Teresita responds inappropriatly
Cindy
synt...@localline.com says...
>
>Hi Paul,
>Did you know that Babylon is confusion by mixing, as in mixing truth
>and error?
Teresita responds:
Also mixing human and animal.
"Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may
be seen in
the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain
races of
men." EGW, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 75
----------------------------------------
Teresita,
You don't have any basis for making such a silly statement.
It is always interesting to me, how when biblical Adventist truth is
posted,
often people like you can't respond in a Christian manner with
scripture. Suddenly there is a need to attack Ellen White, although
she wasn't in the conversation or quoted. It even happens within the
SDA denomination. I have seen it over and over, first someone begins
to preach new and strange doctrines at variance with SDA fundamental
beliefs, and then they are overcome with a compelling need to attack
Ellen White, or her writings. Not that I expect you to answer, but who
inspired you to do this? Satan?
~ Cindy
For those who care about truth rather than slander:
http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/amalg.html
Amalgamation: Ellen G. White Statements
Regarding Conditions at the Time of the Flood
By Francis D. Nichol
(Adapted from his book Ellen G. White and Her Critics, pp. 306-322)
"In the summer of 1864 the "Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist
Publishing Association" at Battle Creek, Michigan, published a
three-hundred-page Ellen G. White volume entitled "Important Facts of
Faith in Connection With the History of Holy Men of Old." This was the
third of a four-volume series carrying the general title of Spiritual
Gifts.
In this work the narrative of the early history of the world is
presented, commencing with "The Creation" and carrying down to the
giving of the law to Israel, these matters, as the author states in
her Preface, having been opened to her in vision.
In Chapter 6, entitled "Crime Before the Flood," Mrs. White in
describing the deplorable conditions which led to the catastrophic
destruction of the world, speaks of the amalgamation of man and beast.
In the next chapter there is another similar reference. Occasionally
inquiry is made as to just what Mrs. White did write in this
connection and what her statements meant, and why they are not found
in her later works, now current. Some have linked the amalgamation
statements with the memory of ancient myths regarding strange
creatures produced by unholy alliance between human beings and beasts,
and have asked if the E. G. White statements do not give support to
these fables. It is also intimated that they tend toward evolution.
The only passages in Mrs. White's writings that are of interest in
this connection are found in Spiritual Gifts, volume 3, already
mentioned and republished in Spirit of Prophecy, volume 1, in 1870.
The first, in chapter 6, "Crime Before the Flood," is this:
But if there was one sin above another which called for the
destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of
amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and
caused confusion everywhere. God purposed to destroy by a flood that
powerful, long-lived race that had corrupted their ways before
him.--Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 64.
Chapter 7 is entitled "The Flood," and contains this statement:
Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the
ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the
result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the Flood. Since the Flood
there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the
almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races
of men.--Page 75.
These are Mrs. White's only statements on the subject of the
amalgamation of man and beast.
Just what Mrs. White meant by these passages has been the occasion of
some speculation through the years, and two explanations have been set
forth. Some have held that she taught not only that men and beasts
have cohabited but also that progeny resulted. However, those who hold
this view have contended that this does not support the doctrine of
evolution. The evolution theory depends for its life on the idea that
small, simple living structures can gradually evolve into ever higher
forms of life, finally bringing forth man.
That more or less closely related forms of life may cross and produce
hybrids is not questioned by creationists today. That, in the long
ago, when virility was greater, and conditions possibly in some
respects different, more diverse forms of life might have
crossed--such as man and some higher forms of animals--can be set
forth only as an assumption. But this assumption has marshaled against
it the whole weight of scientific belief today. Of course, scientists
have been wrong, at times, in reasoning that all the past must be
understood in terms of the processes we now see going on.
We might leave the matter as being beyond the range of investigation
or proof. The Bible itself contains some such statements, as all
students of the Scriptures well know.
But there is another explanation of these amalgamation passages which
is well supported and we believe more satisfying and which avoids any
conflict with the observable data of science.
What Does the Word "Amalgamation" Mean?
First, what is the general meaning of the word "amalgamation"? Is it
ever used to describe the depraved act of cohabitation of man with
beast? No dictionaries we have had access to, not even the exhaustive
Oxford English Dictionary, indicate that the term has ever been used
to describe this act. There is another standard English word that may
properly be used to describe such cohabitation. The primary usage of
the word "amalgamation" through long years has been to describe the
fusion of certain metals, and by extension, to denote the fusing of
races of men. In the mid-nineteenth century the word was commonly
employed in the United States to describe the intermarriage of the
white and the Negro race.[1]
The long-established meaning of the key word "amalgamation" as the
blending of races should weigh heavily in determining the
interpretation of the questioned passages.
Second, the whole tenor of Mrs. White's writings provides strong
testimony against the claim that she is here seeking solemnly to
present as fact some ancient stories about abnormal man-beast progeny.
Her writings are not tainted with fanciful fables of the long ago.
Rather, they have a strongly matter-of-fact quality to them. If she
had been a dreamer and visionary, how frequently might she have
regaled her readers with myths and weird stories of antiquity.
What Does the Key Phrase Mean?
The crux of the "amalgamation" passages is this: "amalgamation of man
and beast." That statement could be construed to mean amalgamation of
man with beast, or amalgamation of man and of beast. In a construction
like this the preposition "of" is not necessarily repeated, though it
may be clearly implied. We might speak of the scattering of man and
beast over the earth, but we do not therefore mean that previously man
and beast were fused in one mass at one geographical spot. We simply
mean the scattering of man over the earth and the scattering of beasts
over the earth, though the original location of the two groups might
have been on opposite sides of the earth. In other words, the
scattering of man and of beast.
Then why may we not rightly understand this particular grammatical
construction in the same way when speaking of amalgamation? If we may
speak of a scattering of man and beast without at all implying that
scattering started from a single spot, why may we not speak of the
amalgamation of man and beast without at all implying that man and
beast came together in one place in fusion?
We believe that the meaning of the key phrase in question is found by
understanding it to read: "amalgamation of man and [of] beast." Thus
the passage would be speaking of the amalgamation of different races
of mankind and the amalgamation of different races of animals. The
grammatical construction and common usage permit us to understand "of"
as being implied.
The Results of Amalgamation
But does simply the amalgamation of different races of men and the
amalgamation of different species of animals suffice to measure up to
the description of the evil character of amalgamation and the results
that followed from it; namely, destruction by a flood? Let us look
first at the amalgamation of races of men. Note again the text of the
first quotation cited (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 64), and observe
these characteristics of amalgamation:
1. It was the "one sin above another which called for the destruction
of the race by the Flood."
2. It "defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere."
3. "That powerful, long-lived race . . . had corrupted their ways
before him."
Two distinct groups of human beings are presented at the opening of
the chapter in Spiritual Gifts, volume 3, entitled "Crime Before the
Flood":
(1) "The descendants of Seth," and (2) "The descendants of Cain." The
two groups were distinct in two marked ways: (1) The first group "felt
the curse but lightly." (2) The second group, "who turned from God and
trampled upon his authority, felt the effects of the curse more
heavily, especially in stature and nobleness of form." "The
descendants of Seth were called the sons of God--the descendants of
Cain, the sons of men." Here two races are presented which differ both
in moral and physical characteristics.
Then follow immediately these words: "As the sons of God mingled with
the sons of men, they became corrupt, and by intermarriage with them,
lost, through the influence of their wives, their peculiar, holy
character, and united with the sons of Cain in their idolatry."--Pages
60, 61. Next comes a description of their evil course of idolatry,
particularly their prostituting to sinful ends the gold and silver and
other material possessions that were theirs. Mrs. White then observes:
"They corrupted themselves with those things which God had placed upon
the earth for man's benefit."--Page 63. From a discussion of idolatry
she turns to polygamy and makes this statement: "The more men
multiplied wives to themselves, the more they increased in wickedness
and unhappiness."--Page 63.
Even in this brief chapter we find sufficient to support the position
that the judgment of a flood upon men was because of the amalgamation
of races of men. Two races are presented. The amalgamation of the two
results in corruption and idolatry, and polygamy only increases the
corruption and wickedness. The disputed passage says that God brought
the Flood because men "had corrupted their ways before him."
The Divine Image Defaced
Let us now note parallel passages in Mrs. White's writings. In
Patriarchs and Prophets, where she writes much more at length on the
subject, she speaks thus of the descendants of Seth and Cain:
For some time the two classes remained separate. The race of Cain,
spreading from the place of their first settlement, dispersed over the
plains and valleys where the children of Seth had dwelt; and the
latter, in order to escape from their contaminating influence,
withdrew to the mountains, and there made their home. So long as this
separation continued, they maintained the worship of God in its
purity. But in the lapse of time they ventured, little by little, to
mingle with the inhabitants of the valleys. This association was
productive of the worst results. "The sons of God saw the daughters of
men that they were fair." The children of Seth, attracted by the
beauty of the daughters of Cain's descendants, displeased the Lord by
intermarrying with them. Many of the worshipers of God were beguiled
into sin by the allurements that were now constantly before them, and
they lost their peculiar, holy character. Mingling with the depraved,
they became like them in spirit and in deeds; the restrictions of the
seventh commandment were disregarded, "and they took them wives of all
which they chose." The children of Seth went "in the way of Cain;"
they fixed their minds upon worldly prosperity and enjoyment, and
neglected the commandments of the Lord."--Pages 81, 82.
Here Mrs. White paints a picture of cumulative wickedness, climaxing
in the Flood, and stemming largely from the amalgamation of the "race
of Cain" and the "children of Seth." We are using the word
"amalgamation" in its proper dictionary meaning, and according to the
common usage of the time in which Mrs. White wrote--the intermarriage
of different races.
Further on in Patriarchs and Prophets Mrs. White declares:
Polygamy was practiced at an early date. It was one of the sins that
brought the wrath of God upon the antediluvian world. Yet after the
flood it again became wide-spread. It was Satan's studied effort to
pervert the marriage institution, to weaken its obligations, and
lessen its sacredness; for in no surer way could he deface the image
of God in man, and open the door to misery and vice.--Page 338.
In a comment on the history of Israel, she observes:
It came to be a common practice to intermarry with the heathen. . . .
The enemy rejoiced in his success in effacing the divine image from
the minds of the people that God had chosen as His
representatives.--Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 499.
Then take this passage from another of Mrs. White's writings:
Unhallowed marriages of the sons of God with the daughters of men,
resulted in apostasy which ended in the destruction of the world by a
flood.--Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 93.
Parallel Passages Summarized
Let us summarize: The result of the breaking down of the marriage
institution, and particularly the intermarriage between the children
of God and the heathen, was to "deface the image of God in man."
Further, "Unhallowed marriages of the sons of God with the daughters
of men" carried mankind irresistibly forward in increasing iniquity
"which ended in the destruction of the world by a flood." Substituting
the word "amalgamation" for "marriage" in the above quotations, note
the striking parallel to the following statements in the disputed
passage: "The base crime of amalgamation . . . defaced the image of
God"; and, "God purposed to destroy by a flood that powerful,
long-lived race that had corrupted their ways before Him."
In none of the parallel passages we have quoted, or in any others that
might be cited, does Mrs. White speak of the cohabitation of man with
beast as being a feature of the gross and dismal picture of
antediluvian wickedness that precipitated the Flood. On the contrary,
it would appear that she speaks of intermarriage of the race of Cain
and the race of Seth, with its inevitable train of idolatry, polygamy,
and kindred evils, as the cause of the Flood. And all this harmonizes
with the earlier quoted statement in the opening paragraph of the
chapter that contains the passage in question.
As the sons of God mingled with the sons of men, they became corrupt,
and by intermarriage with them, lost, through the influence of their
wives, their peculiar, holy character, and united with the sons of
Cain in their idolatry.--Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, pp. 60, 61.
As already stated, this introduction to the chapter "Crime Before the
Flood" is followed by a recital of the idolatry that grew rampant, the
denial of God, the theft, the polygamy, the murder of men, and the
destruction of animal life. Then comes immediately the disputed
passage, as though summarizing; "But if there was one sin above
another which called for the destruction of the race by the Flood, it
was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the
image of God, and caused confusion everywhere."[2]
One apparent stumbling block in the way of accepting this
interpretation of the passage as an intermarriage of races of men and
a crossing of different species of animals is the construction of the
statement: "amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of
God." How could the crossing of species of animals do this?
But let us look more closely at what she says. Two results follow from
the "amalgamation of [1] man and [2] beast": It (1) "defaced the image
of God," and (2) "caused confusion everywhere." We have seen how the
marriage, the amalgamation, of the races of men produced the first of
the results. Why could we not properly consider that the amalgamation
of the races, or species, of animals produced the second, that is,
"caused confusion everywhere"? When two related things are described
in one sentence, it does not follow that we must understand that all
the results listed flow from each of the two.
Second Passage Examined
This brings us to a consideration of the second of the two passages
relating to amalgamation:
Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the
ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the
result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood
there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the
almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races
of men.--Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 75.
This passage is separated from the first by only a few pages. The
intervening pages give the account of the Flood.
Here she speaks of "every species of animal which God had created," in
contrast with "the confused species which God did not create."
"Confused species" of what? The construction permits only one answer:
Species of animal. But an amalgamation of man with beast would
produce, not a species of animal, but a hybrid man-beast species,
whatever that might be. Mrs. White is here most certainly speaking of
"confused species" of animals. And she says simply that such "confused
species" "were the result of amalgamation."
Let us summarize, now, by placing in parallel columns the substance of
two statements by Mrs. White:
Amalgamation of Man Amalgamation of Beast
The intermarriage, the amalgamation, The amalgamation of "species of
of races of men defaced the image of animals" resulted in "confused
God. species."
We believe these parallel passages fully warrant the conclusion,
already reached, that when Mrs. White said, "amalgamation of man and
beast," she meant (1) the amalgamation of races of men, and (2) the
amalgamation of species of animals. The first "defaced the image of
God," the second "caused confusion everywhere."
Three Important Conclusions
Mrs. White says that "since the flood" there "has been amalgamation of
man and beast," and adds that the results may be seen in (1) "almost
endless varieties of species of animals," and in (2) "certain races of
men." There are several important conclusions that follow from this
passage:
1. Mrs. White speaks of two clearly distinguished groups that testify
to this amalgamation. There are (1) "species of animals" and (2)
"races of men." There is no suggestion that there were species part
man and part animal. But how could there be amalgamation of man with
animal and the result be anything else than hybrid man-animal species?
She does not even hint of subhuman monsters or caricatures of man. On
the contrary, as just noted, she speaks unequivocally of "species of
animals" and "races of men." She does not single out or name any
particular race as bearing the evidence of this amalgamation.
2. Mrs. White speaks of the "almost endless varieties of species of
animals" that have resulted from amalgamation. Now it has been
suggested that Mrs. White in the matter of amalgamation reflected the
thinking of those who believed the fiction of man-animal crosses. If
we rightly understand that fiction, as it has been wafted through the
centuries by the winds of credulity, a few large, mythical creatures
of antiquity were supposed to have resulted from a union of man with
animals. And these creatures were always supposed to reveal both human
and animal features. But there is nothing in the ancient fiction that
supported the idea that "almost endless varieties of species of
animals" were the result of an unnatural cross of man with animals.
Mrs. White is here certainly not expressing an ancient, mythical view.
Not even the credulous pagans, wholly devoid of biological knowledge,
would have thought of entertaining such an idea. How much more
reasonable to interpret the passage to mean that these "almost endless
varieties of species of animals" resulted from an amalgamation of
previously existing forms of animal life!
3. Mrs. White calls upon the reader to look about him for proof of
what she is saying. In other words, whatever this amalgamation has
been, its fruitage is evident today. "As may be seen," she says, "in
the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain
races of men." But can anything be "seen" in our day that would
provide support for the ancient myth of beast-men? Certainly there is
nothing in the savage races of some remote heathen lands that even
suggests a cross between man and animals.[3] And if the most degraded
race of men does not suggest such a cross, much less do any species of
animals suggest it. But the results of the amalgamation of which Mrs.
White speaks "may be seen" by the reader.
Darwinism and Creationism
At the time she wrote her amalgamation statement in 1864, Darwin's
influence was only beginning to be felt in the world. Until he
published his Origin of Species (Nov. 24, 1859), most scientists, and
religionists generally, had held firmly to the view that the species
are "fixed," that is, they cannot be crossed. Darwin theorized that
all creation is in flux, with no ultimate bounds on any form of life.
He reasoned that natural law, expressing itself through natural
selection and survival of the fittest, causes simple forms to become
increasingly complex and to rise constantly in the scale of life,
until man finally appears. His theory and the doctrine of the fixity
of species could not live together. One devoured the other. To Darwin
and those who agreed with him, it seemed that the chief obstacle to
acceptance of his theory was the doctrine of species fixity. And to
orthodox Christians belief in species fixity seemed absolutely
essential to belief in Genesis.
Thus when the battle began between the Darwinites and the believers in
Genesis the fighting was chiefly over this question of the fixity of
species. Creationists generally considered the term "species" as
equivalent to the "kinds," in Genesis, to each of which was given the
divine order to "bring forth . . . after his kind." Gen.1:24. Such an
equating of "species" and "kind" we now know to be unwarranted.
The outcome of such an uneven fight is known to all. Evolutionists had
little trouble in proving that there are "endless varieties of species
of animals," if we might borrow Mrs. White's words in her amalgamation
statement. And whenever creationists have sought to make their stand
on the point of fixity of species, as that term is generally
understood, they have been put to rout.
Present-day creationists who have any knowledge of genetics, which
treats of the laws governing "heredity and variations among related
organisms," fare much better than did their fighting fathers. Genetics
shows how endless varieties may develop within certain limits--the
limits of the potential variations within the original strain--but no
farther. In other words, the simple fact of variations in species does
not, in itself, provide any proof for evolution. That much is certain.
Thus we may believe in "endless varieties of species" after Ararat
without believing in evolution. Mrs. White wrote in 1864 that these
"almost endless varieties" "may be seen," though creationists at that
time, and for about a half century more, saw no such thing; they saw
only fixity of species. Yet Mrs. White had no leanings toward Darwin's
theory. From the outset she spoke vigorously against evolution!
Was It Sin?
Mrs. White describes the "amalgamation of man and beast" as a "sin"
and a "base crime," but why should the amalgamation of various species
of animals be thus described?
Note first that Mrs. White, in the chapter "Crime Before the Flood,"
is using the word "crime" as loosely synonymous with "sin." The key
word before us, therefore, is "sin." And what is sin? It is
transgression of the law of God. This is often restricted in
theological thinking to violations of the Ten Commandments, the moral
law. That Mrs. White frequently uses the word "sin" in a much larger
sense, as including any violation of so-called natural laws, is
evident from an examination of her writings. The reason she does this
is that she declares that these so-called laws of nature are as truly
an expression of the mind and will of God as are the Ten Commandments.
For example: "It is just as much sin to violate the laws of our being
as to break one of the ten commandments, for we cannot do either
without breaking God's law."--Testimonies for the Church,vol. 2, p.
70.
Now let us turn to the Bible record of the condition of the whole
created world, man and beast, before the Flood:
"And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the
face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and
the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them." Gen.
6:7.
Why should the Lord repent that He had "made them," the beasts and
birds and creeping things, as well as man? In a few verses farther on
is found the answer:
"And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all
flesh had corrupted his [A.R.V. their] way upon the earth." Gen. 6:12.
"And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of
cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth, and every man." Gen. 7:21.
The Plan of God for Eden
When God first made the world He placed upon it a wide variety of
animals and plants, distributed over hills and valleys, on sunny plain
and in shady dell. The picture was one of beauty and harmony in
diversity. We can, of course, only conjecture as to details of the
Edenic world. The record declares that God commanded that each form of
life should bring forth "after his kind." Gen. 1:24.
And the fossil records bear silent testimony that between the major
forms of life there appear to be no intermediary forms. There are
sharp gaps instead. Whether the Lord designed that His perfect earth
should also preserve distinctions between the more closely related
forms of life, we can only venture a guess. But if He placed all these
more or less closely related forms upon the earth, it would seem a
reasonable assumption that He did so as an expression of His divine
conception of what a perfect world should be like.
We think this is even more than a reasonable assumption in the light
of specific counsel later given to Israel, as God sought to set up in
this sinful world a government according to the plans of heaven.
Through Moses God said to Israel:
"Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with
a diverse kind; thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed:
neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee."
Lev. 19:19. (See also Deut. 22:9-11.)
Satan and the Animal Kingdom
The Bible presents a picture of a controversy between God and the
devil that starts with the beginnings of our world and covers
everything that has to do with our world. That Satan, as a free moral
agent, has been allowed of God to roam the earth and use his
diabolical skill in creating disorder and destruction, the Bible amply
testifies.
The first instance of Satan's attempt to bring disorder in our world
was his speaking through an animal, a serpent. And though Satan was
the instigator of the serpent's wily words, the Lord included the
serpent in the judgments meted out at the fall.
Where the Scripture record is so brief we must be slow to dogmatize.
But we may find in the fact of Satan, his evil purposes, and this
specifically mentioned instance of his control of a member of the
animal kingdom, a strong suggestion that the animal kingdom has
suffered from his diabolical cunning. We cannot believe that in Eden
there were blood-thirsty beasts, ill-tempered, snarling, and vicious.
All believers in the Bible grant that these evil changes in the beasts
were the result of sin. But how could a beast, which does not have a
moral nature, and therefore has no knowledge of sin, be changed in
nature by the entrance of sin into the life of Adam and Eve? The
Christian mind will not permit the idea that God so changed the
animals. In the fact of Satan, whose domination of the serpent is
recorded for our learning, is surely found the only real explanation
of the sorry change that came over the animal kingdom. Part of that
change, we believe, was the confusing of the species, the blurring of
a wondrous picture of divine harmony in diversity.
A Belief Consistent With Scripture
We grant that this belief as to the cause of the confusing of species
cannot be supported by a clear text of Scripture. We affirm only that
this belief is consistent with such scriptures as discuss those
earliest days. And nothing more than this need be affirmed in order to
protect the belief from being lightly dismissed by any Bible believer,
as an unreasonable explanation.
It is evident that on this view of the confusion of species in the
animal kingdom we find a satisfying answer to the question: How could
the crossing of different forms of animal life be described as sin?
Was sin involved in the activity of the serpent? We all answer Yes.
But we immediately think of Satan. Even so with the crossing of
animals. Any and every move to mar God's original, orderly plan can be
described only as sin.
Mrs. White Focuses on Satan as Evil Power
One cannot read far in Mrs. White's writings before becoming aware
that she views the whole drama of our world from its earliest days
onward as a great struggle between God and the devil.[4] Mrs. White
pictures Satan as stalking over the earth, bent on disorder and
devastation, even as the Bible pictures him. It is true that she did
not specifically refer to Satan in the amalgamation statements in
Spiritual Gifts. However, another reference to amalgamation discloses
her views as to the cause of certain of the changes that took place in
our world after Adam and Eve fell. The statement reads:
Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord's great garden, but after
Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up. In the parable of the
sower the question was asked the Master, "Didst not thou sow good seed
in thy field? how then hath it tares?" The Master answered, "An enemy
hath done this." All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious
herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he
has corrupted the earth with tares.--Selected Messages, book 2, p.
288.
This statement, viewed in the setting of the whole tenor of Mrs.
White's writings which attribute to Satan the active responsibility
for all evil in our world, fully warrants us in concluding that she
attributed to Satan the "confused species" of animals. Hence she would
most certainly describe these "species" as a manifestation of sin,
even as she could properly speak of the appearance of insensate but
"noxious, poisonous herbs" as an exhibit of the activity of the "evil
one." Thus her amalgamation statement regarding "sin" is consistent
with all that Scripture has revealed of earth's early days, in terms
of the interpretation we have given to the key phrase, "amalgamation
of man and beast."
Statement Not Found in "Patriarchs and Prophets"
We come now to the consideration of the fact that the amalgamation
statements were not incorporated by Mrs. White in Patriarchs and
Prophets, now current, and the natural inquiry as to why these
statements do not there appear. Some have conjectured that these two
statements have been purposely suppressed.
The fact that a passage is not retained in later publications, or that
a particular book is not republished, is not in itself valid ground
for assuming that suppression has occurred. The groundlessness of such
a suggestion is made transparently clear when we give these pertinent
facts in the case:
From 1858 to 1864 there appeared from Mrs. White's pen four small
volumes carrying the general title Spiritual Gifts. With the exception
of volume 2, which is largely autobiographical, and the latter half of
volume 4, the volumes present a portrayal of sacred history from the
creation to Eden restored.
From 1870 to 1884 she brought forth four larger volumes, under the
title The Spirit of Prophecy. These volumes cover more fully the
subject of man's religious history from Eden to Eden. In large part
the material in Spiritual Gifts, except the autobiographical volume,
is reproduced in The Spirit of Prophecy. Often the text of the former
is exactly reproduced, chapter after chapter, in the latter. In some
instances there are deletions, and often there are additions. A
detailed study of the matter reveals that here apply the principles by
which an author, in bringing out a new and more complete treatment of
a theme, may properly add or subtract or revise. The two amalgamation
passages appear verbatim in The Spirit of Prophecy, in volume 1,
published in 1870.
How easy it would have been for Mrs. White to drop out the
amalgamation passages in the 1870 edition. The passages had already
raised questions, as is evidenced by the reference to them in Uriah
Smith's work, Objections to the Visions Answered, published in 1868.
That was the time to "suppress" them if she cared to do so. But two
years later she reproduced the chapters containing the passages, so
that both the passages and the context remain the same.
Up to this time Mrs. White had been writing quite exclusively for the
church. The next step was the planning of books that might be sold to
those outside the Seventh-day Adventist church, even to those who
might not have any religious background or connection. Naturally,
included in such a plan would be the desire to give an appropriate
emphasis to certain truths that distinguish the preaching of the
Advent movement. Now, even as a minister, turning from his
congregation to address a mixed multitude, would quite change his
treatment of a subject, by addition, subtraction, or revision, even so
would a writer. In 1890 the great subject of man's early history,
which is the theme of Spiritual Gifts, volume 3, and Spirit of
Prophecy, volume 1, was covered in a new way in the book Patriarchs
and Prophets, prepared for sale to the general public. This is one of
a set of current works which cover the religious history of man from
Eden to Eden, and known generally as the 'Conflict of the Ages'
Series. In each volume of the series the field is covered in an
amplified and sometimes new way, and no pretense is made of reprinting
an earlier work. It would be just as consistent to contend that the
whole four volumes of The Spirit of Prophecy have been suppressed as
to contend that a certain five sentences--the total involved in the
amalgamation passages--have been suppressed.
In this connection we remind the reader that the four volumes of
Spiritual Gifts, which are the original source of the amalgamation
passages, are currently available in a facsimile edition.
_______________________________
[1] The Century Dictionary, edition of 1889, says, under
"Amalgamation": "2. The mixing or blending of different things,
especially of races." The idea of the blending of races, as one
meaning of the word, seems to have faded out of some dictionaries,
probably in view of the fact that the term "hybridization" is now
generally used to denote fusion, or crossing, of living things.
However, the 1949 printing of Funk and Wagnalls New Standard
Dictionary says, under "Amalgamate": "3. To form into a compound by
mixing or blending; unite; combine; as to amalgamate diverse races.
Used specifically, in the southern United States, of marriage between
white and black persons."
A Dictionary of American English (Oxford University Press, 1938-1944,
4 vols.) says:
"Amalgamate, v. (1797-, in general sense.) Of persons: a. To combine
or coalesce, esp. by intermarriage. /b. (See quot. 1859) ... 1859
BARTLETT 8 Amalgamate ... is universally applied, in the United
States, to the mixing of the black and white races.
"Amalgamation. (1775- in general sense.) /The fusion of the white and
black races by intermarriage."
[2] Some might contend that the construction of this sentence
indicates that the writer is listing a new crime to the series,
something in addition to the unholy marriages, idolatry, murder, etc.
We do not believe that such a conclusion is required. It is no unusual
thing for a writer to list a series of items, and then, in conclusion,
focus upon one of them, with some such introductory phrase as, "If
there is one item above another . . ." Nor do we believe that any
special weight should be placed on the fact that in thus
recapitulating, the writer amplifies on the particular point under
discussion, as though the very focusing on it seems to draw the
writer's mind to a related thought. This, we believe, is a wholly
reasonable way to view the construction before us. Mrs. White returns,
in the last paragraph of the chapter, to focus on the main cause of
the Flood, as earlier set forth in the chapter. In so doing she
expands a little to include the related "confusion" in the animal
kingdom that had resulted from the entrance of sin into the world.
[3] In the middle of the nineteenth century, when some dark recesses
of the earth had scarcely been touched by explorers, strange stories
were often told as to the kind of savages who dwelt there. Probably
some who first read Mrs. White's amalgamation statements unconsciously
allowed these strange stories to determine their interpretation of the
passages. Needless to say, now that all the savage races are fairly
well known, the testimony of those who have come in contact with them
is that though they may be depraved, they are exceedingly human in
every respect, and need only the opportunity to acquire the white
man's habits and vices! Mrs. White does not comment on the phrase,
"certain races of men." She gives no details as to how the races
intermingled after the Flood, nor does she say that such postdiluvian
intermingling was a "base crime." We need only to note that she makes
the simple statement that "amalgamation" produced "races of men," not
races part man and part animal.
[4] A four-volume work by Mrs. White, published between 1870 and 1884,
entitled Spirit of Prophecy, carries the secondary title: The Great
Controversy between Christ and Satan, not to be confused with the
later work Great Controversy, which is an expansion of the fourth
volume. In the first volume the two amalgamation passages are
reprinted in their original context."
Jeff Needle
question being asked. But I wonder, isn't it simpler to just say she was
wrong in this instance?
Mrs. White herself said that not everything she wrote was inspired. While
honoring her role as a prophet of the Lord, can we not take her statements
at face value and accept what she said about herself?
"Cindy" <synt...@localline.com> wrote in message
news:854598cc.03052...@posting.google.com...
Teresita
mixing things, and I added Ellen White's, I guess, reverse prophesy (external to
scripture) that men and animals mixed together in the time after the flood when
Babylon was built up.
In article <I7dBa.2341$KN3.7...@dca1-nnrp1.news.algx.net>, "Jeff says...
Jeff Needle
to suggest a simpler solution.
--
Jeff Needle
jeff....@general.com
Teresita
synt...@localline.com says...
>
>In article <854598cc.03052...@posting.google.com>,
>synt...@localline.com says...
>>
>>Hi Paul,
>>Did you know that Babylon is confusion by mixing, as in mixing truth
>>and error?
>
>Teresita responds:
>
>Also mixing human and animal.
>
>"Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen
>>in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain
>races of men." EGW, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 75
>It is always interesting to me, how when biblical Adventist truth is
>posted, often people like you can't respond in a Christian manner with
>scripture. Suddenly there is a need to attack Ellen White, although
>she wasn't in the conversation or quoted.
It is an interesting mindset that you exhibit, that you take my simple quotation
of EGW concerning amalgamation, which she says occured since the Flood, in the
time of Babylon perhaps, and call it an attack when it was merely an elaboration
of your point that "Babylon is confusion by mixing" using the words of the
Spirit of Prophesy.
>It even happens within the
>SDA denomination. I have seen it over and over, first someone begins
>to preach new and strange doctrines at variance with SDA fundamental
>beliefs, and then they are overcome with a compelling need to attack
>Ellen White, or her writings. Not that I expect you to answer, but who
>inspired you to do this? Satan?
The spirit of God is peace. The spirit of Satan is defensiveness and paranoia.
Susan Williams
>I did not attack Ellen White, the topic was that the spirit of Babylon involves
>mixing things, and I added Ellen White's, I guess, reverse prophesy (external to
>scripture) that men and animals mixed together in the time after the flood when
>Babylon was built up.
Not only that, when I mentioned Foxe's Book of Martyrs which talks
about millions of Christians who were put to death because they
differed with Rome in religion, you replied the name of the book was
or should be, "Foxe's Book of Heretics!"
Like Ted Seeber, you gave approval to their deaths and then come on
the forums telling me I hate people just because they disagree.
We are still under Homeland Security right through to the destruction
of this nation. We are asked to report all terrorist activity found
in people who have a profound disrespect of human life!
In His Grace,
Susan
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Alan M
"Susan Williams" <salet...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:6s6bdv0l317i6dfjs...@4ax.com...
> On 28 May 2003 20:31:34 -0700, Teresita <tere...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> >I did not attack Ellen White, the topic was that the spirit of Babylon
involves
> >mixing things, and I added Ellen White's, I guess, reverse prophesy
(external to
> >scripture) that men and animals mixed together in the time after the
flood when
> >Babylon was built up.
>
>
> Not only that, when I mentioned Foxe's Book of Martyrs which talks
> about millions of Christians who were put to death because they
> differed with Rome in religion, you replied the name of the book was
> or should be, "Foxe's Book of Heretics!"
>
Not only that Susie. When it rained today it slowed the traffic down.
Joseph Meehan
It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
problems.
--
Joseph E. Meehan
26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
Joseph Meehan
news:ZTgBa.45440$1s1.6...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
How amazing!!!
Alan M
"Joseph Meehan" <sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:iMjBa.85640$BA.27...@twister.columbus.rr.com...
True. I was following Susie's Rules of Relevancy.
Alan M
Welcome back Cindy.
The subject of your post sounds like a movie title - perhaps not one for
general viewing. Do you think it's possible you read too much into
Teresita's response ?
Teresita
>Not only that, when I mentioned Foxe's Book of Martyrs which talks
>about millions of Christians who were put to death because they
>differed with Rome in religion, you replied the name of the book was
>or should be, "Foxe's Book of Heretics!"
Among Foxe's "martyrs" are the Albigenses, who taught that suicide is
commendable, that matrimonial intercourse is unlawful, that concubinage, being
of a less permanent nature, is preferable to marriage, and that abandonment of
his wife by the husband, or vice versa, is desirable.
Tom A.
It's the Jesuits fault! They made it rain! Then they drove slowly,
blaming the rain!
It's a conspiracy, I tell you! A conspiracy!
--
Tom A.
"We've got to get it together people! We're focusing on the little
things like hatred, monsters and mind control, and letting the big
things fly right by!
Like, where the hell did Gwynn get the money to buy all those pizzas?"-
Torg, www.sluggyfreelance.com
Rusty
"Jeff Needle" <jeffn...@tns.net> wrote in message
news:I7dBa.2341$KN3.7...@dca1-nnrp1.news.algx.net...
> The explanation given here was very complete and can supply an answer to
the
> question being asked. But I wonder, isn't it simpler to just say she was
> wrong in this instance?
Or perhaps even simpler we could even suppose, very accurately, that it's
clear she wasn't talking about offspring being produced from a sexual union
of mankind with animals?
In Christ,
~Rusty
Teresita
>
>Like Ted Seeber, you gave approval to their deaths and then come on
>the forums telling me I hate people just because they disagree.
>
>We are still under Homeland Security right through to the destruction
>of this nation. We are asked to report all terrorist activity found
>in people who have a profound disrespect of human life!
We merely carried out God's commandment in His Eternal Word:
Deuteronomy 17:2–5 "If there is found among you, within any of your towns which
the Lord your God gives you, a man or woman who does what is evil in the sight
of the Lord your God, in transgressing his covenant, and has gone and served
other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the host of
heaven, which I have forbidden, and it is told you and you hear of it; then you
shall inquire diligently, and if it is true and certain that such an abominable
thing has been done in Israel, then you shall bring forth to your gates that man
or woman who has done this evil thing, and you shall stone that man or woman to
death with stones."
Jeff Needle
Teresita
>>
>>"Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may
>>be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain
>>races of men." EGW, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 75
>
>>produced "races of men," not races part man and part animal.
As a Filipina-American I'm interested in finding out if my origins lie in the
amalgamation of true men and beasts before I consider joining the Adventist
Church. I wouldn't expect the Adventist Church to accept converts from the
Chimpanzee race, nor would I expect them to accept a convert from the Asian race
if it has been determined that Asians are among the "certain races of men" that
arose from post-Flood amalgamation.
Teresita
>
> Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
>
> It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
>problems.
None the least of which is breaking this commandment:
Deut.22:[5] The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither
shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto
the LORD thy God.
Rusty
"Teresita" <tere...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:bb5m2...@drn.newsguy.com...
Well Teresita, in truth the only thing that would probably prevent you from
being able to join the Adventist church is your loyalty to Catholocism.
None the less your supposition that "amalgamation of man and beast" means
the offspring of a sexual union between mankind and animals is incorrect.
This was only mentioned twice in all of her writings, and neither time was
it an instruction or implication of procreation of man with animal.
Not only was this addressed at length in a previous post and even a link was
provided that clearly addressed this issue (here it is again
http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/amalg.html ), but even simple grammar and
sentence structure shows this to be an incorrect assumption of what was said
since the use of the preposition "of" is clearly implied before "beast".
The statement very clearly reads "amalgamation of man and [of] beast", not
"amalgamation of man WITH beast."
Amalgamation of man and beast simply deliniates the two classes that were
subjected to amalgamation, but in no way implies the amalgamation took place
BETWEEN the two. Amalgamation of man WITH beast means the mixing of the
two. She never hinted of subhuman beings or any kind of hybrid
animal-human relationship. She did speak of "species of animals" and "races
of men" but not any kind of amalgam of animals with human beings.
Finally the chromosomal structure of humans and animals differ and the
possibility of an offspring as the result of the sexual union of man with
beast is an impossiblility. Perhaps you didn't know this, but Hatians
(among others) regularly have sex with primates. In fact, it is a very
common practice even to this day. Yet we see no man/chimps being born. As
close as primates are to humans, their DNA and chromosomal structure
prohibits the mixing of the two.
Perhaps you should read the link that was provided. How interesting that
you yourself have stated in regard to Catholic beliefs that one should
believe what they (the RCC) write about their own doctrines and teachings
rather than hold to their own misunderstandings; yet you refuse to do so
yourself when it comes to another church. To be fair shouldn't you do the
same when it comes to other churches? Or will you just ignore the truth and
erroneously believe whatever you want just as you blast others for doing in
regard to the RCC?
In Christ,
~Rusty
Teresita
>Amalgamation of man and beast simply deliniates the two classes that were
>subjected to amalgamation, but in no way implies the amalgamation took place
>BETWEEN the two. Amalgamation of man WITH beast means the mixing of the
>two. She never hinted of subhuman beings or any kind of hybrid
>animal-human relationship. She did speak of "species of animals" and "races
>of men" but not any kind of amalgam of animals with human beings.
That makes the situation even worse. If there was no amalgamation between men
and beasts, White implies that certain types of intermarriage between men
defaces the image of God in their offspring and was sufficient an abomination to
incur the punishment of the flood.
Jeff Needle
I've been on list for a very short time, and have followed the
discussions with some interest. What motivates you, Teresita, to be on
this list? I am on several lists and newsgroups of other religions
because I want to learn about them, and have no real interest in
confronting them. I wonder what drives people to invest precious time
in areas that are not relevant to their daily lives.
I'll be interested in your thoughts. And please don't take this as a
criticism, only a matter of curiousity for me.
--
Jeff Needle
jeff....@general.com
Cindy
No.
Only check out her subsequent posts, she is continuing with her
agenda, despite being shown that her quote from a Ellen White hatesite
is taken out of context, while claiming she is not attacking Ellen
White.
She has been doing this same kind of thing for quite a while now.
Is it possible that while questioning whether I have misjudged
her,that you have failed to notice she has also just posted another
innapropraite response? Claiming that the persecution and murder of
God's people by the Papacy for over a thousand years was justified
according to scripture?
Do you see anything wrong with that?
Does anybody else?
If so, why isn't anyone saying anything about it?
~ Cindy
Teresita
synt...@localline.com says...
>
>Is it possible that while questioning whether I have misjudged
>her,that you have failed to notice she has also just posted another
>innapropraite response? Claiming that the persecution and murder of
>God's people by the Papacy for over a thousand years was justified
>according to scripture?
1 Cor 5:[5] To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh,
that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Alan M
> > >
> > >
> > > For those who care about truth rather than slander:
> > >
> >
> > Welcome back Cindy.
> >
> > The subject of your post sounds like a movie title - perhaps not one for
> > general viewing. Do you think it's possible you read too much into
> > Teresita's response ?
>
> No.
>
> Only check out her subsequent posts, she is continuing with her
> agenda, despite being shown that her quote from a Ellen White hatesite
> is taken out of context, while claiming she is not attacking Ellen
> White.
>
> She has been doing this same kind of thing for quite a while now.
My question was a reality check. You could have reality on your side but, as
you've said, it's difficult to see into someone's heart.
>
> Is it possible that while questioning whether I have misjudged
> her,that you have failed to notice she has also just posted another
> innapropraite response?
I have failed to notice; so it is possible.
>Claiming that the persecution and murder of
> God's people by the Papacy for over a thousand years was justified
> according to scripture?
>
> Do you see anything wrong with that?
I don't believe that persecution or murder is justified. Therefore I do see
something wrong with it. I guess the Papacy has had its problems in the
past. Hopefully things are OK now.
Teresita
>I've been on list for a very short time, and have followed the
>discussions with some interest. What motivates you, Teresita, to be on
>this list?
What I do is find positions in Catholic doctrine that are very strongly
supported by a plain, literal interpretation of Sacred Scripute, and from this
inside track I try to get Adventists to defend their opposing positions with
wild circumlocutions and unorthodox renderings of the Word.
Examples of this are the position of the comma when Jesus says "I say to you,
today you will be with me in paradise" to the Adventist position that goes "I
say to you today, you will be with me in paradise," which is the only place in
scripture that the comma is moved thus by Adventists even though Jesus says "I
say to you" several times. Another example is the unique translation by
Adventists of the Greek word for Sabbath in Col 2:16 to mean a yearly feast,
even though the preceeding 59 times in the NT it is used to refer to the weekly
day of rest. Yet another example is when Adventists get the Bible to mean it
wasn't really Samuel that appeared to Saul after death, but a demon, even though
the bible says Saul knew it was Samuel. Another example is when Adventists say
Christ's teaching on the rich man being tormented in hell was a false picture of
the afterlife, thus making people wonder how many other teachings of Christ are
not true.
The total effect that I'm trying to achieve is to make honest seekers of the
truth come to the conclusion that Catholicism is based on a solid Rock, and
Adventism is a house of cards that is propped up by endless exceptions to basic
principles of biblical exegesis.
Jeff Needle
Teresita wrote:
>
> In article <3ED77BFD...@general.com>, Jeff says...
>
> >I've been on list for a very short time, and have followed the
> >discussions with some interest. What motivates you, Teresita, to be on
> >this list?
>
> What I do is find positions in Catholic doctrine that are very strongly
> supported by a plain, literal interpretation of Sacred Scripute, and from this
> inside track I try to get Adventists to defend their opposing positions with
> wild circumlocutions and unorthodox renderings of the Word.
>
> Examples of this are the position of the comma when Jesus says "I say to you,
> today you will be with me in paradise" to the Adventist position that goes "I
> say to you today, you will be with me in paradise," which is the only place in
> scripture that the comma is moved thus by Adventists even though Jesus says "I
> say to you" several times. Another example is the unique translation by
> Adventists of the Greek word for Sabbath in Col 2:16 to mean a yearly feast,
> even though the preceeding 59 times in the NT it is used to refer to the weekly
> day of rest. Yet another example is when Adventists get the Bible to mean it
> wasn't really Samuel that appeared to Saul after death, but a demon, even though
> the bible says Saul knew it was Samuel. Another example is when Adventists say
> Christ's teaching on the rich man being tormented in hell was a false picture of
> the afterlife, thus making people wonder how many other teachings of Christ are
> not true.
>
Consider the following, in no special order:
1. Concerning the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, it is, indeed, a
parable. Adventists correctly, I believe, understand the language of
parable, as in the language of apocalyptic, to use exaggerated imagery
that would be understood by the original hearers. It seems rather odd
to me, given how Catholicism spiritualizes away the statements in
Revelation, that you would question Adventists spiritualizing away the
language of the parables.
2. The comma question -- it isn't so much a grammatical point (it can't
be, since Greek has no such punctuation), but rather, once again, trying
to harmonize a single statement against the abundance of scripture
teaching. I would not approach it the way most Adventists do. I leave
the comma where it is, but I point out that Jesus promised the thief
that, that day, he would be with Him in paradise. If you check the
Greek, "paradise" is really a garden, the kind where Jesus, and,
presumably, the thief, were buried. The same word is used later in the
gospels to describe just such a place. We can see here a complete
harmonization, without worrying about silly commas.
3. I haven't heard "Sabbath" in Col. to mean a yearly feast, but rather
a cycle of yearly feasts. Inasmuch as the Greek renders it in the
plural, this seems reasonable. Nowhere is the weekly sabbath referred
to in the plural in the New Testament. There has to be a reason for the
plurals.
> The total effect that I'm trying to achieve is to make honest seekers of the
> truth come to the conclusion that Catholicism is based on a solid Rock, and
> Adventism is a house of cards that is propped up by endless exceptions to basic
> principles of biblical exegesis.
Of course, I would disagree with you. And, if your posts that I've read
so far in any way represent your grasp of Adventist teaching, then I'm
not sure you'll make much progress.
But, I will point out, you've not really fully answered my question.
You've told me *what* you're doing, but not *why*. Why do you care? Do
you do the same thing on, say, Jehovah's Witness boards, Mormon boards?
Or do you have a particular interest in Seventh-day Adventists? And if
so, why?
--
Jeff Needle
jeff....@general.com
Teresita
>
>But, I will point out, you've not really fully answered my question.
>You've told me *what* you're doing, but not *why*. Why do you care? Do
>you do the same thing on, say, Jehovah's Witness boards, Mormon boards?
>Or do you have a particular interest in Seventh-day Adventists? And if
>so, why?
It seems to be a waste of time. I'll drop ARCA from my list of favorites
and make this my last post.
Jeff Needle
It does good if you stimulate discussion. I for one hope you stick
around.
--
Jeff Needle
jeff....@general.com
Rusty
Any what intermarriage is being referred to? Not blacks with whites, or
hispanics with asians, or anything like that. The intermarriage being
referred to was between the sons of God (decendants of Seth) and the
daughters of men (decendants of Cain).
It is the spiritual defacing of the image of God that caused Him to send the
flood to wipe out mankind at that time and shorten the lifespan, not because
of some subhuman creatures that were the result of the sexual union of men
with animals.
The antediluvians were exceedingly wicked, and that's why they were
destroyed by the flood. Wicked were destroyed, righteous were saved in the
ark. Read the story of it some time, it's in Genesis chapter 6.
In Christ,
~Rusty
Susan Williams
<sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
>
> It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
>problems.
Being the premiere Antichrist psychiatrist, tis no wonder the killers
are respectable citizens and paranoid condemned of the scriptures
would flourish everywhere.
Your posts constantly accuse those who have brains unlike you of
mental illness. What were you saying about courtesy and respect? The
Lord is showing you creatures why you will be destroyed. Reason and
conscience wholly silenced. Can't even explain an excuse for
yourselves. Teresita added to Ted Seeber's terrorism by calling the
horrible record of martyrdom, "Foxe's Book of Heretics."
Susan Williams
That is your concern, O personal psychiatrist of the Antichrist.
What happened when it rained fire upon your race?
>>
>>
>
>How Amazing!!!
The Saints will finally live in peace when those who are murderers and
liars like their father, is no more.
Susan Williams
wrote:
You are supposed to deal with the issues. But how can you? Meehan has
given you a clean Antichrist bill of health.
Susan Williams
You did not condemn the Albigenses. You condemned ALL THE MARTYRS!!
The Albigense by no means represent the majority!
The lies and accusations that you have mentioned against the
Albigenses were created by their murderers! Now it is adopted in the
subverted encyclopedias which refused to print the Protestant version
of who the Albigenses are. Another super-terrorist is just trying to
excuse herself.
No suicide cult every gave any government trouble. The Heaven's Gate
Cult didn't. The Jim Jones Cult didn't. Suicide is likeable to them,
and any slightest threat of government intervention causes them to end
it all.
The Antichrist spent years in massive crusades to exterminate the
Albigenses until they succeeded. She used massive crusades TO
EXTERMINATE EVERY OTHER PROTESTANT OR RELIGION THAT BELIEVED
DIFFERENTLY FROM HER. The difference with the Albigenses is that she
was successful.
But now another super-terrorist tell us that in condemning the
martyrs, she was only mentioning the Albigenses when that plainly
wasn't true!
Susan Williams
What then is the problem with Osama carrying out that word?? Why then
do you super-terrorists tell us we don't allow others to disagree with
us? Why do you lie? In your opinion you use Deuteronomy!
You mean you even killed people who broke the Sabbath Teresita, now
telling us you are carrying out God's word?'
Tell us some more Oh race of murderers!
Susan Williams
>In article <lJjBa.85638$BA.27...@twister.columbus.rr.com>, "Joseph says...
>>
>> Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
>>
>> It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
>>problems.
Well it looks like Teresita condemned all non-Catholic blood again!
It makes psychiatrists from the Antichrist like Meehan very happy!
>None the least of which is breaking this commandment:
>
>Deut.22:[5] The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither
>shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto
>the LORD thy God.
You know, I read the scriptures for the last days and don't see the
diagnoses of this psychiatrist for the Antichrist there. I see
different concerns there! It tells us that "perilous" times are
coming.
Meehan is showing us the reason while protecting deadly people like
himself who condemn whole races of human life?????
Susan Williams
<sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Alan M" <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
>news:ZTgBa.45440$1s1.6...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com...
>>
>> "Susan Williams" <salet...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:6s6bdv0l317i6dfjs...@4ax.com...
>> > On 28 May 2003 20:31:34 -0700, Teresita <tere...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >I did not attack Ellen White, the topic was that the spirit of Babylon
>> involves
>> > >mixing things, and I added Ellen White's, I guess, reverse prophesy
>> (external to
>> > >scripture) that men and animals mixed together in the time after the
>> flood when
>> > >Babylon was built up.
>> >
>> >
>> > Not only that, when I mentioned Foxe's Book of Martyrs which talks
>> > about millions of Christians who were put to death because they
>> > differed with Rome in religion, you replied the name of the book was
>> > or should be, "Foxe's Book of Heretics!"
>> >
>>
>> Not only that Susie. When it rained today it slowed the traffic down.
>>
>>
>
>
> How amazing!!!
I don't believe when President Bush heard about the 911 attacks that
he had visited the Vatican psychiatrist Meehan in order to acquire his
concerns. I am at least talking about those concerns that the
President makes public.
I'm not concerned about Traffic. Neither is President Bush (that he
makes public), AND NEITHER ARE THE SCRIPTURES!
Why did you race of killers lie!!
Why do you constantly accuse us of now allowing others to disagree,
when it is clear you are the killers of the Antichrist who never had
any intention not only for people to disagree, BUT FOR ANYONE TO LIVE
WHO DOES NOT VIEW RELIGION YOUR WAY??
I have asked you over and over again even in the climate of
Anti-terrorism. For some reason you can't answer.
Joseph Meehan
> On Thu, 29 May 2003 08:41:53 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
> <sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
> >
> > It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
> >problems.
>
>
> Being the premiere Antichrist psychiatrist, tis no wonder the killers
> are respectable citizens and paranoid condemned of the scriptures
> would flourish everywhere.
>
> Your posts constantly accuse those who have brains unlike you of
> mental illness.
I don't "accuse" anyone of mental illness. Mental illness is not a form
of wrongdoing any more than AIDs or the flu; it is an illness.
Do consider seeing a professional. Mental illness can be treated. It
is up to you to take the first step towards recovery. Don't worry that
those around you will think less of you. If they are your true friends they
will support you, if they don't support you they are not your true friends
and they are fools who think mental illness is a wrongdoing.
> What were you saying about courtesy and respect? The
> Lord is showing you creatures why you will be destroyed. Reason and
> conscience wholly silenced. Can't even explain an excuse for
> yourselves. Teresita added to Ted Seeber's terrorism by calling the
> horrible record of martyrdom, "Foxe's Book of Heretics."
>
>
--
Joseph E. Meehan
26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
Susan Williams
<sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Susan Williams" <salet...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>news:7t4hdvg2b2dtqie9g...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 29 May 2003 08:41:53 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
>> <sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
>> >
>> > It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
>> >problems.
>>
>>
>> Being the premiere Antichrist psychiatrist, tis no wonder the killers
>> are respectable citizens and paranoid condemned of the scriptures
>> would flourish everywhere.
>>
>> Your posts constantly accuse those who have brains unlike you of
>> mental illness.
>
> I don't "accuse" anyone of mental illness. Mental illness is not a form
>of wrongdoing any more than AIDs or the flu; it is an illness.
GOOD! Seeber condemned everyone to death who doesn't view religion as
he does. Teresita did the same.
THAT WAS DELIBERATE WRONG DOING!
Now comment for us, since you also believe the same, Antichrist
psychiatrist!
Please remember that we are still in the climate of September 11th
which is supposed to be a very trying time for the existence of you
people!
>Do consider seeing a professional.
You go to any professional and find out if a person exposes killers,
he needs help. That is your job and not mine. Compartments below
jail and below the electric chair is where you belong.
>Mental illness can be treated. It
>is up to you to take the first step towards recovery.
WHY AM I MENTALLY ILL JUST BECAUSE I DISAGREE WITH YOU AND FAVOR LIFE?
Show us whether or not psychiatry can make you recognize what I am
asking.
>Don't worry that
>those around you will think less of you.
You killers think alot of me shown by the time you take to prove I'm
nuts by your paranoia posts.
>If they are your true friends they
>will support you, if they don't support you they are not your true friends
>and they are fools who think mental illness is a wrongdoing.
Okay, when you went to them, what did they say is the condition
mentally of anyone who reports terrorists nevermind super-terrorists
since September 11?
>> What were you saying about courtesy and respect? The
>> Lord is showing you creatures why you will be destroyed. Reason and
>> conscience wholly silenced. Can't even explain an excuse for
>> yourselves. Teresita added to Ted Seeber's terrorism by calling the
>> horrible record of martyrdom, "Foxe's Book of Heretics."
Sorry Antichrist Meehan, but it is the choice of your religion why
others can outwit you in scripture, reason, logic, and CERTAINLY
CHARACTER!
Your lack of such came through birth.
Joseph Meehan
> On Sat, 31 May 2003 13:17:20 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
> <sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Susan Williams" <salet...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:7t4hdvg2b2dtqie9g...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 29 May 2003 08:41:53 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
> >> <sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
> >> >
> >> > It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her
other
> >> >problems.
> >>
> >>
> >> Being the premiere Antichrist psychiatrist, tis no wonder the killers
> >> are respectable citizens and paranoid condemned of the scriptures
> >> would flourish everywhere.
> >>
> >> Your posts constantly accuse those who have brains unlike you of
> >> mental illness.
> >
> > I don't "accuse" anyone of mental illness. Mental illness is not a
form
> >of wrongdoing any more than AIDs or the flu; it is an illness.
>
> GOOD! Seeber condemned everyone to death who doesn't view religion as
> he does. Teresita did the same.
>
> THAT WAS DELIBERATE WRONG DOING!
>
> Now comment for us, since you also believe the same, Antichrist
> psychiatrist!
".. believe the same" what? Same as who?
>
> Please remember that we are still in the climate of September 11th
> which is supposed to be a very trying time for the existence of you
> people!
".. you people" What is that supose to mean?
Frankly I don't see myself in the same climate of 9-11. I don't see
many people there.
>
> >Do consider seeing a professional.
>
> You go to any professional and find out if a person exposes killers,
> he needs help.
I do not suggest seeing a professional because what that. I suggest it
for your writting that appears to show a disconnection from reality. Not
every reality, but much of it. You seem unable to put facts in perspective
with reality. You seem unable to disquinish between fact and accucation.
You seem to be caught up in a circle of believing the whole story, because
some part of it is true and the story fits into your preconcived view of the
world. You show an inability to tell the difference between the men and
women, (individuals) who may have killed other individuals and people who
are alive today, generations after those people have all died.
There is a truth in what you say and there is a lesson to be learned
from history, but your conclusions have little to do with either.
> That is your job and not mine. Compartments below
> jail and below the electric chair is where you belong.
>
> >Mental illness can be treated. It
> >is up to you to take the first step towards recovery.
>
> WHY AM I MENTALLY ILL JUST BECAUSE I DISAGREE WITH YOU AND FAVOR LIFE?
You are not. Many people disagree with me (George Bush JR being one)
but I don't believe many of them are mentally ill. I might suggest asking
yourslef this. How many people who are mentally ill, thought they were
before treatment? Most needed someone to help them, to encourage them to
seek help. Some found that someone in the shape of a police officer or
judge. I hope you can find that someone in my or someone you know, before
you recieved the attention of an official.
>
> Show us whether or not psychiatry can make you recognize what I am
> asking.
Often what you ask is not clear. It is often is a mix of the real and
the impossible.
>
> >Don't worry that
> >those around you will think less of you.
>
> You killers think alot of me shown by the time you take to prove I'm
> nuts by your paranoia posts.
I have no need to prove you are nuts. I do hope that you will see the
need for help. You are right that I do think a lot of you.
>
> >If they are your true friends they
> >will support you, if they don't support you they are not your true
friends
> >and they are fools who think mental illness is a wrongdoing.
>
> Okay, when you went to them, what did they say is the condition
> mentally of anyone who reports terrorists nevermind super-terrorists
> since September 11?
I went to no one.
>
> >> What were you saying about courtesy and respect? The
> >> Lord is showing you creatures why you will be destroyed. Reason and
> >> conscience wholly silenced. Can't even explain an excuse for
> >> yourselves. Teresita added to Ted Seeber's terrorism by calling the
> >> horrible record of martyrdom, "Foxe's Book of Heretics."
>
> Sorry Antichrist Meehan, but it is the choice of your religion why
> others can outwit you in scripture, reason, logic, and CERTAINLY
> CHARACTER!
>
> Your lack of such came through birth.
>
--
Susan Williams
<sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>"Susan Williams" <salet...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>news:7t4hdvg2b2dtqie9g...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 29 May 2003 08:41:53 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
>> <sligoj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Well, it looks like TedM aka Susan is back to crossposting again.
>> >
>> > It shows a lack of courtesy and respect, in addition to his/her other
>> >problems.
>>
>>
>> Being the premiere Antichrist psychiatrist, tis no wonder the killers
>> are respectable citizens and paranoid condemned of the scriptures
>> would flourish everywhere.
>>
>> Your posts constantly accuse those who have brains unlike you of
>> mental illness.
>
> I don't "accuse" anyone of mental illness. Mental illness is not a form
>of wrongdoing any more than AIDs or the flu; it is an illness.
You can't tangle with any Christian. So you resort to accusing them
of mental illness. Countless questions are given to you to answer
even after you and your fellow super-terrorist hatemongers of the
Antichrist issue out lies, but you know better than answering.
If I didn't do any wrongdoing, how come you have attacked me with hate
and said I was hateful and other indignities while preaching against
it like every other documented super-terrorist of the Pope have been
doing for centuries?
> Do consider seeing a professional. Mental illness can be treated.
Do consider settling your life. We are not responsible for your
illegitimate birth that constantly causes you to hate others who were
born properly and who have then accounted to reason for their beliefs.
We have told you this repeatedly and repeatedly. We are not concerned
if the mentally ill view normal people as mentally ill. We have
repeated this to you over and over again. If you don't want to hear,
we will just be content to let you know over and over again till the
fire burns the facts of your eligitimate birth into you.
> It
>is up to you to take the first step towards recovery.
Recovery from what? Tell me? Ted Seeber condemned all non-Catholics
to persecution and death. Teresita then followed in super-terrorism
proving that the Protestant record of your cult is correct and you
super-terrorist murderers are still the same. Now calm down killer
buddy! Sooner or later the crimes of you people will have to catch up
with you. Going into Vatican psychiatry is not going to help you.
>Don't worry that
>those around you will think less of you.
Why tell us that when you can't recover from the news and implications
of your eligitimate birth?
>If they are your true friends they
>will support you, if they don't support you they are not your true friends
>and they are fools who think mental illness is a wrongdoing.
You mean when I was upset that you Vatican psychiatrist killers
condemned non-Catholic blood and slipped by revealing your true colors
again as you are telling us that all non-Catholics should be killed?
>> What were you saying about courtesy and respect? The
>> Lord is showing you creatures why you will be destroyed. Reason and
>> conscience wholly silenced. Can't even explain an excuse for
>> yourselves. Teresita added to Ted Seeber's terrorism by calling the
>> horrible record of martyrdom, "Foxe's Book of Heretics."
>>
>>
In His Grace,