Read prior message: http://www.a4t.org/Letters/turner-pastors_thoughts_on_this_site.html

Bro. De La Torre,


This morning I received and read your e-mail reply to my letter. I am grateful that you have read my letter and have taken considerable time to construct a response. The purpose of me writing my letter was to give you my personal assessment of your metamorphosis from "Adventist believer" to "Adventist critic", and to convey to you my sentiments concerning the drastic change you have made.

In reading the tone of your e-mail, I have immediately seen that you are argumentative about your position and desirous of engaging in a "electronic fight". I have ascertained this by noticing your use of capital letters in the midst of sentences, so as to make your points. In my earlier days of being introduced to posting, instant messaging, and e-mail, I was told that such constructing of words (using all capital letters at certain points in a sentence) in an electronic message constitutes "electronic shouting" or "electronic fussing". Adding to your sentence construct, I see that you have been willing to take jabs at myself, make assumptions about myself, i.e. my knowledge concerning the Bible, make assumptions about what I probably believe and probably sign on to. Bro. De La Torre, I wish to first say that I was able to write most assuredly about your position/s concerning various doctrinal or subject areas, simply because you have a web site, and therefore have thoroughly stated your positions, on various topics, for all the world to see. I do not wish to have an adversarial discussion with you, as others have. Possession of the proper spirit is essential to the changing of hearts; whether its yours or mine that needs changing. I am perfectly willing to e-dialogue with you on the topics that you have raised, and equally as willing to renounce (publicly) any position I have held to date that is not founded in the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy; as you have challenged.

However, I would propose the following: Firstly, that in our correspondence we stick to the topic or issue at hand and discuss the merits, or demerits, of our proposals; and refrain from personal attacks. This does a disservice to God and to the advancement of His gospel when we "fist fight" over the scriptures. Secondly, that we tackle issues one by one. Your e-mail raises about 6 or 7 questions, and as I like to be detailed in my answers, It means that we must nearly write a mini book before releasing a single e-mail.

I would however, like to give a response to your first question in the previous e-mail. You posed the following: 1. Who does the Bible say was with Eve during her temptation in the Garden of Eden? Specifically referring to Gen. 3:6 as compared with what is printed in Patriarchs and Prophets, I’ll let you find the page or pages, (I no longer have those books) because it is one of the SDA’s core teachings that ANYONE from kindergarten age onwards can easily recite?

In answer to your question....

The way in which you posed your question "Who does the Bible say was with Eve during her temptation ..." suggests to me that you have reached an assumption that Adam was "with her" when she was being tempted by the serpent, based on the construct of that portion of Gen. 3:6. However, I believe for your theory to be authenticated, one would have to accept a rather overwhelming idea that Adam was standing next to Eve's side, completely mute, as suggestions were being made by the serpent to disobey the direct command of God, and that Adam not only made no contribution while the discussion was going on, but watched his wife eat the fruit (without protest) and then was instructed by Eve to eat the fruit; for which he humbly obeyed; also without protest. Bro. De La Torre, surely this cannot be the case. For what reason would Adam have become a boy, obedient to his "mother's command. He was the first human created, created before Eve, given dominion over the animals, and the donor of the rib that produced his wife; and was instructed by God that she was to be his "help meet" (Gen. 2:18). But you seem to be suggesting that Adam was acting as a weak man, who has allowed his wife to take the lead on such a crucial issue; the introduction of sin into this world. I ask you, what circumstances produced such a silent, passive Adam at that critical juncture? I will admit that if you follow the generally accepted view, that Eve came over to where Adam was, after she ate the fruit, and gave him the fruit, shows that Adam allowed his love for his wife to become a point of weakness, but its hard to believe that he was walking around the Garden of Eden "a generally weak man" just ripe and susceptible for such as scenario as his wife being tempted, in his presence, without him breathing one word of protest, and then being "told" to eat the fruit as his wife has; to which he passively consents. Bro. De La Torre, I must say that for one to draw such conclusions shows a driving intent to come up with anything to discredit the servant of the Lord, than to reach conclusions that bear a semblance of reasonable logic. Although I know that not all of God's word will follow logical, human reasoning, I do believe that reasonable conclusions can, and must be drawn concerning certain biblical stories. For example, I think that it would be unreasonable to conclude that Daniel was a timid, faithless man after you have read the story of him in the Lion's den. By the same token, to think that Adam was weak even before the first sin is illogical.

At issue are the two following words, "with her." You are certain that those words, "with her" means that Adam was there at the tree. But I ask you, are all constructions of scripture to be taken as self-explanatory? I think not! Does not the Bible say, "And the Lord hardened the heart of Pharoah"? (Ex. 9:12) If I just look at those words, I would have to conclude that God encouraged Pharoah to harden his heart against the words that He inspired Moses to say to him. That's just not logical. Why would God speak to Moses to tell him to appeal to Pharoah to let the Children of Israel go, and then speak to Pharoah to encourage him to resist what Moses was saying? Therefore, the construct of the verse cannot be accepted as self-explanatory. In 1 Thessalonians 2:11 the bible states, "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." Does this mean that "God deludes people?" Absolutely not! Just as in the case of Pharoah, when one consistently resists the word of the Lord, there is a "hardening effect." Pharoah and "those who resist truth" share one thing in common; a hardening from consistent resistence. It was not "God" who cause Pharaoah's heart to hardened, but the rejection of God that hardened his heart. In the last days, it is not God who sends delusions to men and women, but rejecting of the truth that sends men and women into delusion.

My point is that just looking at the construct of a Biblical text and drawing a conclusion, simply by using the construct of that text as the only prove of what it seems to be saying, is not reasonable exegesis. The scriptures are replete with texts for which you may apply the aforementioned exegetical principle safely, but this application of Gen. 3:6 is not one of them. I believe that "with her" is only referring to the fact the Adam is who she is adjoined to; a restatement of his position as her husband. Do you really believe that Adam would have let this event come and go, without offering one word of caution? That is my question to you.

In your response, I only ask one thing....that you answer the question that is posed. The aforementioned question is the question I am desirous of an answer from you.

Sorry that it has taken so long for this response. I really have been just that busy. I hope that you will see that I am not a Pastor who dodges questions and issues.

God bless and look forward to your response.

Pastor T.

Dear Pastor T.,

I was a bit surprised to see your message. I will admit that I was a bit of intrigued, if that is the correct word. He must have a lot to tell me, because it took him this long to write it all out!

I also wish to tell you that I am trying to come across as a friend not an adversary. I can readily admit to much that you brought out in your response and it stung me. There is no better time to change than when it is realized that change is required! Of my own, I do not have any Truth, apart from what God has impressed my mind with and through His Spirit he has allowed me to partake it with others. You did hit the nail on the head, when you said that I tended to debate people. I would say it was more like challenge people that saw things differently! Change is hard, trust me!! But through the grace of Jesus I am improving, and I will continue improving through His grace alone until He sees fit to stop me. I could tell you quite a story besides that I am blind. Let me just preface it with this...I was on dialysis for two years until we realized that my wife could donate one of her kidneys to me, even if she was of a different blood and tissue group. With that in mind, we were accepted at a major transplant center in Los Angeles. It took months of treatments to prepare my body and de-sensitize it to accept my wife's kidney. Now, here is the incredible part that only God could have made to happen...first, I have to say that we had been told that the chance for a cadaver donor were rare for me, because I had already received a cadaver kidney in 1994, so, because of the antibodies I had in me, my chances were in the 5% range of the entire population of our country! We were finally given our surgery date. It was scheduled for April 10^th of this year (2009). On Sabbath, April 4^th, as we were beginning my daily home hemo-dialysis treatment, I received a call from the transplant center asking me if I could come in that afternoon after I had finished dialysis. Why, My wife and I asked? A PERFECTLY MATCHING Kidney was being flown in from St. Louis for me!!! Surgery was done the next morning, I was out of the hospital in three days and I haven’t looked back since! God is sooo Good! And I was the least deserving of the many candidates (I was still far up on the list), BUT...I was the ONLY Perfect Match! Do we not have a loving and most gracious God?

This website is for the purpose of studying what is Biblical Truth. If it doesn’t agree or gel with the Scriptures it is deemed false doctrine, as simple as that.

God has a ‘people’ not a ‘church’. They are a people FIRST, not the other way around. I do not have to assume anything about you, Pastor Turner, just the fact that you are a Pastor tells me all that I need to know, not judge, just as if I called myself a doctor or a farmer would give you all the background that you would need to get an insight into my head. I do not assume anything that YOU have not already made clear to me about yourself. Having been born into a preacher’s family I know more than I would ever wish to know!

Let’s get back to your question. The first thought that came to my mind was that you were beginning to wander off the path. While the Bible does not create a historical thesis on what happened in Eden, we know what did not happen. Adam was not the one that was tempted. Genesis 3:13 gives us the entire story. Adam is not under scrutiny under God’s gaze, Eve is!! While I am sure that Adam had some culpability or responsibility, the God of Heaven and Earth, who is an able Judge over all, the entire Universe, for that matter is ‘not’ gazing down at Adam! Where did you get your speculations from that Adam would be cowering under Eve’s demands and could not resist her enticements? If anything can be said, it would be that Adam certainly held fast to the concept of not being an absent husband as in neglecting his bride or as is more commonly done to do by a legal separation and divorce. Hooray for Adam!

Another crucial point that needs to be made and I can only assume is one reason why this Church canonizes her is because she wrote about events that even the Bible’s prophets were not privy too. Some Bible writers -simply said that Satan fell from heaven or that he was the morning star. But no one outside of Ellen White goes into the details of what was occurring in heaven behind closed doors that even Satan was not allowed to attend. Is this the basis for a belief that she was inspired? Would GOD give a late century writer information not contained or delivered to any of His prophets of old? Please think about the absurdity of this. We are talking about the Highest Being that has ever existed or will ever exist!

This brings to mind 1 Cor. 15:22-28. I feel that it is vitally important that all who may someday read this should also be impacted by what the Word of God really says:

15.22

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

15.23

But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

15.24

Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

15.25

For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

15.26

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

15.27

For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

15.28

And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Not to switch the subject on you, but, since this does tie in with some of the comments that you have brought up, especially about the SOP and Truth. Allow me to surmise it as I recall it.

God does have events that He has kept between His Son, Jesus and Himself alone. No, not even a prophet knows these things. There is no Biblical evidence to believe that what Ellen White says she was shown could have ever happened. Secrets are secrets and if Satan was dying to discover them, then we can safely assume that he didn’t. I am certain that Ellen was just as capable as Satan at making up something that her mind made up, as beautiful as she may have portrayed it. She was not a part of the Deity, she had no historical basis for writing anything that happened prior to Creation. If she did, what would that do to anyone’s belief in the Scriptures? What would that do to 2 Tim. 3:16-17?

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

3.17

That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

How, pray tell, do we apply verse 17 to Ellen White?

Let me get back to 1 Cor. 15. What these verses clearly say is that God is the Ruler of all and that all things will return to normalcy after Death is vanquished. Christ will also return to His previous position in Heaven. God the Father will once again be the King, owner and Ruler over all that lives and breathes, all that is animate and inanimate. I am bringing this up because it is so common for Christians, including SDAs to say that Christ is God. There are two members of the Deity and as there is order in heaven, we should have order in our minds as to who is God and Who is the Lord. While I will admit that God threw mankind a curve ball, there is also a reason why He gave us the Scriptures and did not leave it up to a mere uninspired human to figure out the details! After all it is well known that Ellen White wrote about the Deity as the Bible teaches it as well as covering herself by writing of the Trinitarian (as much as I hate putting a capital on this word, clarity demands it) doctrine. Which one is, Mrs. White? God is a God of order not disorder...

This would also be a good place to say that if a true seeker for Truth searches through the New Testament () which is the portion of the Holy Bible that all the secular churches deem important, that if they were to just look at each book’s salutation, they might be amazed at how many times these different authors agree on one thing; that Jesus Christ is not God, that He is a separate Being, the SON of GOD! Never, Jesus Christ, God of Heaven and Earth. I was also aware that the Holy Spirit is ‘never’ mention in all these salutations at or near the beginning of each book in the New Testament.

So, the question that really matters is this, is Jesus God? If not Who is His God?

The response that He gave to Mary upon meeting her outside His tomb is most important: John 20:16,17 :

16: Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

17: Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

This is further established in Rev. 3:12 :

12: Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.

Who is speaking here and WHO is He speaking about? How many Holy Beings are we dealing with? How many times does Christ tell us ‘My God’?

And Christ in His own gentle way then says in the following verse:

13: He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Who is the Spirit here? Was another Person left out? Or is it possible that Christ is telling us that God, His God and Father still has that still small voice. Which all mankind should recognize as our conscience?

I am not a preacher, but I would sure not want to be caught in that group mentioned a few verses prior to v.12. Rev. 3:9. It makes me shudder at the thought!

This may be the wrong place to interject this thought, but since it just hit me, I had to find a place to insert it into.

Rev. 19:10 is an oft quoted text that proves to a believer of this Church the validity of Ellen White being a true prophet. Can we look a little closer into this text? The angel is remonstrating John for bowing before him, the angel. So, that I do not leave anything out of the point that needs to be seen here I will enclose the entire text:

And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: Worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

I do not know if the underlined words will appear on the email, so I will tell you that I underlined the words "the testimony of Jesus. Pastor Turner what are the two words that follow this short phrase? Now, comes my question to you and to ALL pastors in Adventism, as much as this verse has been studied and taught in seminary, how this point be so acutely absent? The entire existence of Christ upon this earth was devoted to ‘Worshipping the Father’. This has been the essence of the angelic hosts in heaven, AND will ne the essence of all those that make it to live for eternity. This is the Testimony of Jesus Christ. THIS IS THE essence for the Spirit of Prophecy! To sum it up this should be emblazoned on the foreheads of ALL Adventists: The Spirit of Prophecy is the Testimony of Jesus Christ. The Testimony of Jesus Christ is WORSHIP GOD... not the writings of Ellen White! I realize this is a doctrinal belief of your Church, but it is the core reason why more and more individuals are leaving this Church. Once you discover this for yourself you will literally wonder how you could have missed this simple Truth all of your life. I would dare say that in your youth, you were impressed that this was a good job with many benefits, but it could never equal what could also happen if one were found to be in the Synagogue of Satan.

As I hope you will see there is much that needs to be studied and has not been mentioned by men whose purpose in life is to delve into the Scriptures and be the eyes for the blind and the mouths for the mute and dumb.

I believe that the area of hypocrisy by Ellen White is not paid any attention by the Church. We know that Christ was not a vegan, while on Earth, yet the Church elaborates on Ellen being a vegan, when it is well known that she was not. The following well known quote cannot be denied:

"If you can get me a good box of herrings, fresh ones, please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy...half a dozen cans of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can GET A FEW CANS OF GOOD OYSTERS, get them." (Letter 16, 1882, to daughter-in-law, Mary Kelsey White). This quote can be found in Herbert Douglas’ book Messenger of the Lord, pp. 315-316.

So, should anyone doubt D.M. Canright when he writes in his book, The Life of Ellen White, the first paragraph from chapter 11?

"There is no example in the Bible where a prophet took advantage of his inspiration to enrich himself. The prophets of the Bible generally worked hard, had little and died poor. Mrs. White and her husband began poor. She says: "We entered upon our work penniless" (Testimonies, Vol. I., p. 75). But as soon as they became leaders, they commercialized their work, and managed to supply themselves well. They soon had abundance, and used means for themselves lavishly. They would always have the best of everything, and plenty of it. Everywhere they went they required to be waited upon in the most slavish manner. At an early campmeeting in Michigan they sent their son Edson out in camp crying: "Who has a chicken for mother? Mother wants a chicken." Mrs. White dressed richly, and generally had a number of attendants to wait on her."

Pastor T., my site was never intended to be a center for debate, controversial? Perhaps! Passion encourages study, debate only encourages further debate... no. My style of writing has been a style that I have long held. I did try rather surprisingly to myself to hold my outbursts to myself. I can only continue to grow in His grace. Like Paul, I AM a chief among sinners, and I am apologizing for giving you the impressions that you garnered by perusing the site. But, I will warn you that there are three areas which can tackle my restraints. They would include the false teachings of the Trinity, the false teachings of the timing of Christ’s death and resurrection and of course, last but certainly not the least, the belief that Ellen G. White was an inspired messenger of God. I believe that those were among the areas that my challenge to you were posed under. Show me from the Scriptures the validity of the popular beliefs, held by your Church and most other Christian churches and I trust that we will engage in a fruitful if not enlightening set of discussions. Let me assure you that I am not an intellect in any of these areas, I just tend to put the Bible in it’s rightful place...on the TOP of the heap!

May God richly bless you as well as our discussions.

Brother Bob
(see www.a4t.org)

Many will be lost because to avoid being deceived
they preferred to believe a lie.