I am here a pilgrim stranger, Give me Jesus alone; He will guard my soul from danger, Give me Jesus alone.
Refrain 1: Give me Jesus alone, Give me Jesus alone; Till I reach my home in glory Give me Jesus alone. When the pow’rs of sin beset me, Give me Jesus alone; When my friends on earth forget me, Give me Jesus alone.
Refrain 2: Give me Jesus alone, Give me Jesus alone; Every hour and every moment, Give me Jesus alone. Though the world its praise should offer, Give me Jesus alone; With my Lord I’ll meekly suffer, Give me Jesus alone.
Refrain 3: Give me Jesus alone, Give me Jesus alone; Let the world deride or flatter, Give me Jesus alone. When my heart for joy is singing, Give me Jesus alone; Or when pain my heart is wringing, Give me Jesus alone.
Refrain 4: Give me Jesus alone, Give me Jesus alone; In the sunshine or the shadow, Give me Jesus alone. Passing through life’s verdant meadow, Give me Jesus alone; Or through death’s dark gloomy shadow, Give me Jesus alone.
Refrain 5: Give me Jesus alone, Give me Jesus alone; Whether life or death await me, Give me Jesus alone.
It's important for us to review some of Ellen G.White's 'failed prophecies' which witness against her claimed pro-phetic gift, for Deut 18:20-22 shows if her prophecies fail to come to pass, she is a 'false prophet' as Christ warned against in Matt 24, as a sign of the end of the age. Yet before seeing some of her predictions, we must first note the claims she is a prophet:
"Seventh-Day Adventists hold that Ellen G. White performed the work of a true prophet during the 70 years of her public ministry…As Samuel…as Jeremiah…as John the Baptist, so we believe that Mrs. White was a prophet to the church today." (Review & Herald, 10, 4, 192.
"This in-breathing by the Holy Spirit does impart to the prophetic utterances the quality of being authentic, authoritative, and infallible…It safeguards the prophet's message from human influences that would distort or pervert it." (Caottrell & Specht, Relation between D.A by EGW and Life of Christ by Hanna p.32); "Ellen White had that gift (of the Holy Spirit) and she was canonical in so far as doctrinal interpretation and authority is concerned." (Arthur Delafield, Gen. Conf., 1989)
While these statements show the SDA church's view of Ellen, when her failed prophecies are brought forward they'll often try to excuse her saying, 'she never claimed to be a prophet'. But, didn't she?
"My work includes much more than this name (prophet) signifies". (Selected Messages vol. I, p.36)
After saying she's even more than a prophet, she contradicts herself , saying why she's never claimed to be one!:
"I know that many have called me a prophet, but I have made no claim to this title…Why have I not claimed to be a prophet?--Because… my work includes much more than the word 'prophet' signifies". (Selected Messages I, 31+32, 1906)
SDAs claim her 70 years of prophetic ministry began in 1845, for she died in 1915. Yet in her 'Biographical Information Blank' of Mar 10, 1909, asking "When …did you begin laboring for the cause?" she wrote "In Maine, 1842 …1844-45 began public labor, relating visions, etc."
Again Selected Messages II p.4 says her "first and second messages were given in 1843 + 1844", and in Early Writings she tells "In 1842 I constantly attended the Second Advent meetings in Portland Maine…Wave after wave of glory rolled over me, till my body grew stiff …I remained in this state of body and mind a long time." (p11+12) confirming the 1842 date in SM II.
Ellen tries to evade being a false prophet (Deut 18:21+22) by saying all God's prophecies are 'conditional', and if she's a false prophet so must Jesus and the Apostles as well. Yet she and the SDA don't allow this for other prophets whose dates failed-except and only for her own! In their book God's Channel of Truth-Is it the Watchtower? SDAs hold the Watchtower Society are false prophets for setting dates just as Ellen did. (ch'Bricks in the Boat').
Ellen says "Those who so presumptuously predict definite time, in so doing gratify the adversary of souls; for they are advancing infidelity rather than Christianity. They produce Scriptures and by false interpretation show a chain of argument which apparently proves their position. But their failures show they are false prophets." (Test IV, p.307);
Their saying failed prophecies prove the prophet is false, must also say Ellen White the Adventist's prophet is also a false prophets for their own failed prophecies or set dates for Jesus return.
Reviewing Ellen White's 'Failed Prophecies'
We start this review in Ellen's book The Great Controversy, on p.447:
"When the time passed at which the Lord's coming was first expected-in the spring of 1844…"
Ellen says they as early Adventists first expected Jesus' return 'in the spring of 1844'. On p 420 she repeats 'The testimony of the prophecies which seemed to point to the coming of Christ in the spring of 1844, took deep hold of the minds of the people" But these early Adventists did not 'first' expect Christ to return in 1844, but rather in the 7th month of 1843! For years Millar preached Christ's return in 1843, using a 'Prophetic Time chart' with four (4) prophetic periods ending in 1843.
These four time periods pointing to 1843 were as follows:
7 Gentile 'times' (2520 years) beginning from 677 B.C. and ending in 1843. (Lev. 26:18,21,24+2
45 'days' (turned to 45 years) from 1798 A.D. ending 1843 (days between Dan 12:11 and 12:12)
1335 'days' (turned years) beginning 508 A.D. ending 1843 (days of Dan 12:12).
Ellen White endorsed this chart as being ordained by God, through her 'visions', as we find scattered through Early Writings. In one of Millar's meetings in 1842 she fell into a trance, and coming out of it confirmed the 1843 chart:
"In 1842 I constantly attended the second advent meetings in Portland, Maine, and fully believed that the Lord was coming. Inexpressible love for Jesus filled my soul. Wave after wave of glory rolled over me, until my body grew stiff…I remained in this state of body and mind a long time." (p.11+12).
But her statement of what her 'vision' was about is found on p.74:
"(I Saw)…the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered, that the figures were as He wanted them…" But, Jesus' predicted return in 1843 failed! So in Great Controversy p.427 she says "God designed to prove His people. His hand covered a mistake in the reckoning of the prophetic periods". If it was first directed by God hand, why and how is it possible to have a mistake in the reckoning?
We know she saw the figures were as He wanted, before the 1843 failure, for on p. 236 she says
"Those faithful disappointed ones who could not understand why their Lord did not come, were not left in darkness…The hand of the Lord was removed from the figures, and the mistake was explained. They saw that…the same evidence which they had presented to show that the prophetic periods closed in 1843, proved they would terminate in 1844…again they had a point in time." With all these statements in view, we now see that:
1. His predicted return in 1843, confirmed by her vision, didn't occur in 1843, so it was a false prophecy!
2. 1843 failed. So she saw God tested their faith as His hand covered some figures, causing a mistake
3. The mistake was explained, as 'no "0" year from BC to AD, and now the figures all pointed to 1844 instead.
4. From this 'prophetic guidance' they expected His return 'in the spring of 1844', but it failed! So her next 'vision' confirming 'spring' was wrong, it was a false prophecy.
5. Next, they expected His return Oct. 22, 1844. Her visions confirmed these prophetic periods pointing to this date. Both the date was wrong and the event was wrong for Jesus did not come, and the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia showed the Day of Atonement (10th day of 7th month) was on Sept 23, 1844,--not Oct 22. Thus her recording God's corrected reckoning for Oct 22, 1844 was indeed another false prophecy!
But even her saying "the same evidence which they had presented to show that the prophetic periods closed in 1843, proved that they would terminate in 1844" ARE false prophecy for another reason: the mistake they found of 'No Zero year' going from BC. to AD., changed the 2300 'years' from 1843, to 1844. Also the 2520 yrs of the '7 Gentile times' from 677 BC that would end in 1844 A.D..
But there were 4 prophetic periods on that chart-not just two! The other 2 time periods didn't go from BC. to years AD.. So the period of 45 years in #3, from 1798 to 1843 did not change to become 1844. And, neither were the 1335 years in #4, from 508 AD to 1843 changed to 1844. So these 2 time periods directly contradicted the other 2 periods on the same chart! These prophetic periods that said 1843 did not now say 1844 at all. Here was more false prophecy!
The '7 Gentile times' is dropped from SDA teaching, for it's of God's restoration for Israel, in the end of the Church Age. As Ellen predicted Jesus would come so soon, there wasn't enough time. So of Israel's restoration she prophes-ied:
"I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes…I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up". (Early Writings, p. 75). Now in 2000 AD, with over a million in Jerusalem, and God having restored a homeland to Israel, and them being an independent state in 1948, we can see beyond cavil, this was another false prophecy!
Ellen had another vision on Dec 10, 1844. She records:
"As God has shown me in holy vision the travels of the Advent people to the Holy city …I have tried to bring back a good report, and a few grapes from the Heavenly Canaan, for which many would stone me" (Word to the Little Flock)
Why stone her? God's law requires prophets be tested (Deut 18:21+22) and false prophets were to be stoned to death! Here she tells she saw the Advent people ascending the narrow path to the city, "Until we heard the voice of God, like many waters, which gave us the day and hour of Christ's coming".
Apart from this vision, there can be no accounting for her writing in WTLF p.22 "It is well known that many were expecting the Lord to come at the 7th month 1845. That Christ would then come, we firmly believed". No prophetic periods pointed to 1845-only her vision Dec 10, 1844, where she 'heard the voice of God'. Since Jesus did not return that year either, as she had seen in 'holy vision', it was false prophecy too!
She later predicted Jesus return for 1850:
"In a view given June 27, 1850, my accompanying angel said 'Time is al-most finished'…what we have been years in learning, they (new believers) will have to learn in a few short months …then I saw that the seven last plagues were soon to be poured out." "I saw that the time for Jesus to be in the most holy place was nearly finished and that time can last but a very little longer…The sealing time is very short, and will soon be over." (Early Writings, p 64 & 5.
There were 5 Ú years from Dec 1844; the 'few short months' are now 150 years! Thus this 1850 prophecy is another false prophecy!
Ellen proves this 'sealing' hadn't begun yet, for in 1884 she wrote in SP IV, p. 315 "The judgment is now passing in the Sanctuary above... Soon-none know how soon-it will pass to the cases of the living". Since by 1884 it had not passed to the living, then they weren't already judged by 1850, nor had Christ made His 'special final atonement' required before the sealing of the 144,000 begins-so another false prophecy!
Ellen predicted Jesus' return in 1843, the spring of 1844, Oct 22, 1844, the 7th month of 1845, and by Dec 1850. The SDA's own T.V. speaker, Mark Finley said "Some of these prophets are obvious phonies because the things they predict don't come to pass. And you know what happens when the things they predict don't come to pass? They simply set new dates…" And these are by no means her only false prophecies, there are many more.
In his book White Washed, a former SDA Pastor Sydney Cleveland conclusively deals with the SDA 'conditional prophecies' excuse, thoroughly exposing ten of Ellen's false prophecies, concluding "…all have failed to meet the requirements of her own 'inspired' prophetic chronology!" (p.88, 2000 ed.,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Part 2
Prophetic Failures
of Ellen G. White V. Streifling, Ph.D.
In the article above 'Prophetic Failures' we saw several false prophecies made by SDA's prophet Ellen White:
She confirmed the Prophetic date of Jesus' return for 1843
She confirmed Jesus' return for the Spring of 1844
She confirmed His return for Oct 22, 1844
She prophesied His return for the 7th month of 1845 and,
She also predicted His return by Dec, 1850.
Still we should now review some more of her 'failed prophecies' which witness against her claimed prophetic gift, for Deut 18:20-22 shows if her prophecies fail to come to pass, she is a 'false prophet', and we saw both her own statements that those who predict times for Jesus' return are being used of Satan, as also their T.V. Evangelist Mark Finley stating those whose predictions failed, are 'obvious phonies'.
We noted the SDA's claim that Ellen is a prophet:
"Seventh-Day Adventists hold that Ellen G. White performed the work of a true prophet during the 70 years of her public ministry…As Samuel…as Jeremiah…as John the Baptist, so we believe that Mrs. White was a prophet to the church today." (Review & Herald, 10, 4, 192.
We also saw her own claim to be 'more than a prophet': "I know that many have called me a prophet, but I have made no claim to this title…Why have I not claimed to be a prophet?--Because… my work includes much more than the word 'prophet' signifies". (Selected Messages I, 31+32, 1906)
In His book White-Washed, the former SDA Pastor Sydney Cleveland thoroughly deals with some of Ellen's other false prophecies. With his permission, we list them below, citing Ellen's statements which pertain to them:
1. The Lisbon earthquake (1755), and the Dark Day (May 19, 1780) definitely fulfilled two signs of Christ's second coming.
"These signs were witnessed before the opening of the nineteenth century. In fulfillment of this prophecy there occurred, in the year 1755, the most terrible earthquake that has ever been recorded… the earthquake at Lisbon…" (GC p.304-305, 188 The Calgary Sun, Dec 9, 1988, p.1, shows 12 worse quakes than this!
2. Turkey would fall on August 11, 1840.
"This power was to be overthrown…It will end on the 11th of August, 1840…At the very time specified Turkey…ex-actly fulfilled the prediction" (GC p. 334, 335, 188 Turkey still stands today.
3. In 1850 the 'sealing' time was almost over and the seven last plagues would soon be poured out. (We dealt with this on the tract 'Prophetic Failures of Ellen G. White')
4. God told Ellen White that individuals attending the Conference at Battle Creek on May 27, 1856 would still be alive at Christ's second coming.
"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". (Test I, p.131 +132). Willie White, the youngest there would be 151 years old today.
5. During the Civil War, England will attack the Unites States and humble America to the dust.
"I was shown…England fully understands…that the war is not to do away slavery…This nation (USA) will yet be humbled into the dust…When England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion". (ibid, 258+259, Jan 4, 1862)
6. Old Jerusalem will never be built up.
"I was pointed to some … believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes…I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up." (Early Writings p. 75)
7. Angels would destroy San Francisco.
"While at Loma Linda, Cal, April 16, 1906…during the vision of the night…I could see houses shaken like a reed in the wind. Buildings great and small, were falling to the ground. Pleasure resorts, theaters hotels, and the homes of the wealthy were shaken and shattered…The destroying angels of God were at work. One touch, and buildings so thor-oughly constructed… quickly became heaps of rubbish…The forbearance of God was exhausted…judgment day had come." (Test IX, p.93, 1909). Here she didn't predict earthquake or fire, but Angels at work. San Francisco wasn't named, only a city - it could be any city in the world! She said it was 'Judgment Day' which didn't come in 1906.
8. Ellen White will be one of the 144,000. ( translated alive when Jesus returns )
"These (144,000) having been translated from the earth, from among the living, are counted as 'the first fruits unto God'. (GC 649). "As we were about to enter the holy temple, Jesus raised His lovely voice and said, 'Only the 144,000 enter this place'…after we beheld the glory of the temple, we went out." (EW p.19, 1851)
9. None could be saved after the 2,300 years ended October 22, 1844. (This is called the 'shut door' doctrine.) "For a time after the disappointment in 1844, I did hold in common with the advent body that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world…" (SM I, p.63, 1883)
"While in Exeter, Maine, in a meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others, many of them did not believe in a shut door… It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from his mediatorial throne and going to the holiest as Bridegroom to receive his kingdom…Most of them received the vision and were settled upon the shut door" (letter to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847; Adventist Currents, Apr 1988, p.29).
10 …Oct 21, 1858, God mentioned to Ellen White that the time of trouble was just before them.
"The time of trouble is just before us; and then the stern necessity will require the people of God to deny self, and to eat merely enough to sustain life." (Test I, p.206, 185 This time still hasn't arrived!
Having listed and thoroughly proved these were all failed prophecies, Rev. Cleveland says
"In the overall picture, the facts are that Ellen White's entire end-time scenario has remained unfulfilled for more than one hundred years! None of it has come to pass: not the investigative Judgment; not the little time of trouble; not the latter rain; not the loud cry; not the national Sunday law; not Satan's impersonation of Christ; not the time of Jacob's trouble; not the universal death decree; not the great time of trouble; not the Second Coming of Christ-all have failed to meet the requirements of her own "inspired" prophetic chronology!" (p.87 + 8
While far more than enough failed prophecies have been already shown, (for only one would make her a false prophet), yet we would do well to still look at one further example, recorded in Adventist Currents, of April, 1988. This records the events of Feb 15, 1845 at the meeting conducted by Israel Dammon, in Atkinson, Maine. By this time Ellen and others absolutely believed in the shut door, as well as requiring baptism into this 'message'. SDAs now accept the record from the Newspaper Piscataquis Farmer as giving an accurate account of the Dammon trial where friendly witnesses gave their God-fearing testimony of what events happened in that meeting:
Wm Crosby told "There was a woman on the floor who lay on her back with a pillow under her head; she would occasionally arouse up and tell a vision which she said was revealed to her.."
James Ayer, Jr identified this visionary "Saw the woman with a pillow under her head - her name is Miss Ellen Harmon, of Portland…She told brother Doore she was distressed on his account-was afraid he would loose his soul, and advised him to be baptized…"
Isley Osborn affirmed "She told them their cases had been made know to her by the Lord, and if they were not baptized that evening, they would go to hell."
Joel Doore stated "I believe in Miss Harmon's visions…Sister Harmon said to my wife and the girls, if they did not do as she said, they would go to hell…" (ie. crawling on the floor)
Loton Lambert testified "The woman that lay on the floor relating visions, was called by Elder Dam-mon and others, Imitation of Christ…the one that they called Imitation of Christ told Mrs. Woodbury and others, that they must forsake all their friends or go to hell. Imitation of Christ, as they called her, would lay on the floor a while, then rise up and call upon someone and say she had a vision to relate to them…there was one girl that they said must be baptized that night or she must go to hell; she wept bitterly and wanted to see her mother first; they told her she must leave her mother or go to hell… Imitation of Christ told her vision to a cousin of mine, that she must be baptized that night or go to hell…"
There are several considerations which show Ellen White gave several false prophecies here:
1. It added works (being baptized, forsaking parents, crawling on the floor) to faith for salvation.
2. It presupposed God was already investigating the cases of the living, which Ellen claimed to reveal, but 39 years later Ellen saw that God had not yet moved to the cases of the living. Thus God could not have shown her the cases of those living in 1845! Thus, her claim that God showed her they must be baptized that night or go to hell, was clearly false prophecy!
3. Their rebaptisms were into the Shut Door message they later repudiated. God could not require a rebaptism into a false message, upon pain of eternal damnation!
Again this was a false prophecy.
No wonder she wrote "In our frequent change of location in the earlier history of the publishing work, and I have crossed the plains no less than 17 times-I lost all trace of the first published works...And here I pause to state that any of our people having in their possession a copy of any or all of my first views, as published prior to 1851 will do me a great favor if they will send them to me without delay" (SM I, p.29 She desperately needed to suppress all her first 'shut door' visions! In Life of EGW-her False Claims Refuted, D. Canright has an entire chapter on her suppressed writings, at the expense of their ministers! Serving SDA with her for 25 years, he speaks from first-hand experience.
Certainly Ellen's long legacy of False Prophecies proves she's a false prophet, according to Deuteronomy18:20-22.
Seeing false prophets in the world today, setting dates for Jesus' return, we must not repudiate the message of His return-but only the false prophets with their false dates which they use to spur their followers to excessive time and money to get the message out before it's too late! Yet the message that Jesus is coming again is God's Truth-it's objective truth-His promise is sure
An SDA tried to defend the following EGW position........
A good example of poor logic and misuse of scriptures. Follow the sequence of correspondence and our reply.
The "Original Article" we posted:
When reading Desire of Ages, on page 62 or 87 depending which version one has, in the 10th paragraph of chapter 9 "Days of Conflict", Ellen G White states, "All this displeased His brothers. Being older than Jesus, they felt that He should be under their dictation."
If Jesus had older brothers, how could He have been born of a Virgin Birth? If He wasn't born of the Virgin Mary, then He would have inherited Adam's sinful nature. Perhaps this is no mistake due to Ellen G White and the Seventh-Day Adventists belief in Jesus taking on sinful human nature. Another evidence of their false Jesus!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply from an offended SDA
---- Original Message ----- From:---- ------- ------
To: jwfacts**********Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 11:50 AM
Jesus did indeed have brothers. But they were step brothers! Read Matthew 13:53-58. verse 55 states that Jesus had brothers. Yes Joseph the earthly father of Jesus was actually married before he met Mary and married again.
So Mary was a virgin and Ellen White is not denying that by saying that Jesus had brothers! read it again in Mark 6:1-6 verse 3 says the same thing!
You are looking for errors in Ellen White to discredit her. When you do that you will never find any truth in her writing because truth is not what you are looking for! You need a change of heart towards Ellen White in order to truly see if what she says is the truth or not. Dont say to yourself,"This is threatening my faith". If you want the truth then change your heart to test it with proper scales. Do not be a Pharisee when it comes to new light concerning something. Judge it fairly with a heart that wants to know what is right.
This is my Prayer Amen.
Kevin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Kevin
I received your comment re EGW's words in Deisre of Ages concerning Jesus' supposed "OLDER brothers and sisters", and I must say that I appreciate your writing in to MacGregor Ministries concerning this on their web site. As a former SDA myself, who strongly believed in EGW until I was about 28, I can understand your necessity to defend her at all costs -- even when she denigrades our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ (Tit 2:13).
I used to do the same, not thinking that the Bible shows what is God's Scales for weighing out whether one is a True or False prophet in Isaiah 8:19+20. It asks how we'll know if they speak from God or a familiar spirit, and the answer is "If they speak not according to this Word (the very Word of God) there is NO LIGHT in them". In this case, Bro Kevin, over the past 30 years as a former Adventist, I have encountered scores of places where she contradicts the Word of God, and herself, and over a dozen of her false prophecies. All these are the Biblical Tests of a True or False prophet. It is God who says "there is no light in them" and this of necessity applies to her.
In the specific instance of her statement that Jesus had OLDER brothers and sisters, here is just one more example, Bro Kevin. For the Bible references you gave did not say "OLDER", but only spoke of brothers and sisters! So here EGW adds the word 'older' and it changes the whole Bible Story! In EGW's defense you stated:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Yes Joseph the earthly father of Jesus... Bro Kevin Jesus had NO earthly father. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit as we read in Luke 1 and Matt 1. Indeed Joseph was shocked to discover Mary was pregnant and wanted to divorce her, until the angel told him she had conceived of the Holy Spirit, and that He WAS THE SON OF GOD (not any human father). By your calling Joseph an earthly father of Jesus, you are denying His virgin birth, which is the very problem you're trying to solve for EGW because she said Jesus' brothers and sisters were OLDER than Him! So to uphold his virgin birth, you're making Joseph His earthly father, thus DENYING his virgin birth anyway. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Joseph was married before he met Mary, and married again. Please provide the Biblical Text that shows this! Here you are merely question begging! But there is no Bible proof of this. Here you're dismissing Sola Scriptura and relying on what your 'prophet' EGW has indicated. But in doing this you're buying into the Catholic teaching that was generated to uphold their view of the perpetual Virginity of Mary, so that she's still the immaculate Virgin Mary in heaven today! Thus EGW has brought this from Catholicism and made it divinely inspired for SDAs by endorsing it!
But it is contrary to Scripture. Matt 1: 24+25 say that Joseph took her as his wife, and he "did not know her until she had brought forth her FIRST BORN"son, Jesus Christ. This tells us that Joseph DID KNOW Mary after Jesus was born, SO she was not perpetually a virgin after that but she became the mother of Jesus brothers and sisters -- who were Younger than Him, for He was FIRSTBORN.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Really Bro Kevin, you have tried to re-define what are Step-brothers, though you probably did not realize it. Step siblings are brothers and sisters who share ONE Common parent.--not two. In this case ONLY Mary was a Common parent to Jesus and his brothers and sisters. Joseph was NOT Jesus parent, so He was not his actual father. Adoptive parents (as you may refer to Joseph's relation to Jesus) do not author Step-Children. Thus EGW was clearly very wrong in this respect concerning Jesus, for His ONLY earthly parent was Mary, and so His only brothers and sisters had to be from Mary's womb.
And it's very important, for as soon as you take EGW's view, you are denying Jesus' virgin birth, and accepting the basis of her second false view re Christ, that being that Jesus had a fallen Sinful Human nature. And of course you are also opening the door to her third view that denied the True and Absolute deity of Jesus, for she really spoke of him as an angel in many places. She taught in 1903 "The man Christ Jesus was NOT the Lord God Almighty".
I hope that some of these things I've shared with you here, Kevin, may help you to use a Biblical Scales to evaluate EGW, instead of your own subjective emotional opinions, for she really is there to challenge your faith. The bottom line, would be however, that you must ask "Who do I love the Most?: Jesus, or EGW?" If you defend EGW at the expense of Jesus, when she denigrades Him as she does, then She's got first place in your heart, and you're breaking the first commandment.
If you Love and defend Jesus, and let the False Prophet go, then You've made Jesus LORD over your life and faith. That's the real Christian way to God. If you hold EGW's writings as above the Bible, by adding whatever she says to the Bible as a basis for your faith, then again she's your false god. For the Real God of the Bible tells us NOT TO ADD to what He has spoken! EGW has added to the bible in hundreds of places, and we as SDAs had forsaken Sola Scriptura. To be a real Christian you must return to Sola Scriptura, Bro Kevin
May God bless and guide you as you seek to do His will, and begin to uphold Him first in All things and every area of your life. Amen
Jude 1:9 Michael the Archangel --- said (to Satan) 'The Lord rebuke thee'
Rom 10:9 If you confess 'Jesus is LORD'… you shall be saved.
Most Christians are amazed to learn that SDA teaches that Jesus is Michael the Archangel, but Ellen White said He was Michael, so if they changed this, they'd need to reject her as 'the spirit of prophecy' and they'd not be the remnant church! So now they hold He's both God the Son, and Michael.
It makes a great difference who Jesus really is for 2 Cor 11:4 says, there'll be those who teach another Jesus, preach a different gospel and have another spirit. These marks identify cults, who invariably attack the Doctrine of Christ. Early SDA denied His deity saying He's the archangel. Their Commentary vol 5 p 1129 cites Ellen "The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty"
I Tim 2:5; Heb 7:4; Rev 17:14; 15:3 &16:5-7 show He is Almighty God.
The real Jesus is the God-man Christ Jesus. He was never an Archangel! He's not God-angel-man. So SDA has a different Jesus.
But Ellen White said:
"Michael, or Christ, with the angels that buried Moses" (Jude 9, Spiritual Gifts, IV a, p. 15
"And before the context closed Christ Himself came to Gabriel's aid---Gabriel declares 'But lo, Michael, one of the Chief Princes came to help me" (Dan 10:13, Prophets & Kings, p.572)
"There is none that holdeth with me in these things but Michael (Christ) your prince." (Desire of Ages p.99)
"Moses passed under the dominion of death - but Christ the Savior brought him forth from the grave. Jude 9" (ibid 379)
SDA use her 'gift' to prove He is Michael as seen from their Commentary vol 4, p. 860 where they appeal to her writings as their final authority; and that Michael standing up in Dan 12:1 is Jesus ending his mediation for us, quoting Desire of Ages p.379. In 1 Ths 4:16 they reason as He's coming with the voice of the archangel, then He must be Michael! To allow this, they redefine what an Archangel is, in vol. 7, p. 706 -- Michael is one of the names of Christ -- not as the chief angel, but as the ruler over the angels'. Here they say 'an archangel is not an angel', but is an Archbishop a bishop, or the Chief of police, a police? Isa 8:20 "If they speak not according to this Word, there is no light in them".
We must show the Bible definition of this, to see how wrong their redefinition is. To evade this test of Scripture, SDA have made their own Clear Word Bible (1994), adding E.G. White's interpretations into the text!
1 Ths 4:16 "When Christ descends from heaven, He, as the Archangel will" ---
Rev 12 "God's Son Michael and the loyal angels fought."
Jude 9 "the Lord Jesus Christ, also called Michael the Archangel"
Dan 10:13 "then Michael, the prince of the Lord's host, came to help me"
While their commentary tried to accommodate Ellen by saying an archangel is not an angel, now their Clear Word Bible actually making Christ into an angel!
Rev 10:1 "Next I saw a mighty Angel --- I knew it was the Lord Jesus"
Rev 10:5 "Then this mighty Angel, the Lord Jesus ---"
Rev 10:8+9 (--take the book from the Mighty Angel--) "So I went up to the Son of God and asked --- "
Is Jesus 'Michael'?
Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the NT shows the word 'Archangel' is from two words: 'archay' meaning 'chief' and 'aggelos' meaning 'angel', defining 'Archangel' as 'The chief of the angels', flatly confuting SDA's Commentary's words "not as chief of the angels".
The LXX, Dan 10:13 shows he is "one of the Chiefs of the princes". Here the article is in plural spelling 'twv' and 'archay' is also plural 'Archwvtwv' so it literally says 'one of the chiefs of the angels". --- There are more archangels.
The Bible makes clear distinctions between Jesus and the Angels:
1. Heb 1:14 says angels are all spirits but Jesus showed He was not a Spirit (Lk 24: 27-29). So to the SDA who made Him an angel in Rev 10, He is a spirit, which denies His bodily resurrection, an Anti-Christian deception (2 Jn 7), as well as denying He is the God-Man (Col. 2:9).
2. Angels are all created beings, while Jesus is their creator (Jn 1:1-3; Col 1:16-1 but not created !
3. Heb 1&2 tells many ways Jesus is better (by nature) than the angels, emphasizing His true deity!
Gesenius' Hebrew Chaldee Lexicon of the OT proves decisively that the Chiefs of Princes in Dan 10 are the archangels. Of Michael, it says "One of the seven (7) archangels who interceded for the people of Israel before God". Strong's Exhaustive Concordance Dictionary concurs, and Thayer's Greek Lexicon gives more insight re. the 7 archangels. In Luke 1:9 Gabriel says "I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God". Rev 1:4 speaks of the 'seven spirits' (which angels are) who are before God's throne.
But Jesus is God on the throne (Jn 1:1; Mk 16:19; Acts 2:32-36). In Rev 3:1 it is "He who has the seven spirits (angels) of God". In 15+16 these 'seven angels' hold the seven vials with the last plagues for the earth. In Zech 3:9 Jesus is the 'Stone having seven eyes'--the Seven Archangels before his throne.
As the Bible shows these 7 spirits, and the 7 archangels are 7 spirits, these are the 7 archangels in Tobit (LXX), so Michael the Archangel is one of the 7 arch-angels. Jesus who is the fullness of Deity bodily, is 'the Man Christ Jesus', and NOT a Spirit, thus not the archangel, Michael.
Thayer's Lexicon also tells of more info in the Jewish Encyclopedia and the Book of Enoch, We know Enoch is quoted in Jude 14 (the same context as vs 9 about Michael). Here we learn who the archangels are, as the Jews knew about "And then Michael, Uriel, Raphael and Gabriel looked down from heave"--- The footnote points to 40:2 where it explains the names of the 7 archangels as being: Michael, Uriel, Gabriel, Raphael, Raguel, Saraquel and Remiel. The note continues to tell their ministry, sometimes expressed in their names.
But SDA use to defend their stance saying that since Jesus comes with the archangel's voice, and since He says all who are in their graves will hear His voice and be raised to life, then His voice is the archangel's voice, and He's the archangel!. Looking carefully at these passages we see why they only allude to them. 1 Thess says He's coming with the archangel's voice, and with the trump of God. If his coming with the archangel's voice makes Him the archangel, then His coming with the trump of God also makes Him a trumpet! The error is evident, yet it's deeper for it's the voice He's coming with. This reduces Him to merely a voice-not even an angel. But the preposition 'with' followed by an article 'the' plus a noun, speaks of a separate entity, not the same entity.
The verse says "The Lord Himself will descend from Heaven with a shout -a commanding call--" Jesus Himself is going to shout, and this is what He refers to in John 5, that those who are asleep in the dust of the earth, will hear His voice-not an angel's when He comes. Since He says in Matt 25 that He will come with all His angels, of course He will bring the 7 archangels with Him. But in Matt 24:31 He says He'll send them forth 'with the great sound of a trumpet' while 1 Cor 15:52 says the 'trumpet will sound and the dead will rise'.
Yet since He brings all archangels, there's no reason the archangel in 1 Thess is Michael. Odds are 7 to one it's a different one, especially as SDA teach that God cast off Israel, and as Michael is the archangel for the Jewish people, and Jesus is coming for His church, in contrast to Israel. -unless it be in a context of Michael calling all the angels to battle, to combat Satan and his angels, who would certainly try to prevent Jesus' return for His church. Since Michael and his angels evicted Satan and his hosts from heaven in Rev 12, (where Christ is God on the throne), and as Michael dispensed with the Prince of Persia in Dan. 10, it follows there would be a great spiritual battle taking place in conjunction with Armageddon, when Christ comes for His church.
In Dan 10, Michael is not the one who spoke to Daniel, but the Archangel who came to dispense with the 'prince of Persia'. The ONE speaking to Daniel is described as 'a man clothed in linen, whose waist was girded with gold of uphaz, His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes were like torches of fire, his arms and feet like burnished bronze…' (vs 5+6).
We see this same ONE in Rev 1:13-18, who is clothed in linen, and his eyes are like flame of fire, and his feet like fine brass, refined in fire. He is Jesus Christ. Thus Christ spoke to Daniel, and so He was not Michael, one of the Chiefs of the Angels!
Distinction between Jesus and Michael is seen by comparing Rev 12 with the Gospels, for when Michael cast Satan from heaven, Jesus said "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven", showing He was God on the throne as He watched Michael, with the division of angels at his command, casting Satan and his hosts from heaven. Jesus watched as Michael was fighting.
A similar distinction is seen comparing Jude 9 with Rom 10:9, cited in the heading of this article. Here Michael did not dare accuse Satan, but said "The LORD rebuke thee". Jesus, Who is "LORD over all" had no problems accusing Satan, declaring him 'a liar from the beginning' and 'the father of lies'. And Rom 10:9 says we must confess that Jesus IS LORD to be saved.
SDA argue that since the name 'Michael' means 'Who is like God', then it must be Jesus who is God, for it would be desecration to apply such a name to an angel. This is only human logic, based on inadequate evidence and asks 'why did Ellen apply it to Jesus before they accepted He was God, and while she denied He was Almighty God?' The name 'Michael' means 'Who is like God?" in a question, subjunctive mood. It's linguistic nonsense to apply this to Jesus Who IS God. Since He is God, it would be against His Divine nature to call Him a name saying He is like God, much less asking Is He like God? Yet the Bible shows the names of all the other Archangels, were even given to men, as well as these angels, though and while each of these names describes some characteristic of Jesus as God. We will illustrate these below:
Gabriel from 'El Gibbor' (Mighty God). Ezra 2:20 a man is called 'Gibbar'.
Raphael from 'Jehovah Rapha' (El heals) used for man in 1 Chron 8:2+37
Raguel means 'friend' or 'husband-lover' (Songs), of Christ. The name 'Reu' (Gen 11:1 is a short-form of this, as also in Luke 3:35 (Gk # 4466).
Saraquel 'Sar' (prince) & 'Raquel' (wandering sheep). Jesus is Prince and the Lamb who journeys (Mk 13:34). In Matt 2:18 we see'Rachel'.
Remiel ('Ram Yah') is 'Jehovah raised God'. It's used for men in Ezra 10:25
Uriel is 'the flame of God' as in Deut 4:24. II Chr 13:2 etc apply this to men.
Phanuel (the face of God) in Deut 34:10 is applied to men in Lk 2:36 as 'Peniel'; also 1 Chr 4:4 and 8:25.
Michael Who is like God? not applied to God, but 9 men as 1 Chr 5: 13, 14;
Nb. 'Uriel' and 'Phanuel' are 2 names for the same Angel, the one earlier, the other later dating.
When other efforts to show Jesus is Michael fail, SDA Pastors often turn to Zech 3:1+2, saying that 'the Angel of the Lord' often speaks of theophanies of the pre-advent Christ, so here 'the Angel of the Lord' who tells Satan "The Lord rebuke thee---" is Jesus as Michael of Jude 9 who says these words to him.
This straw man assumes what it tries to prove. It assumes only one person can say 'the Lord rebuke thee'; and each time we see 'the angel of the Lord' it is Yhwh; and that as Yhwh the Son--not Yhwh the Father or Holy Spirit. It's error to use the OT to define the New, and to use prophetic passages to overturn didactic Scripture and establish doctrine. And it's error to use the Heb 'Malach' of messenger as equal to archaggelos in NT Gk, when in Daniel the Heb 'Sar' (prince) is used for Michael--not malach as in Zechariah.
Here they limit the persons of Zech 3:2 to those in 3:1, when there's no reason there could not be 4: the Lord's Messenger; Joshua; Satan, & Yhwh Himself. The context of Zech 3 begins in Zech 1 where the Lord's Angel (vs11) stands between the Myrtle trees, talking to Yhwh (vs12) who answers the angel (vs13).
As the messenger is an angel, and not Yhwh in Zech 1, and this context leads us into Zech 3, then neither is the Angel the Yhwh who tells Satan "Yhwh rebuke thee"(3:2); and there are 4 entities in 3:1+2, (as we noted apparent, above).
That the messenger is not Yhwh is also seen from vs 6 onward where the angel says "Thus says Yhwh", and Yhwh says He'll send "My Servant, the Branch". Yhwh's Servant, the Branch (Heb netzer) speaks of Jesus (Isa 42:1; 52:15) The Nazarene. Thus Jesus whom Yhwh would send, is not the Yhwh who speaks in Zech 3, and neither the Messenger of Yhwh who as we've shown isn't Yhwh.
So the Yhwh of this passage must be either Yhwh the Father, or Yhwh the Holy Spirit. But since here in Zech 3:2 the Yhwh who spoke said "Yhwh who chose Israel rebuke thee", and as Eph 1:2+3 says God the Father chose us in Christ, we deduce it was Yhwh the Holy Spirit who was speaking here in Zech 3:2.
As Peter said 'Holy Men of old spoke being impelled by the Holy Spirit', and since the Holy Spirit spoke through Isaiah (Acts 28:25), and as the Holy Spirit was the Yhwh who Israel tested in the wilderness (Heb 3; Ex 17:2-7), so too here He was the Yhwh who was speaking in Zech 3:1+2 and vs 6 &c.
Thus here in Zech 3, the Angel (Messenger) of Yhwh is not Yhwh, and neither is this Angel the Pre-Incarnate Christ. And the Yhwh who rebuked Satan was the Holy Spirit here, which is a very different scene in Jude 9 where Michael the Archangel did not dare to accuse Satan, while Jesus Himself both accused and rebuked Satan during His ministry saying "Get behind me Satan", and "the devil was a liar and a murderer from the beginning". Here the SDA's misuse of Zech 3 has failed in every way. But they show they know their efforts were wrong:
To deny Jesus was first created by God (Prov 8:22+) their commentary says:
"There is an obvious parallel in this passage to the work of the Second Person of the Godhead. However, the passage is allegorical, and caution must be exercised not to press an allegory beyond what the original writer had in mind. Interpretations derived must always be in harmony with the analogy of Scripture. (vol III, p.972)
"--- Dogmatic conclusions from parabolic passages are unjustified---verification of doctrinal beliefs should always be sought in the literal statements of the Bible". (ibid, 973)
Since SDA know and use these principles in Prov 8, then it is conclusive they know it's wrong to violate these same principles in using Zech 3:1+2 to try and show Jesus is Michael the archangel, especially when they ignore the context of Zech 1 through 3:10, they use the OT to define the New, begging the question on many assumptions, and assuming what they set out to prove.
Former SDA, Dudly Canright, in his Life of E.G.White--- on p162 tells Dr. Kellogg theorized all that was left of a person at death was a record of his life kept in heaven, and at the resurrection a new body of new matter would be formed like the old one and made to think he was the same person. James White who accepted this also asked Ellen for her "light" on it. She said God had shown this to her. When Canright asked "How about Christ's body which was raised?" she answered, "He dropped it all when he ascended". Here Jesus' dropping off His resurrected body, allowed Him to be the Spirit-being, Michael the Archangel, who she recorded as winging his way with her around in heaven, in A Word to the Little Flock, in 1847.
The investigative judgment doctrine, peculiar to Seventh-day Adventists, teaches that in fulfillment of Old Testament sanctuary typology, Christ entered into the second apartment of the sanctuary in heaven in 1844 in order to begin a work of "investigative judgment" to see who was worthy of eternal life, both of those still living and those dead.
A brief background for this teaching is called for. Ellen G. White, under the influence of William Miller, an early Adventist, agreed with his date for the visible return of Christ. October of 1844 was set for the second coming of Christ. Christ obviously did not return on that date, so in order to "save face" over a false prophecy, "investigative judgment" was born.
SDA's use Daniel 8:14 in their reasoning,
"And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed". (Authorized Version).
The SDA reasoning is faulty on two points regarding this scripture. First, the Hebrew word for "cleansing" is not used. The translators of the King James Bible would have been more accurate had they said "restored" rather than "cleansed".
Also the SDA's try to turn the Hebrew words "ereb boqer" for "days" into "years", but these words literally mean "evening-mornings". Obviously an actual solar day of 24 hours is referred to, not "years", as SDA publications state.
The New American Standard Bible more clearly says in Daniel 8:14, "And he said to me, "For 2300 evenings and mornings; then the holy place will be properly restored."
Despite all this, including the fulfillment of this scripture, 1844 nevertheless came to be the date in SDA theology when a work of final atonement, a "cleansing" which would blot out a believer's sin would supposedly begin.
This teaching is the opposite of the full atonement taught by the Christian church, and also mocks at the words of our Savior from the Cross, "It is finished." (John 19:30). Hebrews 10:12 also states,
But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, FOREVER, sat down on the right hand of God." (NAS).
Christ paid fully for our sins, atoning for them fully. No scripture teaches otherwise.
SERIOUS RAMIFICATIONS OF THE
1844 INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT TEACHING
In 1877, Uriah Smith, an early Adventist, declared, "Christ did not make the atonement when he shed his blood upon the cross. Let this fact be fixed forever in the mind".
(The Sanctuary and the Twenty-Three Hundred Days of Daniel VIII, 14, p. 276, quoted in "Are the Gospel and the 1844 Theology Compatible?" by Robert D. Brinsmead, p.17).
Ellen White herself declared (or plagiarized) in The Great Controversy that,"before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed, there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended." (1844).
We will not be citing page numbers for "The Great Controversy" since so many editions were printed, but by looking in the index for the subject, the quotes can be found. So, Ellen White places the time of Christ's atonement after 1844.
While plagiarizing various evangelical writers of this time she did also copy statements teaching that redemption was finished at the cross, and some SDA's like to quote only these references, but in all honesty, they must admit the SDA view was and is a denial of the absolute atoning work of Christ at Calvary.
There is even found in "The Great Controversy" this denial of Him as our absolute mediator.
"Those who are living upon the earth when the intercession of Christ shall cease in the sanctuary above, are to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator. Their robes must be spotless, their characters must be purified from sin by the blood of sprinkling. Through the grace of God and their own diligent effort, they must be conquerors in the battle with evil."
Later in the same book this statement is made,
"In that fearful time the righteous must live in the sight of a holy God without an intercessor."
What a terrible thought to have to stand before God without Christ as our mediator! Thank God for the assurance found in l John 21,
"...And if any man sin, we have an advocate (intercessor) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous."
WHO BEARS OUR SINS?
The answer to the above question comes quickly to the Christian because the scriptures plainly teach that Christ "bore our sins IN HIS OWN BODY on the tree" (1 Peter 2:24). 2 Corinthians 5:21 says that Christ was "made...to be sin for us".
The SDA's go one step further, and say that Christ will in turn lay our sins on Satan, and he will bear them! Their strange interpretation of Leviticus 16, making Satan the Scapegoat, is unsupported by Christian theologians, and is further proof that by using "The Great Controversy" as their guide, they would add to Christ's finished work of atonement.
NO FURTHER JUDGMENT IS REQUIRED
A thorough reading of the bible book of Hebrews shows no references at all to two compartments in heaven. At the Glacier View Conference of Adventists, the Sanctuary Review Committee admitted the "two-phased" concept was absent from the Book of Hebrews, and that no reference was made in the book of Hebrews to Daniel at all. This was fully reported in Ministry Magazine of October 1980, page 21, an SDA publication.
Indeed, Hebrews 10:10 plainly says, "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus once for all." Hebrews 10:14 carries on the same thought,
"For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified".
Truly, Christ did it all on Calvary. The "investigative judgment" of the SDA's, born of failed prophecy and incorrect interpretation of scripture should be abandoned by all lovers of truth.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MM Outreach
Historically, evangelicals have had difficulty defining and categorizing SDA. Much SDA doctrine is biblically orthodox. Within its ranks are many true Christians, some even in positions of prominence. At various points in its history, most notably in the 1888 General Conference, the SDA church has been shaken by the biblical gospel.
In the 1970s this became quite intense (Se: Paxton, Geoffrey, J., The Shaking of Adventism). Unfortunately, it produced a polarization. The church administrators generally became more entrenched in the unorthodox positions of traditional SDA, while some pastors and even whole congregations left or were asked to leave the SDA church ("From Controversy to Crisis," CRI Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 9–14). In official publications the SDA church continues to defend Ellen White legends, and maintain there was no difference in the degree of inspiration she received from that received by Bible writers (Review & Herald, 4 October 1928, p. 11; "Source of Final Appeal," Adventist Review, 3 June 1971, pp. 4–6; G. A. Irwin, Mark of the Beast, p. 1; "The Inspiration and Authority of the Ellen G. White Writings," Adventist Review, 15 July 1982, p. 3; Ministry, October 1981, p. 8; see also, Judged by the Gospel, pp. 125–30). In their June, 2000, General Conference they voted to more aggressively affirm and support the "Spirit of Prophecy through the ministry of Ellen White"(Adventist Today, [online: July 2000] ). They also teach a number of other doctrines clearly irreconcilable with the biblical gospel (see "Doctrine," below). So long as these things continue, evangelicals must persist in questioning the status of the SDA church organization in Christianity, and much more, her claim to be God’s only true, end-time "Remnant Church." [...]
SDA teachings most clearly contrary to the gospel and unorthodox in nature are its insistence on water baptism as an essential prerequisite to salvation, its teaching about the end time significance of sabbath observance to identification of true believers, and its doctrine of the Investigative Judgement. Source: Watchman Fellowship profile of SDA
In effect, Seventh-day Adventism's doctrines span the range from orthodox through aberrant, heterodox, sub-orthodox and heretical.
For this reason, the publishers of Apologetics Index advise Christians not to get involved in Seventh-day Adventism, and urges those who are already part of the SDA church to instead seek out a church that teaches sound, biblical theology. There also is a lot of confusion among Seventh-day Adventist themselves. Their problems are compounded by the fact that over the past two decades, deep divisions or factions have developed within the SDA. The Christian Research Institute states:
Those who follow Adventism closely know that the last two decades have been characterized by a deep internal conflict which has divided the denomination and left many Adventist [sic] disillusioned. Today, there are various divisions and factions within SDA. Some wish that Adventism would fully enter into the evangelical mainstream, while maintaining certain Adventist distinctives. Others, the more traditional or fundamentalist Adventists often reject portions of Question on Doctrine and seek to hold on to several heresies which arose early in the Adventist movement, such as the investigative judgement, the sinful nature of Christ, and viewing Ellen G. White as the infallible interpreter of Scripture. It is the division of Adventism, who often refer to themselves as "the remnant church," or God's exclusive agent, that CRI would regard as being cultic. Some within this camp would anathematize all of Protestantism, arguing that as Sunday-keepers they will receive the mark of the beast just prior to Christ's second coming. Admisttedly, this is the extreme part of SDA, but nevertheless well-represented.
The crisis that exists within SDA today essentially centers around the investigative judgment, an unbiblical doctrine which severely compromises if not outright denies the biblical doctrine of justification by faith. Second only to the investigative judgment issue is the all-encompassing question of the inspiration and authority of the writings of Ellen G. white. The controversy which has raged regarding the writings of Mrs. White has undoubtedly shaken the entire structure of SDA.
It is out sincere hope that this 5 million member church body, which has historically been a mixture of orthodox and heretical doctrine, will move toward a more soundly biblical position and away from the doctrinal errors it has held in the past. It is our hope that the leadership of SDA will lead its people out of all forms of legalism and into the liberty that results from being justified by God's grace through faith alone (Eph. 2:8-9). Source: Seventh-day Adventism
Discernment ministry Watchman Fellowship notes:
SDA teachings most clearly contrary to the gospel and unorthodox in nature are its insistence on water baptism as an essential prerequisite to salvation, its teaching about the end time significance of sabbath observance to identification of true believers, and its doctrine of the Investigative Judgement. (...)
Other distinctive SDA teachings include vegetarianism and other ''health'' issues, and the doctrine of ''soul sleep,'' a misnomer for the belief that between death and resurrection one is essentially non-existent except in the memory of God. This is definitely aberrant from the Bible, but does not conflict the gospel. Much of the SDA health message may actually be helpful. But when, as is often the case, spiritual stigma is attached to non-observance of its asceticism, then the gospel is compromised (Gal. 2:11-16). (...)
Even when speaking of being saved by the righteousness of Christ, Adventist writers refer to imparted righteousness, seldom to the biblical concept of imputed righteousness. Calling it ''Christ's righteousness,'' while insisting on the believer's perfection of character as a prerequisite to salvation, is at worst a thinly veiled works salvation, or at best an attempt to mix grace and works, something the Bible says is impossible to do (Rom. 11:6). Mrs. White's words are crystal clear - one will not be forgiven till all sins are eradicated from one's life and one's character is perfected. Precisely the same heresy is found (besides many others) in Mormonism. It is not the salvation by grace alone through faith alone offered in the Bible.
The error is compounded by the teaching that this latter day 1844 event must be believed in to exercise the proper faith necessary to be saved. When Jesus said on the cross, ''It is finished, '' i.e. completed, paid in full, it cannot be that there is yet another salvation event more than 1800 years later, just as essential to salvation as Christ's death on the cross, in which one must believe in order to be saved. This is clearly ''another gospel'' (Gal. 1:6-9). [...more...]
Soul Sleep"?: SDAs deny that believers on death go to heaven. They say that believers go to soul sleep in the grave until Christ's return. This is a belief that they share with the Jehovahs Witnesses.
Since (in thier view) the soul cannot exist apart from the body, man must rest in the tomb until the resurrection.
This teaching is refuted by the following verses:
Luke 16:19-31 the story of the rich man and Lazarus.
Philippians 1:23 "I am in a straight between two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better."
Hebrews 12:1 "We are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses" (The faithful departed listed in chapter 11 of Hebrews)
Revelation 6:9,10 "I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the Word of God ... they cried with a loud voice"
Ezekiel 32:21 "The strong among the mighty shall speak to him out of the midst of hell..."
Ezekiel 32:30,31 "The Zidonians which are gone down with the slain ... Pharaoh shall see them and shall be comforted, even Pharaoh and all his army slain by the sword."
See also 1 John 5:11-13; John 11:25,26; 2 Timothy 1:10. In addition, Adventist believe in annihilation of the wicked and deny the existence of hell. However, the reality of hell is shown from many verses of Scripture, among them:
Matthew 5:22; 10:28; 2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; Revelation 20:10; John 3:36
New Testament Witness The New Testament reveals the estate of all unredeemed men as sold into bondage to sin, hence, slaves of sin (Rom. 7:14; 6:20). There are three Greek words that reveal the full picture of Christ's work of redemption on the cross for sinners:
agorazo....... To purchase in the market (Rev. 5:9; 14:3-4) exagorazo ... To purchase and to REMOVE or TAKE OUT of the market never to return (Gal. 3:13; 4:5) lutroo ........... Loosed and set free (Titus 2:14; 1Pet. 1:1
Christ paid the ransom price (His precious blood) IN FULL on the cross in order that the one who comes by faith in Him is purchased out of the slave market of sin, never to return again and is set free. If therefore the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed" (Jo. 8:36).
Though man's redemption is now fully accomplished and paid for by Christ's work on the cross, Scripture also refers to a future "redemption" of our physical, mortal bodies which are still subject to futility (Rom. 8:23; Phil. 3:21). In the future, this mortal (body) must put on immortality, and this perishable (body) must put on the imperishable (1Cor. 15:35-5. Christ's finished work redeemed the whole man: body, soul and spirit.
When a repentant sinner, by faith, turns to God via the cross, Christ's FINISHED, redemptive work is then applied, in full, to that sinner. In other words: "IT IS FINISHED.
Most Christians, I find, understand the general idea behind forgiveness: God took our sins and gave them to Jesus. But that's only half the message! God also took Christ's perfect righteousness and gave it to us! Second Corinthians 5:21 says, "God made Him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God." How could I stand up and declare that in the sight of God I am as righteous and acceptable as Jesus Christ? Because of what I do? No way! It's because of who I am in Christ.
The Bible goes to great lengths to declare that righteousness is a free gift that a man receives by faith.
Because Paul taught that one is saved by grace through faith rather than law keeping his enemies accused him of teaching that a Christian had a free license to sin. Paul gave the death blow to that argument in verse 1 of Romans 6. He went on to say:
Rom. 6:15 “What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? 17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. 18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.”
Can God’s Word get any clearer that we are not under law but under grace (verse 15)? And can God’s Word get any clearer that because were are under grace and not the law that this is not a license for free sinning? True Christians do not practice sin because they follow the law of love which comes from the heart. Notice Paul says in verse 17 “but ye have obeyed from the heart”. Those who claim to be saved and continue living a life full of sin are false professors and their actions prove that they are still servants of sin rather than a servants of righteousness just as the above verses declare. Those who are truly saved obey from the heart out of love for God and mankind. As a result their righteousness far exceeds the righteousness of the Pharisees who were trying to be righteous by the deeds of the law.
.
"God's Son Michael and the loyal angels fought." 
