DebbieB:
I agree.
EGW said: "Brother J would confuse the mind by seeking to make it appear that the light God has given through the Testimonies is an addition to the word of God, but he presents the matter in a false light. God has seen fit in this manner to bring the minds of His people to His word, to give them a clearer understanding or it. But notwithstanding all this, some who profess to make the word of God their study are found living in direct opposition to its plainest teachings. Then to leave men and women without excuse, God gives plain and pointed testimonies bringing them back to the word of God that they have neglected to follow." 5T663

Dear BBD:
When the first statement of fundamental beliefs was published, Seventh-day Adventists believed this:
"XVI. That the Spirit of God has promised to manifest itself in the church through certain gifts, enumerated especially in 1 Cor.12 and Eph.4; that these gifts are not designed to supersede, or take the place of, the Bible, which is sufficient to make us wise unto salvation, any more than the Bible can take the place of the Holy Spirit; that, in specifying the various channels of its operation, that spirit has simply made provision for its own existence and presence with the people of God to the end of time, to lead us to an understanding of that word which it had inspired, to convince of sin, and to work a transformation in the heart and life; that those who deny to the Spirit its place and operation, do plainly deny that part of the Bible which assigns to it this work and position."
(the gift of prophecy and spiritual gifts were included in one paragraph in the original statement whereas the 1980 statement of beliefs it is set forth in two paragraphs: 17 and 18)
The writings of E.G. White are a gift given to the church by the Holy Spirit.
Do Seventh-day Adventists still believe this original statement of belief?

This is what it says now:

Quote:

---

18. Gift of Prophecy
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)

---

Isn't this new wording basically saying the same thing?

In today's world we see prophecy as the Bible writers, then Mrs. White, but archaeologists tell us that there was a prophetic guild with differnt types of prophets. There were the prophets who's writings became the Bible, who tended to have a special relationship with Emperors and giving a very universal message. Then there were local prophets who would make local applications of the universal message to groups or to certan times in history.

We find this same issue in history. The early church had Bible writers, and also metions prohets who did not write the Bible. Then during the dark ages we find that there was a man (and I'm sorry but I keep mispelling his name) Jehocin of Flore, who the church had accepted as a prophet, and the pope who was living at that time also proclaimed him to be a true prophet. His prophecys laid the ground work for what later developed into the Protestant Reformation, and Adventism's approach to prophecy is fully based on his principles, and Dispensationalism is based on taking a portion of his message and building something new on only a portion of his message, but, like us, they still use his prophecys as their foundation.

We also see just before Ellen White the prophetic ministry of William Foy. Until the 1970s we thought that Foy had rejected the gift of prophey and soon died, but when he was researched, it was discovered that he was faithful in sharing his visions. Was the pastor of a large church in Boston which offered him a comfortable life. When Ellen Harmon started her ministry and he told how he saw the same things and how people ignored Mrs. White and crowded around him, he left Boston and moved to the backwoods of Maine pastoring small country churches and looking for people living in the back woods to minister to them, giving up a very comfortable life for a very hard life, but to minister in a place where people were off the beaten path and allow Mrs. White to have her ministry. In heaven his crown will share the stars with Mrs. White, as well as those from his ministry in Boston, but I believe that some of his stars are going to be a different color or have a unique glow or something that makes them stick out over the others, and they will be for the ones he found in the backwoods in Maine. He showed the same spirit as Jonathan showed to David.

Also, in the same time frame, Hariot Tubman was a conductor on the underground railroad. In a play I saw on Mrs. Tubman's life there was a scene where they were trapped by a river and she received a vision telling her how to escape. Now I have not come accross any place else about her having visions so I don't know where the play got it from, but if so, then she was a prophet who's visions were how to get through to freedom and safty.

We need to keep these other prophets in mind as we study Mrs. White's role as a prophet and not just limit prophecy to the few prophets who happened to have a small part of their ministry be universal enough to be the Bible, and pretend that that small part of the ministry of s few prophets be the whole of prophecy.

Now this point does not address a second issue that we need to deal with, in how the evidence says that prophecy/inspiration works (even Biblical prophecy)as opposed to how the Fundamentalism movement of the late 1800s to early 1900s say it is suposed to work.

The writings of EGW are inspired in equal measure to the Bible, for there are no degrees of inspiration. At the same timne, they are not intended to be added to the Bible. The Bible itself has two units (Tanakh or OT and Greek Scriptures or NT) which are composed of sub-units (Torah, Naviim, Ketuvim, i.e. law, prophets, writings, TNK=Tanakh, and the NT with its Gospels/historical, epistles, apocalyptic). Sixty-six books all told, all inspired.

However, In the Bible Nebuchadnezzar's name is spelled five different ways. Were four of them wrong? No. Spelling is probably not (in most cases at last) a key issue. Nevertheless, we understand that the phenomenon of inspiration operates such that inspired writings are protected from significant error. That is, if the prophet was about to use an expression that would basically be erroneous, the Holy Spirit is understood to have superintended and guided the mind of the prophet in order to prevent him from using the flawed expression. So we may operate on the assumption that the facts given in the Bible are indeed facts.

What we read in inspired writings therefore we may anticipate will be correct historically, scientifically, with regard to health principles, salvation, etc. Infallible means "cannot fail." I believe that the phenomenon of inspiration operates such that that which is truly inspired is infallible. This woudl go for all inspired writings, whether in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, or English.

In any case, we should still remember that The Bible is viewed as a unit in itself and is what we should lead with. It remains true that in His mercy God has granted us enormous insights through the gift of prophecy via EGW and we would be inviting disaster if we thought we could ignore that which God reveals to us through this source.

Bottom line, I will labor to understand and rightly divide the Bible, even as I respect and heed His warning through the Spirit of Prophecy in all its manifestations, which certainly includes the writings of Ellen G. White.

As an aside, here is a link I did to a study concerning adding to God's word, while I was pastoring in Utah and surrounded by Mormons. It is abit dated, but I can tell you, it sometimes helps cut the ice, and also it helps to review assumptions we have held. Sometimes we get surprised.

http://www.greatcontroversy.org/documents/sermons/sermonsLK/kir-addg.html

LK

Yes Brother Kirtpatric, I want to come back and conferm that I do not believe in differences in degrees of inspriation. I hope that I did not make that impression in my last post.

It is amazing that we cannot see how much this false view of inspiration to which we hold affects the way we see the world. We are blissfully comfortable in our ignorance.

Darius, you’ve made statements like that before. But you’ve never enlightened us. Care to?

Jeff

Here is an interesting EGW quote pertaining to the Bible:

Quote:

---

But 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 or 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. {GC88 595.1}

---

Sounds like EGW places the Bible only as "the standard of all doctrines, and the basis of all reforms."

I would say that EGW's writings should be tested by the Bible, rather than the Bible being tested by EGW's writings.

This means that the Bible is to be taken above the writings of EGW as stated by EGW herself, and rightfully so, don't you all agree?