I posted a link to the medal and to the exchange that took place between the pope and BB Beach, the only source I know of for that information. That information is relevant to the thread. If anyone has good evidence that this information is inaccurate, then let them present it. The fact that the information came from that particular website is really irrelevant. Since when do those on CA limit their sources exclusively to those websites which post only views they find agreeable or "credible"?

I believe that the following quotes from Ellen White make it essential for us as Adventists to wake up and pay close attention to the relationship developing between the papacy and the protestant churches, including our own beloved church:

"The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization. Were this reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly regarded, as also God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement. The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation would be built on the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the structure." Series B No. 2 54,55, or 1 SM 204, 205

"The sin of ancient Israel was in disregarding the expressed will of God and following their own way according to the leadings of unsanctified hearts. Modern Israel are fast following in their footsteps, and the displeasure of the Lord is as surely resting upon them." 5T 94

"If when the Lord reveals your errors you do not repent or make confession, His providence will bring you over the ground again and again. You will be left to make mistakes of a similar character, you will continue to lack wisdom, and will call sin righteousness. The multitude of deceptions that will prevail in these last days will encircle you, and you will change leaders, and not know that you have done so." RH 12/6/90

"We are in danger of becoming a sister to fallen Babylon, of allowing our churches to become corrupted, and filled with every foul spirit, a cage for every unclean and hateful bird....I tell you the truth, Elder Butler, that unless there is a cleansing of the soul temple on the part of many who claim to believe and to preach the truth, God's judgments, long deferred, will come." Letter 51, 1886.

"We are not to spend our time in controversy with those who know the truth, and upon whom the light of truth has been shining, when they turn away their ear from the truth to turn to fables. I was told that men will employ every policy to make less prominent the differences between the faith of Seventh-day Adventists and those who observe the first day of the week. In this controversy the whole world will be engaged, and the time is short. This is no time to haul down our colors. A company was presented before me under the name of Seventh-day Adventists, who were advising that the banner or sign which makes us a distinctive people should not be held out so strikingly, for they claimed it was not the best policy in securing success to our institutions....I saw some reaching out their hands to remove the banner, and obscure its significance." 2SM 385

I couldn't agree more.

What "supposed argument that is supposed to happen" do you have reference to?

I can relate to what you are saying here John317.

I get accused of needing to believe ALL of Ellen White when I quote her. Just because I quote some of her does not mean that I have to agree with ALL of her. So, the same with the link you posted .... just because you posted some of the source does not mean that you have to agree with ALL of that source.

Good Point. I am glad to have company with this belief.

Dave ... you've made a very good point here. Well said ....

That is an entirely different situation. What I am referring to is reading quoting an article in a paper or source without necessarily agreeing with everything in the entire paper or book. The Bible and Ellen White are different matters, and you know this perfectly well. It is intellectually dishonest to compare websites with Ellen White in the manner that you have done here, Redwood.

What ever you say John. I guess you must be the judge of 'dishonesty'. You must be in a superior level of knowledge to know such things. Therefore I submit to your attack on me. I must be lacking in both intelligence and honesty.

However .... per the rules of this forum. I would ask that if you desire to attack me further ... that you do it in a PM. Thank you John. I really don't feel that my intelligence nor my honesty needs to be a public matter of discussion here.

I just have to smile. I can not read either John's or Redwood's minds. However, I found Redwoods comment to be very tongue in cheek, not in comparing the two. He was just saying that he also can take some things and leave some things in EGW's writings just like you take some things and leave others on this website. Of course the writings of EGW aren't comprable with this website. The point was that he doesn't take everything she says any more than you take everything the website says. (Now my stance on EGW nor this website have been discussed here, so let's not go there, but briefly, for the record, I do believe firmly in EGW and I firmly see this website as being the type of website I would never want to frequent. We need to focus on Jesus, not on each other's or the church's supposed, or real, or imagined sins.)

Thank you for making this very valid and serious observation.

John,

In answering your question that you repeated several times I would first emphasize that the most significant error of the source you referenced here is the way in which they interpret details, the symbolism they attribute to certain features of the medallion and conclusions they draw from even the most incidental and innocuous aspects of the whole story. In terms of accuracy and truth very little is correct. But there are some very clear factual errors simply about the medallion itself that I would like to point out that significantly undermine the credibility of your source of all this misinformation.

• The stars - the sketch of the medallion and their description say there are six on each side - the medallion actually has 23 stars, 9 on one side of Jesus, ten on the other and 4 on the cloud at Jesus feet.(Even with their mistaken number of a total of 12 stars their negative spin agenda misses the Biblical symbolism of the number 12...)
• They describe 9 lightning bolts coming out of the cloud - they are rays of light from the cloud since they are straight lines.
• The "mountain" on which Jesus is standing - The outer straight lines interpreted as edges of a mountain are more likely the outer edges of the spreading beams of light coming from the cloud of glory as they are parallel to the 9 clearly defined light rays.
• The Maltese Cross - Actually it more closely resembles a Cross patee since it does not have the sharp indentations at the end of the 4 main branches that are distinctive of a Maltese Cross. It is simply a variant of the Christian symbol of the cross.

Regarding your other question about who else has received this medallion, I think one implication of your question apparently was the suggestion that this medallion was minted especially for this visit with the pope. The copyright date on the medallion is 1973, 4 years before the meeting with the pope.

And regarding your repeated question about referring to the pope as the "Holy Father", I will see if Dr. Beach can shed some light on that next time I see him. (He still comes to the GC periodically and we go to the same church.) But I vaguely recall something about this from prior discussions that the quote was an English translation of the comment that Dr. Beach made in Italian, I believe. (Dr. Beach speaks about 5 languages) As I recall, the term for "pope" in Italian, "Papa", means "father" just as the the Latin origin of the English word pope. A Catholic Italian translator would just as likely translate it as "Holy Father" as "The Pope".

Tom