Seguidores

sexta-feira, 14 de dezembro de 2012

5 REASONS TO REJECT THE WRITINGS OF ELLEN G. WHITE

Douglas ReisBlog Question of Trust

Adventists believe in the permanence of spiritual gifts (1 Cor 12:4-7, 13:8-10) and understand that the gift of prophecy is prevailing among the people of God (1 Cor 13:8, 14:5; Jl 2 : 28), becoming a powerful mentor. They also recognize that Ellen G. White (henceforth EGW), a pioneer and mentor of the movement, received the gift of prophecy, employee throughout his ministry almost 70 years. An analysis of what EGW wrote with biblical teachings reveal the harmony between them and their consistency.
Meanwhile, from his own time to contemporary, EGW suffers from several critical. Even among professed Adventists, there are those who, openly or concealed, through ignorance or rational decision (ist), have found it difficult to believe in his writings. In this space, we will reflect on some of the motivations for this.
Possibly, there were many motivations as there are critics. To facilitate our analysis, condensamos and categorize the factors that lead to disbelief and present some podenderações. We believe that even non-Adventists or sympathizers with the movement or its ardent opponents, can benefit from these reflections, since they are in a position far enough to evaluate the arguments and draw their conclusions.
Will benefit most Adventists who, if they agree with the official position of the denomination, may (1) acknowledge the difficulties of her fellow travelers, (2) analyze the risks that their faith runs and (3) look for reasons to continue believing; case feel inclined to disbelieve the prophetic authority of Ellen White, have the opportunity to (1) recognize their questions, (2) reflect on their motivations to disbelieve and (3) honestly take a clear position, given the nature of Adventism (talk about below this point).
Because this text is a popular test and not an academic work, take some liberties. One of them, visible from the first lines, the approach is stripped, which will facilitate a greater number of readers who have access to the argument. We aim for the matter in general terms, without spending time on technical details, which can be found in many recent research studies. At the same time, we opted for a milder language, so that no one feels offended, though, at times, the vehemence in defending some points is required. But never do it to hurt or cause controversy itself. Honestly, we present the "faith once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3) and admonish those who are teaching "other doctrine" always "with good conscience, and faith without hypocrisy" (1 Tm 1 : 3.5).
After those preliminary considerations, while the presentation of the most common reasons for rejection of the writings of EGW among Adventists:
One. EGW's writings represent only the "lesser light", we must keep our faith in the Bible: Adventists liberals in the late 1970s (and before), clung to the author's statement to justify a demotion from his writings, as if they were inspired a lesser extent, in relation to the Bible. Another famous case: to justify the disparity of their own views with those of EGW, the Adventist theologian Desdemond Ford argued that it would only pastoral authority. In fact, it would be correct to conceive that EGW received inspiration smaller compared to the biblical prophets? It is a precarious argument, because we would have to admit that Inspiration is a gradual phenomenon, something foreign to the Bible (2 Timothy 3:15; note the phrase: "All scripture is inspired," stating that the inspired writings are of the same nature, Despite their different approaches and genres). The biblical authors always considered themselves inspired, because they recognized the work of the Spirit in their minds, though not explecitem or detailing the modus operandi of the phenomenon. There are writings inspired or uninspired, nothing more or less like inspired. The phrase "lesser light" has been understood by most Adventist theologians in their functional aspects: thus the lesser light possess more limited application, ie, clarify, demonstrate and apply more general concepts found in the "greater light," the Bible . Still, in practice, when some pejoratively claim that the writings of EGW are just the "lesser light", presuppose a conflict between them and beat the Scriptures, or at least the way you understand them;
2nd. The writings of EGW contradicts the Bible, showing details of the missing sacred text: In the late 1990s, Steven Daily wrote about Adventism should be facing the next generation. One of the sensitive points is to resolve the tensions between the Bible and the writings of EGW deciding where to stay next to the first book. For Daily tensions are not only real but insoluble. Therefore, it remains to discard anything from the author of which is suspected (even minimally) contradict the Bible. However, the proposal ignores that two types of writing, admittedly inspired, appear contradictory, then or own inspiration is questionable or at least one of them could not be considered inspired. In this sense, worth the advice of Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21, on evaluating the prophecies, some unknowingly take as a Christian should try everything and "retain what is good." The context limits the examination of prophetic events, which should be evaluated according to their full compliance with the other scriptures. See: Isaiah 8:19-20, 1 Jo4: 1. Everything indicates that Daily has already made his choice in favor of the latter option. Of course this is a false dilemma counter the testimony of Scripture. Even because if EGW repeat exactly the same guidelines found in the Bible, we would not need at all of what she wrote! Truth is progressive (2 Peter 1:19). In his prophetic discourse (Matthew 24), Jesus took several points of the writings of Daniel and other prophets vétero-testamentary. Meanwhile, Paul reworked the concepts of discourse of Christ and still find it expansions in Revelation. It is natural that the prophet later expand its predecessors. Jesus himself criticized the practice of valuing the detriment of past prophets contemporaries (Matt. 23:29-30), while each prophet is to test the devotion of his generation obedient (v. 34-35). In part, this confusion is established due to misconceptions related to the influences of culture on the writings of EGW;3rd. EGW's writings represent a particular view of the author, a Victorian lady who lived in a context of traditional evangelicalism: understanding the cultural context in which he lived given prophet is always useful to understand its message. Unfortunately, the Higher Criticism of the eighteenth and nineteenth eliminated the factor of supernatural inspiration, crediting the Bible matters only to the human element. The Scriptures are no longer the inspired Word of God to become man's word mystical. It was not what God was saying, but what they said about Him. The historical-critical method, with its naturalistic presuppositions, still survives and unfortunately influences Adventist theologians who adopt it in whole or in adapted form. As could be expected, the natural consequence is to extend this understanding to the writings of EGW, limiting them to their own well-defined historical surrounded. When one of these assumptions, both the Bible and the testimonies have little to say to the man of the century. You can extract a principle here and there, but most of the guidelines would be "contaminated" by a culture so far removed from our own that it would be illogical to adopt it by its principles. It would have space (at best) to Christian existentialism, which perhaps echoes the approach purely devotional given to the writings of EGW, or at the conclusion of what she wrote does not pass the "advice", nothing gets to be normative . Obviously, there is no biblical basis for limiting a writing inspired by their culture. We are not denying the cultural influence on individuals. Even if God repeatedly subjected to human culture, as when He revealed Himself to the Jews or profetos embodied in the First Century Palestine. But God is a real being, and a reality that transcends culture. His revelation, although it expresses within particular cultures, is the fruit of the Holy Spirit, who actually spoke to individuals at a given time and space (1 Peter 2:20-21). In connection with the practice of dating the writings of EGW, is the accusation that they represent an earlier stage of evangelicalism, marked by legalism and severity;
4th. EGW's writings represent a legalistic Christianity: The standards of conduct, dress, dating, food and Christian life found in EGW penalty seems harsh, exaggerated and outdated. How to sustain them? Some even seem embarrassing enough to admit them in public! Still, for its commitment to biblical doctrines, which such observance of the ten commandments and respect to dietary laws, Adventists are taxed naturally loyalists by evangelicals in general. Would, then, the Scriptures, the source of legalism? In fact, we have to understand that theological liberalism and own unrestricted freedom advocated by postmodernity favor the understanding that the individual must create their own rules. In addition to any standards would be absurd - even God has to convey. We must remember that even the Apostle Paul, the author of more than NT practices loyalists fought, argued that Christians were saved for "good works" (Eph. 2:8-10), investing in virtually every end of the epistles that wrote about the need to observe specific standards of conduct, to the point of saying what should occupy our minds (Phil 4:8)! To justify the rejection of specific portions of the writings of EGW, many Adventists claim that sections were not inspired, fruit or plagiarism of authors of his time or even interpolations and additions made by editors and trustees of his writings;
5th. The writings of EGW are the result of plagiarism and constant tampering by the trustees of its literary heritage: Since the publication of The White Lie by Walter Rea, ad hominem accusations against EGW multiply, mainly from plagiarist. Possibly D.M. Canright, the first great apostate Adventism, is the author of this charge, which became more sophisticated over time. In fact, EGW uses expressions and material authors of his time. This would decrease the inspiration of his writings? It is necessary to remember that the biblical authors resort to quotations from writers of his day, Paul quotes the poet Aratus, in his work The phenomena (Acts 17:28) and Judas cites the apocryphal book of Enoch (Jude 14-15). Inspiration can select materials and use them according to their purposes. Lucas even admits to having written his gospel not through visions or apparitions of angels, but based on "careful investigation" interviewing "eyewitnesses" - or so one would admit that his gospel was less inspired! The complaints against the trustees, heritage EGW documents are open to consultation and now, how much digitized, it becomes easier for anyone to ascertain the original writings. Generally, those who feel defeated by the revelation, usually react accusing adulteration of original, similar to anti-trinariana lady I met who accused the translators of the Bible to twist the text of Matthew 28:18-20 (although there is no textual vairantes text and all manuscripts support the translation found in our current Bible versions).Before everything exposed, it remains a decision. Or disbelieve or believe. Clearly this has to be balanced and in a spirit of prayer, one feels that God guide a rational decision. It is no coincidence that many criticisms of the writings of EGW can be turned against the Scriptures and vice versa. The nature of revelation is one. If I found reason to disbelieve the EGW would have to act in a logical and coherent, it rejects the biblical material. However, God has led me to accept all that He inspired and revealed. I also believe that without an Adventist accept the prophetic authority of EGW on issues such as worship, food, personal conduct or any area of ​​the Christian life is not authentically Adventist. Best would be to adopt another Christian confession. I know that this is a particular decision. But there's a domino effect: whoever rejects the writings of EGW, soon will disbelieve other aspects of the Adventist faith (the pre-Advent judgment commencing in 1844, the Sabbath, healthcare reform, etc.). To what extent could be Adventist without believing these things?

Nenhum comentário:

Postagens de Destaque