Originally posted by Mike Lowe:
Thomas, now that we have God's stamp of approval upon our 27 beliefs we can confidently believe we are right. Thanx to Sister White.

I dont think you really answered the objections and questions but just restated in different words. Perhaps there isnt an answere fit to print...

John, the fact the SDA church is lukewarm is evidence she is the remnant church. The remnant church will be shaken during the MOB crisis, if she were perfect there would be no need for a shaking.

If lukewarmness is evidence of being the remnant, then the remnant section in heavens books will sure be crowded...
What does MOB stand for?
That a shaking will produce any positive result is in it self evidence that not all is asleap and apatic in the church, if sda is homogenly lukewarm a shaking would just result in an empty vessle. Also notices that wheat and weeds must grow together till harvest time, or thats what Jesus says anyway.(matt 13:24+)

/Thomas

Ikan,
I agree with your post, the key is the heart....

I agree with Justin, being "right" and being in "relationship" means having the right relationship with Jesus. No paradox here.

Thomas, sorry my answer failed to address your question. Let me try again. You asked, Do we need Sister White in order to correctly interpret and understand the truths revealed in the Bible? My answer is, Yes. But now that we know what is right we can go back show how the Bible confirms it.

Otherwise, you end up with people arguing over opinions as to what this or that text means. It has to do with the differences between inductive and deductive reasoning. It's always best to start off with the answer and prove it using the evidence rather than the other way round (i.e., start off with the evidence and arrive at the answer).

For example, we know the earth was created in 6 days. Starting off with the answer makes it easier to deal with seemingly contradictory evidence. When the evidence appears to support evolution we are not up ended because we know somehow, someway it agrees with the truth. The same can be said of the Flood and other controversial Bible truths. We know the evidence supports the truth, it's just that it's not always apparent at first glance.

This same principle applies to Sister White and our unique doctrinal truths. We know the answer because it has been confirmed by God through Sister White. So, anytime there's a question about this or that text we know that somehow, someway it supports the truth, it's just that it's not always obvious at first glance.

Does that make sense?

Mike,
Your explanation is circular. You state that we know what's right, then confirm it with EGW, who confirms what was was written.......

Additionally your explanation gives the true nature of the so-called study that we engage in. We study not for truth but to confirm what we believe the truth to be. We do this by memorizing verses or finding ways to bend texts to our particular truth..... I would call that something, but studying it isn't.......

Mike you also wrote, ou asked, Do we need Sister White in order to correctly interpret and understand the truths revealed in the Bible? My answer is, Yes. But now that we know what is right we can go back show how the Bible confirms it."

I thought we use the bible to interpret EGW and not the other way around. I would submit that we have the writings of EGW and can make use of them, however even if we didn't the Holy Spirit would help us correctly interpret what truths are revealed in the bible.

Thus, what we need is the Holy Spirit which will lead and guide into all truth, and yes he may choose to utilize the writings of EGW to accomplish His goal , however He (the Holy Spirit) is not limited to using EGW to correctly interpret the bible......

Steve, I agree with you that God has used Sister White to help us correctly understand the truth as revealed in the Bible. But I do not believe it is possible to confidently affirm some of our more controversial doctrines without the Holy Spirit's stamp of approval as manifested in the writings of Sister White.

There are just too many uncertainties concerning the various Bible manuscripts and translations to leave the important work of "rightly dividing the word of truth" to uninspired minds. The devil is very clever at causing doctrinal divisions over the exact meaning of this or that text. If the truth were plainly known then there wouldn't be catholic and protestant churches.

We need the sure word of prophecy to help us know without a doubt what is truth. God gave us Sister White so we can know that what we believe is from the hand and mouth of God. No more guess work. No more wondering if it could be this or that way. I am 100% convinced that our understanding of the plan of salvation is right and true. Having this blessed assurance feels great. Thank you Jesus.

Justin wrote, "Why would this be a problem for you, Steve, is beyond my comprehension. If you have issues with EGW writings so as to cause you (as an Adventist) not to accept her statements as confirmation of our beliefs, then we should talk about specific points (or statements) of EGW that you may have questions on."

Justin,
Do you have a problem with me expressing my opinion about how we utilize the writings of EGW? Perhaps when reviewing the 27 fundamental beliefs and the info from the White Estate regarding how her writings should be used, you would understand my position. If however you are uncomfortable with my questions, I will gladly keep them to myself...

Mike,
Again I direct your attention to the affirmations and denials issued by our church (emphasis mine) and ask if you agree with them. Clearly there is a conflict with what you have posted and what the official church stance is:

AFFIRMATIONS

We believe that Scripture is the divinely revealed word of God and is inspired by the Holy Spirit.
We believe that the canon of Scripture is composed only of the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments.
We believe that Scripture is the foundation of faith and the final authority in all matters of doctrine and practice.
We believe that Scripture is the Word of God in human language.
We believe that Scripture teaches that the gift of prophecy will be manifest in the Christian church after New Testament times.
We believe that the ministry and writings of Ellen White were a manifestation of the gift of prophecy.
We believe that Ellen White was inspired by the Holy Spirit and that her writings, the product of that inspiration, are applicable and authoritative, especially to Seventh-day Adventists.
We believe that the purposes of the Ellen White writings include guidance in understanding the teaching of Scripture and application of these teachings, with prophetic urgency, to the spiritual and moral life.
We believe that the acceptance of the prophetic gift of Ellen White is important to the nurture and unity of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
We believe that Ellen White's use of literary sources and assistants finds parallels in some of the writings of the Bible.

DENIALS

We do not believe that the quality or degree of inspiration in the writings of Ellen White is different from that of Scripture.
We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are an addition to the canon of Sacred Scripture.
We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White function as the foundation and final authority of Christian faith as does Scripture.
We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White may be used as the basis of doctrine.
We do not believe that the study of the writings of Ellen White may be used to replace the study of Scripture.
We do not believe that Scripture can be understood only through the writings of Ellen White.
We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White exhaust the meaning of Scripture.
We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are essential for the proclamation of the truths of Scripture to society at large.
We do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are the product of mere Christian piety.
We do not believe that Ellen White's use of literary sources and assistants negates the inspiration of her writings.
We conclude, therefore, that a correct understanding of the inspiration and authority of the writings of Ellen White will avoid two extremes: (1) regarding these writings as functioning on a canonical level identical with Scripture, or (2) considering them as ordinary Christian literature.

Mike, if I have understood you correctly, I am supprised and shocked by the results of this discussion. What I thought was an ironical tounge in cheek comparasion in my first post on this subject seems the more likely to be true all the time. Can it really be true that the writings and words of ellen white is the bottom line of how sda read the bible comparable to how the words of popes is the bottom line of how catholics read the bible? Ellens books has been and are important to the sda, but in my oppinion, doctrine should be made from the 66 books of canon. If the case cant be clearly or at least satisfactorily made from the bible, then its the doctrine that needs mending and not the bible. The biblical predictions for people adding to the words of the bible are no pretty sight...

/Thomas