I'm sorry, but I didn't see a response to my question.
Do you think that's not a valid question.

Very true!
Satan hates the scriptures, and when he can't ban it's reading, he uses many other ways to bring the Bible truths into confusion. One huge way to do this is in changing the way the Bible is interpreted.

Satan is a diligent Bible student, he is inspiring " men who claim to be religious but are not religious" to so link phrases in scripture together in order to make the Bible say the exact opposite of what it actually says. He not only changes actual wording, he changes the meaning of the words themselves, to the point where two people can be talking together using the SAME WORDS, thinking they are talking about the same thing, yet understanding the message totally differently.

This was even true back in the early church, when they still had Paul's actual letters as written, "which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:16)
Gnostic thought, higher criticism, allegorical reading, skepticism, and simply seeking to make scripture say what one wants it to say, have brought totally confusion.

Of course -- with all these new translation versions, all this confusion tends to get implanted right in the text and often in just tiny almost unperceivable ways. We do need to seek for the Bible version that is the truest to the original for our foundational Bible study.

Yet, remember the Bible is the Word of God, bringing us the message of hope, life, ultimate truth, and redemption from the bondage of sin; and God has promised those who with humble hearts, depending upon the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth, make the Bible their constant study and guide will find truth.

But we need Divine help --

"Without the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, men will not be able to distinguish truth from error, and they will fall under the masterful temptations of Satan. {COL 408.3}

Perhaps it's a valid question, but I'm not the valid respondent. Ask Ellen White. Ask your Bible. Ask God and the help of His Holy Spirit. The promise of the Bible is still true today that those who seek with all their heart will find.

I have included the actual paragraph tags to these quotes, and they are publicly available online (unfortunately these are NOT on the EGW CD). You may find them and read them from their original context at https://egwwritings.org.

I would definitely encourage people to do what dedication says we should in her post just above:



After statement #7 comes out, you will see just how important this is. It makes me angry that the White Estate kept these statements under wraps for so very long, in spite of the fact that the church was very much needing this guidance, dating from the Bible Conference of 1919. Why should the church have needed to flounder about in a sea of erroneous opinions when God had given us clear warnings on this point? Why should our church have needlessly adopted the attitude espoused by Maxwell that "through this Book, in all its multiplicity of versions and translations, God has chosen to speak to human hearts in all the world." Maxwell counselled people to "read all the versions you can obtain."

Maxwell was wrong. God has clearly not chosen every version of the Bible. But, since the White Estate had not released Ellen White's own statements giving warning about this, how was he to know? The church soundly rejected the other watchman on the wall: Dr. Benjamin Wilkinson, dean of theology at our Washington Missionary College in Tacoma Park. He warned everyone of the changes that had been made in some of the modern versions--and that was still in his time, for many more versions have come out since then. But Maxwell and Wilkinson would have dramatically differed on this question of Bible versions, and unfortunately, the Maxwell theology prevailed in our church. Our own Sabbath School quarterlies have often relied on the NIV or other popular versions: Maxwell's own favorite seems to have been the RSV--the very namesake for what Ellen White said was coming: revisions.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Statement #6:



Clearly, at least one member of the fallen party who have been participant to "mutilating the Word" is identified here. How, then, can Adventists receive the modern versions, hot off their presses, that have emerged from the Catholic-dominated Bible societies--without even questioning them?

Next, the bombshell statement . . . .

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Statement #7:

If you ignore all prior ones, do not neglect to read this one.



People are changing the Bible, folks. And the changes they make are of eternal import. Your Bible version may decide if you will ever enter heaven. This is not a matter of idle debate. Souls will be eternally lost over their choice of which "scripture" they chose to accept.

CHOOSE WISELY.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Green, I expected an apology. Or at least a retraction of the statement. While there may be some statement, somewhere, that Ellen White says other versions are not valid, obviously your #1 statement does not relate to it.

My first thought is, do you do this to inflame people? You've done this more than once.
But I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Very easy to search for keywords. Much harder to actually understand the meaning. I'm guessing you didn't actually read it in context and that's why you are at a loss as to what the context is.


So yes, people, read these quotes in the context yourself. You will find there is no hidden secret message that has been kept back from you. You will find this is nothing but more of the same of what Green has been saying for years. The context does not support his premise.

kland,

I have no interest in debate. Feel free to differ with me--we all see things differently. You and I both must choose wisely which teachings we will accept as truth and which we will consider error.

But on the question of context, I think it is very important to note that people often carry context too far. Context is good, and it is important to consider the context of something. But when it comes to inspiration, context is not a box in which to put a statement in and restrict its application to only that context. Inspired statements tend to jump out of those boxes.

Consider some Biblical examples:

Here is one.



According to that, the "even unto even" applied to a specific sabbath held on the ninth day of the seventh month. But we have other inspired writings that pull this principle out of this context and apply it broadly everywhere, to all Sabbaths, don't we?

Here's another one.



The first text was clearly in the context of the wilderness wanderings...nothing more. The second one was in the context of Ezekiel's prophecy against Jerusalem. Are other inspired writers going against the "rule of context" in applying the day-for-a-year principle outside of the actual contexts in which it is given? YES. The Bible seems to make no such rule as people like to make.

Be careful how you study...it affects what you believe...and be careful what you believe...it affects your salvation.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Important key point: Inspired writers.

Statement #8: Expanding to Ellen White's Writings



Consider, for example, the "gender neutral" editions of Ellen White's books that have come out from the White Estate, fulfilling Mrs. White's prophecy here. Folks, we are in the times "just before the close of this earth's history."

We are living in times when we cannot be assured that the materials we are reading have not been altered--particularly with newer releases (compilations, abridgments, etc.). I think there was some discussion on the forum here in the past about "The Great Hope" book.

There have also been major edits done to other books, such as the book "Daniel and the Revelation," by Uriah Smith, which, although this was not written by Mrs. White herself, she had highly recommended and placed it on par with her own books in importance. We've had some discussion here in the past with respect to that one as well, for it also fulfilled Mrs. White's prophecy that "books of a new order" would be written. In the case of Daniel and the Revelation, the editing took place after 1931 when our church first began to drift toward the acceptance of the Trinity doctrine. The leaders knew they would have to change that book, because it was so clearly non-trinitarian up to that point. Once they got into meddling with it, however, they changed far more than simply removing all of the non-trinitarian materials. They changed entire paragraphs, adding and subtracting at the will of the editors, and changing interpretations of some of the prophecies.

Satan knows that by these "revisions," he will be able to lead many astray. This is why it is so important to compare and evaluate the truth of anything with a clear "thus saith the Lord." We must not even trust what our church leaders say or publish--we must check it against the Bible. "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20).

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

"gender neutral" editions of Ellen White's books that have come out from the White Estate"!? What?! When did this happen?