I would never say she was. I fear God.

But there are heaps of people who continue to gather lies and they are pretty subtle.

At http://www.christian-forum.net/ you can search for "Ellen White" and so far there are only 30 posts. They seem unanimous that she's a false prophet, and the strange phenomena where demonic, and SDAs are just as deluded as Mormons.

Here's the main post listing the slander.
http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?act=findpost&hl=&pid=171840

It's identical to this blog. I'm guessing it's the same guy, and he pasted it.
http://endtimespropheticwords.wordpress....-day-adventism/

Here's another example:
http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?act=findpost&hl=&pid=175417

I guess I'll attempt to say something as soon as I get time.



I want to make a post on their forums right now, but I know it will take hours to research all these things, and I just don't have time right now.

Please pray. Perhaps this zealot who opposes the truth means well, and will turn out like Paul.

And here is another Bible verse about Seventh Day Adventists.

"...an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God." John 16:2 NASB

Truth is. No voice of disagreement will change Truth.

As with all, pursuing Jesus is your only hope.

"And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart." Jeremiah 29:13 KJV

"Hear me, O Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem; Believe in the LORD your God, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.
2 Chronicles 20:20 KJV

"It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household?" Matthew 10:25 KJV

"And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." Joshua 24:15 KJV
Regards!

Most probably by Benedict Arnolds.

Gerry

Here is one of the quotes that some use to claim she is a false prophet. They ignore the fact that the section starts by saying that the vision "concerns the church generally," the people who disagree with her, claim the prophecy concerned the people at the conference but the prophecy was about the SDA church generally. Some will be food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, and some will be translated to heaven!

At the Conference at Battle Creek, May 27, 1856, I was
shown in vision some things that concern the church
generally(page 128)...Said the angel, "Some food for worms, some subjects
of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the
earth, to be translated at the coming of Jesus."(page 131)
- Ellen G White
- Testimonies to the Church

When you read how the vision starts then you can see that she was talking about the church in general

I never worry about what they post there.

If they can not figure out the Biblical position of what happens when you die, why would a person be concerned about deeper issues?

I'm not really concerned about 'when' Jesus comes. I have to be ready NOW. That is what I am concerned about.

You are right Redwood. We should be ready now. Unfortunately most people, uncluding me, are not ready yet. I wish i knew God s time setting...

We are always ready. As long as we accept Jesus as our Savior, and repent, his blood covers us.

pkrause

For you .... it could be tonight. You could die at any moment. The next thing you know ... there He is.

While it may have been subconscious to a large degree, the problem with the above vision comes from the development of fundamentalism in the late 1800 and early 1900s. As Fundamentalism developed there developed false ideas of what a prophet should be and how inspiration should work. Mrs. White faught against people trying to make her fit the fundamentalist mold of a prophet, however after she died and the rejection of her hand picked and trained church leaders in 1923, the church went gung hoe for the myth of a prophet and forcing Mrs. White into this mold.

When you look at Bible truth you learn that thr promises and curses of God are alike conditional. We have become so adapt at tap-dancing over these texts to force the Bible to fit what we want it to say, that we don't notice that the Bible 1) Gives every generation either the chance to be the last generation, or to prepare for the next generation to be the last generation and related to that 2) There are similar statements in the Bible about when the time would be and people living then to see it. However they were all based on conditions that were not fulfilled.

As for that Ellen White quote: The context was that the church was planing an evangelistic thurst and Mrs. White was encouraging them in this decision: In reality, like many ideas in business meetings, the idea stopped in the planning room. It was never implimented. If the condition was not fulfilled, then why would we expect the prophecy to be fullfilled?

Now I've noticed six things about this critical sites:

1.) They like to take her quotes out of literary or historical context. An example here is they have quote after quote that a superficial reading sounds like she's denying her borrowing. However, when looked at who she was addressing those comments to, they were to people who were aware of her copying, some of them were doing the copying for her. The issue was not whether or not she was coppying, but as they were starting to be influenced by the developing theory of fundamentalism, they did not see the copying as fitting the myth of a prophet and wondered if her message came from her visions or from all her reading and the sources she was copying.

The critics neglect to point out that these so called denial statements are not given to wide eye ignornat wonderers who only heard roumers that she was copying. They were given to the people who were fully aware of the copying, many of them helping copy, and she knew that they were aware of her copying. You cannot have a denial statement to the people who are intamately aware of the facts and you know that they are aware of the facts.

2.)They are notorious for either misquoting Mrs. White, or quoting her but mixing it with other ideas that she may not have held. For example, Mrs. White was saying that England was following the civil war and considering wether or not to get involved. The critics said she predicted that England was going to get involved and they didn't. I've seen and others have pointed out quote after quote where when compaired to how they write what she says and what the source actually says, you find them frequently misquoting her and in their misquote they make her say something that she actually does not say. They are not able to simply coppy words and letters correctly.

So far the critics have a horrible tendency of taking her quotes out of context, then not even able to get her words right so they are twisted words out of historical or literary context, they do not sound very trustworthy.

3.) In the matter of the reformed dress, testimony # 11, and events after 1888, especially on the issue of the daily and in conversations with Stephen Haskell, and some of the forefathers of todays Historic Adventist movement, she wrote a lot about what visions do and do not do for her. What issues are central and how her time is wasted on side issues that people push her to comment on and how Haskell and these others took all her comments on equal setting and she did not like it. These are topics where she frequently changed her mind and where she warned us that if we were to focus on these issues we would find problems. So they confirm that she was right, if you want to focus on those issues you will find problems. I'll follow her advice and see what she has to say about them but not focus on them but focus on what these critics avoid like the plague, the issues she saw as central and important.

Well, as you look at the issues the critics focus on, they are ALL these issues that she saw as side issues where she said that God has given her the same insight that God gives people in general and not a theam of her visions. They constantly look at the side issues. I never found them even once looking at any of her central messages.

So the critics look exclusively at perepheral issues, take the quotes out of context then can't even just quote her out of context but they have to twist her words.

4.) The critics tend to claim that they were once conservative Adventists, but how they discribe their expirence as Adventists were as using Mrs. White as a club to smash non-Adventists. Now they have become "converted" and are using Paul as a club to smash Adventists. I do not see much of a change in them.

I see them as just general snobish people who think that they are better if others are worst. They used Ellen White to coddle to their conseat and contempt. Learned that Ellen White did not meet the mold of a fundamentalist prophet, so they changed to Paul who has been seen as a prophet for nearly 2,000 years, surely Paul fit the mold of a fundamentalist prophet, and they now use Paul to coddle their conseat and contempt.

5.)Their interpatation of Paul comes not from exogetical studies of Paul, but from church tradition. They are very focused on Reformation Theolgoy, and how Luther and others in the 1500s understood paul and see these sixteenth century interpetations as the final authority. How safe would you feel to go to a medical doctor who has studied how medicine was done in the 1500s and insist that is the only form of medicine to use and to reject all developments that have come since the 1500s? I would not trust them with my health. And here these theogogical "medicine men" want us to trust our eternal life on where Bible knowlege was in the 1500s and even the advancements made by the Wesleys are rejected. Modern Biblical Scholarship does not support their views. May I recommend Jim Fleming "Acts: New Discoveries from the Early Church" audio recordings of lectures and notebook (Google in "Jim Fleming" and "Biblical Resources") Also the works of E. P. Sanders "Paul and Palestaining Judiasm" and "Paul, the law and the Jewish people" J. D. G. Dunn "Romans" 2 vol, and " Jesus, Paul and the Law" (John Knox 1990) S. Westerholm "Israel's law and the Church's faith, 'Paul and his Interpreters'" F. Theilman "From Plight to Solution: A Jewish Framework for understanding Paul's view of the Law in Galations and Romans" and P. J. Thomson "Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakha in the letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles" (all refered to in Fleming). They may not support some of our traditions, but they don't condem us for our love for the Sabbath and they shread the arguments of our critics.

6.) The critics offer a very westernized cultural version of evangelical Christianity as the only way of salvation. They do not see that Jesus is bigger than Christianity, much less any section of Christianity. They teach righteousness by works, saying the right things about Jesus. Righteousness by vocabulary. They have a short list of works, but it is still works. Those who have not said the right words about Jesus are lost. If you follow the chain of their arguments They don't have room in heaven for Abraham Joshua Heshel, Anwar Saddat, Gandhi, maybe they can barely squeeze Mother Teresa in. There are many Jews who love God. There are many Muslims who love God, there are many Buddists who are reaching out to what ever is out there. Jesus sees who they are. Being saved in the "Name" of Jesus means the character of Jesus. Many Jews, Muslims, Hindus will wake up in the resurection and say "You're Jesus? I thought that Jesus was... well, never mind, I know you, you have been my friend and comfort throughout life!!!"

Now who do I want to be in heaven with, those who are going after the character of Jesus even if they don't meet the standards that the critics offer for salvation; or with fundamentalist evangelicals who use Paul as interpeted by tradition and not what Paul had in mind, to bash Adventists and to take perepheral issues from Mrs. White, out of their context, then change her words. Somehow heaven with these people sound like an eternal hell to me. I am quite happy not catering to them.