And making EGW the end all, be all, of all true doctrine is at best pronouncing this woman to be your pope. Ellen, herself, time after time stated that she had only limited knowledge and light.



You sit there in your self-righteous judgment and pronounce Jack to be lost. You sir, when you judge others [i.e., decide their fate], judge yourself!

Robert

"We [EGW includes herself] have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light [truth] that is yet to come to us."


"We [again, EGW includes herself] have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed."


"Men rest satisfied with the light already received from God's word, and discourage any further investigation of the Scriptures. They become conservative, and seek to avoid discussion."

You find the references so that you can see that they are real.

BTW, I challenge you to a debate on,

1] Man's sin problem and

2] The truth as it is "in Christ".

First I need to convince you that no matter how righteous you view yourself to be you are still a sinner in need of Christ's righteousness obtained some 2000 years ago. If I can do this then you will gladly accept the true gospel (#2).

Rob

To quote Ellen White as authority and as someone you have confidence in is not making her a pope. For one thing, the pope never claimed to have dreams and visions.

Has any human being, prophet or apostle, ever had unlimited light? If not, then how is Ellen White's having limited knowledge relevant? One might just as well say the same thing when Paul or John or Peter or Isaiah are quoted, for they also had limited light.

Another point here is that Ellen White often spoke and wrote often about the importance of not moving any of the "pillars of our faith". So while it's true that Ellen White said there were things we would need to learn and unlearn, those things did not include changes in certain named fundamental doctrines of the Bible.

Please do not place EGW on the same level as Paul. Paul wrote more than 53% of the NT. Ellen merely studied his works (along with the other NT men). She is the lesser light....

EGW was given to the SDA church not because she had all light or that everything she stated was infallible, but because SDA at that time were to darn lazy to open their Bibles and read it for themselves. Who said that? EGW! Find it!

Those are all good and true quotes. Now how about the other quotes from her writings that bear on this topic? Will you also accept those?

For instance:

Before the last developments of the work of apostasy there will be a confusion of faith. There will not be clear and definite ideas concerning the mystery of God. One truth after another will be corrupted.

After the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations, every conceivable power of evil will be set in operation, and minds will be confused by many voices crying. "Lo, here is Christ; lo, He is there. This is the truth, I have the message from God, He has sent me with great light." Then there will be a removing of the landmarks, and an attempt to tear down the pillars of our faith. A more decided effort will be made to exalt the false sabbath, and to cast contempt upon God Himself by supplanting the day He has blessed and sanctified. This false sabbath is to be enforced by an oppressive law.

In the future, deception of every kind is to arise, and we want solid ground for our feet. We want solid pillars for the building. Not one pin is to be removed from that which the Lord has established. The enemy will bring in false theories, such as the doctrine that there is no sanctuary. This is one of the points on which there will be a departing from the faith.

What are those landmarks and those pillars of our faith?

More later.

Honestly .... I don't take anyone seriously who would make these kinds of statements and place himself as judge and jury. I think God has a few choice words for people who do this.

AMEN

The point is still valid that no one has ever had an unlimited knowledge of truth, so by admitting this, Ellen White was only admitting what Paul and all other Bible writers would also have freely admitted to.

Everyone on this thread needs to keep to the topic and away from getting so personal. This goes equally for all sides of the discussion.

You don't even understand the issue of the Sabbath, which is future. You, from my talks with you, keep the Sabbath as the Jews did - to be saved!

In the future the Sabbath (as understood from the NC) will be a sign or symbol of justification by faith, but I'm not interested in getting off into that subject here and now.

The title is "is there more than on definition of sin?" I gave Jack's list.

We sin because we are sinners. We sin because we have in us "the law of sin and death". In fact we are sinners by birth alone. We are sinners by nature, apart from doing bad things outwardly. It's called iniquity - our bent to self (better known as the love of self in contrast to God's agape love).

Sin then is simply self-seeking. Everything I do, apart giving Christ permission to work over my nature, is for self-centered reasons. It's all about me... That's the problem. Every other sin we do (as in transgression) is because we are born self-centered and selfish!