Log In  |  Help  |  Mobile View  
 
Visiting Donna Kupp's Shares (account name: the_kupp_journal)
 
 ELLEN WHITE, SDAs and SWINE'S FLESH
  


                    ELLEN WHITE, SDAs and SWINE’S FLESH

Harold Kupp writes:

I was doing some research on Mrs. White and swine’s flesh and found a fascinating article written by the Whites and published in their Present Truth periodical. What is interesting is that it appears that when the pioneer Adventist’s based their beliefs on the Bible alone, they came up with some “Present Truth” that directly contradicts the present truth about swine’s flesh shown to Mrs. White by her spirit guide. Following are some excerpts on the subject of swine’s flesh and Peter’s vision.

THE PRESENT TRUTH. VOL. I. - PARIS, ME.,. NOVEMBER, 1850. - NO. 11

SWINES FLESH
.
"Some of our good brethren are troubled in regard to eating swine's flesh, and a very few abstain from it, thinking that the Bible forbids its use. We do not object to abstinence from the use of swine's flesh, if it is done on the right grounds.
We think that too free and abundant use of it, and other animal food, of which many, and even some of our brethren in the present truth are not guiltless, is a sin; for it clogs and stupefies the mind, and in many cases impairs the constitution; but we do not, by any means, believe that the Bible teaches that its proper use, in the gospel dispensation, is sinful. But we do object to a misapplication of the holy scriptures in sustaining a position which will only distract the flock of God, and lead the minds of the brethren from the importance of the present work of God among the remnant. Error, however small it may appear, darkens and fetters the soul, and if persisted in will lead to gross darkness, and great errors, and sooner or later its fatal results will appear."

[WHAT?  “…but we do not, by any means, believe that the Bible teaches that its [swine flesh] proper use, in the gospel dispensation, is sinful. Did I read that right?] read on…

"The principal texts that are quoted to prove that the Gentile church is forbidden to eat swine's flesh are Isa.lxv,4; lxvi,17. Now we do really think that these texts fall far short of affording sufficient proof on this point. In fact, we must believe they have no direct bearing on this time. The burning of "incense upon altars of brick," remaining "among the graves," lodging "in the monuments," and sacrificing "in gardens" are rebuked in connection with eating "swine's flesh." Now, if one applies literally to our day, then, certainly all do; but we think
that no one will undertake a literal application of the whole of Isa.lxv, 4;
lxvi,17, to this time. This is one reason why we think that these texts have no literal bearing on this time…."


[WELL – There goes the “eating swine's flesh and mouse” verse – right out the window- according to the original present truth that text has no bearing on this time…]


"…But as we may not all see just alike as to what the Prophet teaches on this subject, let us come to the New Testament. And what do we find? Certainly, if eating swine's flesh is a sin in the sight of Heaven, in this dispensation, the New Testament has in some way taught us the fact. But we find that the New ttestament does not, directly nor indirectly, teach any such thing."

[WOW! swine's flesh not a sin according to the New Testament.]

"… But the New Testament so far from teaching that the use of swine's flesh is wrong, that it affords good testimony that it is not forbidden. First, take the case of the Apostle Peter, when God was about to send him to preach to the Gentiles. His Jewish views and feelings in relation to common and unclean beasts that did not part the hoof and chew the cud, see Lev.xi, must first be removed before he could see that God was no respecter of persons, and that there was salvation for the Gentiles. "About the sixth hour," (noon,) "Peter went upon the housetop to pray." "He became very hungry, and would have eaten;" and in this state "fell into a trance." The opening heavens discovered to him "a certain vessel" descending, in which "were ALL MANNER of four-footed beast." &c. Certainly, swine were there. The sudden appearance of these beasts no doubt aroused Peter's Jewish feelings and prejudices for he considered many of them "UNCLEAN." At this point "there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter, kill and eat." But Peter said, "Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or UNCLEAN." This vision, and the connected circumstances, rid the Apostle of his exclusive feelings, and opened the way for him to preach to, and eat with the Gentiles."


[HOLY SOW! – Peter’s vision teaches just what everybody (except the *new* present truth Adventists) thought it meant. That the unclean meat laws did not apply to Christianity.]


"Now look at some of the trials of the apostolic church, on the subject of eating with the Gentiles, and some other points of the law of Moses, and the final decision of the conference of apostles and elders assembled at Jerusalem. See Acts,chap.xv. Judaizing teachers taught the churches that they, in order to be saved must keep the law of Moses. This at once caused divisions among them,
and called forth the following from the Apostle Paul. "Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not converts used swine's flesh, and other meats which were "abomination" to the Jews, while the converts from the Jewish church were inclined to still follow the law of Moses in these things, and were JUDGING the Gentile converts, and binding on them burdens which the gospel did not require…Some of our good brethren have added "swine's flesh" to the catalogue of things forbidden by the Holy Ghost, and the apostles and elders assembled at Jerusalem. But we feel called upon to protest against such a course, as being contrary to the plain teaching of the holy scriptures. Shall we lay a greater "burden" on the disciples than seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and the holy apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ? God forbid. Their decision, being right, settled the question with them, and was a cause of rejoicing among the churches, and it should forever settle the question with us."

[WOW AGAIN- “…contrary to the plain teaching of the holy scriptures…should forever settle the question with us.” The irony is overwhelming – when the early Adventists stuck with the Bible they were certain that eating flesh meat – even swine's flesh was not a sin. And then what happened – the original “present truth” was replaced by a *new* present truth revealed to Mrs. White by her spirit guide in 1863.

The *new* present truth forbids all flesh meat and it revealed that God wanted mankind to return to a vegetarian diet, contrary to Jesus’ example in word and deed. One can only wonder why Jesus did not tell us God’s will when he was here on earth? Instead – Jesus ate flesh and offered flesh food to others and then more than1800 years later supposedly told Mrs. White “Not an ounce of flesh-meat should enter our stomachs. The eating of flesh is unnatural. We are to return to God's original purpose in the creation of man." {TSDF 78.3}

Harold Kupp

The entire article is found at:
http://www.presentdaytruth.com/books/present-truth/present-truth-vol1-no11.php

I am not a Seventh Day Adventist (and never have been), a natural Jew, or a Catholic.  I am simply the least of Christ's brethren who love Him and keep His Commandments.




Creation date: Jun 24, 2012 8:25 am     Last modified date: Jun 29, 2016 12:53 am   Last visit date: Oct 23, 2016 5:06 am     link & embed ?...
    Report Objectionable Content   
Select a Color