Mr/Rev/Pastor/Father.... Eugene Shubert
Not to be disrespectful but why do you post "the new William Miller" beside your name, it has a connectation just as if I were to say I was "the new Jesus Christ". Every person stands on their own merits and should not put forward or present themselves as someone else, not to be critical but it seems pretentious to call yourself by that name, maybe just "Eugene Shubert" would do...........

It's not unusual to display insignias or a ranking system in a forum or to say something about one's self. John the Baptist was asked, "What do you say about yourself?" Please be accurate. I never said that I was someone else. Perhaps what you are saying is that you disapprove of John the Baptist claiming to be the fulfillment of prophecy?

John 1
19 Now this was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem sent priests and Levites to ask him who he was. 20 He did not fail to confess, but confessed freely, “I am not the Messiah.”
21 They asked him,“Then who are you? Are you Elijah?”
He said, “I am not.”
“Are you the Prophet?”
He answered, “No.”
22 Finally they said, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”
23 John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.’”

Isaiah wrote:The voice of one crying in the wilderness:

“Prepare the way of the LORD;
Make straight in the desert
A highway for our God.
Every valley shall be exalted
And every mountain and hill brought low;
The crooked places shall be made straight
And the rough places smooth;
The glory of the LORD shall be revealed,
And all flesh shall see it together;
For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.”
Isaiah 40:3-5.

I don't believe that William Miller would compare himself to Jesus Christ. However, the angel Gabriel did represent John the Baptist as a type of Elijah (Luke 1:17). Jesus said very plainly that John the Baptist was Elijah (Matthew 11:14).

Yes and they had insight not available to man, so better to be correct than assume a title..........

The insight was available to John the Baptist, saying he was fulfilling Isaiah 40:3-5. And John the Baptist was a man.

So you claim the insight of the prophets, to divine inspiration?

I claim to be completing a dream that William Miller had that was only partially fulfilled by him. See Ellen White's book, Early Writings pp. 81-83. William Miller dreamt of receiving a small treasure chest with an attached key. The chest contained dazzling Bible truths, beautifully arranged. In 1982, God gave me an overpowering crash-course with a continuous flood of awesome insight and understanding of Daniel and Revelation in a span of 3 short weeks. [1]. Some time after I had received my powerful hermeneutic, which is how I summarize the interpretive principle to the new light, I had a dream about using a powerful device. In my dream, I was in the foothills of a large mountain. I had this gadget in my hand and I knew how to use it. To the left of me was a jogger, jogging up the uphill road toward the large mountain. I was at a slightly higher elevation. He was exerting all the energy he had trying to maintain his slow and grueling but consistent pace on the uphill grade of the road. Just for fun, I thought I would surprise him. With my powerful device I made a 3-dimensional holographic image of him. I then made that holographic copy of the jogger run pass him effortlessly at an incredible speed. I was in absolute awe of the uphill speed of my jogger and in finding that I could make the image run up the much steeper mountain at a virtually unlimited speed.

I also had a vision while reading the Living Temple by John Harvey Kellogg. I thought I was reading a very revealing part of the book but later discovered that I had been reading the words of a vision. The startling things I had read in Kellogg's book for about a page and a half simply weren't there but I believe that what I read was a clear presentation of Kellogg's pantheism.

So you are a prophet, have you tested the spirits that are mentoring you to see if they are true?.....

The Seventh-day Adventist position is that merely receiving supernatural revelation doesn't make one a prophet. Seventh-day Adventists don't think of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:10-17), Joseph (Matthew 1:20-23, 2:19-20, 2:22), the wise men (Matthew 2:12) or Pilate's wife (Matthew 27:19) as prophets, even though they received supernatural revelation.

I don't think of myself as a prophet. My inclination is to think of myself as the David Hilbert of theology. Before Hilbert became a world famous mathematician, he wrote a paper featuring a new and innovative idea. It solved a difficult problem in the mathematical theory of invariants. Hilbert's approach was abstract but it solved the mathematics so decisively that it brought an end to further investigation of the problem. Hilbert tried to get his paper published in the appropriate mathematical journal at the time but it was rejected. The German mathematician Paul Gordon was the first referee to judge Hilbert's work. Gordan had worked on this problem for 20 years. He was "the king of invariants." After reading the paper, Dr. Gordan exclaimed, "Das ist nicht Mathematik; das ist Theologie!" ("That is not mathematics; that is theology!"). I have received a very similar insult from a few who have read my exegesis of Daniel and Revelation. Their response was "That is not theology; that is mathematics!"

Ellen White wrote positively concerning William Miller:

God sent His angel to move upon the heart of a farmer who had not believed the Bible, to lead him to search the prophecies. Angels of God repeatedly visited that chosen one.

Angels of Heaven were guiding his mind, and opening to his understanding prophecies which had ever been dark to God’s people.

Ellen White included Miller's prophetic dream in her book Early Writings. Do those endorsements persuade you that William Miller was a prophet? Or are you saying that there is a profound distinction between inspired dreams and visions?

reddogs wrote:Have you tested the spirits that are mentoring you to see if they are true?

Yes, sleep peacefully. David Hilbert checked his mathematics carefully before writing his paper.

You have answered the question in a manner which I have become accustomed to, but do you still claim the Bible as your guide....

I claim to be a true Seventh-day Adventist. If you need a hint to determine my exact meaning, I refer you to The Seven Faces of Seventh-day Adventism.

"No advice or sanction is given in the Word of God to those who believe the third angel’s message to lead them to suppose that they can draw apart. This you may settle with yourselves forever. It is the devisings of unsanctified minds that would encourage a state of disunion. The sophistry of men may appear right in their own eyes, but it is not truth and righteousness. ‘In Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; . . . that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross’ [Eph. 2:13-16]." 2MR 185


Really now? How about "Come Out Of Her My People," ? It sounds like drawing apart to me. If indeed you suppose that the SDA church is drawing closer towards the Babylonian system whould'nt you think that coming out would be the solution.

Personally I do not see anything above Pastoral (Bishop) authority such as president or such that would justify the immence church organization that is somehow responsible to decide the doctrinal statement for the entire church. And although as Adventists we do not go and streight out say that there is no salvation outside of Adventist church... we sure imply that IMO by saying that those who leave the DENOMINATION to join other are lost and their salvation is questionable. Even the mandate to be rebaptised also implies that you have to be Baptised by the terms of our church in order for it to be true Baptism. If that is not the case, then it's not really being revealed as such.
My salvation rests on Christ's righteousness alone and I have faith that He and He alone has the ability to resurect me from death. As a result He gives me hope for gradually transforming my mind to conform to his teachings and not those of tradition of the world. And it seems to me that his teaching were people oriented and not erganization as a whole. He did not come to start a club, but to change individuals and cause them to see the true state of things and repent. I don't believe that the current system of one way "Teleevangelism on stage" helps much. There's very little discussion envolved and little discussion that exists really controlled "fill the blanks in the study guide" type of discussion. I am saddened by the state of the church, but if I was Satan I would rejoice, because all I have to do is to get hold of a decent publisher and a "worthy" President. The power of the Church is not in the leadership, but the power of the church is in Christ empowering individuals... every single one of us to believe enough to be moved to action. Not simply trying to convert people, but really loving them in spite of who they are. Encouraging them... building them up, and not condemning them for not being a one of us. We are only an example of what they can be. We are not the end but the means to an end... and it is Christ who is the end.
The tactics that are used to bring people to church to "save the lost" are either "Guilt trip" or "Scare the hell out of them". I believe that people are leaving for the same reason. They have not experienced the true mind change. They only been on guilt trip for a couple of years and they get tired of it. Although pastors preach true conversion... they do so with very carefully as not to offend anybody. We are becoming capitalist economy church, where numbers are more important than quality, and we work really hard to bring the numbers in without actually caring enough to know who those people are. I agree somthing has to change, but will starting yet another movement based on dreams really the Biblical solution? God gave us all suficient Bible and our own minds. To say that one person has better understanding and is worthy of title of the prophet based on few uncertain dreams is very presumptious. If you don't believe that Bible is suficient enough to speak for itself on its own... then how do we know you are right to begin with? JWs enterpret it one way and their way is the only way... so does any other denomination. And they have their prophets who dreamt dreams too. Heck, I've had dreams. Dreams in many case are reflection of your own reality and your deepest desires... you can control these subconciously and sometimes conciously. It's a fact. Basing your Theology on dreams in sola scriptura times is a pretty unreliable matter IMO. Dreams were used by God when there was nothing else to hold on to. There was no canon, and people could not read or write. We can. I'm not rulling out the posibility, but I would not bank my Theology on these... just based on some of the "Prophets" who come and go. We are all prophets. Prophesy is not only predicting the future, but understanding the past. We are all royal priesthood. So follow Christ instead of going back and forth between denominations and movements. Then you can boldly stand and say that you in fact did your best with the knowledge that you have been given... or you can say that I was a part of the movement that believed the correct thing. Whichever suits your soul better.

aarkhipov wrote:"No advice or sanction is given in the Word of God to those who believe the third angel’s message to lead them to suppose that they can draw apart. This you may settle with yourselves forever. It is the devisings of unsanctified minds that would encourage a state of disunion. The sophistry of men may appear right in their own eyes, but it is not truth and righteousness. ‘In Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; . . . that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross’ [Eph. 2:13-16]." 2MR 185

Really now? How about "Come Out Of Her My People," ? It sounds like drawing apart to me. If indeed you suppose that the SDA church is drawing closer towards the Babylonian system whould'nt you think that coming out would be the solution.

Hi aarkhipov. I'm really not sure precisely what perception you are addressing. Is it real, false or imaginary? Ellen White is characterizing the Seventh-day Adventist church by the most important Adventist doctrine there is — the third angel’s message. Christians who believe the three angels' messages should be together. Babylon is composed of all those who embrace the three demons' messages. We should be drawing apart from Babylon. I'm not the only person who is saying that the SDA church is drawing closer towards the Babylonian system. What's the issue here? Are you saying that you don't recommend Ellen White's advice to stop the Adventist church from becoming a sister to fallen Babylon?

aarkhipov wrote:Personally I do not see anything above Pastoral (Bishop) authority such as president or such that would justify the immence church organization that is somehow responsible to decide the doctrinal statement for the entire church. And although as Adventists we do not go and streight out say that there is no salvation outside of Adventist church... we sure imply that IMO by saying that those who leave the DENOMINATION to join other are lost and their salvation is questionable. Even the mandate to be rebaptised also implies that you have to be Baptised by the terms of our church in order for it to be true Baptism. If that is not the case, then it's not really being revealed as such.

My salvation rests on Christ's righteousness alone and I have faith that He and He alone has the ability to resurect me from death. As a result He gives me hope for gradually transforming my mind to conform to his teachings and not those of tradition of the world. And it seems to me that his teaching were people oriented and not erganization as a whole. He did not come to start a club, but to change individuals and cause them to see the true state of things and repent. I don't believe that the current system of one way "Teleevangelism on stage" helps much. There's very little discussion envolved and little discussion that exists really controlled "fill the blanks in the study guide" type of discussion. I am saddened by the state of the church, but if I was Satan I would rejoice, because all I have to do is to get hold of a decent publisher and a "worthy" President. The power of the Church is not in the leadership, but the power of the church is in Christ empowering individuals... every single one of us to believe enough to be moved to action. Not simply trying to convert people, but really loving them in spite of who they are. Encouraging them... building them up, and not condemning them for not being a one of us. We are only an example of what they can be. We are not the end but the means to an end... and it is Christ who is the end.

The tactics that are used to bring people to church to "save the lost" are either "Guilt trip" or "Scare the hell out of them". I believe that people are leaving for the same reason. They have not experienced the true mind change. They only been on guilt trip for a couple of years and they get tired of it. Although pastors preach true conversion... they do so with very carefully as not to offend anybody. We are becoming capitalist economy church, where numbers are more important than quality, and we work really hard to bring the numbers in without actually caring enough to know who those people are.

Have you read my commentary on The Literary and Prophetic Structure of Revelation 2 and 3? It turns out that the names of the seven churches of Revelation 2 and 3 and all the symbols used to describe those churches have a prophetic meaning. I haven't written up the section on Laodicea yet but here's the core idea. Antiochus II named the city of Laodicea for his wife Laodice. Laodice literally means, "people justice", which I expect means "justice of the people." Even this has to be interpreted. One commentator has interpreted these words correctly and thus rightly perceives the name (character) of the Laodicean church. "Its name designates it as the Church of mob rule, the democratic church, in which everything is swayed and decided by popular opinion."

The fact that Laodice was married to Antiochus II (Theos) seems very significant. Antiochus II accepted the title of Theos, meaning "the god". So, in effect, Laodice was married to antichrist.

aarkhipov wrote:I agree somthing has to change, but will starting yet another movement based on dreams really the Biblical solution?

I believe that you are misrepresenting me. Ellen White taught that there would be a movement in the Adventist church that would greatly disturb the leadership:

Ellen G. White wrote:There is to be in the churches a wonderful manifestation of the power of God, but it will not move upon those who have not humbled themselves before the Lord, and opened the door of their heart by confession and repentance. In the manifestation of that power which lightens the earth with the glory of God, they will see only something which in their blindness they think dangerous, something which will arouse their fears, and they will brace themselves to resist it. Because the Lord does not work according to their expectations and ideal, they will oppose the work. "Why," they say, "should we not know the Spirit of God, when we have been in the work so many years?" — Because they did not respond to the warnings, the entreaties, of the messages of God, but persistently said, "I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing." 1888, p. 765. [2].

I do not elevate dreams above clear Biblical exegesis.

aarkhipov wrote:God gave us all suficient Bible and our own minds. To say that one person has better understanding and is worthy of title of the prophet based on few uncertain dreams is very presumptious.

I don't believe that you have read this thread carefully. Do you really believe that William Miller was a prophet? And are you certain that God didn't give me a stunning revelation? [3].

aarkhipov wrote:If you don't believe that Bible is suficient enough to speak for itself on its own...

Where in the world did you get the idea that I don't believe that the Bible is sufficient? Didn't William Miller believe that the Bible is sufficient? If you had read what I have written about my experience, then you should have noticed how discouragement and an unsatisfied longing in my heart was quickly answered by waking up "at 1AM with an insatiable desire to read Daniel 11." Also, "I had it in my mind that I was going to take the text exactly for what it says." How is that not respectfully submitting to the authority of God's Word?