posted 08-06-2000 01:21            

If some of Kellogg’s closest associates in theology were pantheists, wouldn’t that be compelling evidence against Kellogg? Surely you don’t deny that Dr. E. J. Waggoner was a pantheist? I ask you to read a short web page called, Adventism’s Past Pantheism.

By the way, I have read The Living Temple and I firmly believe that Kellogg was a pantheist!

posted 08-06-2000 20:55            

Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. This is what is going on.

Kellogg and his followers were so overjoyed by the doctrine of God being so very near in the things around them that they appeared to ordinary minds to be pantheists.

For example: If you’re jumping up and down with great delight when you take a shower because you think that God is in the water and you’re splashing God filled water all over yourself, then I think it’s fair to call you a pantheist. Likewise, if your greatest enthusiasm for evangelism is in telling people to drink water because they’re being filled with the life-giving Spirit of God, then again, I think you’re a pantheist. The same enthusiasm has been expressed for God literally being in the healthy food we eat and in the pure air we breathe.

For absolutely terrifying examples of this, click on the hyperlink for the web page that I mentioned before.

posted 08-08-2000 05:50            

Darwin, you and Eugene are just like I was UNTIL I read the Kellogg papers in about 1980. When I first read the Kellogg papers was the time of the Ford and Rea crisis, Glacier View etc etc. That was when I cut down my practice and spent beaucoup time studying everything I could get my hands on. All that transpired then was the 'mindspring' that made me search--which I am still doing and I try to maintain an open mind. But on this subject, don't bring me flimsy evidences of hearsay. Bring me proof from Kelloggs own words to counter the words we have in rather surprising detail from him in the Kellogg Papers. If anybody reading this has new evidence for me, please let me see it. If I am proven wrong I will apologize right here (if I'm still alive and able)

posted 08-10-2000 00:15            

quote:

---

If some of Kellogg’s closest associates in theology were pantheists, wouldn’t that be compelling evidence against Kellogg? Surely you don’t deny that Dr. E. J. Waggoner was a pantheist? I ask you to read a short web page called, Adventism’s Past Pantheism.

---

benherndon,

In truly Kelloggian style, you alter my question and answer something altogether different.

You say:

quote:

---

I will not accept because some of his friends were pantheist that is evidence Kellogg was also.

---

The question I asked was relevant because of the allegation by Ellen G. White that Kellogg was the ringleader of a movement and the chief advocate of demonic doctrines aiming to overthrow Adventism. If you are affirming that Kellogg was not a ringleader in the promulgation of a controversial theology, then maybe you should save us some time and just point us to a web page that answers all the charges leveled by Ellen G. White against Kellogg.

quote:

---

Don't bring me flimsy evidences of hearsay. Bring me proof from Kellogg’s own words [that he was a pantheist].

---

What do you know of commonly accepted forms of proof in courts of law? The testimony of eyewitnesses to the teachings of Kellogg is not hearsay. Furthermore, if I allege that Kellogg promoted “scientific theories which are akin to pantheism”, and you wish to debate that, then you need to reply to the subtle form of pantheism that I think Kellogg taught (08-08-2000 04:07; 08-06-2000 20:55).

quote:

---

I don't have the book The Living Temple with me but I read it from cover to cover about 15 yrs ago looking particularly for (1) God was in the tree---type of statement and (2) and that he did not believe in God, the same God that you and I believe in. It simply wasn't there!

---

Of course it’s there. I quote it on my web page. You get to the web page I mentioned by clicking on the hyperlink. Put your cursor over the underlined text Adventism’s Past Pantheism and click your mouse button as usual and the page I mentioned will open up for you.

aB wrote,

quote:

---

Eugene … was making fun of the man who is jumping in the shower.

---

aB, are you like benherndon and do not understand my illustrated definition of Kelloggian pantheism?

posted 08-10-2000 23:34            

The charges of pantheism against Dr. K were an excuse seized upon for other purposes. There was an agenda brewing at that time based on other problems. They will not stand the test of integrity and fairness. Many were ignorant of what pantheism even was--but note that DR. K knew the definition. His accusers didn't. They were grossly improperly made, were unfair and the whole incident a blight on their own Christianity. To those of you who 'surf' this thread I say, do not take my words or those of Eugene Shubert, Schwarz and Walton and a host of others but go read the Living Temple AND read the Kellogg papers then make up your own minds.

Dr. K did surgery as have I. Who heals these people we 'butcher'-up? What power is it. Where is that power. Is there somebody up there waving a magic wand or winding a coil spring---OK, Eugene, you explain what it is in my 300 avocado trees that when I cut them down to the trunk 3 ft from the ground, shoots begin to come up from the bark and within 3-4 yrs again bearing beautiful tasteful avocados. Buy lots of them. Is that power WITHIN that stump coming from a magic wand or spring or by the powers of evolution, or is it the power of the God of Creation who sustains His creation by the 'finger' of his power, by His spirit WITHIN (if His Spirit is within could one say God's omnipresence is in the tree. Where was God or His angel in the burning bush?) or what--WHAT? Now use your words. It's easy to criticize. Now---you explain it! I don't want to hear what it isn't---only what it is.

posted 08-12-2000 20:10            

I agree that Kellogg never worshipped the morning sun. I believe he worshipped the morning bath.

Who’s the prosecutor here? You may think it’s your choice but it isn’t. Do you remember EGW advising that no one attempt to refute the arguments of pantheism because they would screw it all up? EGW rightly insisted that Volume 8 of the Testimonies were a sufficient answer; nothing else could compare. Obviously the accusations of Prof. Prescott are irrelevant in my court of higher opinion.

The official charge must be that Kellogg promoted “scientific theories which are akin to pantheism” because these are the words of the Prophet.

You accuse me of not defining pantheism properly at all. I say that if you want to appoint the accused or an incompetent prosecutor to try this case, that’s fine. I have no interest in sham trials. I accept the Webster dictionary definition of pantheism, but remember, the inspired accusation is about something akin to pantheism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Eugene Shubert:
benherndon,

Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. This is what is going on.

Kellogg and his followers were so overjoyed by the doctrine of God being so very near in the things around them that they appeared to ordinary minds to be pantheists.

For example: If you’re jumping up and down with great delight when you take a shower because you think that God is in the water and you’re splashing God filled water all over yourself, then I think it’s fair to call you a pantheist. Likewise, if your greatest enthusiasm for evangelism is in telling people to drink water because they’re being filled with the life-giving Spirit of God, then again, I think you’re a pantheist. The same enthusiasm has been expressed for God literally being in the healthy food we eat and in the pure air we breathe.

For absolutely terrifying examples of this, click on the hyperlink for the web page that I mentioned before.

---

If you wish to defend Kellogg, I sure would feel more comfortable if you said something that indicated that you understand the charges.

Thank you,

Eugene Shubert