Friday, February 19, 2010

Steve Wohlberg's End Time Delusions

A few years ago I came across a book called End Time Delusions written by Steve Wohlberg. The book aggressively goes after the Left Behind novels and the theology behind them. The most obvious target in Wohlberg’s sight is the pretribulational rapture because that forms the basis of the LB series. But, essentially, he is opposed to all the standard premillennial positions. This includes mid-trib, pre-wrath and post-trib. I like reading opposing viewpoints so I checked it out. However, once having discovered Wohlberg was a Seventh Day Adventist, I promptly lost interest in the book.

He recently appeared on Jan Markell's Radio Show talking about the popular Twilight series although, at the time, Jan hadn’t realized who he was and what his beliefs were. Jan is a pre-trib Messianic Jew who believes God hasn’t finished with Israel. Wohlberg’s beliefs are the antithesis of all these things and he actively teaches against them through various mediums, with ever-increasing exposure. When the subject of End Time Delusions came up again on another blog, it prompted me to take another look at him.

Wohlberg flies under the radar - you can read his many articles at whitehorsemedia.com without discovering his SDA affiliation. The one reference I could find to that is HERE .

As I researched him and connected the dots, I found a large number of SDA sites all linked to each other. But in each case I had to dig deep to see the SDA connection. The dead giveaway was either references to Wohlberg’s books or Ellen G White.

So what’s the big deal? Who cares if he’s SDA if what he is teaching is biblical? My response is, why conceal the fact that you’re SDA? Incidentally, Herbert W Armstrong’s organization used the same tactic many years ago, and offshoots of that org still do. I was once a member of that organization.

On page 30 of ET Delusions, Wohlberg makes the following statement:

“We don’t need to depend on scholars to find the answer. In fact, it is never safe to lean completely on any man, no matter how smart or educated they may be. Christians should never be taught to rely solely on Tim LaHaye, John Walvoord, Thomas Ice, Jack Van Impe, Grant Jeffrey, Chuck Smith, John Hagee, or any other popular teacher, including Steve Wohlberg. We should all open our Bibles, pick up our own concordances, and find out for ourselves what truth is.....”

I might add that guys like Chuck Missler encourage people not to believe them and to search out Scripture. Ironically, Wohlberg immediately goes on to inform his readers what he thinks about Matt 24 etc, thus telling them what they should believe. In fact in so many cases, Wohlberg actually twists Scripture to convince his readers that what a particular verse is saying may actually mean something else.

But Wohlberg is being dishonest. Does he really want his readers to search the Scriptures for themselves or does he want to lead them down a particular path? Would he add Ellen G White to that list?

The SDA Biblical Research Institute has an online essay called Is the Bible Our Final Authority? It's a rambling article full of semantics and I suggest people read it thoroughly. The author refers to alleged Scripture problems and contradictions and raises the subject of hermeneutics. In reality there aren’t any Scriptural problems. All contradictions have been adequately addressed by scholars and it’s interesting that these supposed difficulties are entertained by the author in the first place.

Already Adventists have begun to work on these problems. Several carefully reasoned articles and a number of book-length essays and collections of essays have appeared. We have the BRI volume, Gerhard Hasel's Biblical Interpretation Today, which particularly addresses methods; George Rice's Was Luke a Plagiarist? and the BRI publications on prophetic interpretation. We should note as well Alden Thompson's Who's Afraid of the Old Testament God? which has implications for hermeneutics. The publication of several of Ellen White's writings on the nature of the Bible and workings of inspiration has proved invaluable. Indeed they set us on a path that offers at least partial resolution of the tensions.

The reference to Rice’s book “Was Luke a Plagiarist” may be a subtle defense of the fact that Ellen G White was found to have plagiarized many of her writings word for word. In other words, if Luke borrowed data from the disciples then why can’t White do the same? It gets more interesting:

To this point Ellen White's guidance has received only passing notice. We have noted her ringing endorsement of the truthfulness and authority of Scripture. A more careful study makes clear that for her the Scriptures remain the final authority, not only where they touch religious matters, but in their report of events as well.

However Mrs. White is not where Evangelicals are. While affirming the Bible's authority, she recognizes in far higher profile the human element in Scriptures. We review in brief excerpts what she has to say about the language and thought patterns in the Bible:

"Don't you think there might have been some mistake in the copyist or in the translators?" This is all probable. . . . All the mistakes will not cause trouble to one soul, or cause any feet to stumble.-Selected Messages, Bk. 1, 16.

The writers of the Bible had to express their ideas in human language.-Ibid. 19.

There is not always perfect order or apparent unity in the Scriptures.-Ibid. 20.

The Bible must be given in the language of men. Everything that is human is imperfect.-Ibid.20.

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented.-Ibid. 21.

The writers of the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen.-Ibid.

It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions but on the man himself, who, under the influence of the Holy Ghost, is imbued with thoughts.-Ibid.

With the immense advantage of the gift of prophecy in modern times, Adventists are prepared for a genuinely integrated understanding of revelation, inspiration, and preservation of authority in the Word while others explore box canyons in search of understanding. But we will fall short of God's plan unless we allow the Holy Spirit to both interpret the Word and move it into proclamation.


Any SDA statement of faith will readily attest that Scripture is the inspired word of God. However, in my opinion, the gist of what the above article is saying is that, because of all the human problems associated with the Bible, the SDA especially benefits from prophets like Ellen G White to set things straight. Other sources confirm this fact and this is a major problem with that group. See page 12 "Writings of Ellen G. White".

Getting back to Wohlberg, my problem isn’t just the fact that he maligns pretribbers and Dispenationalists with condescending phrases. I could still be a posttribber and still be concerned about this guy. This issue goes beyond rapture timing differences. Wohlberg’s book isn’t just a “biblical” attack on the LB series per se; it’s a veiled introduction to SDA eschatology and everything that it entails. His mission is to undermine all elements of the LB series, not just the pre-trib rapture, and covertly introduce his own agenda.

A little bit of history:

SDA William Miller, using a series of erroneous calculations from Daniel, predicted that Christ’s second coming would occur in 1844. When it failed - instead of re-examining Miller’s error - SDA officials proposed several solutions finally settling on the doctrine of the Sanctuary, which was subsequently endorsed by Ellen G White. So the story was changed. Instead of returning, Christ moved from the First Compartment to the Second Compartment of the Sanctuary. This has major ramifications for the one-time Blood Atonement, Salvation by Grace and the exposition of the book of Hebrews, and it introduces the “Investigative Judgment” doctrine. But it was how Miller derived his original conclusion that locks Wohlberg into his calculations and arguments because the IJ doctrine is contingent to the same rationale and cannot be discarded.


The arguments that motivate Wohlberg to deny that the covenant in Dan 9:27 is made by the Antichrist are all tied to how SDA interpret the days into 1260 years and how they relate them to historical Papal Rome. He then needs to deny the single Antichrist we see in Revelation because, for Wohlberg and the SDA, the Great Seal of God in the End Time is not the Holy Spirit, it is actually Sabbath observance. To do this he also needs to allegorize Rev 13:15-18 and make it say something different. Thus the true Mark of the Beast now becomes enforced Sunday worship.

Up until recently I presumed the SDA chose Sabbath observance because it seemed the better day traditionally. I was wrong. Sabbath observance and the teachings of E G White lie at the heart of Adventism. To the SDA, Sabbath observance is critical to salvation. We only get a hint of this in ET Delusions in the chapter called “Thunder From Heaven’s Temple”. Here he discusses and emphasizes the Big Ten - The Ten Commandments. While he never states it; Wohlberg is really highlighting the Sabbath. Here is the perfect opportunity for him to speak plainly about Sabbath salvation in the End Time, yet incredibly, he only mentions the Sabbath once in connection with the other commandments. Why?

Wohlberg also believes the SDA is the true church and the true Remnant of Revelation. This includes the 144,000 of Rev 7 despite the clear teaching of those verses. SDA also becomes the true Israel and this apparently gives him license for allegorizing away the location of the battle of Armageddon in “Frogs, Fables and Armageddon” (pp 193-194):

“…(Rev 16:16) This is the only time the only time the exact word Armageddon is used in the Bible. The truth is, there is no literal place called “Armageddon” anywhere in the world….”
He then goes on to suggest that Armageddon - having being derived from Megiddo - could literally mean a mountain of slaughter upon which God’s enemies are cut off. To prop up his contention, he appeals to the mountain that fills up the whole earth in Daniel 2. Referring to Rev 16:16-20 he says:

“Contrary to the all-pervasive teaching of the third frog, these words clearly describe divine wrath upon spiritual Babylon and a global slaughter that reaches far beyond the Middle East”

“…Who is the gathering at Armageddon really against? Literal Jews? No! It is a gathering of the world forces of Mystery Babylon against the Warrior on the horse and against His army.”

Note: According to Wohlberg (p 192), “The third frog of false prophecy is now teaching a secret rapture, seven year tribulation, futurist antichrist (sic), literal drying up of a literal Euphrates, and a literal Middle-East Armageddon involving literal armies attacking literal Jews. Dear friend this is all false prophecy….”


Add to the "third frog" list the belief in a Tribulation Temple and the Antichrist persecuting Israel - as Wohlberg states elsewhere - and it pretty much covers every rapture view.

Back to the Sabbath issue; a couple of weeks ago I e-mailed an official SDA site asking about Sabbath observance and salvation. Here’s the response I got:

I think the correct answer to your question, which is really something of a personal dilemma for you, is to say that the real issue revolves around the question of the Sabbath. Which day is the true Sabbath? Which day does Scripture and History support? To find the answers to these questions may involve some reading and reflection. In the end we are all individually responsible to God for discovering what is right and true and for allowing Him to lead us into His truth. You will remember that Jesus said, “ Do not think that I came to destroy the Law and the Prophets. I did not come to destroy, but to fulfil”, Matt 5: 17 and “If you love me keep my commandments”, Jn 14 :15. I can only advise that you seek to understand this important question both from the Bible and from what has happened to the Sabbath through history ( which includes how the keeping of Sunday began in the church after the apostolic era), and then make up your own mind on the basis of all the evidence. As to the matter of salvation, a good question to ask oneself about any spiritual matter, is “ Can a person be saved if he/she persists in living out of harmony with God’s will, once His will is known? “ It may take some time for you to work through these matters in your own life, but I believe you will feel more satisfied with this course of action.

Not satisfied, I asked him for clarification, “If I’m reading this correctly, I will lose my salvation if I continue to willfully worship on Sunday. Correct?”

To which he responded:


Dear Friend,

I can see that you are a thinking person who really wants to do what is right. But I cannot speak for God. Only He knows who will be saved and who will not, because He can read the heart, and knows the end from the beginning. Tomorrow
(Saturday) is the day He set aside at creation for man to keep holy and the day that Jesus kept when He was on earth. I think you know that now. So it’s really over to you. I will be praying for you.


He meant YES, by the way. He just couldn’t bring himself to say it just as Wohlberg couldn’t let on because they both want to be considered normal Evangelical Christians. Yet they are NOT. They openly agree to free Grace salvation by faith but privately teach that salvation depends (and will depend) on Sabbath worship. It is legalistic and undermines Grace, and the doctrine of Investigative Judgment also undermines Christ’s work on the Cross. Their hermeneutical methodology is heavily dependant on White’s interpretation of Scripture.
Here's an excerpt from Hohmann's article, Sabbath Refutations

The crux of the matter boils down to this in the end: Does one need to keep the sabbath in order to be saved, or maintain their salvation status with God? Many a Sabbatarian will state that it is by grace apart from law they are saved, but turn around and claim one puts their salvation at risk should they sin habitually, and they define one of these sins as not keeping the sabbath. So they do indeed claim one has to keep the sabbath in order to be saved, disguising this belief in semantics.

Further reading:

See especially the videos of Dr Walter Martin in the following link. After initially refusing to classify SDA as a cult in his book, he began to have strong reservations.

EX Adventist Outreach

Ellen G. White - Prophet or Pretender?

Writings of Ellen G. White

The 2300-day Dilemma

Seventh-day AdventismBy Dr. James Bjornstad

Dr. Ford and Glacier View

THE 1844 INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT DOCTRINE

Seventh-day Adventism RENOUNCED
by D. M. Canright


Article list

Bible Contradictions and Other Bible Difficulties


Addendum:

Steve Wohlberg has told us what he believes the “third frog” of false prophecy teaches. Compare that to what we read in Revelation:

Rev 16:13 And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet, three unclean spirits like frogs; for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty.Rev 22:18-19 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.

32 comments:

mac said...

Jon,

Instead of trolling blogs and leaving suggestions to Google something re "PreTrib Rapture Dishonesty" etc, how about you come back and actually advance some Scripture for your own beliefs.

I keep asking but none of you people come back.

Rob said...

I looked at Steves site and i had no promblem finding where it is stated that he is a member of the sda church that he attends along with his family.
While this fact is not on the front page one can find it out very easy.
So i dont see how he is hidding the fact at all when it is clear that he is an sda.
Been how the Bible never uses the word rapture and that every eye will see Jesus when he returns one wonders how the rapture can even thought of as happaning when the bible proves that the rapture is not true.
And yes i am sda

mac said...

Hi Rob,

Thanks for the comment. I DID note the one reference to Steve’s SDA affiliation in my article. This is, I believe, a recent addition as other observers had noted its absence and that he does not tend to divulge that information on his site.

Jan Markell, for example, is also a Messianic Jew and holds to a lot of the tenets that Steve denounces in his book. At the time of his interview she had no idea that Steve had been writing polemics against beliefs that she holds dear. In fact, according to Steve, Jan would be a member of the “third frog of false prophecy”.

Not once in his “End Time Delusions does he ever own up to being Seventh Day Adventist. Why would you think this would be a problem? Is he not all about saving souls? Why, when he had the perfect opportunity in chapter 32 of his book, did he not come right out and state that Sabbath worship is the Great Seal of Revelation; that the Remnant Sabbath keeping SDA Church is the one true Church and that all other churches are apostate?

I believe that if he really had the courage of his convictions that is exactly what he should have done. The SDA stamp should have been all over that book, but it isn’t.

Regarding the word rapture – you may be familiar with the word harpazo in 1Thess 4:17.
ἁρπάζω harpazō to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force)

So, in fact, there really is a rapture mentioned in Scripture. The issues of contention are timing; whether the gathering of Matt 24:31 is the rapture and who the elect refers to. The doctrine of the Trinity is an interesting one – do you believe in it? The SDA didn’t at one stage. But where is Trinity mentioned in Scripture? You probably believe that Christ is Michael but which verse gives us that? Need I go on?

In Him,

mac

mac said...

Marylee,

Go read my response to your other comment that you tried to post, and perhaps come up with a quote from Margaret’s vision that shows she was not a posttribulationist or that she was a pretribulationist.

Google Dr Paul Wilkinson’s book For Zion's Sake: Christian Zionism and the Role of John Nelson Darby.

Also Google Fred DeRuvo’s - Some Posttribulationists Say the Darndest Things!: About PreTrib Rapturists

Both these books debunk the errors you’re trying to spread

Maranatha

Netcube Technology said...

satan in flirtation on the highest level, false doctrine

Netcube Technology said...

after viewing steve wohlberg on google video, i notice something very wrong about his theory about endtime, ohhhh at last i found out that he belongs to SAD - a cult

ALISANDRO said...

Seeing that Steve Wohlberg makes statements based on The Word of God (The Holy Bible),his religious denomination would seem to be irrelevant.

ALISANDRO

mac said...

Hi Alisandro,

Thanks for your comment.

You say that Steve makes statements based on the word of God but that isn’t always true. Steve’s eschatology is based on his tradition which was influenced by SDA prophet Ellen White. In fact, SDA eschatology actually contradicts the plain meaning of Scripture and in ETD, Steve twisted elements of Revelation to suit it.

Normally, Steve’s denomination wouldn’t be important but the consequences of the SDA Investigative Judgment doctrine run contrary to Scriptural atonement and orthodox evangelical belief. The Sabbath teaching is in the same class.

Steve seems to have an axe to grind with the “Left Behind” eschatology. He’s written a number of books attacking it as “deceptive” and even one on Israel. He’s also made a number of YouTube presentations doing the same. When you put books out challenging or attacking other systems you should be prepared for responses and your own system scrutinized.

Owlsong said...

I just wrote to Steve Wohlberg telling him he was leading people astray making a forgery of the bible and that he should cease. I quoted the scriptures he took out of context and the out and out lies; such as saying Jesus said "He would utterly destroy them all". Then he went on to say , so if Jesus made an end of the world you can see what is holding Satan back, not chains for 1000 yrs but circumstance, if their are no people there is no one to tempt and Satan must roam the earth with his demons alone--blah blah--Steve forgets to read the bible!!Jerimiah ch.4:23-25 The reference to "them all"--as being destroyed, shows the word "them" in italics in all versions. Because it means, not every person on earth but, all the evil persons.Jesus is searching for a Just man, he would not search if all were dead! Because in chapter 5 He tells us He will not make an utter end! But Wohlberg goes on with this as his defining reasons that it "isnt Gods will holding Satan in chains but a "chain of circumstance leading to no men to tempt! This is Wohlbergs rendition of the bible. I read his whole document on the Millinium and he turns the word of God upside down, he is dependant on the laziness of people who wont read the Word! So he leads them in derision! He has big bucks behind him and he preys on the tech-no hip that have no care to investigate the bible themselves and so will be led to the slaughter instead of able to hear the Good Shepherds voice, because they haven't heard it!! If they are not aquainted with the Word they will be lost. Wohlberg is a spirit of antichrist himself.

Owlsong said...

I received a scathing reply foamining with hate after my rebuttle of his falsehoods, I refer to Steve Wohlberg. He said I made myself God that only satan would write such things and went on with much worse> I really would like to post his letter to me so the nation could see how much "Christian love" this man has. I told him exactly where he was changing scripture and thus the meanings. He retaliated with a mile long shopping list of insults with emphesis! I must have hit a real nerve and just like Satan he hissed and bared his teeth! Well the truth is my shield not a lot of name calling.

mac said...

Wohlberg’s belief in Satan’s restraint on a desolate earth has more to do with what was taught to him by his tradition (E G White) than by exegesis. He, and other SDA apologists, have been conditioned to adhere to White’s interpretation of the Bible.

He will go to the OT and dig out vague out-of-context references to desolation and try to make them point to Satan’s 1000 yr imprisonment on a bare earth because he has to. Yet so many other OT verses depict a Messianic reign here on earth – one with births and deaths - so we know it’s not the eternal state.

Furthermore whenever verses in Revelation refer to the abyss or bottomless pit, the location is always distinct to the earth’s surface – under it, in fact. When I do a word study on “abyss” using the major Greek & Hebrew scholars via BibleWorks I see that they all refer the abyss’s location to a region below the earth’s surface or under the depths of the sea. It couldn’t be any clearer.

SDA’s version of Satan’s restraint is illogical and unscriptural:

Satan is retrained so that he can’t deceive the nations (Rev 20:3) not just as some sort of “punishment” but if it’s the same people, they were already deceived at the gathering of Armageddon (Rev 16:13-14). And even if he was placed in the same locale as the nations during the Millennium –what difference could it possibly make? They can’t attack the saints and the “Blessed City” because they can’t get to them. At some point Satan has to deceive them anyway so they attack the saints after the Millennium, so what’s the point of imprisonment on a desolate earth?

In fact the SDA scenario raises far more questions than I have time to address.

I’m sorry you had that experience with Steve.

eagle wings said...

Hi,

I am a Seventh-day Adventist and came across this blog when I was actually looking for some information about Steve Wohlberg, as his name came up and I had no idea who he was. It is difficult however to accept what you say about Steve Wohlberg as fact when the facts listed under your heading "A little bit of history" are clearly wrong. William Miller was not an SDA. He was a baptist preacher who through his preaching the millerite movement started. It was not his intention to start anything separate from his church, in fact he discouraged people from separating them from their own denominations. He died in 1849 a Sunday keeper as opposed to some of the millerite followers who started keeping the seventh day of the week as their worship day. Of these followers the Seventh-day Adventist church arose becoming an organisation in 1963. To say that the officials of the church endorsed a view that was developed years before the church was even organised is to incorrectly present the history of what happened. It was a group of individuals that searched out and come to an agreement on why they believed Miller's prediction had not eventuated, not an organisation or officials from an organisation. In fact at the time these individuals were not observing the Sabbath and did not do so until a few years after the event that you are talking about, so to call them Seventh-day Adventist officials is clearly wrong.

mac said...

What Miller’s beliefs were at the start – whether he was a Sunday observer or not – is a moot point. It doesn’t matter what his affiliation was at the time of the “1844” prediction. In fact he posthumously inspired several organizations – one of which I was a member of.

Most SDAers I’ve spoken to do not deny a connection to Miller.

It’s his view of Daniel and the date “1844” that we’re interested in when referring to SDA. The early “SDA” pioneers set their sights on that prophecy and when it failed to eventuate they regrouped and resorted to the doctrine of Investigative Judgment. Ellen G White was also involved in that.

Whether or not the church became official in 1963 is also a moot point – the Sabbath doctrine has been observed by the SDA since the beginning. But starting dates weren’t my point. My point was Wohlberg’s and the SDA church’s reliance on White and Wohlberg’s attack on the “Left Behind” genre (dispensationalism).

If you had no idea who Steve was then you didn’t read his book. His book is misleading and erroneous.

Valerie said...

Hi. I am an X SDA. All I can say is that the "spirit" of this church is demonic and deceptive and blinds people to truth with the lie that the sda church is the "one" true church and uses fear tactics and ridiculously distorted interpretaions of prophecy to prevent one from finding the Jesus of the Bible-Who is the Way and the Truth and the Life.
It is a church of oppression. I am so glad that he whom the Son sets free is free indeed.
I cry everyday for sda friends who are trapped in the bondage of the sda false doctrines.

Here are a couple links for those sda'a who are secure enough in Christ and brave enough to seek out the truth.

http://www.gentlybroken.com/

http://www.formeradventist.com/stories/shewmake.html

Valerie said...

Hi. I am an X SDA. The "spirit" of this church is demonic and deceptive and blinds people to truth with the lie that the sda church is the "one" true church and uses fear tactics and ridiculously distorted interpretaions of prophecy to prevent one from finding the Jesus of the Bible-Who is the Way and the Truth and the Life.
It is a church of oppression. I am so glad that he whom the Son sets free is free indeed.
I cry everyday for sda friends who are trapped in the bondage of the sda false doctrines.

Here are a couple links for those sda'a who are secure enough in Christ and brave enough to seek out the truth.

http://www.gentlybroken.com/

http://www.formeradventist.com/stories/shewmake.html

mac said...

Thanks for your comments, Valerie. I'm glad you're out of that church.

Blessings.

marci said...

I had to do a search to find out if Steve Wohlberg was indeed a Seventh-day-Adventist because I was so pleased to read, after only skimming through his book, that he was sharing truth with his reader. I believe that he was speaking to a general audience, not to place emphasis on any denomination, but to point out and emphasize truth as it is in God's word. It is apparent that you have not studied the prophecies or doctrines enough to know what God's word says. If you did study, "line upon line" and "precept upon precept" comparing Scripture upon Scripture, you would indeed know what the Scripture says about these things. It all fits together so simply. We can know that the Bible is truth, as so many do not believe, just by looking at the Prophecy in Daniel 2. History, predicted right on target.
You are wrong about Ellen White who herself did not call herself a "prophet" (not saying that you said she did) but a fitting title for one that simply passes ALL the tests of a true prophet. One thing you are wrong about is that she said that MANY would leave the (SDA) church only to have MANY more take their place. We do NOT believe (as a whole) that you necessarily have to be a Seventh-day-Adventist to be saved, on the contrary, MANY will come in (accept God's truth) at the last minute and not call themselves Seventh-day-Adventists, there will be no time, but they will have chosen to follow Him, to OBEY HIM, to "keep His commandments". Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandmenets." John 14:15 That means ALL 10, not just 9! Why is it that the majority of Christians leave out the 4th one!? Why is it that people call those that want to OBEY God and keep ALL of His commandments, "legalists"!? Why is it so important to keep 9, but neglect the 4th?! Maybe SDA's put so much emphasis on the 4th because it is the one that is forgotten or deemed not necessary?! I believe that God's 4th commandment, the ONLY one he said to "REMEMBER" is vitally important to those that LOVE and OBEY Him!It distinquishes HIM from all false gods, it points to HIM as Creator, he "rested" and "blessed" and "sanctified" His Sabbath, His Holy day!Genesis 2. Was God tired from "all His work"? Surely not!! He set it aside for His children to come before Him and worship Him who made Heaven and earth and all that is in it! This will be the distinquishing "sign" of God's people!
Keeping GOD'S Sabbath (not man's) distinguishes His people from those that do not obey Him! It is true, many "Christians" will be lost because they say it doesn't matter if we obey! Satan thought the same thing, he didn't need to OBEY!
"And the Lord said unto Moses, "How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? Exodus 16:28 Then He goes on to talk about His Sabbath! Nothing's changed! God does not change!Malachi 3:6
"Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD and the FAITH OF JESUS." Revelation 14:12 You cannot refute what God said! (Although the Catholic system does for sure!) But then most of Christendom follows in the footsteps of that system!~Blessings~

mac said...

Thanks for your comment. I’m presently preparing for a three week trip so I can’t respond to you in-depth. When I return, I’ll be putting something together in another post where I will address some of these issues.

It may seem that my posts are attacking Steve Wohlberg personally. In fact, he’s written several books attacking dispensationalism, premillenialism and pretribulationalism. That being the case, some sort of response to his polemics should be expected.

One problem with the book “Delusions” is that Steve doesn’t really inform his readers that he uses a different hermeneutic to what dispensationalists use. SDA relies heavily on the “Types and Shadows” methodology whenever Scripture doesn’t align with a presupposition. This allows Wohlberg to make Scripture mean almost anything he expects it to.

One example is that Rev 7 plainly tells us who the 144,000 are but Wohlberg uses his “deductive logic” to make them something else. The location of the abyss and Armageddon are other examples of this “reasoning”.

Rosita Alonzo said...

the Investigative Judgement already started with the living now, so the time of grace for SDA is about to be over , for those unprepared, then is coming a big shaken in the SDA Church and only the faithful will remain, mostly sheep without sheperds, and with those God will finish the last message to the world, thats your last chance, you reject that last chance and you are lost forever, because now is the last time of grace for the non-SDA, after that all the real children of God will be sealed, time of grace ends and the 7 plagues start pouring, you may believe it now, or when it happens, that's up to you, but this generation will not pass. the end is at hand. Religion has always had only one purpose. RE-LIGARE from latin= rebind, rebond, reunited, reglue restore to our first relation with God, be part of Jesus body, reborn, abide in Jesus, be the temple of the Holy Spirit, so as a byproduct you could be sanctify, get a divine nature, be holy, keep the commandments of God, be perfect in your sphere as God is in His OR YOU CANNOT BE SAVED. YOU LOST THE MEANING AND PURPOSE OF RELIGION AND YOU ARE LOST TOO.

Rosita Alonzo said...

WHAT REALLY IS YOUR AIM? save others? or just justify that you are a hard headed person? The Truth is the Truth, not matter what, are you a Jesuit? to whom really is convenient all that supposed Truth you are talking about? you create a false hope in people, so they may continue in their sins, and that day will surprise them as a thief in the night, why you want them to believe a Jesuit invention, so proved and researched, supported by mediums and all the churches created by freemasons? What is your agenda? who you really serve? you may attack the SDA church all you want, but not matter what, Truth will triumph at the end, with you or without you, but God will never do anything in secret, He will tell all to His people by His prophet, who by the way, you do not know the whole history, you are violating the "Do not Tell false testimony against your neighbor", talking about that mentally retarded girl, that God has to use because was nobody else who qualified for the position and she become only By His grace in a prolific writer with so many information for His people, to whom now you owe even the cereals you eat at breakfast, because God wanted Holy People, Healthy, with Brilliant minds, and clear understanding, so God raised a humble girl with barely 3rd grade education, unable to attend school anymore, and she did not create the SDA church, she was a prophet in the making at that point, eating pork, a Sunday keeper eating meat, sick, but as God revealed to her how a child of God should eat clean, nourishing food, she become vegetarian, she followed the 8 principles of the Health reform, and grow as the few honest Bible students who studied the Bible with honesty, prayer and dedication put together all the Truth of the Bible, and that from the great men of God of all time, BE HONEST WITH YOURSELF, THE ONLY REASON OF DOUBT AND DISBELIEF IS LOVE OF SIN, the proud heart does not want to accept that God requires TOTAL SURRENDER AND OBEDIENCE, after we are saved, because Jesus mean: The one who will saved His people from their sins, NOT IN THEIR SINS, NOT TO KEEP SINNING. OR YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS???

amc said...

I invite you to read my article again and carefully note my reason for writing it.

It seems that Seventh-day Adventists believe that it's quite alright for Steve Wohlberg to write a number of books attacking dispensationalists, pretribulational rapturists and even Israel.

In fact, as you might already know, he even has a website containing articles against Israel and dispensationalism. Many of these articles misrepresent both dispensationalism and Israel.

For example, Wohlberg states that disp teaches 2 ways of salvation. But that isn't the case at all.

There is only one way to salvation and that is through faith in Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God.

Please give me a valid reason why he shouldn't be responded to.

Ex Adventist Outreach

Escorpion Venenoso said...

SDA is the true remnant Church, Steve Wolhberg is right. You people are wrong in accusing him. God bless

Escorpion Venenoso said...

Steve Wolhberg is right. He does not twist the scriptures, you accuse him to.

Escorpion Venenoso said...

Yeah Michael the Archangel is definitely the preincarnate Christ. Jesus is described as being the "Angel of the Lord" in the OT. Michael defeats Satan in Revelation 12. Michael the Prince stands up for God's People in Daniel 12 and relievers them. The Captain of the Army of The Lord is Jesus, and he is worshipped by Joshua in the book of Joshua! Prove me wrong. Angel the word only means 'messenger' like a prophet or kings, Jesus is the arch messenger, or arch angel, aka chief messenger. SDA have historically believed in the Trinity. Ellen White did. Get your facts straight on Adventism

amc said...

Quote: " SDA is the true remnant Church, Steve Wolhberg (sic) is right. You people are wrong in accusing him."

Escorpion Venenoso, perhaps you can show me exactly where I am wrong and how the SDA is the true remnant church.

Most importantly, please do note that this article was responding to Wohlberg's polemics against the view which I believe in.

Quote: "Steve Wolhberg (sic) is right. He does not twist the scriptures, you accuse him to."

Wohlberg teaches that Israel is prophetically finished as a nation but the Bible tells me something else (Jer 31: 31-37; Amos 9:14-15; Hos 5:15; Acts 1:6-7; Rom 11: 25-29).

Quote: "Yeah Michael the Archangel is definitely the preincarnate Christ. Jesus is described as being the "Angel of the Lord" in the OT."

The theophanies of the OT are never said to be Michael. The SDA derived that doctrine by deduction in the 1840s. Part of that conclusion is based on the assumption that Israel equals the church. Michael is simply the angel assigned to the nation Israel. Angels are created beings while Jesus existed eternally as God. Most notably, not once is Jesus said to be Michael in Scripture.

The following is problematic for that view:

Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, "The Lord rebuke you!" Jud 1:9

Jesus also claimed to be Jehovah. You might find the following links insightful:

http://creation.com/jesus-christ-our-creator-a-biblical-defence-of-the-trinity

http://jesusisyhwh.blogspot.com/

mkmason2002 said...

Steve openly says he's SDA. I feel you're not portraying him truthfully.
What's your evidence for a pre-trib rapture? I don't see it. But I can give you numerous verses in favor of a pre-wrath rapture "after the tribulation of those days" as it states in Matthew 24.
The TRUE sabbath is on the 7th day, from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday. Do you rest on the Sabbath? Or do you follow the Catholic law?
I find your article mean-spirited.

amc said...

I don't wish my responses to you to be taken in a harsh way. Either way, here we go:

You say I'm mean spirited. Please point out where I'm unfair. When someone devotes so much time disparaging a system in his books, on his website and on YouTube then it is fair to respond to him. He calls dispensationalism the third frog of false prophecy. Should that not elicit some response? Does that sound fair to you?

You say I haven't portrayed him truthfully. Can you show me how? Wohlberg didn't mention that he was an Adventist in "End Time Delusions" (or in the Israel Deception). It should have been particularly germane due to the fact that he discussed the Big Ten Commandments, Revelation and the Antichrist. Where was the BIG warning about the Sabbath and the true Mark of the Beast (Sunday worship)?

He appeared on the Jan Markell show which is openly dispensational and pretribulational yet neglected to he mention that he was an Adventist with a list of credits to his name attacking her beliefs. He was there pushing his Twilight merchandise. When she found out she promptly pulled his materials off her Web Store.

Regarding the Sabbath; it's not about following "Catholic law". What does your Bible say? You may want to familiarize yourself again with Acts chapter 15, Rom 14:4-6; Col 2:16-17 & Gal 5:1-4. The meaning of these texts is obvious. The Mosaic Law is an indivisible unit of civil, ritual and ceremonial laws. Break one and you break them all. Is keeping the Sabbath (in contrast to keeping Sunday) a matter of salvation to you as it is with Adventism?

amc said...

I find your comment on prewrath perplexing. I assume you hold to the Van Kampen-Rosenthal prewrath rapture view. If so, you have far more in common with pretribulationists than with someone who teaches that the millennial earth remains entirely desolate while believers reign in heaven.

Prewrath is self refuting. It teaches that Matt 24:31 is the rapture which cuts short the tribulation. It teaches that the last half of Dan 70th week is divided into the great tribulation and the day of the Lord. Yet everywhere Scripture tells us that the great tribulation is three-and-a-half years. If Matt 24:31 is the rapture then it occurs at the end of the week, not before. Furthermore, the rapture doesn't cut the tribulation short at all. The gathering in Matthew occurs AFTER the tribulation, after the cosmic signs and after the sign of the Son of man.

Prewrathers totally confuse the Lord's meaning in Matt 24:21-22. He cuts those days short so that people can be saved to enter the millennium alive.

They teach that all second coming passages and rapture passages mean the same single event, and yet have three more coming following the one in Matt 24:31. The one or two who teach that Christ remains in the atmosphere after the rapture have a problem with the great multitude worshipping the Lamb in heaven, immediately after the rapture.

See my article The Gathering of Mat 24:31

amc said...

Note: I should have said that the Mosaic Laws are civil, dietary and ceremonial...to be observed as ONE UNIT.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

1. EGW reported observed behaviors during the supposed revelations was more consistent with possession than inspiration by The Holy Spirit, and she plagiarized a lot.

2. The Mosaic Laws were a unit during the Mosaic Covenant, though there were some more important than others. Under the New Covenant, only the moral and some civil as showing how moral works out in practice would be relevant. Paul reiterates the morality over and over while telling us circumcision food laws and sabbaths are NOT relevant any more.

3. I am not sure what your position on the rapture is, but while a mix of historicist and futurist makes more sense that preterist or either of the other two alone, you cannot have a pre tribulation rapture because Paul in II Thessalonians, Daniel chapter 7 and Jesus in Matt. 24 "AFTER the tribulation of those days the Sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky" rules a pre trib and secret pre trib rapture out. Jesus comes back to end the antichrist's persecution of the church and end his rule and takes up those of us still living in hiding or on the run from the antichrist to Himself, while He rains down wrath on the antichrist, then descends to take over.

Jehovah's Witnesses have I think a similar scenario, but if so it is the only thing they got right.

amc said...


Thank you for your comments, Christine.

Yes, EGW plagiarized. As to whether she was under possession or not, I can't judge.

Yes, Mosaic Law is no longer applicable. We are now under the Law of Christ, as Paul tells us in Galatians.

I don't see where a mix of historicist and futurist view "makes more sense."

A few years ago I was a posttribulationist and might have made similar statements regarding Thessalonians, Daniel and the Olivet Discourse. I never used to concern myself over it much despite having many pretrib friends. However, having seen how adamant some of the newest prewrath people were that they were right, I began to look at it closer. And I changed my mind.

I eliminated prewrath fairly quickly because it hangs on the premise that the Great Tribulation is cut short. It simply isn't. You mention a "secret" rapture and it turns out that the prewrath view has those as well.

If you take all the texts concerning Christ's return and compare them you find that He comes at a time of peace yet also after a time of horrific conditions. Both cannot be correct for a single coming.

Posttribulationism usually requires that the 7th trumpet equals Paul's Last trump. The 7th trumpet occurs prior to Christ's return therefore it also teaches a "secret" rapture. To get over that problem, they rearrange the chronology of Revelation. They have to push the 7th trumpet forward and the resurrection of the trib saints (Rev 20:4) chronologically backwards to fix the "secret" rapture problem and maintain a single First Resurrection. The problem is that Dan 12 tells us that the resurrection of his people will be after 1,335 days which aligns with a post 70th week event.

Robert Gundry actually admits to a two-phase First Resurrection (The Church and the Tribulation p 148). Yet he won't accept a pretrib resurrection of church saints. In fact he argues contra a plain pre-mil understanding that the Sheep & Goats judgment occurs post-mil. That scenario eliminates the problem of unsaved people getting into the millennium. Also consider this: if the rapture occurs at the end of the tribulation then why does one need a Sheep & Goats judgment?

The Antichrist's 42 month kingdom still exists during the bowl judgments, which indicates that God's wrath is at least coincident with the beast's rule. We could say more on all this but suffice to say that it's rather more complex than your observations might indicate.

amc said...

BTW, Christine, I used to frequent Constance's blog soon after I left the New Age behind. I rarely go there now for various reasons. I notice that you are quite prolific there and that you're given to making throwaway statements like:

Quote: The main disasters in Revelation are apparently mostly against the antichrist who isn't here yet. Forget pre trib rapture by the way. escape through the event like Noah in the Ark is finding a safe place, not flying totally off world. ~ End quote

I see that you profile yourself as "Greek Orthodox". I have some, albeit limited, knowledge of G.O. and was attracted to some of its rich history after I left the New Age. The problem with G.O. is that, like Catholicism, Scripture isn't its strong point. Church doctrine oversees the texts rather than letting the texts speak for themselves. You can say what you like at Constance's blog, but take care in providing evidence for your assertions when posting here.