Who changed the “Great Controversy” Dear d:... Yes. finally, I got your letter. I understand that you are busy man and that you have other important responsibilities as a school teacher. Anyway. I do appreciate your effort, and ‘am glad that you do answer to my letters. I have to admit that [ expected little bit longer ietter from you, but even from this what you sent me I can sce your position regarding the meters we are talking about. From your letter I can sce that you are not familiar with the official position of Seventh day Adventist Church regarding the changing of the book “The Great Controversy” (GC). Pastor P. Repnik did not express his personal opinion or his personal view regarding omitting first four pages from the chapter “The Snares of Satan”, from the Great Controversy book. He actually, expressed the official position of the World Wide Church of the Seventh day Adventists regarding this matter. And you can find all about this at the end of the 1884 GC book in nearly all editions written in English language. On the page 507 there is “Supplement to Reprint Edition, Ellen G. White’s Portrayal of the Great Controversy Story” by Arthur L. White, Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate (in that time). Here you can find their “reasons” for need to reprint and change the GC book. Regarding the omitting of the first four pages from the chapter entitled the “Snares of Satan” of GC book. on page 522 you can read. “Ellen White began the work in 1886. while she was residing in Basel. Switzerland, and completed it at her home in Healdsbourg, California, in may, 1888. She not only enlarged the presentation but in some cases she left out items. An example of this is seen in the familiar chapter entitled “The Snares of Satan” in the Great Controversy (pages 518-530 in current printings). The first four pages of this chapter as printed in the 1884 book dealt with the manner in which Satan employed Protestant ministers to carry out his objectives in depreciating the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. This could be understood by Seventh day Adventists. but siace the presentation was now to go to non-Adventists, Mrs. White felt that the pages dealing with this should be dropped out of the new and larger book. In 1923 the omitted portions of this chapter were reprinted in Testimonies to Ministers, bringing them back for Adventist reading” This was written by Arthur L. White. then a Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate. This is the official position of the Seventh day Adventist Church (SDA) regarding omissions of four pages from the Snares of Satan of GC. The changes are obvious. so Arthur L. White is trying to explain the reasons for doing that. ‘As you can see for yourself our leading brethren are trying to convince us that it was Ellen G. White herself who made the omissions and changes in her own writings. Unfortunately. she is not with us any more to confirm or to deny this accusation. Also, the Adventists and Protestants openly accuse Ellen G. White to be a plagiator because, as they claim, she used material of other authors for writing her books. Again. she is not with us to confirm or to deny this. But there are still ways to find out what is the truth, as { will show you in this letter. If you don’t mind, I will show you some of the other changes that Ellen G, White (inspired by Holy Spirit) made. according to our leading brethren. In the Preface of the 1884 edition of GC we can read the words of the publishers: “We would say to those who have felt disappointed because this volume was not issued sooner. that we believe the delay was providential, as the book contains matter of great interest and importance which it would not have contained had it been published sooner. And still this volume does not give all that the writer has to present on the closing scenes of this dispensation. Some matters which could not possibly be inserted in this work (space being limited), will be published separately. As itis, this book is larger than was intended.”Pe: From this words we can understand that the publishing of the 1884 GC book was delayed. an disappointment of many. But, say the publishers, “the delay was providential” because “the book contains matter of great interest and importance which it would not have contained had it been published sooncr”. Let’s have a look at the words of Spirit of Prophecy, was it delay the will of God. or somebody's else's will: “Just at that time the devil was influencing minds to hold back my books published at Review and Herald. Those at the head of the work there discouraged the agents about handling "Patriarchs and Prophets" and "Great Controversy," the very books which the people should have had at once, and concentrated their efforts on "Bible Readings," promising that at a certain time they would concentrate their efforts on my books, But this promise they never kept. At the very time when "G. C." should have been circulated everwhere, it was Iving idle on the shelves of the Review and Herald and Pacific Press. The light given by God for the people was hidden away in the publishing houses. The inner working of this matter was presented to me, and I saw that the very men who said that the canvassers would not handle my books, were themselves arranging matters so that they should not handle them. They told me falsehoods.” -J. N. Loughborough, February 19, 1899, Doctor Paulson's Collection.- {PC 140.2} Now, you can judge for yourself about this matter. Actually, these examples are just a small, minor details, and I use them only for illustration or examples. The real damage and confusion was done when the leading brethren dared to change the issues of doctrinal nature in the GC book. According the evidences, the biggest changes and omissions happened regarding “The Midnight Cry”, “The Loud Cry”, “Second Angel's Message, Third Angel's Message, “The Fourth Angel’s Message”... Today, all the SDA churches of the world are preaching, praying for and expecting this great event, the out pouring of the Holy Spirit upon every honest soul, which will filled with the Holy Spirit go to all the world to preach the truth about the God's Law with great might and power. This is also known as the Loud Cry of the Third Angel. Great miracles and healing will then happen. and thousands will convert and accept the truth. This sounds very encouraging and wonderful, but do we really know all we have to know about the Loud Cry? Have a look at some serious changes that are put on the Ellen G. White's account, as the “brethren” want us to believe, and that she made the changes herself: 1884 GC, p. 421: - “The Loud Cry” - the chapter title, 1888, 1911 GC p. 603: - “The Final Warning” - changed. 1884 GC p. 422: - “it swells to a loud cry”. 1888, 1911GC p. 604: - deleted. 1884 GC p. 424:- “as the time comes for the loud cry to be given”. 1888. 1911 GC p. 606: - deleted. 1884 GC p. 429: - “When the loud cry shall be given”. 1888. 1911 GC p. 611: - deleted. 1884 GC p. 429: - “far exceeded by the mighty movement under the loud cry”. 1888, 1911 GC p. 611: -deleted. The standard 1888 and 1911 church editions of the GC book. gives the impression. that “the final warning” is the completion of the Third Angel's message. Whereas the 1884 edition, distinctly teaches that the “Loud Cry” is the message of the Angel of Revelation 18. “In connection with his message the call is heard, "Come out of her, my people." As these warnings join the third angel's message, it swells to aloud cry. (4SP 422.1) There is no “Loud Cry” message in the 1888 and 1911 editions of the GC book. So, the Loud Cry starts when the angel of Revelation 18 join or unite with the Third angel, and united together they give the Loud Cry. You will never find this teaching in the later editions (1888, 191 1) of the GC book, which are widely accepted by all SDA churches of the world as the heavenly truth given to them. They are not aware that the God's words are taken out. and the words of human wisdom are addedinstead. Let us have a look in some other examples: 1884 GC p_ 421: - “In this Scripture the announcement of the fall of Babylon, as made by the second angel, [Rev. 14:8] is repeated, with the additional mention of the corruptions which have been entering the churches since 1844.” 888, 1911 GC p. 603: - “This Scripture points forward to a time when the announcement of the fall of Babylon, as made by the second angel of Revelation 14 (verse 8), is to be repeated, with the additional mention of the corruptions which have been entering the various organisations that constitute Babylon, since that message was first given, in the summer of 1844.” The emphasis has been supplied to highlight the change. The 1884 edition teaches that “the churches” as a whole since 1844, which could include an apostate SDA church is targeted by this message. But, the 1911 edition deflects any possible finger of accusation being pointed at the SDA church as being part of Babylon, in the mind of the SDA reader, because they have been taught that the SDA church will never be part of Babylon. 1888, 1911 GC p. 607: -“The church appeals to the strong arm of civil power, and, in this work, papists and Protestants unite.” (Emphasis supplied). In the 1884 edition, the Protestants lead the way to appeal to the civil government, calling for Catholic support. In the 1911 edition, this distinction is completely blurred. with both Catholics and Protestants being equal partners in this work. The traditional SDA teaching that “the Catholics are coming; the Catholics are coming; - to lead in the persecution of Sabbath keepers does not stand up to the test of inspiration. In the 1884 GC p. 123 it's written: “Never from that day would Rome stand as secure as she had stood. It is the Protestants - specifically Protestant America who will lead the way in the persecution of the saints. Don’t forget that the SDA-s are one of the Protestant denominations too. Let us continue with the comparisons: 1884 GC p, 232: - “But the message announcing the fall of Babylon must apply to some religious body that was once pure. and has become corrupt. It cannot be the Romish Church which is here meant: for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries. 1888, 1911 GC p, 382: -* The message of Revelation 14, announcing the fall of Babylon must apply to religious bodies that were once pure and have become corrupt. Since this message follows the warning of the judgment, it must be given in the last days; therefore it cannot refer to the Roman Church alone. for thai church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries.” I will pose a question here; Does the message of the fall of Babylon (Rev. 14:8) apply to the Roman church or not? In the 1884 edition of GC Ellen G. White says that the message of the fall of Babylon does not apply to the Roman church. In the 1888, 1911 editions of the GC book. she is saying that the message of the fall of Babylon does apply to the Roman church and not.the Roman church alone. What is here the truth, and what is the lie and who do we trust. Was it the original 1884 edition of the GC written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Were the later 1888 and 1911 editions written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Why would Ellen G. White in the 1884 GC write that the message of the Second Angel does not apply to the Roman church for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries, but in the later editions of the GC (1888, 1911), she is saying that the Second Angel message does apply to the Roman church? Try to answer these questions. Next example:4. 1884 GC p, 232: “When the churches spurned the counsel of God by rejecting the Advent message, the Lord rejected them. The first angel was followed by a second, proclaiming, "Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication." (REV. 14:8] This message was understood by Adventists to be an announcement of the moral fall of the churches in consequence of their rejection of the first message. The proclamation, "Babylon is fallen,” was given in the summer of 1844, and as the result, about fifty thousand withdrew from these churches.” 1888, 1911 GC p. 389: -The second angel's message of Revelation 14 was first preached in the summer of 1844, and it then had a more direct application to the churches of the United States, where the warning of the judgment had been most widely proclaimed and most generally rejected, and where the declension in the churches had been most rapid. But the message of the second angel did not reach its complete fulfilment in 1844. The churches then experienced a moral fall, in consequence of their refusal of the light of the advent message; but that fall was not complete. As they have continued to reject the special truths for this time they have fallen lower and lower. Not yet, however, can it be said that "Babylon is fallen,... because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” She has not yet made all nations do this... The change is a progressive one, and the perfect fulfilment of Revelation 14:8 is yet future.” What can we see in this example? The original (1884) GC says that “the first angel was followed by a second, proclaiming, "Babylon is fallen, is fallen, [Rev. 14:8] which happened “in the summer of 1844, and as the result, about fifty thousand withdrew from these churches.” The later (1911) GC claims that “the message of the second angel did not reach its complete fulfilment in 1844. The churches then experienced a moral fall, in consequence of their refusal of the light of the advent message; but that fall was not complete. Not yet. however. can it be said that "Babylon is fallen,... because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication." She has not yet made all nations do this... The change is a progressive one, and the perfect fulfilment of Revelation 14:8 is yet future.” Interesting, isn’t it? In the original 1884 GC Ellen G. White writes that the fall of Babylon happened in 184, and as result of this. about fifty thousand people withdrew from fallen churches. In the later editions ‘of GC (1888, 1911) she is writing that the fall of Babylon was not complete, not yet, can it be said that “Babylon is fallen...” and the perfect fulfilment of Revelation 14:8 is yet future. According to this, it looks like Ellen G. White herself is not quite sure what is she writing in the GC book. Iwould repeat the question from above; Was the original 1884 edition of the GC written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Were the later 1888 and 1911 editions written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Did Babylon (Protestant churches) fall in 1844 or not? One GC says that it is. while the other say that it is not. This is a contradiction, isn’t it? Does the Holy Spirit contradicts to Himself? To which GC can we trust. to the original (1884) where it says that the Second Angel fulfilled his mission in 1844, or to the letter editions (1888, 1911) where it says that the Babylon has not yet made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornification and that the perfect fulfilment of Revelation 14:8 will progressively happen in the future? The original 1884 GC p. 232 say that when the (Protestant) churches spurned the counsel of God by rejecting the Advent message, the Lord rejected them. Did the Lord make a mistake by rejecting the Protestant churches? Or, did those fifty thousand people make a mistake by leaving the fallen churches? And then we find this words in the 1884 GC p.254 -“In like manner was prophecy fulfilled in the first and second angels’ messages. They were given at the right time, and accomplished the work which God designed to accomplish by them.” In the book Early Writings p.245 we can find similar words: “Prophecy was fulfilled in the first and second angels’ messages. They were given at the right time and accomplished the work which God designed to accomplish by them. Jt does not say that the fulfilment of the Second Angel’s message will happen in the future, progressively.a2 It says that the churches fell, and they fell completely. They rejected God’s message, and the Lord rejected them, The churches fell completely for fifty thousand people left the fallen churches. If the churches didn’t fell, they would not have the right to leave the churches. The 1911 GC p. 389: says that: “Not yet, however, can it be said that "Babylon is fallen.... because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication." She has not vet made all nations do this...” It says that the Babylon did not made “all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication” (that will happen in the future). But in the 1884 p. 235 = says this: “Were it not that the world is hopelessly intoxicated with the wine of Babvion, multitudes would be convicted and converted by the plain, cutting truths of the word of God.” And then our leading “brethren” are telling us how Ellen G. White herself did all the changes in her writings under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. So, the Protestant churches completely fell in the time of the preaching of the Second Angel's message, or they didn’t. They made all nations drink of the poison wine of the wrath of her fornification, or they didn’t. It cannot be both ways. While one is the truth, the other is a lie. What would you say? Let’s go on, with the next example: 1884 GC p, 430: - “The message will be carried, as was the midnight cry of 1844, not so much by argument as by the deep conviction of the Spirit of God.” 1888, 1911 GC p. 612: - “The message will be carried not so much by argument as by the deep conviction of the Spirit of God.” As you can see in the 1911 edition of the GC, the words “as was the midnight cry of 1844” are missing. Why would anybody hide from us the fact that the Loud Cry will be carried as was the Midnight Cry of 18447 Let us read about the Midnight Cry in the original (1884) GC, p. 250: “The work did not stand in the wisdom and learning of men. but in the power of God. It was not the most talented, but the most humble and devoted, who were the first to hear and obey the call. Farmers left their crops standing in the fields, mechanics laid down their tools, and with tears and rejoicing went out to give the warning. Those who had formerly led in the cause were among the last {0 join in this movement. The churches in general closed their doors against it, and a large company who had the living testimony withdrew from their connection. In the providence of God, this cry united with the second angel's message, and gave power to that work.” Humble farmers, mechanics, labouring men, lay people gave this message. People who were not educated according to the schools. Ministers did not lead in this work. Also, we find that the churches opposed the message. No church organisation gave this message. And that is how the “Loud Cry” will go. 1884 GC p. 424: -“As the time comes for the loud cry to be given, the Lord will work through humble instruments, leading the minds of those who consecrate themselves to his service. The laborers will be qualified rather by the unction of his Spirit than by the training of literary institutions. Men of faith and prayer will be constrained to go forth with holy zeal, declaring the words which God gives them.” The 1911 edition of the GC omits this fact. because the SDA church leaders have fooled people into believing that the ministers will lead in giving the “Loud Cry”, and that the SDA church will give the “Loud Cry”. Nothing can be further from the truth than this. Therefore, we need to study more deeply into the history of the Midnight Cry of 1844, to have a better understanding of how the “Loud Cry” will be carried. This nest example is the most important for as to understand it:6, 884 GC p. 422: - “Hence the movement symbolized by the angel coming down from Heaven, lightening the earth with his glory, and crying mightily with a strong voice, announcing the sins of Babylon. In connection with his message the call is heard, "Come out of her, my people." As these warnings join the third angel's message, it swells to a loud cry.” 1888, 1911 GC p. 604: - “Hence the movement symbolized by the angel coming down from heaven, lightening the earth with his glory and crying mightily with a strong voice, announcing the sins of Babylon, In connection with his message the call is heard: "Come out of her, My people." These announcements, uniting with the third angel's message, constitute the final warning to be given to the inhabitants of the earth.” This is a movement which will give a Loud Cry, as we can understand reading the original 1884 edition of the GC. If you read the any of the latest editions, you will end up walking in darkness. Now, we can see clearly the omissions and changes, they are so obvious, and the meaning of the messages completely distorted, and manipulated. Who did all this? By whose authority? Was it really Ellen G. White herself the person responsible for this manipulations, as our leaders say? Did she change her own writings, and Gill them with the contradictions? Did she had authority to do this? Let us see what she has to say regarding this matter: A Word to the Little Flock p. 27: - “So far from desiring to withold anything that I have ever published. I would feel great satisfaction in giving to the public every line of my writings that has ever been printed.” (1883). R&H 5. p. 10: - “That which I have written is what the Lord has bidden me write. I have not been instructed to change that which I have sent out.” (1905) Special Testimony, Series B. No. 7, p. 57: - “Not a word is changed or denied.” (1905) a 231; - “Iam not to retract one word of the message I have borne.” (1906) These are very plain and clear statements, which can not be controverted, and we can see that Sr. White ‘was not authorised to change her writings. Who did then? ‘The next example from the Testimonies will help us to se who is responsible for manipulations of the Spirit of Prophecy writings. All words typed in Bold stvle arc omitted from the Testimonies. Testimonies for the Church Vol. 5. p. 61-66. ST, The Testimonies Slighted Healdsburg, California, June 20, 1882. Dear Brethren and Sisters in Battle Creek: I understand that the testimony which I sent to Brother ----- Eld. Smith, with the request that it be read to the church, was withheld from you for several weeks after it was received by him, Before sending that testimony my mind was so impressed by the Spirit of God that 1 had no rest day or night until I wrote to you. It was not a work that [ would have chosen for myself. Before my husband's death [ decided that it was not my duty to bear testimony to anyone in reproof of wrong or in vindication of right, because advantage was taken of my words to deal harshly with the erring and to unwisely exalt others whose course I had not in any degree sustained. Many explained the testimonies to ‘suit themselves. The truth of God is not in harmony with the traditions of men, nor does it conform to their opinions. Like its divine Author, it is unchangeable, the same yesterday, today, and forever. Those who separate from God will call darkness light, and error ruth. But darkness will never prove itself to be light. nor will error become truth. (5T 62.1} ‘The minds of many have been so darkened and confused by worldly customs, worldly practices, and worldly influences that all power to discriminate between light and darkness, truth and error, scemsTe destroyed. J had little hope that my words would be understood; but when the Lord moved upon me so decidedly, I could not resist His Spirit. Knowing that you were involving yourselves in the snares of Satan. I felt that the danger was too great for me to keep silent. Hence I wrote to you as I dids but Eld. Smith felt at liberty to withhold the testimony from the church for weeks. If God was leading him and those united with and counselled him in this act, he was not leading me; the burden which moved me to write was a false burden, imposed by another spirit. Further that this, Eld. Smith questioned the propricty of bringing the testimony before the church at all. Thus he takes the responsibility of standing between God’s word of reproof and the people. I committed the matter to Eld. Smith as an officer of the church. But in consideration of my past position in this work, in consideration of the connection God has been pleased to give me with his cause from its very rise, was it the prerogative of Eld. Smith, or of those whom he took into his counsel, to even question this matter? Shall he sit in judgment upon my work, or on my letters of warning to the church? This man, who has so long avoided disagreeable responsibilities; who has let matters drift whichever way they were disposed to go, rather than brace himself for duty, and with moral courage reprove and rebuke wrong; who has shunned so many dutics belonging to him in bis position of trust, - has now ventured to act in a new character, and to assume responsibilities which God hath not given him. He has placed himself and his influences in direct opposition to my work, so that cannot reach the people to impress upon them the testimonies which God has given me. And there are others equally blinded, who will follow in this path. For years the Lord has been presenting the situation of the church before you. Again and again reproofs and warnings have been given. October 23, 1879, the Lord gave me a most impressive testimony in regard to the church in Battle Creek. Especially in reference to Eld. Smith. Now he is found firm, persistent, stubborn, on the wrong side. He is not led hy the Spirit of God in his decisions, The Lord has laid no such burden upon him. Human influences have moulded his judgment. No greater evidence of this can be given that the course he has taken in regard to my testimony to the church. During the last months I was with you I carried a heavy burden for the church. while those who should have felt to the very depths of their souls were comparatively easy and unconcerned. I knew not what to do or what to say. I had no confidence in the course which many were pursuing, for they were doing the very things which the Lord had warned them not to do.. So it is with many among our people who have drifted away from the old landmarks and who have followed their own understanding. What a great relief it would be to such could they quiet their conscience with the belief that my work is not of God. But your unbelief will not change the facts in the case. You are defective in character. in moral and religious experience. Close your eyes to the fact if you will, but this does not make you one particle more perfect. The only remedy is to wash in the blood of the Lamb. In rejecting this testimony, Eld. Smith, you have virtually rejected all the testimonies. You must know this is the ease. This testimony bears the same evidence of its character that all others have borne for the last thirty-six years. But it condemns certain wrongs which you have committed, and which God condemns. The reason why you cannot sec it, is because you have been cherishing feelings wholly opposed to the Spirit of God. Your actions stand registered in the books of heaven. Eld. Smith, I was more grieved that I can express to find you again working on the side of the encmy. You will find quite a number who will strengthen you in your position; the leaven is working. You pronounce my work human, not actuated by the Spirit of God. On this point you have had great light; for this you are responsible. If God has ever wrought by me-unworthy and week as Iam at all times - he has wrought by me and through me for the last few months. In this long letter I spoke of many facts which I distinctly stated that I had been shown. I wrote to you, saying that I had seen what course you would pursue, to what lengths you would go, unless you heeded the light which God sent you in reproofs, in counsel, and warnings. Will you do despite to the Spirit of grace? Twas most astonished to a letter from Sr. Amadon - a collection of partial disclosures. hints of terrible things that could not be revealed. Then she remarks: “Sr. White, be careful you slay.” As though God’s messenger was doing a work independent of the Spirit of God! ‘Thus Ahab thought when he met Elijah, and said, “Art thou he that troubleth Israel?” Elijah throws back the imputation firmly and decidedly: “I have not troubled Israel; but thou and thy father’s house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of God, and thou hast followed Baalim.” Those who bear the warnings of God, are often regarded as the offending party, whereas, the whole blame rests with those who have alienated themselves from the Lord by transgression. Elijah does not offer8. ‘one excuse for his work. He does not prophesy smooth things, neither does he try to conceal the real cause of the judgements of God. Ifyou seek to turn aside the counsel of God to suit yourselves, if you lessen the confidence of God's people in the testimonies He has sent them, you are rebelling against God as certainly as were Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. You have their history. You know how stubborn they were in their own opinions. They decided that their judgment was better than that of Moses and that Moses was doing great injury to Israel. Those who united with them were so set in their opinions that, notwithstanding the judgments of God in a marked manner destroyed the leaders and the princes, the next morning the survivors came to Moses and said: Ye have killed the people of the Lord." We see what fearful deception will come upon the human mind. How hard it is to convince souls that have become imbued with a spirit which is not of God. As Christ's ambassador, I would say to you: Be careful what positions you take. This is God's work, and you must render to Him an account for the manner in which you treat His message. (ST 66) J would’ask the Jeading “brethren”; “Did Ellen G. White made this omissions and changes too? The original “Testimony for the Battle Creek Church” has 84 pages. From the first to the last page there is virtually no page without some omission or change. This omitted paragraphs you will not find in any latter editions of any book. You can find them only in original editions. From this text we can clearly see that Eld. Smith, that is Uriah Smith did not believe that the writings of Spirit of Prophecy were inspired by the Holy Spirit. Ellen G. White knew that her writings will be manipulated. She had couple of visions segarding this matter, like the following few: IT p, 577: - “That night I dreamed that I was in Battle Creek looking out from the side glass at the door and saw a company marching up to the house, two and two. They looked stern and determined. I knew them well and turned to open the parlor door to receive them, but thought I would look again. The scene was changed. The company now presented the appearance of a Catholic procession. One bore in his hand a cross, another a reed. And as they approached, the one carrying a reed made a circle around the house, saying ce times: "This house is proscribed. The goods must be confiscated. They have spoken against our holy order." Terror scized me, and I ran through the house, out of the north door, and found myself in the midst of a company, some of whom I knew, but I dared not speak a word to them for fear of being betrayed. I tried to seek a retired spot where I might weep and pray without meeting eager, inquisitive eyes wherever I tured. I repeated frequently: "If I could only understand this! If they will tel] me what J have said or what [ have done!" (IT 577.2) J wept and prayed much as I saw our goods confiscated. I tried to read sympathy or pity for me in the looks of those around me. and marked the countenances of several whom I thought would speak to me and comfort me if they did not fear that they would be observed by others. I made one attempt to escape from. the crowd, but sccing that I was watched, I concealed my intentions. I commenced weeping aloud. and saying: "If they would only tell me what I have done or what I have said!" My husband, who was sleeping ina bed in the same room, heard me weeping aloud and awoke me. My pillow was wet with tears, and a sad depression of spirits was upon me.” (1T 578.1) The confiscated goods which spoke against their holy order are nothing else but the Spirit of Prophecy writings. 1SM p. 204: - “The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganisation. Were this reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organisation would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement. The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation would be built on the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the structure.” (1SM. 204)De) XH. Octob. 16, 1886, book 1, p. 372: - “The work committed to me forty years ago J must carry forward as long as life shall last. [ will not shun to declare the whole counsel of God. Unpleasant as it may be, 1 must warn, reprove, rebuke, as God bids me, whether the carnal heart will accept or reject the words of warning. For forty years, Satan has made the most determined efforts to cut off this testimony from the church; but it has continued from year to year to warn the erring, to unmask the deceiver, 1o encourage the desponding. My trust is in God. I have learned not to be surprised at opposition in any form or from almost any source. I expect to be betrayed, as was my Master, by professed friends. (RH, October 16, 1883 par. 17) Exactly 42 days after Ellen G. White wrote this words there was General Conference 1883, where the leading brethren decided the following: R&H November 27, 1883: - “32, Whereas, some of the bound volumes of the Testimonies to the Church are out of print, so that full sets cannot be obtained at the office; and, Whereas, There is a constant and urgent call for the reprinting of these volusnes; therefore, Resolved, That we recommend their republication in such a form as to make four volumes of seven or eight hundred pages each. 33. Whereas, Many of these Testimonies were written under the most unfavourable circumstances. the writer being too heavily pressed with anxiety and labour to devote critical thought to the grammatical perfection of the writings, and they were printed in such haste as to allow these imperfections to pass uncorrected; and, Whereas We beliéve the light given by God to His servant is by the enlightenment of the mind, thus imparting the taught, and not (except in rare cases) the very words in which the ideas should be expresses: therefore. Resolved. That the republication of these volumes, such verbal changes be sade as to remove the above - named imperfections, as far as possible, without in any measure changing the thought; and further, 34. Resolved, That this body appoint a committee of five to take charge of the republication of these volumes according to the above preambles and resolutions.” The “committce of five” to change the Testimonies of the Holy Spirit was made up of the following, individuals: G. 1. Butler - chairman: S. N. Haskel; Uriah Smith; J. H. Waggoner, W. C. White. The fact that the “brethren” put Uriah Smith on this committee, whén he had been publicly rebuked in the preceding year (1882), for rejecting the Testimonies. shows as how much faith the leaders of the SDA church had in the Testimonies of the Holy Spirit! He first rejected the Testimonies, and now he has the honour to correct them. We can now see why in the previous pages, the rebukes personally addressed to Uriah Smith, have been removed from “Testimonies to the Church”, after the 1883 G. C. Resolution was passed. The committee of five, removed these rebukes from the Testimonies as they were reprinted! This 1883 G. C. resolution uses the excuse that the Testimonies had to be changed because of the grammatical imperfections contained in them. This was a false statement, to give the “brethren” an excuse to change the Testimonies. The following quote will demonstrate that this charge of grammatical imperfection is a lie. Ministry Magazine, April 1994 p. 10, 12: - “Mrs White's remarks conceming the revision were not recorded, but whatever she said. the General Conference session did not choose to cite her as authority for their action. .,.Relatively few changes involved actual grammatical errors. ...The vast majority of wording changes did not involve grammatical errors at all,” (By Ronald Graybill). Uriah Smith was the director of the Adventist publishing house from 1855 to 1861. After him. James White takes the duty of director for three years, then Uriah Smith again from 1864 to 1869. Then Br. J. N. Andrews for one year. From 1877 to 1880 again Uriah Smith in the time when the “Great Controversy was ready to publish, but thanks to Eld. Smith, it was published with four years delay. At that time, James White's health was very poor, so, he was very weak. but despise that he takes the duty of director for one year until his death in 1881. After James White Eld. Smith becomes director of the publishing house from 1881 {9 1897, just in those most important years for Adventists, Elder Smith was the person responsible for not publishing the real record of the events happening at the General Conference in Mincapolis. in the year 1888. Today, while we have record of all General Conferences , the record from this 1888 General10. Conference does not exists under the sun. So, while the “houscband” around Spirit of Prophecy James White was alive, the writings were safe. Aer his death in 1881 Uriah Smith and others who were in rebellion against the Testimonies of the Spirit of God, are moving in and have free reign to change and tamper with the original Spirit of Prophecy writings. In the year 1883 Eld. Smith and others decide to form a committee of five to change the grammatical “imperfections, as far as possible, without in any measure changing the thought”. The evidences speak for themself, clearly showing what they did, changing not only “the taught” but omitting whole pages as we could see in the book Great Controversy where they took out four pages from the chapter Snares of Satan. In the book “The Great Controversy” the changes are so big that the 186 new pages were added, and four pages taken out, beside the changes that they did to “the taught” of certain paragraphs. Were they all grammatically imperfect? In one GC it says that the Protestants fell rejecting the Second Angel’s message, so, God rejected them, while in the other GC it says that the Protestants did not fell completely, but the fall will happen progressively in the future. One GC says that if the world was not so intoxicated with the poison wine, many would accept God’s message, and the other GC says that the Protestants did not yet intoxicated the world with the poison wine. While one GC says that the Second Angel's message “Babylon is fallen, is fallen...” docs not apply to the Rome, the other says that it does apply to the Rome, and not only to the Rome. One right word at the right place and the whole “taught” is changed. And the “brethren” are calling this “removing graniniatical imperfections”. This is nothing else but manipulation and misleading done with the purpose. Thank's to the “committee of five” virtually whole world today (Protestants and other “Christians”) refuse to read the Spirit af Prophecy books, because they believe that Ellen G, White used the material of other worldly authors for writing her books. “Therefore she must be the false prophet” they say. Today this borrowing from other authors we call “plagiarism”. So, Ellen G. White is plagiator and false prophet. And the (majority) Adventists are agreeing with it. You can check this on the Internet. it’s all over, hundreds of web-sites where Ellen G. White is “exposed” as a Adventist false prophet and plagiator. Many of those people are former Adventist pastors. While all blame should go to the address of the shepherds of Israel. to the leaders of the flock, to our “brethren” which are paid from the tithes of their sheep (Ezekiel 34). Well, in the year 1888 the 1888 edition of “The Great Controversy” appeared. This one contained 186 more pages then the 1884 edition of the GC. Also, pages were deleted, and the chapter headings were changed. and the text was re-worked and re-worded. It was a completely different book, being the first volume of the “Conflict of the Ages” series. An interesting fact is, that the Australian edition of the 1888 GC was a word-for-word copy of 1884 edition of GC known also as “Spirit of Prophecy vol. 4”. So, where did all those extra pages and changes come from? Through the work of the committee of five. All the historical quotations in the 1888 edition (the 1911 edition is built upon the 1888 edition), came from Uriah Smith’s books written previously, word-for-word. A. G. Daniells and W. W. Prescott in the 1919 Bible Conference notes, state plainly this fact. that Sr. White was not responsible for the historical quotations placed in the changed editions of the “Great Controversy”. W. W. Prescot, 1919 Bible Conference: -*... When I talked with W. C. White about it (and I do not know that he is an infallible authority), he told me frankly that when they got out “Great Controversy”, if they did not find in her writings anything on certain chapters to make historical connections, thev took other books, like “Daniel and Revelation”, and used portions of them”. In “Spectrum”, an Adventist magazine, in summer 1972, Ronald Graybill published the evidence that Ellen G. White did not borrow material from other authors, but from Uriah Smith. R. Graybill tried to jestily Sr. White, that she borrowed the material from somebody from her church. He writes: Spectrum, Summer 1972 p. 50, 51: - “If one takes an 1834 edition of Smith’s classic work (or even a current edition) and compares his exposition of Daniel 11:36-39 with Ellen White's treatment of the French Revolution, one quickly discovers clear evidence that Mrs. White did not quote Scott, Gleig,1S Thiers, or Alison directly. She drew the quotations entirely from Uriah Smith's work....If one compares the Great Controversy, pages 269-270 and 273-276, with the 1873 edition of “Thoughts on Daniel”, pages 314-325, or the 1884 edition of “Daniel and Revelation” pages 270-279 (either of which Ellen White could have used in her 1888 revision), one discovers that she used nothing from Scott, Gleig, Thiers, or Alison that Smith did not have, Every time Smith deleted material, she deleted the same material, although occasionally she deleted more. She even used the quotations in exactly the same order on pages 275 and 276. There can be no doubt that she drew the historical quotations from Smith, not the original works.” (By Ronald Graybill). Having already proven from Sr. White's writings that she was not authorised by God to change her writings, Graybill’s claim that Mrs. White drew the historical quotations from Smith are not true. Smith himself put these quotations in the later editions of “Great Controversy”. Now we can understand why so- called “Sr. White’s” books teach in harmony with Uriah Smith’s interpretation of Prophecy. Uriah Smith and the-“brethren” revised 1884 GC to fit in with Uriah Smith's propethic works, while leaving Sr. White’s name on the front cover of the book. And now the world and Adventists are casting a blame on Sr. White, not knowing that it was Uriah Smith who is responsible for this, and not Sr. White. Thave a record from “Bible Conference of 1919”, also published in “Spectrum” in May 1979. This Bible Conference happened in the year 1919, just four years after Sr. White died. The whole record contains around 2, 400 pages, which were “lost” up until year 1974, when Dr. Donald Yost found two boxes in the office of General Conference in Washington. There is a small section from this Bible Conference of 1919: Spectrum 54-55, “1919 Bible Conferenc “W.W, Prescott: You are touching exactly the experience through which I went. personally, because you all know that J contributed something toward the revision of "Great Controversy." [ furnished considerable material bearing upon that question, A. G. Daniells: By request. W. W. Prescott: Yes, I was asked to do it, and at first I said’ "No, I will not do it. I know what it means." But J was urged into it. When I had gone over it with W. C. White, then J said, "Here is my difficulty. I have gone over this and suggested changes that ought to be made in order to correct statements. These changes have been accepted. My personal difficulty will be to retain faith on those things that I can not deal with on that basis." But I did not throw up the spirit of prophecy, and have not yet: but I have had to adjust my view of things. I will say to you, as a matter of fact, that the relation of those writings to this movement and to our work. is clearer and more consistent in my mind than it was then. But still you know what I am charged with. I have gone through the personal experience myself over that very thing that you speak of. If we correct it here and correct it there, how are we going to stand with it in the other places? E,M, Wilcox: Those things do not involve the general philosophy of the book. W. W. Prescott: No, but they did involve quite large details. For instance. before "Great Controversy" was revised, I was unorthodox on a certain point, but after it was revised. I was perfectly orthodox. C.M, Sorenson: On what point? W.W. Prescott: My interpretation was, (and I taught it for years in The Protestant Magazine) that Babylon stood for the great apostasy against God, which headed up in the papacy, but which included all minor forms, and that before we come to the end, they would all come under one. That was not the teaching of "Great Controversy." "Great Controversy" said that Babylon could not mean the Romish church, and I had made it mean that largely and primarily. After the book was revised, although the whole argument remained the same. it said that it could not mean the Roman Church alone, just that one word added. EM, Wilcox: That helped you out.126 W. W. Prescott: Yes, but I told W. C. White I did not think anybody had any right to do that. And J did not believe anybody had any right to use it against me before or afterward. I simply went right on with my teaching. JW. Anderson: Would you not claim other portions of the book as on the same basis? W. W. Prescott: No, I would refuse to do that. I had to deal with A. R. Henry over that question. He was ‘determined to crush those men that took a wrong course concerning him. I spent hours with that man trying to help him. We were intimate in our work, and I used to go to his house and spend hours with him. He brought up this question about the authority of the spirit of prophecy and wanted me to draw the line between what was authoritative and what was not. I said, "Brother Henry, I will not attempt to do it, and J advise you not to do it. There is an authority in that gift here, and we must recognise it." Ihave tried to maintain personal confidence in this gift in the church, and I use it and use it. I have gotten ‘great help from those books, but I will tell you frankly that I held to that position on the question of Babylon for years when I knew it was exactly contrary to "Great Controversy," but I went on, and in duc time I became orthodox. I did not enjoy that experience at all, and I hope you will not have to go through it It means something. C_L. Benson: That is the pivotal point. You had something that enabled you to take that position. What was it? WW. Prescott: I can not lay down any rule for anybody. What settled me to take that position was the Bible, not any secular authority. JN. Anderson: Your own findings must be your authority for believing and not believing. W._W. Prescoit: You can upset everything by applying that as a general principle. C.P. Bollman: Could you tell, in just a few words. how the Bible helped you? W._W. Prescott: That would involve the whole question of the beast. Voice: To your knowledge. has Sister White ever made a difference between her nine volumes and her ‘other books? W.W. Prescott: [ have never talked with her about it. In my mind, there is a difference between the works she largely prepared herself and what was prepared by others for sale to the public. A. G. Daniells: You might as well state that a little fuller, the difference in the way they were produced. W. W. Prescott: If I should speak my mind frankly, I should say that I have felt for years that great mistakes were made in handling her writings for commercial purposes. C.M. Sorenson: By whom? W. W. Prescott: I do not want to charge anybody. But I do think great mistakes were made in that way. That is why I have made a distinction as I have. When I talked with W. C. White about it (and I do not know that he is an infallible authority), he told me frankly that when they got out "Great Controversy,” if they did not find in her writings anything on certain chapters to make the historical connections, they took other books, like "Daniel and the Revelation." and used portions of them; and sometimes her secretaries, and sometimes she herself, would prepare a chapter that would fill the gap.” Well. I think this is sufficient to see that it was the leaders of SDA church who changed and manipulated the Spirit of Prophecy books, and not Ellen G. White. There is much more material where the leadersceeys admit that it is them who did the changes, but for now, this is sufficient. Unfortunately, “The Great Controversy” is not the only book that suffered changes, There is Early Writings, Desire of Ages, Patriarchs and Prophets... They are all mainly compilations, and when you write a compilation, it is easy to add or to omit, or at least to edit. The leadership of SDA church is well aware of this, and this is not the accident. They know what they are doing. It’s all happening as Sr. White saw it would happen, as we could read in her visions on the previous pages. The goods will be confiscated for they are spoken against their holy order. This is already happened. And the main reason for this is that they wanted to hide from us the truth about “The Loud Cry”. The leaders want us be completely ignorant on this point. If we go couple of pages back. you will remember that the Loud Cry begins when the Angel from Rev. 18 joins with the Third Angel's message. The Loud Cry begins there where the Third Angel is - which is the Seventh day Adventist church. This is where the Loud Cry of the Third Angel will be heard. And the Jeaders know this, that the Angel from Revelation 18 will sound his message in the SDA church. The message of this angel is: “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird." "And I heard another voice from Heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." (Rev. 18:1, 2, 4.] “In this Scripture the announcement of the fall of Babylon, as made by the second angel, [Rev. 14:8.] is repeated, with the additional mention of the corruptions which have been entering the churches since 1844. In connection with his message the call is heard, "Come out of her, my people." As these warnings join the third angel's message, it swells to a loud cry. (4SP 422) This is what the leaders of SDA church want to hidefrom their members, and this is the teaching of the original 1884 Great Controversy, the most important Ellen White’s book on Bible prophecy. Reading all the other editions of the manipulated GC-s will deceive, mislead you, and prepare to receive mark of the beast, and worship the false christ. But, if you read the original Spirit of Prophecy books, espccially the Great Controversy, original 1884 edition, you have good chances to Jearn the truth about the last days. Praise the Lord for His guidance. and showing us the traps of Satan. so we can avoid them, and find the way into the Everlasting Kingdom of Jesus Christ. Maranatha!