Changing Times (Part 2)
| Contents |
|
1. Refresher 2. Timely Truths 2.1. Certain Aspects of Lifestyle Reform 2.2. Racial Distinctions 2.3. The Permanence of the Ecclesiastical Org. 3. Conclusion of Part 2 |
Refresher
Zahakiel: All right; Luke, please open the meeting with a prayer.
Qinael: Our most holy and
gracious Father,
We thank you for this time you
have given your children to gather together, and for the promised blessing,
that where two are three are gathered, there you are in the midst of us.
We thank you for this time of
study, and we ask that your Spirit be poured out upon all present to receive
the enlightenment you would have.
In the name of Yahshua, known as Jesus, we pray – Amen.
Rita: Amen.
Barb: Amen.
Zahakiel: Amen.
HappyRock: Amen.
Naraiel: Amen.
Ye: Amen.
ILoveAllOfYawl: Amen.
Crystle: Amen.
Guerline: Amen.
ILoveGod: Amen.
Zahakiel: Last month we began a topic that became so long, when I was preparing the notes, that it necessitated a split into segments. As a result we are continuing it this month.
The titles of these messages are, “Changing Times” parts 1 and 2. There will also be a third and final segment next month, and I am saving the best for last. The basic idea of these studies is an examination of the statements of Ellen G. White, whom we consider (as do most conservative Adventists) to be inspired by the Spirit of God. Going through our doctrines, however, some might say, “Well, this isn’t found in the writings of Ellen White,” or “Didn’t she say (for example) that the Mark of The Beast was something else?”
The truth of the matter is that we have seen, even in Mrs. White’s writings herself, that there are three categories into which these writings are placed. The first category, which we examined last month, is the set of “eternal” statements. These are statements made by Ellen White that are based directly upon divine principles, often simply re-statements of the words and teachings of Christ, and are to be consistently upheld by Christians at least until the end of this age. Here is an example I found recently, “Jesus asks an evidence of [the people’s] love for Him. ‘If ye love me, keep my commandments’ (John 14:15). If it were not possible for us to keep His commandments, why does He speak words to us of this kind?” [This Day With God, page 346] We find that the keeping of the commandments, based upon the very words of Christ, are to be everlasting, and did not end with the crucifixion.
The second category involves those statements that are conditional upon a specific course of events. Of such statements Mrs. White made the comment that we saw last month, “Regarding the testimonies, nothing is ignored; nothing is cast aside; but time and place must be considered. Nothing must be done untimely.” [Selected Messages Book 1, page 57] And also, “God’s promises are conditional. In order to make it possible for Him to bless us, we must do our part. We cannot expect that all His blessings will come to us naturally, if we fold our hands in inactivity. We are to be laborers together with God. It is our privilege and duty to labor for souls ready to perish.” [Sermons and Talks Volume Two, page 195]
Zahakiel: The third category includes those statements that were always meant, by circumstances or stated intent, to be temporary, for a specific time. Of an example of such we read, “We need at this time to show a decided interest in the work of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union. None who claim to have a part in the work of God should lose interest in the grand object of this organization in temperance lines. It would be a good thing if at our camp meetings we should invite the members of the WCTU to take part in our exercises. This would help them to become acquainted with the reasons of our faith, and open the way for us to unite with them in the temperance work.” [Daughters of God, page 125] That was an acceptable task in Mrs. White’s day. Today, however, anyone who attends our camp meetings knows that we have much to cover in very little time, and a Gospel to teach in a world that supports largely corrupted organizations. At this time I do not believe it is a safe venture to unite the interests of the Church, as an organization, with any other group with an agenda distinct from our own. Furthermore, trying to get liquor banned from society today just isn’t going to get very far.
This last group of statements needs no real “study” to determine. They are usually identified by such statements as, “at this time,” or something similar. The statements that by-and-large have caused the most confusion among Adventists are the conditional ones; and further, some of her statements that are not controversial because they have not been properly identified as conditional are among the CSDAs’ chief obstacles in reaching the hearts and minds of Adventist Christians. As a result of the topic, as I mentioned last time, we are going to be looking at many more statements of Mrs. White than usual, and in this month’s section we will be going over some historical developments as well.
Last month we looked at four “eternal” concepts presented in the work of Ellen White, these being:
1) Victory over Sin
2) The Name of The Church
3) The Unity and Authority of The Church
4) Lifestyle Reform
We ended on this fourth one, because it was stated that there were some exceptions to the specifics listed under this category. In other words, while the principles Mrs. White espoused and promoted regarding a Christian lifestyle are indeed eternal, some of the details, such as endorsing a particular style of clothing, were decidedly not. We pick up where we left of last month addressing this point.
Are there any questions so far?
Rita: None.
Crystle: No
Naraiel: None.
HappyRock: No.
Ye: No.
Guerline: No.
ILoveAllOfYawl: No.
Timely Truths
1) Certain Aspects of Lifestyle Reform
Zahakiel: As we saw near
the conclusion of last month’s study, Mrs. White went from strongly advocating
a particular style of clothing for women (i.e., the “Reform dress”) to
simply falling back to the Biblical position of humble, unassuming clothing
without getting into specifics. It is
not that she discovered anything wrong with the reform dress itself, only that
the “dress question” was beginning to take up so much time in the minds of the
people that the grand object of the Church’s existence was being overshadowed.
The principle, of
course, was right, but the time for specifics has passed. In the end, each Seventh-day Adventist man
and woman is accountable to God for the clothing he or she wears as a testimony
to the world, as it is written, “work out your own
salvation with fear and trembling,” or holy reverence. (Phil 2:12)
Now Seventh-day
Adventists are, as with some Christians of all stripes, stuck regarding many of
their doctrines, in the country of “Someday.”
In other words, they know to do good – or what they believe to be good –
but they will get around to it… Someday.
“Someday,” they say, “we will cease from all known sin… maybe.” “Someday,” they say, “we will have to deal
with the Sunday Law, but just keep your eyes on the pope…” “Someday,” they say, “we’ll switch over to
that good and healthy vegetarian diet.”
It is good to have
goals, of course; it is not good to have goals that are immediately
attainable. An athlete does not say,
“Someday I will train for the race,” especially when he has been told all his
life that the race is “coming soon.”
One of the aspects of
difference between the CSDA Church and the mainstream SDA movement is that we
don’t necessarily hold up vegetarianism as the ideal diet for every
person in these last days. If we
believed it to be the best then we, who are not stuck in “Someday,” would
immediately adopt it. There are groups
who have attempted to do this – the Seventh-day Adventist Reform movement, I
believe, has made vegetarianism a test of fellowship, and it has proven a great
curse to their members, particularly in certain parts of the world. I recall that as a new Creation Seventh Day
Adventist I went to visit an SDA pastor who was the nephew of one of my aunts,
though not a blood relative of my side of the family.
I shared with him the
Victory, and a few other doctrines, and while he seemed to like the idea,
particularly about the Victory message, one of his points of disagreement was
in our strong position on separating from what we see as a fallen Church. He said that in the Bible we find that there
were unfit rulers, such as Rehoboam, but we didn’t see the people taking the
sword and removing him from the throne.
The history is true; however, it is entirely inapplicable to us on at
least two counts. First, we are not trying to “remove” the General Conference
(the head of the mainstream SDA Church) from power – they are welcome to all
the earthly power they can get their hands on.
Yahweh is not preventing them, nor is He calling us to try and stop them
from forming as many chains to this planet’s systems as they can. As Yahshua
said, “they love to pray standing in the synagogues
and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say
unto you: They have their reward.” (Mat 6:5) Our job is to warn, not to prevent or to force. Second, Rehoboam did not apostatize then go
to the world and begin to persecute the saints based upon Egyptian or
Babylonian policy. He was simply a bad
king.
Zahakiel: One of the
problems with separatist groups, my relative said (and his criticism is true)
is that they tend to fixate on one or two doctrines that they believe makes
them superior to the mother Church, and then go to extremes with it or
them. For example, he told me about the
SDA Reform Movement that had begun to show a presence in Belize. He told me about some poor fellows in the
western part of the country that were as thin as twigs, and unhealthy as it is
possible to get without losing life, because they had gone to such an
unsanctified extreme regarding Mrs. White’s counsel.
I did attempt to explain
to him what makes the CSDA Church distinct from a separatist group, and that we
seek a perfect balance in all our teachings.
He certainly did seem impressed by my answers, and by me personally, but
he was not prepared to leave his pastorate.
It has been some years
since I have spoken to him, and I do not know what has become of him since, nor
of the progress of the Reform Movement in Belize.
Naraiel: Yes, In
Colombia a lot of Adventist members have cancer and other diseases because they
eat carbohydrates only.
Zahakiel: <nods.>
Certain aspects of
lifestyle reform must be conditional upon the situation in which that
lifestyle exists, and diet is one of those aspects.
Whereas we certainly do
see benefits in vegetarianism, we do not believe that every individual body can
have a healthy diet without at least some animal products. The alternative, in many cases, would be
expensive supplements, since the soil does not produce crops with nearly as
much nutritional value as it did in Mrs. White’s day. And of course, that was before farming became a “big business”
kind of operation complete with cut corners, pesticides and unnatural
processing techniques.
Many of us are
vegetarian, and suffer no ill effects on their health. I haven’t eaten meat in about 15 years,
although I do occasionally have a little dairy, and I have not suffered from
any negative conditions that are attributed to diet.
While we claim to be sanctified, however, and all of us have near perfect health, there are still some who are dissatisfied, saying, “But some of you still eat meat. How can you say you are Adventists of the last days?” We find, interestingly enough, that those who have taken it upon themselves criticize our lifestyle choices are invariably less healthy in body, mind and spirit than ourselves – and this is obvious to those both within and outside of our movement. The same may be said for those who criticize our doctrines in general. Our position is a simple one, “Come and see.” (John 1:39)
Now, I have chosen diet as one aspect of the way we deal with Mrs. White’s statements about lifestyle reform, because it is one of the stirring questions within modern day Adventism; but the principles and statements I have made are certainly expandable to any aspect of living. Are there any questions about this?
Crystle: No.
HappyRock: No.
Rita: None.
Naraiel: No.
Ye: No.
Barb: None here.
ILoveAllOfYawl: No.
Guerline: No.
ILoveGod: No.
2) Racial Distinctions
Zahakiel: The statements made by Ellen White in regard to race are among the most instructive in illustrating the need for understanding the times in which these documents were written. First, to clarify the complete equality in Christ of all races to which Mrs. White subscribed, in stark contrast with the unsanctified “prophets” of her time such as those responsible for the Book of Mormon, we find:
“In one place the proposition was made that a curtain be drawn between the coloured people and the white people. I asked, Would Jesus do that? This grieves the heart of Christ. The colour of the skin is no criterion as to the value of the soul. By the mighty cleaver of truth we have all been quarried out from the world. God has taken us, all classes, all nations, all languages, all nationalities, and brought us into His workshop, to be prepared for His temple.” [Testimonies to Southern Africa, page 85]
“Let us prayerfully consider the colored race, and realize that these people are a portion of the purchased possession of Jesus Christ. One of infinite dignity, who was equal with God, humbled himself so that he might meet man in his fallen, helpless condition, and become an advocate before the Father in behalf of humanity.” [The Review and Herald, December 17, 1895]
“Christ came to this earth with a message of mercy and forgiveness. He laid the foundation for a religion by which Jew and Gentile, black and white, free and bond, are linked together in one common brotherhood, recognized as equal in the sight of God. The Saviour has a boundless love for every human being.” [The Review and Herald, October 27, 1904]
At times, however, when discussing the practical aspects of the Gospel work, the Spirit of Prophecy writings appear somewhat segregationist. We read, for example,
“The breaking down of distinctions between the white and the colored races unfits the blacks to work for their own class, and exerts a wrong influence upon the whites.” [The Southern Work, page 96]
Also, “Let as little as possible be said about the color line, and let the colored people work chiefly for those of their own race.” [Testimonies for the Church Volume Nine, page 206]
The reason, however, is clearly given for those with the desire to look clearly into these matters: “As time advances, and race prejudices increase, it will become almost impossible, in many places, for white workers to labor for the colored people. Sometimes the white people who are not in sympathy with our work will unite with colored people to oppose it, claiming that our teaching is an effort to break up churches and bring in trouble over the Sabbath question.” [Maranatha, page 142]
On particularly striking statement is found here (I will post it in its entirety, and let me know when you are finished): “In reply to inquiries regarding the advisability of intermarriage between Christian young people of the white and black races, I will say that in my earlier experience this question was brought before me, and the light given me of the Lord was that this step should not be taken; for it is sure to create controversy and confusion. I have always had the same counsel to give. No encouragement to marriages of this character should be given among our people. Let the colored brother enter into marriage with a colored sister who is worthy, one who loves God, and keeps His commandments. Let the white sister who contemplates uniting in marriage with the colored brother refuse to take this step, for the Lord is not leading in this direction.
“Time is too precious to be lost in controversy that will arise over this matter. Let not questions of this kind be permitted to call our ministers from their work. The taking of such a step will create confusion and hindrance. It will not be for the advancement of the work or for the glory of God.”
[Selected Messages Book 2, page 344]
Rita: Finished.
Qinael: Finished.
Pastor “Chick”: Finished.
Ye: Done.
Guerline: Finished.
HappyRock: Done
ILoveGod: Done.
Naraiel: Done.
Crystle: Finished.
Kimberly: Done.
Barb: Finished.
ILoveAllOfYawl: Done.
Zahakiel: Another of similar character is found in this place: “The colored people should not urge that they be placed on an equality with white people. The relation of the two races has been a matter hard to deal with, and I fear that it will ever remain a most perplexing problem. So far as possible, everything that would stir up the race prejudice of the white people should be avoided. There is danger of closing the door so that our white laborers will not be able to work in some places in the South.
“I know that if we attempt to meet the ideas and preferences of some of the colored people, we shall find our way blocked completely. The work of proclaiming the truth for this time is not to be hindered by an effort to adjust the position of the Negro race. Should we attempt to do this we should find that barriers like mountains would be raised to hinder the work that God desires to have done.”
[Testimonies for the Church Volume Nine, page 214]
Such statements today would be positively awful, and it is good that this is so; but what may be said of individuals must also be said of groups of people: what profit is there in gaining equality, or even gaining the whole world, if the Gospel is hindered in the process? Those who have their eyes on Heaven, and not on earth, realize that there will always be injustices – between the sexes, between the races, between social and economic classes. It does not mean that these situations are by any means acceptable, but at the turn of the last century to focus on so divisive an issue as race would arouse such prejudice in so many minds that it would have been an effective barrier to the work that is to have everlasting consequences.
There was a time and a place for the adjustment of the races in society. In the 1960s, during the civil rights movement, many positive changes were made regarding the status of blacks in this country without the hindrances to the Gospel that would have arisen fifty years earlier. The Sabbath question, for example, was not in view among the civil rights workers, although, interestingly enough, the marriage issue was still not a wise one to pursue in that day.
In 2008, such advice as the following would have precisely the opposite effect as in her day in many parts of the world: “In regard to white and colored people worshiping in the same building, this cannot be followed as a general custom with profit to either party…” [Testimonies for the Church Volume Nine, page 206] Whereas a hundred and fifty years ago a large percentage of the population would have taken great offense to such a mixing, in these days an equally large percentage would take offense to any such segregation. Here is one striking example of where “time and place” must be considered in the application of Mrs. White’s words. These measures were clearly dependent upon the circumstances existing in her time, and an attempt to hold to these instructions today would do as much harm, if not more, than would the ignoring of them at the time of their authorship.
Zahakiel: The Gospel truth of the matter has always been this: “God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though He needed any thing, seeing He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation, that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after Him, and find Him, though He be not far from every one of us.” (Acts 17:24 – 27)
How we have needed to act as a people, however, because of the circumstances imposed upon society by deceived and unsanctified minds… this has, at times, taken great wisdom and caution to determine.
Are there any questions about this part?
Rita: None.
ILoveAllOfYawl: No.
Naraiel: None.
Guerline: No.
Qinael: No.
Crystle: No.
Ye: No.
Kimberly: would you recommend that in these days people intermarry?
Zahakiel: That would probably depend somewhat on the society in which they live. In the U.S. it’s hardly the issue it once was, at least in most places.
Kimberly: Right.
Guerline: What were the reasons for not intermarrying?
Zahakiel: The same as she gave for the other “segregation-sounding” statements we listed above. The people in this country 100+ years ago would have focused so much on that aspect of what the Church allowed that the Gospel, the commandments, the teachings about sanctification... these would have been quickly forgotten or ignored.
And then, of course, some people were inspired to violence by these things... it was actually unsafe.
Pastor “Chick”: Even when I was a youngster in many places the offspring of intermarriage would be mistreated by prejudice.
Zahakiel: Yes, that’s true. And, sadly even today there are some places where that’s the case. It may simply have lessened in degree...
Guerline: I see.
3) The Permanence of the
Ecclesiastical Organization
Zahakiel: We have seen,
clearly, that in the writings of Ellen G. White, as in the Bible, the Bride of
Christ, the eternal spiritual embodiment of the Holy Spirit in a collection of
human beings, was always to have a name.
That name, moreover, was to be significant to the time in which the
Bride then lived. It was to be a
testimony. When men were rejecting the
clearest revelations from Heaven, the Church was called the “Sons of Elohim.” When all the world continued to suffer from
the confusion of Babel, Yahweh raised up “Israel” to overcome the ignorance of
the heathen nations. When the leading religious authorities rejected Yahshua,
those who followed Him adopted the title “Christians,” emphasizing their belief
that He was, in fact, the “Christ” for which they had been waiting.
When the world was
strangled by the darkness of traditionalism, and the Word of God was so
obscured by the decrees of men that it left a stain so extensive that to this
day it lingers on, the Bride was known as the “Reformation,” for there was much
indeed to reform. When these reforming
Churches ceased to reform, and became complacent in its ignorance of the full
claims of divine law, the “Seventh-day Adventist Church” proclaimed – by its
very title – that there was a necessary blessing largely being ignored by
Christendom.
Likewise, although
rebellious spirits do their best do downplay or diminish this sacred truth,
there has always been a clearly-defined order in the Body of
Christ. Never was there a time
when it was acceptable to Heaven to have a disorganized, doctrinally diverse
group or set of groups claiming to represent the Savior on earth. This failure on the part of ecclesiastical
institutions has given atheists and agnostics excuses aplenty for
unbelief. Now, some who are familiar
with Christian history might protest, and say, “The reformation Churches were
never that organized, and what about the Waldenses?” It needs to be clearly understood that when a people are coming
out of gross darkness (such as the Israelites during the Exodus) Yahweh will
allow a number of situations to develop that are certainly not ideal. One need only read through the first five books
of the Bible to discover the great condescension with which the Almighty
treated those who had spend all their lives as ignorant slaves. Rome, in all its manifestations, has tended
to make of men much the same.
Further, as we saw in a
previous study entitled “The Seven Thunders,” the Waldenses, while they had a
key role to play in the development of present truth, were not themselves a
“Church” in the fullest sense, or a distinct class of workers in the vineyard
of the world.
Zahakiel: But while the
“name” of the Bride is eternal, and the organizational principles of the Bride
are eternal, the same cannot be said of its actual “incarnation,” for lack of a
better term.
The fact that there have
been different organizations, bearing different names, down through history
shows that there have been changes to the Bride over time, and many souls have
been left behind because of a lack of desire for the continuing channel of
light. Ellen White’s writings certainly
reflect an awareness of this idea:
“We have many lessons to
learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those
who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have
occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. As long as we hold to our
own ideas and opinions with determined persistency, we cannot have the unity
for which Christ prayed.” [Counsels to Writers and Editors, page 37]
Again, “There is no
excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be
revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The
fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our
people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error
into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose
anything by close investigation.
“We are living in perilous times, and it does not become us to accept everything claimed to be truth without examining it thoroughly; neither can we afford to reject anything that bears the fruits of the Spirit of God; but we should be teachable, meek and lowly of heart. There are those who oppose everything that is not in accordance with their own ideas, and by so doing they endanger their eternal interest as verily as did the Jewish nation in their rejection of Christ.”
[Counsels to Writers and Editors, pages 35, 36]
Zahakiel: Brother Luke
is currently engaged in an email discussion with a mainstream Seventh-day
Adventist who claims that one of the distinguishing characteristics of spurious
offshoots is that they have rejected “total faith” in the writings of Ellen
White. It seems to me, however, that
total faith in the Spirit of Prophecy writings is a theological impossibility,
since to accept these works as unerringly true is also to accept the statements
that “the Bible is the only infallible authority in religion,” [The Great
Controversy, page 239] and “In regard to infallibility, I never claimed it;
God alone is infallible. His word is true, and in him is no variableness, or
shadow of turning.” [The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, page 1393] The paradox of the attempt to hold Mrs.
White’s writings up to the same level of authority as the Bible that has been
preserved by divine providence for thousands of years should be readily
apparent to all. The total faith of the Christian, whether an acknowledged
Adventist or not, must be in the promises of God alone, particularly those
revealed in the Bible for the benefit of all mankind.
Is everyone
understanding so far?
Naraiel: yes
Qinael: <nods.>
ILoveAllOfYawl: yes
HappyRock: Yes..
Guerline: Yes.
Rita: Yes.
Barb: yes
Crystle: Yes
Ye: Yes
Kimberly: If modern
prophets are equally as inspired as the Bible why can we not use their work in
the same way?
Pastor “Chick”: I see a
difference in a “local prophet” and a “cannonical prophet.” Can we expound on
that?
Zahakiel: Go ahead.
Pastor “Chick”: I would
rather you did, if possible :)
Zahakiel: Perhaps if you
share what you see as the difference I can take off from that. <nods.>
(it will also give me a chance to pull up a relevant document).
Pastor “Chick”: Ok.
A “local prophet” such
as Ellen White was called as a “special messenger” to meet a need in a
particular generation or time frame (set of circumstances). The “canonical prophets” were recognized by
Christ, for one, and then the world Church in its infancy... Now, I have not
refined this, but that is the general idea.
Zahakiel: <nods.>
It might be of benefit to read the book review of “More Than a Prophet,” where
I go into the idea of how New Testament prophets were regarded by the Church.
To basically summarize
what I say there in agreement with the author of that book, (and I will provide
the link with this transcript) the prophets of the Old Covenant did not operate
within the same social framework as the N.T. oracles.
They were held to very
high standards (e.g., stoned to death if their prophecies did not come
to pass) and they were not accountable to a religious community in the same
sense.
They were sent as the
unilateral “voice of God,” from which there was no appeal, no vote, no
mitigating factors. In the New Testament, the prophets are given a more
widespread, but more diffused, gift of prophecy. They were to operate alongside the members, all of whom
considered inspired.
In fact, the New
Testament writings, (e.g., 1Cor 14:5; 1Th 5:20, 21) specifically tell us
to evaluate prophetic utterances. There is no indication given that there is a
suspicion the prophets were not converted; this was simply to verify the
accuracy of what they were reporting.
Guerline: It shows also
that the Bible is or has enough for anyone to attain to salvation. And I think
this is the reason why Mrs. White says that she is a lesser light leading to
the Greater light. In his wisdom, the Father has seen the need in the last days
to call messengers to bear certain messages.
Zahakiel: Certainly.
Jude describes the faith as “once delivered” in the first century. That is the
measure of truth.
Qinael: The New/Old covenant distinction makes sense
to me... I was wondering about the local / canonical distinction, and it seems
that there were canonical prophets that were actually “local” prophets as well;
Amos, Micah, the ones called “Minor Prophets” in most contents listing. I’m
wonder about the reason for the change between covenants, however...
I suppose it would have
to do with the Spirit being poured out on all believers, and the lack of a need
for a human mediator.
Zahakiel: The New
Testament represents what I believe to be the ideal. For example, under the Old
Covenant Moses said, “Would God that all Yahweh’s
people were prophets, and that Yahweh would put His Spirit upon them!”
(Num 11:29)
We have a higher degree
of light (as a body) with the writings of the O.T. prophets before us, and the
example of Christ. It may be that in our less spiritually barbarous forms, we
can handle a more general infusion of inspiration.
Qinael: <nods.>
Right, yeah; and that was when Joshua was telling him to tell the ones
prophesying to stop it in accordance with the usual OT way of things.
Zahakiel: Yes.
Is everyone satisfied
with that? I will post the link to the review where I go into that matter
somewhat in more detail.
Rita: Yes.
Qinael: <nods.>
ILoveAllOfYawl: yes
Pastor “Chick”: OK
Ye: yes
HappyRock: Yes.
Ye: yes
Guerline: Yes.
Zahakiel: Returning to this idea that the permanence of any given Church incarnation is conditional, we find that Christ taught that there was an acceptable point at which new workers were to be drawn out of old, saying to the Pharisees, “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” (Matthew 21:43)
And of course, although by His own testimony the “gates of hell” were never to prevail against the Church that He established – a statement (found in Matthew 16:18) used even to this day by Roman Catholics to support the bloated, corrupt parody of Christianity that is modern Catholicism – we find that both prophecy and history support the continued application of the “vineyard” being let out only to suitable keepers.
In the Spirit of Prophecy writings, a Church is only considered valid as long as it remains united with Christ. We read, for example:
“‘Thus saith the Lord: If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord.’ (Jer 31:...37) These words the Jews applied to themselves. And because God had shown them so great favor and mercy, they flattered themselves that, notwithstanding their sins and iniquities, he would still retain them as his favored people, and shower especial blessings upon them. They misapplied the words of Jeremiah, and depended for their salvation upon being called the children of Abraham. If they had indeed been worthy of the name of Abraham’s children, they would have followed the righteous example of their father Abraham, and would have done the works of Abraham.” [The Spirit of Prophecy Volume Two, page 52]
As a general rule, “Jerusalem is a representation of what the church will be if it refuses to walk in the light that God has given. [...] Christ turned from them, saying: ‘O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,’ how can I give thee up? ‘How often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!’ Matthew 23:37.” [Testimonies for the Church Volume Eight, page 67]
“The Lord Jesus will always have a chosen people to serve Him. When the Jewish people rejected Christ, the Prince of life, He took from them the kingdom of God and gave it unto the Gentiles. God will continue to work on this principle with every branch of His work.” [Last Day Events, page 59]
Zahakiel: Clearly, then, Ellen White used the example of the fall of the Jewish Church as revealed in the Gospels as a template to describe a general principle that is applicable to “every branch of His work” even in these latter times. That there is a legitimate time appointed by Heaven to depart from an unsanctified religious organization as a result of corruption we find:
“I am instructed to say that we must do all we possibly can for these deceived ones. Their minds must be freed from the delusions of the enemy, and if we fail in our efforts to save these erring ones, we must ‘come out from among them’ and be separate.” [Ms 106, 1905, p. 8]
That a legitimate application of that principle may be made toward Seventh-day Adventism, as the CSDA Church contends, we read further (and say when you’ve read these three quotes):
“I was confirmed in all I had stated in Minneapolis, that a reformation must go through the churches. Reforms must be made, for spiritual weakness and blindness were upon the people who had been blessed with great light and precious opportunities and privileges. As reformers they had come out of the denominational churches, but they now act a part similar to that which the churches acted. We hoped that there would not be the necessity for another coming out. While we will endeavor to keep the ‘unity of the Spirit’ in the bonds of peace, we will not with pen or voice cease to protest against bigotry.” [Last Day Events, page 48]
“The General Conference [of SDAs] is itself becoming corrupted with wrong sentiments and principles […] The high-handed power that has been developed, as though position has made men gods, makes me afraid, and ought to cause fear. It is a curse wherever and by whomsoever it is exercised.” [Last Day Events, page 49]
“The voice from Battle Creek, which has been regarded as authority in counseling how the work should be done, is no longer the voice of God […] It has been some years since I have considered the General Conference as the voice of God.” [Last Day Events, page 50]
Rita: Done.
ILoveAllOfYawl: Done.
Pastor “Chick”: Finished.
Qinael: Finished.
Naraiel: Yes.
Barb: Finished.
Guerline: Yes.
Ye: Done.
Crystle: Finished.
HappyRock: Done.
Zahakiel: One final one, “In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the sentence: ‘Found wanting.’ By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged.” [Last Day Events, page 59]
Now, in conclusion of this section, I think it is important to note that mere “corruption,” even outright apostasy, is not – by itself – a legitimate reason for leaving an organization. Ellen White herself was clear on this: “There is no need to doubt, to be fearful that the work will not succeed. God is at the head of the work, and He will set everything in order. If matters need adjusting at the head of the work God will attend to that, and work to right every wrong. Let us have faith that God is going to carry the noble ship which bears the people of God safely into port.” [Last Day Events, page 52]
“I tell you, my brethren, the Lord has an organized body through whom He will work. […]When anyone is drawing apart from the organized body of God’s commandment-keeping people, when he begins to weigh the church in his human scales and begins to pronounce judgment against them, then you may know that God is not leading him. He is on the wrong track.” [3 Selected Messages, pages 17, 18]
We, who teach a separation message, therefore, need to be very careful in how we explain our position. From the above quotes, we find that no light matter will result in separation from what was once a Church of Christ. In the case of the Jewish system, it took the very crucifixion of the Messiah to necessitate a calling-out. In the apostolic system it took a formal “marriage” to pagan Rome. What we would need, in light of the last two SOP quotes, to justify a separation message is to show that there was a corruption that began with, but was not limited to “the head of the work.” The apostasy would need to be of a particular nature that filters down to every least member, so that merely removing the individuals involved at the head would not alleviate the corporate guilt of the system. Further, we would need to show that the result of this apostasy is that the Church is no longer properly described as “the organized body of God’s commandment-keeping people.” This is obviously a very serious matter indeed.
In our final section next month, when we examine the conditionality of one of Seventh-day Adventism’s most distinct doctrines – its understanding of the Mark of The Beast and its expectation of a National Sunday Law – we will see whether or not the above criteria have been fulfilled and, if the Sunday Law prediction was indeed conditional, how such apostasy has affected our anticipated fulfillment of that prophecy.
Are there any questions here?
Rita: None.
Naraiel: None.
Barb: No.
Ye: No.
HappyRock: None.
Guerline: No, and very thankful for this threefold message.
Rita: Amen.
Conclusion of Part 2
Zahakiel: To conclude this month’s meeting, we have begun to examine the other side of Ellen G. White’s body of written material. We have found that while a lot of her writings are based directly on principles that ought to govern a Christian’s behavior in every age, a number of the specific elements of her counsel were designed to address a particular crisis, or a particular turn of events. This is that “local prophet” idea mentioned above. Think of it as being “local” in the responsive sense, rather than about geographic location:)
Her counsels on diet depended to a large degree upon the best medical advice available at the time, and also upon the state of agriculture that is no longer analogous to our own day. Her discussion of dress, while maintaining the still-valid principle of modesty, cannot be applied in every particular to this year’s norms without arousing the very prejudices and distractions from the Gospel work that such measures were originally intended to avoid.
The same may be said of her statements regarding the racial divides. While this issue has certainly not been “solved,” the climate has so changed from the days in which the testimonies were written that while we praise them for their wisdom in the context of the 1800s, we must consign them more to the archives of Adventist history than the active guidebook for congregational practices.
While Mrs. White’s writings are perfectly in harmony with the Bible’s clearly revealed concept of a surviving “Remnant” of every age’s faithful Church, and that the authority and dignity of the Bride are taken with It through Its various incarnations, we find that she is also in harmony with the concept that there are, in fact, “various incarnations.” We find in the Spirit of Prophecy works that there does come a time when worldliness and corruption reign in an ecclesiastical body to such a degree that separation is the only divinely sanctioned course of action. This is an extreme measure, to be sure, and we will examine the specifics of that measure in our final section next week. For now, it is enough to have demonstrated that there are times when Yahweh will call forth new workers for His vineyard, and that NO Church, including the Seventh-day Adventist Church of which Mrs. White was a member until the end of her life, is naturally immune to the development of such conditions.
If there are no further questions, then, I will ask pastor to close our meeting with a prayer.
Pastor “Chick”: Our Father in Heaven,
We are blessed by the inspiration of your delegated messengers. Whether they are for a time or circumstance, we trust your wisdom in the dispatch of such agents of salvation. Thank you for your Word that has been preserved down the ages, that we might all have the grand opportunity to find a home in your Family.
As we contemplate the principles shared with us today, may we find the blessings that we need to both know and share as the opportunity presents itself.
Dismiss us with your love and providential care. In the Holy and precious name of YAHshua, our Savior, AMEN!
Zahakiel: Amen.
Barb: Amen
Rita: Amen.
Qinael: Amen.
Guerline: Amen.
Naraiel: Amen.
Ye: Amen.
HappyRock: Amen.
