This section of posting is reserved for comments relating to Ellen White and Revelation. Please post accordingly.
32 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Chapter 1
I was a little concerned when I first saw the title of this book: The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: How to Read God’s Three Books. Comparing Biblical Perspectives with the Writings of Ellen White. I had heard that the Bible and nature where “God’s two books”, so I was naturally curious what the third book was. The tagline of “Comparing Biblical Perspectives with the Writings of Ellen White” made me guess that Dr. Hanna considered Ellen White’s writings the third book. I was glad to discover that this was not the case. A thorough discussion on the inspiration of Ellen White and the role her writings play in our faith is a whole other debate. But I think almost everyone would agree that Ellen White is not equal to the Bible. Ellen White herself says this, and Dr. Hanna affirms it as well on page 23. So I was relieved as I read the first chapter to discover that the third book was the incarnation of Christ. Christ is the greatest revelation of who God is. He is certainly one to be studying as one of the revelations of God. He is the clearest and best revelation.
If there was any doubt in my mind that the writings of Mrs. White were inspired by the Holy Spirit, after reading this chapter of Dr. Hanna’s book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture”, I have concluded that she wrote as she was led by the Holy Spirit as did holy men of old. As we have studied that we should test prophecies based on the results – this revelation which was given in the 19th Century and could be still applicable in the 21st Century, then it is today evidence enough that her writings are biblical. After writing this commentary on Part 2 of the book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture”, I have learnt why the author uses so much of Mrs. White’s quotations. He believes in her as an inspired prophet for the Seventh-day Adventist church.
After reading the many chapters in The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, I decided to comment on chapter 4, “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical? This is an alarming question that still remains to be answered among many Adventists as well as non-Adventists. I chose this chapter because I had read some of it before and some other materials that coincided with it. When I first read this chapter, I thought that Dr. Hanna should have gone into a little detail about the person and calling of Ellen White, at least for the people who are not familiar with her. After rereading the chapter, I found that if anyone read the chapter they would come to a precise answer to the character and calling of Ellen White and find her to be a true prophetess of the Lord. Personally, after rereading the chapter, I wished I had never changed the topic/subject of my research paper. The chapter brought to view, at least for me, that the whole universe and the sciences if studied truthfully illuminates the grandeur of a Great Master Creator/Artist. The Exploration of this chapter helped me to further understand and see the complete harmony of Ellen White’s views and the Scriptures. After anyone reads Ellen White’s quotes that Dr. Hanna outlines in this book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” and the last nine words that she spoke “Brethren and sisters, I commend unto you this book” at the General Conference Session of 1909 held in Washington, D. C., I am sure that most if not all of them would come to the conclusion that Ellen White’s writings are truly biblical. I believe that this chapter was well prayed over, thought out, and developed by an individual who was convicted to learn, teach/share, and develop more fully his knowledge of revelation and inspiration and let me hasten to add hermeneutics as have been revealed to him by God. This chapter was inspirational and refreshing to me.
One thing I can defiantly say about Dr. Hana’s book as well as his theology is that it is consistent. The theme of God’s three books flows through all that I have read so far as well as all of the class discussions/lectures. Even when it came to Ellen White, her message and writings were compared with God’s three books, and as was mentioned by someone previously, I too am glad that EGW was not counted as one of the books, although the subtitle does suggest that.
What I’ve been wondering is why after putting all this effort into writing this book is it not being published for a wider audience than just the seminary and local area? One thing this book offers that most on this and related topics don’t is brevity and simplicity. The average church member would neither the time nor the background to handle most books on this topic, but Hana’s book is short enough to fit into just about anyone’s schedule and it is written in a way that is accessible to just about anyone. 9/29/2006 5:05 PM
I am commenting most heavily on chapter 4, partly because my research project deals with aspects of what chapter 4 is all about, and partly because the question that chapter 4 goes a long way toward answering, has long been very important to me for personal reasons. "Are Ellen G. White's Writings Biblical?", this is the question that is asked by the author, and in the first paragraph Dr. Hanna uses an excellent approach of showing the full spectrum of EGW's position and the deep regard with which she held scripture. On page 47, he states that at the close of her first book she makes the statement, "...the Word of God as the rule of your faith and practice." And then further down the same page he shows that at the close of her life and ministry, during a general conference session, she publicly heralds the importance of the scriptures once again with the statement of, "...I commend unto you this Book", as she is holding aloft the Bible.
As we look back in our Adventist history, it sometimes appears to me that each succeeding generation feels that it is at the pinnacle of scriptural understanding, and while that may be true in the unique sense that we have reached farther in our understanding than our forefathers did and perhaps reached a pinnacle, we must recognize, even as EGW did ("well organized work must be done in the church, that its members may understand the manner in which they may impart light to others, and thus strengthen their own faith and increase their knowledge"), that there are many pinnacles to be reached and in fact the highest pinnacle will never be reached by us even in our glorified immortal forms [CT 55.2]. Our overarching need as a church then is to recognize that our "vast" knowledge of scripture is but a small sheet of scribbled notes in comparison to the limitless mine of knowledge that exists in the Word and how it reveals Christ to us personally and how it sheds light on the cosmos in relation to our Creator.
I am a firm believer that EGW hit the nail on the head with her statements [p58] that seem to qualifiy the idea that everything in the cosmos (natural world) that does not contradict the Word, is, therefore, of God and can actually reveal more of God to us. The caveat being, it must be tested according to the Scriptures.
Over and over again, EGW points to the importance of quantifying ourselves and our ideas according to the Scriptures and not the other way around, as is often done in the secular world, and even many times in the theological world as well, much to my dismay. It would seem then, to my understanding, that EGW had no problem pointing her readers to the Bible. The reason I say problem, is because if she were indeed unBiblical in her writings, might she have been somewhat reticent to constantly point others to the Bible in the fear that it might be discovered she had been unBiblical in some of her writings? I do believe this is one of the primary reasons, among the others previously stated, for finding assurance that Ellen G. Whites's writings were and are, indeed, Biblical. 10/01/2006 11:26 AM
Chapter 10 – Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?
Yes, indeed I agree that they are!
In this chapter, Hanna first indicates to us that Ellen White emphasized that the cosmos indeed testifies of God, and even though sin has entered into our world and distorted the picture, we can still view His Awesomeness through His creation, and be able to comprehend who He is and what He has done.
Having grown up in the city, I found it hard to worship God through nature, and it wasn't until I lived out in western Canada, near the mountains, did I realize the vastness and the awesomeness of God. The majesty of the mountains, the turquoise-colored water, and the purple skies indeed screamed to me how much time God took to reveal Himself to us through His creation!
Even though one may never have an encounter with the actual physical scripture, God’s creation testifies of Him and one cannot help but wonder about a Superior Being.
God has indeed written His law on our hearts, thus bringing us to want to have a desire to inquire the deeper meanings of life. However, because the mysteries of God are infinite, we as finite people may have difficulty embracing them.
Secondly, Hanna shares with us that White believes that scripture has been given from God, and that even though man wrote it, and that man may be fallible, there are no imperfections because all scripture came from an infallible God, who used designated men to communicate on His behalf.
Thirdly, Hanna points out to us that White states that there was a ‘divine-human communion’, where Christ is the Son of God, and also the Son of man—a truth that is hard for us to comprehend.
Finally, what can be drawn from this chapter is that nature and scripture do not disagree, they work together and attest firmly of one another! And even though science keeps discovering new things, there is never anything that is discovered that contradicts what scripture has already made known to us.
Jerome Skinner In response to “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical?” I found it interesting that her last comments were to lift up the word. Then I thought when we say is something biblical, that can have a number of meanings. Is it biblical in what sense? That she uses the bible in her writings, that her writings are in harmony with the bible, or that she agrees with the bible. I believe these are some questions to think about and to search out because there can be a tendency for our outlook on her writings to be based on what we mean when we say biblical. Will people be judged based on her writings who had them like the bible? As I read your chapter these questions came to mind when the term biblical is used. In response to the lesser light idea, one of my teachers said she is a lesser light in that the bible has 40 writers but she is only one, interesting. I think before we can dive into the great ideas you bring out in your book, we need to examine the terms and their usage, so we can clearly identify what we are exactly talking about so there won’t be any ambiguity in our understanding.
In chapter seven, “Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Christ-centered?” from the book, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Dr. Martin Hanna answers the question with a resounding “Yes!” Ellen White speaks of the three persons of the Godhead – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. According to Dr. Hanna’s presentation, she gives attention to and identifies each personality by their attributes. The Father – divine, the Son – God, the Holy Spirit – divine Spirit. It is interesting to note that when characterizing Jesus, Dr. Hanna selects quotations where she does not describe Him the way she does God the Father, and the Holy Spirit as divine, but rather zooms straight to the point that “Christ was God.” Further, Ellen White describes the Son as “the majesty of heaven” and “equal with the Father in dignity and glory.” Clearly, Ellen White’s point is to portray Jesus as God. Not only does she portray Jesus as God, but as fully human.
I believe that her writings were indeed Christ-centered in that she often spoke of Christ as part of the Godhead, and that He was divine in nature, and human in form. However, in revealing this information, does Dr. Hanna give a large enough sampling of her works to indeed prove that she was Christ-centered in what she wrote. I believe yes. In reviewing the selection of her works, judging from the footnotes, in time between 1872 through 1915, the very year of her death, clearly she wrote extensively on the subject of Christ. During this time, each selection speaks of Christ. Not one deviates from the theme of Christ. It is often said that when one is at death’s door, you often find out who they truly are, or what they really believe. If even near the end of her life, Ellen White wrote still about Jesus as divine and human, and that He took on human form to be our substitute even as late as Jan. 5, 1915 in the Signs of the Times article, then surely her works were Christ-centered.
Many persons may frown when they hear about Ellen White. Some say who is she, so what about! about what she has said, was she inspired of God. Upon reading this chapter it brought it home plain that Ellen was really inspired and that she was truly led by God. From observation in this chapter, I have never seen one statement where she sought to exalt her writings above the Scriptures, but rather she exalts the scriptures above her writings. Dr. Hanna unequivercally outline that Ellen White encourage that we go to and fro in scripture to increace knowledge and to have a clear view of God and His purposes for us. He also outline that Ellen encourage that the mind is to be trained and to advance day by day. Thus if we really get into the scriptures with a teachable spirit and humility of heart we will receive the understanding that God wants us to receive. Therefore, though Ellen white may not be liked by many Dr. Hanna made it clear that, what she was doing was to basiclly point us to the scriptures where we can drink from ofr ourselves from the fountain of life. Furthermore, her writings were Christ centered, biblical and relevant to the cosmos. This made her theology relevant.
I am thankful for this chapter that brings into question the authority and athtenticity of Mrs. Ellen G. WHite's writings. I must admit that I did not read the chpater to be convinced, I was already convinced. I read the chapter to get another another view, and I must admit I was very appreciative of the structure and layout. I am amazed how inspiration works and especially when I peruse the writings of Mrs. E.G. White, I am convinced without a doubt that God indeed did speak through her. Many of the principles and laws contained in hermenuetical principles are clearly seen in her writings. This is proof to me of the same God speaking even as He did with the prophets of old. Her writings are biblically supportive, i.e., she is a reflection of the greater light of the Bible. Dr. Hanna you have certainly done your homework and have dispelled many of the critics who will attack the lesser light as insignificant. I must add that I especially like the phrase found on page 60: "Every text of Scripture is a diamond, touched and irradiated by the divine rays of Christ" Thanks!
I really enjoyed reading this chapter. It is always fun to see how balanced Mrs. White is in her understanding and in her writings. There are many that abuse her writings, and more that have lost all faith in her writings. I found in my reading of this chapter that Dr. Hanna has been a dilligent student of both the Word of God and Mrs. White. His conclusions that Mrs. White supports a wholistic view of Revelation Inspiration are well documented and thorough. I think his conclusion is fair. Mrs. White is more balanced than many give her credit. If she had been unbalanced in her view of Scripture or Christ, she would not have become the person of God she turned out to be. I believe that she had an extraordinary connection with God, and seeing her recommendations on the Word of God, Christ, and the Cosmos we should be spending more time and effort clarifying the three in our own understanding. I believe that her final words to the Adventist World Assembly "I commend unto you this book" are sound advice for anyone. We should be ardent in our efforts to find the Truth through the holistic model Dr. Hanna suggests. Sven Frantzen
I think Dr. Hanna’s discussion of the relationship between Ellen G. White and the Scriptures is good in what it covers. However, I must have missed the passage that dealt with how the use of Ellen G. White as an authoritative inspired writer can be balanced with the principle of Sola-Scriptura. It’s much easier to show how White fits with Prima-Scriptura since she referred to herself as a lesser light and Scripture as a greater light. The problem is that when you need a lesser light (i.e. a flashlight) is when the greater light is missing (i.e. stadium lights). Even if the lesser light leads to the greater light, as White suggests (i.e. using a flashlight to find the switch for the stadium lights), once the greater light is in use there is no more need for the lesser light.
Having grown up in the Church I have seen the way that some people use Mrs. White. While in theory they say that her writings are subordinate to the Bible, in practice they put her on par with or above Scripture.
Reading a commentary is always an easier way of getting at the truth of a passage, and obviously an inspired commentary would seem to be the end of the discussion. In effect this would lead, especially in cases where Scripture is silent, to people putting White on par with or in some cases above Scripture. For Sola-Scriptura to be truly Sola-Scriptura then how can the writings of Ellen G. White be integrated? How can we use the lesser light with the greater light?
Chapter Ten of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture is a fine chapter. I enjoyed reading EGW's "ocean excursion" experience. I wonder what she meant when she said "I can write better before" (p. 116). It seems like she had such a remarkable experience with God's book of nature that it had such a powerful impact on her mind and physique. It also had a complementary impact in her relationship with Christ and Scripture. Powerful story.
This chapter reminds me that although God's world has been marred by sin, nature still exudes God's beauty and love, both the human and divine dimensions of nature.
It is made clear in this chapter the fact that God is reaching to human beings who are finite in everything: language, nature, and character. Therefore, God has to stoop down and speak a language that reaches us where we are. However marred nature is, its God given beauty never cease to amaze earth's inhabitants. Great are marvelous are his works.
I like the connection made between the divine-human communion which points to the divine-human union 'in the nature of Christ, who was the Son of God and the Son of man. The divine and human natueres were united in Christ. I believe this is the most spellbinding mystery and paradox. It makes it possible for us not only humanly but also spiritually to be in Christ and Christ in us. Beautiful.
I think this is the sweetest of all spiritual realities, that Christ is in me and has found a place in me as His temple, the temple of another helper/comforter. How comforting, how unfathomable? How life transforming?
Chapter 4. I have found the Cosmic Christ of Scripture to be very informative and insightful. I love the way in which Dr. Hanna uses Mrs. White's writtings to illustrate the Biblical perspective that knowledge will increase whenever we go to and fro the different revelations of God. If we are going to increase in our knowledge of God and deeden our relationship with Him. It is therfore critical for us to acquit oursleves with Him in all the areas inwhich He has revealed Himself to us.The reason i say this is because many Christians today fail to increase in their knowledge of God, because they accept portions of God's revelation and pay little or no attention to other parts. Many do not have any problem accepting God's revelation in Christ, Scripture and some of the areas within the cosmos. This could be as a result of negligence or ignorance. Let us look at science for example,some Christians today reject scientific revelations in all its form. Largely, because in the past and in some instances today,many evolutionalists, atheists and skeptics have used it to argue that there is no God, creation occured because of a big bong and that the Bible should be taken as any other book. I believe that an inclusive approadch to scientific data should be taken. This is so, because not all things in science should be acceoted or rejected. There is true and false science. True science hormonizes with Scripture while false science does not. Hence, the revelation of God in true science should be accepted and studied by God's people and false claims about Him in science should be rejected. Now when thid is done, our knowledge of God captured in the study and acceptance of true science will increase. in addition our faith in God would be stregthened. This is one of the concepts i have gleaned from chapter 4 of Dr. Hanna's book, based on His usage of the Bible and Spirit of prophecy.
October Comment GSEM 510-2 Revelation, Inspiration, and Hermeneutics
Olga Sadovoy
Talking about the relationship between science knowledge and the Bible we realize that even in postmodern world, where everything is allowed, and you can believe in anything you want, there is a big tension between these too dimensions. Ellen G. White makes several statements which show that the Bible prevails, but it does not contradict the ambition to study science. The quotations taken from her several works (cited in the Cosmic Christ of Scripture book) proof this idea. It was quite interesting to read an article on the relations of science and religion written by Albert Einstein. Trying to understand the source of religious tendencies in human beings and the source of rejection any religion connection with the science he comes to a summary that in our materialistic world the serious scientists can be only deeply religious people. Mrs. White perhaps on purpose made the stress on the importance of people who believe in God be eager to study to increase the knowledge. Because it was considered (and we still feel its effect) that there can be nothing between God and Science. It is very important to understand this and change the image of the church. True believers go to and fro and perfect their minds in the knowledge of the cosmos. But first area of their studies is always God’s Written Word.
The prima-Scriptura principle is important because Scripture points to other revelations such as extra-biblical prophets like Ellen White.
At the same time, the sola-Scriptura principle is important lest the other revelations identified by Scripture be used to undermine the role of Scripture as the only final rule of faith and practice.
The concept of Christ as supreme revelation and Scripture as special revelation does not imply that we don’t need Scripture once we encounter the revelation in Christ.
Similarly, the concept of the cosmos as a lesser light does not imply the we do not need the light of the cosmos once the greater light of Scripture is recognized.
Finally, the concept of Ellen White as a lesser light does not imply that we don’t need her light once the greater light of Scripture is recognized.
Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?
The Scripture verse John 17:15 which reads “I don’t pray that you would take them out of this world, but that you would keep them from the evil” is quite relevant not only to the title of this chapter but to the cosmos as well. In this twenty first century where postmodernism seems to be the norm, prayer is needed for this troubled sect as they try to find a place in society and ultimately in this world (cosmos). With so much evil in existence, prayer is definitely needed for them to be protected from such evil. So this scripture verse is rather pertinent.
In the first paragraph, the author gives a description of Ellen White’s experience on a day’s ocean excursion. The writing about nature, with the waves running high and the wind blowing strong are quite depictive of the wonders and awesomeness of God’s majestic works. God did not only create the waves and the winds, but ever since time memorial, He has been controlling them. Ellen White’s experience on her excursion is an analogy to what is happening in the world (cosmos) today with the waves running high in our lives and the winds blowing strong in our troubled world. Certainly her writings are relevant to the cosmos as she alludes to the fact that in the midst of the sea or storms of our lives, God is our Redeemer and we must trust Him.
This is a revelation to who God is and as the postmodernists learn this as well as understand about faith through a biblical perspective, then there will be hope for them.
In the third paragraph of page 116, the author refers to Ellen White’s comment ‘Divine –Human Revelations’. I agree that although sin has obscured God’s revelation, the revelation of God in the cosmos is ‘an open book’ which reveals God Himself who works in the cosmos. This ‘open book’ revelation has already been seen in God’s revelation of Himself in the winds and the waves as described by Ellen White during her ocean excursion.
On pages 117-119, the second reference is made of Ellen White’s comment on the Bible and Scripture. Again I am in agreement that every chapter and verse of the Bible is a communication from God to man and that Scripture is like a chain with one part explaining another. These references to both the Bible and Scripture are very relevant to the cosmos as the author correctly puts it, “the knowledge necessary for salvation, standard of character, historical facts, and the highest science are reliably revealed in Scripture”. Thus the cosmos has been provided with the standard guide to just about any topic of research and this guide is found throughout Scriptures in the Bible.
On page 120 – the author states that according to Ellen White, God’s revelation in Scripture and in the cosmos is in harmony. The logo on page 120 directs or points the greater light (from the Bible) to nature and a second arrow pointing from nature which is the lesser light to the Bible. This has always been the author’s stand that the God in Scripture is the greater light and Ellen White is the lesser light. Thus, Ellen White’s writings (the lesser light), point from Scripture (the greater light), to nature, which is very relevant to the cosmos today.
First off, I want it to be clear that I am a faithful believer in the Spirit of Prophecy as embodied in Ellen White. That said, I have some concerns about some of her statements that Dr. Hanna uses in chapter 7. And perhaps my concerns are related more to my (mis)understanding than the thought-ideas contained in her words.
On page 90, Dr. Hanna quotes Ellen White as saying that Christ did not part with his divinity, and this was why even though he was tempted just like we are he was “untainted” by the world’s corruption, surrounded by it all the while. It seems to me that there needs to be a better explanation than this as it seems to connote that the reason Christ did not fall into sin is directly because of his Divinity. A divinity, incidentally, that humanity can never partake of. Humanity will always be a creation, even after we have received glorification and eternal life from divinity. I have heard it said or maybe I’ve said it myself and forgotten if it’s my own or if it belongs to someone else, but I have a saying that seems to better encapsulate this idea that Christ simply veiled his divinity within the garb of humanity. This statement seems resemble, in idea anyway, the second 1st and 2nd century heresy of Docetism, but strictly and only in the sense of saying that Christ merely resembled humanity. Saying that Christ only took on the garb of humanity to cloak or veil his divinity almost seems to cheapen the sacrifice that he made on our behalf. The phrase, “Christ actually turned over and gave up his glory in order to inhabit a human body, which could in no way contain divine glory”, seems to me to better elucidate this idea of what, among other things, Christ gave up for us. I know this statement may seem a little inflammatory but it is not meant to be and I have more to say on this subject but I’ll include it in another blog comment.
In my previous post I made a statement at the end of it about what the essence of Christ’s humanity was. I believe that even though Christ fully gave up his divine glory in order to inhabit a human body, it is not a long leap to state that he was still fully divine. Primarily because we must still remember that human were created in the image of God. According to Genesis 1:27, (NET Genesis 1:27 God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.) He created both sexes in his image and therefore it seems logical that he could easily inhabit a form that was originally created in His image to begin with. However the only issue is His divine glory that is simply too much for humanity to bear without being killed by it. That is what he gave up to become fully human even though he was fully divine at the same time. His glory is not the essence of His divinity although His glory would have been extremely declarative of His divinity, in this case He utilized other means to present His God status to humans because He had to, otherwise it would have prematurely put to death any human who chanced to look upon Him even as an infant. This is all simply my opinion based on Biblical evidence and logical reasoning, flawed though it may be. I would love to have some feedback on this from anyone. Thanks.
Three very important questions have come up. (1) Did Jesus cease to be divine in his incarnation? (2) Was Jesus fully human in his incarnation? (3) How do the first two questions relate to salvation from sin?
These questions may be addressed by clarifying the following text. “Jesus, who was in the form of God, made himself of no reputation, and took on the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of humanity” (Phil 2:6-7).
First, did Jesus cease to be divine? The word “form” (morphe) may refer to the glory of God and the relative absence of glory in humanity. Jesus is the brightness of God’s glory and the express image of God’s person (Heb 1:3). Jesus prayed to the Father: glorify me your own self, with the glory I had with you (Jn 17:5). The reference to “made himself of no reputation” could also be translated “emptied himself.” This should not be understood to mean that he ceased to be God. "In him dwells the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col 2:9).
Second, did Jesus become fully human? Third, what about salvation from sin? The reference to “form of a servant” and “likeness of humanity” does not indicate that Jesus was only apparently human (docetism). His likeness to humanity provides a real contact with our humanity. Therefore, we can experience the likeness of his death and resurrection and our “old man” is crucified with him (Rom 6:5-6). In the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned our sin in the flesh so that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us (8:3-4).
Chapter 4 - Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Biblical?
First and foremost, I believe that it is imperative that we reiterate that position of Ellen White’s statement that she, “commended us unto the Book.” She has always maintained the position that the Bible holds precedence above her writings. Throughout this chapter, Hanna strives to share with us Ellen White’s writings ‘in light of the Biblical model.’ Three of the main points that Hanna shares with us are; One – we should go ‘to and fro’ in the scriptures, simply meaning that in order for our understanding to be increased within the area of prophecy, we need to study the Old Testament book of Daniel, and correspond it with the New Testament book of Revelation; Two – we should go ‘to and fro’ amongst the scriptures in conjunction with what the cosmos has to say, for they go hand in hand in spite of all corruption in the world, Creation still testifies of God and what He has said in His Word; and Three – we need to go ‘to and fro’ between Scripture and Christ, and this will illuminate who Christ is and what He has done. By and large, this chapter seeks to emphasize that Christ, Scripture, and the Cosmos have exclusive dominancy yet they complement one another, and God’s influence is evident in all three.
Chapter 7 – Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Christ-Centered?
In this chapter, Hanna asks the intriguing question of, “Are her (Ellen G. White) writings Christ-centered in the same way that Scripture is Christ-centered?” The three main points that are called to attention in this chapter are, first, “Ellen G. White agrees with Scripture that God has created humanity in the image of divinity”, meaning—the Father is in the Son and the Spirit, the Son is in the Father and the Spirit, and the Spirit is in the Father and the Son; second, “just as the Godhead/divinity is sometimes referred to under the name of one divine person, so the one humanity is sometimes referred to under the name of one human person,” meaning in Christ, God became man ; and third, “Jesus is the Restorer of full human personhood,” meaning, in the divine-human Christ there is accomplished a Christ-centered connection of divine persons to human persons. In my opinion, Ellen G. White’s writings are indeed Christ-centered however; they are formulated in such a way not to be an authority over the Bible but in essence, a guiding light back to the Bible. For us to be able to comprehend the fact that Christ was fully Divine and fully human, is one that is hard for us to wrap our minds around yet, through the writings of Ellen White, she helps us to be able to see the unity that exists between the Godhead.
The issue of the exclusive dominance of the different revelations of God has been raised. This terminology stands in tension with the issue of complementarity of divine influence through each revelation.
Therefore, I prefer not to refer to exclusive dominance. I am more comfortable with the language of the inclusive authority of God in all his complementary revelations.
The one authority of God is mediated in different ways through Christ, through Scripture, and through the cosmoms.
After reading Chapter 7 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Christ-Centered?” I am compelled to comment on Chapter 4 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical?” In my discussion of Chapter 7 I focused on the concept of Christ as restorer of the human personhood. Specifically, that he has made us partakers of the divine nature. The bible speaks of this and Ellen White clearly discusses it in her writings. In unity with that thought (and possibly the theme of the whole book) is the following quote found in Chapter 4 on page 50, “The book of nature and the written word do not disagree: each sheds light on the other. Rightly understood they make us acquainted with God and his character by teaching us something of the wise and beneficent laws through which he works.” Therefore, it can also be concluded that Scripture and Nature play a role in restoration. In as much as scripture and nature point to Christ and are valuable because of Christ, there is a certain sense in which they help humanity in our process of restoration. Nature and scriptures help humans comprehend the benefits of the sacrifice of Christ and the requirements of living a righteous life. They are not the Restorer, for Christ alone holds that title; however, they are aids in our restoration. We must not exalt them to a position of the Restorer but Christ points to them and gives them authority. Therefore, when utilized in the proper context they lead us to “adore his name and to have intelligent trust in his word” (p50) and thus, compel us to become acquainted with the divine nature He offers to us.
“If they don’t according to God’s word, there is no light in them.” (Isaiah 8:20)
“Ellen White continually pointed people to the Scriptures.” (Hanna, 47)
Yes, Ellen White is a special person in Adventist history. She had unique revelations from God to help people in her day and in ours. She has been labeled a “prophet” in our church. (Which makes me wonder—would we, as a church, ordain E.G. White if she were around today? Could we get past our sexism for a prophet? Hmm.)
Anyway, the SDA Church has never officially stated that Ellen White’s writings are equal with Scripture. Sister White even told us to use Scripture as the standard by which to measure her writings. So, as a church, that’s what we have done and continue to do.
My question comes when we start using other Christ-centered, extra-biblical sources. Let’s say, C.S. Lewis. How do we use Lewis’s? We measure them against the Scriptures, right? So, what’s the difference between how we practically use the writings of a Christ-centered theologian and those of a “prophet”? Do we act as if EGW’s writings are part of the “standard,” and make sure that other theologians measure up to both the Bible and EGW? If so, then do we keep adding to the standard, or is it just EGW that gets “canonized” with the actual Bible?
In chapter six, Dr. Hanna shows how Ellen White’s writings agree with Scripture in how they deal with Christ. Dr. Hanna demonstrates not only that Ellen White’s writings are Christ-centered, but he also goes into some of her writings on what Christ’s human-divine state means for us.
Christ came into the earth clothed in humanity as Adam was. And Christ succeeded where Adam failed. This idea of Christ coming to earth to be a second Adam in order to offer us the chance to have salvation is a powerful concept. Like Dr. Jon Paulien suggests in his book “Meet God Again For the First Time,” God offers to trade our sinful and messed up history for His perfect history. That is what Jesus made possible for us by coming to this earth and living a perfect life as a human-divine person. This is one of the many powerfully Christ-centered ideas that Ellen White points out in her writings.
It seems that many people in the past have used Ellen White’s writings to point out the messed up histories and lives that we as humans have. But many people don’t balance her cutting statements about sin and worldliness with her statements about the perfect life of Christ that we are offered in exchange for our messed up lives. We need to always see the beauty and balance in the writings of Ellen White as they point us toward Jesus, the perfect Adam!
It is nothing new that Sister White's writings are a hot topic in an academic setting within the SDA Church. The topic of her relevance will be debated until Jesus comes. The main problem is the way her words have been misused, abused, and ripped from their context to be used as a hammer to drive a certain point home by many who are misguided in their priorities of what is really important in this Christian race.
As Geoffrey has questioned:
"Do we act as if EGW’s writings are part of the “standard,” and make sure that other theologians measure up to both the Bible and EGW? If so, then do we keep adding to the standard, or is it just EGW that gets “canonized” with the actual Bible?"
I believe that many have been guilty of making Sister White the standard and ignoring the clear instruction from her that she was not to be the standard. I was at a church where one of the members (a suspected Shepherd's Rod) only quoted the Bible once in my two years there. He had an eBook device with all of Sister White's writings on it and all throughout Sabbath School and any discussion would search for quotes relevant to the topic from her writings.
Dr. Hanna points out in his book, "Scripture is a perfect chain with one portion explaining another". If we believe this to be true, then it is possible to be saved without reading one jot or tittle of "Spirit of Prophecy". For clarity's sake, I'll note here that I am not anti-EGW, I am anti misuse of her writings and I believe that many people can benefit from reading her writings.
I also believe that we must carefully select how we use her writings and we have no business publishing things that she never intended to be published. And we certainly have no business using such writings to enforce certain pet doctrines, as I have seen done. Sister White's relevance to the world we live in is only as good as those who interpret her message. If rightly presented, her writings can be of great benefit to building God's kingdom. When wrongly presented, they do terrible damage to the cause of Christ.
There are distinctions between biblical revelation and extra-biblical revelation. Similarly, there are distinctions among various manifestations of extra-biblical revelation.
When we evaluate extra-biblical revelation in Ellen White and C. S. Lewis we may come to different conclusions as to their revelatory roles.
Scripture is our only, unique, primary and final rule of faith. Ellen White is a Seventh-day Adventist prophetess. C. S. Lewis has also been wonderfully used by God in a different way.
"Similarly, there are distinctions among various manifestations of extra-biblical revelation."
What is the distinction, then, in how we (as Adventists) use a non-cannonized prophet's (revelatory)writings, and how we use other Christ-centered theologians' (revelatory) works? (More specific then "coming to different conclusions.")
I can’t get into specifics here. I am only suggesting that we have a responsibility to distinguish between extra-biblical and biblical revelation, and also between various extra-biblical revelations. To acknowledge that something is revelation (biblical or extra-biblical) does not free us from responsibility to rightly assess the role of the revelation and to rightly interpret the revelation. Extra-biblical revelations are to be evaluated by the standard of biblical revelation. Similarly, some extra-biblical revelations might be definitive for our understanding of other extra-biblical revelations. Revelations which are judged to be manifestations of the gift of prophecy are certainly definitive in this way.
By no means do I intend to “beat a dead horse” so to speak, but the nature of Christ and what He gave up to become as we are is, to me, a very important and relevant issue. I hope the two questions posed by Dr. Hanna that came up as a result of my blog were not intentionally raised by me as I did not intend to question the reality of Jesus’ divinity or His humanity. I used the word “inhabit” in my previous postings because of it’s use in Dr. Hanna’s book. I’m not sure that it conveys the sense of Christ’s nature in the way that I’d hoped to. One of the meanings that I’d hoped to convey was that for Christ to become fully human couldn’t have been that much of a stretch for Him since humans were already created in His image to begin with, the stretch comes about when we consider how much physical glory that Christ gave up in order to present himself face to face with sinful humanity. As we know, no man can see the face of God and live, that is God’s face revealed in all His glory. All of this is still a mystery that will be unfolded for us during all of eternity, and we will continue to learn more and more about it. So I am by no means attempting to come up with any sort of concrete answer, however I simply wanted to clarify my understanding of the nature of Christ. One of my favorite Ellen White quotes shows how fully united and yet completely distinct were the two natures, human and divine, in the person of Christ. “For a moment the divinity of Christ flashed through His guise of humanity” {DA 707.2}. In this sense “visage” could be a better understanding in place of the word “guise” but it gives the idea that Christ’s divinity was on a very short leash just brimming to burst over into His humanity, and at times it did spill over a little.
I would like to thank everyone who has posted comments. Please understand that my comments do not necessarily indicate that I disagree with anyone. I simply make comment in order to clarify my position and to make suggestions for others to consider. Where we do disagree, I am happy that we can disagree agreeably. In this way, we can learn form each other.
32 comments:
Chapter 1
I was a little concerned when I first saw the title of this book: The Cosmic Christ of Scripture: How to Read God’s Three Books. Comparing Biblical Perspectives with the Writings of Ellen White. I had heard that the Bible and nature where “God’s two books”, so I was naturally curious what the third book was. The tagline of “Comparing Biblical Perspectives with the Writings of Ellen White” made me guess that Dr. Hanna considered Ellen White’s writings the third book. I was glad to discover that this was not the case. A thorough discussion on the inspiration of Ellen White and the role her writings play in our faith is a whole other debate. But I think almost everyone would agree that Ellen White is not equal to the Bible. Ellen White herself says this, and Dr. Hanna affirms it as well on page 23. So I was relieved as I read the first chapter to discover that the third book was the incarnation of Christ. Christ is the greatest revelation of who God is. He is certainly one to be studying as one of the revelations of God. He is the clearest and best revelation.
9/10/2006 1:40 PM
If there was any doubt in my mind that the writings of Mrs. White were inspired by the Holy Spirit, after reading this chapter of Dr. Hanna’s book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture”, I have concluded that she wrote as she was led by the Holy Spirit as did holy men of old. As we have studied that we should test prophecies based on the results – this revelation which was given in the 19th Century and could be still applicable in the 21st Century, then it is today evidence enough that her writings are biblical. After writing this commentary on Part 2 of the book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture”, I have learnt why the author uses so much of Mrs. White’s quotations. He believes in her as an inspired prophet for the Seventh-day Adventist church.
9/24/2006 11:20 AM
Chapter 4
After reading the many chapters in The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, I decided to comment on chapter 4, “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical? This is an alarming question that still remains to be answered among many Adventists as well as non-Adventists. I chose this chapter because I had read some of it before and some other materials that coincided with it.
When I first read this chapter, I thought that Dr. Hanna should have gone into a little detail about the person and calling of Ellen White, at least for the people who are not familiar with her. After rereading the chapter, I found that if anyone read the chapter they would come to a precise answer to the character and calling of Ellen White and find her to be a true prophetess of the Lord.
Personally, after rereading the chapter, I wished I had never changed the topic/subject of my research paper. The chapter brought to view, at least for me, that the whole universe and the sciences if studied truthfully illuminates the grandeur of a Great Master Creator/Artist. The Exploration of this chapter helped me to further understand and see the complete harmony of Ellen White’s views and the Scriptures. After anyone reads Ellen White’s quotes that Dr. Hanna outlines in this book “The Cosmic Christ of Scripture” and the last nine words that she spoke “Brethren and sisters, I commend unto you this book” at the General Conference Session of 1909 held in Washington, D. C., I am sure that most if not all of them would come to the conclusion that Ellen White’s writings are truly biblical.
I believe that this chapter was well prayed over, thought out, and developed by an individual who was convicted to learn, teach/share, and develop more fully his knowledge of revelation and inspiration and let me hasten to add hermeneutics as have been revealed to him by God. This chapter was inspirational and refreshing to me.
9/29/2006 3:11 PM
One thing I can defiantly say about Dr. Hana’s book as well as his theology is that it is consistent. The theme of God’s three books flows through all that I have read so far as well as all of the class discussions/lectures. Even when it came to Ellen White, her message and writings were compared with God’s three books, and as was mentioned by someone previously, I too am glad that EGW was not counted as one of the books, although the subtitle does suggest that.
What I’ve been wondering is why after putting all this effort into writing this book is it not being published for a wider audience than just the seminary and local area? One thing this book offers that most on this and related topics don’t is brevity and simplicity. The average church member would neither the time nor the background to handle most books on this topic, but Hana’s book is short enough to fit into just about anyone’s schedule and it is written in a way that is accessible to just about anyone.
9/29/2006 5:05 PM
I am commenting most heavily on chapter 4, partly because my research project deals with aspects of what chapter 4 is all about, and partly because the question that chapter 4 goes a long way toward answering, has long been very important to me for personal reasons. "Are Ellen G. White's Writings Biblical?", this is the question that is asked by the author, and in the first paragraph Dr. Hanna uses an excellent approach of showing the full spectrum of EGW's position and the deep regard with which she held scripture. On page 47, he states that at the close of her first book she makes the statement, "...the Word of God as the rule of your faith and practice." And then further down the same page he shows that at the close of her life and ministry, during a general conference session, she publicly heralds the importance of the scriptures once again with the statement of, "...I commend unto you this Book", as she is holding aloft the Bible.
As we look back in our Adventist history, it sometimes appears to me that each succeeding generation feels that it is at the pinnacle of scriptural understanding, and while that may be true in the unique sense that we have reached farther in our understanding than our forefathers did and perhaps reached a pinnacle, we must recognize, even as EGW did ("well organized work must be done in the church, that its members may understand the manner in which they may impart light to others, and thus strengthen their own faith and increase their knowledge"), that there are many pinnacles to be reached and in fact the highest pinnacle will never be reached by us even in our glorified immortal forms [CT 55.2]. Our overarching need as a church then is to recognize that our "vast" knowledge of scripture is but a small sheet of scribbled notes in comparison to the limitless mine of knowledge that exists in the Word and how it reveals Christ to us personally and how it sheds light on the cosmos in relation to our Creator.
I am a firm believer that EGW hit the nail on the head with her statements [p58] that seem to qualifiy the idea that everything in the cosmos (natural world) that does not contradict the Word, is, therefore, of God and can actually reveal more of God to us. The caveat being, it must be tested according to the Scriptures.
Over and over again, EGW points to the importance of quantifying ourselves and our ideas according to the Scriptures and not the other way around, as is often done in the secular world, and even many times in the theological world as well, much to my dismay. It would seem then, to my understanding, that EGW had no problem pointing her readers to the Bible. The reason I say problem, is because if she were indeed unBiblical in her writings, might she have been somewhat reticent to constantly point others to the Bible in the fear that it might be discovered she had been unBiblical in some of her writings? I do believe this is one of the primary reasons, among the others previously stated, for finding assurance that Ellen G. Whites's writings were and are, indeed, Biblical.
10/01/2006 11:26 AM
Chapter 10 – Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?
Yes, indeed I agree that they are!
In this chapter, Hanna first indicates to us that Ellen White emphasized that the cosmos indeed testifies of God, and even though sin has entered into our world and distorted the picture, we can still view His Awesomeness through His creation, and be able to comprehend who He is and what He has done.
Having grown up in the city, I found it hard to worship God through nature, and it wasn't until I lived out in western Canada, near the mountains, did I realize the vastness and the awesomeness of God. The majesty of the mountains, the turquoise-colored water, and the purple skies indeed screamed to me how much time God took to reveal Himself to us through His creation!
Even though one may never have an encounter with the actual physical scripture, God’s creation testifies of Him and one cannot help but wonder about a Superior Being.
God has indeed written His law on our hearts, thus bringing us to want to have a desire to inquire the deeper meanings of life. However, because the mysteries of God are infinite, we as finite people may have difficulty embracing them.
Secondly, Hanna shares with us that White believes that scripture has been given from God, and that even though man wrote it, and that man may be fallible, there are no imperfections because all scripture came from an infallible God, who used designated men to communicate on His behalf.
Thirdly, Hanna points out to us that White states that there was a ‘divine-human communion’, where Christ is the Son of God, and also the Son of man—a truth that is hard for us to comprehend.
Finally, what can be drawn from this chapter is that nature and scripture do not disagree, they work together and attest firmly of one another! And even though science keeps discovering new things, there is never anything that is discovered that contradicts what scripture has already made known to us.
Jerome Skinner
In response to “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical?” I found it interesting that her last comments were to lift up the word. Then I thought when we say is something biblical, that can have a number of meanings. Is it biblical in what sense? That she uses the bible in her writings, that her writings are in harmony with the bible, or that she agrees with the bible. I believe these are some questions to think about and to search out because there can be a tendency for our outlook on her writings to be based on what we mean when we say biblical. Will people be judged based on her writings who had them like the bible? As I read your chapter these questions came to mind when the term biblical is used. In response to the lesser light idea, one of my teachers said she is a lesser light in that the bible has 40 writers but she is only one, interesting. I think before we can dive into the great ideas you bring out in your book, we need to examine the terms and their usage, so we can clearly identify what we are exactly talking about so there won’t be any ambiguity in our understanding.
In chapter seven, “Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Christ-centered?” from the book, The Cosmic Christ of Scripture, Dr. Martin Hanna answers the question with a resounding “Yes!” Ellen White speaks of the three persons of the Godhead – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. According to Dr. Hanna’s presentation, she gives attention to and identifies each personality by their attributes. The Father – divine, the Son – God, the Holy Spirit – divine Spirit. It is interesting to note that when characterizing Jesus, Dr. Hanna selects quotations where she does not describe Him the way she does God the Father, and the Holy Spirit as divine, but rather zooms straight to the point that “Christ was God.” Further, Ellen White describes the Son as “the majesty of heaven” and “equal with the Father in dignity and glory.” Clearly, Ellen White’s point is to portray Jesus as God. Not only does she portray Jesus as God, but as fully human.
I believe that her writings were indeed Christ-centered in that she often spoke of Christ as part of the Godhead, and that He was divine in nature, and human in form. However, in revealing this information, does Dr. Hanna give a large enough sampling of her works to indeed prove that she was Christ-centered in what she wrote. I believe yes. In reviewing the selection of her works, judging from the footnotes, in time between 1872 through 1915, the very year of her death, clearly she wrote extensively on the subject of Christ. During this time, each selection speaks of Christ. Not one deviates from the theme of Christ. It is often said that when one is at death’s door, you often find out who they truly are, or what they really believe. If even near the end of her life, Ellen White wrote still about Jesus as divine and human, and that He took on human form to be our substitute even as late as Jan. 5, 1915 in the Signs of the Times article, then surely her works were Christ-centered.
Many persons may frown when they hear about Ellen White. Some say who is she, so what about! about what she has said, was she inspired of God. Upon reading this chapter it brought it home plain that Ellen was really inspired and that she was truly led by God. From observation in this chapter, I have never seen one statement where she sought to exalt her writings above the Scriptures, but rather she exalts the scriptures above her writings.
Dr. Hanna unequivercally outline that Ellen White encourage that we go to and fro in scripture to increace knowledge and to have a clear view of God and His purposes for us. He also outline that Ellen encourage that the mind is to be trained and to advance day by day. Thus if we really get into the scriptures with a teachable spirit and humility of heart we will receive the understanding that God wants us to receive.
Therefore, though Ellen white may not be liked by many Dr. Hanna made it clear that, what she was doing was to basiclly point us to the scriptures where we can drink from ofr ourselves from the fountain of life. Furthermore, her writings were Christ centered, biblical and relevant to the cosmos. This made her theology relevant.
I am thankful for this chapter that brings into question the authority and athtenticity of Mrs. Ellen G. WHite's writings. I must admit that I did not read the chpater to be convinced, I was already convinced. I read the chapter to get another another view, and I must admit I was very appreciative of the structure and layout. I am amazed how inspiration works and especially when I peruse the writings of Mrs. E.G. White, I am convinced without a doubt that God indeed did speak through her. Many of the principles and laws contained in hermenuetical principles are clearly seen in her writings. This is proof to me of the same God speaking even as He did with the prophets of old. Her writings are biblically supportive, i.e., she is a reflection of the greater light of the Bible. Dr. Hanna you have certainly done your homework and have dispelled many of the critics who will attack the lesser light as insignificant. I must add that I especially like the phrase found on page 60: "Every text of Scripture is a diamond, touched and irradiated by the divine rays of Christ" Thanks!
I really enjoyed reading this chapter. It is always fun to see how balanced Mrs. White is in her understanding and in her writings. There are many that abuse her writings, and more that have lost all faith in her writings. I found in my reading of this chapter that Dr. Hanna has been a dilligent student of both the Word of God and Mrs. White. His conclusions that Mrs. White supports a wholistic view of Revelation Inspiration are well documented and thorough. I think his conclusion is fair. Mrs. White is more balanced than many give her credit. If she had been unbalanced in her view of Scripture or Christ, she would not have become the person of God she turned out to be. I believe that she had an extraordinary connection with God, and seeing her recommendations on the Word of God, Christ, and the Cosmos we should be spending more time and effort clarifying the three in our own understanding. I believe that her final words to the Adventist World Assembly "I commend unto you this book" are sound advice for anyone. We should be ardent in our efforts to find the Truth through the holistic model Dr. Hanna suggests.
Sven Frantzen
I think Dr. Hanna’s discussion of the relationship between Ellen G. White and the Scriptures is good in what it covers. However, I must have missed the passage that dealt with how the use of Ellen G. White as an authoritative inspired writer can be balanced with the principle of Sola-Scriptura. It’s much easier to show how White fits with Prima-Scriptura since she referred to herself as a lesser light and Scripture as a greater light. The problem is that when you need a lesser light (i.e. a flashlight) is when the greater light is missing (i.e. stadium lights). Even if the lesser light leads to the greater light, as White suggests (i.e. using a flashlight to find the switch for the stadium lights), once the greater light is in use there is no more need for the lesser light.
Having grown up in the Church I have seen the way that some people use Mrs. White. While in theory they say that her writings are subordinate to the Bible, in practice they put her on par with or above Scripture.
Reading a commentary is always an easier way of getting at the truth of a passage, and obviously an inspired commentary would seem to be the end of the discussion. In effect this would lead, especially in cases where Scripture is silent, to people putting White on par with or in some cases above Scripture. For Sola-Scriptura to be truly Sola-Scriptura then how can the writings of Ellen G. White be integrated? How can we use the lesser light with the greater light?
Chapter Ten of The Cosmic Christ of Scripture is a fine chapter. I enjoyed reading EGW's "ocean excursion" experience. I wonder what she meant when she said "I can write better before" (p. 116). It seems like she had such a remarkable experience with God's book of nature that it had such a powerful impact on her mind and physique. It also had a complementary impact in her relationship with Christ and Scripture. Powerful story.
This chapter reminds me that although God's world has been marred by sin, nature still exudes God's beauty and love, both the human and divine dimensions of nature.
It is made clear in this chapter the fact that God is reaching to human beings who are finite in everything: language, nature, and character. Therefore, God has to stoop down and speak a language that reaches us where we are. However marred nature is, its God given beauty never cease to amaze earth's inhabitants. Great are marvelous are his works.
I like the connection made between the divine-human communion which points to the divine-human union 'in the nature of Christ, who was the Son of God and the Son of man. The divine and human natueres were united in Christ. I believe this is the most spellbinding mystery and paradox. It makes it possible for us not only humanly but also spiritually to be in Christ and Christ in us. Beautiful.
I think this is the sweetest of all spiritual realities, that Christ is in me and has found a place in me as His temple, the temple of another helper/comforter. How comforting, how unfathomable? How life transforming?
Thanks for this beautiful chapter.
-Kendrick Cid
Chapter 4.
I have found the Cosmic Christ of Scripture to be very informative and insightful. I love the way in which Dr. Hanna uses Mrs. White's writtings to illustrate the Biblical perspective that knowledge will increase whenever we go to and fro the different revelations of God. If we are going to increase in our knowledge of God and deeden our relationship with Him. It is therfore critical for us to acquit oursleves with Him in all the areas inwhich He has revealed Himself to us.The reason i say this is because many Christians today fail to increase in their knowledge of God, because they accept portions of God's revelation and pay little or no attention to other parts. Many do not have any problem accepting God's revelation in Christ, Scripture and some of the areas within the cosmos. This could be as a result of negligence or ignorance. Let us look at science for example,some Christians today reject scientific revelations in all its form. Largely, because in the past and in some instances today,many evolutionalists, atheists and skeptics have used it to argue that there is no God, creation occured because of a big bong and that the Bible should be taken as any other book. I believe that an inclusive approadch to scientific data should be taken. This is so, because not all things in science should be acceoted or rejected. There is true and false science. True science hormonizes with Scripture while false science does not. Hence, the revelation of God in true science should be accepted and studied by God's people and false claims about Him in science should be rejected. Now when thid is done, our knowledge of God captured in the study and acceptance of true science will increase. in addition our faith in God would be stregthened. This is one of the concepts i have gleaned from chapter 4 of Dr. Hanna's book, based on His usage of the Bible and Spirit of prophecy.
October Comment
GSEM 510-2 Revelation, Inspiration, and Hermeneutics
Olga Sadovoy
Talking about the relationship between science knowledge and the Bible we realize that even in postmodern world, where everything is allowed, and you can believe in anything you want, there is a big tension between these too dimensions. Ellen G. White makes several statements which show that the Bible prevails, but it does not contradict the ambition to study science. The quotations taken from her several works (cited in the Cosmic Christ of Scripture book) proof this idea. It was quite interesting to read an article on the relations of science and religion written by Albert Einstein. Trying to understand the source of religious tendencies in human beings and the source of rejection any religion connection with the science he comes to a summary that in our materialistic world the serious scientists can be only deeply religious people.
Mrs. White perhaps on purpose made the stress on the importance of people who believe in God be eager to study to increase the knowledge. Because it was considered (and we still feel its effect) that there can be nothing between God and Science.
It is very important to understand this and change the image of the church. True believers go to and fro and perfect their minds in the knowledge of the cosmos. But first area of their studies is always God’s Written Word.
The prima-Scriptura principle is important because Scripture points to other revelations such as extra-biblical prophets like Ellen White.
At the same time, the sola-Scriptura principle is important lest the other revelations identified by Scripture be used to undermine the role of Scripture as the only final rule of faith and practice.
The concept of Christ as supreme revelation and Scripture as special revelation does not imply that we don’t need Scripture once we encounter the revelation in Christ.
Similarly, the concept of the cosmos as a lesser light does not imply the we do not need the light of the cosmos once the greater light of Scripture is recognized.
Finally, the concept of Ellen White as a lesser light does not imply that we don’t need her light once the greater light of Scripture is recognized.
Martin Hanna.
Are Ellen White’s Writings Relevant to the Cosmos?
The Scripture verse John 17:15 which reads “I don’t pray that you would take them out of this world, but that you would keep them from the evil” is quite relevant not only to the title of this chapter but to the cosmos as well. In this twenty first century where postmodernism seems to be the norm, prayer is needed for this troubled sect as they try to find a place in society and ultimately in this world (cosmos). With so much evil in existence, prayer is definitely needed for them to be protected from such evil. So this scripture verse is rather pertinent.
In the first paragraph, the author gives a description of Ellen White’s experience on a day’s ocean excursion. The writing about nature, with the waves running high and the wind blowing strong are quite depictive of the wonders and awesomeness of God’s majestic works. God did not only create the waves and the winds, but ever since time memorial, He has been controlling them. Ellen White’s experience on her excursion is an analogy to what is happening in the world (cosmos) today with the waves running high in our lives and the winds blowing strong in our troubled world. Certainly her writings are relevant to the cosmos as she alludes to the fact that in the midst of the sea or storms of our lives, God is our Redeemer and we must trust Him.
This is a revelation to who God is and as the postmodernists learn this as well as understand about faith through a biblical perspective, then there will be hope for them.
In the third paragraph of page 116, the author refers to Ellen White’s comment ‘Divine –Human Revelations’. I agree that although sin has obscured God’s revelation, the revelation of God in the cosmos is ‘an open book’ which reveals God Himself who works in the cosmos. This ‘open book’ revelation has already been seen in God’s revelation of Himself in the winds and the waves as described by Ellen White during her ocean excursion.
On pages 117-119, the second reference is made of Ellen White’s comment on the Bible and Scripture. Again I am in agreement that every chapter and verse of the Bible is a communication from God to man and that Scripture is like a chain with one part explaining another. These references to both the Bible and Scripture are very relevant to the cosmos as the author correctly puts it, “the knowledge necessary for salvation, standard of character, historical facts, and the highest science are reliably revealed in Scripture”. Thus the cosmos has been provided with the standard guide to just about any topic of research and this guide is found throughout Scriptures in the Bible.
On page 120 – the author states that according to Ellen White, God’s revelation in Scripture and in the cosmos is in harmony. The logo on page 120 directs or points the greater light (from the Bible) to nature and a second arrow pointing from nature which is the lesser light to the Bible. This has always been the author’s stand that the God in Scripture is the greater light and Ellen White is the lesser light. Thus, Ellen White’s writings (the lesser light), point from Scripture (the greater light), to nature, which is very relevant to the cosmos today.
Sheryl Nicholson
First off, I want it to be clear that I am a faithful believer in the Spirit of Prophecy as embodied in Ellen White. That said, I have some concerns about some of her statements that Dr. Hanna uses in chapter 7. And perhaps my concerns are related more to my (mis)understanding than the thought-ideas contained in her words.
On page 90, Dr. Hanna quotes Ellen White as saying that Christ did not part with his divinity, and this was why even though he was tempted just like we are he was “untainted” by the world’s corruption, surrounded by it all the while. It seems to me that there needs to be a better explanation than this as it seems to connote that the reason Christ did not fall into sin is directly because of his Divinity. A divinity, incidentally, that humanity can never partake of. Humanity will always be a creation, even after we have received glorification and eternal life from divinity. I have heard it said or maybe I’ve said it myself and forgotten if it’s my own or if it belongs to someone else, but I have a saying that seems to better encapsulate this idea that Christ simply veiled his divinity within the garb of humanity. This statement seems resemble, in idea anyway, the second 1st and 2nd century heresy of Docetism, but strictly and only in the sense of saying that Christ merely resembled humanity. Saying that Christ only took on the garb of humanity to cloak or veil his divinity almost seems to cheapen the sacrifice that he made on our behalf. The phrase, “Christ actually turned over and gave up his glory in order to inhabit a human body, which could in no way contain divine glory”, seems to me to better elucidate this idea of what, among other things, Christ gave up for us. I know this statement may seem a little inflammatory but it is not meant to be and I have more to say on this subject but I’ll include it in another blog comment.
~Blessings
In my previous post I made a statement at the end of it about what the essence of Christ’s humanity was. I believe that even though Christ fully gave up his divine glory in order to inhabit a human body, it is not a long leap to state that he was still fully divine. Primarily because we must still remember that human were created in the image of God. According to Genesis 1:27, (NET Genesis 1:27 God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them, male and female he created them.) He created both sexes in his image and therefore it seems logical that he could easily inhabit a form that was originally created in His image to begin with. However the only issue is His divine glory that is simply too much for humanity to bear without being killed by it. That is what he gave up to become fully human even though he was fully divine at the same time. His glory is not the essence of His divinity although His glory would have been extremely declarative of His divinity, in this case He utilized other means to present His God status to humans because He had to, otherwise it would have prematurely put to death any human who chanced to look upon Him even as an infant. This is all simply my opinion based on Biblical evidence and logical reasoning, flawed though it may be. I would love to have some feedback on this from anyone. Thanks.
~Blessings
Three very important questions have come up. (1) Did Jesus cease to be divine in his incarnation? (2) Was Jesus fully human in his incarnation? (3) How do the first two questions relate to salvation from sin?
These questions may be addressed by clarifying the following text. “Jesus, who was in the form of God, made himself of no reputation, and took on the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of humanity” (Phil 2:6-7).
First, did Jesus cease to be divine? The word “form” (morphe) may refer to the glory of God and the relative absence of glory in humanity. Jesus is the brightness of God’s glory and the express image of God’s person (Heb 1:3). Jesus prayed to the Father: glorify me your own self, with the glory I had with you (Jn 17:5). The reference to “made himself of no reputation” could also be translated “emptied himself.” This should not be understood to mean that he ceased to be God. "In him dwells the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col 2:9).
Second, did Jesus become fully human? Third, what about salvation from sin? The reference to “form of a servant” and “likeness of humanity” does not indicate that Jesus was only apparently human (docetism). His likeness to humanity provides a real contact with our humanity. Therefore, we can experience the likeness of his death and resurrection and our “old man” is crucified with him (Rom 6:5-6). In the likeness of sinful flesh He condemned our sin in the flesh so that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us (8:3-4).
Martin Hanna.
Chapter 4 - Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Biblical?
First and foremost, I believe that it is imperative that we reiterate that position of Ellen White’s statement that she, “commended us unto the Book.” She has always maintained the position that the Bible holds precedence above her writings.
Throughout this chapter, Hanna strives to share with us Ellen White’s writings ‘in light of the Biblical model.’
Three of the main points that Hanna shares with us are; One – we should go ‘to and fro’ in the scriptures, simply meaning that in order for our understanding to be increased within the area of prophecy, we need to study the Old Testament book of Daniel, and correspond it with the New Testament book of Revelation; Two – we should go ‘to and fro’ amongst the scriptures in conjunction with what the cosmos has to say, for they go hand in hand in spite of all corruption in the world, Creation still testifies of God and what He has said in His Word; and Three – we need to go ‘to and fro’ between Scripture and Christ, and this will illuminate who Christ is and what He has done.
By and large, this chapter seeks to emphasize that Christ, Scripture, and the Cosmos have exclusive dominancy yet they complement one another, and God’s influence is evident in all three.
Chapter 7 – Are Ellen G. White’s Writings Christ-Centered?
In this chapter, Hanna asks the intriguing question of, “Are her (Ellen G. White) writings Christ-centered in the same way that Scripture is Christ-centered?”
The three main points that are called to attention in this chapter are, first, “Ellen G. White agrees with Scripture that God has created humanity in the image of divinity”, meaning—the Father is in the Son and the Spirit, the Son is in the Father and the Spirit, and the Spirit is in the Father and the Son; second, “just as the Godhead/divinity is sometimes referred to under the name of one divine person, so the one humanity is sometimes referred to under the name of one human person,” meaning in Christ, God became man ; and third, “Jesus is the Restorer of full human personhood,” meaning, in the divine-human Christ there is accomplished a Christ-centered connection of divine persons to human persons.
In my opinion, Ellen G. White’s writings are indeed Christ-centered however; they are formulated in such a way not to be an authority over the Bible but in essence, a guiding light back to the Bible. For us to be able to comprehend the fact that Christ was fully Divine and fully human, is one that is hard for us to wrap our minds around yet, through the writings of Ellen White, she helps us to be able to see the unity that exists between the Godhead.
The issue of the exclusive dominance of the different revelations of God has been raised. This terminology stands in tension with the issue of complementarity of divine influence through each revelation.
Therefore, I prefer not to refer to exclusive dominance. I am more comfortable with the language of the inclusive authority of God in all his complementary revelations.
The one authority of God is mediated in different ways through Christ, through Scripture, and through the cosmoms.
Martin Hanna.
After reading Chapter 7 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Christ-Centered?” I am compelled to comment on Chapter 4 “Are Ellen White’s Writings Biblical?” In my discussion of Chapter 7 I focused on the concept of Christ as restorer of the human personhood. Specifically, that he has made us partakers of the divine nature. The bible speaks of this and Ellen White clearly discusses it in her writings. In unity with that thought (and possibly the theme of the whole book) is the following quote found in Chapter 4 on page 50, “The book of nature and the written word do not disagree: each sheds light on the other. Rightly understood they make us acquainted with God and his character by teaching us something of the wise and beneficent laws through which he works.” Therefore, it can also be concluded that Scripture and Nature play a role in restoration. In as much as scripture and nature point to Christ and are valuable because of Christ, there is a certain sense in which they help humanity in our process of restoration. Nature and scriptures help humans comprehend the benefits of the sacrifice of Christ and the requirements of living a righteous life. They are not the Restorer, for Christ alone holds that title; however, they are aids in our restoration. We must not exalt them to a position of the Restorer but Christ points to them and gives them authority. Therefore, when utilized in the proper context they lead us to “adore his name and to have intelligent trust in his word” (p50) and thus, compel us to become acquainted with the divine nature He offers to us.
- David B. Franklin
“If they don’t according to God’s word, there is no light in them.” (Isaiah 8:20)
“Ellen White continually pointed people to the Scriptures.” (Hanna, 47)
Yes, Ellen White is a special person in Adventist history. She had unique revelations from God to help people in her day and in ours. She has been labeled a “prophet” in our church. (Which makes me wonder—would we, as a church, ordain E.G. White if she were around today? Could we get past our sexism for a prophet? Hmm.)
Anyway, the SDA Church has never officially stated that Ellen White’s writings are equal with Scripture. Sister White even told us to use Scripture as the standard by which to measure her writings. So, as a church, that’s what we have done and continue to do.
My question comes when we start using other Christ-centered, extra-biblical sources. Let’s say, C.S. Lewis. How do we use Lewis’s? We measure them against the Scriptures, right? So, what’s the difference between how we practically use the writings of a Christ-centered theologian and those of a “prophet”? Do we act as if EGW’s writings are part of the “standard,” and make sure that other theologians measure up to both the Bible and EGW? If so, then do we keep adding to the standard, or is it just EGW that gets “canonized” with the actual Bible?
Geoffrey Blake
In chapter six, Dr. Hanna shows how Ellen White’s writings agree with Scripture in how they deal with Christ. Dr. Hanna demonstrates not only that Ellen White’s writings are Christ-centered, but he also goes into some of her writings on what Christ’s human-divine state means for us.
Christ came into the earth clothed in humanity as Adam was. And Christ succeeded where Adam failed. This idea of Christ coming to earth to be a second Adam in order to offer us the chance to have salvation is a powerful concept. Like Dr. Jon Paulien suggests in his book “Meet God Again For the First Time,” God offers to trade our sinful and messed up history for His perfect history. That is what Jesus made possible for us by coming to this earth and living a perfect life as a human-divine person. This is one of the many powerfully Christ-centered ideas that Ellen White points out in her writings.
It seems that many people in the past have used Ellen White’s writings to point out the messed up histories and lives that we as humans have. But many people don’t balance her cutting statements about sin and worldliness with her statements about the perfect life of Christ that we are offered in exchange for our messed up lives. We need to always see the beauty and balance in the writings of Ellen White as they point us toward Jesus, the perfect Adam!
Brent Wilson
It is nothing new that Sister White's writings are a hot topic in an academic setting within the SDA Church. The topic of her relevance will be debated until Jesus comes. The main problem is the way her words have been misused, abused, and ripped from their context to be used as a hammer to drive a certain point home by many who are misguided in their priorities of what is really important in this Christian race.
As Geoffrey has questioned:
"Do we act as if EGW’s writings are part of the “standard,” and make sure that other theologians measure up to both the Bible and EGW? If so, then do we keep adding to the standard, or is it just EGW that gets “canonized” with the actual Bible?"
I believe that many have been guilty of making Sister White the standard and ignoring the clear instruction from her that she was not to be the standard. I was at a church where one of the members (a suspected Shepherd's Rod) only quoted the Bible once in my two years there. He had an eBook device with all of Sister White's writings on it and all throughout Sabbath School and any discussion would search for quotes relevant to the topic from her writings.
Dr. Hanna points out in his book, "Scripture is a perfect chain with one portion explaining another". If we believe this to be true, then it is possible to be saved without reading one jot or tittle of "Spirit of Prophecy". For clarity's sake, I'll note here that I am not anti-EGW, I am anti misuse of her writings and I believe that many people can benefit from reading her writings.
I also believe that we must carefully select how we use her writings and we have no business publishing things that she never intended to be published. And we certainly have no business using such writings to enforce certain pet doctrines, as I have seen done. Sister White's relevance to the world we live in is only as good as those who interpret her message. If rightly presented, her writings can be of great benefit to building God's kingdom. When wrongly presented, they do terrible damage to the cause of Christ.
That’s My Two Lincolns®
Pastor Jones
There are distinctions between biblical revelation and extra-biblical revelation. Similarly, there are distinctions among various manifestations of extra-biblical revelation.
When we evaluate extra-biblical revelation in Ellen White and C. S. Lewis we may come to different conclusions as to their revelatory roles.
Scripture is our only, unique, primary and final rule of faith. Ellen White is a Seventh-day Adventist prophetess. C. S. Lewis has also been wonderfully used by God in a different way.
Martin Hanna.
"Similarly, there are distinctions among various manifestations of extra-biblical revelation."
What is the distinction, then, in how we (as Adventists) use a non-cannonized prophet's (revelatory)writings, and how we use other Christ-centered theologians' (revelatory) works? (More specific then "coming to different conclusions.")
I can’t get into specifics here. I am only suggesting that we have a responsibility to distinguish between extra-biblical and biblical revelation, and also between various extra-biblical revelations. To acknowledge that something is revelation (biblical or extra-biblical) does not free us from responsibility to rightly assess the role of the revelation and to rightly interpret the revelation. Extra-biblical revelations are to be evaluated by the standard of biblical revelation. Similarly, some extra-biblical revelations might be definitive for our understanding of other extra-biblical revelations. Revelations which are judged to be manifestations of the gift of prophecy are certainly definitive in this way.
Martin Hanna.
By no means do I intend to “beat a dead horse” so to speak, but the nature of Christ and what He gave up to become as we are is, to me, a very important and relevant issue. I hope the two questions posed by Dr. Hanna that came up as a result of my blog were not intentionally raised by me as I did not intend to question the reality of Jesus’ divinity or His humanity. I used the word “inhabit” in my previous postings because of it’s use in Dr. Hanna’s book. I’m not sure that it conveys the sense of Christ’s nature in the way that I’d hoped to. One of the meanings that I’d hoped to convey was that for Christ to become fully human couldn’t have been that much of a stretch for Him since humans were already created in His image to begin with, the stretch comes about when we consider how much physical glory that Christ gave up in order to present himself face to face with sinful humanity. As we know, no man can see the face of God and live, that is God’s face revealed in all His glory. All of this is still a mystery that will be unfolded for us during all of eternity, and we will continue to learn more and more about it. So I am by no means attempting to come up with any sort of concrete answer, however I simply wanted to clarify my understanding of the nature of Christ. One of my favorite Ellen White quotes shows how fully united and yet completely distinct were the two natures, human and divine, in the person of Christ. “For a moment the divinity of Christ flashed through His guise of humanity” {DA 707.2}. In this sense “visage” could be a better understanding in place of the word “guise” but it gives the idea that Christ’s divinity was on a very short leash just brimming to burst over into His humanity, and at times it did spill over a little.
~Blessings
I would like to thank everyone who has posted comments. Please understand that my comments do not necessarily indicate that I disagree with anyone. I simply make comment in order to clarify my position and to make suggestions for others to consider. Where we do disagree, I am happy that we can disagree agreeably. In this way, we can learn form each other.
Martin Hanna.
Post a Comment