This post of yours shows how you have cherry-picked details that appear to support your side, when in reality, your position is wholly unsupported, as other passages bring out. You have, I believe, willfully misrepresented the situation. You, above all others here, having been a pastor of many years and having had much opportunity to study into these matters, are accountable to God for the manner in which you present the truth. If you intentionally mislead others, God will take this into account. If this has not been your intention, you are still accountable for that which you should have known. And you should have known what I will share here. There are only ten (10) statements on the EGW CD-ROM from Mrs. White's writings that speak of Erasmus. You picked out the only two that are "borderline" negative toward him. Even they are not clear enough to support your position well. Yet you ignored the majority of her statements which are written far more favorably toward Erasmus AND his collection of the scriptures.

Your willful ignorance of Mrs. White's true stance relative to Erasmus and your portrayal of it is dishonest to yourself and to God's prophet.

You asked this: "how does she describe the person who produced it?" You then proceeded to give us cherry-picked statements that put him in a less favorable light than how Mrs. White truly answers this question herself. In this, you have erred. This careless regard for the Spirit of Prophecy has been customary with you, and it has compromised your entire view on this subject, not to mention other theologies as well. I urge you to be honest with yourself and with others, knowing that we shall all stand at the bar of God to face judgment one day soon, and every idle word will be brought to account before Him.

Now, for the fuller view of Erasmus given us by Mrs. White:



Those statements, taken together, provide us with the following endorsements of Erasmus by Mrs. White:

1) He presented the Word of God in its original tongue.
2) He had corrected errors of former versions in it.
3) The sense (meaning) was more clearly rendered in it.
4) "It led many among the educated classes to a better knowledge of the truth."
5) It "gave a new impetus to the work of reform."
6) Erasmus was on the side of the reformers.

These points you misrepresented to us. You have claimed this work was done by "the Catholic Church." It was not. It was done by a Catholic individual who, like Luther, sympathized with those who opposed its teachings and traditions. These scriptures were not handled by official Catholic channels, committees, or edicts. This was NOT a work of "the Catholic church."

To further highlight the fact that Erasmus was at heart among the reformers, I will quote a snippet to be found online which notes that while Erasmus and Luther did not agree in every particular, they were largely in agreement.



You did know all of this, right? Why, then, have you rendered an inaccurate representation of these things?

May God open the eyes of each reader here to discern between truth and falsehood, and between light and darkness.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Green, throughout these discussions you have been presenting a very extreme view of the King James Version as if that is the only Bible that contains the truth, and that all modern versions are a false presentation of the Bible.

In an attempt to get you to see it from a more balanced perspective, like I believe your will find in the writings of Ellen White, I have collected some examples to show that your extreme view is not the only true picture of reality.

Yes, the work of Erasmus was important and useful, but I still believe that the Lord does not want us to understand the work he did, nor the work of the translators if the KJV - are the only people that have ever done a useful work on behalf the Bible, nor that their work is perfect.

In this area I have presented an accurate representation of these things - as a counterattack to your unbalanced presentation.

Although English is quite common in many countries in Europe, people do not understand the KJV English, and they need the Bible in their own language, neither Latin nor English. They need to be touched by the Holy Spirit in their own language.

The way you present these thing is like an attack on the Bible itself.

Your extremism is a cruelty to those people and not at all in the Spirit of the work of Ellen G White.

In this area you are totally blind to truth and falsehood, and you need to be endowed with a heavenly vision.

So I urge you to repent before it is too late, before the Holy Spirit is withdrawn from this earth. Let your heart and mind be subdued by the Love of Jesus Christ and His Word.

Our national Bible Society presented some of the above information about the KJV to its members in connection with the 400th anniversary of the KJV, so this is general knowledge.

Do you support the ordination of women?

...
..

Johann,

I'm not a KJVO (King James Version Only) individual. Far from it. I have enjoyed reading the Bible in multiple other languages, for I am linguistically capable of doing such. However, only the Spanish translations, of those other languages, may have come from the Majority Text. I am not against modern translations. I am against the use of the following corrupt codices in the translation process: codex alexandrinus, codex vaticanus, codex sinaiticus, and their derivatives. I also oppose the Septuagint as having been a poor-quality, error-filled translation.

I am well aware that some of the errors have crept into even the KJV translation. But, as you should be aware, far more of them have entered the modern translations which have selected these corrupted codices as their primary source.

What you say about me being an extremist is not true. I have learned the truth, and the truth is liberating and moderating. However, moderation does not mean I must go out and smoke a little, drink a little, party a little, in order to be more like society and have my message accepted by them. It is not being an extremist to avoid these evils. Nor is it being an extremist to shun the errors of the modern Bibles which have elevated the corrupted manuscripts to a level of divine authority.

I firmly believe that if Mrs. White were alive today, she would have some answers for us on this topic. I also firmly believe that God has not given us the answers through such plain prophetic utterance because God expects us to use our God-given intellect to study and to learn these truths for ourselves.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Hm - are you saying Johann does not have a reasonable mind? I think so! I don't suppose you'd like to moderate yourself now, would you?

Why did She rely on the KJV? She grew up with the KJV. Probably memorized large portions. The speak volumes to the fact that that is the version she knew best.

Borderline??? Really?

My main study Bible is the KJV. But I have many other translations that I use, often refering to them to try to understand what is really being said. Yes, EGW used the KJV, She even pointed out errors in the KJV. She also used other versions, and never gave a warning about them. Today, in the Adventist world, the most outspoken evangelist I know that is rabidly pro-KJV, is Walter Veith. But Walter will tell you that his conversion out of Catholicism was by reading the NIV. And the Bible he preaches out of is the NKJV. That speaks volume.

Green, you have used an interesting term, "cherry picking quotations". In these discussions you have made a reference to a publication which presents the same kind of extreme views as you have on the KJV.

Although written by a former SDA Bible teacher our own publishing houses refused to publish his views, as far as I could determine. They were published by a non-SDA under a different identity, and by an independent branch of SDA. It so happens that while serving in the ministry of the SDA church we received a number of warnings against that particular branch or independent ministry, both verbally and in writing. We received samples of their falsehood and deceit, and to use your expression, their cherry picking way of quoting the writings of Ellen G White.

I could not help being reminded of this when you were quoting from that book, and then now when you used this expression. It was the father of the present president of the General Conference who served at that time.

I give reasons for why the KJV is superior and I hear ad hominem remarks in return. To me, this indicates the level of interest in facts and accuracy that tends to become the norm with those who have accepted inaccurate Bible versions.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

You have already presented most of your arguments over at ClubAdventist where someone has refuted them. Just go over there and read for yourself.mI have not seen you presenting any more valid ones here.