Latest

Seventh Day Adventist's Ellen G. White

No comments:

Ellen G. White and her husband, James, together with Joseph Bates, founded Seventh Day Adventist into what it is now. Although SDAs already watered down their stand and claim over White’s real role on Adventism movement, she was considered an inspired prophet of God. In fact, most (if not all) fundamental doctrines and beliefs of the Adventist are from the visions and writing of White.


In 1980, however, Walter Rea said that majority of White’s writings are copied from other sources like J N Andrews. Rea’s statements painted White as plagiarist and liar. During that time, SDAs declared that White’s work can replace the Bible, as she is a prophet from the Lord.
 

Clause 17 of SDA Creed declared White as the prophet. “This gift of prophecy is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth.” Simply, the statement elevated White and her works at par with God and the Bible.


The Great Controversy said of White as “have been inspired by God.” And it went to justify the claim saying that “many of her prophecies about world events and the modern day condition of man have already been fulfilled.”


And although she said that “in regard to infallibility, I never claimed it, God alone is infallible.” However, in the book Testimonies, she declared “Yet, now when I send you a testimony of warning and reproof, many of you declare it to be merely the opinion of Sister White. You thereby insulted the Spirit of God.”


To translate the statement to simple words, White is trying to tell members of her church that if they will not consider her words as God’s, they are insulting God himself. What can the Pope say of this? The Pope himself claims infallibility (in today’s Roman Catholic environment), but speaking against the Lord is opposing God.


Now White, being considered the prophet and inerrant speaker of the Lord, prophesied several events, that also declared her to be a liar and a false one. Let us check some of these failed prophecies.


But prior to doing that, let us remember that a prophet is only a prophet when all his or her prophecies are true. Otherwise, that “prophet” is not God’s. And if that prophet is not God’s, whose prophet is he or she?


Christ Return in 1856. In Testimonies for the Church, White said “I was shown the company present at the conference. Said the angel: ‘Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.”


The statement was made last 1856, but all of the people present at the conference are all dead, yet Christ return has not yet been fulfilled. This means that White’s claim that “some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus” is flatly a lie.


Perhaps, White’s statements on the advent of Christ can be traced to the Millerate movement. The Advent is a main principle that guided the Millerate. And after the group disintegrated, White continued the quest to predict the Second Coming of Christ.


So Ellen G. White lied? Yes, she did.


Can her prophecy be trusted if she lied on one? No.


Is she a prophet when she lied? No.



England Against USA. Testimonies states:


A portion of the queen’s subjects are waiting a favorable opportunity to break their yoke; but if England thinks it will pay, she will not hesitate a moment to improve her opportunities to exercise her power and humble our nation. When England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion. England is acquainted with the diversity of feeling among those who are seeking to quell the rebellion.


The statement was made with regards to England joining the Civil War, which would utterly wipe USA out. The statement, however, never happened. USA rose to become one of the global superpowers and leaders of the free world. She was never humbled into dust by England.


So Ellen G. White’s prophecy was false? Yes.


Is she a false prophet? Yes.


Salvation Ended in 1844. In the book Early Writings, White told them Adventists on the closing of the heavenly sanctuary. It said that that the midnight cry was the last great test, that the work for the world was finished, and that the door was shut.


Then she further said “Dear Brother and Sister, I have now written the vision God gave me. I am tired sitting so long. Our position looks very clear. We know we have the truth, the midnight cry is behind us, the door was shut in 1844 and Jesus is soon to step out from between God and man.”


Simply, Adventism believes that salvation has ended, and no can ever be saved from hell. Wow! It is a perfect contradiction to the Bible’s declarations that God wants everyone to get saved. It is a complete attack to the basic tone of the Bible.


Was Ellen G. White wrong? Of course.


Is her mistake against the Bible? Absolutely.


Did she consult the Bible? Apparently, no. If yes, she disregarded biblical merits.


With these three failed prophecies, can we trust Ellen G. White? No.


We can’t trust a person who lied on one. If she could lie on one, she would lie on many. Therefore, she is not trustworthy. For we understand that a prophet speak no lie.

The Gospel of Wealth: God as the Genie

No comments:
There are several prosperity gospel preachers advocating how God will prosper His children. There is no need to mention them. While God really blesses, the extreme of their teachings does not sound in tune with the Word of the Lord.

Prosperity gospel preachers teach the "hundredfold return" principle combined with the "seed faith" belief. What these principles mean? Simple: If you give God $10, you will receive $1,000. You need to plant some seed for you to reap more.

I have nothing against these principles, per se. We cannot outgive God, that's the sure thing. But the problem here is the attitude, the motivation behind.

For instance, you have a bill to pay amounting $5,000. Because you believe in the principle of hundredfold return and the seed faith, you will give $50 or $100 on Sunday service and trust God to give $5,000 (and maybe some extras for the extras you give) on Monday.

Scenario 1: No $5,000 arrived on Monday. 

Does it make God a liar? Or does it make the prosperity gospel preacher a liar? (The latter is a better possibility.)

Scenario 2: $5,000 arrived on Monday. 

You did your part of the bargain, now God did his part of the bargain.




Truth

Why were you billed $5,000 in the first place? If it's because you live in an expensive house, had you not thought that God wanted you to sell off your expensive house and buy a more modest home?

Is God now obligated to meet your needs just because you are bad spender? Is God a genie that must grant all your wishes and everything you ask Him?

Is God a CEO of the company who must bargain with the employee union to get them working? Should God really compromise with us for us to serve Him?

Okay God, I have given you $10 already, you must give me $100. If this is how things work, then I think those poor Christians of old were not givers. They died poor, mutilated by the Roman soldiers, tortured during the Inquisition, and even persecuted in most parts of the world. Had they given $100,000 to the Lord, they would have been millionaires (by the standard of their day).

The prosperity gospel principle treats God as the means to an end. A tool. An object. The promises of God on material blessings are now turned into MONEY BACK GUARANTEE. You give, you will get your money back, 100% plus interests.

If we are serving God for the fringe benefits attached to this service, then we are not serving out of love, but out of the compensations we get. And if God is not giving us adequate compensations, I guess we should get a new manager. Sir Robert L'Estrange, a British journalist of the 17th century, wrote: He that serves God for money will serve the devil for better wages. 



Is the Iglesia ni Cristo a Christian Sect?

No comments:
Definition of the word "Christian" is "of, relating to, or professing Christianity or its teachings."
From there, let us go to the fundamental beliefs or teachings of Christianity. "They are 
1) the Deity of Christ
2) Salvation by Grace, 
3) Resurrection ofChrist
4) the gospel, and 
5) monotheism."

I am stressing number 1: Deity of Christ.

Following this line of reasoning, we can say that a Christian church or a Christian individual believes fundamentally in the deity of Christ. This is the foremost requirement for a person or church to fit the adjective "Christian". Otherwise, a person or a church should not claim to be a "Christian" and should be stripped of such claim. (While there are five fundamental teachings, as noted above, and to have disagreement with one strips you of the word "Christian" allow my bias on the first teaching: Deity of Christfor the sake of my line of argument.)

The Iglesia ni Cristo claims to be a Christian church, even an indigenous Christian sect.


However, the INC denies the deity of Christ. Rather, they only believe that Christ is just a mere man following or given authority by God.

Allow my argument to flow, if the INC does not believe in the deity of Christ, it is safe to conclude that the Iglesia ni Cristo does not fit the definition. Even the name of the organization is a misnomer.

To quote Michael Tan, Chancellor of UP Diliman: "Then there is Iglesia ni Cristo, not technically “Christian” because it does not see Jesus as divine (http://opinion.inquirer.net/86708/born-again)."
 
Copyright ©2024 Speaking of the Truth in Love • All Rights Reserved.
Template Design by BTDesigner • Powered by Blogger