Good morning everyone,
I am very grateful for your responses.
There are many teachers witin the SDA church who will give what you have described as a "twisted" interpretation of Ellen Whites writings.
As Adventists we are not on the same page and are inconsistent with the interpretation of our doctorines.
I was at a Sabbath school, in which it was bluntly stated by an elder of our church that people who drink tea, and coffee will not be going to heaven. And that it also applied to chocolate eaters, as well as meat eaters. The argument given was that these health laws are just important as the ten commandments. And if we know that meat, coffee, tea, and chocolate is harmful to us, and we partake in it, we are denying the conviction of the holy spirit, and thus cannot have salvation, because we were not sanctified according to our knowledge.
In addition to that, it was stated that if these laws did not concern our salvation then why would God give them to us.
So it is not just people of other churches who are twisting Ellen Whites writings. It is coming from within are church also.
Other churches use Collosians chapter 2:14-17 to refute the beliefs of our church on diet and the Sabbath. However they are ignorantly unaware that Paul was addressing the universal spiritualism, and the gnostic Judiastic regulations and practices of the Collosians. Bacchiocchi has shown this in the Collosian Heresy section of 'From Sabbath to Sunday'.
I dont blame the members of our church who say that meat eaters will not go to heaven, because after reading carefully what Ellen White says , it is EXACTLY what she is saying.
Among those who are waiting for the coming of the Lord, meat eating will eventually be done away; flesh will cease to form a part of their diet. We should ever keep this end in view, and endeavor to work steadily toward it. I cannot think that in the practice of flesh eating we are in harmony with the light which God has been pleased to give us. All who are connected with our health institutions especially should be educating themselves to subsist on fruits, grains, and vegetables. If we move from principle in these things, if we as Christian reformers educate our own taste, and bring our diet to God's plan, then we may exert an influence upon others in this matter, which will be pleasing to God."
Therefore, how can it be argued that Ellen White wants us to endeavor work steadily toward the original diet God planned for us, just to be cancer free people.
In the next passage:
653. Those who have received instruction regarding the evils of the use of flesh foods, tea, and coffee, and rich and unhealthful food preparations, and who are determined to make a covenant with God by sacrifice, will not continue to indulge their appetite for food that they know to be unhealthful. God demands that the appetite be cleansed, and that self-denial be practised in regard to those things which are not good. This is a work that will have to be done before His people can stand before Him a perfected people.
"The evils of flesh foods, tea, and coffee"
Flesh food is not just unhealthy it is associated with being evil or rather 'ungod like'. So I dont think her statement is applying that meat eating in the past 100+ years is evil because of the hormones, pollution, and the cruelty in the butchering of animals etc. I think she is applying that meat eating has been an evil, since the creation of the world, that God did not intend for us to be apart of, and through her He is now making it clear.
Then the question that arises is, was Jesus a vegan?
And a possible accusation could be:
Would Christ have fed the 5000 with 'evil' eating of fish flesh.
Why didnt our Creator, if eating meat is evil, multiply the baskets with wholsome nuts, fruits, and herbs. It would have been an tremendous statement for our beliefs.
When Ellen White writes:
Greater reforms should be seen among the people who claim to be looking for the soon appearing of Christ. Health reform is to do among our people a work which it has not yet done. There are those who ought to be awake to the danger of meat eating, who are still eating the flesh of animals, thus endangering the physical, mental, and spiritual health. Many who are now only half converted on the question of meat eating will go from God's people to walk no more with them.
It is clear that many half vegans will separate from God's people because they will not be able to give meat up, thus implying that God's people will not eat meat. And it is obvious that only God's people will go to heaven.
Mr. Myers has kindly explained in his post that "In this forum is much that explains the dangers of eating animal products, yet many will cntinue to eat as they please. Rejecting light that God sends is an indication of a deeper problem."
"Those that are translated are a special group of people. Many other Christians have been laid to rest. Those translated will be living at a higher standard than most living today. They will perfectly reflect Christ."
My questions to Mr. Myers are:
are you implying that anyone partaking in meat during the last days, will not be apart of God's people and thus will not be given immortality (not be heaven)?
Does evil have a time frame?
Wasnt the early church told that the coming of the lord is like a thief in the night.
So arent we all measured to the same high standard of living, regardless of when we lived. And isnt that why we need the cross so much? We will never live up to God's standard.
And if evil does have a time frame,
Can someone raise an animal with care, and prepare it for food as people did in the Old testament, such as Abraham.
After reading all of our viewpoints. It is clear that if Ellen White was NOT saying that meat eaters of yesterday and today will not be in heaven, she IS saying that at the 'last days' meat eaters will not be considered by God to be his people. And therefore at the 'last days' if you are a meat eater you will not be in heaven. So the Remnant church should ever endeavor to work towards ceasing to eat meat.
Therefore according to our doctorine:
Salvation is (will be in the last days) dependant on what we eat, because when we accept Christ as our lord and savior and keep a relationship with him, he will prepare us and enable us to live according to his will - which includes the removal of flesh from our diet.
And so the accusation by the anti-advenstist is not entirely false.
God bless us all and I am very appreciative of the comments that you have shared to this topic.
