Comments on the Seventh Day Adventist Church.
an outsider's perspective)At
the beginning of 2010, some members of the Seventh Day Adventist
Church left two booklets at our house, I guess as part of their
activities. Having read the booklets,
I felt moved to make some comments to the people who left them - their
email address was stamped inside the cover. However, as I put words to
(electronically) I felt the issues went far beyond the average
member. Not knowing any ministers, or
having any connection with the Seventh Day Adventist Church (SDA), I
to see that all roads seemed closed as far as communicating directly
with the SDA and perhaps having them
reconsider the material they were handing out.
be others who have also been given either or both of these two
thought there could be some value in sharing our thoughts. If you have
read either of them, and feel like emailing me your comments, maybe we
can learn something from each other.
absence of further input at this point, let me make a start. I can
always update later.
the two booklets again reinforced my belief that the Christian Churches
as in 2010 have "lost the plot" as far as being able to present the
truth that was
in the original Bible. Don't get me wrong, there was truth presented in
both booklets, but mixed with so much error (as I see it) that people
would probably be better off not reading them. Of course, if you have
the basic truths of the original Bible (the Bible before it was
corrupted with errors) in your mind, then you can extract
the truth and reject the error. But, if you are an average
Christian, especially a new Christian, what they are saying
"Biblical", and therefore OK - but
it is not OK.
I'll start with the "easy" one first.
Commandments Twice Removed"Written by Danny Shelton and
an overall comment, the title suggests the booklet is about the Ten
Commandments, and while they do get a mention, in reality the booklet
is about the Fourth Commandment. Sure, the Sabbath is important,
but people need instruction in how to keep all Ten
I have no real problems with what is
said about keeping the Sabbath.
My main concern lies
with what is said in the booklet about the "Law of Moses".
I have used some personal pronouns. This may cause some people to think
"who gives you the right to sit in judgment about a religious booklet?"
My answer is "we have to". If we (the Christians of
today) do not monitor - make judgments
- about what we put into our mind, we will very quickly loose track of
what is right (before God) and what is wrong.
have read the book "The
Silence of Adam" you will already be familiar with the fact that
because Adam kept silent when Eve was taking the forbidden fruit, he
allowed sin to come into the world. Eve was deceived by the
but Adam was not (1 Tim 2:14). He had the ability to speak up
stop the action (sin). Instead he remained silent, and then ate the
fruit as well.
I am speaking up because I see people
being instructed in a way of life that will result in sin.
of the definitions for "judgment" given in WordWeb is "(5) The
to assess situations or circumstances shrewdly and draw sound
conclusions". I am trying to do just that. When I see
groups passing off their church's traditions as "truth", I
it is time to "draw sound conclusions" about what is truth and what is
have no problem with groups having their own
internal traditions which they follow. The Catholic Church is
very open about that. The problems start when churches use
certain verses in the Bible to try and give those
traditions Biblical backing, and then use those traditions
to try to draw others
into their group.
After reading my comments, you
your own decision about whether the facts I present, or the booklets
themselves, are the more accurate.
in case you are reading
this article without reading the Introduction at the beginning of this
web site, you need to understand that our current English Bibles
contain hundreds of verses in error. To get back to the "original"
Bible (or as close as we can get), you first have to isolate or resolve
the corrupt verses that Satan (who deceives the whole world, including
Christians, Rev 12 :9) [see "The Great Deception" in the Miscellaneous Index] has inspired men to put into the original
"differences" between Christian religions have come about because men
have zeroed in on the errors (and ignored the many other verses that
contradict the errors) and made them part of their doctrines. Obviously
the verses that are in error have an appeal to men, because they
usually "water down" the original truth, or give the truth a "mystery"
feel that only those "in the know" can talk about.
name of this web site - NewBiblicalUnderstanding.info - has
come about because of our realization that we have to read ALL the
Bible has to say about a topic - in other words, find a theme that runs
throughout the Bible - and then reject those verses that are in
conflict with the Bible theme. In copying the Bible by hand in past
centuries, it was easy to "make a mistake" or even "change" a verse as
you copied, but almost
impossible to change every place a topic is mentioned. We can use
this fact to isolate the verses contaminated by men. I should also
mention that besides the corruption in the original language, our
Bibles also suffer from mistranslations, and misinterpretation.
Law of Moses.In the booklet "Ten Commandments
Twice Removed", I feel the problems start on page 33.
writers quote from Gal 3:10-13 "for as many as are of the works of the
law are under the curse. ... No one is justified by the law. ... The
law is not of faith. ... Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the
Then they quote from Rom 3:31, 7:12 "Do we then
the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the
law. ... Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just
So far so good. But then they
drop their bombshell.
Middle of page 33: "Can you
identify which of the two [emphasis mine] laws Paul was referring to in these passages? By the
end of this study, you will know that in Galatians 3:10-13, he
referred to the Law of
Moses - in Romans 3:31 and 7:12, he referred to the Ten
Commandment Law of God,
established in our hearts by faith."
As I understand
it, and I will try to show, there are not two laws being
mentioned - just one.
I do that, we perhaps should pick up on the expression that was used -
"the Law of Moses". It is true that some Bibles do contain the
expression. It is also true that within groups of people with many
things in common, they will sometimes have "in house" expressions or
abbreviations to speed up their conversation.
have not found
any place in the Bible where it describes Moses going off on his
own, and then writing down a list of his own laws (his ruling
divorce may be an exception).
What I do find repeated many times, is Moses listening to God stating
His laws, and then Moses going off and writing them down. The Ten
Commandments - the umbrella over all of God's laws - was
written by God,
on two stone tablets.
the phrase "the Law of Moses" is a shorthand way of saying "the Laws
given by God, and then recorded by Moses". Unfortunately, because the
shorthand phase was used so often, people became confused about what
Moses did and what God did. Jesus had to remind them of who did what.
bold within Scripture, mine.]
6:31-32 NET. Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness,
as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.' "
(32) Then Jesus told them, "I tell you the solemn truth, it is not Moses who has given you
the bread from heaven [obviously some thought
that Moses did], but my
Father [did, and right now] is giving you the true bread
"Law of Moses" is not some man-made law that can be easily tossed to
one side. The laws Moses recorded are God's laws, and still
stand today. Sure, after Jesus's death and His
sacrifice being accepted by God, there have been some changes.
7:12 NET. " For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law
must come as well."
Please note - it does say
"change", not "done away".
Also note - the things
that change are mainly caused by a change of priesthood.
instance, circumcision is now "of the heart" and not "of the flesh"
(Rom 2:28,29). Col 2:11 NET. "In him you also were
— not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands,
by the removal of the fleshly body, that is, through the circumcision
done by Christ". We [today's Christians] do not have to
sacrifice animals, but we are
required to sacrifice our own bodies (Rom 12:1). We no longer
have to wash the inner parts of animals, but we do have to wash our
robes clean in Christ's blood (Rev 7:14), and so on.
were some regulations that were put into place "until the new order
Since we have accepted Christ's sacrifice, and therefore part of the
Order, we don't
need to act out the things that were a foreshadow.
are still required
for those not yet a part of the New Order - those who have not heard
about Christ's sacrifice, or have not got the faith to believe in it.
Old and New Order.The
Ten Commandments, and their amplification through the Statutes,
Judgments and Laws given by God still stand today. Prior to the day of
Pentecost 33 AD, when the Holy Spirit was made available to those who
are called, the people were given additional things to do to remind
of their sin and the need for the Messiah to come.
"For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I
brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or
sacrifices. [These were added later] (23) But this is what I
commanded them, saying, 'Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you
shall be My people. And walk in all the ways that I have
that it may be well with you.'"
state the above in simple terms, all the laws given by God up to the
end of chapter 24 in Exodus, still stand. The burnt offerings,
sacrifices, washings, food and drink offerings, that are given in
Exodus chapters 25 to 40, and are to do with the Tabernacle (later the
Temple) are the things that have "changed" for today's Christians (but
not non-Christians). God has given us many commands about the way we
are to "walk" through life (see especially Exodus 20 - 24), and we are
most definitely required to follow those commands as best we can.
you read the following verses carefully, you can see the difference
between the Old Order and the New Order.
NET. "The Holy
Spirit is making clear that the way into the holy place had not yet
appeared as long as the old tabernacle was standing.
This was a symbol for the time then present, when gifts and sacrifices
were offered that could not perfect the conscience of the
worshiper. (10) They
served only for matters of food and drink and various washings; they
are external regulations imposed
until the new order came.
(11) But now Christ has come as the high priest [therefore a
change in the priesthood] of the good
things to come. He passed through the greater and more perfect tent not
made with hands, that is, not of this creation,
(12) and he
entered once for all into the most holy place not by the blood of goats
and calves but by his own
and so he himself secured eternal redemption. (13)
the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a young cow sprinkled on
those who are defiled consecrated them and provided ritual purity,
(14) how much
more will the blood of Christ,
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God,
purify our consciences from dead works to worship the living
(15) And so he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those
who are called may receive the eternal inheritance he has
since he died to set
them free from the violations committed under the first covenant."
now have two different groups of people in the world. Those "not
called" and therefore who have not accepted the sacrifice of Christ and
are still under the "Old Order", and those "who are called" and have
accepted Christ's sacrifice and have been baptized and have received
the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands, and therefore are a part of
the "New Order". Notice that during the millennium people
will still be giving sacrifices at God's temple in Jerusalem, showing
that the Old Order system will be required until all people have moved
to the New Order.
Zec 14:20-21 NET. "On
that day the bells of the horses will bear the inscription "HOLY TO THE
LORD." The cooking pots in the
will be as holy as the bowls in front of the altar.
Every cooking pot in Jerusalem and Judah will become holy in the sight
of the LORD who rules over all, so that all who offer sacrifices may come
and use some of them to boil their sacrifices in them.
On that day there will no longer be a Canaanite [local expression for
an unclean person] in the house of the LORD who rules over all."
point I am trying
to make is that NOTHING
has been "done away", and Jesus when He was on earth, said the some
thing. Mat 5:17-18 NET. "Do not think that I have come to
the law or the prophets. I have not come to abolish these things but to
fulfill them. (18) I tell you the truth, until
earth pass away not the
smallest letter or stroke of a letter will pass from the law
until everything takes place".
symbolism has changed for those now of the New Order, but none of God's
law - as recorded by Moses in
the first five books of the Bible - has been "done away". They still
stand, and are still a useful guide for life, and especially for those
who have never heard the name "Jesus Christ". Most of the laws
spoken by God and recorded by Moses teach us how to apply the Second
Great Commandment (treat others the way we would like to be treated if
we were in their position), and the others teach us how to be Holy as
God is Holy, or remind us that our sins have to be dealt with.
to the point the authors were trying to make that there are two
different laws being talked about in Galatians 3 and Romans 3,7.
do not think anyone has a difficulty with understanding that Romans 3
and 7 are talking about the Ten Commandments. If you read Rom 7 you
will see that Paul even mentions the 10th Commandment (not to covet).
that that is true, we need to take a closer look at Gal 3.
readily admit, that for some people, Galatians can be difficult to
understand. Part of that difficulty is understanding the problem the
Apostle Paul is trying to address.
Let us look at
and see if we can put what Paul is saying in context. Right at the
beginning of the letter he touches on a major problem.
1:6 NET. "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the
one [God,John 6:44]
who called you by the grace of Christ and are following a different gospel —"
This should set off warning bells and
flashing red lights to us -
we do not want to follow the Galatians into a different gospel.
started them down this wrong road?
court you eagerly, but for no good purpose; they want to
exclude you [from the body of Christ], so that you would seek them eagerly".
had come into the church, and with slick stories and dire promises,
were trying to get a following. One of their requirements is shown in
Gal 5:2-3 NET. " Listen! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be
circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you at
all! (3) And I testify again to every man who lets himself be
[for religious reasons, after accepting Christ's sacrifice] that he is
obligated to obey the whole law." [I take this to mean that
if you go back to physical circumcision, you also have to go back to
the Temple sacrifices and associated traditions.] In other
words, they wanted people to step back into the Old Order.
circumcision is part of the Law of God, started by God with Abraham
(Gen 17:10), and later recorded by Moses (Lev 12:3). As
I have already shown, it is still a law - but what gets circumcised has
been changed for those of us of the New Order (our heart not our
flesh). Looking backward to the
original intent of physical circumcision, misses the whole point of
was willing to die for. Gal 3:3 NET. "Are you so
foolish? Although you began
with the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by human effort?"
Col 3, Paul is explaining
that looking to a Law will never give the same results as exercising
our faith that Christ died to pay for our sins, and release us from the
death penalty. Remember, all humans have sinned (1 John
therefore are under the death penalty for breaking God's Law. Just
keeping the Law from then on (though it is doubtful anyone could do it)
will not remove that penalty. We have to have the faith that
Christ's sacrifice will cover (atone) our past sins and also any future
put it another way, we will never get salvation by obeying laws - Old
Testament laws nor New Testament laws, or even "man's" traditions.
you go to Gal 3 and replace every time the word "law" is used with "Ten
Commandments" or "the Law of God", it still makes perfect sense. There
is just one law being
talked about - the Law of God as recorded by Moses, and this includes
the Ten Commandments.
However, we are still
required to keep the
Law of God, including the Ten Commandments (but not the Temple
rituals to remind us of sin and the need for the Messiah to come) - not as a
way of obtaining
salvation, but as a way of showing
love to God and our fellow man.
"curse of the law" comes from Deut 27 and especially verses 15-26. If
you read those verses you will see that the curses apply to all the law
given by God and recorded by Moses, and does include the Ten
Commandments. The formula is very simple - obey God's laws
of it) and you will be blessed: disobey God's law and you will be
cursed. Since mankind is unable to obey the law without
help, then it follows that all men, at some point in their lives, fall
under the "curse of the law". Once that happens, no amount of further
"keeping of the law" by ourselves will undo the problem.
brings us to the "handwriting of ordinances" in Col 2:14. It also is
mentioned on page 33 of the booklet.
2:13-14 KJV "And you, being dead in your sins and the
uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,
which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his
have we been forgiven "all trespass" - by blotting out the debt we owed
from breaking God's law. God's law is not "against us" - it shows us
what we should do in every situation, if we are going to love God and
our fellow man - but what is "against us" is the penalty for having
broken God's law in the past. By Jesus being willing to be
to the tree, we now have a way of having that requirement against us
When Jesus was nailed to the tree and was
killed with a
spear through His side [a sacrifice has to be killed by loss of blood],
no law was "done away", but there was now a way for us to receive
forgiveness for our past sins.
You might want to see,
Translation of the New Testament.
Jamieson Fausset and Brown
think the Jerusalem Bible puts it rather well. Col 2:13,14 " ... he has
forgiven us all our sins. 14 He has overridden the Law, and canceled every record of the debt
that we had to pay; he has done away with it by nailing it
to the cross."
A debt was canceled - not a law.
booklet, by wrongly using Col 2:14 to do away with "the Law of Moses"
(actually God's Law recorded by Moses), leaves a huge void in a
Christian's understanding. All the Laws, Statutes and Judgments spoken
by God are "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness". And that includes the Laws
to, and recorded by, Moses.
To limit God's words to
just the Ten Commandments, puts a veil over people's eyes - from which
they may never recover.
of keeping God's Holy Days as outlined in Ex 23 and Lev 23 - which
spell out the
seven key points in God's plan for salvation - people look to the pagan
holidays that were adapted to "Christianity" by the Catholic church,
like Christmas and
Easter. Because people do not keep God's calendar or His Holy
Days, they think
Jesus died on a Friday and was raised on the Sunday - making ridicule
of the only sign Jesus said he would give the Jews of His day, that he
would be 72 hours [as was Jonah in the fish] in the tomb (earth). Jesus
into the tomb around sunset on a Wednesday and walked out of it around
sunset on the Saturday. The tomb had long been empty when the angel
opened it on the Sunday morning.
And so on, and so
The lack of Biblical understanding is great
among those who do away with the "Law of Moses".
Point.On page 34, the statement is made "Bible Scriptures
This is a nice thought, but
just not true for our current English Bibles..
obvious example is Proverbs 26, verses 4 and 5 - one says to
not answer a fool, and the other says to answer him.
reason you follow a particular proverb depends on why you are doing it
- but contradict they do.
Another example is Mat 5:3
and Luke 6:20, and also Mat 5:6 and Luke.6:21
5:3 NET. "Blessed are the poor
in spirit, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to them.
6:20 NET. Then he looked up at his disciples and said:
"Blessed are you who are poor,
for the kingdom of God belongs to you.
'Poor in spirit", which contradicts Luke's just being "poor". Remember,
they are both describing the same event.
NET. "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness, for they will be satisfied.
6:21 NET. "Blessed are you who hunger now, for you
will be satisfied.
are you who weep now, for you will laugh.'
someone who "hungers and thirsts for righteousness" is quite different
than someone who is just "hungry" - yet both authors are supposedly
quoting the words spoken by Jesus, in what is commonly known as the
"Sermon on the Mount".
The answer is simple when you
read Luke 1:1-3. Luke was accurately recording what people
him about 30 years after the event. Obviously, by passing down the
stories of what took place while Jesus was on earth, some of the "truth"
had become lost. Matthew, an eye witness would remember, it seems, a more accurate
version. There are over 60 places where the stories in Luke contradict
the facts, or give a different sequence of events that contradict
the other Gospels.
You can find one person's list of contradictions at;
[I don't agree will some, but most I do].
There are around 20 Scriptures
used to say that
Jesus was God before His birth, which contradict
over 150 verses that
state, or support, there is - and always was - only one God. And the
list goes on. No doubt there was less contradiction in the original
writings, but contradiction within the Bible is something we need to be
aware of, and then resolve
when we come across it.
The confusion and
mis-information caused by the first booklet is bad, but the second
booklet is worse.
before Dawn.Written by Ellen G. White.
must admit, it has been over 24 hours since I wrote the above.
hind-sight, what has been on my mind, is, do I tell it like I think it
is, or do I take a position that would be more palatable to most people?
you think "Ellen G. White" is still beyond reproach -
may I suggest you hit the back arrow, or close the file right now.
You will not want to read what follows.
is no "soft" way - that I can come up with, and still be
honest - of handling my comments about this booklet.
booklet is a mixture of Biblical fact, church tradition, and a touch of fiction.
of many books, including "Lord of the Rings", used Biblical
facts/events/morals in storys, but the big difference is that they
do not claim it is a
"revelation from God". Nevertheless they do come up with some
However, from what I have read, Ellen
G.White did claim to have had "visions" from God - and that puts
"Darkness before Dawn" in a whole new ballpark.
that destroys her argument (that God was speaking through her), is that
she uses what we have found to be errors in the King James
Version of the Bible, as fact. I believe, that if God was
involved in her "visions", He would not have passed on the man made
errors of the KJV.
That said, I do not believe that
she was in
contact with demons, though no doubt they would have liked to encourage
the deceit she was putting on people.
is a quote on the Internet from Testimonies, vol 4, p 20, written in
1876, in which she says "My work for the past 30 years bears the stamp
of God or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the
matter. The testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil."
All the evidence that I see, says that
this statement is not
completely true. Sure, it does not appear to be testimonies of the devil, but nor does it appear that
testimonies are of God. A lot of it came from humans, and a
corrupt KJV. Of course, all the accurate parts of the KJV that were
used would be "of the Spirit of God", so there is some truth in her
statement, but it is still a misleading statement as I see it.
was, as I understand it, simply a victim of her own ego.
I also think that Herbert Armstrong was to some extent as well, as no doubt were and are many others.
I have made some bold statements, now I have to give you some proof for
what I have said.
I have already mentioned, the key that lets her down, are the errors in
the KJV - the Bible most readily available in her
So, for a moment let us look at some of the history of the
James Version of the Bible. I have covered it in more depth
in "How to Study the Bible" and the "History of
the KJV", and "The Great Deception". But a brief thumbnail sketch here is in
to 1382, few English translations were available, and any individual
books of the Bible in English that were available, were translated from
In c 1382, John Wycliffe, made the first
translation of the Bible into English - but again it was
translated from the
1525, William Tyndale made the first English Translation of the New
Testament from the Greek ( the best Greek that was available at that
time, but not as good as we have today). A number of other Bibles
many drew on his work - including the KJV to some extent.
the Geneva Bible was made available. It was the first
to be made by a committee, the first Bible with verse
divisions, and the Bible the Pilgrims took to the New Land.
This translation was well received by
the people, but rejected by the clergy (it diminished their power over
people), who turned around and wrote their own - The Bishop's Bible.
Deliberately written to uphold the false doctrine of
through ordination within the church, and promoting the word "church" instead of "congregation".
1604, King James, who had been "in politics"
for over 30 years in Scotland, (in my words) saw that he needed a
strong Church between himself and the people in England to take some of
pressure off himself, called a meeting with the church. The
outcome was that he called for a new Bible translation, to be based on
the Bishop's Bible. He also imposed other conditions. It appears that
he was trying to draw the two camps together (Tyndale/Matthew/Geneva
and the clergy) and thereby give more power to the church leaders.
the King James Bible, published in 1611, was as much about politics as
it was religion.
While, for the most part, it used that classic Shakespearian
English which people came to love, in substance it fell short
of an "accurate" translation of the original languages. For instance,
the word "ordain", which was not used in the original Hebrew or
Greek, was written into the English KJV over 40 times ( but only
eight times used to "give an office to a man", the rest as camouflage).
hierarchy is very difficult to maintain. Over and above that, the
"Trinity" was pushed, and many other errors were "written" into the
script, or the current errors retained.
Prior to the
mid 1900's these errors were difficult to
pinpoint, but with more accurate translations and the availability of
computers and the Internet, things are now much different.
The average person today, with even a cheap, small/slow computer and the right
programs (some free off the Internet) can start to bring the errors to
the surface. Ellen G. White was able to convince people that she was
"special" with her
"fictionalization" of parts of the Bible in her day, because very few
ability or means to show that some of what she was saying
not have come from God. She was, it would seem, using what she read, and what
others were writing and saying, from a Bible that has since been proved by many
to be corrupt in places.
books available to show that Ellen G. White did use the material of
others. As did Herbert W. Armstrong (and many others it would seem). He
said, that when he read material
from others and saw that it was truth, he took that as a "revelation"
from God, and used the material in his own writings.
Unfortunately, the members of his church took the word "revelation" to
that somehow Herbert Armstrong was in direct communication with God.
The fact that both Ellen G. White, and Herbert W. Armstrong, used
corrupt KJV Bible to put "incorrect" doctrine into their respective
the fact they had no more input from a higher power, than was
available to everyone. However, they both used their
writing skills to enhance
their position in their respective churches. I have no doubt, that at
the time, in their minds, they thought that the good they were doing
was more important than doing deeper research into their source
For us, looking back in
hindsight, using the corrupt verses of the KJV, seems to have done more harm than good.
Biggest Problem.Scattered throughout the booklet are
references to Christ being a "God" before His human birth.
Page 2, Christ was warning Satan at the time of
the original rebellion.
Page 4, "... Him who was equal with
Page 10, twice talks about "the deity of Christ".
19, again talks about "the deity of Christ".
And so on.
truth of the original Bible is that Jesus (the man) did not exist
before God the Father fertilized an egg in Mary's womb, which resulted
in His birth.
think that men, with the help of
Satan, set out to muddy the water by saying Jesus was God
His birth. I guess the logic goes something like, "if Jesus was a
""God"", then I can not be expected to come up to the
same standard of character".
Maybe they thought that if they put an element of mystery into the
Bible, it would make people come to those "who know" to talk about it.
What ever their reasons, about 20 Scriptures were changed or
misinterpreted, to create the "new understanding" that Jesus was
I do not blame Ellen White getting caught
up in this
deception, as most Christians have been, and especially those who
believe in the Trinity, or Binitarian concept. However, if
she had truly been in contact
with God or Christ, then I feel that this error would have been one of
the first to be corrected. It, and other KJV errors, was not
corrected, which leads me to feel that all her writings were the works
Her claim that she was in direct contact
(via visions) with God, in my understanding, comes up as false.
a detailed explanation of the 20 or so Scriptures used to support the
concept that Jesus was a "God" before His birth, you might like to see
the article "One or Two Gods?",
or the article "The Nature of
God and Christ".
There are over 150 (and still counting) Scriptures that state, or
support the statement, that there is only one God - God the Father and
creator of all mankind.
page 3 is the statement "With one accord, Satan and his host threw the
blame of their rebellion wholly upon Christ, ... ".
truth of the original Bible is that Christ did not exist at the time of
the initial rebellion.
page 5, "The great controversy between Christ and Satan, that has been
carried forward for nearly six thousand years, is soon to close;"
can not be true, as Jesus was born less than two thousand years ago.
page 16, "... until His heart was broken and His life crushed out."
thought also reflects the errors of the KJV. Moffatt puts in the
missing part of Mat 27:49. Jesus died because of a spear thrust to His
side - big enough to put your hand into (John 20:27). John 19:34 should
be in the past tense "... the soldiers had pierced
His side ...". Jesus
died by having His blood drained out - just like every other sacrifice.
If He had not, He would not be a true sacrifice.
page 44, in talking about the time of Jacob's trouble, we read "...
while persecuted and distressed, while they endure privation and suffer
for want of food, they will not be left to perish."
Bible paints a different picture.
NET. Now when the Lamb opened the fifth seal, I saw under the
altar the souls of those who
had been violently
killed because of the word of God and because of the
testimony they had given.
(11) Each of them was given a long white robe and they were
to rest for a little longer, until the full number was reached of both their fellow servants and their
brothers who were going to be killed just
as they had been.
NET. The beast was permitted to go to war against the saints
and conquer them. He was given ruling authority over every tribe,
people, language, and nation,
NET. Then I saw thrones and seated on them were those who had
been given authority to judge. I also saw the souls of those who had been
beheaded because of the testimony about Jesus and because of the word
These had not worshiped the beast or his image and had refused to
receive his mark on their forehead or hand. They came to life and
reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
page 45 to page 62 (the end of the booklet) I feel there are too many
problems to try and put them down in this type of article.
G. White breaks from the Biblical sequence of events (Mat 24:1-31, Mark
13:3-31, the seven seals in Revelation, with the seventh becoming the
seven trumpets, and the last trumpet becoming the seven last plagues,
and so on) and puts in a lot of her own ideas of what things are going
to be like at the end. It seems to me that this section of
booklet is where she tries the most to embellish the Biblical account
with her own writing style.
Or, in other words, draw
to herself, rather than draw attention to the fine detail of prophecy
that is throughout the Bible.
it gets Worse.Jesus made it
clear while He was on earth, that He did not want His followers to form
a hierarchy or exercise power over others.
20:25-26 NET. "But Jesus called them and said, "You know that the
of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those in high positions use
their authority over them. (26) It must not be this way among you!
Instead whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant,""
only New Testament hierarchy that I can find that can be substantiated from
the Bible is;
Children, wives, husbands, Christ,
God. (Eph 6:1, 1 Cor 11:3, Eph 5:23)
fact that the veil in the temple was torn at Jesus's death, shows us
that we now have
direct access to God the Father. We no longer need a man
as High Priest. Christ is now our High Priest (Heb
and intercedes for us in heaven. 1Ti 2:5
there is one God
and one intermediary
between God and humanity, Christ Jesus, himself human",
fit in with the framework given, if Christ was to send "apostles,
evangelists" (Eph 4:11) then they would not
take up a position "over"
people without the "signs, wonders and miracles" (2 Cor 12:12) to prove
they had Christ's backing. They would work from the side,
assisting people, and
their teaching would be consistent with all of the original Bible.
Some of Ellen G. White's teaching in the
"Darkness before Dawn" is not consistent with the original
As well, her teachings went beyond advice,
and became instructions that in many cases contradict the basic truth
of the Bible.
A "Hard to Take"
Conclusion.In light of the above, I am lead to believe that
Ellen G. White is - or is like - the Jezebel of Rev 2:20.
2:20 NET. "But I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel,
who calls herself a prophetess, and by her teaching deceives my
servants to commit sexual immorality and to eat food sacrificed to
Let me try to explain why I think this is a
The words "who calls herself a prophetess" have some substance. She said that she was not a prophet -
claimed to be
something greater. In the absence of what that
title might be, the default then becomes "prophetess". Indirectly she did claim to be at least that, and more.
words "by her teaching
deceives my servants"
reflects the truth of the matter. She used "her teaching",
and the end
result is that many are deceived about what is the truth of the
The words "to commit sexual
immorality" is referring to the end result of her
The Bible often uses sexual purity - or
the lack of it - to describe spiritual purity. A couple of
Rev 14:4 NET. "These are the
ones who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins.
These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These were
redeemed from humanity as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb,"
the 144,000 firstfruits include married men and women. However, in
spiritual terms, God sees them as "virgins".
17:1-2 NET. Then one of the seven angels who had the seven
came and spoke to me. "Come," he said, "I will show you the
condemnation and punishment of the
great prostitute who sits on many waters,
(2) with whom the kings of the earth committed sexual immorality
and the earth's inhabitants got drunk with the wine of her immorality."
Beast Power and the false prophet use a corrupt religious system to
pull people together. Ellen G. White was not "pure" in her
instructions, and hence caused big problems for those who followed her.
words "to eat food
sacrificed to idols" involves three aspects.
Bible often refers to the truth as food (see 1 Cor 3:2, Heb 5:12), the
words "to eat
food" is about listening to the truth. Then comes the word
Something that is sacrificed, is something that is killed,
and therefore destroyed.
So, the strength that could have come from understanding the
truth of the original Bible is lost. Finally the word "idol".
An idol is anything that comes between us and God.
White set herself up as standing between the people and God (as a sort
of high priestess) and thus became an idol herself. By
to have visions, she was trying to be a "go between" between God and
mankind. That would have been OK if it had been true, but
there was no additional information given that was not already in the
world, or a fertile imagination could not conger up.
reasons why all this might be true continue.
2:21 NET. "I
have given her time to repent, but she is not willing to
repent of her sexual
I believe, Jezebel is held up as a type of the church. What
saying is that the church has had time to repent - to see the errors in
what she was saying - but it does not seemed to have happened. In January of
we were handed a booklet in which the text was written by Ellen G.
White, who has been dead for years. Most definitely
it would be apparent that there has been no repentance - no
change in the Church in that time.
2:23 NET. "Furthermore,
I will strike her followers with a deadly disease,
and then all the churches will know that I am the one who searches
minds and hearts. I will repay each one of you what your deeds deserve."
are reports on the Internet - how reliable I am not sure - that
indicate the number of people leaving SDA is very high. My
very limited experience with the SDA church, suggests that they have a
good ability to attract interest, especially using people's fascination
with prophecy, but not as good ability to hold
that interest, so it could be true that almost as many leave as join.
Some reports suggest that it is mainly the young people who leave - the
future "pillars" of the church - which could indicate that the
church is indeed in a "sick bed".
of the problem seems to be that there are men high up in the hierarchy
of the church who strongly defend the works of Ellen G. White - and
perhaps even promote it possibly more than even she intended. From
I have read on the Internet, any minister who tries to bring about
reform, is "dealt with" by the administration. I might again add, the
concept of a "hierarchy" in the New Testament church was deliberately
written into the KJV, and is not God's form of government at this time.
No wonder the church is "sick" with so much error being promoted as
truth. I can understand why God can not bless such a
situation with growth.
A Ray of Light.In
looking at the Seventh Day
Adventist Church from the outside, their troubles look more than what
is humanly possible to overcome.
However, there is
one statement in Rev 2 that indicates that things might just get better.
2:19 NET. 'I know your deeds: your love, faith, service, and
steadfast endurance. In
fact, your more recent deeds are greater than your earlier ones.
this might come about, I have no idea. From what I have read, it appears that many
men have tried to address the situation, but so far all have been ignored or silenced, or
efforts made to discredit them.
It is a sad
situation, but I
must admit I am surprised by how well Christ outlined (Rev 2:18-29) the situation
nearly 2000 years ago. Let us pray that someone can get a
breakthrough, and get them back to the truth of the original Bible,
instead of the words of a woman who used the corrupt (in places) KJV.
Bob Orchard 2010