers rules of life for them to follow while I make an exception in my own case…"34

"Above all things, we should not with our pens advocate positions that we do not put to a practical test in our own families, upon our own tables. This is a dissimulation, a species of hypocrisy."35

Mrs. White even went so far as to condemn those who ate meat as being unfit for God’s service:

"No man should be set apart as a teacher of the people while his own teaching or example contradicts the testimony God has given His servants to bear in regard to diet . . . His disregard of health reform unfits him to stand as the Lord’s messenger…"36
Jesus had something to say about hypocrites who placed burdensome requirements on others while not obeying those requirements themselves:
For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.37

**In the Didache, an early Christian document believed to have been written around the first century A.D., the author advises early Christians on how to identify a false prophet:

“If any prophet teaches the truth,
yet does not practice what he teaches,
he is a false prophet.”38 **

ellenwhiteexposed.com/contra6.htm

 

[djconklin]

By 1901 it seems that God had changed His mind on butter, because Sister White sent out a testimony taking butter off the banned list:

ROFL! There’s no such thing as a banned list in the SDA church!

 

[djconklin]

In the Didache, an early Christian document believed to have been written around the first century A.D., …

The Didache

While some date this text as early as 60-130 AD it is often now seen to be a document from the early second century. There are no clear references to events that can be dated. Instead the information that it is dated by is the doctrine etc. The doctrine of the Didache seems to be less developed than some later texts in regards to church structure, etc. compared to Ignatius, which either favors an earlier date, or a different location. However, it also makes reference to some material that is regarded as later. Here is a discussion of the later date:

ccel.org/ccel/richardson/…html#viii.i.i

Since some see in it quotes from the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas they assign it to the second century.

When you source lies to you about such simple things, why should you trust them on the more complex, or anything at all?​

Look at the post again and find the quote from Daniells with a number 32 at the end. Here’s the rest of the quote in context:

"A. G. Daniells: No, I couldn’t; but I do not believe that; and I can enter upon an explanation of health reform that I think is consistent, and that she endeavored to bring in in later years when she saw people making a bad use of that. I have eaten pounds of butter at her table myself, and dozens of eggs. I could not explain that in her own family if I believed that she believed those were the Lord’s own words to the world. But there are people who believe that and do not eat eggs or butter. I do not know that they use salt. I know plenty of people in the early days did not use salt, and it was in our church. I am sure that many children suffered from it.

There is no use of our claiming anything more on the verbal inspiration of the Testimonies, because she never claimed it, and James White never claimed it, and W. C. White never claimed it; and all the persons who helped to prepare those Testimonies knew they were not verbally inspired. I will say no more along that line." See sdanet.org/atissue/books/1919bc/0801-1919bc.htm.

This is a good example of why you cannot trust the anti-EGW web sites on anything. I have even seen them make up quotes.

 

[greggy53]

Not relevant how many people could read and write. Augustine once herad someone “reading” Romans outside his house. When he went to see who it was he found that the guy was blind. Supposedly (I’m told it isn’t true, but its neat nonetheless …) when Jerome translated the Bible into Latin (most people couldn’t read or write that either–some people lie by not telling you that) he used the word “vine” for Jonah’s gourd. So, when the priest was reading it the people shouted, “No, gourd, gourd!” When the Bereans were checking Scripture to see if what Paul was saying was true or not, were they reading it? Or, were they cross-checking from memory? Maybe one could read–but, how many scrolls on the Bible were there at that time? In Berea?

Some people may be misinformed, or uninformed, some have been lied to and didn’t check their source(s). But, that doesn’t make them “malicious.”

No, what makes them “malicious” is when they fail to inform their un- educated audience about the high rate of illiteracy of the time period while, accusing the church of purposfully keeping the scriptures from the people. That is what I call malicious deception. I bleieve the SDA does this because it’s the only way they can win converts.

 

[djconklin]

Quote:
Originally Posted by djconklin
Not relevant how many people could read and write. Augustine once herad someone “reading” Romans outside his house. When he went to see who it was he found that the guy was blind. Supposedly (I’m told it isn’t true, but its neat nonetheless …) when Jerome translated the Bible into Latin (most people couldn’t read or write that either–some people lie by not telling you that) he used the word “vine” for Jonah’s gourd. So, when the priest was reading it the people shouted, “No, gourd, gourd!” When the Bereans were checking Scripture to see if what Paul was saying was true or not, were they reading it? Or, were they cross-checking from memory? Maybe one could read–but, how many scrolls on the Bible were there at that time? In Berea?

Some people may be misinformed, or uninformed, some have been lied to and didn’t check their source(s). But, that doesn’t make them “malicious.”

No, what makes them “malicious” is when they fail to inform their un- educated audience about the high rate of illiteracy of the time period while, accusing the church of purposfully keeping the scriptures from the people. That is what I call malicious deception.

I have never heard the church not mentioning the high illiteracy–we know that is true even among people today. And just because they can read and write doesn’t mean that they understand what they are reading. I have heard people in the church correct the idea of why the Bible was chained to the wall in the church in Martin Luther’s day–so people couldn’t steal it. The “old” view was from ignoarance–not maliciousness.

I bleieve the SDA does this because it’s the only way they can win converts.

No, and you should know the joke on the word “believe.”

 

[djconklin]

**1882 - Oysters and Herrings? **

Mrs. White was still privately eating unclean meat a full 13 years after her public commitment! In this 1882 excerpt from a letter to her daughter-in-law, Mary Kelsey White, she expresses her fondness for herring and oysters:

Mary, if you can get me a good box of herrings - fresh ones - please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy cans, say (a) half dozen cans of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them.13
This letter gives credence to Fannie Bolton’s claim that Ellen White was discovered in a restaurant “very gratified in eating big white raw oysters with vinegar, pepper and salt”.14
Some find it difficult to believe that Sister White actually ate oysters because her testimonies tell Adventists they should refuse to eat them:

His stronghold seems to be giving way; his hitherto brave heart is growing weak. He is invited to accompany them for a walk, and they lead him to a saloon. Oysters or other refreshments are called for, and he is ashamed to draw away and refuse the treat.15

1887 - What’s a campmeeting without chicken?

According to Dr. John Kellogg, Mrs. White celebrated her return from Europe in 1887 with “a large baked fish.” When she visited the Battle Creek Sanitarium during the next several years, she “always called for meat and usually fried chicken,” much to the consternation of Kellogg and the cook who were both vegetarians.16

At the various camp meetings she attended, her lax dietary habits became common knowledge, thanks in no small part to her own children. Kellogg recalled once hearing Edson (J.E.) White standing in front of his mother’s tent calling out to a meat wagon that regularly visited the grounds:

“Say, hello there! Have you any fresh fish?”
“No,” was his reply.
“Have you got any fresh chicken?”
Again the answer was “no,” and J.E. bawled out in a very loud voice, "Mother wants some chicken. You had better get some quick."17
Years after his mother’s death Willie White told of his mother’s difficulty in giving up meat. He described the difficulty in finding vegetarian cooks, and of lunch baskets filled with turkey, chicken, and tinned tongue.18

**1890 - More Oysters! **

"What kinds of edibles command the highest price in the market? Those that stimulate this passion, and because they create impure desires. What mean those oyster stews, and crab parties, and terrapin soups, and squab suppers, wild fowls, cloves, and a host of other like things? Eaten, in many instances in high (?low) life, expressly to beget unhallowed desires! Oh! shame, where is thy blush! Do you want more proof? Behold the fertile South. But particulars are too revolting, both as regards the beastly indulgence of whites with blacks, and the number of rakes [immoral men] and harlots among the latter! Our world is literally FULL of sensuality!"20
James blasted those who ate oysters because of their supposed power to stimulate “sensual desires.” Yet surprisingly, his own wife fostered a love for these forbidden, unclean creatures. In 1907, Adventist physician Dr. Charles Stewart wrote a letter to Mrs. White questioning why she ate oysters:

"Three parties, all Seventh-day Adventists, two of them officially connected with the denomination, state for a number of years after you received the light on health reform, that you ate meat and oysters. Two of these persons within the past ninety days told me personally that you ate oysters in their own home, on one occasion as late as 1890. Another stated that he saw you eating oysters in a restaurant.
"If you deny that you ate oysters and state that the statements of these two men are false, I will make an affidavit to this statement and give you the names of the two persons referred to so that they can be asked for an explanation."21

Mrs. White never responded to Dr. Stewart’s letter, nor did she deny the statements of the two men who saw her eating oysters.
1894 - 25 years after her 1869 pledge…

It was not until 1894 that Mrs. White finally gave up meat eating at the insistence of a Catholic woman!

"I have a large family, which often numbers sixteen. In it there are men who work at the plough, and who fell trees. These have most vigorous exercise, but not a particle of the flesh of animals on our table. Meat has not been used by us since the Brighton (Australia) Campmeeting (January, 1894). It was not my purpose to have it on my table at any time, but urgent pleas were made that such a one was unable to eat this or that, and that his stomach could take care of meat better than it could anything else. Thus I was enticed to place it on my table. The use of cheese also began to creep in, because some like cheese; but I soon controlled that. But when the selfishness of taking the lives of animals to gratify a perverted taste was presented to me by a Catholic woman, kneeling at my feet, I felt ashamed and distressed. I saw it in a new light, and I said, I will no longer patronize the butchers. I will not have the flesh of corpses on my table."22
Apparently her heavenly communications with angels were not enough to convince Mrs. White to give up meat. It took a Catholic woman begging her to give up meat on the basis that it was wrong to take the lives of animals! It makes one wonder how much confidence she had in her own visions!

Take the last line and see how many websites it could have came from.

And for the rest of the story that the critics don’t dare tell you about see

1. whiteestate.org/issues/Vegetarian.html “ELLEN WHITE
   AND VEGETARIANISM: Did She Practice What She Preached?”
   By Roger W. Coon, Edited by Donald E. Mansell.
2. “Ambivalent on meat-eating for most of her life. … After her health visions, she made it a policy to avoid flesh foods whenever possible. She gave freedom of choice to others, including members of her household.” found at whiteestate.org/books/mol/Chapt41.html; the footnote for the last sentence is “Forgoing flesh food was a struggle for Ellen White. Understanding this struggle and the circumstances that made her resolves more difficult to achieve helps everyone understand the process of Christian growth in themselves and others. See pp. 311-317.” The pages refer to the book Messenger of the Lord: The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White
   Herbert E. Douglass. It is part of Chapter 27 “Principles and Policies” and can be seen here: whiteestate.org/books/mol/Chapt27.html#Principles%20and%20Policies

 

[happilycatholic]

Then you won’t have any trouble showing the biblical texts that show SDA’s aren’t keeping the Sabbath as you have repeatedly claimed.

Good one dj. I didn’t say the 613 commandments that include the 39 precepts governing the keeping of the Sabbath were in the Bible. I said the Bible is a Jewish source.

---