Ellen White

bshields · 05-17-12 7:03 pm

l_miller wrote:

I am amazed that the corporate church didn't yet have the guts to correct this situation, and keeps insisting in teaching those absurdities worldwide. They are afraid of switching to a more pure Christian doctrinal foundation. They would rather keep the "door shut"... to the truth. Unbelievable! Saving the Soul of Ellen White. 4 January 2011

Maybe you don't understand the "shut door" I. the shut door believers were those who believed Jesus had closed probation and only those who had gone through the "great disappointment" of 1843-44 could be in the ark of safety. And, only those who followed the little flock that ellen and James were in were actually in the ark. The only ones those in the ark tried to persuade to join them were the ones that went through the disappointment. Al other Christians were Babylon. ellen had some rather nasty things to say about them. Today SDAs try to sweep all that under the rug. To bring the early days to light would put ellen in a rather awkward situation since they hold her as their guiding light.

This situation lasted for about 5 years. a problem arose when children were born into families and others wanted to join them. They exhausted there hope of Jesus return and decided to open the doors to new faces and soon the shut door became history. Evidently ellen's guide slipped up and didn't inform her that Jesus hadn't shut the door to mankind. ellen's guide had a habit of not informing her of wrong concepts. She didn't know when Sabbath started and ended. She assumed it started a 6:00 pm and the little flock followed that theory for 5 or 6 years before someone informed them that the Israelite Sabbath started at sundown.

Is there some reason you won't answer the questions we ask?

Last edited by bshields (05-17-12 7:12 pm)

bob_2 · 05-18-12 3:24 am

To be an apostate, Tom, is not always wrong if you understand the word:

apostate:
someone whose beliefs have changed and who no longer belongs to a religious or political group

I have changed my view on Salvation and how the Sabbath fits into the scheme of things. If that makes me an apostate, so be it. My beliefs have changed.

tom_norris · 07-02-12 3:31 pm

Question: A genuine prophet is tested by the truth about Jesus, that one pervades E. G. White writings why is that many say she a false prophets? What test did they use to come with such conclusion?

esso christian
Manila, Philippines

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Answer by Tom Norris:

The SDA’s have done a very poor job as it relates to Ellen White. They have owned and controlled all her writings since the late 1930’s, and thus there is no excuse for how badly they have misunderstood and misrepresented her to the church and the public. Shame on them!

The endless debate and criticism about Ellen White is not the fault of Ellen White, but of the White Estate. They created legions of problems by suppressing and hiding her most sensitive writings so that they could revise and sanitize church history to fit their views. They also did this so that they could create their own modern day prophet like Joseph Smith, and thus gain converts.

As a result, the Takoma Park SDA’s became a cult of Ellen White followers, with Arthur White the High Priest of Traditional, 20th century Adventism. The White Estate was the most sacred place in all Adventism, and few could even gain entrance into the vaults where Ellen White’s writings were stored and protected.

Whatever the issue or debate, the White Estate was always ready to find just the right quote from Ellen White that settled the discussion. If one did not surrender the point, then an article or book would be written under Ellen White’s name to make sure everyone understood what they should believe. Those who refused, were seen as fighting against Ellen White, and therefore an enemy of Adventism.

Unfortunately, the SDA leaders have confused and misrepresented Ellen White to the church and to the world. They would have been much further ahead if they had just told the truth about her life and beliefs, letting her speak honestly for herself. This was the point of the White Estate, but it soon became a propaganda factory for the SDA’s to enlarge their market share.

However, the NT is about the Gospel teaching, and works, of Jesus, the greatest of all prophets. No prophet is greater than Christ, nor should any church try to embellish and uphold one person, like Ellen White, above others, as if they had doctrinal authority. Something is very wrong with how the SDA’s have used and abused Ellen White. It is an ongoing problem that the leaders refuse to address or correct. Sad.

The Ellen White of history is not the same Ellen White as defined by the White Estate. They are two very different people. The former is real, while the latter is full of fiction and myth. There are a number of detailed explanations about this online, and here on All Experts.Com.

See :

Test-Is Ellen White true or false
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm

Ellen White False Prophet?
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … hite-3.htm

Ellen White- A Public Discussion by Tom Norris
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

The Rise of the Mythical Ellen White

After the great Battle Creek Schism, and the subsequent retreat to Takoma Park, the early 20th century SDA’s struggled to survive. Their great Battle Creek Empire had collapsed only 12 years after 1888, and now the Denominations credibility was at an all time low. People were flocking out of Adventism, and many spoke very badly of this divided denomination that had recently been so successful, focused, and united.

Consequently, the Takoma Park leaders were sensitive to the many critics that had left the church, especially those like Canright, Jones, and Kellogg, just to name a few. There were also any number of books, articles, sermons, and tracts attacking the SDA’s and Ellen White specifically.

Something had to be done. So the leaders fought back by trying to prove Ellen White was genuine and true, without error or mistake. They embellished her and gave her great authority that she never had when she was alive, even as they made up doctrines that she never believed, and denied she ever changed her views.

The White Estate essentially became a propaganda machine for the church. It was never an honest archive of Ellen White’s writings, but rather a paranoid and corrupt institution that was misusing and abusing the writings and the legacy of Ellen White.

The White Estate was more interested in defeating their critics then understanding what Ellen White was trying to say. So they did not mind manufacturing church history to make their points. Thus they produced numerous Ellen White books in a manner that was dishonest and misleading, and that did not represent Ellen White's mature viewpoints and doctrines. Shameful.

The Test of A Prophet

As part of this plan to fight the critics, the 20th century SDA’s, invented a method to “test” and prove Ellen White’s credibility. This test included such points as: A true prophet’s predictions will “come to pass” (Jeremiah 28:9), or He does not give his own private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20, 21), or His message must harmonize with the Bible (Isaiah 8:20).

While such points may seem harmless enough, the problem is that there is no such test in the NT. Nor could anyone, including the apostles, pass such a rigid list of requirements.

10 Tests of a Prophet

The Bible provides 10 key indicators that determine whether a person is truly receiving visions from God.  They are …

• A true prophet’s predictions will “come to pass” (Jeremiah 28:9)
• He will glorify God rather than himself (John 16:13)
• He does not give his own private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20, 21)
• He points out sin (Micah 3:5-8)
• He warns of coming judgment (Isaiah 24:20, 21)
• He edifies the church (1 Corinthians 14:3, 4)
• His message harmonizes with the Bible (Isaiah 8:20)
• He teaches that Jesus came in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3)
• He has a Christian character (Matthew 7:16-20).
• He is obedient to the will of God (Deuteronomy 18:18).

http://www.ellengwhitetruth.com/her-min … ophet.aspx

See also:

http://www.whiteestate.org/books/pay/PAYc06.html

Bad Test Leads to Wrong Conclusion;

Once these “tests of a prophet” had been established, it was only a matter of time before the critics would have an easy time proving that Ellen White is a false prophet, at least by these new White Estate standards.

The first test was the easiest to refute. Ellen White was wrong about the date for the return of Christ; as well as some other predictions. Thus she failed the first point of the test. Others points of this test were also of such a nature that no one could ever have claimed to maintain such a level of perfection. Not even the apostles could pass such a test, much less the prophets of old.

So the White Estate set Ellen White up to fail. There is no such test, nor is Ellen White’s credibility or Life Story dependant upon such mythical rules. Look at this web site and see the result of making up things about Ellen White.

You Be the Judge; Does Mrs. White Pass the Biblical Tests of a Prophet?

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/egw35.htm

The 20th century SDA’s have set Ellen White up for failure. Having decided to hide much of her best doctrinal writings, they invented new ways to defend a misunderstood her, - when all they had to do was tell the truth about church history and the writings they were hiding.

The Pioneers, as compared to the White Estate, viewed Ellen White’s writings very differently. She did not have any doctrinal authority, nor was there any such test of a prophet, which she could never have passed if there were one.

This SDA test is utter nonsense, and so too this idea that Ellen White has doctrinal authority. There is no such test in the Bible, even as the Cannon was closed long ago. Both the critics and the White Estate have wasted their time with such mythical and diversionary debates.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com and Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 07-03-12 2:57 pm

About 1980, when Glacierview happened, and I knew some of the people there, our pastor at the time, Richard Fearing. This guy was no theologian. He was a Neal Wilson follower. This event changed me and I didn't have to be there. When Des Ford pointed the Bible taught that Jesus did not go into the holy place of heaven to do repetitive work there until 1844, then He went before His Father in the Most Holy Place, that is unbiblical.

At that time, I concluded that EGW was irrelevant. I conclude the Bible had the answers and chose not to turn to a concordance on EGW's writings. If not irrelevant, she was more devotional than relevant.

tom_norris · 07-05-12 6:38 pm

Bob said: About 1980, when Glacier View happened, I knew some of the people there, our pastor at the time, Richard Fearing. This guy was no theologian. He was a Neal Wilson follower.

Tom said: Yes, Glacier View was all about power and church politics. It was not a search for truth. When I realized this point, I walked away from Traditional Adventism. And I have never looked back.

Bob said: This event changed me and I didn't have to be there.

Tom said: Few people were allowed to go to Glacier View. It was not open to the public or to the church for that matter.

However, it changed Adventism forever. It has never been the same since, nor is the reforming work of the Gospel within Adventism completed or finished. The 3rd Angels Message has terminated in great failure for all to see, - which leaves the way open for the development of the 4th Angels Message. This is the only way out of this mess. There is no other option. Thus:

Adventist Reform is the extension of the correct Gospel Reforms of Dr. Desmond Ford.

Adventist Reform is the result of searching for truth, and not paying attention to either tradition or politics.

Adventist Reform leads to the development of the 4th Angels Message and the completion of Sabbath Reform.

Bob said: When Des Ford pointed out the Bible taught that Jesus did not go into the holy place of heaven to do repetitive work there until 1844, then He went before His Father in the Most Holy Place, - that is unbiblical.

Tom said: Dr. Ford debunked the IJ and proved it to be incorrect, false doctrine. The leaders refused to repent and tried to paint Dr. Ford as an evil man fighting against God and Ellen White. This was never true. Since then, millions of SDA’s have left the church in disgust, even as the credibility of the Denomination has fallen to an all time low.

Bob said: At that time, I concluded that EGW was irrelevant.

Tom said: Dr. Ford never said, or “concluded,” that EGW was irrelevant.” So why did you?

Dr. Ford is a great supporter of the Ellen White of history, even as he understood that she never viewed the IJ as a the Judgment pillar in the 1st Angels Message. He wrote about this point in his large Glacier View Tome, but it was too difficult for biased people to understand.

The SDA’s had been brainwashed into believing myths, as thus the truth was treated as fiction, even as tradition became truth. The same thing took place with the Jews.

Just because Ellen White has been misunderstood and abused by the White Estate, that does not make her life’s record of no value to the church or to those who study history. The point is to understand the genuine Ellen White of history and move away from this fictionalized character that was invented by the White Estate to support Uriah Smith’s legalism.

The real Ellen White has great insight into the Advent Movement, even as she condemns what the White Estate has done to her reputation and that of the Advent Movement.

Ellen White was an eyewitness to the growth and progress of the Advent Movement. She created a long and detailed record that cannot become irrelevant to anyone searching for the facts. Ellen White, for better or worse, is part of church history. She must be understood and viewed within the proper context. Where she was correct, good; where she was wrong, she was wrong.

Regardless, the Advent Movement must go forward, learning from their past mistakes as they do so. This is the point. The noble mission of the Advent Movement to prepare the church for the Great Tribulation and the 2nd Coming must go forward with more Gospel Reforms, including getting the Sabbath doctrine correct.

Ellen White would not only agree, but she would be cheering us on, urging the SDA’s to repent and move forward to the 4th Angels Message, which includes the active and reformed, NC Sabbath of Christ.

Bob said: I concluded the Bible had the answers and chose not to turn to a concordance on EGW's writings. If not irrelevant, she was more devotional than relevant.

Tom said: It was very wrong for the modern SDA’s to treat Ellen White’ writings as if they were like scripture. This did not happened when she was alive. She would not permit it.

Rather, this false hermeneutic was developed after she died, - by the White Estate. They created this myth, which has now ruined the SDA church. Good for you to reject it.

But don’t condemn Ellen White for what has happened to the SDA’s. Don’t throw out the points where she was correct, just because she held some error. Everyone has embraced doctrinal error, except Christ. The apostles being a good example, both before and after the cross.

However, Ellen White is not the problem for the demise and schism of Adventism; it is the White Estate’s fault. They are the ones that created all this confusion and myth, even pretending that Ellen White made no mistakes and changed no positions. This is nonsense. They were hiding the Gospel side of Ellen White in an evil attempt to promote their own legalistic agenda and that of Uriah Smith. The wolves were placed in charge of the sheep, and look how the flock has been deceived and decimated. Very sad.

I think there will be a special place in hell for Arthur White. But Ellen White is not the problem, in fact, she will be part of the solution, as soon as the false record in the White Estate is corrected. This is what you should be screaming and complaining about. There are some bad actors in this story, and the White Estate is at the top of the list.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform

bob_2 · 07-05-12 7:25 pm

I have found there is no need to turn to EGW to get answers to Biblical questions. If she can get Heavenly geography wrong, what else could she get wrong??? Tom you seem to hang on to her. Did she ever call what you claim Christ did, suggest a Reformed Sabbath to be in the Gospel????

tom_norris · 07-11-12 5:58 pm

Question: Is tithing for the church today? Must Christians tithe in order to be obeying God's Law?

God Bless,
Linda
------------------------------------------------------------------

Tithing & the Church; Right or Wrong?

Answer: Tithing is an Old Covenant doctrine that supported the Levitical Priesthood and the Temple Services. It is NOT a New Covenant doctrine. No Christian should ever pay tithe or practice anything close to it. Tithing. is wrong in the church.

There were no Levites or tithing in the apostolic church, which means there can be neither today. Those, like the SDA’s, that claim the NT teaches tithing, are very misinformed and wrong. The NT teaches, “sharing,” not tithing. Such are the Gospel Facts.

The Protestant Doctrine of the Priesthood of All Believers, renders tithe impossible and moot. Thus the change in the Covenants produced a change in financing for Israel. Because there was no longer a priestly caste in the church, there could be no tithing. It is prohibited by the very nature of the Gospel, where everyone was equal, and everyone is a priest of God.

1Pet. 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

1Pet. 2:9 But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God’s OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;

In the New Covenant, all are Priests of God, with Christ the High Priest. Consequently, the concept of tithe is impossible in the church, where all are equal priests. There is to be no separate, higher class, which must be obeyed or supported. Thus there can be no tithe to support what does not exist.

No Christians are shown paying tithe in the NT. Not one! This is because it never happened. Which means those that teach otherwise, like the SDA’s, are not being honest or true with the Gospel Story. They are wolves in sheep’s clothing, deceiving the sheep and savaging the flock for money.

Tithe is Old Covenant

The SDA’s are following the OC. They pretend that their pastors are like the Levites, and thus all must pay them 10% tithe. They also pretend that the church is the equivalent of the OC Jewish Temple, where the tithe was stored. However, this is all wrong and only shows how badly they misunderstand the Gospel and the NC teachings of Christ.

Tithe in the church is a false and dangerous doctrine. It is against the fundamentals of the Gospel and Protestantism. No one who understands the Gospel correctly will practice tithe, or anything like it. It is very wrong and against the teachings of Christ.

Here is an online discussion about tithe that covers most every aspect of this Gospel debate.

The Fraud of Church Tithing
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=239

See also:

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uption.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ithe-3.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … hing-1.htm

After some study and research, it will become obvious that the OC doctrine of Tithe does not belong in the NC. This is why the early church never practiced it, and why no one today should be so foolish. But many embrace this error, which is nothing more than a religious fraud.

Few SDA’s know this, but after 1888, Ellen White backed away from the doctrine of tithe, even refusing to follow it as taught by the SDA church. More than that, when she was confronted about her supposed misbehavior, she told the leaders that the Spirit had been leading her AWAY from tithe. How many SDA’s know this fact? Not many.

In conclusion, tithe is a false doctrine in the church. Anyone who promotes tithe, or pays tithe, or receives tithe, is following a false Christ and a worthless Gospel. They are repudiating the Priesthood of All Believers, and denying the fundamental Gospel teachings of Christ and the Protestant Faith.

Let all beware this false doctrine.

Let all denounce and repudiate tithing; those who practice it do not understand the Gospel, nor are they following the genuine Christ.

Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”

I hope this answers your question.

Tom Norris for All Experts & Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 07-29-12 10:00 am

Question for Tom Norris: I have been reading about your views re the first angels message. Are u saying EGW did not believe the IJ doctrine?

She did teach this doctrine, and it was a false doctrine.

Joyce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer: Ellen White and the IJ

Ellen White did embrace the doctrine of the IJ, which was invented by others in the late 1850’s and codified in the 1870’s by Uriah Smith. I have never said otherwise.

All the SDA's embraced this unique doctrine, which was built upon the earlier correction to Miller's sanctuary error of Dan 8: 14.

However, NONE of them thought this doctrine was the Judgment “pillar” in the 1st Angels Messages. They all knew that Rev 14: 6, 7 was only a reference to the Second Coming. This is what William Miller taught and it is also what all the SDA Pioneers embraced, without exception and without change during the entire 19th century.

This historical fact has been lost on the modern SDA’s; they teach that the IJ is located in the 1st Angels Message, and that the IJ resides in Rev 14: 6.7. Therefore it cannot be debated, revised, or removed. It is incorrectly viewed by many SDA’s as fundamental history that defines historic Adventism.

The problem is this: the IJ was never a "pillar" in the Three Angels Message. Nor is there any such “Celestial Judgment” in the entire Bible. The IJ has turned out to be a mistake. It is not the “Pre- Advent Judgment of the Church” as the SDA’s teach, nor is it a “pillar” in any sense of this word. For this error they must repent.

Rev. 14:6 And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, having an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people;

Rev. 14:7 and he said with a loud voice, “Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters.”

The IJ is not the foundation of anything. It was not the Judgment Pillar in the 1st Angels Message as the SDA leaders claimed at Glacier View in 1980. And Ellen White never, never, never, said otherwise. Which means that the SDA church is OFFICIALLY standing in full opposition to Ellen White about this, and other points.

The White Estate is the source of this purposeful fraud, which is ongoing to this very day. This is the biggest problem with the SDA’s. They are very dishonest about Ellen White. They have not come close to telling the truth about her views, and this issue about the IJ is only one of many misunderstood views that the SDA’s do not want to get cleared up or corrected. They like all this fiction they have promoted over the years and they have no plans to repent or correct the record.

Ellen White’s view of the IJ was dramatically DIFFERENT from what the White Estate and Traditional Takoma Park Adventism teaches. Although it was still wrong, it was not as wrong as what was later taught about the IJ in the 20th century. This is the correct point that was being made.

I repeat, Ellen White’s view of the IJ does NOT agree with Traditional Adventism, - as the church has claimed for so many years. She has a very DIFFERENT view of the IJ, as well as the law and the Gospel when compared to Traditional Takoma Park Adventism. Shame on the White Estate for not telling the truth about such important details.

The 1888 Debates did not deal with the IJ:

Had the 1888 debates been allowed to go forward, in the honest search for truth, the Battle Creek SDA's would have understood that the IJ was a legalistic error that must be repudiated.

In fact, this is what E. J. Waggoner correctly concluded a few years after 1888. But the leaders never wanted, or allowed, any honest debate or serious Bible Study to take place. They manipulated the discussion, misrepresented Ellen White's position, and that of the NT, and refused to be honest about this theological crisis.

After 1888, the lack of resolution became fatal, and the SDA Empire self-destructed as a result. So there was no 19th century debate about the IJ, only about the law in Galatians and the definition of the Gospel.

However, this only postponed and inevitable IJ debate that would take place in 1980 at Glacier View. Here the Takoma Park based church arrogantly entered into a false trial against those experts, like Dr. Ford, who had the Gospel facts.

By 1980, the administrators managing the church had no idea what really happened in 1888, because the White Estate had kept it hidden. So they trusted the White Estate's view of history and doctrinal development, even though the White Estate had been caught hiding a large cache of documents. But the church was so corrupt by this point, that even the discovery of fraud in the White Estate made no difference to those in charge.

It was a big mistake to trust the White Estate because it allowed the church leaders to promote the IJ out of its proper historical context. Consequently, the leaders embraced a false view of the 1st Angels Message, and a false view of the Judgment, - as well as a false view of the law and the Gospel. This is the problem with Traditional Adventism. It is false, even as it is based on myths and dishonest history.

Had Ellen White been at Glacier View, she would have repudiated the IJ, just as she did the old view of the law in Galatians in 1888 along with character perfection.

More than that, she would have repudiated this absurd and outrageous claim that the IJ is the Judgment "pillar" in the 1st Angels Message. No one in Battle Creek ever took such a view. She would also correct this false idea that the Gospel is balanced by both Justification and Sanctification. She knew better after 1888.

The only Judgment pillar in Adventist theology is the Second Coming, which is located in the 1st Angels Message of Rev 14: 6, 7. All the Pioneers knew this fact. NONE of them would agree with the Takoma Park apologist’s definition of the IJ. Not even Ellen White or Uriah Smith.

The SDA church is doomed if they do not repent, correct the record, and return to the original and true version of the Three Angels Message. The one that contains the Protestant Gospel and the Judgment pillar of the Second Coming. The IJ is a false pillar.

See also:

Where are our Pillars of Faith stated in EGW Writings?
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ed-EGW.htm

The IJ-08
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-1.htm

IJ -06
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ment-2.htm

SDA Pillars
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … illars.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … -FAITH.htm

Atomorrow- EGW, 1888 & 1844
http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/message … 1023044579

http://www.atomorrow.com/discus/messages/1780/1010.html

Ellen White & the IJ

How would Ellen White react to the charge that the IJ is a false doctrine? Would she claim it is sacred doctrine, beyond change or repudiation? Did she say it was beyond examination or correction? No.

Here is what Ellen White would say:

"There is no excuse for any one 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."

Review and Herald, Dec. 20, 1892   

"Those who sincerely desire truth will not be reluctant to lay open their positions for investigation and criticism, and will not be annoyed if their opinions and ideas are crossed."

Review and Herald, July 26, 1892

"Those who cannot impartially examine the evidences of a position that differs from theirs, are not fit to teach in any department of God’s cause."

Review and Herald, February 18, 1890  

It is a pity that the SDA’s have been so dishonest about Ellen White and church history all these years. They have confused themselves, and everyone else in the process. Now they have no idea what they are talking about, nor do they want to learn the facts and repent.

See also:

The Judgment in the 1st Angels Message
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=227

I hope this reply answers your question and gives you the necessary resources for further study.

Tom Norris for All Experts.com & Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 08-30-12 6:06 pm

Adventists Claim Hacker Swiped Manuscripts; By ADAM KLASFELD

BALTIMORE (CN) - A "theological investigator" broke into a database of unpublished manuscripts by a co-founder of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to hawk the documents online, the Ellen G. White Estate claims in Federal Court.

White (1827-1915) "was a co-founder of the Seventh-day Adventist Church ... and revered messenger of God," according to the complaint.
An ardent abolitionist and vegetarian, White told her followers she experienced religious visions in 1845, which she chronicled in writings that laid the philosophical groundwork of the world's 12th-largest religious sect.

Seventh-day Adventist Church adherents believe in the absolute infallibility of Scripture, pitting most members against abortion, homosexuality and birth control.

White's critics, most notably University of California at Berkeley's science historian Ronald Numbers, accused her of plagiarizing her visions from mundane health reformers of her day. She wrote 40 books and more than 5,000 articles, and her estate claims copyrights to more than 50,000 pages of her writings.

Lead defendant Brendan Knudson, who calls himself a "private detective, specializing in theological and historical investigations," has tried to unearth the unpublished pages since 2006, the estate says in its lengthy complaint.

The estate claims that Knudson sought help from hackers to break into its database after the organization rebuffed his demands for unrestricted access.

"On January 13, 2012, Knudson, under the alias 'GirdedSword,' registered his profile on an Internet forum located at www.hackforums.net ('Hack Forums'), used by computer hackers with the purpose of communicating, organizing and hiring hackers," the complaint states.
"Knudson frequently used the alias 'GirdedSword' or 'WithGirdedSword' for communication across the Internet and social media, such as: on Twitter '@withgirdedsword'; on Skype 'withgirdedsword,' on his personal blog 'With Girded Sword.' ...

"After registering on Hack Forums, Knudson engaged in a determined and aggressive effort to hack into the Estate's technologically protected website. ... He requested help, posting numerous messages on the Hack Forums, all with the intent of recruiting others to help him access 'thousands and thousands' of SDA Prophet Ellen White's 'unpublished letters and manuscripts' [i.e. EGW Protected Works] from an 'online' 'password protected database' found at www.egwwritings.org. Some of Knudson's posts were deceptively entitled 'Unpublished Religious Database,' ... or 'Sensitive Website Information Download Hack.' ...

"Knudson indicated that his intention was 'to perform a public service and acquire the unpublished writings of a 'prophet' of a particular religious institution ... to put this information in the hands of the public.' ... Additionally, he wrote, 'This is urgent, and I am willing to pay on acquisition of the information,'" the complaint states. (Citations omitted)

The estate claims that Knudson found as many as 20 John Does willing to help him hack. From Feb. 17 to April 9 this year, the database sustained attacks from users as far and wide as Armenia and Brazil, the estate says.

Knudson, originally from Australia, lives in Armenia, the estate says. It claims that an investigation into the attack yielded evidence that tied Knudson to it.

"Significantly, the SQL injection inquiries that were contained in the web server logs match exactly the SQL inquires posted on the Hack Forums by Knudson and the others," the complaint states.

"Structured Query Language," or SQL, refers to questions written in database language intended to extract the contents of the database, the Adventists say.

Unable to breach a second level of protection, Knudson returned to Hacking Forums on March 1 asking users to decrypt several passwords, which the users provided, according to the complaint.

The estate claims that Knudson successfully swiped 8,300 documents by the end of the month.
On March 20, he bought three domains, unpublishedellenwhite.com, ellenwhiteletters.com and ellenwhitemanuscripts.com from WildWestDomains.com, according to the complaint.

WildWestDomains.com resells domains from the better-known company, GoDaddy.

The complaint names those two companies as defendants, along with other dot-coms Webs Inc., HostGator.com, Domains By Proxy and PayPal.

The estate claims that Knudson worked under the alias "SDAnonymous," but left his digital fingerprints and address on his PayPal agreement to sell the unpublished White writings.

It claims that Knudson marketed the writings by sending an email blast to more than 1,000 addresses that he swiped from the web.
He compromised his anonymity again by promising readers of "Adventist Today" that the unpublished documents just needed "a few tweaks" before he publicly released them, the estate claims.

"In response to an article published in 'Adventist Today' on March 27, 2012, regarding the recent publication of Ellen G. White's works, Unpublished Ellen White, a website owned by Knudson, proved his intimate inside working knowledge of the plaintiff's EGW Writings Database, when he stated that to release the unpublished writings would involve only a 'few tweaks' and 'some minor adjustments to the Estate's already public website and everything would be available to anyone,'" the complaint states. "In fact, for months, Knudson and his co-conspirators attempted to break plaintiff's website's security in order to illegally copy the EGW Protected Works."

The estate seeks an injunction and damages for violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Stored Communications Act and other laws.

It is represented by Arnold Lutzker.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/08/22/49525.htm

tom_norris · 11-17-12 11:59 pm

Question for Tom Norris:

Hello, and thank you for considering my question.

It has become knowledge to me, after some research, that Mrs. Ellen G. White's first message to the church was a book called "An Appeal to Mothers."

Perhaps you've heard of it?

I will be as polite, yet to the point as I possibly can in describing it. Basically it was a book about what Mrs. White called "self-vice" (masturbation).

In the book, which is no longer in circulation for obvious reasons, she describes many diseases and ailments that humans contract from such practices. Later, when the scientific community found her to be entirely incorrect, the book was taken out of circulation (I do still have a copy however).

Jeremiah says: "If a prophet saith things that do not come to pass he/she is a liar and not sent of Me." How do you feel about that?

Sean R. Pick
California, United States

----------------------------------------------------------

Answer: Ellen White and her book, An Appeal to Mothers, 1864

1) First, Ellen White’s early writings were about eschatology and Adventist history. She wrote about the details of her ministry, including her visions, as well as the development of the Advent Movement.

Although she had previously written articles for the Present Truth Magazine, her first three books were--Christian Experience and Views of Mrs. E. G. White, first printed in 1851; A Supplement to Experience and Views, issued in 1854; and Spiritual Gifts, Volume 1, (219 pages) which appeared in 1858.

http://www.gilead.net/egw/books2/earlyw … index.html

She also wrote some Testimonies before 1864 and articles for the Youth Instructor. So this book you mention was not even close to “her first message to the church,” much less her first book. So the chronology of the question is incorrect, and so too the assumption that this was an important work, by which Ellen White should be judged today.

2) Second, this idea from the White Estate, that Ellen White had to be correct on all points or she is a fraud, is absurd. This is not how the Pioneers viewed her Spiritual Gifts, nor is this how the NT views such gifts.

So here is the second misconception about this topic. Ellen White can be wrong, and she often was, and still have genuine, spiritual gifts to help build up the church. The “tests of a Prophet,” invented by the Takoma Park SDA’s is very wrong and misleading. We all need to forget much of what has been taught by the 20th century SDA’s about Ellen White.

See:

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … hite-3.htm

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

3) Third, this small, 1864 book is still available online. It was originally titled: An Appeal to Mothers: The Great Cause of the Physical, Mental, and Moral Ruin of Children of Our Time.

An Appeal to Mothers -1864
http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/appeal.htm

This work has not been hidden or covered up as far as I know. However, there are many, far more important documents written by Ellen White that were being suppressed and hidden from the church and the public. This is a real problem that has yet to be addressed by the Adventist Community.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm

Here is the Barnes & Nobel Book Overview

Largely of historical interest, Ellen G. White's 1864 book on health care reform deals with the perceived problems of masturbation among the young. Terming it a "solitary vice" and "self abuse," she addresses her concerns--and her solutions--directly to mothers, advocating religion, awareness, and work.

Though hardly politically correct today, with modern knowledge and insight, her views and solutions are far less extreme than most other health care professionals' of the age.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/an-appe … 1111664944

4) Fourth; Historical Background

Ellen White wrote this small work after her Health Reform vision, at a time when she was raising four boys. This topic was a big health issue at the time, even though it seems strange to us today. But we should not judge those in the past by our modern standards. We must keep the proper historical context to be fair.

In addition, the points made by Ellen White were normative and even restrained for her time. America was in a “frenzy over the problem of masturbation” and Ellen White was dealing with this issue a practical manner for that time period. This is why the original title was called: An Appeal to Mothers: The Great Cause of the Physical, Mental, and Moral Ruin of Children of Our Time. The title alone clearly shows this was a popular crisis of the day.

In fact, Dr. J H Kellogg, of the famous Battle Creek Sanitarium, held the same views as Ellen White, because this is what the medical establishment taught at this time. Masturbation, in addition to being a sin, was thought to cause all manner of awful diseases, including insanity, vision and hearing problems, epilepsy, mental retardation and even cancer.

Kellogg was a popular author about many health topics, and one of his best selling books was about sex. The first of many editions was written in 1877; the book was called "Plain Facts For Old and Young.” It contained some very strange, harsh, and outdated advice about masturbation and sex that shocks us today. Ellen White’s views are tame compared to Kellogg’s. He was a strange man.

18th & 19th Centuries

It was primarily during the 1700s and 1800s when masturbation was first associated with mental and physical deficiencies. Some prominent physicians, scientists, philosophers, and religious leaders believed that illnesses such as insanity, vision and hearing problems, epilepsy, mental retardation, and general health problems were caused by self-stimulation. In fact, over 60% of medical and mental illnesses were blamed on masturbation.[1]

The fear of masturbation was so great that throughout the world, extreme preventative measures were instituted including the use of mechanical restraints, genital surgery, and physical discipline.[2] By the 19th century the cereal magnate John Harvey Kellogg declared "sex for anything but reproduction" to be "sexual excess." Kellogg and others began advocating routine circumcision of males as a deterrent to masturbation.

http://www.afraidtoask.com/masturbate/History.htm

http://www.nndb.com/people/018/000133616/

http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/brought … llogg.aspx

http://www.rotten.com/library/sex/mastu … ornflakes/

http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/moden … lPlai.html

http://www.amazon.com/Plain-Facts-Old-Y … 040505808X

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0btFjQxoaLQ

Masturbation And The Bible
http://www.ldolphin.org/Mast.shtml

5) Kellogg’s Extreme Views

During this time period, the practice of Masturbation was viewed as so unhealthy and debilitating that barbaric measures were proposed to stop the practice.

Kellogg actually became an Anti-masturbation crusader, along with his many other crusades, for which he was unapologetic. He “upped the ante by insisting that circumcision should be performed with no anesthesia. Why? So the teen would feel the pain and remember it the next time he was tempted to 'self-abuse.'”

Listen to Kellogg’s barbaric advice about performing circumcision without anesthesia. We should all, both males and females, (who also suffered awful procedures), be glad we live in a more civilized time.

"The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed."

Such were the uneducated and hysterical views during this time period. Ellen White is not nearly so radical as she could have been. This point alone underscores her wisdom in this matter. She does not advocate the harsh and extreme measures that others, like Kellogg promoted.

http://www.cracked.com/article_19520_5- … world.html

http://www.cracked.com/article_19520_5- … z2CVaO22XE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg

http://www.whale.to/a/john_harvey.html

6) A Public / Family / Health Topic

The topic of masturbation was a widely discussed health and family matter during this time period, which explains why Ellen White addressed it in a book for all to read. And why many others also did the same thing, including Kellogg, with his large, best selling book that seems very bazaar to us today.

Ellen White was raising a family and this was a popular family topic. Apparently, it needed to be addressed and she did so.

By 1860 the White family numbered six, with four boys ranging from a few weeks to 13 years of age. The youngest child, Herbert, however, lived only a few months, his death bringing the first break in the family circle. The culminating efforts to establish church and conference organizations, with the demands for much writing, traveling, and personal labor, occupied the early years of the 1860s. The climax was reached in the organization of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists in May, 1863.

This revelation on June 6, 1863, impressed upon the leaders in the newly organized church the importance of health reform. In the months that followed, as the health message was seen to be a part of the message of Seventh-day Adventists, a health educational program was inaugurated.

An introductory step in this effort was the publishing of six pamphlets of 64 pages each, entitled, Health, or How to Live, compiled by James and Ellen White. An article from Mrs. White was included in each of the pamphlets. The importance of health reform was greatly impressed upon the early leaders of the church through the untimely death of Henry White at the age of 16, the severe illness of Elder James White, which forced him to cease work for three years, and through the sufferings of several other ministers.

http://www.whiteestate.org/about/egwbio.asp#early

7) The White Estate’s View

Physical and spiritual dangers of masturbation or "self-abuse"

Few topics have generated more ridicule from critics than Ellen White's statements regarding "self-abuse," "solitary vice," "self-indulgence," "secret vice," "moral pollution," etc. Ellen White never used the term "masturbation."

Her first reference to this subject appeared in a 64-page pamphlet, An Appeal to Mothers, April 1864, nine months after her first comprehensive health vision. Primarily devoted to masturbation, pages 5 to 34 were from her own pen; the remainder consisted of quotations from medical authorities. [1]

Ellen White did not say that all, or even most, of the potentially serious consequences of masturbation would happen to any one individual. Nor did she say that the worst possible degree of a serious consequence would happen to most indulgers.

Modern research indicates that Ellen White's strong statements can be supported when she is properly understood. The general view today, however, is that masturbation is normal and healthy.

Two medical specialists have suggested a link between masturbation and physical abnormalities due to zinc-deficiency. Dr. David Horrobin, an M.D. and Ph.D. from Oxford University, states:

"The amount of zinc in semen is such that one ejaculation may get rid of all the zinc that can be absorbed from the intestines in one day. This has a number of consequences. Unless the amount lost is replaced by an increased dietary intake, repeated ejaculation may lead to a real zinc deficiency with various problems developing, including impotence.

"It is even possible, given the importance of zinc for the brain, that 19th century moralists were correct when they said that repeated masturbation could make one mad!" [2]

More recent research has confirmed the critical role of zinc as a principal protector of the immune system, with a host of physical illnesses attributable to zinc-deficiency.

Two professionals in the area of clinical psychology and family therapy have compared Ellen White's statements on masturbation with current medical knowledge. [3]

Dr. Richard Nies defended Ellen White's general counsel on masturbation, making four main points:

(1) Masturbation leads to "mental, moral, and physical deterioration. . . . It is not the stimulation, per se, that is wrong. It's what's going on in . . . [persons] when they're becoming self-referenced and self-centered."

(2) Masturbation "breaks down the finer sensitivities of our nervous system. . . . It is not difficult to see in terms of the electrical mediation of our nervous system, how disease becomes a natural result of individuals who have placed their own gratification at the center of their being. . . . Disease is the natural result of this."

(3) Masturbation is a predisposition that can be "inherited and passed on and transmitted from one generation to another, even leading to degeneration of the race."

(4) In dealing with others, especially children, Ellen White's counsel lies in the direction of dealing with the consequences, of showing them that we should be training for love and eternity, not self-gratification with its terrible consequences. Dr. Nies concluded his paper, "Self-gratification is synonymous with destruction."

Alberta Mazat observed that Ellen White's concern regarding masturbation was primarily on the mental consequences rather than the "purely physical act. She was more concerned with thought processes, attitudes, fantasies, etc." Mazat quoted Ellen White's references to the fact that "the effects are not the same on all minds," that "impure thoughts seize and control the imagination," and that the mind "takes pleasure in contemplating the scenes which awake base passion."

Mazat further noted that some may be embarrassed by Ellen White's strong statements regarding masturbation. However, many of Mrs. White's other statements also seemed "unrealistic and exaggerated before science corroborated them, for example, cancer being caused by a virus, the dangers of smoking, overeating, and the overuse of fats, sugar, and salt, to name a few. . . . It seems worthwhile to remind ourselves that medical knowledge at any point is not perfect." [4]

Looked at from another perspective, God always upholds the ideal for His people through His messengers. However one reacts to Ellen White's specific counsel, clearly masturbation was not what God had in mind when He created man and woman, united them in marriage, and then instructed them to be fruitful and multiply. God's ideal in regard to sexuality is the loving relationship that exists in marriage between husband and wife. Anything else, including masturbation, falls far short of God's ideal.

Notes

[1] An Appeal to Mothers was reprinted in 1870 as part of a larger work, A Solemn Appeal Relative to Solitary Vice and Abuses and Excesses of the Marriage Relation. A facsimile reprint appears in the Appendix to A Critique of Prophetess of Health (by the Ellen G. White Estate).

[2] David F. Horrobin, M.D., Ph.D., Zinc (St. Albans, Vt.: Vitabooks, Inc., 1981), p. 8. See also Carl C. Pfeiffer, Ph.D., M.D., Zinc and Other Micro-Nutrients (New Canaan, Conn.: Keats Publishing, Inc., 1978), p. 45.

[3] Richard Nies, Ph.D. (Experimental Psychology, UCLA, 1964; equivalent Ph.D. in clinical psychology, including oral exam, but died during dissertation preparation), Lecture, "Give Glory to God," Glendale, Calif., n.d.; Alberta Mazat, M.S.W. (Professor of Marriage and Family Therapy, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, Calif.), Monograph, "Masturbation" (43 pp.), Biblical Research Institute.

[4] Mazat, Monograph, "Masturbation."

[Adapted from Herbert E. Douglass, Messenger of the Lord: the Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1998), pp. 493, 494, with additional comments.]

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/faq-unus.html

8) Modern View about Ellen White and Masturbation:

Revisiting Ellen White on Masturbation

Such discrepancies between what Ellen White wrote and what modern medical science thinks prompt some to question whether she was inspired by God, as Seventh-day Adventists generally believe. It is my view that we cannot answer this question unless we look at her life and work as a whole. When we do that, I think she fares very well even though she made many mistakes along the way.

If she did nothing more than help establish Loma Linda University, that would be enough evidence to convince me that God used her in a special way; however, she did this sort of thing several times! Clearly, not everything she said and did will pass the test of time. I think it unreasonable to think that it should.

I find it helpful to compare Ellen White’s remedies for masturbation with what many in the medical community were practicing in her time. Over the last several decades, this has become more evident to researchers. For instance, in the spring of 2003, The Journal of Social History published a review essay by Robert Darby titled “The Masturbation Taboo and the Rise of Routine Male Circumcision: A Review of the Historiography.” Written from the point of view of one who believes that there is no more justification for circumcising infant boys than girls, it summarizes and evaluates many recent historical studies.

http://spectrummagazine.org/article/col … sturbation

9) Conclusion,

Today, the critics need to better understand the historical context of this topic, (and all others), before they try to discredit Ellen White. She was very restrained on this topic as compared to Kellogg and others.

In addition, everyone needs to repudiate the “tests of a prophet” that was dreamed up by the White Estate. This worthless test only causes misunderstanding, diverting people away from the important contributions of Ellen White. Regardless of her “spiritual gifts,” Ellen White was still a person of her time and culture.

Although Ellen White lived in another time period, her genuine contributions to the Advent Movement should not be overlooked or marginalized. She lived to promote the Advent Cause, which she defined as the Three Angels Messages.

More than that, she tried to push the SDA’s forward from their prophetic position of the 3rd Angels Message, to the 4th and final Advent Message. This is still what she wants to see for the Advent Movement.

It is a tragedy that the White Estate has been so dishonest and incompetent about Ellen White. They have failed to correctly explain her views or her life story, for which they need to repent and correct the record.

The Advent Movement needs to better understand Ellen White and her views about the Law, Gospel, and the 2nd Advent. The topic under discussion hardly rises to such an important level, nor does her book about masturbation discredit her spiritual gifts or negate her eschatological insights as many assume.

I hope this answers your question.

Tom Norris for All Experts.com & Adventist Reform

l_miller · 12-08-12 10:08 pm

bshields, I now understand that you're defending your belief about Ellen White which I had quoted from George Tichy in agreement that the tsda's need to tell the truth.

"George tichy said: I couldn't believe that MY OWN CHURCH had hidden all those FACTS from me and everyone else as possible. That was a big shock. When I start reading this material of All expert SDA, and Adventist of and for Tomorrow back 2007..OMG. I have been "duped" I stop attend sda church in 1989."

This 2012 of December I am truly well fed. I come on this site to get my breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Here's the link: saving-soul-ellen-white; http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2011/0 … llen-white

I am amazed that the corporate church didn't yet have the guts to correct this situation, and keeps insisting in teaching those absurdities worldwide. They are afraid of switching to a more pure Christian doctrinal foundation. They would rather keep the "door shut"... to the truth. Unbelievable!

l_miller · 12-08-12 10:23 pm

btw..The members that used to chat here went over to Spectrum.

And I wonder why is that? If it's persecution, that is no problem.

Thank God for the Internent.

I will be at the pubic library checking things out so I can survive. Now I'm at the Mcdonald's with my lap top.

Last edited by l_miller (12-08-12 10:44 pm)

tom_norris · 12-09-12 1:29 pm

Thanks for that post.

I read some of that discussion about Ellen White, and it just goes around in useless circles, with the blind trying to defend one myth after another. And yes, there are a number of ATomorrow friends over there speaking their minds. Good for them.

It is sad to watch the continued meltdown of Adventism. Spectrum is part of the problem. They are not about reform and they have never been about serious change, much less telling the truth. If they were, they would promote serious articles that deal with the facts, instead of wasting time on myths and minor points.

For example, all of us on ATomorrow know the fact that the White Estate hid thousands of documents about the 1888 debates, but yet, that point is ignored so that people can debate some minor point over and over. Why not deal with the real issues? Why not face up to what the White Estate has done and start dealing with the real problems that are at the root cause of the demise of Adventism?

Spectrum has always been run by denominational insiders. It is not an open, free, or honest publication. Rather is it nothing more than liberal propaganda for SDA's, all the while pretending that it is trying to promote useful discussion. This proves that it is not only the cultic conservatives that try to brainwash and manipulate, the liberals also have their own useless agenda.

Today, we live in the age of the internet. It is no longer possible to hide the facts of history or theology. So why is the Adventist Community still pretending that it lives in a 19th century bubble?

Everyone can look up Ellen White online and get the facts. They can see her changed position on the Gospel and read the key documents from Adventist history that have long been hidden and suppressed by the leaders. They can even see the real Ellen White warning about the dangers of tithe and refusing to follow church doctrine on this point. All of which has been covered up and hidden by the leaders.

Consequently, the SDA spin on things no longer controls the discussion. And the more they try, the worse things become. The present situation is dysfunctional and unsustainable. This is going to end very badly for the SDA's if they don't stop the madness, repent, and embrace serious Gospel Reform.

I think the time has come for the SDA's to stop playing games and honestly deal with the issues. But their leaders are so corrupt and incompetent that they have no intention of telling the truth about anything, because it would only make them look bad. So this charade continues, and Spectrum is part of this endless nonsense and double-talk.

It is time for serious an credible Adventist Reform.

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform

cadge · 12-12-12 11:19 am

"Everyone can look up Ellen White online and get the facts. They can see her changed position on the Gospel ...."

Yes Tom, we can see where EGW progressed from a strong legalistic foundation prior to 1888, and then became more Gospel orientated somewhat in her later writings, but she still had one foot on Mt. Sinai and the other on Mt. Calvary. That is what is the causing the continual confusion in the denomination. So, like I said before: Why would God choose a messenger to the remnant church that didn't even understand the Gospel?

Cadge

tom_norris · 12-14-12 7:01 pm

Cadge said: Yes Tom, we can see where EGW progressed from a strong legalistic foundation prior to 1888, and then became more Gospel orientated somewhat in her later writings, but she still had one foot on Mt. Sinai and the other on Mt. Calvary.

Tom said: First off, most all Protestant churches were very legalistic in the 19th century. Their views of keeping the Sabbath were basically the same as the SDA’s, except the day was different. They all thought it sinful to work on the Sabbath, drink alcohol, play cards, dance, and on and on.

So you have to keep things in historical, theological, and cultural perspective.

Second, I never said that Ellen White is the source for all Gospel correctness or clarity. She is not. She did not start the 1888 Gospel debates; that was young E. J. Waggoner.

So others understood the Gospel better than she did and before she did. Regardless, when the point was raised, she agreed that there was serious error in SDA theology, unlike Uriah Smith and others who claimed otherwise. She came late to the Gospel Party. But at least she showed up, so she deserves credit, not censure.

Third, the White Estate Cover Up is the real problem:

You say; it is now clear that Ellen White moved from legalism to a “somewhat” correct understanding of the Protestant Gospel. (No thanks to the White Estate. They have done their best to hide Ellen White’s changed view about the law and the Gospel.)

I say; Ellen White moved from being typically wrong about the law and the Gospel, as were most others in her day, to embracing the correct Protestant Gospel within the context of Luther’s Reformation view.

Ellen White went from promoting character perfection, Sanctification, and law keeping, to Christ’s character stands in our place, complete with a new focus on Christ, not the law. In fact, after 1888, she correctly embraced Luther’s definition of Gospel salvation with both hands.

Of course, if one grew up Adventist, no one would ever know that Ellen White ever understood the Protestant Gospel, much less that she got in a large debate about Luther and the Two Covenants. Such facts were carefully hidden from everyone.

The true story of Ellen White’s life, and SDA history, has been horribly manipulated and suppressed by the White Estate. So what you are reacting to is new information that should have long ago been disclosed to the Advent people. Now that it is in the public domain, everyone needs to be more responsible for how we view both Ellen White and Adventism.

In fact, to this very day, the real story of 1888 and Ellen White has not been told by the White Estate. Nor could they ever tell it until they repudiated what they have been teaching all these years.

Fourth; Ellen White CHANGED her view of the law and the Gospel;

From the beginning, Ellen White embraced a Methodist Gospel, one that was heavily based on sanctification. When she embraced the 3rd Angels Message, with its’ emphasis on the law and the Sabbath, it fit very well with her earlier view of salvation and Miller’s judgment of the 2nd Coming.

But her Gospel progress was not complete. Forty years later, her view of the Gospel would be challenged by an internal church debate about the specifics of Luther’s theology as it related to SDA theology.

As part of Ellen White’s Gospel “progress,” she had to change her views about specific doctrine. There was no room for compromise. She had to understand the 1888 debate and choose a side. She did. She sided with the minority, who were promoting Luther’s position on the law and Gospel, - Waggoner and Jones. This was a different view from her Methodist / SDA theology, and thus she was faced with a monumental decision. One that changed the course of the Advent Movement.

As a result of 1888, Ellen White went to war with Uriah Smith and worked hard to reform the SDA’s about the Gospel. She even had Smith fired from the Review. But she lost the Reform War. The SDA church never fully understood nor embraced the Protestant Gospel. Not in 1888, and not at any time since.

Today, it is time for the Adventist Community to understand the facts of history and theology instead of the self-serving propaganda from the Denomination. It is time to deal with the issues and resolve them so that the Advent Movement can go forward to the next level, which the Pioneers called the 4th Angels Message.

Ellen White deliberately changed her view about the law and the Gospel. She embraced Luther’s view, and never looked back. It was not an accident or a halfway measure.

So let’s not pretend Ellen White just drifted from legalism to a “somewhat” better understanding the Gospel, - with one foot in the legalistic camp and the other next to Luther. No. Ellen White got it right. There was a huge debate about specific texts in Galatians. Ellen White picked a side. The right side. But she lost. And so too did the denomination as it soon collapsed because of all the doctrinal error and division.

Once in Takoma Park, the leaders covered up this history so that they could invent and promote what we call today, “Traditional Adventism,” with it’s focus on Sanctification, legalism, and the IJ.

The leaders covered up, not only the 5-year 1888 Gospel debate, but the very Gospel itself! But only until the 1970’s, when Gospel truth surfaced for a decade, only to be outlawed by the leaders at Glacier View in 1980.

The SDA Community and their critics have been horribly manipulated and deceived by the SDA leaders. All have been denied the true story about Ellen White’s life, even as they were also misguided about the Protestant fundamentals that define and empower the Advent Movement.

It is now obvious that Adventists have been taught a false Gospel and a manipulated version of history that is full of myths, half-truths, and false doctrine. And yet, there is no repentance or reform. Just double-talk and denial.

THIS is the problem with the SDA’s today.

What happened to the quest for Gospel “truth”?

Is. 9:16 For those who guide this people are leading them astray;
And those who are guided by them are brought to confusion.

Cadge said: That is what is the causing the continual confusion in the denomination.

Tom said: The SDA’s need to start telling the truth about church history and start repenting for their many false doctrines. Had the White Estate not covered up the 1888 debate, we would all know what happened and why, thereby avoiding a repeat of 1888 in 1980.

If the White Estate had told the truth about Ellen White and the Gospel, Glacier View would not have taken place to weaken and divide the church. All could have learned the same correct Gospel, --the same one that Ellen White endorsed after 1888.

More than that, there would have been no such thing as “Traditional” Takoma Park Adventism. It would have been impossible.

If the truth about 1888 had not been hidden, and a false story promoted instead, things would have been much better for modern SDA’s. Now they are so dysfunctional and cultic that they may not survive much longer. At present, they have no credibility or reason to exist. They are irrelevant and lost.

Today, the only way to stop the madness is for the White Estate to confess what they have done and tell the truth about Ellen White and 1888. It’s just that simple. The many lies and myths must be confessed and the record corrected. Luther’s Gospel must be allowed to become part of Adventist theology, just as Waggoner insisted in 1888.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Estate.htm

The cover-up about Ellen White is the root cause for the confusion and demise of modern Adventism. Not Ellen White.

Cadge said: So, like I said before: Why would God choose a messenger to the remnant church that didn't even understand the Gospel?

Tom said: All humans are faulty, even the ones that God uses for his own ends. Very few of “God’s messengers” understood the Gospel, especially those in the OT. And none of them were perfect. Not Adam, Noah, Moses or David.

Why did God choose any of the people he did? Because rocks won’t get the job done. He needs people.

None in the OT really understood the Gospel, especially the Jews; they never understood their Gospel destiny. Not even John the Baptist understood the Gospel. So why be so hard on Ellen White? She never murdered anyone or committed adultery, like Moses and David, nor did she commit incest like Noah or condemn the world to futility and sin as Adam and Eve both did. I could go on and on, but I trust you get the point.

It is clear that God uses faulty people who do not fully understand or obey the Gospel. Ellen White is not the villain she has been made out to be. The White Estate is the real problem.

Peter is another example more to the point. He was supposed to preach the Gospel that Christ taught him, but yet, he fell into legalism and embraced a false Gospel. The book of Galatians is all about this Gospel debate. His fellow apostle, Paul had to curse him.

If Ellen White was a mistake, so too Peter and many others that God has used. But of course we know better.

Ellen White does not deserve the bad reputation she has gained from the White Estate and their critics. Ellen White was a Gospel Reformer and the White Estate should have let the world know this fact.

If Peter can get the Gospel wrong, and he did, so too can Ellen White. And she did. But she also progressed and finally embraced correct Gospel doctrine, and so too Peter. Good for her, and good for the Advent Movement. Too bad so few know the facts.

Ellen White should not be judged on a different basis than anyone else. She gets great credit from me for standing up for the Gospel in 1888. She could have easily done the wrong thing by siding with Uriah Smith.

It took great courage and insight for Ellen White to change her views about the law and the Gospel. Ellen White played a remarkable role in 1888 and this story should have never been hidden, much less changed to reflect the opposite of what actually took place.

The real problem is this: the White Estate hid documents and manipulated Ellen White’s story, including her beliefs about the law and the Gospel, as well as the IJ and the very fundamentals that define the Advent Movement. THIS is the problem.

The White Estate has so dishonestly misrepresented Ellen White, that there is no other way to fix this mess except for them to confess and correct the record. The SDA’s cannot go forward to the next level, the 4th Angels Message, until they repent and tell the truth about Ellen White and church history.

At this point, enough facts are now online for all to see. So whether the White Estate admits the obvious or not, the Advent Movement can go forward without them. The Advent people must stop following wolves. They must learn to recognize them and chase them away.

Today, the SDA community is no longer bound by the myths and confusion of dishonest Adventist history. The facts are in the public domain, and they have been so for a number of years, thus the truth about Ellen White can set the Adventist Community free to focus on serious Gospel Reform and eschatological development.

It is time for the Advent Movement to stop being misled by their corrupt leaders and go forward and once again focus on Gospel Truth and Prophecy.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris

tom_norris · 11-07-13 8:29 pm

Question for Tom Norris:

Given that there was a great deal of acrimony and dissent in the church at the time, as well as an immediate need to bolster EGW'S credence as God's one and only prophet, which was flagging in more intellectual SDA Circles, have you considered the possibility that she--without acting on her own--may have had dedicated and ardent adherents who would commit arson on her behalf, if for no other reason than to give the appearance that at least some of her later-in-life prophecies had actually come true?

This is alluded to in The Road to Wellville by Dr. Kellogg and there seems to some--or perhaps even a good deal of circumstantial for such a scenario.

But what are your thoughts on this possibility and whom might you suspect could have been the culprits in EGW's Inner Circle, if such was, in fact, the case?

Bruce,

California, USA
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Tom replied:

First off, the “Road to Wellville” is fiction, not history. It was written in 1993. “The title comes from an actual booklet called The Road to Wellville written by C. W. Post, a former patient at the sanitarium who was inspired by his diet there to found his own cereal business. Post used to give out his booklet in boxes of Grape-Nuts cereal.”

The Road to Wellville was adapted into a movie in 1994, directed by Alan Parker and starring Anthony Hopkins, Bridget Fonda, Matthew Broderick, John Cusack, Michael Lerner, Dana Carvey (as George Kellogg), Lara Flynn Boyle, John Neville, Colm Meaney, Camryn Manheim, and Monica Parker.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Wellville

It was an awful book and even a worse movie, in spite of having the great Anthony Hopkins play the role of Dr. Kellogg.

Second, Ellen White was not living in Battle Creek at this time. She lived far away in California, where she would die in 1915.

Third, Ellen White was not a militant, nor were her followers. So there is no possibility that she or anyone that supported her, would embrace in the crime of arson against the church.

Fourth, there was plenty motivation to destroy the church from those that were angry about the recent debate, confusion, and schism that developed after 1888. At this time, legions were angry with Uriah Smith and Ellen White and with Traditional 19th century Adventism. A great schism had started, as the SDA’s self-destructed for all to see.

Those that left the church had motivation to harm the church. In fact, there was so much public anger directed towards the SDA’s, that they had to leave town, refusing to even consider rebuilding in a place were they were not wanted. Dr. Kellogg also left the church. But he stayed in Battle Creek and managed to keep both the San and the flagship health magazine under his control.

The White Estate has downplayed what really happened in Battle Creek. They have been caught trying to manipulate and dishonestly revise church history in order to cover up the 1888 doctrinal issues that destroyed the Denomination. As usual, they ignore the real issues and point to diversions.

Here are some links about this fire:

http://www.adventistreview.org/2004-1513/story1.html

http://www.battlecreektabernacle.com/article.php?id=34

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-fr … 2A25752C3A...

First off, fire was a very common threat in the 19th century. Moreover, Battle Creek had a problem with, not only fire, but with arson, and thus there were many fires over the years. In fact, many SDA buildings were burned in Battle Creek, not just the Review.

The Detroit News noted that: “this [the burning of the Tabernacle] was the thirteenth big fire in Battle Creek’s West End and every building save one that was a part of the Adventist group… “

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/egw71.htm

The Review fire took place in December of 1902. This was a time when there was a great anger and schism taking place within the SDA denomination. Many had already left the SDA church in 1902, with the vast majority siding with the popular Dr. Kellogg who. Only a minority remained loyal to the traditional official teachings of the church at this time.

Here is Ellen White’s view of the Review fire:

Ellen White publicly warned the church leaders in no uncertain terms that those who had stood their ground ever since 1888 and had "for years" resisted the light of the Minneapolis theology were in grave danger. She had "no smooth message" for those who had confused the theological issues in an attempt to protect their previous positions, refusing to admit error [15].

She decried the fact that the Minneapolis reformers had been taunted and accused of being "fanatics, extremist, and enthusiasts." "Let me prophecy unto you," she publicly wrote, "unless you speedily humble your hearts before God, and confess your sins, which are many, you will when it is too late see that you have been fighting against God...Your turning things upside down is known of the Lord. Go on a little longer as you have gone, in rejection of the light from heaven and you are lost [16]."

In 1896, Ellen White wrote another communication to Battle Creek entitled, "The Danger of Rejecting Truth." She was very concerned about the denomination for she knew they were in great "peril." "The church needs to be converted," she wrote, again making reference to the denomination's refusal to accept the 1888 message. She reminded them about the history of the Jewish nation and compared their rejection of Christ with the denomination's recent rejection of the new light from Minneapolis [17].

In a reference to Waggoner and Jones' unauthorized promotion of their theological views throughout the denomination against the expressed wishes of the hierarchy, Ellen White drew the parallel of how the chief priests and rabbis thought they, too, were competent to instruct the apostles as to how they should teach. She then defended Waggoner and Jones by making the point that "men in authority are not always to be obeyed, even though they may profess to be teachers of the Bible [18]."

According to Ellen White, the religious leaders in Battle Creek refused to "open their eyes to discern the fact that they have misinterpreted and misapplied the scriptures, and have built up false theories, calling them fundamental doctrines of the faith [19]."

In a reference to the Galatian controversy, she scolded the church by saying, Seventh-day Adventists "are in danger" of rejecting truth "because it contradicts something which they have taken for granted" but which is not really truth at all.

At the close of the epistle, Ellen White could not refrain from speaking even more to the point. Because she knew that the Review had been the largest and most influential antagonist against the Minneapolis message, she felt it her duty to warn this great, beloved institution that it was in serious danger. "That men should keep alive the spirit which ran riot at Minneapolis," she wrote, "is an offense to God. All heaven is indignant at the spirit that for years has been revealed in our publishing institution at Battle Creek. Unrighteousness is practiced that God will not tolerate. He will visit for these things [20]."

Because the vast majority of the Battle Creek hierarchy continued to reject the original Minneapolis message, numerous evils resulted. This in turn lead to the fulfillment of Ellen White's predictions that the judgments of God would be poured out upon the denomination's revered institutions. These monuments to the third angel that had been built at such great cost and sacrifice were to be totally destroyed and the Church's headquarters in Battle Creek forever abandoned. This, according to Ellen White, was the direct result of the denomination's rejection of the Minneapolis message.

By February, 1902, the world-famous sanitarium burned to the ground and ten months later, the Review and Herald building was also completely destroyed. The Review especially had been the proudest and most visible symbol of the rise and progress of Seventh-day Adventism, and its sudden and total loss was a staggering blow to the work of the third angel. Within one hour, the flames of judgment had reduced the Review's four-story, 80,000-square foot building to a heap of smoldering ruins [21], never again to be rebuilt in Battle Creek [22].

Ellen White was not surprised by these events. "When this news [about the destruction of the Review by fire] came," she said, "I felt no surprise, and I had no words to speak. What I have had to say from time to time in warnings has had no effect except to harden those who heard, and now I can only say: I am sorry, so very sorry, that it was necessary for this stroke to come. Light has been given. If it were acted upon, further light would not be needed [23]."

Ellen White was sadly convinced that, "God's people have departed from Him; they have not followed His instruction, and He has come near them in correction [24]."

It was Ellen White's position that the denomination's 14-year history from 1888 through 1902 culminated in tragic loss as a direct result of not accepting the original 1888 message delivered by Waggoner and Jones. Her interpretation of this time period makes the events of the 1888 era assume a more solemn and ominous tone than many have previously realized.

Although more than a century has passed since the 1888 Minneapolis Conference, there can be no mistake about Ellen White's assessment. Her famous statement in 1902 summarizes her viewpoint of this episode quite succinctly: "I have been instructed," she wrote, "that the terrible experience at the Minneapolis conference is one of the saddest chapters in the history of the believers in present truth [25]."

Following the "fiery indignation," as Ellen White called it, the church leadership, under her direction, fled Battle Creek in humiliation and disgrace, to Takoma Park.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … -house.htm

I hope this answers your question.

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com and Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 11-09-13 5:53 pm

Bruce said: Thanks for the time you've put into this Tom but I find the net effect of your response at first condescending--that is, "Wellville" is clearly a work of fiction just as were Jesus' Parables but this doesn't refute the notion that there may be an element of truth to be gleaned from either.

Tom replied: I have been to Battle Creek researching Kellogg and the SDA Health Movement. I can assure you that the fictional book called the “Road to Wellville” was not a serious work. The book was a spoof, and a very bad one at that. It was full of myths and rude stereotypes, as well as many bad, sophomoric jokes. It was a horrible book and worse movie. As someone who takes history very seriously, this book, and the movie, was utter nonsense. But in all fairness, it was never meant to be taken seriously. It was a failed spoof that fell flat.

Furthermore, while the above is my personal opinion, the fact of the matter is that this movie was a well-justified, commercial disaster. In spite of a very good caste, the movie was unwatchable. It was supposed to be a comedy, but it was neither funny nor historically credible. It was crude and demeaning of the health movement, which is a rather serious matter.

To prove this point, the famous critic, Gene Siskel gave the picture an awful review. He said: “The Road to Wellville, which has fine actors, beautiful costumes, splendid production design and an offbeat story, but is about as entertaining as an enema featured subject of the movie itself.”

Siskel correctly complains that this plotless and pointless movie makes no sense. Listen to what he says:

"The Road to Wellville is based on the best-selling novel about a 1907 health spa run by Dr. John Kellogg, cornflakes titan and better-living-through-cleaner-bowels guru…”

“After the preview screening, I heard more than one viewer ask, ‘What was that about?’ And that was my reaction, too. I kept waiting for a theme to emerge.”

“Obviously, director Alan Parker must find some satirical reference to today's health concerns, but the problem is that we now know a better diet is clearly important to one's health. So rather than laugh at Dr. Kellogg, we can't help but view him as a visionary who just went too far.”

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1994 … e-spa-star

So I stand by my view that this was an awful movie. It does not do justice to what took place in Battle Creek. Good health, and those who dedicated their lives to such a concept, should not to be mocked, much less turned into fiction for rude laughs.

Furthermore, there is no comparison with the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels and some modern fictional writer who is obsessed with enema jokes. I don’t know why you would think so. I find this strange.

Bruce said: Further, I find your review of the film utterly superfluous and, in fact, wrong, as I enjoyed the movie almost as much as I was entertained by the book, no matter how "un-non-fictional" both works admittedly are.

Tom said: Perhaps the book was better than the movie. I think it sold very well, unlike the movie, which was a financial disaster. Regardless this work of fiction was the worst book and movie I think I have ever seen. Moreover, as someone who has studied the history of the health movement, it was also full of misinformation, error, and slander. It has no redeeming value whatsoever.

Bruce said: And as to the response, ultimately, I find the defense of EGW less than gratifying.

Tom said: Apparently you are one of these (former) SDA’s that remain angry and bitter at Ellen White. They are everywhere. I understand. I get it. But life goes on. We now live in the 21st century, and we know what went wrong in the past and why.

The fact of the matter is that all SDA’s have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into believing many false things. Most of what we were taught about Ellen White was not really true. So you need to get caught up, and understand that there are legions of people that have been manipulated into believing the White Estate’s improper instruction.

No SDA knew the real Ellen White, which was hidden deep in the White Estate, kept away from public view. This is only now starting to change, but not with any help from the leaders. They are still content to deceive everyone about Ellen White and many other things. So you need to stop fighting the past and re-educate yourself about SDA history by reading the details of Adventist Reform. Then you can re-direct your anger to the White Estate, where it belongs.

Furthermore, the only agenda I have about Ellen White is to tell the truth about what she really believed, said, and taught. It is not to blindly defend her as you charge. However, Ellen White is often unjustly charged for many things. Those that know the facts have a duty to speak up and correct the record.

See Ellen White/ Adventist Reform:
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

Bruce said: Going back to my question, please note that I didn't ask if Sister White lit the matches. Clearly, culpable deniability would have been of utmost concern.

Tom replied: Your theory that Ellen White, or her those that supported her, were somehow behind the arson in Battle Creek is ludicrous on many levels. First, it was those who disliked Ellen White, and that were angry at the church, that would have been motivated to attack SDA property in Battle Creek. Those that supported her, would never think of taking such criminal action against their own interests.

Bruce said: Rather, my question was whether it was at least conceivable that some of those who still counted themselves as her supporters might have done the dirty work of making her prophetic gifts more believable and if so, whether or not you had seen anything in your research which might show that there were such people in her coterie.

Tom said: The answer is NO! You have a very warped and strange view of Ellen White, one that does not fit with the record of history. Your theory of arson to support Ellen White is not credible in the slightest.

Bruce said: So instead of addressing this question, a nearly full defense of her is the undertaken, based on little more than assert that The Supposed Prophetess was a pacifist and would never have condoned such behavior.

Tom said: The question was answered. Your theory is absurd. I also game you a number of additional reasons why this could not be so.

Bruce said: My reaction to this is to again bring Jesus' Name into the discussion as I'm convinced that he was also non-militaristic.

Tom said: While Jesus could be viewed as a pacifist, he teaches that he will come back with a celestial army and destroy the world. Is that the behavior of a pacifist? Hardly.

Bruce said: However, this has done little to prevent those who take his "I didn't come to bring peace into the world" Reference literally, and embark on such campaigns as The Inquisition, The Crusades and The Branch Davidians, none of which I'm convinced he would have supported, either.

Tom said: Sin and war were both invented in heaven; then exported to Earth. This is why we live on a death planet, where all live a short while then die. We are stuck in a great controversy between good and evil. Our only hope is to understand and embrace the Gospel.

Bruce said: In other words, what a so-called prophets followers do with his or her words, is completely beyond that seer's ability to control.

Tom said: Ellen White’s writings do not, and have not, encouraged or promoted anyone to start burning down SDA buildings in Battle Creek. Ellen White did not promote criminal behavior, nor would anyone with a rational mind think otherwise. You need to update your views about Ellen White. At this time she was an old woman living in an assisted living setting in California.

Bruce said: Further, I don't think a skeptic looking in from the outside at the time, could help but think that Mrs. White took a little too much vindication from the fires, in much of her subsequent writing.

Tom replied: You are wrong. I have ever heard anyone suggest what you are saying. The facts of history to do not support your theory. Sorry.

Bruce said: So in the end, I'm not saying your opinion is less than well-researched, but I am saying that is somewhat biased and may, in fact, be if not incorrect but at the very least is unresponsive.

Tom replied: What I am saying to you is based on decades of research and study about Ellen White and the history of Battle Creek. It is biased to reflect the facts, and only the facts. It is correct. Your theory is flat out wrong and unsupported by evidence.

Moreover, my answer to you was not “unresponsive,” but on point. You are wrong. Period. Your theory is not worth two cents. Why not spend some time doing some serious research and try to find the facts?

Bruce said: PS: I understand you're a member of Capital Memorial Church, for which church--or at least, the church building--I feel a close affinity as my dad was The Potomac Conference's Project Construction Manager back in '62 when the edifice was built.

Tom replied: I too walked around the church when it was being built. It was a cutting edge design back then. I remember Dr. Hadley was a big supporter of that project. CMC was supposed to be a special church that targeted the best part of the city. It was vibrant and full of big names for a number of years. But like the rest of Adventism, it has self-destructed for all to see. It was forced to merge with another SDA church, and struggles to exist.

Bruce said: That is, I visited the site many times when I was in 2nd grade at JNA and while the construction underway and still find it to be a very remarkable structure, no matter how weak I find the philosophical foundation upon which it was built.

Tom said: The Advent Movement has some very good theology and worthwhile history. They have a Protestant pedigree. But over the years they have had some very poor and dishonest leadership. Which is to say, most of what we were taught is flat out wrong.

So Adventism needs to repent of their errors and myths and correct the record. As Protestants, they can only embrace the Gospel, and what is true and correct. The removal of errors is part of the reformation process. Such a Reformation is the only way to save the Advent Movement, which has a worthwhile mission to prepare the last church for the end of the world.

Bruce said: PPS: I also see the phrase "Adventist Reform" as the last words in your response, which phrase I find somewhat puzzling, as it my contention that trying to reform any religious organization is tantamount to trying to re-bake a cake.

Tom replied: Theology is not like baking. In fact, religion is meant to move forward, mature, unfold, and progress. Jesus’ reformed Judaism and invented the Church, changing the world in the process. Proving that in theology, you can “re-bake the cake.” Thus the OC was replaced with the NC and truth went forward.

Further along in history, the Roman Catholic Church went corrupt. So what happened? The Reformers “protested” and reformed the church, and the world, setting in motion the very freedoms we enjoy today. Proving once again that religious reform is normative and necessary.

The Advent Movement also came into existence because Miller reformed the eschatological views of his day. Once this reform had taken place, others followed, like Sabbath Reform, which is where the SDA’s entered the picture.

The 1st century church was built in reform and debate. So too the Protestant Reformation, which set in motion even more theological reforms, which are represented by the various denominations.

Gospel Truth is progressive. No one today should discount the theological contribution made by the 19th century Adventist Pioneers, or doubt that they have pushed eschatology forward. Every church today now embraces the very Adventist doctrines that they all once repudiated. Thus the Adventists have literally changed the entire eschatological platform for the modern church. Few give them the credit they deserve for such an achievement.

The challenge today for the self-destructing SDA’s is for them to grow up and move beyond their dishonest and incompetent leadership. They must not only remove what is false, and change their very organizational structure; they must also defend what is correct and true.

Most Adventists are so confused about most everything, that they need to get their bearings and take stock of what they believe and why. They need to separate the myths and error from what is fundamental and true. This is Gospel Reform.

At the end of time, there will be a final reformation of the church, meaning all denominations. At that time, Eschatology will be credible and true, not based on legalistic myths and false views about Sunday.

Rev 18 shows this time when the Gospel, and the NC Sabbath, will be fully understood like never before in the history of the world. Then comes the great tribulation and the end of the civilized world, which is followed by the 2nd Coming, which is the Judgment of the world.

Mark 13:19 “For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will.

The Adventists need to return to their noble mission to prepare the last church for what is shortly to come to pass. This is their destiny and fate.

It is time for the Advent Community to repent and embrace Adventist Reform, going forward in Gospel Truth.

Adventist Reform
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=234

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for All Experts & Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 11-11-13 5:51 pm

Bruce said: Thanks again for the response, Tom but once more I take issue with much of what you say.

Tom said: No surprise here. I think you are going to believe whatever you want, no matter what the evidence shows. There are many who think they have all the answers when it comes to religion. But yet, under closer examination, they don’t know what they are talking about.

Bruce said: First, I persist in my view that neither negative reviews nor lack of box office receipts do anything to refute the notion that one can glean truth from fiction.

Tom replied: There are much better places to search for truth. This is the point. Why look in the gutter for truth? I suggest that you use better sources.

Pay attention: The “truth” about the health movement will not be found in a fictional work that mocks and slanders it. If this point seems wrong to you, so be it. Persist in embracing myths all you want, but you are wasting your time.

Bruce said: Both Jesus and EGW were roundly panned by their critics and yet you persist in citing their words, ad nauseum.

Tom said: It is obvious you are hostile towards the Christian Faith, like so many former SDA’s. Not only do you think Ellen White is a bad person, it seems, so too, Jesus Christ himself.

Furthermore, I have no idea why you would compare Jesus to some two-bit, 20th century, non-religious, fictional writer. Very strange.

Bruce said: Further, I find much of your "refutation" of my hypothesis to be little more than ad homonym attack on me--based on your "Guilt by association" labeling of me as angry ex-SDA and that it is your argument which is of little or no value.

Tom said: Wrong. I gave you the facts. If you don’t like them, feel free to make up whatever myths you want. This is what most people do.

It is apparent that you are not here to ask and learn, but to throw stones and cause trouble. You have your own agenda, even as you think you have all the answers.

Sorry, I am not impressed with your bad attitude and worthless sources.

If you don’ t want real answers, don’t ask any questions. Better yet, start your own website and instruct everyone about your own special version of SDA history, which is based on absurd assumptions and silly myths. But don’t pretend you didn’t get a real answer. That is not true.

Bruce said: Moreover, I'd suggest that your allegation that I'm angry is a projection of your own emotional state, which you've displaced onto me.

Tom said: Over the years I have spoken with many former SDA’s such as yourself. So you are not fooling me in the slightest. After all, we went to the same schools and lived in the same cultic world of confusion and false doctrine, where guilt was the featured motivator and myths passed for facts. Growing up in such cultic error has profoundly negative effects on childern, giving many of them bad attitudes for life, such as yourself.

You need to understand that 1) all religion goes bad, and 2) most of what we were taught as SDA’s was not correct or true. But guess what? Every denomination was also full of doctrinal error.

Rather than harbor anger or resentment against the SDA’s, (which is justified), it is better to find out what really happened and why, removing all that is false. Better yet, the best thing to do is find the true Gospel, understanding the teachings of Jesus for Eternal Life.

Bruce said: Did I say EGW wanted the buildings in Battle Creek burned to the ground?

Tom said: Your strange theory that Ellen White’s followers may have burned down the SDA’s institutions in Battle Creek is groundless and counter-intuitive to the facts. Period.

Bruce said: But I don't think even you, who seem hell-bent on vindicating her for whatever reason, would say that she was sad to see them go and that it's possible that she--or one of her misguided scyophants--may have had some part in their destruction.

Tom said: Wrong. Ellen White’s husband, James White built these institutions. The last thing Ellen White wanted was to see is her husband’s life work go up in flames. So you are very wrong to think that Ellen White was glad to see such destruction. Such a view is ludicrous.

Listen to Ellen White comment on how she felt about this fire. She is not glad whatsoever. It was a tragedy of epic proportions, because it also signaled the end of the Battle Creek Empire for the SDA’s. Their inability to resolve the 1888 debates, resulted in this great disaster, which still haunts the church today.

"When this news [about the destruction of the Review by fire] came," she said, "I felt no surprise, and I had no words to speak. What I have had to say from time to time in warnings has had no effect except to harden those who heard, and now I can only say: I am sorry, so very sorry, that it was necessary for this stroke to come. Light has been given. If it were acted upon, further light would not be needed.

Her famous statement in 1902 summarizes her viewpoint of this episode quite succinctly: "I have been instructed," she wrote, "that the terrible experience at the Minneapolis conference is one of the saddest chapters in the history of the believers in present truth [25]."

Note that Ellen White said: The “Saddest chapter.” NOT, the “Gladest chapter.”

Bruce said: Absurd? Perhaps. But then again how many times has this been the only explanation for any number of seemingly inexplicable behaviors or enterprises?

Tom said: There is no “perhaps” about it. Your theory is “absurd.” It does not fit with the facts, only with your anger and revenge against the Adventists. However, such misguided emotions are not the same as historical facts, just excuses to embrace tall tales of myth and babble.

Bruce said: I also see no truth in your insinuation that being an ex-SDA necessarily implies that one must also be angry, as I assure you I am not; I may find the denomination deluded in the extreme and that they have totally misconstrued god's word and how to use it in their daily lives or what part that word should have in raising their children but at my age it doesn't anger or scare me I only find their situation absurd and amusing.

Tom said: Like I say, I have communicated with hundreds and hundreds of former SDA’s. Many of them have some very negative, incorrect, and unhealthy views about Ellen White and Adventism. (Thanks of course to the White Estate.) You seem to fit in this category.

Bruce said: Lastly, I am unswayed in my assertion that reform is impossible with churches as the cake cannot be re- or unbaked, and as is proven by the fact that Jesus didn't Reform Judaism any more than Protestantism reformed the Catholic Church, both split from the old and started something new.

Tom replied: First off, the church is not “something” new. Rather, the New Covenant is reformed and updated Judaism. This was always the point of the Old Covenant; it would prepare the way for the New Covenant Gospel, which is 100% Semitic. Thus the OC was reformed into the NC church.

Secondly, the Reformation was also another great reform period, thus Luther and others made some much needed changes and improvements. A portion of the church was updated from an Old Covenant view of theology to a New Covenant view that featured the Gospel instead of the law. Proving that reform and forward progress is valid and necessary.

So you can pretend you know what you are talking about, but you don’t. You are wrong on many points.

Bruce said: Further, based on the latest internal struggles I see in Adventism I submit that real progress will only come in the lives of those who make the decision to leave it.

Tom said: I agree that forward progress in the Advent Movement can only take place after people leave it. I do not deny that repentance of many false doctrines needs to take place within Adventism before they can even comprehend Gospel Reform.

But then what? Millions have left Adventism, and to what end? None have found pure Gospel, much less credible eschatology or the true Gospel Sabbath that Christ teaches. There is great confusion and error in every denomination. The SDA’s are not the only ones to need repentance and Gospel Reform.

Bruce said: Thanks again, if for nothing other than the comedic relief you've provided,

Tom replied: I don’t think the demise of the Advent Movement, or the physiological damage that the Adventists have caused to millions of people, like yourself, is a laughing matter. Neither is the Gospel, or the search for Eternal life by those who realize they are heading to the grave.

I hope that you can somehow find a way to rise above your dysfunctional cultic upbringing, and discover the amazing teachings of Christ. What he teaches about salvation, eschatology, and even the Sabbath is what matters most, for we are all judgment bound sinners, who must one day give an account of our lives and of our faith to Christ.

Rom. 14:10 For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris, for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 10-18-14 11:17 am

Previously Unknown Photo of Ellen White Found

The candid picture from 1905 provides a rare glimpse into the Adventist pioneer’s everyday life.

Review Posted October 8, 2014

A previously unknown photograph of Adventist Church co-founder Ellen G. White has surfaced among the aging documents of an Adventist physician who died in California in 1966.

The 1905 photo — which shows White walking outdoors with her son William and his wife, May — is the first new picture of White to turn up in decades, and its discovery is especially thrilling for White scholars because it provides a rare glimpse into her everyday life.

“I’ve never seen her in this way before,” said James R. Nix, director of the Ellen G. White Estate, a church institution that oversees White’s writings.

“This particular photo is significant because it is candid,” Nix said Wednesday. “You feel like you could step up to her and say, ‘It’s nice to see you.’”

Only about 50 photos of White are known to exist, and most of them were taken in a studio or other formal setting.

In the 1905 photo, White, 77, is seen walking near a pitched tent as she apparently attends the General Conference session in Takoma Park, Maryland, in May 1905…

See also:

Ellen White
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ite-13.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm

Fraud & Cover-up in the White Estate

There is obviously no comparison between the 1979 discovery of thousands of Ellen White letters and manuscripts from the 1880’s and 1890’s versus a single photo from 1905 discovered a few weeks ago. The first has not been acknowledged, much less given any publicity by the Denomination, while the latter is treated like the discovery of the century.

The White Estate is playing games, and so too the Review. This is why so many have left the church. There is too much double-talk about Ellen White. So let’s forget this diversionary excitement about a photograph of Ellen White and her son and get back to the real issues that are being suppressed by the leaders.

Let everyone understand: The fact Ellen White wore a scarf in 1905 is irrelevant. However, the fact that the White Estate has been hiding and misrepresenting Ellen White’s theological views is very relevant. THIS is the discovery that needs to be discussed and made public.

There is no concern, much less debate about what Ellen White looked like, or how she dressed or what kind of eyeglasses she wore. No. No. No. The issues are about theology, doctrine, and church history. What happened in 1888? Why did the Battle Creek Empire collapse 14 years after 1888?

And what about last day events? What would Ellen White say to us in the 21st century? Would she talk about fashion, as the White Estate pretends? Or would she want to address the theological chaos and corruption that has overtaken the SDA church?

It is time for the Adventist Community to meet the genuine Ellen White in the 1905 picture. The real person with the scarf, not the fabrication that the White Estate has crafted and indoctrinated everyone to believe.

Today, we can know for certain what Ellen White believed and taught about any topic, including the theological details of the 1888 debate, - which are very different from what the White Estate has claimed all these years. All this information has always been in the White Estate, and it is still there. But Arthur White did not like the real Ellen White, so he made up a new one that pleased him, even as he claimed 1888 was a great “victory” for the church.

There is no excuse for the White Estate not to know the facts. But they have been so busy hiding facts, - that they don’t know what they are anymore. The Ellen White of the White Estate is not the one in the 1905 photo. Their version of Ellen White never existed. She is a fraud of their own creation.

Let everyone understand: the Adventist Community has been knowingly deceived and misled about Ellen White as well as the fundamentals of the Three Angels Messages by the White Estate and the Review. And this fraud goes on to this very day.

It is time for the White Estate to stop ignoring the real issues, and confess the great publishing fraud of Arthur White. The facts are known. Stonewalling is not a defense, only a tiresome indicator of guilt. The White Estate is a criminal enterprise. They are poison for the Advent Movement. They must be cleaned up and reformed, with or without a court order.

Willie White Censored

Although the White Estate is guilty of manipulating and censoring Ellen White, they did the same to many others as well. To underscore the point about fraud in the White Estate; notice Willie White in the photo. He was Ellen White’s oldest son and her personal manager in charge of all her writings and the original White Estate. As such, he went to the 1888 General Conference with his mother. There, he made careful notes of Waggoner’s infamous Righteousness By Faith sermons. These rare, handwritten notes were always part of the original White Estate collection.

However, once the Denomination took control of the White Estate in 1937, they hid this important document, as well as all the documents relating to 1888. The church even denied such a document existed; over and over they would make this point. But it was all a lie.

Froom also claimed to have examined the evidence in the White Estate about 1888 and concluded that no such notes of Waggoner’s sermons existed. This blatant falsehood allowed him to fabricate doctrinal issues (in Movement of Destiny) and insert more myth and misdirection about 1888 into the modern debate. This fraudulent work led to the debacle of Glacier View. And the Denomination has self-destructed ever since.

Let everyone understand: The White Estate has been hiding, and is still hiding, the details about 1888. Why? Because to tell the truth is to admit that they were manipulating and fabricating church history and doctrine.

In other words, the leaders do not want the members to know that Ellen White does NOT support either the IJ or tithe as the church is dishonestly taught all these years, much less Traditional Adventism. The White Estate has misled millions, for which they must repent and correct the record.

White Estate Must Repent & Reform

Today, the White Estate is trapped. They don’t want to promote Arthur White’s legalistic fraud anymore, but they also don’t want to admit they are guilty of publishing fraud, or that they were wrong about Glacier View. So for the sake of their pride and to hide their guilt, they dare not explain the meaning of the legitimate discoveries they have been suppressing.

Now, all they can do is stonewall reform, and gush over the fashion sense of Ellen White in 1905, as the church self-destructs in confusion and myth.

The White Estate is a criminal enterprise; it is not an honest or open institution that has either Ellen White’s or the Advent Movement’s best interest at heart. If the church leaders continue to cover-up the great crimes of Arthur White and REFUSE to correct the record, they will face legal action to force the issue. They have been warned before and now the warning is about to become legal action.

Had the White Estate not hidden thousands of documents, and just told the truth about Ellen White and the great 1888 debate, the modern history of the SDA’s would have been much different and improved. There would have been no Glacier View or schism in the church. Until the White Estate confesses what they have done AND corrects the record, the SDA’s will continue to self-destruct.

The White Estate has not been honest with Ellen White’s writings or views and the church is paying a horrible and well-deserved price.

The White Estate must be cleaned up and reformed if the SDA church is going to survive and go forward. They are the source for much of the legalism and doctrinal confusion that has overtaken the Denomination.

The great fraud of Arthur White is not going to stand and neither is Glacier View. The genuine Ellen White of history must be allowed to speak freely to the Adventist Community. She deserves to be heard, as she has much to say.

Shame on the White Estate for censoring and manipulating Ellen White and church history! It is time to shine a bright "light" on the White Estate so that everyone can see their dirty "secrets" that have been hidden in the basement of the General Conference all these years. But nothing can remain hidden forever. What the White Estate has done is obvious and "evident." They have been caught for all to see. Consaquently, they must 1) confess, 2) repent and 3) correct the record.

Luke 8:16 “Now no one after lighting a lamp covers it over with a container, or puts it under a bed; but he puts it on a lampstand, so that those who come in may see the light.

Luke 8:17 “For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.

Luke 8:18 “So take care how you listen; for whoever has, to him more shall be given; and whoever does not have, even what he thinks he has shall be taken away from him.”

Tom Norris for Adventist Reform / New Covenant Adventism

P. S. I almost forgot; what a lovely scarf Ellen White wore in 1905!

http://www.allexperts.com/ep/2318-70484 … Norris.htm

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=11

tom_norris · 10-31-14 12:05 pm

Question for Tom Norris:

We live in a religious world of self-proclaimed prophets. It isn’t even good enough just to be a prophet anymore. We have some who opt even higher for the lofty title of Apostle.

In light of the age-old problem of self-proclamation, can it be said that Ellen G White was a false prophet?

Did she proclaim herself as such?

Did she use this title for her own ends and 'profit' from this perception? (Profit in the sense of taking advantage.)

Was she even a prophet in any sense of the word?

What is correct title we should assign to this esteemed leader of Adventism?

Marvin, from Florida

----------------------------------------------------

Tom Norris responds:

There has been much published about Ellen White, most of it mythical and embellished, taken out of historical context and manipulated by the White Estate. I have had meetings with the late Arthur White about this subject, even as I was allowed to research in the White Estate vault for a number of months. I know the facts.

Most everyone is very confused about Ellen White, including the SDA's, they are the most confused and understand her the least. But this begs the question; why is everyone so confused and angry with Ellen White? And why are there so many different views of her life and teachings?

Here is the problem; the White Estate has done a horrible job representing Ellen White. They have misrepresented her views, writings, and counsel, even as they have rejected the Fundamentals of Adventism, which Ellen White endorsed. This is why the SDA church is self-destructing in chaos and doctrinal confusion.

Millions of people have lost faith in Adventism because of how the White Estate has portrayed Ellen White and her alleged view of doctrine and theology. She was never a “prophet” as the White Estate claimed, nor did she have any doctrinal authority when she was alive.

The public has been greatly deceived by the White Estate about Ellen White's role, mission, and views, and it is time for the facts to emerge and for the record to be corrected.

See;

Is Ellen White A True Prophet?
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm

How do we correctly define Ellen White today? Where does she fit within the history and theology of the church? How did her contemporaries in the church view her? And how did she view herself? The answers to these questions will show that the White Estates has most everything wrong.

Ellen White's role within the Church

Ellen White did not view herself like a "prophet," as understood and promoted by the White Estate. Nor did she claim any doctrinal authority, or infallibility, much less that her writings were like scripture. She emphatically taught that all doctrine must be based only on the Bible, even as she claimed that all doctrine must be honestly examined and tested by the scriptures.

This popular view that Ellen White is like an OT prophet is not supported by the Pioneers or Ellen White. Nor did she claim to be like the Mormon Prophet Joseph Smith or the Prophetess Ann Lee of the Shakers.

So what kind of prophet is Ellen White? Where does Ellen she fit within the Gospel Story? Where in the Bible can we substantiate her role?

Was she an Old Testament Prophet, like the SDA's teach? Or is she more like a NT Apostle that writes scripture as many Traditional minded SDA's also teach?

The answer is neither.

She did not live in the OT era, so she can never be an OT prophet. Nor was she a 1st century, Jewish apostle like Peter, James, or even Paul.

Ellen White can only be categorized as a 19th century New Covenant believer that had Spiritual Gifts as articulated by Paul in Corinthians.

1Cor. 12:28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues.

1Cor. 12:29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they?

1Cor. 12:30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they?

1Cor. 12:31 But earnestly desire the greater gifts.
And I show you a still more excellent way.

1Cor. 13:1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.

1Cor. 13:2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

The fact of the matter is that Ellen White had some legitimate spiritual gifts for the edification of the church, but she did not have any doctrinal authority. Why? Because she was not an OT Prophet or a NT Apostle. She was a New Covenant, Protestant Christian that had some spiritual gifts. This is where she fits within the Christian church, and this is how the Pioneers correctly viewed her.

In fact, the Pioneers would not allow Ellen White's "gift" to be used for doctrinal purposes, nor did they view her writings like scripture. But this has obviously changed for the modern SDA.

Listen to the Pioneers speak to this point:

"Every Christian is therefore duty bound to take the Bible as a perfect rule of faith and duty. He should pray fervently to be aided by the Holy Spirit in searching the Scriptures for the whole truth, and for his whole duty. He is not at liberty to turn from them to learn his duty through any of the gifts. We say the very moment he does, he places the gifts in a wrong place, and takes an extremely dangerous position." James White, Review & Herald, October 3, 1854

They (SDA's) believe in the perpetuity of spiritual gifts. They believe that the spirit of prophecy has rested upon Mrs. White, and that she is called to do a special work at this time, among this people. They do not, however, make belief in this work a test of fellowship. James White, Review and Herald, June 13, 1871

Uriah Smith, the longtime Editor of the Review was also in agreement with the Protestant position of the Battle Creek SDA's. Listen to him make the same point as James White:

The Protestant principle of the Bible and the Bible alone, is of itself good and true; and we stand upon it as firmly as anyone can; but when reiterated in connection with outspoken denunciations of the visions, it has specious appearance for evil. So used, it contains a covert insinuation, most effectually calculated to warp the judgment of the unguarded, that to believe the visions is to leave the Bible, and to cling to the Bible, is to discard the visions. . . . When we claim to stand on the Bible and the Bible alone, we bind ourselves to receive, unequivocally and fully, all that the Bible teaches. Uriah Smith, Editor, Review and Herald, Jan. 13, 1863

Ellen White was also in full agreement with her husband and Uriah Smith. She never claimed to have doctrinal authority as the SDA church teaches today, or that she was a "prophet" like the White Estate also claims. She was a Protestant, and therefore she understood and upheld the Bible as the only rule of faith and doctrine.

Listen to Ellen White on this point:

When God's Word is studied, comprehended, and obeyed, a bright light will be reflected to the world; new truths, received and acted upon, will bind us in strong bonds to Jesus. The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this Holy Word will be in harmony.

Our own views and ideas must not control our efforts. Man is fallible, but God's Word is infallible. Instead of wrangling with one another, let men exalt the Lord. Let us meet all opposition, as did our Master, saying, It is written. Let us lift up the banner on which is inscribed; The Bible our rule of faith and discipline. Ellen White, Review and Herald, Dec. 15, 1885.

However, after Ellen White died in the early 20th century, things changed. She was not only given posthumous doctrinal authority by the SDA church, but her writings competed with the Bible in Sermons, Sabbath School Lessons, Books, and Review articles.

In the hands of the incompetent and dishonest White Estate, Ellen White became a legend, having apostolic authority combined with an Old Testament prophetic role. She was promoted in a manner that she would never approve as the White Estate flooded the church with her manipulated writings that were promoted like scripture.

Here was the original version of the "Clear Word" Bible for SDA's. Here was great error that turned Ellen White into a prophet like Joseph Smith, even as it pushed the 20th century SDA's into schism that is ongoing to this very day. Thus for generations, from every pulpit in the SDA community, the words of Ellen White rained down in the place of scripture, as if they were scripture.

For many modern SDA’s, Ellen White’s writings had the same inspiration and authority as all the other "Prophets" in the Bible. This is what the White Estate had indoctrinated all to believe when it was not true. Ellen White never claimed to be a “prophet” as the White Estate teaches.

The White Estate packaged and promoted Ellen White as if she were a modern day Bible Prophet. Thus her writings became like the Bible, if not greater for SDA's, because they were read far more often than the Word. As a result the White Estate became more powerful, controlling every facet of the church and recklessly attacking those that would not agree to view her writings as the White Estate demanded.

This was all wrong. Ellen White would refute the White Estate's view of her role and her theology. To underscore this point, just consider one surprising fact about Ellen White's writings:

In Battle Creek, when Ellen White was alive, the SDA's were not allowed to read her writings from the pulpit. The Sabbath sermon would be full of scripture, and so too their works on theology, including the Sabbath school lessons. But no Ellen White. Why? Because neither Ellen White nor the Pioneers wanted to give the impression that she had any doctrinal authority, or that her writings were in any way equal to the scriptures.

In the 19th century, within the SDA Community, Ellen White was not viewed like the infamous Joseph Smith or any of the many others that pranced around claiming to be Prophets of God. Ellen White was a Protestant, and so too was the Advent Movement. Thus she knew her place and her role, and so too did James White and the others.

Listen to Ellen White speak about the basis of doctrine. She does not support the White Estates view that she has doctrinal authority.

But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. (The Great Controversy, p. 595)

The words of the Bible, and the Bible alone, should be heard from the pulpit. (Prophets and Kings, p. 626).

In fact, there were "many" in her day that wanted to use Ellen White's writings in their sermons, even as there was some that viewed her as if she had doctrinal authority like a Bible Prophet. But she would not allow it.

Many from among our own people are writing to me, asking with earnest determination the privilege of using my writings to give force to certain subjects that they wish to present to the people in such a way as to leave a deep impression upon them. It is true that there is a reason why some of their matters should be presented; but I would not venture to give my approval in using the Testimonies in this way, or to sanction the placing of matter, which is good in itself in the way which they propose. Ellen White to Brother Littlejohn, Aug. 3, 1894

Don't you quote Sister White. I don't want you ever to quote Sister White until you get your vantage ground where you know where you are. Quote the Bible. Talk the Bible. It is full of meat, full of fatness. Carry it right out in your life, and you will know more Bible than you know now. Spaulding-Magan Collection, p. 174

The testimonies of Sister White should not be carried to the front. God's Word is the unerring standard. The Testimonies are not to take the place of the Word.... Let all prove the positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim as truth from the revealed Word of God. Evangelism, p. 256

See also:

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … e-true.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ipture.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … rophet.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … papers.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ite-10.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … hite-3.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ite-13.htm

During the 20th century, the White Estate made false and heretical claims for Ellen White, which they still do to this very day. They deceived the church into thinking that Ellen White did have doctrinal authority and that her writings were essentially the same as scripture. Not only was this very wrong and dishonest, they were also hiding her real views about the Gospel and eschatology, as well as tithe,hermeneutics, and church history.

This outrageous behavior should not be tolerated by the Adventist Community or the public. This fraud within the White Estate must be addressed and corrected. The Advent Movement should not be held hostage to the myths of the White Estate. This is an absurd proposition. Ellen White has much to say to the modern SDA church, but the White Estate will not allow it. They refuse to tell the truth about Ellen White and her views, nor will they repent for what they have done.

Just think about what has taken place in the SDA church? While the White Estate elevated some carefully selected writings of Ellen Whites to the level of scripture, they were hiding thousands of her most mature and theologically rich documents that they did not like or appreciate. The White Estate is the problem. They made Ellen White into something much more than she ever claimed, even as they hid and manipulated her true positions in order to do so. This is criminal behavior that will not stand.

The fact that the White Estate has created an army of zealots to promote their propaganda is beside the point. Traditional Adventism is based on a massive fraud in the White Estate about Ellen White. Ellen White was not the kind of "prophet" that had doctrinal authority or that wrote scripture. Nor did she ever make such claims.

The White Estate needs to confess what they have done and correct the record. They need to clear up their many myths and errors and stop manipulating Ellen White to say what she does not believe. It is time for the real Ellen White of history to speak freely to the Advent people. They will be shocked at her real views, which do not support Traditional Adventism; much less what took place at Glacier View.

I look forward to the day when the record will be officially corrected and the genuine Ellen White of history will be better understood and appreciated by all.

For more information see:

Ellen White Discussion
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

I hope this helps.

Tom Norris for All Experts.com & Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 12-06-14 2:09 pm

The Review has proudly announced that the Smithsonian Magazine has selected Ellen White as one of the 100 Most Influential Americans.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsoni … 41/?no-ist

What does this mean? Is this good news or bad? After all, this list of 100 is full of Outlaws, hedonistic Pop Icons, Religious cult leaders, and hardcore Capitalists. Thus the influence generated by many on this list is for great evil, which is why Charles Mason and Lee Harvey Oswald are also listed, along with Jesse James, John Wilkes Booth, and Al Capone, just to name a few.

While Ellen White may or may not deserve to be on this list, with whom should she be compared? And how would she want her life’s work to be viewed by the public? More importantly, what does the Adventist Community think of her today? Do they view her as a positive or negative influence?

Before we address these questions, let’s see what the Review and White Estate have to say. To whom do they compare her?

The Review wrote:

A leading scholar on Ellen G. White welcomed a decision by Smithsonian magazine to name the cofounder of the Seventh-day Adventist Church as one of the 100 most significant Americans of all times. The magazine places White in a group that includes the likes of Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., and Helen Keller in its Spring 2015 issue. The individuals were chosen with the use of an algorithm that measures data taken from Wikipedia pages and Google book scans. “It is good to see an institution of Smithsonian’s caliber giving proper acknowledgement to Ellen White,” said William Fagal, associate director of the Ellen G. White Estate, a depository of White's writings.

http://www.adventistreview.org/church-n … -americans

Let everyone understand, when it comes to Ellen White, the Adventists have never been honest. The White Estate has foisted a massive fraud about her life and her beliefs on the public and the Denomination, and it is getting tiresome. Ellen White would not approve.

It is obvious that the Denomination’s leaders are still trying to project their fabricated views of Ellen White into this Smithsonian article by making false associations that were not made by the author, and not warranted by the facts of history.

Listen to the Review’s misdirection about Ellen White as they claim she has been favorably compared to “Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King Jr., and Helen Keller.”

This too is false.

No such comparison was ever made in this article, nor would it be warranted whatsoever. Ellen White is a Religious Figure. SHE MUST BE COMPARED TO THOSE IN HER CATEGORY. This is exactly what this Smithsonian article did, but not the Review. They tried to obscure the fact that Ellen White has been placed in the same company as a number of horrible cultic leaders. Then they tried to force an unwarranted comparison to some great and positive people. Such misdirection and propaganda is typical of of how the church treats (abuses) Ellen White.

SDA’s Dishonest About Ellen White

The SDA’s today are starved for recognition and good news about Ellen White. This is because the vast majority in the Adventist Community has turned their back on the White Estate’s version of Ellen White, along with the doctrine of the IJ, which the church claims she supports as a pillar in the 1st Angels Message. (This was never true.)

Rather than tell the truth about what Ellen White really believed about the IJ and other doctrines, they want everyone to know that she was a great woman and so too the church she helped found. End of story. Beleive what we tell you about her. Thus the church continues to promote a manipulated, embellished, and false view of Ellen White, much like how the Mormons hide the facts of their perverted leaders, try to make them look respectable and true.

The SDA’s have never told the truth about Ellen White’s life, and they have no plans to correct this massive fraud in the White Estate. They are once again being very dishonest to pretend that there is any comparison or association between Ellen White and Lincoln, King, or Keller. There was none whatsoever. So why did they make such a false association?

The Smithsonian correctly placed Ellen White in the Category of Religious Figures, - not in the category for Women, (Keller) or Presidents, (Lincoln) or Rebels (King). It is obvious that the Review was trying to make the point that she was a positive figure, and thus they have mischaracterized the article and the facts about Ellen White. Nothing new here.

AToday

AToday also covered this story. They seemed more honest about the facts. Except they too have repeated this myth from the White Estate that claims Ellen White was the “most important of the co-founders.”

This was never true, and this is not what the article said. Anyone familiar with the history of Battle Creek knows that James White was by far, the most important and influential founder, even as he was Ellen Whites’s husband and publisher. Ellen White, who never held any church office, would be unknown today, if not for her genius husband who built the Battle Creek Empire.

In fact, after President James White died in 1881, Ellen White had no power or control over church matters. She went to Europe to research for her books, and did not come back until shortly before the 1888 debacle. By 1891, Ellen White was sent to Austrialia by the leaders who did not like her support of Waggoner's new theology. Waggoner was also exiled to England. By the time Ellen White returned a decade later, she was an old woman, with no official power or control. Battle Creek was in flames, as she predicted, because of the failure to embrace Waggoner's new 1888 theology. The facts are clear that James White was the mastermind behind the remarkable growth of the 19th century SDA's. Ellen White's role has been purposefully embellished, exaggerated, and manipulated by the White Estate so they could sell more books and control the 20th century church through the use of her name. This is a crime. The White Estate is guilty of a massive publsihing fraud, which is ongoing today.

Ellen White Included in Smithsonian’s “100 Most Significant Americans”

By AT News Team, December 1, 2014: A special issue of a widely respect history journal has included Ellen G. White, the most important of the cofounders of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, among what it calls the “100 most significant Americans.” She is one of only 11 religious figures included on the list of whom just three are women…

The other two women included with White in the section on the most influential American religious figures are Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Christian Science religion, and Anne Hutchinson, who was a religious dissenter among the Puritans who founded Massachusetts. Hutchinson was an early advocate of a grace-oriented Christian faith and helped to establish the principle of religious liberty in America.

The eight men who round out the most significant American religious figures include Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, founders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints or Mormon religion; and Jonathan Edwards and Cotton Mather, the two most noted preachers in the Congregationalist movement that early on shaped much of American Protestant faith. Also included are William Penn, the Quaker leader who founded Pennsylvania on principles of religious freedom; Roger Williams, an early Baptist leader who also played a key role in establishing American principles of religious liberty; L. Ron Hubbard, founder of the quite recent Scientology religion; and Billy Graham, the key leader of the contemporary Evangelical movement in the U.S.

http://atoday.org/ellen-white-included- … onian.html

Ellen White in Context

Here is the correct Category for Ellen White; Religious Figures. She can only be compared to others in this SAME category.

Joseph Smith Jr.
William Penn
Brigham Young
Roger Williams
Anne Hutchinson
Jonathan Edwards
L. Ron Hubbard
Ellen G. White
Cotton Mather
Mary Baker Eddy
Billy Graham

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsoni … BroGtFt.99

Now that we have the correct category for Ellen White, we can see that she lives with some pretty dubious company. Joseph Smith, with his 40 wives tops the list. No doubt Ellen White would be horrified to be compared to this cultic Mormon leader.

In fact, almost 40% of this list are fanatical cult leaders; Smith, Young, Hubbard, and Eddy. Why are the SDA’s trying to hide this obvious association?

Answer: MILLIONS of people, including most SDA’s, and MILLIONS of former SDA’s, think Ellen White was a legalistic fraud; a cultic prophet, much like Smith or Eddy. Some even think she was a plagiarist. Only the most fanatic SDA’s believe that Ellen White has spiritual authority like the Bible Prophets. Thus it is clear that she is not viewed in a positive light, like Abraham Lincoln or Helen Keller, as the church would have everyone believe. MOST PEOPLE TODAY THINK ELLEN WHITE IS A FRAUD. But in fact, it is the White Estate that has created this fabricated person, which so many do not like.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … rophet.htm

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm

In fact, the reason why Ellen White made this list, is not because so many have a positive view of her, but because she is so controversial and hated by her critics. The SDA's have been at war over Ellen White for decades, and thus legions of websites and forums are full of debate about Ellen White. Thus it is the endless debate, controversy, and schism over her supposed teachings and status as a "Prophet" that explains her ranking. She made this list, not because her life’s work is seen as positive, but because of the non-stop debate over her life and beliefs.

Note: “Skiena and Ward would be the first to acknowledge that their method has limitations. Their concept of significance has less to do with achievement than with an individual’s strength as an Internet meme—how vividly he or she remains in our collective memory.”

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsoni … biHbkRW.99

Now we can see why the Review wanted everyone to think Ellen White has been compared to some very positive people in other categories. They don’t want to admit that she stands next to some of the worst cultic frauds in history. Nor do they want to understand that this article has not given Ellen White the “proper acknowledgment,” as the White Estate claims. She stands next to some awful religious leaders, and many think this is exactly where she belongs. Few think she is like Billy Graham, but legions think she is like Joseph Smith.

The Adventists bemoan such a dubious association and have worked hard to promote a false record of Ellen White that has been foisted on the church and the public by the White Estate. The real Ellen White is unknown to the public or to the Adventist Community, and this is the real tragedy. Ellen White has much to say, but the White Estate will not allow her to speak honestly because they would be condemned in the process.

At some point, it will become evident that the SDA’s have foisted a massive fraud about Ellen White on the public and the church. The White Estate is a criminal enterprise; they have fabricated the life story and beliefs of Ellen White when they have had all the facts to tell the truth. How sad.

One day this will change, and the real Ellen White of history will emerge for all to see. Until that day comes, when the White Estate confesses, (or is forced to confess) what they have done, and corrects the record, -the real Ellen White will remain hidden behind numerous myths and fabrications from the White Estate.

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 12-10-14 12:52 pm

Question:

Tom,

You seem to know a lot about the Seventh-day Adventists.

What church do you attend or belong to?

James, from Oregon
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer:

Tom Norris was born SDA, in Takoma Park, MD. I only went to SDA schools and even studied theology at CUC, now called Adventist University. I have been, and still remain, a member of the Capital Memorial SDA Church, - for 60 years. I have also been researching SDA history and theology for 40 years, which explains why I am so informed about the real issues.

Here is something that I have learned: if anyone wants to understand Adventism, they must first understand the history and views of Ellen White and her 19th century peers. To misunderstand Ellen White’s story, is to misunderstand Adventism. With this in mind, I went into the White Estate in search of the real Ellen White of history. To my surprise, I found her being held prisoner by Arthur White in the basement of the General Conference building.

In 1979, I was given special permission to enter the White Estate Vaults to research Ellen White’s writings about the 1888 debates. There I discovered a massive fraud, whereby thousands of rare, historic, documents had been hidden and suppressed by Arthur White. Why? So that the church could promote a fabricated and manipulated story of Ellen White and her views.

This stunning discovery of publishing fraud in the White Estate was quickly covered up by the church leaders and remains un-confessed and stonewalled to this very day. At some point, this crime must be exposed and the record corrected. This I intend to do, even if legal action is required.

I repeat: the published story of Ellen White is a fraud, and the leaders have known this fact for decades. Ellen White is not a fraud, but the White Estate’s version of her life and her beliefs have been horribly manipulated by Arthur White and others. (No wonder everyone is so confused about Ellen White?) To be blunt; the White Estate is a criminal enterprise. Period!

Hidden Documents in White Estate
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm

Now that I have gone public with this information, calling for honest reform in the White Estate, I am officially an outcast; no longer allowed to speak in the SDA media, which means that I am forbidden to post on the Review or Spectrum Forums, which are controlled by the church. This is how whistleblowers are treated by SDA’s; censored and silenced.

The modern SDA leaders do not want to hear about their wrongdoings, nor do they want the public to find out what they have done. They no longer care for truth, thus they have turned out to be very dishonest, even criminal. No one should trust anything that is published by the SDA Denomination; it is most likely to be worthless, self-serving propaganda and fabrication.

Here is some Profile info about Tom Norris:

Experience in the area

Tom Norris was raised as a Seventh-day Adventist in Takoma Park, Md. He attended SDA grade and High schools, moving on to study Adventist theology at Columbia Union College. He also spent significant time conducting independent research in the General Conference Archives and the Ellen G. White Estate. Over the years he has also interviewed a number of prominent Adventist scholars, theologians, and Pastors ranging from the late Arthur White to the exiled Dr. Desmond Ford. In addition, he has amassed a large private library, which includes numerous rare books and manuscripts about Adventist theology and history. He is presently the online editor of Adventist Reform, and can be found at Adventist for Tomorrow answering questions online about SDA theology and history as well as promoting Adventist Reform.

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=11

Education/Credentials

Tom Norris attended SDA grade and High schools, moving on to study Adventist theology at Columbia Union College. He also spent significant time conducting independent research in the General Conference Archives and the Ellen G. White Estate.

http://www.allexperts.com/ep/2318-70484 … Norris.htm

Today, the modern SDA’s are self-destructing in well-deserved confusion and chaos. Millions of former members have already left this Old Covenant denomination that can no longer tell the truth or grow. The endless debates about Ellen White and the Investigative Judgment have taken their toll. The Advent Movement, which was turned into a cult of Ellen White by Arthur White, it is near death.

Until the SDA’s repent for their massive fraud in the White Estate and better understand their doctrinal development, becoming honest about Ellen White and her writings, they are doomed.

Regardless, one way or another, this massive, ongoing fraud in the White Estate will not stand. The Advent Movement will not be bound by fraud; it must go forward without the many myths and fabrications from this self-destructing Denomination that has lost its’ way. Adventist Reform is inevitable, the sooner the better.

I hope this helps,

Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform

tom_norris · 01-24-15 5:06 pm

A response to Charles Scriven’s Spectrum’s article: What Shall We Do With Ellen White? Jan 6, 2015

http://spectrummagazine.org/article/201 … llen-white

*******************************************************

The Truth About Ellen White: by Tom Norris, Jan 24, 2015

Today, as the Advent Movement continues to self-destruct; many think Ellen White is the problem. Thus she is harshly criticized and condemned by legions of critics, both within and without the Denomination.

Typical Critics of Ellen White:

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/egw25.htm

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/rea/rea7.htm

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/white.htm

http://www.nonsda.org/egw/bible.html

http://www.bible.ca/7-WL-CH3-aint-so.htm

http://www.bible.ca/7-plagiarism.htm

http://www.ellenwhiteexposed.com/canright/egw16.htm

Some however, think Ellen White’s critics are making trouble in order to oppose Gospel truth. Such defenders of Ellen White often claim to have “studied the issues” even as they try to defend Traditional Adventism and dismiss the critics. But what are the issues, and what exactly have they studied in order to resolve the problems about Ellen White?

Typical Defenders of Ellen White:

http://www.ellenwhitedefend.com

http://www.faithdefenders.com/articles/ … white.html

http://www.ellenwhiteanswers.org/critics/dale-ratzlaff/

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/issues.asp

http://spiritofprophecydefend.com/bible.html

http://personal.southern.edu/~jslake/EG … 20Page.htm

http://omega77.tripod.com/AAAEXP.htm

http://www.ellenwhitedefend.com/Defense … ritics.pdf

Critics versus Apologists

As the battle over Ellen White rages on, which side is correct? Is Ellen White the reason why millions have left the church in the past 40 years? Is she a “false prophet,” and the reason why the modern SDA’s have lost their self-identity and continue to implode in doctrinal confusion and schism? And if so, “What shall we do with Ellen White?”

Ellen White is no stranger to controversy or criticism. Every so many years, serious complaints and doubts surfaced about her role and theology. This phenomenon took place in Battle Creek, and again after the SDA’s moved to Takoma Park, and even today, 100 years after Ellen White is gone.

Ellen White, either living or dead, has always had her critics and defenders. In the 21st century, both are legion. So the present debate, confusion, and criticism about Ellen White is nothing new for the Adventist Community. It is an ongoing problem that has never been fully or honestly addressed by the modern Adventists, much less by the critics or the apologists.

However, at some point, the real issues must be fully and honestly addressed. But when? Who is going to stand up and tell the “full truth” about Ellen White?

So far, no one in the church or its media empire wants to go near the real issues about Ellen White. And this includes Spectrum or Atoday. While these Journals pretend to call for the “full truth” about Ellen White, they have been censoring those who have the facts for many years. Such hypocrisy is mind-boggling.

When it comes to Ellen White, there is an epidemic of dishonesty and double-talk taking place within the Adventist Community. This is by design. The church leaders prefer confusion to the facts, which condemn them, even as they have turned stonewalling into an art form.

Here is the real problem; neither the critics nor the apologists are able to discern the “full truth” about Ellen White, because they don’t have the full story, much less a truthful one. While the White Estate is the proper source for the facts about Ellen White, they have not told the truth about Ellen White’s writings or her life. People only know what the White Estate has claimed the truth to be all these years. And their story has turned out to be manipulated and very false.

For those that want the facts, the search for the real Ellen White must start in the White Estate, which is the official source and database for what everyone knows about Ellen White. Here is where the “full truth” resides, even though it has not become public as yet.

Both Spectrum and Atoday should be ashamed of themselves for ignoring and censoring Tom Norris’s discovery of fraud in the White Estate. Adventism, whether liberal or conservative, has become not only very dysfunctional, but very dishonest and corrupt. The hierarchy will not allow serious journalism about Ellen White, much less honest reform in the White Estate.

There is no such thing as honest or independent journalism in the Adventist Community. Spectrum and Atoday are neither. They refuse to investigate or report about the discovery of fraud in the White Estate. So they are not really seeking the “full truth” about Ellen White as they pretend. They are manipulating the discussion for their own ends, even as they are part of the problem and part of the cover-up that has been going on in the White Estate for generations. This is why it keeps going on and on.

Let everyone understand that Tom Norris discovered a massive fraud about Ellen White inside the White Estate in 1979. The leaders knew all about this discovery, including the General Conference President. Consequently, the leaders faced a choice between hiding this massive discovery of wrongdoing from the Adventist Community and the public, OR protecting the White Estate.

The leaders made the wrong choice.

They choose to cover-up Arthur White’s fraud and let his false version of Ellen White stand as true, -when they knew it was not. Then they went forward to pretend that Dr. Ford was the problem, - when all along the real heretic was Arthur White, the most dishonest man in SDA history.

Glacier View, in 1980, could not have taken place without this massive fraud in the White Estate, which dishonestly supported many legalistic doctrines in the name of Ellen White. This is why thousands of Ellen White documents were kept hidden and covered-up so that a false trial of Dr. Ford could take place with the supposed approval of Ellen White. But it was all a charade, a hoax, and a scam. Ellen White’s true views supported Dr. Ford. A fact that the leaders do not want the Adventist Community to know.

Glacier View was the high water mark for Traditional Adventism, and the Denomination has been in free fall ever since. Enough is enough. It is time for the “full truth” about Ellen White and her views. And church history, to be made known to the naïve and abused Adventist Community.

Unless the dishonest, confusing, and divisive issues about Ellen White can be fully and honestly resolved, the modern SDA’s are ruined. Unless the SDA’s repent for their abuse of Ellen White’s writings, as well as Glacier View, they are only destined for cultic irrelevance and endless debate and division, --which is not what Ellen White would want.

In hindsight, we can see that the modern Advent Movement has been in shambles for many decades, especially since 1980. It is clear that for better or worse, the fate of Adventism will be determined by their understanding of Ellen White and her views. If the SDA’s continue to misunderstand, deny, and abuse her writings, they will continue to implode when they should be promoting cutting edge, Gospel eschatology and preparing the church for the 2nd Coming. This is why the fraud in the White Estate cannot stand.

20th Century Ellen White Debate

Today, Ellen White, and her writings, must be understood in their proper historical context. Any other method will fail to find the full truth. Fortunately, there is a long, clear, chain of evidence about her life’s work, writings, and views. Thus the facts, and only the facts, must define her and determine her views.

See:

Ellen White Forum Discussion
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

Ellen White False Prophet
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … rophet.htm

After the Battle Creek Empire self-destructed, at the turn of the 20th century, Takoma Park became the new church headquarters. Following Ellen White’s death in 1915, the church purchased all her writings and set up the Takoma Park White Estate in the late 1930’s. Here is where many legends and myths originated as the White Estate purposely suppressed Ellen White’s most theologically mature writings, and focused instead, on her earlier, pre-1888 views.

The White Estate essentially opted for Uriah Smith’s legalistic errors, claiming that Ellen White also agreed with such theology, when this was not true after 1888. Thus the Takoma Park apologists dishonestly promoted Smith’s theology as if Ellen White supported it, when she did not. She never reconciled with Smith, and in fact had him removed from the Review upon her return from exile in Australia.

Traditional, Takoma Park Adventism was built on the theology of Uriah Smith, not Ellen White. Her strong opposing views and harsh condemnation of Smith’s theology were knowingly hidden by the White Estate, and so too the fact that Uriah Smith and Ellen White became mortal theological enemies because of 1888. Ellen White would be livid with how badly the White Estate has promoted her theological views.

Let everyone understand: the White Estate has knowingly misunderstood and miss-communicated Ellen White’s true theological views to the Adventist Community. While they embellished her status and made her into a Bible prophet that she never was, they were also promoting Uriah Smith’s views in her name that they knew she did not believe or support. Which is why the White Estate was hiding so much of her writings.

Traditional Takoma Park Adventism, which features legalism and an obsession with the IJ, is not the creation of Ellen White, nor does she support such Glacier View endorsed error. Such is the “full truth” about Ellen White that few want to know.

By mid-century, the Adventist Community wanted to see more material from the secretive and paranoid White Estate. Consequently, two SDA missionaries complained that the White Estate was suppressing Ellen White’s writings, especially as they related to the infamous, but censored, 1888 debates. Thus Weiland and Short pressured the Denomination for more information about Ellen White, which was answered by LeRoy Froom in his epic tome Movement of Destiny.

Froom claimed that his official work on 1888 used all the resources from the White Estate, and thus he denied this idea that there were any hidden documents. But he was not telling the truth. Froom’s massive work turned out to be a fraud, and so too his claim that the White Estate was not suppressing documents. They were, and he knew it. The White Estate was a crime scene, even as Arthur White was incompetent and grossly dishonest.

In fact, the very 1888 documents that the White Estate had long denied existed, were always in their files, and so too the stunning details of this great Gospel debate between Ellen White and Uriah Smith that the church was hiding and manipulating. The fact of the matter is that the White Estate was suppressing a large amount of Ellen White’s documents, even as they denied they were doing any such thing.

No wonder the Adventist Community was, and still is, so confused about Ellen White? How could things make sense when there were thousands of documents being hidden for most of the 20th century? Here is the “full truth”: Generations of SDA’s have been indoctrinated to believe a fabricated version of Ellen White. Some like the fraud they have grown up with, but most do not. But guess what? The genuine Ellen White is unknown to the Adventist Community. At some point the real person must replace the fiction of the White Estate.

The White Estate has knowingly deceived the Adventist Community; manipulating both church history and doctrine. And they have never confessed, much less admitted that they are the source for all manner of false information about Ellen White and SDA history.

For those that are honestly seeking the “full truth” about Ellen White, here is some: the White Estate has never been a source for truthful or honest history, much less for journalistic ethics. They knowingly promote propaganda, myth, and fiction as if it were true, even as many today give them a pass, pretending they honestly represent Ellen White when they have not and do not.

Let all understand: this massive publishing fraud in the White Estate has been discovered and documented; it cannot be refuted or censored away. Nor will it stand. The White Estate is living on borrowed time. At some point legal action will be taken to force them to tell the “full truth,” because it is clear that they have no plans to confess.

Fraud in the White Estate

From the beginning of the Denomination’s ownership of the White Estate, the church strictly censored and limited the use of Ellen White’s writings. The leaders vowed to keep most of her large collection off limits to everyone until the “time was right” to tell the truth, which time, of course, never came. This was especially true for the large collection of 1888 documents that contained the unpleasant details of the debate between Uriah Smith and Ellen White.

During the last half of the 20th century, as the Righteousness by Faith debates heated up in the 1970’s, more and more of Ellen White’s writings would be made public by the White Estate through compilations and manuscript releases. But even so, things became even more confused and contradictory.

The more material released; the more conflicts appeared. It was obvious that something was very wrong in the White Estate. In fact, there was a dark secret waiting to be discovered inside the basement vaults, one that is destined to become the worst scandal in the history of the SDA’s.

Unknown to the public or to the Adventist Community, the White Estate was suppressing a very large collection of Ellen White materials that included the details of the infamous 1888 debate that destroyed the Battle Creek Empire. Even though the Denomination had published numerous books and articles about this topic, they were full of error, because the White Estate was hiding the real facts.

Let everyone understand, including the critics and the apologists: the White Estate is the source of a massive publishing fraud about Ellen White and church history that must be exposed and stopped. This outrageous fraud is a cancer that has been destroying the Advent Movement from within for decades.

It is time for all to hear the full truth about what is so wrong in the White Estate. And for strong and radical treatment, no matter the cost or how bad it makes the church leaders appear.

It is time for the “full truth” about Ellen White to become clear. And it starts with the White Estate confessing what they have done and correcting the record.

Here is the real truth about Ellen White. The White Estate is the problem, not Ellen White, who gave no one any permission to hide, much less manipulate her writings or put false words in her mouth. Shame on the White Estate.

What has taken place in the White Estate is a premeditated and massive publishing crime. One that is still ongoing today. Not only is this illegal and immoral, it is a fraud that the highest church leaders promote and protect, even to this very day. While some may think this is impossible; we are talking about real documents discovered in the White Estate and the Archives. These are irrefutable facts, not personal opinions or reckless charges of wrongdoing.

Moreover, no one should think that thousands of Ellen White documents went missing in the White Estate by accident. No, these documents were always in the White Estate files. Arthur White and others knew all about them and what they contained, - which is why they were hidden, and why the White Estate was such a very secretive and restricted place.

Ellen White’s 1888 writings were so explosive, (and they still are today), that President Danniels hid them from the church. He did not want a repeat of what took place in Battle Creek. Which meant that a substitute and sanitized story about Ellen White would have to be invented by the Takoma Park apologists. This is exactly what the White Estate did. They developed a dishonest version of church history, which has been a great source of confusion and debate to this very day.

This massive fraud about Ellen White is why the White Estate was set up like a fortress protecting State secrets. They were hiding the “full truth” about Ellen White even as they fabricated an alternative version, which became the basis for Traditional Adventism.

However, the “full truth” about Ellen White shows that she does not support Traditional Adventism, much less the doctrine of the IJ as taught and promoted by the White Estate and the Review. The real Ellen White is not like the dishonest version developed by Arthur White, nor were her views being correctly transmitted to the Adventist Community, as she desired. The White Estate has developed a manipulated and false view of Ellen White and it is time to stop this nonsense and correct the record.

Regardless of the details, the point is this: the White Estate was caught in 1979 foisting a massive scam about Ellen White on the Adventist Community; one that has never been explained, confessed, or repudiated by the White Estate to this very day. It must be exposed, stopped, and corrected. Period!

Although the Adventist Media refuses to cover this story, and the White Estate claims innocence, it is true nonetheless. In 1979 Tom Norris entered the White Estate (with special permission) and caught Arthur White conducting a massive fraud about Ellen White and church history. A fraud that has never been acknowledged or confessed, much less the record corrected

It was a shocking discovery that was covered-up by the church’s leaders and ignored by their media outlets, like the Review and Spectrum, which to this very day, still refuse to tell the truth about the massive fraud in the White Estate. (They refuse to allow Tom Norris access to their Forums).

See:

Hidden Documents, by Tom Norris
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm

Ellen White Discussion, by Tom Norris
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

Let everyone in the Adventist Community understand; this massive, ongoing fraud in the White Estate is the real source of today’s problems with modern Adventism. This premeditated and long running publishing scam must be addressed, investigated, and resolved. There is no other way.

We. Must. Tell. The. Full. Truth. And. Demand White Estate Reform. This is the only way to resolve the issues with Ellen White and save the Advent Movement.

Today, Ellen White, as defined and promoted by the White Estate is a fictional character, - a fraud, and so too is Traditional Adventism, which she is supposed to champion. Much of what passes for correct eschatology or Gospel doctrine is not endorsed by the genuine Ellen White of history.

Shame on the White Estate and those that support this corrupt institution. They have ruined Ellen White and almost destroyed the Advent Movement. A little more time and all will be lost.

Shame on those, liberal or conservative, that lie in the name of religion. Shame on those church leaders and the media that have conspired to cover-up fraud in the White Estate, -censoring those that have the full truth about Ellen White.

Let everyone understand: much of what has been taught about Ellen White in the 20th century (and even today) is false and purposefully misleading. This includes her views about the Law and the Gospel and the Investigative Judgment, as well as hermeneutics, church history, Health Reform, and even Tithe. The real Ellen White is not like Arthur White’s fabricated, legalistic screamer, and the sooner the Adventist Community understands this surprising and positive fact, - the better.

The scope of this ongoing fraud in the White Estate is almost beyond belief. How could such a scam be allowed to go on for so long? Even after an independent researcher discovered it in 1979, no action was taken by the leaders or the Review to inform the church, much less confess. Why? Because they knew it all along.

In spite of the White Estate’s claim of innocence, and the fact that they published the hidden documents, (in an unreadable format) 7 years after Glacier View, -this fraud about Ellen White is still going strong today. Thus the leaders continue to deny the facts, refusing to tell the truth or correct the record.

How could those in the Adventist Media allow such a massive fraud to continue for so long? How could any honest journalist not want to discover the “full truth” about Arthur and Ellen White? Especially since Tom Norris, an eyewitness to this discovery of fraud in the White Estate, has gone public with his discovery? All they had to do was open their eyes to see the facts.

Such a dereliction of duty by the Review, Spectrum, and AToday, proves there is no free or honest press within the Adventist Community. The Adventist Media is part of the problem. They would rather censor then investigate because they are not looking for truth, but to promote their own brand of SDA propaganda. It is obvious that loyalty to the hierarchy trumps seeking truth by those in the Adventist Media.

Shame on the Review and those, like Spectrum, that have given the White Estate a pass all these years, and even now. They are enablers and co-conspirators. White Estate is a criminal enterprise that has betrayed Ellen White and ruined the Advent Movement. They should not be protected by the church media or anyone.

The White Estate has deceived millions, even as they have made millions of dollars selling dishonest and fabricated books about Ellen White. Had they just told the truth about church history and Ellen White’s views, there would have been no Glacier View or Walter Rea. Nor would the church today be so divided and disoriented about the fundamentals that define the Advent Faith.

It is time to stop indulging and protecting the White Estate. They are great deceivers that have ruined the Advent Movement and misrepresented Ellen White. They are the real problem that must be addressed and resolved.

We. Must. Tell. The. Full. Truth. And Demand White Estate Reform.

Spectrum Calls for Truth About Ellen White

Today, as in the past, there are renewed calls for the church to tell the truth about Ellen White. Both Spectrum and AToday recently went on the record advocating that the “full truth” be told about Ellen White.

But what exactly are they talking about? The fraud in the White Estate? Hardly. If that were the case, they could have long ago told the truth and called for White Estate reform. So they are not really looking to find the facts or the “full truth” as they claim. Rather, they have long ago refused to hear the facts they pretend to seek. So they are just playing hierarchical games.

In fact, both Spectrum and AToday have refused to publish Tom Norris’ story about the discovery of fraud in the White Estate. Not only that, they have censored him from their Forums, all in a futile attempt to defend criminal wrongdoing in the White Estate. Such are the endless games that are being played about Ellen White. No wonder the SDA’s are failing? How can they not be?

So these new calls from Spectrum and AToday to tell the “full truth” about Ellen White are not serious whatsoever. They do not go to the root of the problem, nor do they offer any real solution, much less a truthful one to resolve all the confusion and debate swirling around Ellen White. It is just more double-talk from those that have made a living from Adventism all these years. It is more cover-up from those that support the corrupt SDA hierarchy.

No Free Press or Gospel Reform

Let everyone understand: the SDA’s are not organized as an honest Protestant denomination. They are a hierarchy, like the RCC. Moreover, they have no free or independent press, much less any desire to defend free speech or promote serious Gospel Reform. They would rather censor those that have discovered wrongdoing in the church then deal with the real issues that make the leaders feel uncomfortable. Such a corrupt hierarchical context explains why the discovery of thousands of Ellen White documents has been ignored by the Review, Spectrum, and AToday, even to this very day.

While many know that wrongdoing has taken place in the White Estate, few know the extent or the implications. Even to this very day, there has been a conspiracy in the church to pretend all is well. Not only is this very wrong on many levels, this is no way to find truth or solve the dysfunctional problems of the church. Shame on the Adventist Media; they are part of the problem when they should be promoting serious Reform in the White Estate.

Listen to Chuck Scrivin call for the “full truth” about Ellen White, followed by support from AToday. But why are these papers covering up the real problems in the White Estate, even as they call for the “full truth”? Why are they not calling for a real investigation about massive fraud in the White Estate?

How many thousands of hidden documents have to be discovered in the White Estate before it becomes newsworthy? How many facts do they need before it becomes apparent that the White Estate is a criminal enterprise that needs reform?

Let all understand, Adventism is corrupt. They no longer seek truth or even know how to define such a term. Thus the White Estate claims that their version of Ellen White is “absolutely reliable,” which really means, “We deny any wrongdoing or error.” But few believe them, because it is an impossible statement to support. The White Estate’s version of Ellen White is incoherent and contradictory, which is why there is so much endless debate about her and her views.

While Spectrum has correctly taken issue with the White Estate’s ludicrous claim of innocence, Scriven’s supposed quest for the “full truth” about Ellen White falls flat. What he seems to mean by that term is give us a liberal Ellen White that makes sense to us today. Then all will be well.

Thus Scriven’s call for the “full truth” about Ellen White has nothing to do with any investigation into wrongdoing by the White Estate. It is just more worthless double-talk by the leaders that have no intention of getting to the facts. They don’t want to know the details of wrongdoing in the White Estate, which is why there is never any clarity about Ellen White and her views.

What Shall We Do With Ellen White? by Charles Scriven

In October, the editors of the Adventist Review published, in the monthly edition called Adventist World, an important sermon that declared the “Spirit of Prophecy”—Ellen White’s prophetic ministry—to be “absolutely reliable.” This phrase is admirable for its clarity and does produce, as good prose will, a shock of recognition. But what we recognize is that the claim the phrase expresses is not true. Given all we’ve learned since the 1970s, it comes across as sheer denial, even as willful disregard of truth. And you cannot read "Ellen Harmon White: American Prophet," the recently-published Oxford University Press volume edited by Terrie Dopp Aamodt, the late Gary Land, and Ronald L. Numbers, without realizing all of this anew.

http://spectrummagazine.org/article/201 … llen-white
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s Tell the Truth about Ellen White: Charles Scriven Addresses a Critical Issue; by Ervin Taylor

Comments by Ervin Taylor, December 30, 2014: For various reasons, commenting on something published in Spectrum on the Adventist Today web site is something that is rarely seen. However, for the recent editorial by Charles Scriven in Spectrum’s Fall 2014 issue, an exception must be made. This is because Dr. Scriven has called for all of us to do something that will be very hard for some to carry out, but it must be done for the long-term intellectual and theological health of Adventism in the 21st century.

I suggest that anyone seriously concerned with the long-term viability and credibility of the institutional Adventist faith community in the modern world among educated individuals must carefully read and consider the points raised by Dr. Scriven. His message is a straightforward plea: “Tell the truth about the Adventist prophet.”

http://atoday.org/lets-tell-truth-ellen … issue.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Double-talk About Ellen White

While neither Scriven nor Taylor has spent any time researching in the White Estate vaults, they have no problem censoring those that have. Speaking as an eyewitness to the fraud in the White Estate, I find it ironic, and telling, that those who have turned a blind eye to the discovery of fraud in the White Estate, are now calling for the “full truth” about Ellen White. Such SDA double-talk is tiresome.

While Scrivin’s call for truth telling about Ellen White is long overdue and welcome, his analysis of the problem, as well as his proposed solutions are trite, diversionary, and worthless. Proving that he, like those at the Review and AToday, are content to give the White Estate a pass and look the other way. This is not only wrong; it makes the Adventist Media a co-conspirator with the White Estate’s crime of publishing fraud.

Here is Scrivin’s pathetic formula to address the problem about Ellen White:

1) A good first step would be to cut the overstatement…

2) Another step would be to grant, again repeatedly, the brokenness of many of the great heroes of our faith. David, the beloved composer of many Psalms, was at one point a murderous adulterer…

3) Still another step would be to tell the good stories and quote the best quotes with open, grateful hearts…

Tom Norris, by contrast, has no intention of ignoring the fraud in the White Estate, which is the basis for all that is confusing and wrong about Ellen White. Norris wants to deal with the real issues and expose the “full truth,” thus facilitating honest Reform in the White Estate. Here is Tom Norris’ proposal to make sure that the “full truth” about Ellen White finally becomes public.

1. White Estate Guilty of Publishing Fraud: The first step is to understand that the White Estate is the problem. They are guilty of promoting a massive and long running publishing fraud about Ellen White and her beliefs. They need to “cut out the fraud and tell the full truth about Ellen White.” Is this too hard to comprehend?

Let all understand; the White Estate is guilty of suppressing Ellen White’s writings and promoting publishing fraud, which is far more serious than making “overstatements.” Spectrum should be ashamed for trying to minimize and cover-up such disastrous wrong doing in the White Estate. “Overstatement” is not a crime, but hiding documents and publishing books that are knowingly false is a crime.

2. Cover-Up: As with many crimes, there is often a cover-up. The General Conference, the White Estate, the Review, and others, have conspired to cover-up the largest publishing fraud in modern church history, which is ongoing to this very day. In fact, after Tom Norris discovered this fraud in 1979, more cover-ups took place as Web sites would be shut down and Tom Norris, an eyewitness to this crime, was censored from one church Forum after another, including Spectrum. Why? Because the SDA leaders are dishonest, controlling, liars that will say anything to defend their legalistic fraud. No wonder millions have left?

AToday Censors Adventist Reform
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=224

Although the White Estate today claims they have told the truth, such a claim of innocence is standard procedure for all criminals, both before they are caught, and after. No one should be fooled by the White Estate’s claim of innocence. The White Estate is a crime scene, not an honest institution that represents Ellen White or the Advent Movement.

I am personally shocked and disappointed at the outrageous dishonesty of the SDA leaders. Hiding a crime will not solve anything. In fact, the longer this scam continues, the worse things become for the Denomination and the public’s perception of Ellen White and SDA theology. It is time to shine a bright light on the outrageous behavior of the White Estate and force them to “tell the full truth.” They have been caught for all to see. There is no way out except through confession and reform.

3. Legal Action: Now that the White Estate has been caught, they will be forced to confess, even if it requires a class action lawsuit. Then perhaps the SDA media will finally cover this story.
Regardless how the truth becomes public, I agree with Spectrum that it is time to tell the “full truth” about Ellen White and repudiate the false record that Arthur White has established in her name. It is time to correct the official record of Ellen White’s life and views, including telling the truth about her great theological fight with Uriah Smith. Justice and truth are waiting, and so too the Adventist Community, including Ellen White.

I repeat: this scandal about Ellen White, brought to us all by the White Estate, has gone on far too long. It is time to correct the record, including the false history of the 1888 debates, which have never been honestly reported by the church. The many myths and half-truths promoted all these years by the White Estate must be repudiated and corrected. Ellen White’s true views about doctrine, including the IJ, must trump the many myths that have been taught for generations in her name.

4. Repentance and Restitution are next. The modern SDA church has made millions of dollars selling fraudulent books about Ellen White. They must not only confess and repent, but they must set up a fund to compensate those that have been deceived by these books, and for those pushed out of the church over the issue of Ellen White. This fund can be supported by the revenues from truthful and corrective books about Ellen White, from a large and curious market. Ellen White 2.0 will be in great demand.

The Denomination must also repent for Glacier View, which was based on the fraud in the White Estate, even asking for the forgiveness of Dr. Ford, who was telling the truth about Ellen White and her views about the IJ and all else. The real Ellen White would have never supported the outcome of Glacier View, which is why the White Estate continued to hide the discovered documents that were found in 1979.

5. Re-organization: The White Estate was never supposed to be controlled by the church. Ellen White knew better. But they did not listen to her. Thus, the White Estate has always been under hierarchical control, which is why it became so dishonest, manipulative, and corrupt. This must change, the White Estate must have an honest, competent, and independent board, even as a long list of past board members are posthumously censored, starting with Arthur White. There is no excuse for what has taken place and it must never be allowed to be repeated.

One can easily see the difference between Scriven' and Norris' proposed solutions. Scriven 1) allows the cover-up to remain in place, 2) blames a “broken” Ellen White for the problems, and 3) encourages all to be thankful that there are some good quotes from Ellen White.

Such proposals are laughable.

By contrast, Norris demands the full confession of wrong doing in the White Estate, including a new, independent board, followed by the correction of the record and restitution for those that have been harmed. This formula is the only way to make sure the “full truth” about Ellen White is finally told.

Scriven’s proposals are worthless diversions, while Norris proposals will be part of a class action suit that will clean up the White Estate once and for all.

Let all understand that the White Estate is the problem; not Ellen White; this special institution has played the role of Judas, betraying both Ellen White and the Advent Cause. The SDA Media is also guilty of facilitating this farce, even to this very day. Shame on the SDA’s for what has happened. They have no one to blame but themselves.

Traditional Adventists Confused About Ellen White.

Even before 1888, Ellen White was concerned that the SDA’s were becoming like the 1st century Jews that refused to admit truth. After 1888 she was even more certain, fearing that the judgments of God would strike the rebellious denomination, destroying the Battle Creek Empire. Which is exactly what took place at the turn of the 20th century. This is why the SDA’s moved to Takoma Park.

However, the modern SDA’s have never been told the “full truth” about what happened in Battle Creek, and why the SDA Empire collapsed in anger and theological debate 14 years after 1888. In fact, the Denomination has published one false story after another about this period, none of them being fully complete or truthful.

Not only is this manipulation of church history wrong, the modern Adventists need to know the “full truth” about this great theological debate, of which Ellen White was fully involved and fully invested. This is the only way to understand the genuine Ellen White of history. And to place the Advent Movement back on the proper eschatological track.

For the Takoma Park leaders to have suppressed Ellen White’s detailed and prolific writings of the 1888 period is unconschanable and shameful. But for Ellen White’s views to still be suppressed in the 21st century, it is wicked, disastrous, and criminal. This fraud has done great damage; it has ruined Ellen White and the Advent Movement. What was meant to protect Ellen White and church doctrine has turned out to do the opposite.

Let everyone understand; only when the White Estates confesses what they have done, and tells the “full truth” about the 1888 period, will the Adventist Community understand the genuine Ellen White of history. Then the present theological crisis of self-identity and cultic error can be resolved, propelling the Advent Movement forward to a better understanding of Gospel eschatology.

While the liberal SDA’s are content to ignore 1888 and marginalize Ellen White, many conservatives are determined to defend her, blindly following the many myths and legends that have evolved over the years. But this crowd has also missed the point. Not the point about the importance of 1888, on this point they were correct, but on the details of theology. Their special version of 1888, which comes from Weiland, is no more truthful than Froom’s misdirection and embellishment.

Neither Weiland nor Short were allowed in the White Estate vaults. They never found the large collection of hidden documents, much less the real details of the 1888 debate as they have long claimed. Thus, their views were based on a lack of information, which is why they have turned out to be worthless and wrong.

Regardless if one is a critic or apologist for Ellen White, everyone needs to understand that the White Estate has hidden, manipulated, and suppressed thousands of Ellen White’s most important and mature documents. The Denomination has never told the “full truth” about 1888, Ellen White, or her views; which means everyone’s personal view of Ellen White has been contaminated by the White Estate's manipulations and fabrications. Thus it is the White Estate’s version of Ellen White that is fraudulent and false, not the real person, whose genuine views have been hidden from the church by the White Estate, even to this very day.

Listen to Kevin Paulson make the claim that it is the critics, not the apologists that have forced myths upon the church:

“In truth, the more I have studied and analyzed the charges against Ellen White's prophetic gift and writings, the more persuaded I have become that the true "myth-makers," so far as Ellen White is concerned, are her critics, not her apologists.”

Such a statement could not be further from the truth. Arthur White is the king of myth-makers. I have been in the White Estate and had meetings with Arthur White. He has not been honest about Ellen White or her views, much less about 1888, or the IJ, or much of anything. Only when the White Estate’s account of Ellen White’s life is honestly corrected, will the indoctrinated Adventist Community begin to understand the real Ellen White of history. The White Estate has a lot of work to do, and the sooner they start the better.

Conclusion

Today, it is clear that modern Adventism has failed for all to see. And it will continue to fail until the massive fraud in the White Estate is exposed, confessed, and the record of Ellen White’s life corrected by the facts.

Let everyone understand that the genuine Ellen White of history is very different from Arthur White’s prophetic fraud. Moreover, Ellen White has much to say to the Adventist Community, some of it very surprising. But few, whether liberal or conservative, want to hear her real voice.

It is long past time for the Adventist Community to hear Ellen White’s genuine views without the dishonest manipulation, suppression, and double-talk by the White Estate.

It is also time for the controlled and censorious Adventist Media to grow up and get a conscience; to make the search for truth top priority. Both Spectrum and AToday should use their journalistic resources to expose this massive and ongoing fraud in the White Estate, not cover it up. They need to demand a full investigation and confession of wrongdoing so that the record can be corrected. The church needs to stop ignoring and censoring this major story about wrongdoing in the White Estate and start seriously seeking the “full truth” about Ellen White.

Only when White Estate confesses what they have done and tells the full truth about Ellen WHite and 1888, can a constructive and intelligent discussion take place about Ellen White, and the purpose and fate of the Advent Movement.

Question: “What Shall We Do with Ellen White?”

Answer: “We. Must. Tell. The. Truth. And. Demand. White Estate Reform.

Is anyone listening?

Matt. 13:15 FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL,
WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,
AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES,
OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES,
HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.’

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform

http://www.allexperts.com/ep/2318-70484 … Norris.htm

http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=11

tom_norris · 10-20-15 1:01 pm

Ellen White Ordained! Another White Estate Cover-Up!

After years of discussion and debate about Women’s Ordination, it has been discovered that Ellen White was officially “ordained” by the Denomination. In fact, she received written ordination credentials at least 6 times. Such a historical fact pattern shows how foolish and manipulated this discussion has become.

See: Ellen White's Stature and Her Authority in Photos: Oct 14, 2015
http://spectrummagazine.org/article/201 … ity-photos

http://www.adventistreview.org/church-n … university

The White Estate should have, long ago, let everyone know the truth about Ellen White being ordained. Here is what the White Estate has admitted:

Ellen White's (Ordained) Paper Credentials

The White Estate possesses six paper credentials that were issued to Ellen White.

The first credential is dated October 1, 1883, from the Michigan Conference.

The second is dated December 6, 1885, from the General Conference. On that one credential, the word "ordained" was crossed out.

The third is dated December 27, 1887, from the General Conference.

The fourth is dated March 7, 1899, from the General Conference.

The fifth is dated June 14, 1909, from the General Conference.

The sixth is dated June 12, 1913, from the General Conference.

All of the credentials read "ordained minister.”

Summary

From 1871 until her death in 1915, Ellen White was issued ministerial credentials. From 1871 to 1887 she was credentialed by the Michigan Conference, and from 1884 until her death, she was credentialed as a General Conference Minister. On one of the credentials (1885), the word "ordained" is struck through. (In the 1888 Yearbook she was also listed among the California Ministers.)

Throughout the years, her name was listed along with ordained ministers rather than licentiates, although her biographical information sheet and the testimony of her family indicates that she did not receive ordination at the hands of church officials.

Compiled by the Ellen G. White Estate, Inc.  October 2012
http://whiteestate.org/issues/egw_crede … ntials.htm
--------------------------------------------------

Jared Wright, the author wrote:

I exchanged messages briefly with the White Estate on the topic of her credentials. All of the credentials read "ordained minister," however the White Estate maintains that Ellen White was never ordained by the laying on of hands, and they provide some documentary evidence to support that idea. Nevertheless, she was given ordained minister credentials six times, which speaks to her authority as a licensed woman minister in her own day and age. The White Estate did not elaborate on what exactly her ordained minister credentials did mean.

I point out in fairly clear terms, I think, that the White Estate maintains that Ellen White was never ordained by the laying on of hands. I also provide a link to the page in which the White Estate lays out the case against Ellen White having been ordained.

In advance of this article, I sent messages to representatives of all the U.S.-based White Estate offices asking about the ordination credentials in particular, and whether they would be a topic of conversation at the Andrews Symposium at all. In response, they pointed me to the page on the White Estate website linked above that discusses her credentials. What that page does is to suggest what the credentials do not mean, at least in the White Estate's understanding.

The question that seems to remain unanswered is exactly what the six credentials did mean, both in terms of how Ellen White was understood within her community in her day and age (and indeed how she understood her own calling and ministry), and what her credentials might mean in light of current discussions about the role of women ministers in the Adventist Church.

I also asked the White Estate leaders for comment on those points, but none of them responded to that query. Now to be fair, it is quite likely that I caught them at a bad time with the Andrews University Symposium getting underway this week.

I did receive a response from Theodore Levterov, who is the head of the White Estate Branch Office in Loma Linda, saying that he has been preparing a paper on that data that he'd be willing to share after the Andrews event. So I plan to follow up on that.

So how do we understand Ellen White's ministerial credentials? I think that is still an open-ended question that deserves more attention from the scholarly community. One takeaway that seems fair is that they further establish the fact that Ellen White's spiritual authority was recognized by her faith community, and her call was affirmed on multiple occasions. That seems instructive for contemporary discussions.

MW said: If you have the credential, aren't you then considered ordained? I was "credentialed" , not ordained, and all I had to show for it was a card I carried. It had to be voted somewhere in order to issue Mrs. White a credential. To me that vote would carry the same weight as if she had a ceremony with the laying on of hands. Seems to me this issue should have been brought up during the discussion of the ordination of women at the GC and clarified at that time rather than now. Something just doesn't seem right about the stance of the GC on this.

RV said: Thank you Jared.  The pictures are priceless and bring to mind the old idiom:  ONE PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS. More particularly, the SIX most explicit photographs showing official church documents that proclaim EGW a fully ordained minister!

The Archbishop of Canterbury, the head of the Church of England, crowned Queen Elizabeth II, and he/she will crown the next monarch. EGW is Adventism's "queen", our prophet, founder, and councilor.   As the only prophet of God in two millenia, since the death of John the Revelator, who would be WORTHY to "crown" her? If we accept EGW's prophetic status, surely it was God Himself, who appointed her, anointed her, and ORDAINED her? Which of her contemporary peers had sufficient hierarchy of rank to "lay on hands"? Or did the mere possession of male genitalia confer that privilege on one of her male contemporaries?

I doubt that many Adventists could even name the general conference or local church administrators of her era. Any rank they had was ephemeral and trivial, and surely not sufficient to ordain/crown God's only prophet/prophetess in two thousand years! So why is the White Estate quibbling, and nit-picking, about which mere mortal man laid hands on her? We should proudly proclaim that God Himself ordained her!

The word "ORDAINED" is crystal clear on multiple official documents and should be proof enough that EGW was "ordained". What a travesty and lack of transparency that this has been concealed for so long!

NL said: In my humble estimation this is exactly THE point. The church OFFICIALLY recognized her calling. What were they going to do hand out to her a prophetess certificate. She was and the emphasis is SHE was a minister, preacher, messenger CALLED of God not the church. The church simply acknowledged that calling. God calls whomever He calls just as the Spirit blows wherever the Spirit blows. Male or Female, young or old, child or adult. Ethiopian or whatever nationality.

The mumbo jumbo about she was never ordained because the "brethren" did not lay on hands is an answer that has no question. But lets go ahead and posit this response (not ordained because no laying on of hands) by the Anti W/O crowd. It would look something like this; They did not lay on hands because she was female, but that begs the question why do we have pictures of properly signed ordination papers? The Occam's answer would seem to be self evident, who in their right mind is/are going to lay their hands on Gods prophet and consider that some sort of imprimatur but the church. An answer that has no question, "but they didn't lay on hands"

harrpa said: Sadly, it's obvious that through the years The White Estate has been complicit in keeping the truth quiet about Ellen White's ordination certificates and her documented ordination status as published in several editions of the SDA Yearbook.

Sadly, this fact was left out of required History of Adventism classes for thousands and thousands of academy and college students. Who has wanted these facts hidden and why does truth have to be uncovered by others? Why hasn't The White Estate been upfront about the authority she carried in our early church history? What else is being hidden about EGW in those sacred vaults? Past actions are the strongest predictor to current and future behavior. Not encouraging.

Tom Norris said: I am banished from commenting on this, or any Spectrum article. So I must reply on this uncensored Forum. However, there is a reason I am not allowed to speak. I have been in the White Estate and I know that they are very dishonest. I caught Arthur White hiding the 1888 materials and dishonestly manipulating both church history and doctrine. It was a clear case of publishing fraud, which is a crime.

I spoke out against such dishonesty, but the church leaders looked the other way. They don’t want to admit that the White Estate is guilty of a massive publishing fraud, one that has ruined the reputation of Ellen White and the Advent Movement. So the pretending goes on and on, as if all was well in the White Estate, when in fact it is a criminal enterprise.

Hidden Documents in White Estate
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … uments.htm

Let everyone understand: The White Estate has never been honest about Ellen White or church history. This little cover-up about Ellen White’s ordination credentials pales in comparison with the massive cover-up of the 1888 debate, which has never been honestly or correctly explained to the Adventist Community. If the church leaders have no problem hiding and manipulating Ellen White's 1888 writings, which include visions and letters about these infamous theological debates, what is the big deal about hiding six little ordination papers? The White Estate has lied so many times, about so much, that they don't even know how to tell the truth. If Ellen White were alive, she would throw out the board and demand a full correction of the record, which at this point, does not support the facts or the truth about Ellen White and her views.

Ellen White
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

The White Estate is a criminal enterprise. They are masters of publishing fraud, mind control, and historical manipulation. They are the root cause for all that has gone wrong with modern Adventism. Unless this out of control archive is cleaned up and reformed, there is no hope for SDA’s. They will continue to self-destruct for all to see.

The White Estate needs to admit what they have been doing and repent before a class action suit is brought against them. They need to correct the historical record and tell the truth about Ellen White and church history, including admititng that she was an ordained minister. No wonder millions have left this dishonest, corrupt denomination. People can only take so much double-talk and nonsense in the name of Jesus. Very sad.

Tom Norris, for Adventist Reform
http://www.allexperts.com/ep/2318-70484 … Norris.htm

tom_norris · 08-05-16 1:21 pm

Question for Tom Norris:

Subject: Azazel

Who is prefigured by the "scapegoat" of Lev 16:10,21 on the Day of Atonement?

SDA traditionalists claim it is Satan. Is this correct?

What are the implications if this interpretation is wrong or correct?

Is this even important since we have no clear message from the NT about the scapegoat's fulfillment?

Marvin, Florida
-----------------------------------------------------------

Tom Norris answers:

The Scapegoat: Jesus or the Devil?

Adventist History is complicated and intriguing. It is full of both myths and surprising insights. Following the great disappointment of 1844, a 24-year-old Millerite preacher and publisher, named Owen R. L. Crosier claimed that Satan is the antitypical scapegoat, springing into action at the time of the Second Advent only to be destroyed by Christ.

Crosier was greatly influenced by the older Hiram Edson, a farmer, who first taught that the sanctuary in heaven was the fulfillment of Dan 8: 14. This doctrine was called the Cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary, which later morphed into the Investigative Judgment. Both the scapegoat and the sanctuary teachings were anchored to Old Covenant shadows, which the SDAs developed into doctrines that survive to this very today.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._R._L._Crosier

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Edson

O. R. L. Crosier, “The Law of Moses,” The Day-Star Extra, Feb. 7, 1846, 37-44.

http://ellenwhite.org/content/file/day- … r#document

Crosier’s 8 Reasons Why the Scapegoat is Satan, -Not Christ:
http://text.egwwritings.org/publication … umber=1234

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archiv … -g.-white1

Ellen White embraced Crosier’s scapegoat position for many years. However, after the 1888 debates, there is strong evidence in the White Estate that she changed her mind; just as she did about the Law in Galatians and other views during this same decade. This scapegoat doctrine is just one more example that shows how the White Estate has not been honest about Ellen White. They do not want to admit that she was ever wrong; much less that she changed her views.

This is all wrong. Ellen White grew and matured as a Christian. More than that, she became involved in the 1888 debates, taking the minority position, which lost. As a result she was exiled far away from Battle Creek to Australia, where she continued to push for doctrinal reform.

Ellen White
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=225

The White Estate should be ashamed for hiding so much information about Ellen White all these years. And for failing to explain that Ellen White changed many of her views in the 1890’s, such as the Law in Galatians, the Gospel, Tithe, and the Scape Goat doctrine. She also claimed during this time period that more truth would surface about the Sabbath. Thus paving the way for a new version, which failed to emerge from the disruptive 1888 debates.

White Estate- Hidden Documents
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Estate.htm

Today, few SDAs have been informed that the decade of the 1890’s was one of great theological debate and change in Battle Creek, one that ended in a great schism and retreat to Takoma Park. Because of the 1888 debates, which were not over until 1891, the majority of SDAs questioned the Sabbath as well as Adventist eschatology. Legalism was under attack in Battle Creek all during the decade of the 1890’s, even as Uriah Smith, the long time Review editor, was demoted so AT Jones could promote Gospel Reform; a new emphasis on Jesus and a lowered focus on Law, judgment, and eschatology.

This was also the same time that Ellen White wanted to change her view of the scapegoat, a fact that puzzles the White Estate today. But it should not. Ellen White was changing her mind about many doctrines during this decade, and the White Estate should know these historical facts, which they have been hiding all these years.

Let everyone understand; after 1888, Ellen White changed her view of the law in Galatians, the Two Covenants, and the Gospel, and thus it makes perfect sense for her to also view Jesus as the scapegoat. This is the correct Gospel position, supported by Calvin and others. The SDA claim that Satan is the scapegoat is utter nonsense and myth; worthless speculation by uneducated legalists and farmers.

Today, the history of Battle Creek and Takoma Park has not been honestly told. The White Estate has never correctly explained the 1888 debates or Ellen White’s many changed positions that resulted from this well documented theological controversy. Moreover, the leaders hid this material in Takoma Park, misleading generations into believing a false view of Adventist history and doctrine. Shameful!

Ellen White would be livid at how her writings have been manipulated, suppressed, and made to say the opposite of what she meant. When the Gospel is better understood, many SDA doctrines will turn into worthless sand. The scapegoat teaching is no exception.

Information for further study:

The scapegoat[

Adventists teach that the scapegoat, or Azazel, is a symbol for Satan. They believe that Satan will finally have to bear the responsibility for the sins of the believers of all ages, and that this was foreshadowed on the Day of Atonement when the high priest confessed the sins of Israel over the head of the scapegoat (Leviticus 16:21).

This belief has drawn criticism from some Christians, who feel this gives Satan the status of sin-bearer alongside Jesus Christ. Adventists have responded by insisting that Satan is not a saviour, nor does he provide atonement for sin; Christ alone is the substitutionary sacrifice for sin, but holds no responsibility for it. In the final judgment, responsibility for sin is passed back to Satan who first caused mankind to sin. As the responsible party, Satan receives the wages for his sin and the sins of all the saved—namely, death. Thus, the unsaved are held responsible for their own sin, while the saved are no longer held responsible for theirs.[142]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh-d … _scapegoat

Ellen White Declares Christ the Scapegoat!

Manuscript 112, 1897, titled “Before Pilate and Herod,” is a 19-page typed document with typical editorial corrections by Ellen White’s secretaries (most of which were made by Maggie Hare), and stamped with “E. G. White” after the end of the content of page 19. This was the usual procedure in her office when making multiple carbon copies of an Ellen White manuscript. There are only three original typewritten copies of this manuscript. One of them contains all 19 pages, and the other two, including the file copy, end on page 17, with the last paragraph of page 17 cut off, and pages 18 and 19 omitted.

The overall content of the deleted pages is not unusual except for the first paragraph of page 18, dealing specifically with the “scapegoat.” That paragraph reads as follows:

Some apply the solemn type, the scape goat, to Satan. This is not correct. He cannot bear his own sins. At the choosing of Barabbas, Pilate washed his hands. He cannot be represented as the scape goat. The awful cry, uttered with a hasty awful recklessness, by the Satan inspired multitude, swelling louder and louder, reaches up to the throne of God, His blood be upon us and upon our children. Christ was the scape goat, which the type represents. He alone can be represented by the goat borne into the wilderness. He alone, over whom death had no power, was able to bear our sins. 18

This 1897 statement departs completely from everything else Ellen White wrote on the subject either before (as confirmed by the quotations above); or later (as presented in the 1911 edition of The Great Controversy).

In the 1911 edition, prepared under her own supervision, 19 she still spoke of the post-1844 era as the “antitypical day of atonement” 20 that will culminate with the final destruction of Satan, at the end of the 1,000 years of Revelation 20, as the antitypical “scapegoat.” 21 So there is no convincing reason to believe that she ever changed her mind on the subject.

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/scapegoat.asp

See also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoat

Leviticus 16:10
http://biblehub.com/leviticus/16-10.htm

What is the meaning of Azazel / the scapegoat?
http://www.gotquestions.org/Azazel-scapegoat.html

The Atonement and the Scapegoat: Leviticus 16
http://www.christianitytoday.com/edstet … thews.html

The Scapegoat and the Sanctuary
http://ssnet.org/blog/scapegoat-sanctuary/

http://omega77.tripod.com/straubscapegoat.htm

http://www.elcristianismoprimitivo.com/ … pegoat.htm

THE ANTI-TYPE of THE SCAPEGOAT (Lev 16) is JESUS NOT SATAN
http://www.logosapostolic.org/bible_stu … zel.htm#b2

THE SCAPEGOAT OF LEVITICUS SIXTEEN
https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hi … oat-bs.pdf

The Day of Atonement and the Scapegoat
http://www.tithing-russkelly.com/sda/id27.html

Your Scapegoat: Satan or Jesus?

I believed for thirty-seven years as a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church that Satan was my scapegoat and that Jesus would put my confessed sins on Satan’s head and he would be punished and die for them because Ellen G. White (EGW) said so. I made the mistake of trusting her as my authority. The result of using her as an authority "the lesser light" to the Bible, gave me a false understanding of the work of my Savior in saving me. I have received a great blessing in learning that Jesus is my Scapegoat and it has given me a greater love and admiration for Jesus’ atonement to save me. I hope you will enjoy this research.

http://www.truthorfables.com/Scapegoat.htm

THE SCAPEGOAT IN THE WRITINGS OF
ELLEN G WHITE: By The White Estate

The identification and eschatological meaning of the scapegoat of Leviticus 16 has generated much discussion in academic circles. Within ancient Jewish tradition, the scapegoat was always seen as a demonic being. 1 But since the post-apostolic period, many Christian expositors have tried to identify it with Christ and His sacrificial death. 2 Seventh-day Adventists have stressed a clear distinction between “the goats” of Leviticus 16:8, considering the one “for the Lord” as a type of Christ, and the one “for the scapegoat [Heb. Azazel]” as representing Satan. 3 This is also the view expressed in Ellen White’s writings.

An Unusual Statement

Seventh-day Adventists accepted O. R. L. Crosier’s biblical arguments that Satan is the antitypical scapegoat that comes into action at the time of Christ’s second advent. Ellen White not only shared the same views, but also taught them consistently throughout her writings. The existence of a single typed paragraph of questionable origin, speaking of Christ instead of Satan as the antitypical scapegoat, should not be used as evidence that she changed her mind on that subject. If that were the case, we would expect to find such a change reflected in her post-1897 writings. It would have changed her entire eschatological framework, shifting both the antitypical scapegoat from Satan to Christ, and the antitypical Day of Atonement from the post-1844 era back to the cross. But none of her writings reflects such a change.

Regardless of how this questionable passage became part of Manuscript 112, 1897, the statement should be viewed as exceptional. It does not provide a reason for anyone to fall into the dangerous fallacy of “generalization,” 22 by which one or a few exceptions are generalized as the overall rule. Ellen White’s writings provide enough evidences that, up to the end of her life, she continued to identify Satan as the eschatological scapegoat.

Yet, we are left with some obvious questions: Did Ellen White herself write that unusual paragraph? How did it become part of one of her manuscripts? And when was it cut from the fuller manuscript? We know only that the shortened copy is what was on file when the collection of her unpublished writings was microfilmed for safekeeping in 1951. But no additional information has been found to help answer those questions. Therefore, any attempt to answer those questions remains in the speculative realms.

What is known is that everywhere else in Ellen G. White’s comments she identifies the scapegoat as Satan. And the other known fact is that Ellen White never incorporated this passage in her published works, although other lines from the manuscript were used. 23 Thus, although we do not have clear answers about the actual origin of this unique paragraph, there is no uncertainty regarding Ellen White’s lifelong understanding of the identity of the antitypical scapegoat.

http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/scapegoat.asp

Conclusion:

Today, the White Estate still pretends that Ellen White has not changed her mind about doctrine. But the facts are clear, she made many changes after 1888, including about the scapegoat. Let everyone understand: the official story promoted about Ellen White is false and very misleading. No one should trust anything from the White Estate. The Ellen White marketed to the world is fiction; the White Estate has been promoting the greatest publishing fraud in modern history. Shameful! Ellen White would not be pleased and neither should anyone else.

As for the scapegoat, John Calvin, as well as Wesley, Spurgeon, etc., are correct to say that BOTH goats represent Jesus. And so too Ellen White, who understood the Gospel after the 1888 debates. The Scapegoat is Christ, not Satan! Crosier was an uneducated farmer, not a theologian or scholar. Who cares what he speculated? Why would anyone today follow such nonsense?

Listen to John Calvin correctly explain that BOTH goats represent Christ.

A twofold mode of expiation is here presented to us; for one of the two goats was offered in sacrifice according to the provisions of the Law, the other was sent away to be an outcast, or offscouring.

The fulfillment of both figures, however, was manifested in Christ, since He was both the Lamb of God, whose offering blotted out the sins of the world, and, that He might be as an offscouring; His comeliness was destroyed, and He was rejected of men.

A more subtle speculation might indeed be advanced, viz., that after the goat was presented, its sending away was a type of the resurrection of Christ; as if the slaying of the one goat testified that the satisfaction for sins was to be sought in the death of Christ; whilst the preservation and dismissal of the other showed that after Christ had been offered for sin, and had borne the curse of men, He still remained alive.

I embrace, however, what is more simple and certain, and am satisfied with that; i.e., that the goat which departed alive and free, was an atonement, that by its departure and flight the people might be assured that their sins were put away and vanished.

This was the only expiatory sacrifice in the Law without blood; nor does this contradict the statement of the Apostle, for since two goats were offered together, it was enough that the death of one should take place, and that its blood should be shed for expiation; for the lot was not cast until both goats had been brought to the door of the tabernacle; and thus although the priest presented one of them alive “to make an atonement with him,” as Moses expressly says, yet God was not propitiated without blood, since the efficacy of the expiation depended on the sacrifice of the other goat.

As to the word Azazel, although commentators differ, I doubt not but that it designates the place to which the scape-goat was driven. It is certainly a compound word, equivalent to “the departure of the goat,”…

Calvin's Complete Commentary, Volume 1: Genesis to Joshua

It is time for Adventism to grow up and repent of their many Old Covenant doctrines and myths, including their error about the scapegoat. They must reposition themselves to follow Jesus and his Gospel, not Moses and the Law. The SDAs must repudiate the Old Covenant with both hands, including the 4th Commandment, replacing their false doctrines with the New Covenant teachings of Christ.

Mark 4:23 “If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”

Tom Norris, for New Covenant Adventism

Adventists for Tomorrow

Announcement

#151 05-17-12 7:03 pm

Re: Ellen White

#152 05-18-12 3:24 am

Re: Ellen White

#153 07-02-12 3:31 pm

Re: Ellen White

#154 07-03-12 2:57 pm

Re: Ellen White

#155 07-05-12 6:38 pm

Re: Ellen White

#156 07-05-12 7:25 pm

Re: Ellen White

#157 07-11-12 5:58 pm

Re: Ellen White

#158 07-29-12 10:00 am

Re: Ellen White

#159 08-30-12 6:06 pm

Re: Ellen White

#160 11-17-12 11:59 pm

Re: Ellen White

#161 12-08-12 10:08 pm

Re: Ellen White

#162 12-08-12 10:23 pm

Re: Ellen White

#163 12-09-12 1:29 pm

Re: Ellen White

#164 12-12-12 11:19 am

Re: Ellen White

#165 12-14-12 7:01 pm

Re: Ellen White

#166 11-07-13 8:29 pm

Re: Ellen White

#167 11-09-13 5:53 pm

Re: Ellen White

#168 11-11-13 5:51 pm

Re: Ellen White

#169 10-18-14 11:17 am

Re: Ellen White

#170 10-31-14 12:05 pm

Re: Ellen White

#171 12-06-14 2:09 pm

Re: Ellen White

#172 12-10-14 12:52 pm

Re: Ellen White

#173 01-24-15 5:06 pm

Re: Ellen White

#174 10-20-15 1:01 pm

Re: Ellen White

#175 08-05-16 1:21 pm

Re: Ellen White

Board footer