|
Post by Admin on Jan 29, 2022 12:32:21 GMT
Unlike most Protestant churches, the SDA sect does not believe the actual words of the Bible are inspired. They teach that only the thoughts were inspired, and that the words are a mixture of the human and the divine. However, they cannot pinpoint how much of the human and how much of the divine are in each word. Is it 10% human? 50% human? 90% human? Where did this doctrine originate and why did the SDA Church adopt it after they discovered that Ellen White's words were not inspired? Learn the facts: Are the Words of the Bible Inspired? Or Not?Brother Anderson, moderator, www.nonegw.org
|
|
steve
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by steve on Sept 14, 2023 20:10:58 GMT
I am not sure I have found the correct forum but I like how it functions. I found this forum while looking for some way to comment on what I saw here - www.nonsda.org/index.html Is this the same forum that is connected to that website as well ?
|
|
steve
New Member
Posts: 3
|
Post by steve on Sept 14, 2023 21:26:45 GMT
I am new to the forum but from what I have read so far (not much) It seems to me that you are placing an inordinate importance on Ellen White. Just like so many members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church - Corporation, Movement, Religion... however it is defined these days. To me, your views and theirs are just the ditch on either side of the same road. I believe very much in the Biblical doctrines of the rather corrupt SDA organization. I think they have it right. And these doctrines are not inextricably linked to Ellen White, and they never have been. As you know, she never held any church office and established no doctrine of the SDA. This is not to say that she did not have a significant influence in the formation and/or explanation of them. She was a Bible commentator and expositor of her day and as such entitled to her own opinions, and I think she did have some important messages presented to her in verifiable visions. Anywhere she is at odds with the Bible makes no more difference to me than any other books published by the SDA Church. I like reading some of them, they are very interesting and even helpful to me in understanding the Bible in ways I may not have thought of on my own. But nothing she wrote is on par with the authority of the Bible. There are much better reasons not to be a member of the SDA Church these days than the Biblical Doctrines they have. If all of Ellen White's books were gone tomorrow, I can not think of how it would make any difference to any Seventh-day Adventist doctrine I know of. So by my way of thinking, you are just using Ellen White as the proverbial strawman. You seem to be attacking Biblical Doctrines held by the SDA Church by attaching them inextricably to Ellen White. I think it is safe to say that most Seventh-day Adventists do not understand the contribution of Ellen White to the Biblical Doctrines of the Church the way you are implying with all of your accusations. As you have no doubt heard it said before "If it's in the Bible we want it, if it's not in the Bible, we don't want it" In all Churches there are those that hold different understandings about the teachings in the Bible. Nothing wrong with that. There are those in the SDA Church that have different opinions about Ellen White. The bottom line is that "the Bible, and the Bible only, is the ultimate authority in all matters of Faith and Doctrine. And Ellen White would agree with that. And I would guess that here is quite a lot of what Ellen White wrote that you could also agree with. She is not absolutely wrong about everything she ever wrote. www.ellenwhite.info/books/ellen-g-white-book-great-controversy-gc-37.htm "...God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority—not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its support."
|
|