Featured Ellen White's Amalgamation of man and Beast Revisited

How do I know am dealing with a boy in a man's body? He screams so hard so he can't hear what am saying.

Over and over again I have asked,
Seeing Ellen White taught equality of men,
1. Why did she rabidly oppose interracial marriages?
2. Why did SDAs until 1992 'advise' against interracial marriages?
3. Why did she teach that 'certain races of men were product of beastiality?
4. Why did she not correct this 'erroneous' notion that bred persistent criticism that ran for 60 years till her death, a notion held on to by her own husband and adopted by the governing body?

But I have discovered you to lie through your teeth. You will probably pretend you haven't seen any of these. An indoctrinated several generation Adventist, fully trained to shout himself hoarse when confronted with truth.

 

William Llyod in 1831 preached harder and more effectively against slavery and went as far as supporting interracial marriages.
Ellen White rabidly resisted the same as late as 1902 as a commandment from God

This is why ONLY SDAs remember anything she ever did for the black man who she taught descended from apes vide beastiality.

Llyod, his name is etched in the annals of history. You don't need his denomination paraphernalia to search him out

 

Testimonies volume 9 page 202

 

But you have not answered me.
1. Why did SDA from 1976-1992 advise against interracial marriage?
2. Why did EGW forbid interracial marriages, specifically between negroes and whites?

You can always refute, say she did not, or attempt your classic retarded excuse:tonofbricks:

 

Hallo my brother,
Once you teach that 'certain races of men' descended from apes vide beastiality, the same is repeated in your ears by those closest to you including your husband and disseminated in your church,then you forbid interracial (negro-white) marriages as a commandment from God citing fanaticism and confusion, and your church following your statements 'advises' against interracial marriages as recently as 1992 in North America, you must have been high on demons:tonofbricks:



PS: Could you cite ANY non-SDA EGW/SDA anti-slavery legacy? You are adept at quoting Moody so am sure you don't suckle, you are a grown up who can read and write. At least it appears so on average

 

I did not teach amalgamation my brother, your godess did.
Did you read Review and Herald answer as to whether amalgamated blood can be saved? They maintained that since EGW still called them men ('certain races of men') the deteroriation was not all bad and in any case they had Adam's blood which is all it took to make them humans.

I have a fertile imagination but I can't possibly think of ANY reason why EGW would rabidly oppose negroe-white marriages while maintaining that all races are equal before God. Your godess was a two-faced plagiarist:laugh:

1901, some twenty years before your godess checked out
'Amalgamation BETWEEN','beastiality', 'deteroriation'
What god(ess) inspired this? The same that 'inspired' Joseph Smith?



How old were you BobRyan in 1976? Were you an Adventist?
Can you imagine your church 'advising' you against marrying your African American sweetheart:tear:

BobRyan, it don't matter if she can recite Great Controversy backwards

 

BobRyan,
No imagination exceeds antediluvian Einstein IQ and GMOs.
No imagination exceeds negroes descending from apes. This was quite a prevalent theme by the way


BobRyan,
Why did SDA for all those years 'advise' against negro-white marriages?
Why did your godess dismiss them as fanaticism?
How comes outside SDA sewers nobody recognizes ANY SDA anti-slavery efforts? Is it a Jesuit conspiracy?

 

James White in 1968 Herald and Review endorsing EGW's negro sexual escapades with apes, published by SDA:smilewinkgrin:

 

The New Work by Uriah Smith marketed aggressively by SDA in 1968.


Did we teach that NEGRO is not human?
Hell no, it is clear they are still 'races of men'
But is the 'general statement' true? Just look at wild bushmen, Hottentots and even the Digger Indians
In any case, do we know the boundary between man and beast? Of course we don't
Sin (what sin BobRyan?) marred the demarcation between these kingdoms


Don't you just wish you were there to teach them about genetic engineering?:laugh:

Brain is a terrible thing to waste :tonofbricks:

 

But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere. Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 64

Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men. Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 75

It is important to recap what we have learnt about these shocking statements from BobRyan's godess.:tonofbricks:

Summary

1. It was "a sin" serious enough to require "the destruction" of the human race.
2. It was a vile, "base crime".
3. This vile sin "defaced the image of God."
4. It occurred both before and after "the flood."
5. Its effects can be seen "in certain races of men."

Following scathing attacks, Uriah Smith in 1868 explained that seeing nobody disputed the descent of Hottentots and bushmen from animals, the statement was generally accurate and in any case they still remained men ('certain races of men')

Uriah Smith's defense was adopted by the SDA governing body including Ellen White's husband James White and was aggressively promoted

The Bushmen of Africa explanation increasingly fell out of favor with the increasingly racially tolerant America and SDA resorted to gymnastics to wriggle out of this

The subject article has successfully demonstrated that AMALGAMATION was understood as beastiality by EGW contemporaries and the SDA church and for the entire 60 years EGW lived since the she made the statement, there was no attempt to correct it. The fact that her own husband and the official magazine Herald and Review repeatedly pushed for the beastiality angle and adopted Uriah Smith's defense means it was IMPOSSIBLE for EGW to be unaware of how her statement was understood.

In 1947, one Dr Frank Marsh convinced an SDA panel to interpret the statement as interbreeding among species. So they developed a new meaning for this statement. A recent SDA scholar F D Nichols claims the word amalgamation in the 19th century was used for interracial marriages between blacks and whites and also those of different faiths

Let's look at intermarriages between races

• How does this deface the image of God seeing both are men made in the image of God?
• And how comes the intermarriage between race which is a sin and a base crime is never described as such in the scriptures?
• Zipporah, Moses wife was of a different race. Were his offspring amalgamated blood?

Why did God make them a great nation instead of destroying them?

This idea appears preposterous until you consider that SDAs until 1992 actively 'advised' against interracial marriages

Let's now look at intermarriages between godly and the ungodly

• How could this be bigger than idolatry,adultery, murder, polygamy and theft all covered shortly before?
• When EGW describes intermarriage between sons of Cain and Seth just before these statements, she says it 'displeased God' and not a BASE CRIME! In Judges 14:4, Samson married a Philistine and it was 'of the Lord'. How then can marrying an ungodly be a base crime worthy of destruction of the human race, yet here it was 'of the Lord'?
• How could intermarriage between people of different faiths now "be seen" in "certain races of men?" Which races show evidence of intermarriage between believers and unbelievers?

As pointed out in the article, there are recent attempts to explain amalgamation as genetic manipulation. I thought it was a joke until our resident EGW apologist flashed the theory. The idea is the pre-Flood men were highly intelligent and they lived longer so they had advanced technology, something that we are only scarcely grappling now. Where is the evidence? It was lost in the flood. How convenient!

But EGW insists AMALGAMATION also happened AFTER the flood. We again have zero evidence of such advanced technology anywhere after the flood. But we have very good evidence of how rudimentary technology was back then. So unlike the 'lost' preFlood evidence, we have no excuse. But perhaps SDA god hid it:tonofbricks:

Now, if AMALGAMATION was IT, the "one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race", how comes Moses does not mention it yet he mentions others, violence, corruption?

And finally, why were these two passages removed from later editions of Ellen White writings? Did God un-inspire them? lets ask The prophet's son

Regarding the two paragraphs which are to be found in Spiritual Gifts and also in The Spirit of Prophecy regarding amalgamation and the reason why they were left out of the later books, and the question as to who took the responsibility of leaving them out, I can speak with perfect clearness and assurance. They were left out by Ellen G. White. No one connected with her work had any authority over such a question, and I never heard of anyone offering to her counsel regarding this matter.
In all questions of this kind, you may set it down as a certainty that sister White was responsible for leaving out or adding to matters of this sort in the later editions of our books.

Sister White not only had good judgment based upon a clear and comprehensive understanding of conditions and of the natural consequences of publishing what she wrote, but she had many times direct instruction from the angel of the Lord regarding what should be omitted and what should be added in new editions. (W.C. White, Selected Messages, Vol. 3, p. 452)
http://m.egwwritings.org/publicatio...tion=all&pagenumber=452&paragraphReferences=1

• Did Mrs. White remove the statements because they created a controversy?
• Did she remove them because they were wrong?
• Did she remove them because the brethren faced a predicament trying to explain them to new converts?
• Did she remove them because they made her appear uneducated?

What a dumb question, an angel told her to do it!

Why the angel did not instruct her to remove them BEFORE publishing, only thawed brains can understand:tonofbricks:

 

Where did EGW get her amalgamation ideas?
What inspired her? The Holy Spirit?
I would like to believe so had the same ideas not been expressed in the Book of Jasher published in 1840
Jasher 4:18 18
And their judges and rulers went to the daughters of men and took their wives by force from their husbands according to their choice, and the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order therewith to provoke the Lord; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon earth, all men and all animals.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/jasher/4.htm