Not a fetish, just trying to establish pedigree.
Besides, with all the beatings that the church fathers have taken either explicitly or implicitly (chants of "paganism" come to mind), surely a reference from Wikipedia to Ellen White's unique -isms can't be too objectionable.
To what end? Why not argue scripture for scripture?
Besides, with all the beatings that the church fathers have taken either explicitly or implicitly (chants of "paganism" come to mind), surely a reference from Wikipedia to Ellen White's unique -isms can't be too objectionable.
I don't object, actually, I couldn't care less. But I have to wonder why you seem to want to take the debate away from scripture and on to extra-biblical sources.
I tried earlier in the thread or the last thread to get you to step back or move forward and tell us how you come to your beliefs. What is the end game of your theology? Mine is pretty simple - God does not change the rules, belief in Him changes men to follow them.
Since you want to make this about anything but scripture, and you refuse to post the scripture that repeals the 4th Commandment, I will go off on the tangential bait.
RE: ECF bashing:
Once I discovered all the errors that I had been taught, I set out to find out how did this happen? Even the Apostles had disagreements that made it into scripture. The ECF's had a huge challenge spreading the Gospel to the Nations. IMO, the early Church's purity was eroded the further they got away from Jerusalem. I think that in order to win converts, the first one's started compromising. Baptizing people en masse is risky business, no? This is clear in the Epistles as well as the rebukes the churches get in Revelation. Then as Paul's converts started converting others, and so on, the lines between paganism and Christianity started to become really blurred. Keep in mind, these guys couldn't possibly have the access to the scriptures that we enjoy.
It looks like it all came to a head at the Nicean Council, where purity was compromised for unity.
Anti-Semitism looks like a source of the apostasy. Hellenists and Gnostics weren't big on being judged. Another was Plato-ism and Neo-Plato-ism. These folks saw "truth" in every religion. This was re-inforced as civil Rome conquered land after land and kept running into gods that looked just like the one's back home. So these little nuances creep in, innocently, over time and become the norm. In broad terms, I do not subscribe to a notion that these things were part of a "vast Hellenist-wing conspiracy". I think it was all an accident.
The part that absolutely blows my mind is that here we are with our electronic Bibles and specials on the Discovery or History channels explaining the pagan origins of a whole lot of Christianity. With PhD level theologians who know full well the origins of the errors they teach, and yet they keep teaching them. But, then I remember it is all prophesied:
Dan 12:4 "But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase."
Isa 35:5 Then the eyes of the blind will be opened And the ears of the deaf will be unstopped.
Why not just ask?