Graffiti in the Holy of Holies: Recent Attacks on the Sanctuary and Ellen White Takes Aim at the Heart of Adventism : Clifford Goldstein Responds

5 Comments

1. R. McRae says:

   July 29, 2010 at 6:29 pm

   Review by R. McRae for Graffiti in the Holy of Holies: Recent Attacks on the Sanctuary and Ellen White Takes Aim at the Heart of Adventism : Clifford Goldstein Responds
   Rating:
   With “Graffiti In The Holy of Holies” written as a rebuttal to former Adventist Dale Ratzlaff’s “The Cultic Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventists”, Clifford Goldstein has produced another apologetic follow-up to his “1844 Made Simple” that powerfully exposes the continually rehashed arguments, recycled year after year by critics of Adventist doctrine. Critics that give little or no consideration of Adventisms indepth and scholarly response to such authors and former members like Desmond Ford, Walter Rea, Ronald Numbers and others. During the 1980s and 90s, the Seventh-day Adventist church published seven volumes of works entitled “Daniel and Revelation Committee Series”, prepared by the best of its theologians. Mr. Goldstein comments on how modern critics don’t even bother to refute these rebuttals, even ignoring them for the most part. What are critics of Adventism so afraid of? Could it be that their arguments don’t stand up under real contextual scrutiny? That according to numerous biblical translations, non-Adventist scholars, both Christian and Jewish, came to many of the same Adventist conclusions about interpreting a day for a year in prophecy? The 70 weeks of Daniel 9 being really 490 years “cut off” from the 2300 days/years of Daniel 8:14? The many Bible translations that, along with Adventists, interpret the heavenly sanctuary in Daniel 8:14 as being “cleansed?” Or maybe it’s the historically proven fact that Daniel’s vision of the “little horn”, in no way could be refering to Antiochus Epiphanes, who never proved to be “exceeding great” by any stretch of the imagination.

   Of course there is the whole Ellen G. White being a “plagiarist” and “false prophet” thing continually being rehashed as well. Over 100 years of rehashing since the days of D.M. Canright for that matter. Let’s just quote one of this so called “false prophet’s” many sayings as an example:

   “Grace is unmerited favor, and the believer is justified without any merit of his own, without any claim to offer to God. He is justified through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, who stands in the courts of heaven as the sinner’s substitute and surety.” Selected Messages Book 1, p. 398.

   Sounds like a pretty “false” representation of God’s saving Grace if there ever was one don’t you think? Is that what those Adventists are teaching the Bible really says? And that’s just one of many E.G. White sayings you never hear quoted by her critics as Mr Goldstein so ably points out.

   But then again, her critics sometimes seemingly contradict themselves as Brother Goldstein points out, like Mr. Ratzlaff’s own reflection of Ellen White’s influence in the Adventist church. In his above mentioned 380 page book, he states on page 351, “To her credit, unlike many ‘prophets’ of her day, her change in doctrine was usually toward mainstream Christianity.” And the scholar that penned the forward to Mr. Ratzlaff’s book, Kenneth Richard Samples is even quoted as saying, “In fact, Ellen G. White seemed to play a significant role in helping the Adventist church move toward theological orthodoxy.” Foreward [7]. Well isn’t that what true prophets are supposed to do? Shouldn’t we know them by their fruits?

   This brings us to one of Mr. Goldstein’s final remarks quoted from p. 172 of “Graffiti In The Holy of Holies”:

   “These are fascinating admissions, fraught with conclusions that Brother Dale doesn’t work through. In his sentence he places quote marks around the word “prophets,” the implication being that he questions her prophetic ministry. Fair enough. But how many other modern day “prophets” have moved their churches toward “mainstream Christianity,” as Brother Dale says Ellen White did? Has Sun Myung Moon, leader of the Unification Church? Or Joseph Smith of the Mormons? Or Mary Baker Eddy of Christian Science? Please! All of these prophets, without equivocation or exception, have led their people away from mainstream Christianity, because they are all false prophets. And yet Brother Dale admits that Ellen White, one of these “prophets,” moved the church toward the mainstream, or as Kenneth Samples says, toward “theological orthodoxy.” That’s kind of a strange thing for someone to do, who (according to Brother Dale) practiced deception, taught false doctrine, and wrote against the gospel.”

   If one truly believe’s in hearing the argument from both sides, something even the secular courts of the world practice, then why not read this book from the pen of Clifford Goldstein? Why not read the many rebuttals that Adventists have published for decades for that matter? Many of which you’ll find in my list of reviews or the Adventist Book Center website. Most are even right here at Amazon.com. Then one can truly consider themselves well read and informed. It might even change some of those negative opinions of Seventh-day Adventist beliefs many of you, even former members have been duped into believing. We’re not afraid of something we really can’t denounce are we?
2. BJS says:

   July 29, 2010 at 7:06 pm

   Review by BJS for Graffiti in the Holy of Holies: Recent Attacks on the Sanctuary and Ellen White Takes Aim at the Heart of Adventism : Clifford Goldstein Responds
   Rating:
   The author is excellent in his analytic way to explain the biblical reality of a heavenly Day of Atonement. If you read this book you can’t anything else but acknowlegde that it is a biblical fact in the prophetic chains of the book of Daniel. An investigative jugdement will taken place before Jesus come back to set up the eternal kingdom of God. It is an answer to former Adventist Dale Ratzlaff’s writing against Adventist doctrins. The reasons of Ratzlaff are melting away like snow in the sun.
3. Paul R. Chartier says:

   July 29, 2010 at 8:06 pm

   Review by Paul R. Chartier for Graffiti in the Holy of Holies: Recent Attacks on the Sanctuary and Ellen White Takes Aim at the Heart of Adventism : Clifford Goldstein Responds
   Rating:
   What a fantastic book! I enjoyed this thoroughly. The best explanation of The Investigative Judgment I have read. I am a Cliff Goldstein fan for many years, and this book does not dissapoint! You need this book in your personal library and share it with your fellow SDAs.
4. Mike says:

   July 29, 2010 at 8:59 pm

   Review by Mike for Graffiti in the Holy of Holies: Recent Attacks on the Sanctuary and Ellen White Takes Aim at the Heart of Adventism : Clifford Goldstein Responds
   Rating:
   The information in this book is really interesting, Cliff seems to have done a good job explaining his position right down to the minutest detail.
5. Lorraine R. Clarke says:

   July 29, 2010 at 9:12 pm

   Review by Lorraine R. Clarke for Graffiti in the Holy of Holies: Recent Attacks on the Sanctuary and Ellen White Takes Aim at the Heart of Adventism : Clifford Goldstein Responds
   Rating:
   Seventh-day Adventism began with lies, and thus requires an ever-more tangled web of lies to sustain itself.
   
   The primary tenet on which this cult is based ~ that the Jewish Day of Atonement in 1844, was the beginning of the unbiblical “Investigative Judgement in heaven” – is proven quite simply to be a lie, thus:
   
   Adventism has ALWAYS said that the tiny first group of Adventists awaiting the return of Jesus, were expecting Him on the Jewish Day of Atonement on OCTOBER 22, 1844. Sadly for this ill-informed, uneducated group, the Day of Atonement in 1844 was on SEPTEMBER 23.
   
   Another glaringly-obvious lie:
   
   Adventism has ALWAYS maintained that Jesus was crucified at the “middle of the 70th Week” of Daniel, on Passover, Friday, 14 Nisan, 31 AD.
   
   The fact is that in 31 AD, PASSOVER occurred on a MONDAY, which means that, had the Cross occurred in 31 AD, Jesus would have been in the tomb for 7 days and 6 nights before His resurrection on Sunday, the Day of Firstfruits.
   
   Obviously Seventh-day Adventist theology is ABSOLUTELY WRONG about these two basic doctrines, and has been CONSISTENTLY WRONG now, for 165 YEARS.
   
   The Bible says that good fruit cannot come from a bad tree, and that fresh water cannot come from a brackish well. Nor can a true church come from a beginning of such outright deception. If the foundation is corrupt, then how can anything built upon it, be sound?
   
   It is ludicrous to think that a tiny, fanatical, localised movement which began in such error, lies, ignorance, false prophecy, hysterical “visions”, and cover-ups, could have continued to the present day, without being rocked to the foundations by the exposure of such very elementary FACTS. Surely some SDA, in all this time, should have thought it might be a good idea to check with a CALENDAR???
   
   It is TRAGIC to think of the millions who have been hoodwinked by such deception.
   
   Here is what the Lord says about the founders of this movement:
   
   Eze 13:3 Thus says the Lord GOD, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!
   
   Eze 13:4 Your prophets have been like jackals among ruins, O Israel.
   
   Eze 13:5 You have not gone up into the breaches, or built up a wall for the house of Israel, that it might stand in battle in the day of the LORD.
   
   Eze 13:6 They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, ‘Declares the LORD,’ when the LORD has not sent them, and yet they expect him to fulfill their word.
   
   Eze 13:7 Have you not seen a false vision and uttered a lying divination, whenever you have said, ‘Declares the LORD,’ although I have not spoken?”
   
   Eze 13:8 Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: “Because you have uttered falsehood and seen lying visions, therefore behold, I am against you, declares the Lord GOD.
   
   Eze 13:9 My hand will be against the prophets who see false visions and who give lying divinations. They shall not be in the council of my people, nor be enrolled in the register of the house of Israel, nor shall they enter the land of Israel. And you shall know that I am the Lord GOD.”

   It is simple to see that the leader who “leads the church TOWARDS THEOLOGICAL ORTHODOXY”, is obviously the leader of a church which BEGAN FAR AWAY FROM theological orthodoxy; which has NOT YET REACHED theological orthodoxy; and is the leader who originally led that church INTO DECEPTION, while the whole evangelical church of the time, worldwide, was denouncing the theological errors of this tiny minority group. Such a leader must be, by definition, a false prophet.
   
   A false prophet does not “grow towards theological orthodoxy”.
   
   It only takes one false prophecy to make a false prophet.
   
   God never gave prophets a “learning curve” nor an excuse for getting the message wrong. God’s message is ALWAYS CORRECT.
   
   Ellen White publicly accused God of “Holding His hand over a mistake in the figures”, when He failed to turn up in 1843 as she expected Him to.
   
   That is a shameful accusation to make, and many might justifiably call it BLASPHEMOUS. But she never even realised just how mistaken her other figures were, for the Day of Atonement in 1844, and for the Cross, in 31 AD.
   
   How can anybody take seriously ANY words of a person who based the doctrines of an entire denomination, on such transparent LIES?
   
   TRUST IN GOD. Jesus is the Faithful and True Witness.