Painting yourself in a corner


I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again… when your entire stated reason for questioning Christianity is based upon paintings that may or may not have been done by Christians, you’re on some really shaky ground.

Let me be even more plain…. when you state your reason for not believing in Christianity is based upon conclusions inferred from a painting… You’re establishing a pretext for not wanting to be saved.

Here’s the real reason you don’t want to be saved… you personally are convicted by the knowledge that you’re a sinner. You know there’s going to be a judgment, and you will be judged for your sins. And it means you reject God’s authority to judge you.

So, you choose a pretext conclusion to not believe in Christianity, and choose some religion that historically did not survive. You then choose your own rules for how to celebrate that religion, and your rules for conduct. Oh, and you choose some mock name to celebrate your own false version of that false religion. Did i leave something out?

The whole thing is false. And it’s a farce, as well.

Now there’s some guy out there claiming that some painting of a Borgia family member is the source of all paintings of Jesus, and thus, he never existed.

That’s so full holes I think I could strain spaghetti with it. So, if I can establish that a painting is copied from Bob Ross’s TV show, that Bob Ross never existed?

Okay, let’s trace the history of paintings of Jesus.  Historically, paintings of Jesus Christ all depicted for about 700 years, a blond, blue-eyed Jesus with short hair – someone who looked typically Anglo or French. This was done by Roman Catholic painters. Good so far?

Then, suddenly, around 700 AD to 850 AD, somewhere in that area, they suddenly began to depict a bearded, long haired Jesus with a forked beard, and his hair divided in the middle, owl-like eyes, and a number of artistic flaws that artists simply wouldn’t place in a painting.

The current research on this suggests that it comes from the Mandylion, (also called the image of Edessa)an image of the head of someone allegedly Jesus Christ. And many now are claiming that the Mandylion is actually the Shroud of Turin, folded to show only the face.

I don’t know who the image is of, I don’t know what the Shroud of Turin is. I’ve heard evidence both for it and against it. I’m just going to say…

Duh. The Borgia’s lived long after this time.

You can claim what you want… I mean, we still have freedom of speech for at least another week or two, I think, so, claim what you like. But you’re going to be VERY hard pressed to answer when someone like Josh McDowell meets you in debate, and starts bringing up the words of Romans who lived in the time of Jesus Christ, and whose writings mention him, like Suetonius.

the evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ is so well established, that historians (reputable ones, not the amateurs) don’t question it. To do so is to destroy your credibility. An afternoon of research can confirm it beyond a shadow of a doubt. The people who say, “I’ve searched for YEARS and still haven’t found any proof Jesus existed…” have never learned how to research (warning – it may require opening a book or two…) and again – have a pretext for not wanting to find the truth.

Well, here’s a new research tool. When all the Christians vanish off the face of the earth, that’s the Rapture. There should be a peace treaty at some point after that. Circle that date on your calendar, and add seven years. Look up in the sky exactly seven years after that moment. You’ll see Jesus Christ. And shortly after that, you’re going to meet Him.

And He’s going to ask you some very uncomfortable questions about what you taught, based upon Priorii arguments about speculative artistic pieces.

Redeeming the Time


16 Redeeming the time, because the days are evil. 17 Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is. 18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; 19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; 20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; Ephesians 5:16-20 (KJV)

Christians,

This is the time. Seriously. I am becoming more and more convinced that the Rapture of the Christians is nearing. Many of you have blogs… this is the time to get serious about this.

Contend earnestly for the faith. Witness to the lost. Try to reach those who call themselves Christians, whose entire claim for a hope in Heaven but who actually claim nothing but a wet forehead as a baby. Try to reach those who think they are a god, and can speak things into existence. Try to reach those who believe that the Watchtower Society is God’s faithful servant on this earth. Try to reach those who believe that Joseph Smith was visited by an Angel who used to be a man named Moroni. Try to reach those who believe they have to keep the laws of Moses to be saved. Try to reach those who think “the Sunday Sabbath is the number of the beast”. Try to reach those who think Hinduism is the way. Who think their Buddhist faith will get them reborn if they redeem enough karma points. Try to reach those who think the vibration of cosmic crystals will allow them to ascend into a higher order of sentient being. Try to reach those who think, “My whole family is Baptist, so I guess I go to heaven too…”

You’re going to get arguments. You’re going to offend many. You’re going to risk a lot of heartache just to finally reach one person – but that one person will avoid Hell forever, and that’s the point.

And you may be planting a seed for when (after we disappear) they may wake up and realize, “This was real, and I just missed it.”

But if you do nothing… they all are lost. Condemned.

Redeem the time, for the days are evil.

One Year Ago Today…


Messianic Judaism Answered 7

We saw over the last two days how simply wearing a yarmulke and attending a messianic synagogue can develop an atmosphere of feeling that this is MANDATORY for believers. And this is the trap that Messianic Judaism has laid for itself.

This could be avoided by simply using a King James Bible to keep people grounded in strong doctrine. I assume that if people are READING their Bibles, they won’t be as easily led astray. Alas, too many people are reading heretical translations, expecially the pro-torah “translations” of the Jewish New Testament and the Orthodox Jewish bible. In truth, very few Messianics to my knowledge even own Goble’s paraphrase, so I’m going to deal the most with the Jewish New Testament.

Remember! If you’re a grace oriented Messianic (like David Sedaka and Dan Juster), I’m really not dealing too much with you. If on the other hand you’re a Hebrew Roots/Shomer Torah (Torah Keeper), then… this article is about ____________________________________ (write your name in there).

There’s a lot of subterfuge involved in David H. Stern’s mis-translation. He comments in the foreword that we are not REQUIRED to keep the Torah, but should want to and feel free to… and then he goes ahead and translates the verses to make it sound like we are REQUIRED to keep it.

Stern claims that mandatory Torah Observance is a heresy (and he’s correct) but then goes ahead and translates his “bible” to read as if it IS mandatory. He can protest what he likes, but the facts remain that those who read his mis-translation end up believing that if they do not keep the Torah they will lose their salvation. Why? Because Stern deliberately translates it that way.

Crucial to the Messianics is the cry that “Messianic Judaism is Judaism! Without Torah, it is Messianic Christianity!” And there’s an implied slam that I have abandoned the faith of my fathers by becoming “Assimilated” into Gentilism. This is an argument they call “Reverse Galatianism” – which is bizarre, as it reveals a complete lack of understanding of the book of Galatians.

Which is so far not too surprising, as I’ve already shown that Messianics are quite adept at turning Scriptures upside down and willingly changing their meanings in the worst kind of Eisogesis.

One can almost imagine messianics gathering to pray the Shemonah Esrei (18 blessings) and including the 19th blessing, the curse against the min (heretics) – meaning assimilated Jewish believers like me who believe in grace and that we are freed from the law.

What it is is Jewiah enodolarty, the worship of Judaism as an idol. Messianics are enamored of Judaica, and Jerusalem, and Jewish sounding music.

And what’s REALLY sad is how many of these so-called “torah observant” messianics are placing themselves under the yoke of the law – then bringing an additional curse on themselves by not keeping it!

They pride themselves on eating kosher, as they munch on non-schected (ritually slaughtered) beef, topped with cheese (Jewish dietary laws forbid the consuming of meat and dairy products together at the same time). No care is given whatsoever to where the meat comes from, or often whether or not it contains beef from the rear of the cow or bull, which is forbidden under Jewish dietary laws. They are not concerned with whether or not the meat processing plant also kills and processes pork – as long as they eat beef or turkey sausages, they’re okay in their minds – neglecting to note that most turkey sausages are flavored with pork to give the pork taste.

This dodges the entire idea of Kashrus, which is to impart to the believer (once they are born again and abandon unecessary things like Kashrus) the idea we must be careful in our daily walk to maintain a level of holiness, ot not let the world pollute us, to keep the world separate from us, to not let it defile us.

Instead, Messianics slavishly align themselves with a Torah they do not actually keep.

And yet, many swagger around wearing yarmulke, and often homemade tsitsis made of colored string (those are the “Fringes” you read about in your KIng James Bible), wrapped around the belt loops on their blue jeans. The implication to Jews when they seee someone wearing yarmulke and tsitsis is that this person is shomer shabbos (sabbath observant). If you’re shomer shabbos, you’re keeping yontiff (Jewish holidays) and kosher as well.

Are you really keeping the law? Let’s see…

  1. To know there is a God Exo 20:2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
  2. Not to even think that there are other gods besides Him Exo 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
  3. To know that He is One Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
  4. To love Him Deuteronomy 6:5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
  5. To fear Him Deuteronomy 10:20 Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God; him shalt thou serve, and to him shalt thou cleave, and swear by his name.
  6. To sanctify His Name Leviticus 22:32 Neither shall ye profane my holy name; but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel: I am the LORD which hallow you,
  7. Not to profane His Name Leviticus 22:32 Neither shall ye profane my holy name; but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel: I am the LORD which hallow you,
  8. Not to destroy objects associated with His Name Deuteronomy 12:3-4 And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. (4) Ye shall not do so unto the LORD your God.
  9. To listen to the prophet speaking in His Name Deuteronomy 18:15-19 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; (16) According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. (17) And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. (18) I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. (19) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
  10. Not to test the prophet unduly Deuteronomy 6:16 Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.

First one, well, I’d say Messianics got that one down. Good. Second? Doing pretty good there, as well. Third? As I’ll demonstrate as we get into the Oneness issue, a lot of Messianics actually trip up on this one. So, many of those who boast of Torah Observance actually fall short only three commandments in.

Before you panic, no, I have no intention of going through all 613 commandments, unless I get like, maybe 50 or more requests. I’ll just hit some of the highlights, because I’m trying to show that what you and David Stern are doing is hypocrisy, the advocating of something you yourself do not do. And i’m trying to show the impossibility of “Maintaining your salvation” by “Torah Observance”, which is impossible for falle man to keep. If that’s really how we have to “maintain our salvation”…. we’re lost, every last one of us.

Fourth Commandment… do you place the Lord your God above you at all times? When you wake hungry and needing coffee in the morning, do you always put on tallis and tefillin first thing, and begin praying, putting the Lord first? Do you spend much time in prayer? Or are there days when you put yourself first, and the Lord second? Sorry, this is a commandment that when you really think about, every Christian fails at miserably. We’re fallen men. We cannot very easily place the Lord above ourselves for very long. Sooner or later, you start thinking about yourself.

Fifth Commandment… to fear the Lord. You do this at all times??? I have to spend a moment or two thinking about Hell, Judgment, etc. to really get there.

sixth commandment….to sanctify his name. Have you cast reproach upon the Lord by a poor witness, ever? How about the time you got angry with someone else for their driving? Okay, that never happens. You never failed to love and honor the Lord in everything you do…. good job. Always keep all 613 commandments perfectly, never failing once. Since you started this torah observance stuff, you never ate a cheeseburger, or non kosher food. You never broke the Sabbath. You’ve always put all other human beings ahead of yourself. Good job! And now, I suppose, you’re ready to climb up on your cross and die for everyone, right?

The point here is, we’re only five commandments in, and suddenly you’re getting uncomfortable. Are you starting to understand that claiming that keeping the Torah is mandatory for keeping salvation is placing a heavy, heavy burden on yourself that no human being in history has ever been able to keep…

Seventh commandment… not to profane His name. Hmmm… see above.

eighth commandment… ever accidentally tear a page in your Bible? I accidentally pulled out that blank last page in my Bible a couple of weeks ago. No? Okay, have you ever dog-eared a page in your Bible? Or underlined a verse? According to the Rabbis’, that’s desecrating a Holy writing, and it’s an averah (sin).

Ninth Commandment…. to listen to the prophet speaking in the name of the Lord. It doesn’t take too much to see it’s Jesus Christ we’re speaking of. Oneness Messianics fall short here, as oneness messianics do not believe in the Trinity, as I mentioned in the 3rd Commandment. And Holy Name-ists, the ones who make the sarcastic “Yay-Zeus” comments, are worshipping a different Jesus Christ. So, all those are violating this one.

It’s really funny, but so far, the Grace Oriented Messianics are actually doing a better job of keeping the Torah than the Torah Observant ones!

Jet’s jump on to the Sabbath…

87. To rest on the seventh day Exo 23:12 Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest: that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thy handmaid, and the stranger, may be refreshed.

88. Not to do prohibited labor on the seventh day Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

89. The court must not inflict punishment on Shabbat Exo 35:3 Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day. Note – Clearly this says absolutely nothing about the Bet Din inflicting punishment for breaking the Sabbath.

90. Not to walk outside the city boundary on Shabbat Exo 16:29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.

91. To sanctify the day with Kiddush and Havdalah Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

92. To rest from prohibited labor Leviticus 23:3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings. Note: The RaMBaM cited Lev. 23:32 – however, this verse in the Hebrew Bible refers only to Yom Kippur.

A lot of Messianics actually do pretty good on these. Except numbers 87, 88 and 92. Ever go out to eat after Shul? Um… you’re making the Shabbos Goy work. If it’s an averah for a Jew, it’s one for the goy too, by your doctrine.

Ever write anything on the Sabbath? What about tearing toilet paper? Start your car? That is kindling a fire. Turn on or off lights? That creates a tiny spark as the light engages – that’s a fire. All these are prohibited labours.

“But we don’t have to keep the Sabbath any more! The LORD put it aside!!!”

You are absolutely CORRRECT, good sir! You do not have to keep the sabbath any longer! Nor do you have to keep kosher, tefilin, tallis, yontiff, any of that. The law is put aside for everyone who is in CHRIST!!!

Now, here’s where I’m going to dumbfound a lot of you… if you believe with a whole heart that you MUST keep the Torah, and you are Jewish, you are absolutely correct…. you MUST keep the Torah, and perfectly! Because if you can read the King James Bible and still believe in mandatory Torah Obsesrvance (and this is my challenge) – you’re not saved. nobody that is saved, and has the Holy Ghost in them to grant them understanding of the Scriptures can possibly read the king James Bible and believe it tells you to keep the Torah.

And you’d better keep it perfectly, and hope that somehow overcomes your fallen nature, so that you can somehow earn your salvation! Impossible? I know! Then, you’d better learn who the Jesus Christ of the Bible is, and seek Him earnestly to be saved.

I repeat, if you can read the King James Bible, and believe it teaches that Torah Observance is mandatory, you do not have the Holy Ghost giving you understanding of the Holy Scriptures. And if you do not have the Holy Ghost… you are not saved.

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:6-9 (KJV)

Roman Catholicism Answered #30 – some objections answered


I’ve mentioned before there was so much wrong with Roman Catholicism, that I almost didn’t know where to start. In the beginning of this blog, I used to actually have a list at the beginning of each post telling you all the things wrong with each topic, and all the points I’d answered. With Roman Catholicism, the post was so long you had to page down three times to get to the article.

Because it’s been months since I began the series, let me first state I demolished the RCc doctrine of the Magisterium. When I insist that all Roman Catholic apologists read my articles first, they always ignore that requirement. How do I know? Because many of them turn to the Magisterium, which is the entire reason I dealt with the Magisterium first.

The next tactic is to claim I’m “Catholic bashing.” Let’s get the terminology correct – it is Roman Catholic, not Catholic. I do not believe in an invisible, Universal church, as I’ve written before – I know many cultists like to blame everything from Easter to toothbrushes on the Roman Catholic church, but the concept of a Universal church WAS invented by the RCc. When the Bible speaks of a church, it is 99 times out of 108 referring to a local, visible institution. And it’s probable that the other 9 uses conform to that reading. Else why did Paul, John, & Peter all address their letters to the “church which is at Rome” “at Corinth…” Why not “To the church…”?

Answer: Because the correct word is “kingdom of God” or “kingdom of Heaven” when talking about all the believers as a group.

The Catholic Church is the most attacked church both from within the church and from outside of the church. — Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible Study E-Sword module

Answer… Yes. That perfectly explains the Crusades and the Inquisition. If by your statement, you mean that the Roman Catholic church cult is the most attacked cult, then that answer would be false.

There are entire RCc documents that are nothing but attacks on any interpretation which conforms to the Bible, meaning Baptists and to some extent, Protestants. The Council of Trent was a violent ideological attack on Biblical Christianity (although aimed primarily at Protestants, it also was aimed at Baptists). The RCc church constantly physically tortured and murdered Christians and Jews, in the name of religion. That has never been repented of, decried, or apologized for by Rome. Instead, those that were put to death for the crime of attempting to kill the King of England were canonized.

Many Protestants will say that Catholics do not know their Bible, do not believe in Bible studies. Some will go so far as to say that the Church does not allow, or discourages Bible study. — Catholic Vs. Protestant Bible Study E-Sword module

Yes, I know. I guess it’s wrong of us to quote official Catholic doctrine, but okay for you. Like it or not, the Vatican has forbidden any reading of the bible. They TOLERATE reading of the Bible. As recently as the 19th century, a Canadian Roman Catholic Priest wrote a book on his experiences in the Roman “church”. He reported seeing a bookshelf as he was being trained for Holy Orders that contained forbidden books… and one was the Bible. He also reported that he took an oath never to read nor interpret the Bible without the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic church to tell him the interpretation of it.

The Roman cult officially forbid the private reading of Scripture at the Council of Trent. Jerome and Augustine can say what they like – the RCc considers itself above the teachings of its founders. Question: is the Pope fallible or not? You say no. Well, if the Pope declares it wrong to read the Bible for yourself, BY yourself, then it’s as if God spoke it, right? Isn’t that what the Roman cult teaches? Then you’ve got a major conflict now, in that some popes forbid the reading of the Bible – look it up, it can be found in the council of Trent – and some encouraged it, as long as it’s an “Approved” Bible.

Didn’t Roman Catholics, on the orders of Rome, burn “Protestant” Bibles? I’ve got to say, Roman Catholics are as bad as Calvinists when it comes to generalizations. Calvinists insist that anyone that disagrees with them is Armininanist, no matter how many times you prove it to them they’re wrong. Roman Catholics have a habit of calling every Christian a “protestant”, which is a biased and EXTREMELY flawed view of History. Baptists are not Protestants.

One of the biggest insults was to call us by the name of one of our biggest Protestant persecutors, when flogging Baptists – Inquisitors called it “painting Calvin’s back” when they’d flog Baptists.

since Inquistitors would write down every scream, moan or shriek of tortured Baptists, try this – go back to the Vatican library and ask to see the transcripts of “inquisitions” of Baptists. Look at what they would shout when you referred to them as Calvin? “I am a Baptist, not a Calvinist!”

600 years later, you’re still calling Baptists “Protestants”.

“After nearly 20 yrs of study, and being in solid Bible-teaching churches, I approached my pastor. He is a nationally syndicated radio preacher. After service one day I asked him the million dollar question. “Which Bible commentary and which “Systematic Theology” should I get, so I know my understanding of all the Scriptures are ‘correct?’ (I had no idea that the only correct answer to that is the Catholic Church.) He looked at me and laughed his signature laugh. I was serious. I wanted to know. He basically said that he picks and chooses what he agrees with from several different sources. Okay,… that works for him, but not for me. That would basically make him THE POPE.”

Answer: This very statement showed that this person had lied to themselves for 20 years and thought they were a Christian. how can you claim to have been a Christian for 20 years, and not understood the simple fact that you are required by God to READ THE BIBLE FOR YOURSELF?

3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; Matthew 12:3 (KJV)

5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? Matthew 12:5 (KJV)

4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, Matthew 19:4 (KJV)

31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, Matthew 22:31 (KJV)

10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner: Mark 12:10 (KJV)

26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? Mark 12:26 (KJV)

3 And Jesus answering them said, Have ye not read so much as this, what David did, when himself was an hungred, and they which were with him; Luke 6:3 (KJV)

You are REQUIRED TO READ the Bible for yourself.

So, how does it make me the Pope, a position not ordained in the Bible, not commanded to nor referenced in a positive way… if I read Adam Clarke say something in a Commentary that I know is wrong, and dismiss it?

The commentaries of the bible are written by men. Sometimes men are bound by the thinking of their denominations. Adam Clarke advocated one or two things his denomination taught, but the Bible forbids.

Should I BLINDY accept that as Biblical truth, when I know for a fact it is wrong?

some commentaries equate the Jewish commandment of circumcision with the unScriptural habit of sprinkling babies. That’s completely unBiblical. But it can be found in Protestant commentaries, because these are MEN writing them, not like the Bible.

commentaries aid our understanding of the Bible, but they are not the EQUIVALENT of the Bible.

Roman Catholic doctrine elevates Roman Catholic teaching ABOVE the Bible.

It’s like Judaism. If the Rabbis say one thing and the Bible another, who do observant Jews follow? The Rabbis. “You shall follow the majority opinion.” The Rabbis teach. “Do not follow a multitude to do evil” is what the Bible commands.

If you cannot read the Bible for yourself, you will be at the mercy of every false teacher – like Pope Francis, the “pope of hope” – that comes along.

If you went to a church for 20 years, and could not grasp this simple fact, you were deluded. You were still a Roman Catholic, and never a Christian.

If you think you cannot read the bible for yourself, and cannot understand the words, then you are not only deluded, but definitely unSaved.

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. John 5:24 (KJV)

Can you understand those words? “verily” means “truth” or “truly.” “I say unto you…” means “I say unto you.” “he that heareth my word” means… “He that heareth my word”.

It’s not complicated. Give it a try.

If you sat in a church for 20 years and did not read your Bible for yourself, then you were lying to yourself the entire time.

“okay, that works for him but not for me.”

WHY NOT??? CAN’T YOU UNDERSTAND ENGLISH??? THEN GET A BIBLE IN YOUR NATIVE TONGUE!!!

“but it’s not translated from the Latin!!!”

News flash – the BIBLE WAS NOT WRITTEN IN THE LATIN. Who CARES how Jerome translated the Greek and Hebrew? WHO CARES????

READ THE BIBLE THAT IS TRANSLATED FROM THE GREEK AND HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS THAT CHRISTIANITY HAS ALWAYS USED, AND DON’T WORRY ABOUT ANY QUESTIONABLE TRANSLATION IN LATIN!

So, let’s try this…. I want you to read Romans for yourself. By yourself. Do not consult any Catholic commentaries. Don’t go asking your pastor what it means. Read Romans and tell me if it sounds like it’s saying you must be saved by faith? That all you have to do is believe?

The roman Catholic church pronounces damnation on anyone who believes it. So tell me, is this consistent with the Bible or not?

If it’s not… then you need to leave the Roman Catholic cult as soon as possible. Get saved. Go to a church, a Bible believing one. And write to your old Roman Catholic pastor, and let him know that you’ve left, and why.

You might get him saved, too.

Answering Roman Catholicism #29


Let’s go back to basics, and ask a simple question that Roman Catholics have a hard time answering.

When and How were you saved?

The average Roman Catholic, including the ones who have come to this blog with debate in mind, all present themselves as “saved”.

So, before I get into how the Bible presents you as saved, let me ask – when and how were you saved?

The answers usually run to one of several answers;

  1. I’m a catholic – I’ve always been saved
  2. I was saved at Baptism
  3. I was saved when I converted to Roman Catholicism

I’ve yet to have a Catholic answer this question correctly.

Alex O. Dunlap came up with a brilliant series of questions that cut to the chase. I’ve personally seen that the New Catholic, taught to respond using evangelical terms for salvation, usually shows what their beliefs are when they are asked these questions. One of the Catholic apologists that tried to debate me gave his answers, and they almost sounded Biblical in the first two… but as he went on, it was clear he believed in salvation by works. Let’s see how you do.

  1. When were you converted?
  2. How were you converted?
  3. To what, or to whom, were you converted?
  4. What do you believe now that you did not believe before your conversion?
  5. What does it mean to be saved?
  6. On what scriptural promises do you base your salvation?
  7. What does it mean to be born again?
  8. Are you sure today that if you die tomorrow, or at any time in the future, you will be in heaven immediately after death?
  9. What do you believe about Purgatory?
  10. What do you believe about the Mass?
  11. Do you still participate in the Mass?
  12. Do you believe that any sinner can be saved who dies without trusting in Jesus Christ alone for the salvation of his soul and forgiveness of his sins?
  13. Do you believe that Mary and Roman Catholic saints can answer your prayers or help you get to heaven?
  14. How do you believe that the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ is applied to your soul?
  15. Have you told your priest you have been saved?
  16. Do you believe you will still go to heaven if you leave the Roman Catholic Church, receive believer’s baptism and join a fundamentalist Bible believing, non-Catholic church?
  17. When and where do you plan to do this?

How does the Roman Catholic church define Salvation? When and where do they officially teach salvation?

By the sacrament of Baptism, whenever it is properly conferred in the way the Lord determined and received with the proper dispositions of soul, man becomes truly incorporated into the crucified and glorified Christ and is reborn to a sharing of the divine life” (Vatican II, Decree on Ecumenism, chap. 3, II, 22, p. 427).

“Just as Christ was sent by the Father so also he sent the apostles … that they might preach the Gospel to every creature and proclaim that the Son of God by his death and resurrection had freed us from the power of Satan and from death, and brought us into the Kingdom of his Father. But he also willed that the work of salvation which they preached SHOULD BE SET IN TRAIN THROUGH THE SACRIFICE AND SACRAMENTS, around which the entire liturgical [ritualistic] life revolves” (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Chap. 1, I, 5,6, pp. 23-24).

Roman Catholicism teaches faith by grace PLUS works. If you do not do works, you have less grace.

In other words, you’re not as saved. So, how do you get into heaven?

Let’s say you need 100 points to get into heaven, and baptism as an infant gets you fifteen points. It’s enough to be saved, but not enough to go to heaven immediately when you die.

Confirmation should be enough to get you a couple more points, I guess. The Mass gets you partial points – you have to keep doing it.

Auricular confession is just as important – it gets you partial points as well.

Considering we do not see the Mass at all in the Bible, but rather the Lord’s Supper (there’s a difference), how does the Catholic justify this?

“We just don’t think about it. The church knows what it’s doing.”

Huh.

Auricular confession cannot be found in the Bible either. Nor the Roman Catholic priesthood system. The Roman Catholic system is basically a misappropriated (meaning stolen or usurped) Levitical priesthood. I’ll deal with that soon as well.

What it boils down to is – the Catholic is taught that he or she is saved when they are Baptized into the Catholic church. Why? None of them seem willing to answer that, but the answer is simple:

The Roman Catholic church considers themselves the One True Universal Church, and Salvation cannot be found outside her.

That’s a bottom line statement, by the way. That’s literally what they teach, in Trent, in Vatican II, in their catechism.Since salvation belongs to the Catholic church, the only way to be saved is to belong to that church. Once you belong to it, you’re saved partially. Now you must begin earning the rest of your salvation.

What’s the quickest way to heaven? to complete all seven sacraments. How can you complete all seven sacraments? Well, unless you become a priest, then leave the priesthood to get married, you can’t.

How do most Catholics expect to get to heaven? Because they haven’t been devout enough and gone to daily Mass and daily Confession, they expect to pay for their sins in Purgatory.

Officially, what is Purgatory? A miniature Hell.

The horrible thing is, how many Catholics are writhing in Torment in Hell, begging God in prayer (or more likely, Mary) “Please!!! Isn’t it enough? When do I get out of these torments???” The horror really is when the realization sinks in that they are NOT getting out of the torments, that they were not saved, never chose Christ, and are in Hell.

“The doctrine of purgatory clearly demonstrates that even when the guilt of sin has been taken away, punishment for it or the consequences of it may remain to be expiated or cleansed. They often are. In fact, in Purgatory, the souls of those who died in the charity of God and truly repentant, but who have not made satisfaction with adequate penance for their sins and omissions, are cleansed after death with punishment designed to purge away their debt” (Vatican Council II, p. 75).

THe doctrine of purgatory shows that Catholics believe in Salvation by grace PLUS works.

Scripture teaches salvation by grace ALONE.

What are the correct answers to the questions above? Here’s how you SHOULD be answering…

  1. When were you converted? When I realized I was a sinner in need of salvation, and only Christ could save me
  2. How were you converted? I prayed to Jesus Christ and begged Him to save me. I then trusted with faith He answered me with ‘yes’. The Roman church has nothing to do with it.
  3. To what, or to whom, were you converted? I was converted by faith in Jesus Christ.
  4. What do you believe now that you did not believe before your conversion? That salvation is by faith alone… I believe in the bible as inspired and inerrant
  5. What does it mean to be saved? It means I was born again, that Jesus Christ Himself gave me salvation as a free gift.
  6. On what scriptural promises do you base your salvation? On Romans, which promises that those who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved. On John 3:16, which says that whosoever believeth will be saved, on Eph. 2:8-9, which teaches that salvation is a gift of God and not of works.
  7. What does it mean to be born again? To be born again means I have died spiritually, and risen with Christ. It means that when He died on the Cross, I died with Him, was buried with Him, and have risen again with Him by His grace.
  8. Are you sure today that if you die tomorrow, or at any time in the future, you will be in heaven immediately after death? Yes. I will go immediately to be with the Lord. To die is to be present with the Lord in heaven.
  9. What do you believe about Purgatory? It is a myth, a doctrinal error. It is a damnable heresy.
  10. What do you believe about the Mass? It is a doctrinal error. I believe in the Lord’s supper, not in the Mass.
  11. Do you still participate in the Mass? No.
  12. Do you believe that any sinner can be saved who dies without trusting in Jesus Christ alone for the salvation of his soul and forgiveness of his sins? Yes.
  13. Do you believe that Mary and Roman Catholic saints can answer your prayers or help you get to heaven? No.
  14. How do you believe that the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ is applied to your soul? I believe Christ did this at the moment of my salvation.
  15. Have you told your priest you have been saved? Yes. He did not understand.
  16. Do you believe you will still go to heaven if you leave the Roman Catholic Church, receive believer’s baptism and join a fundamentalist Bible believing, non-Catholic church? Yes.
  17. When and where do you plan to do this? I’m trying to find a Bible believing church, because what I’m hearing in the Catholic church does not match the Bible AT ALL.

You need to get saved. And fast. The Lord is coming soon!

Seventh Day Adventism Answered 19


Let me briefly discuss the “remnant church” doctrine of the SDA before we go much further and address the failed prophecies.

The position of the SDA cult is that they are the remnant church.

That’s it. If you’re not part of the SDA, you’re not part of the Remnant Church.

So literally, when they read the Bible, and they see anything discussing the Remnant, they somehow think that is talking about them and them alone.

27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: 28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. 29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha. Romans 9:27-29 (KJV)

See, they think that means them. I’m guessing. I’m really not seeing any other remnant besides

21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh. Revelation 19:21 (KJV)

But I’m pretty sure they don’t puff their chests and say, “Why, that’s ME!!!”

13 The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth: for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid. Zephaniah 3:13 (KJV)

There’s our clue. Let’s look at Romans 9 again. Some of you should remember when I did a chapter by chapter breakdown (it was very light, designed to show plain, simple sense readings of Romans…) that I addressed who Romans 9-11 was talking to…

These chapters are talking about Israel. Right? Right.

1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Romans 9:1-5 (KJV)

Well, it’s talking about Paul’s kinsmen. That would be the Jews.

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? 25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. Romans 9:22-25 (KJV)

It mentions it’s talking about the Jews. It mentions that most of them don’t believe. Surely the SDA can’t be appropriating that.

Now, let’s make some conclusions. If the SDA is claiming they are thet “remnant church”, then we have issues. Because what does remnant mean? “That which is left over.”

It’s fitting far more into an eschatological (read: End Times) position than it is into a soteriologiccal position (read: Saved or not) – but the two go hand in hand.

Because the Bible clearly portrays the Remnant as a believing remnant. So, if I’m wrong and this is not talking about the Jews (even though it says it is…) then it’s talking about a believing remnant in the midst of others who are unbelieving.

Let me know if that logic passes you by… it’s one or the other.

So, in effect, the SDA is claiming that if they’re the :remnant church”, a phrase I can’t seem to find in my Bible, then they are the believing ones, and the rest of us (you and I) are the unbelieving. how can I say that? Well, it was actually pretty easy. If you’re separating the Remnant doctrine away from the Jewish people where its sense is readily apparent… then we have an allegorical approach where its sense must be determined among a hypothetical Universal church.

Okay, this is one of my little bugaboos. I hear Christians all the time talk about a Universal Church. “God needs to send revival to the Church!” Well, there’s only one verse in Ephesians where you can stretch the concept of a church into a Universal construct. All other verses in the Bible referring to a church are referring to a local entity. Remember, a sound exegetical principle is that we do not derive doctrine from a single verse. Anyone wanting to look up that rule please note it is called the Hapak rule (from the koine Greek for “Once”).

The correct Biblical phrase for a universal body of believers is “The kingdom of God” or “The Kingdom of Heaven”, not “the Church” – although I realize that means just about all of you instantly disagreed with me. It’s okay, I’m not THAT picky about it. I’m not alone in this insistence – David Cloud makes this same distinction in his writings, and almost nobody complains about him. Almost.

Getting back to the SDA, this conclusion now has HUGE implications, putting them once and for all into the Cult definition, the one we looked at in our second article on the SDA… This puts them into True Church-ism. The single quickest way to identify a cult is to see if they claim to be the One True Church. The Jehovah’s Witnesses claim it, and we call them a cult. The Mormons claim it, and until one ran for President as a Republican, Christians considered them a cult as well (hey if they were a cult before, they should still be a cult now… I mean, Republican is the same thing as Christian, right??? “Ye must be a conservative”, II Opinions 13:13… seriously, if they were a cult before the last election, they’re still a cult).

Here’s some questions for the SDA – can I be a Baptist and still be saved? What position does the acceptance of Ellen G. White as a prophet have to do with my salvation? Can I be saved and reject her as a false prophet?

If I can’t, what does that mean for everyone born before 1844? What does that mean for everyone who was SDA, baptized into the cult, and began examining her words against the Bible and left, forswearing the SDA?

What about Matthew Henry? Was he saved? He lived before Ellen G. White. What about Alfred Edersheim, whose writings Ellen White plagiarized freely from? What about Martin Luther? John Huss? John Calvin? (I’ll answer about a couple of these and say, I don’t think their testimonies give the evidence of being born again… but this is my questions for the SDA, who place equal weight upon acceptance of Ellen G. White and Baptism into their cult alongside being born Again).

We have problems. Major problems. Cult problems.

Now we need to address salvation by works, which the SDA clearly teaches. As I mentioned in the sentence above, the SDA places equal emphasis on being baptized into their cult.

In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry ofChrist will mark the close of human probation before the Second Advent.

This is from their statement of faith, and if you’re used to reading statements of faith and looking for heresies, behold, it is there.

It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom.

This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the kingdom.

Ellen White made it clear, although it’s not mentioned much nowadays, if you don’t keep vegetarian, you’re going to Hell. She made it clear if you don’t keep the Sabbath, you’re going to Hell. Remember, their definition of remaining loyal to God means Keeping the Sabbath – which they themselves do not do! Yet we have testimony that she ate meat and shellfish, and I addressed Sabbath Keeping and the SDA and made it pretty clear, that they do not keep the Sabbath at all…

I think, to me, it’s pretty clear – they teach Salvation by works. They have fulfilled EVERY ONE of the hallmarks of cultism that I showed back in article 2…

  1. Are they teaching Biblical doctrine, or heretical? heretical
  2. Are they preaching the Gospel, or another Gospel? Another gospel.
  3. Is their Jesus the Jesus of the Bible, or a different Jesus? Different Jesus.
  4. Do they rely solely on the word of God, or upon extra-Biblical writings? upon Ellen G. White’s plagiarized writings
  5. Do they derive their doctrines solely from the word of God, or do the teachings of the organization/denomination/cult have equal weight to the Bible? Equal weight.
  6. Is there a central figure or group they owe a personal allegiance to? Ellen G. White
  7. Do they regard their cult/denomination/group as the only true church? Yes
  8. Do they add required actions or works to assist as a means of salvation? Baptism, Sabbath Keeping, Vegetarianism

These are major problems. A different Gospel is a different Jesus, and a different Jesus cannot save. It’s not my quote, it belongs to another Baptist, but I find it so fitting when dealing with cults.

Lastly, we look at the issue of false prophecy. According to the Bible, if a prophet is wrong once, just once, they are a false prophet.

In 1862, Moses Hull was discouraged and planning to leave the SDA. The words of Ellen G. White to him were…

If you proceed in the way you have started, misery and woe are before you. God’s hand will arrest you in a manner that will not suit you. His wrath will not slumber” (“Testimonies for the Church,” Vol. I., pp. 430, 431).

Needless to say, Moses Hull lived to a ripe old age.

The Civil War of 1861-65 placed Seventh-day Adventists in a trying position. They could not engage in war and keep the Sabbath. The draft threatened them. Now, what? I was one of them, twenty years old – the right age to go to war. So I remember it all distinctly. Something had to be done. We hoped Mrs. White would have a revelation. And she did have – several of them, covering thirty pages of printed matter in Volume I. Of “Testimonies for the Church.” At the time, we read these revelations with great anxiety, hoping for light ahead. We were disappointed. They simply told just what everybody already knew, reflecting the sentiments of those opposed to the Government and the war. (D. M. Canwright, LIfe of Ellen G. White Her Claims Refuted, pg. 49)

On Jan. 4, 1862, Ellen G. White received a divine vision, and committed these words to paper, and doubtless years later was to regret it. She claimed that slavery would continue past the civil war, and another war would be needed to fix the problem once for all. She claimed that the war was started by the North not to abolish slavery, but to preserve it.

That’s the most stupid, illogical statement I’ve ever heard. The South was against the abolition of slavery. If the North was against the abolition of slavery, then the south would have inquired, “Then why are we fighting???”

If the war was fought to prevent the abolition of slavery by the north, then.. why did Lincoln (who White bitterly criticized, castigating him in one vision after another) utter the Emancipation Proclamation, setting free the slaves?

How many Adventists are aware that Ellen G. White prophesied that America would be so embroiled in the war, that Britain would be forced to enter the war to end it, and would humble America?

Well, that never happened.

Elder Bates, the same person who’s influence caused the SDA to worship on the seventh day, even wrote a list based on this vision, of the countries that would enter the war, including “…Prussia, Hanover, Sardinia, Sicily, Naples, Venice, Lombardy, Tuscany, Rome, Austria,…” which of course, some of these are small cities, and not liable to be involved in a war. Why not just say “Italy, Germany, and Prussia?”

Needless to say, this never happened.

Ellen G. White predicted famine and pestilence before the end of the Civil War. If by pestilence she meant cannon shot and bullets, she was right. If on the other hand she meant it in its literal sense, then she was wrong.

so… that never happened.

Supposedly, Ellen G. white was shown a vision of the San Francisco earthquake two days before the earthquake… but didn’t bother telling anyone for several days. Well, I prophecy that on Sept. 11, 2001 two airplanes will crash into the World Trade Center. I have been shown much detail by the angels, and it has taken much time to sort it out…

do you believe it? Everyone’s a prophet of God two or three days after major events. As a matter of fact, I will predict the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963! It will happen in… it looks like Texas…

The point here is, Ellen G. White had to learn the hard way to make her prophecies more generic and absent of specific details and dates. How did she learn this valuable lesson? By being wrong so many times.

How many times does the Bible allow a prophet to be wrong?

Answer – none. You cannot ever be wrong, or you are not a prophet.

1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. 5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee. Deuteronomy 13:1-5 (KJV)

False prophets give false prophecies. False prophets lead people astray. If they’re giving prophecies, visions, dreams, then according to the Bible, they’re lying… or they’re heeding the voice of a devil, according to Deut. 13:5.

That’s a bottom line attitude! The Lord tells us how this is.

According to the Bible, Ellen G. White succumbed to her worse fear, that she would be an apostate, a heretic, a false prophet, a daughter of Beliar. We aren’t really left with any choice. And as I reported a few days ago, the SDa itself used to bear witness her visions were either of Satan or God.

Well, they’re not from God. She spoke “thus sayeth the Lord” by using the words “I was shown…” and many times she spoke or wrote to people saying, “My words are the words of the Lord.”

And she was wrong. According to the Bible passage explaining how to differentiate false prophets from right ones, we see you are allowed ZERO errors. She was wrong about the life of Moses Hull. She was wrong about famine and pestilence during the Civil war. She was wrong about England entering the war. She was wrong about Lincoln, the war and slavery. There was no need for a second war to free slaves.

She was wrong, wrong, wrong. So to fix her image, they tried an elaborate “I was shown the san francisco earthquake but did not have time to write it down…” ruse. If this was true, I’m sure Ellen could have simply summoned a news reporter, given him the basic facts, and then written it in detail days later.

If it is true, by callous indifference, Ellen G. White is guilty of the blood of every person maimed or killed in the earthquake and the resulting fire that massacred many. I think we all know and agree she simply tried to take credit for it days later, similar to her first vision who she plagiarized from the very man she would tell the vision to the following day!

So, let’s look at the most embarrassing doctrine of the SDA.

The Shut door of mercy.

This is one that the SDA has had problems with. They ended up having to delete a lot of paragraphs from Ellen G. White’s writings, but they’ve left a few in by accident.

the doctrine teaches that as of 1844, the door of mercy was shut.

That means no SDA today has been forgiven of sins. Which is no surprise, as Ellen G. White has written that all our sins, even the ones from before we were born again, would be brought up again in judgment. Which means the SDA teaches our sins are not forgiven by grace through faith.

Every SDA owes it to themselves to track down and get copies of all of Ellen G. White’s original works. They are readily available, and can be had by anyone – It’s kind of like trying to find Joseph Smith’s early writings – it’ll take a few days of searching, but they’re out there. Or back issues of the Watchtower Society and Awake! All readily available – and immediately embarrassing to those cults as well.

Elder J.N. Loughborough, in his book, “The Great Second Advent Movement,” page 263, edition 1905, desired to give Elder Joseph Bates’ testimony concerning Mrs. White’s work, as given on page 21 of “A Word to the Little Flock,” printed in 1847. The following illustrates the manner in which he uses the material from this early publication. He quotes: “I believe the work [of Mrs. White] is of God, and is given to comfort and strengthen his scattered, torn and peeled people, since the closing up of our work. . . in October, 1844.”

Note those three little dots? They mean that something was left out of the passage quoted. What was it? Just THREE SHORT WORDS. We will insert those words omitted from the lines quoted and indicate them [in uppercase letters]. Here they are: “since the closing up of our work FOR THE WORLD in October, 1844.” These three words reveal the fact that Bates and Elder White, who published the tract in 1847, believed that their work for the world closed up in October, 1844.

Elder Loughborough wished to use these lines and yet hide this fact regarding the belief of these early leaders. To accomplish it he omitted – suppressed – just three words, and placed three dots in their place in his quotation! He did not do this to save space in a large work of six hundred pages. He did it to hide, conceal and suppress a doctrine which he well knew Bates and Elder and Mrs. White all believed and taught in 1847. It is a deliberate deception, too plain to be denied. It shows how willing he was to falsify in order to shield Mrs. White and the pioneers in this movement who adhered to her and proclaimed her a prophet. (The Life of Ellen G. White – her claims refuted by D. W. Canwright pg. 35)”The excitements and false reformations of this day do not move us, for we know that the Master of the house rose up in 1844, and shut the door of the first apartment of the heavenly tabernacle; and now we certainly expect that they will go with their flocks to seek the Lord; but they shall not find him; he hath withdrawn himself (within the second veil) from them. The Lord has shown me that the power that is with them is a mere human influence and not the power of God.” (Ellen G. White, Present Truth – note – there were only eleven copies of Present Truth printed, and this is edited heavily in her “Early Writings” book)

Bottom line – Ellen G. White wrote and believed that if you came to the Lord after 1844, it was far too late. However, by 1864, she’d begun to realize that Armageddon was a little delayed, and so quietly put that doctrine away, although you can still see little references to them here and there in the Great Controversy.

If you believe she’s a prophet, she’s in effect saying there’s no hope for you. You weren’t saved before 1844.

Here ends my writings on THE most distasteful cult I ave examined, even above Mormonism. My impressions of the Jehovah’s witnesses were that they were duped by a drug addled liar, and then manipulated by a lawyer with no ethics and that they still are blind.

My opinions of the Mormons are that they are all generically decent people, sincere but caught up in a cult of disastrous proportions.

My opinions of Roman Catholics is that they’ve been lied to and duped by an evil system.

But the overall impressions I’ve gotten of the SDA is that of sheer, unadulterated, unfiltered evil. I have to stop, as we get close to the celebration of the birth of our saviour, as I cannot bear to write about this cult in such a close proximity to His birth day.

So, I stop here. I may address it further in the future, but for now I’m stopping.

If you’re SDA, you need to do some serious praying, and reading of your King James Bible to find out what the truth is. Get out of this cult, while you still can.

Seventh Day Adventism Answered 18


So far we’ve answered a great deal on SDA…

  • the state of the dead
  • annhilationism
  • the sabbath
  • the covenant of the law and law keeping
  • is the Sabbath for Christians
  • the source of Ellen G. White’s “visions”
  • the real sources of her books
  • the investigative judgment

I write all this out so I can keep track. I know everyone skips past it, but I felt like when I had these lists, I had better direction over my expose’s.

Let’s talk about vegetarianism.

How can SDA possibly read the Bible and still feel a need to eat vegetarian?

Answer – if they have to choose between Ellen G. White and the Bible, they choose Ellen G. White.

Better hope she can save your soul, because you can’t be saved and make that kind of choice!

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: 5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. 1 Timothy 4:1-5 (KJV)

Okay, how does the SDA reconcile this?

The Bible is specific, that any who forbid the eating of meats in the last days is a seducing spirit teaching doctrines of devils!

so… why? Why do they do it?

The SDA is constantly pushing the supposed health benefits of a vegan lifestyle, and are attracting vegan people to their cult. how much truth there is to these claims can be debated. I’d get into this debate, but I’m limiting this to Scriptural reasons.

Ellen G. White ordered the cessation of eating meats to prevent “solitary vice”, according to is it so?

From “An appeal to Mothers” by Ellen G. White…

“We noticed bad diet as a cause of unchastity. By bad diet we mean the use of food and drinks of bad qualities and unreasonable quantities. (p. 5) A diet chiefly or wholly vegetable, is evidently best adapted to allay passionate excitement. Flesh meat diet is more stimulating than vegetable. Consequently it is plain that all those who suffer from too high venereal excitement, should abandon it (meat) … When children shall be taught correct habits of diet, much, very much, Will be done toward the removal of secret vice and other species of unchastity from society. (p. 9) Mince pies, cakes, preserves, and highly seasoned meats, with gravies, create a feverish condition in the system, and inflame the animal passions. . . We should encourage in our children a love for nobleness of mind, and a pure, virtuous character. In order to strengthen in them the moral perceptions, . . . we must regulate the manner of our living, dispense with animal foods, and use grains, vegetables and fruits, as articles of diet. (p. 15)

“Sip no more the beverage of China; no more the drinks of java; what shall you drink at your meals? … I say, nothing is best; yet cocoa, chocolate, or warm water seasoned, or bread coffee, rice coffee . . . will be good substitutes as they do not inflame.”

“For a similar reason, meats, mustards, condiments, peppers, spices, rich foods, gravies, everything heating and irritating, will only add to existing inflammation, and increase both desire and disease … Some kinds of food, as already specified, excite amorous desires; while others, as rice, bread, fruit, vegetables do not; and may therefore be eaten.”

“As to suppers, I recommend none at all….”

If you wish to study this further, by all means, visit other websites. This is as far as I will discuss this topic. Let’s just say that there is no biblical reason given to refrain from eating meat. It has NOTHING to do with how we were in Eden. It has nothing to do with how we may possibly eat after we enter the kingdom of God forever. It has to do with Ellen G. White’s bizarre imagination. I eliminated a large quote section, as I think this is improper to discuss this, even in quoting her writings.

How many SDA are eliminating coffee and tea from their diets? How many avoid cake? How many confine themselves to breakfast and lunch alone? I can tell you Ellen G. White did not. She continued eating meat and shellfish long forbidding it. Apparently, the rules didn’t apply to her.

how many of you still believe Ellen G. White after what I’ve written over 20 days or so?

How many of you still think that she is a prophet?

That’s about to end, because tomorrow – my last planned article on the SDA, as unpleasant as it has been, is going to discuss what a prophet is and is not… and we’ll be looking at some of her prophecies.