Ellen White's "inspired" writings

Many thanks to those that mentioned that I missed the trash posted above.

Basically - I have not heard any of this coming from "the Adventist church" - though I have seen a few people on the outside that would have loved to find a way to "insert it" into the Adventist church so they would have some kind of a foothold for whining.

Be that as it may - the above rantings by T2U can hardly be considered as a "kind of proof" of something besides a wonderfull imagination - and I certainly agree to that much.

Here is more griss for that mill - while you are looking for some mud. Ellen White claimed that she saw Enoch in a Vision - on another planet in the universe. Those who heard her - conjectured that it was some planet in our solar system. Since that time - many would be assailants have tried to impute the words of the bystanders to Ellen White as "if" she taught or made the claims of everyone in the room that happened to hear what she said.

How nice to be able to blame her for everything everyone else says - when you don't have enough from what she says alone. Not that you or anyone here would use such low tactics - I just thought I would offer it as an option for you to consider.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob, you skipped this. </font>[/QUOTE]Is your point that God really does not know what He is doing?

Is your point that you really don't believe God in the OT when HE forbade intermarriage with Pagans?

Is your point that you don't believe Him in the NT when He tells us not to be unnequally yoked with unbelievers?

There are several cases in the OT where the point is made "this thing is from the Lord" - and it is judgment - even though rebellion is being practiced - in the case of Samson - it was turned and used as a means of judgment on the Philistines.

You seem to be grasping at straws now - surely you have not run out of rocks yet.

As I said - she had several visions pertaining to the Pope, indulgences, the RC practice of burning people at the stake. Are you sure you don't want to use one of those?

In Christ,

Bob

 

God never "approved" of sin. And He already declared that act to be "sin". Rather - He used the actions of a rebellious judge in Israel as an opening to judge the pagan Philistines. That is not the same as condoning the sin of Samson's marrying a pagan. From the story of how that turned out - it was clearly a family tragedy as well.

As for how "I know" that her writing about events before the flood in a book called "the Spirit of Prophecy" was in fact - a claim to inspiration - well if you had actually "read" the chapter that you claim to know enough to quote from - you could not "miss" the fact that this is a "claim" to an inspired source of information.

Whether or not the "claim" is proven to be "true" depends on whether she really IS a prophet and passes the test. For example when she claims visions/dreams from God condemn the Papacy for their doctrines and for their burning the saints at the stake - is she in doctrinal "error"? If so then you have "evidence" that she is a false prophet and then these other claims to inspiration can be known to be false.

But as to whether the "claim" is being made in that book - it is very easy to tell from the chapter - had you read it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Agreed - you are having difficulty with that concept. Perhaps some biology would have been useful for you to have taken at some time. Although that is usually not required to get that simple concept above.

Nope. It is simply a statement about speciation and the intermixing of animals to get it.

Some have "speculated" that it might have implicated some kind of genetic engineering for pre-flood man. Ellen White made claims about their being as great in intelligence as they were greater in living longer lives.

In any case - like Daniel 8 and 9 - just because a prophet HAS a vision doesn't mean they and everyone around them are blessed with "all knowledge" on the subject presented.

Hard to believe that the Bible would be instructive on this point isn't it T2U?

The specific example was the Genesis 6 case of the descendants of Seth with the children of Cain.

And "pop" - you get the end of the world - the flood. Genesis 6.

Ellen White did not claim that new races are created - she said that some races show the effects of that compromise. And as ALREADY stated - that evidence is in the form of shorter lives, disease death etc. For example cannibalism and the unsanitary life-style of those pagan people groups produced that result in some cases.

In Christ,

Bob

 

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

This is a "sin" attributed to humanity. "Obviously".

In the case of animals it is a mixing of animals that violates the principle of Genesis 1 - where each animal produces offspring after its kind.

We see see that mankind "amalgamates" animals together in the form of donkeys and horses mixed to get mules. However - the "Sin" of amalgamation of the animals - implies a kind of genetic engineering that goes even beyond that.

In the case of humans. It is much easier to get from the Genesis 6 account as we see the "amalgamation" between the children of Seth and the Children of Cain. The People of God with the children of rebellion.

What the NT calls "being unequally yoked" in a way that compromises your stand for the truth of God's Word.


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

Again the focus is on those animal species that God created (in fact distinctly focused on "animal species" that God Created). The point of man - playing with genetics in the animal kingdom is -- very timely. Animals mixed with animals in a way that genetically alters the offspring resulting in confused species.

In addition - we see the results of Genesis 6 - Humans mixing with humans - where the people of God lose their understanding of truth by mixing with the children of rebellion in marriage. The results were seen in Ellen White's day - in people groups living to an average age of 40, cannibals, living unsanitary lives and devoid of all knowledge of God. How far they fell from the 8 that came out of the Ark.

Of course - I know that the Catholics here have to "pretend" not to understand these points. But as long as they do - they provide opportunity to futher sharpen the point made.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob,

You have done a great job of answering questions that were not raised. Let's take these two points:

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

Amalgation of not only beast, but of man is a "sin" which actually caused the destruction of the race by the flood. It is a "base crime."

Now look at the second quote:

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

Amalgation has caused "endless varieties" in "certan races of men." It appears to me, honestly, that this is saying that a man marrying and having children with a woman of another race is a "sin" and a "base crime." Honestly, I don't see how anything else can be derived. Amalgamation of man is a sin, and this amalgamation produces new races of men.

Exactly why is this a sin?

 

I am a "Believer" in the Bible - when IT says God created the world in six days and rested the seventh - and that WE too should work for SIX days and rest on the seventh. Literally true - trustworthy and believable.

I am a "believer" in the Bible statement that the people before the flood - and those living for a few centuries after the flood lived to be over 900 years of age.

I am a "believer" in the Bible statement that by comparison to modern man - there were Giants living in the land - these people who LIVED to be 900 ALSO GREW to be of a size significantly larger than we are today.

I am a "believer" in the fact that anyone who is 900 years old - has the capacity to LEARN far beyond anyone you meet next door.

I am a "believer" in the fact that the Bible teaches a literal flood that covered all the earth and killed all air-breathing life on land.

T2U - that is an entirely different model than you are used to. I approach the Bible as though it were "true" and its creation "account" trustworthy.

As for whether genetically engineering variations among the animals - is "wrong" (a sin) when in fact God said that each animal species was intended to reproduce "after its kind" -- well again - that takes some degree of trust in the Bible to actually "believe".

IN Christ,

Bob

 

my apologies for jumping in uninvited, but I'm curious about the above too. Thanks.

 

It is primarily a focus on Genesis 1 - where God states His divine purpose for His creation -

On Day 5 and 6 we see the animals created with the commands to reproduce "after their kind".

Genetic engineering brings with it the possibility of a confusion among the species that goes beyond the variations with descent expected.

Clearly this view (That genetically altering the species would be a sin) comes from taking the Bible as it reads - literally and the restriction "After its Kind" to refer to the natural course of variation within a species.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

Bob,

You did not answer my questions.

 

In one of the circus's that travels around here, they had an incidence where a Tiger and a Lion mated and produced Tigon's. This happened naturally, not designed by man. I dont see that intermixing species is sinful.

I realise that there were Giants around, the Nephilliam. Interestingly enough this is pretty much what the whole book of Enoch is about, stating that demons interbred with the daughters of men and caused great wickedness to come upon the earth so God destroyed it with the flood.

 

According to Christ's statement in Matt 22 - Angels don't have the capacity to breed EVEN with Angels - let alone with humans.

The amalgamation of Genesis 6 is the mixing of the children of Seth with the chilrden of Cain. "The unnequally yoked" problem.

In Christ,

Bob

 

And how is this evident in many races that currently exist, Bob? And this also happened after the flood, she says. Which amalgamation does this refer to, and why was it a sin?