2013 Issue

The Issue of Ellen White

A Church or a Cult

A compilation of papers on the subject of Ellen White.

The purpose of this compilation is to make this material freely available in an easy to access format. The hard copies are sold at a price to cover their production and the PDF downloads are available at a cost to cover expenses only. It is not the intention of the compilers to make a living or a profit from other peoples work, but rather to promote their evidences.

Copy right:- All the material in this compilation is freely available on the internet and as such there is no copyright on the material this publication contains other than that stated on the various web sites.

However, this compilation is available for personal use only. No further copies should be made for resale, distribution or sharing and we do ask that no one copies the material to make a profit from it.

The information contained within the included papers does not necessarily coincide with the belief of the compilers. The information is included to enable you to determine its validity, it gives you the opportunity to see what others are saying and have found out.

Introduction

The Seventh-day Adventist denomination is one of the most successful exports from the United States of America with a global membership.

Nineteenth century America spawned a number of religious organisations that have as their base a similar ideology. “You must become one of us to be saved”. In addition to the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, they include among their number the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, the Churches of God and Fellowships of God as well as many other Pentecostal style groups. Today there are multi-millionaire television evangelists business men who are peddling the same type of religious hype.

In the Seventh-day Adventist denomination, one of its early leaders made claims of receiving visions from God. Her name was Ellen Gould White. As a result of the continuous promoting of her writings and publications, she built up a cultic status inside the denomination. In fact, so much so that a belief in her has today become a requisite of membership. Let me make it clear, that I view myself as a loyal Seventh-day Adventist, and I believe that my denomination has the closest doctrinal position to that of the Jerusalem church as set up by Jesus Christ. But unfortunately, it is suffering from its American roots. This has left it with a number of weaknesses, some of which should not be found in a Christian community.

Having said that, the denomination is not a united church as there is a large proportion who like myself stand on a “Jesus Only” platform. We believe that the final authority for all members of the “Body of Christ” is Jesus Christ. On the other side, there is a large area of membership that are following the denominational propaganda without much study, or if they study, they choose to read or watch only that which supports their viewpoint.

The reason for this compilation has been prompted by the many questions that have arisen as we have been promoting Jesus as our final authority within the denomination. The papers it contains answer most of the questions that we have been asked. The chapter titles should lead you to the information that you are interested in. Do not become despondent, remember that our salvation does not depend on which denomination or group within a denomination you belong to. But it depends on our personal relationship with Jesus, who is our only Lord and Saviour. For more information on this subject go to www.thewayofjesus.org.uk

May God bless you as you seek to know the truth and the Holy Spirit give you the means to understand the difference between truth and error.

You are probably reading this because you already have questions in your mind and have read the denominational information and are interested in to see what the evidences are. You will find many viewpoints herein. Make your choice.

The question a believer has to determine is whether or not to believe that the writings of Ellen White are in fact:-

1. The thoughts of Jesus

2. Inspired in a special way

3. Compilations of useful material

4. Or none of the above

The Seventh-day Adventist denomination states clearly in the book “Seventh-day Adventists Believe” the fundamental beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist church; that the writings of Ellen White are “a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provides for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction”. Either we accept this statement or the claims made by the proponents of Ellen White are false.

The reason this is important is as follows, a true Christian believes that Jesus and the work of the Holy Spirit are in fact our only continuing and authoritative source of truth which provides for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction. So, which is the truth on this matter. Are the claims made by the denomination and the Ellen White estates true, or are the teachings of Jesus true?

The following papers have been compiled in this easy to source material to enable the reader to decide for themselves. May God bless you as we like the saints of old study for ourselves.

The Problem of Ellen White and the Adventist Communion.

By K.J.Rosier.

The Nub of the Issue.

One Sabbath morning in the mid 1970s two American visitors came to my home church. The lessons for that quarter were on Hebrews. We had not reached very far into the lesson when the older of the two began quoting Ellen White with page references, while the younger of the two began to tell us that every time we sinned Christ bled afresh in the heavenly sanctuary. The text the younger man quoted as proof for this proposition was that there was no forgiveness of sin other than by the shedding of blood. (Hebrews 9:22) To give support to their view a few more quotes from Ellen White were given with page references. For the most part the members ignored this intrusion but after the morning service the issue was raised again.

I pointed out that when taken in context, Hebrews does not support their view, and that it clearly says that everything was covered by one atoning sacrifice for sin for all time. Therefore the blood of Christ spilt at Golgotha was complete for all sin and all sufficient. As such there was no need for him to bleed afresh, it was all done, it was completed at the cross. At this point the younger of the two produced a note book in which he had a series of quotes to the contrary apparently taken from Ellen White.

As I held my ground over what the New Testament actually taught, and rather frustrated at my refusal to accept the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy on this matter, as well as a cluster of other matters relating to the arrival of Elijah before the second coming and the re-establishment of the temple in Jerusalem, (all of which I rejected on similar grounds) he said to me, “You have a choice, you either believe in the Bible or Ellen White.” It had been already clear to me for some years that one could not have both, and my stand for the teachings of the New Testament and what the text under discussion actually said in context clearly irritated him.

I had to some degree met this before especially among American Adventists, but not quite so intense or extreme. Nevertheless, for many of my American Adventist friends, and those I spoke to in passing, the figure of Ellen White and her writings had seeped deep into their religious psyche to such an extent that whenever they tried to study the Bible, it was not long before they resorted to Ellen White as if they could not trust what they were reading in the scriptures unless it had her imprimatur found in some passage from her writings, assuming there was one to find, which is not always the case.

At Newbold College they confronted the same problem in the Pauline Epistles class. The teacher forbade the group the use of commentaries and Ellen White’s books, forcing the class to read, discuss and exegete the text of each epistle; the result was not just a revelation, the method also led to opposition since some discovered that Paul’s writings were not as Adventist friendly as they believed. In fact, for some Paul was just wrong! This was especially so when it came to the issue of the gospel (justification by faith) and the law. Usually the law, I discovered, gained ascendancy over the gospel rather than the other way round. If read properly, of course, as we were made to do, the gospel triumphed. Every one was left in no doubt that all in Christ are already saved.

The same problem, though with different students from the same part of the world, occurred in the Biblical theology lectures, especially when it came to salvation, grace and judgement. I began to realise that there was a problem within Adventism when it came to certain topics that were at the heart of biblical Christianity, but raised and living in the UK, it was to be another seven years or so before the significance and import of this attitude I had witnessed made any lasting impression on me.

Most of us took the view, and were certainly taught, that Ellen White’s writings were for devotional reading and little else, a view I still hold. For others raised under her influential tutorage she was the inspired prophetess of Adventism; its heart and soul, something other who through her visions had a personal hot line to heaven and whose writings were considered to be verbally inspired and the very last revelation of God. As one American put it to me, she was the last of the prophets, and there would be no one else. Nor did it appear could anyone else have visions or a ministry outside of her, everything filtered through her.

Reading and studying the Bible for itself to discover what was actually there was a serious problem for those brought up in and influenced by this brand of Adventism, which certainly by 1980 (seminal year of crisis for Adventists if ever there was one) was to receive a shock from which many were never to recover, except those who had a biblically centred approach to their faith and did not hold Ellen White in the emotional awe that many of those embracing traditional 1840s American Adventism seemed to do; and, despite the evidence of the way her writings were written, still do.

Some years later, after becoming increasingly aware of the theological divisions developing among the UK Adventists I spent a day in the early 1990s with those who embraced Heritage 1840s Adventism and those, like myself, who did not. They came from various and diverse Adventist congregations and among them were representatives from Gazeley, where from time to time I used to receive the publication Our Firm Foundation. It was while reading one edition of Our Firm Foundation published in 1988 that I encountered an article by Russell Standish where he said that any Adventist trusting on grace alone for salvation was being deceived and that at the end of time Christ would demand to see evidence, or proof, of one’s law keeping credentials. I had to read it twice to believe what I was reading.

The publication, at least those I received, was stuffed with Ellen White quotes to support its legalistic assertions and non-contextual misquotes from the Bible. With that in mind as well as a few other things I had read, I had some idea what I was in for. The organiser took three topics and made an attempt from Ellen White and the Bible to show that it was more the use of terms that divided us. I took the view at the time that it was more than theological semantics; there was a complete rift between those who believed that everything that Ellen White wrote and said was inspired, and those who did not.

During the discussion on the topic of What is Sin it became clear that those holding to Heritage Adventism did not believe in original sin or the full force of the fall as being total and irreversible. Sin for them was not an irreversible condition, but actions that can be overcome with God’s help. Hence, according to their theology, it was possible and essential to become sinless, and not to sin. When it was shown from Romans chapters 3 & 5 that Paul held and taught that sin was an inherent condition from the fall, and that Psalm 51:5 clearly taught that we were conceived in a state of sin, both of which they rejected, it was clear to me that we might as well have been reading of the Qur’an, and any other holy writings for the impact it made. By the end of the day nothing had been achieved to bridge the gap. For one group Ellen White was supreme and the Bible was subservient to her; for us the Bible and the Bible alone was supreme.

It was also apparent as the day progressed that apart from a few peripheral teachings that most Christians believe, the only teaching that the two groups in the room held in common was the day of worship, and the state of the dead. We could never worship together in any comfort or harmony. The meeting also reinforced the Pelagian thrust of the Heritage brand of Adventism, with its denial of original sin, and the belief that we can with God’s aid morally and spiritually develop to a point where we can become acceptable to God; a heresy that has plagued Adventism from its inception; having its origins not only in Pelagius, but also in Origen’s theodicy, whereby it was possible to achieve progressive incremental spirituality, to a point of acceptance before God on the grounds of our development towards perfection. It is, of course, a rejection of the doctrine of the fall and the total depravity of human kind, as well as the doctrine of Justification by Faith as understood and taught in Romans and Galatians. Sin for this brand of Adventism is what we do, not what we are as taught by scripture. Heritage Adventism teaches that since 1844 we have to overcome a sinful condition by being increasingly obedient to the Law; salvation is through sanctification and sanctified character development, whereby a person can reach a point where one could say that one does not sin. For others in the room, sin is an inherited mutant condition as a result of the fall of mankind, which is the very reason we do sinful acts. For this reason everything comes from a dysfunctional sinful nature requiring continuous grace and the all-embracing totality of Christ’s external vicarious righteous covering; hence the term being in (inside) Christ.

In the end we had to agree to disagree; placing some of us in opposition to the thrust of certain Ellen White quotes they regarded as sacrosanct and binding for the identity of a true Seventh-day Adventist. While in my view they were opposing and negating the key New Testament teachings that are essential and binding for the identity of a true Christian. There is a serious fundamental distance between these two houses of Adventism and it revolves around the use of Ellen White, especially many of her earlier pre-1880s statements, as an inspired authority as opposed to those who hold to the principle of Sola Scriptura.

The anecdotal incidents and conclusions cited above were symptomatic of a developing crisis that has been at the heart of Adventism for decades. In 1980 the problem came to the surface as never before, revealing more than ever how much Adventism is at war within itself and how divisive Ellen White’s legacy had become, especially when it came to official usage of her works to establish denominational authority and its claims. The key to the problem is that there is a crisis of authority within the Adventist Church.

In fact there are four contending areas of authority in Adventism:

Firstly, there is the Bible which is regarded as an authority within the parameters of denominational interpretation; much of which is found in the volumes of the SdA Bible Commentary and to some extent in the Adventist Encyclopaedia.

Secondly, there are the 28 articles of Fundamental Beliefs, which are regarded as binding and authoritative, because they are agreed and voted upon at a General Conference session that meets every five years. The most often quoted Ellen White statement about this body is that ‘the General Conference in session is the highest body next to God on earth’; a bold triumphalist claim worthy of Boniface VIII.

Thirdly, there is the authority of the Church as an ecclesiastical corporate institution in its pronouncements, policies and documents; one only has to examine the sub-text of the document on Theological and Academic Freedom and Accountability issued by the Autumn council of 1982 and re-issued a few years later, to see that the Church as an Institution sees itself in triumphalist Papal mode as an authority over what is true and not true regarding scriptural interpretation and methodology, as well as having some control over what its pastors should believe and preach and its theologians teach in its colleges and universities.

Fourthly, and most importantly, holding this entire concoction together (the glue so to speak) is the overarching authority of Ellen White and the place and role her writings have been given as an on- going authoritative source of truth, comfort and ultimate point of reference where the faith is concerned.

Effectively, she is the Adventist equivalent of the Talmud. In fact, no part of official Adventist understanding or interpretation can escape her touch or stand alone from her. She is the one to whose writings (what’s been published of them) every member can go to and quote from with impunity when the Denomination is scripturally challenged (as on many occasions it has been both from within and without) and in need of officially bolstering up its traditional claims, historical prophetic validity, positions and distinctive teachings. The dictum is: When in doubt quote from her and promote her. Quoted and promoted she is.

The dominance described above, in number 4 regarding the role and authority of Ellen White can be easily demonstrated initially in article 17 of the 27 articles of Fundamental Beliefs published in 1980 after the Dallas G.C Session, and republished as article 18 of the now 28 articles after the 2010 G.C. Session. The fundamental crisis of authority in what Seventh-day Adventists believe is found in two articles where a tension exists between the authority and purpose of scripture and the ‘ongoing authority’ and purpose of Ellen White’s writings along side scripture; the latter of which having never before 1980 been mandatory for all Adventist to accept if they wish to become or remain functioning members of the Seventh-day Adventist Communion.

The problem of her place and the role of her writings in Seventh-day Adventism certainly predated 1980. As early as 1919 at the famous Bible Conference called by Daniels, there was a wide ranging discussion over the question as to what Ellen White’s role should be, and what attitude to take regarding the large and varied corpus of her work? Reading through the minutes of that specific session, published in Spectrum, it is clear that those who knew her were aware of how her books and articles had been put together and the sources she used from her library and elsewhere to compile them. They were also aware of the general view held among the members that everything she wrote was directly inspired, especially the letters forming the nine volumes of the Testimonies. This perception which had certainly been encouraged in her life time was known to be false, or at best exaggerated, especially when it came to the content of such works as Patriarchs and Prophets, Prophets and Kings, Desire of Ages and The Great Controversy, along with some of her other productions.

It is significant that Daniels rejected the idea that the Adventist Communion should treat her with the same veneration as the Mormons treated Joseph Smith and his corpus of writings, including The Book of Mormon, a route he considered very dangerous, and unwarranted. There was also a proposal by Prescott to ‘come clean’ over the way she wrote, the help that she had received in writing her books and articles, and her use of various sources. Moreover, by proposing this Prescott was also suggesting that they tell the membership what had been going on behind the scenes, especially the role of her associates, such as Marion Davis, and their work in writing and compiling the information for these publications which were put into the public domain under Ellen White’s name, as if she was the sole author. Prescott was in a good position to propose this because he, amongst others, had some influence in the contents and direction of Desire of Ages, published in 1911.

Prescott’s proposal was rejected partly because her son W.C. White did not want to explain the extent of his mother’s activities and partly because he did not want a Denominational crisis in his time. Apart from that, such a revelation would have threatened her reputation among the members and the standing of the newly established White Estate, which provided a continuous income for the White family. Significantly, Daniels, who had been President of the General Conference since 1901, lost the nomination to remain in that Office during a very acrimonious G.C. session in 1922 because it was generally believed that he did not believe in the Testimonies. Effectively the members and the more conservative elements in the Denomination turned on him in part because of his perceived attitude towards White’s writings and her role inside the Denomination. It was an omen of what was to come and the direction the Denomination was ultimately to take.

So the ‘myth’ surrounding her was allowed to continue; a myth that over some four decades was publically reinforced, developed and propagated by her grandson Arthur White, as he wrote about her, preached about her and edited one compilation after another of his grandmother’s writings. In one such sermon, which I heard in 1974, he referred to her as if she was one of canonical prophets; a latter day Moses, leading the remnant people of God heavenward, and whose prophetic vision was of such an order that it was virtually infallible. Behind the rhetoric and appeals to her was the thinly veiled view that outside of her and the Remnant Church centred on her, there was no salvation, only darkness and ignorance; a view that stretched not only to the outside world, but to all the other ‘fallen’ Sunday keeping Christian churches that the angel in Revelation 18:4 had been calling since 1844 into the Adventist Remnant Church.

In the Review he published an article in 1971 which really showed his colours, declaring that she was for the Adventist Communion ‘the final court of appeal’ rather than the Bible. Arthur White even regarded her writings as superior to that of the Bible because we had in her case the inspired original autographs, whereas with the Bible we did not. This observation, of course, placed her works and personal spiritual authority in an extraordinary high position. It also meant that appeals to Scripture could never be solely used to establish doctrine, or critically evaluate denominational teaching; that role belonged essentially to her with the Bible playing a secondary role. What is worse is that this attitude placed her writings in the minds of many beyond the reach and critical evaluation of scriptural authority; officially her writings would never be judged by the Biblical Canon, and never, to my knowledge, have been, as least officially.

By making such an extraordinary proposition, which no other Protestant Communion claiming to be Christian has ever made for the writings of one of its own influential early members, Arthur White affectively turned the Seventh-day Adventist Communion into a community with her writings at its heart; the very opposite to what Daniels in 1919 believed should be done. It also placed the Communion in a very difficult position with other Christian denominations, for by placing Ellen White’s writings at the centre of Adventism the Communion could not easily defend itself against the charge of being a Cult; a point devastatingly demonstrated in the mauling Walter Martin gave William Johnsson, editor of the Review, during one of the editions of the Ankerberg Show in the early1980s; an encounter that can be embarrassingly witnessed on U-tube.

Ignoring external and internal concerns, for the most part, and Daniel’s warning in particular, it would take another 61 years before the Denomination officially closed the circle at the Dallas General Conference Session in April 1980. By adding her authority and her writings as an article of faith, they officially made acceptance of her as a latter day prophetess, and her writings, now given quasi- canonical status, a test of fellowship. From that moment onward, any member who did not accept the authority of Ellen White and her edited writings published by the White Estate as the true Spirit of Prophecy, according to the interpretation given to Revelation 12:17: 14:12 and especially 19:10 might as well leave and worship in some other community, and should certainly not be employed by the Denomination.

The significance of this development is that since 1980, to remain a Seventh-day Adventist as defined by the official articles of faith, it is no longer sufficient to be a Sabbatarian Christian or just to believe in Christ as Lord and Saviour, his Gospel, the second coming, the resurrection, or any part of the Bible for that matter, as the ultimate source of inspired truth and the final court of appeal for faith and practice. Despite the article on the role and authority of scripture and shallow references to scriptural texts (mostly out of context) to support some of the doctrinal positions found in the articles of faith, officially, Sola Scriptura, as a principle for Adventists, died at Dallas and was given its funeral at the contentious Glacier View Conference in August 1980. Since then, the principle has never been resurrected, save in lip service type comments, nor the high position Ellen White’s writings for Adventists reversed.

There is, however, one further note of warning from the 1919 Bible Conference; this too came from Prescott. The reason he wanted the members to be told about how her books and articles were written was because he believed that if they did not do so then, at some future date someone, after they were long gone, would discover the truth and the Communion would be thrown into a more serious crisis than would have occurred in 1919. His warning was to be prophetic. Ironically that too was to take another 61 years before it came true.

The man who discovered the truth was Walter Rae, whose journey, in part, towards his discovery has been published in his own words in this compilation, along with some key chapters from his book The White Lie published on the internet. According to his own testimony, which I heard on a tape, before reading his book, Rae became an expert on Ellen White and her writings. He even wrote a book for use in Adventist schools and colleges. He grew up with and believed in the propaganda coming out of the White Estate, and regarded her writings as the Spirit of Prophecy mentioned in Revelation 19:10 and therefore an inspired authority for Adventists.

No doubt he also believed as many Adventists did, and some still do, that Ellen White did not read too many books and that she would place the books she bought, or had been given, on the so called ‘high shelf’ only to find that after she had written her own account that it was remarkably similar to what was in the book she had placed on the ‘high shelf’. This was certainly how it was presented to anyone studying about her in Denominational history as taught in any of the Denomination’s schools and colleges.

The belief that she wrote as the spirit moved with hardly any reference to human sources persisted, and still persists among the wider membership, who were, and still are, encouraged to believe that she, and she alone, ‘spoke for God’, and is ‘the very mouth piece of Christ’, let alone the ‘final revelation of God for our time’; a position claimed in the Week of Prayer readings in the early 1990s. It therefore came as something of a shock for Rae during the late 1970s to realise that more earthly sources, other hands and a great deal of reading, copying and material manipulation from a variety of books lay at the root of White’s writings including the copying of some of her so called visions from others, especially William Foy.

As he came across books long out of print that were known to have been in her library and he was surprised to find that he was reading whole passages and pages of writing that were very familiar to him in her writings. He also discovered that in many cases she and her associates directly lifted sentences and paragraphs from these works and became quite skilful at paraphrasing or altering the word order while keeping the thought of the sentences being used. He was able to place the text of the original books next to the text of her books to show the extent of the copying and the methodology used.

There was no reference made to these other books, either in her publications or in those works published under her name, but written and compiled by others in her writing team. Instead, a false perception was allowed to develop around her persona, which has persisted to this day among a membership weaned on her writings and uncritical of the official view of the White Estate and the General Conference. Despite the evidence, and the acknowledgement of the extent of her literary dependency, both at the Glendale Conference convened in 1980 to examine Rae’s discoveries and in an official report in two parts by Dr. Fred Veltmann, published in the Ministry in the early 1990s, the official status quo has continued as if these discoveries and critical evaluations had never taken place.

Even Veltmann, after acknowledging that she possessed an extensive well informed library and concluded that the evidence against her was such that it could do nothing but inflict irreparable damage to her reputation. Rea concluded that apart from her letters and perhaps Early Writings everything else, even her most quotable quotes, came from other writers.

Concerning her visions and their true source and influence, the debate remains alive. While in the early 1850s James White did not doubt that his wife was having visions, he made a strong rebuttal against those who claimed that Adventist teachings were being taken from her experiences. He regarded these experiences as her business, but that the doctrinal positions were firmly based in scripture alone. Even Uriah Smith took the view that she had had some remarkable spiritual experiences, but there is no evidence that he allowed them to inform his editorials for the Review, let alone have any influence on the erroneous stance he took on the atonement, and his persistent Arianism concerning the nature of Christ; views which differed from hers, and which he believed and propagated until his death in 1903. Canwright, on the other hand, was very critical from the start, especially since he realised that James White was editing and correcting copies of his wife’s visionary experiences for publication. We, apparently, do not have a single vision of hers that has not been edited in one way or another.

The view about the source of her visionary experiences was not seriously challenged from a medical perspective until the early 1980s when one of the most intriguing and sensitive papers, with pages of footnotes and references, was published by an Adventist neurologist. Looking at the medical evidence and cases he knew as a medical practitioner, he concluded that she suffered from an over active frontal lobe which had been damaged when as a child she was hit in the face by a stone. He concluded that many of these visions and experiences were part of her mental condition and that Adventists were going to have to face the fact that there was no hot line to and from heaven. While it is true that God could use even a damaged frontal lobe, the fact is that those who have this condition do experience a far higher dream count, dreams which appear to the recipient to be vivid and real, and are hence prone of visionary type experiences.

It is also true that visionary activity was not uncommon in the 1820-40s. After all William Foy amongst others claimed to experience visions, and in Derbyshire at around the same time a certain Annie Southcott wrote down her visionary experiences, many of them of an apocalyptic nature. She even formed her last day remnant in anticipation of the second coming and the end of the world, the entire congregation initially made up of women, no men being allowed. As far as I know she did not have a damaged frontal lobe, but it was certainly active.

Whether or not the visions of Ellen White were from God is not the real issue. All that comes from God conforms to scripture and the testimony within scripture and so has to be tested by scripture. John in 1 John 4:1-3 tells us to test the spirits; in other words test everything by the Word. That means it has to conform to the testimony of Christ and the apostles as found in scripture; though John’s initial concern was the false teaching of Gnosticism which denied the human nature of Christ. However, as a principle, it is applicable to any who claim to have a message from God for the Church. Ellen White, on the other hand, has been officially placed above the Word, which, apart from the unofficial work of individuals making scriptural judgements, makes it very difficult and almost impossible to get any such serious critical evaluation from the Denominational leadership, let alone the White Estate, of the visionary material she left behind. The assumption they make is that what she wrote always conformed to scripture. Walter Martin in the late 1950 discovered, while going through her unedited writings in the White Estate, that this was not the case. The rule of scripture is clear; anyone who claims to have a prophetic ministry, let alone visionary experiences and messages from a divine source, must be subject to scripture, and not to a manufactured sectarian yardstick of tradition supported by emotion and self interest.

As to the percentage of these borrowings found in her works, the figures given by Rae and the Denomination differ widely. But quibbling over percentages is not the point. We know, for example, that her Christology was influenced by Melville’s sermons, and that much of the Desire of Ages was taken from Hannah’s Life of Christ. We also know that much of the material for her book Sketches from the Life of Paul was lifted from Conybear and Housen’s study of Paul’s life and missionary journeys, resulting in a threat of legal action from the publishers. We also know that Steps to Christ a book widely admired, and justly so, was primarily the work of Marion Davis, one of her closest associates until she made the mistake of telling Kellogg’s sister about what they were doing and her misgivings; an indiscretion that led her to being dismissed. In his tape, Rae referred to White as an ‘inspired compiler’, who, as he put it, ‘went to Egypt to buy some corn’, but in reality Ellen White and her associates practiced a knowing and deliberate deceit, which has not only backfired, but has become unfortunately a curse for Adventism, rather than the spiritual aid these books were initially no doubt intended to be.

In itself, referring to other authors and their work, to write a book is not a crime, academics do it all the time, except that they acknowledge the sources and carefully reference everything including thoughts arising from a source. They also review the existing primary sources as well as any other new discoveries so that they can correct perceptions and conceive informed insights that previous authors might have missed; this is perfectly legitimate.

The real accusation that can be laid against Ellen White and her team of associates is that they not only failed to acknowledge the sources they were using, and not only copied carte-blanch from these sources, but allowed a perception to be developed in the minds of the membership that everything written either came directly or indirectly from God, including in some cases visionary activity, when in fact it did not. None of Ellen White’s works would have received the veneration they did, and still do, if it had been revealed from the outset that she and her team were copying and paraphrasing from a wide variety of human sources; even taking historical errors into her texts from these sources without any apparent Divine correction, as a study of the chapter on Jan Huss in Great Controversy revealed, amongst others. To claim that God was directly or indirectly responsible for these works is to argue that God, who knows the history of man in minute personal detail, deliberately made, or allowed, historical mistakes, even when He must have known the truth. Such a reality makes the claim for her works as being of a Divine origin risible.

What is worse is that the White Estate supported by the General Conference and the most widely read Church periodical the Review, has continued to support the status quo, even resorting to lies and character assassination where this issue is concerned. This is for the most part because it is believed that by the discovery of the deceit and duplicity involved in Ellen White’s writing activities, the entire validity and claim of the Adventist Communion as something unique and special is as stake. Or to put it another way, the entire validity and claim of what I term ‘Traditional or Heritage or American Adventism’, as expressed by the White Estate, and supported by the General Conference through the official publications of the Denomination, is at stake; the Denomination having invested very heavily in its own propaganda, while linking its narrative and existence to that propaganda.

If this is the case, and I believe it to be so, then it is time for a serious open discussion about these matters so that the wider membership might ask the question as to the purpose of the Seventh-day Adventist Communion as a supposed Christian Denomination; for it cannot hold together or claim to be Christian, in the truest sense of the term, when it denies Scripture as the final ultimate authority by which everything, including the works of Ellen White, has to be tested. Nor in the present age can the Denomination censor information on this issue flowing through the internet, or act like a man trying to swat plague of flies. Nor will any number of official declarations and protests in the official church publications or on the Adventist websites succeed in assuaging the situation that the Denomination’s leaders have over the past decades created. The leadership has dug a massive whole for itself and the best policy is to stop digging and reflect on the damage.

It is significant that the main topic of discussion, contention and aggravation on the Adventist Online Blog is Ellen White, her role and her works. At the moment the official view of her is under serious attack by members of the Communion who have seen the light, read the materials and refuse to be fooled. Equally, the internet has now given members and ex-members a means of protesting and publishing a mass of information online that cannot be so easily ignored and is open to a worldwide non-Adventist public.

As for the question of plagiarism, the defence made by the General Conference and the White Estate, (also posted on the internet, and put into this compilation) is unconvincing and for all the legal language and clever argument does nothing but turn the dictionary definition of the word on its head. To plagiarise is to take someone else’s work in whole or in part and pass it off as one’s own. This is exactly what White and her associates did. Worse still, as already mentioned, they claimed a higher authorship for what they took from other authors. This is not just plagiarism it is serious deception; a lie which brings the name of God into the deceit and in disrepute.

A Communion that allows itself to be based on such a deception, regardless as to how humanistic and altruistic that Communion may be, cannot call itself strictly Christian, or uphold Christ, when it perpetuates and defends deceit for its own sectarian and financial interests. The Communion also cannot complain about Rome and its own claims via a multiplicity of extra-biblical sources and authorities, (the writings of the Church Fathers, various declarations from Church Councils and Papal encyclicals) when the Adventist Communion in principle is doing the same and has also structured itself corporately and authoritatively in Rome’s image.

Further Problems: the Exclusive Claim for Ellen White as the Spirit of Prophecy and the Authoritative use of Her Writings in that Guise.

For anyone interested in tracing the history of Seventh-day Adventism from the 1840s onwards one runs into one problem after another where attempts have been made to re-orientate the Communion towards the authority of the Apostolic kerygma, or ‘Apostolic verities’ as the Adventist scholar L. E. Froome liked to call them. In simple terms, what Jesus taught we should believe and teach. Since the late 1840s there developed a collective tradition of thinking and distinctive doctrinal acceptance and interpretation, along with the development of a sectarian narrative rooted to prophetic history. Much of this was supported from time to time by Ellen White, even if she was not the originator, making any later attempt to reform misconceptions and re-think biblical issues difficult to consider; let alone turn into something that other informed biblically literate Christians can recognise as sound.

As already mentioned above, there is no doubt that James White considered his wife’s visionary activities and writings to be quite separate from any biblical discussions and conclusions the Adventist group might consider. As noted above, he said as much in one of the Reviews of the early 1850s when critics claimed that Adventist teachings were coming from her visions. This he firmly rejected. Even so, when Uriah Smith proposed the Investigative Judgement innovation claiming that it took place during the Day of Atonement, and had been in operation in the heavenly sanctuary since October 22nd 1844, James White wrote against it, claiming that there was no biblical evidence for such a teaching. His wife, however, endorsed it. In the end James White lost. Smith and Crozier’s version of events supported by Ellen White prevailed; the Denomination has been living with the legacy of this innovation in its various incarnations which number eight at the last count, ever since. It appears in its original form in the erroneous judgement chapter of Great Controversy, published in 1888.

While Ellen White at the famous G.C. session at Minneapolis in 1888 appears to have given some support for Waggoner and Jones’ teaching about Righteousness by Faith, a teaching that at the time was defined as the righteousness of Christ being infused into the believer, she did not realised that infused righteousness was close to a Roman Catholic understanding of infused grace and was tainted by pantheism. A legalistic framework also persisted by which Christ gave the person the righteousness required to obey the law; hence believers could be perfect because they imbibed Christ’s righteousness within themselves. Whether she entirely endorsed their position, or spied its pantheistic implications, is unclear, but to this day those embracing so called Heritage and traditional Adventism believe that she did endorse it and that this understanding of Righteousness by Faith, is true, despite its serious inadequacies and defects when judged by Paul’s teaching in Romans and Galatians. It is interesting that over such a vital matter that is central in the epistles to salvation and our standing with God, she appears to have had no divine communication to correct these two men. Confusion over the gospel in Adventism for the most part remains to this day; a point lamented by William Johnson in his book The Fragmenting of Adventism, as well as in an article for Ministry published in the 1990s.

However, the most intriguing clash in print between those who attempted to shift the Adventist Communion from its traditional interpretations towards a more mainstream Christ centred understanding and those determined to defend the traditional doctrinal status quo and particularly the authority of Ellen White, can be discovered in M.L. Andraesen’s Letters to the Churches published in 1959. Froome in an edition of Ministry published in 1957 gave an account of the agreed conclusions that had come about as a result of lengthy discussions with Donald Barnhouse and Walter Martin, co- editors of Eternity, and other evangelicals. What Andraesen read he regarded as a total betrayal of the Church he believed in and had doctrinally supported as an influential teacher and writer. What really caused offence and lay at the heart of his series of blistering epistles was the statement that it was agreed that the Bible and the Bible only was the final authoritative source for faith and practice among Adventists.

Andraesen argued that it was impossible for the Bible to be the final authority because that ‘downgraded’ the authority of Ellen White and the Spirit of Prophecy, the general term for her writings. He also pointed out that the Adventist Church had through Ellen White been given special light, a special last day message and that all the other Christian denominations had to come to her to discover the true last day message, which only the Adventist Church possessed and was not necessarily found in the Bible.

Further, he argued that the fact that other Christians used their Bibles to criticise Adventists was missing the point. The fact that the Bible did not necessarily support all the teachings of Adventism, sinless perfection for example, was irrelevant because as a people we had a new final authority with a new understanding that had come about since 1844. Everything now, including scripture had to be understood and interpreted in the light of the events of 1844, especially Hebrews. He also admitted that appealing to the Apostolic Church and the documents of the New Testament (in other words Jesus Christ who is our Lord and Saviour) alone was pointless, since the Adventist Communion had nothing to do with what was understood in the past regarding salvation; all had changed after the anti- typical Day of Atonement on the 22nd October 1844. We were, so to speak, in a new dispensation whereby sinless perfect was now possible.

Support for the above came with selective quotes from Ellen White, which he also used to undermine the other two offending positions cited in Froome’s article; firstly, that the atonement was completed at the cross, and secondly, that Christ had a sinless unpolluted nature. Andraesen denied the first proposition on the grounds that traditionally the opposite had been taught. His objection was that if Christ made a final and complete atonement on the cross, then no such final atonement could have taken place in 1844, whereby the heritage position taught is that Christ moved from the first to the second apartment in the heavenly sanctuary to begin his ministry of investigative judgement. The ‘new theology’, as he called it, undermined the very reason for the Adventist Church’s existence, and undermined a key distinctive teaching that was endorsed by Ellen White. To accept the new position was to undermine her doctrinal authority and to question the source of her writings and visionary experiences.

His objection to the second proposition, that Christ had a sinless nature, was that Ellen White taught the opposite and that Christ was primarily our example showing us how to become morally perfect, and sinless, as was required for the last generation to face and survive the end time judgement of God. In fact, Andraesen insisted that Christ had to have a nature just like us, sinful, to show us how to become perfect (sinless). He argued that Christ had to be just like we are to be an effective saviour, a model for us to follow and perfectly emulate. He quoted and misinterpreted texts from Romans and Hebrews, to prove his case.

Salvation, he insisted, now rested since 1844 on the divinely aided capacity of the every believer to become perfect. That is to ensure the overcoming of all sin so that sins held against one could be blotted out from the heavenly record. This was essential, as was the emulation of Christ perfect nature, if a person was to be prepared for the second coming. He quoted from Desire of Ages, and other publications of White’s to prove his point, including the official hand book for Bible Study in the Home Circle, published in the early 1940s, where it does clearly state that Christ had a sinful nature by which he showed us how to overcome our sinful natures and thus become perfect. The ‘new Christology’ as found in Froom’s Ministry article was, he declared, un-Adventist and against revelation as shown through Ellen White. Again her doctrinal authority was he believed being undermined.

Andraesen even published a reply from a G.C. officer who agreed with him that the basis and authority for Adventists teachings came from Ellen White’s writings. He concluded that if Froome and the G.C. at that time, believed what they had agreed to in their numerous meetings with Barnhouse, Martin and others, they were not only undermining Ellen White as a source of Divine truth and denying the Divine light given to the Communion, but were leading the Church into perdition by denying what the Spirit of Prophecy had clearly taught since 1844, regardless as to scriptural authority to the contrary. He also called for the resignation of the entire leadership of the General Conference.

Any one reading through Andraesen’s Letters to the Churches can see with hindsight the seeds of the present crisis with the rise of Heritage 1840s Adventism and its variants, along with the present well- drawn battle lines over the issue of Ellen White’s writings and authority, as an arbiter of doctrine and the yardstick by which all statements of belief are to be measured and tested. However, despite objections to her writings, made by Canwright, arguably, the real objection to 1844 and the sanctuary teaching began in 1905 with Ballanger’s letter to Ellen White, to which he never received a reply. Since then others have raised their objections to this unbiblical sanctuary doctrine both in its original form as well as in the compromise innovation in Questions of Doctrine whereby we have a two phase ministry in heaven, rather than any physical movement, the second phase of which began in 1844.

The solution, as demonstrated by the General Conference Biblical Research Committee in the 1980s, is still to use Ellen White to support the modified position, and to distort Hebrews, by making the text conform to traditional Adventist teaching, as did Andraesen, while using the inadequate proof text method in its support. When read in context, the texts do not support what they claim. For all the arguments to the contrary, the thrust of the sanctuary teaching and 1844 has remained in place largely because of White’s endorsement of Smith, and a few Biblical texts taken out of context, supported by the belief that if this teaching can be seriously undermined then the Adventist Communion might as well cease to exist; this attitude of mind unfortunately ties the Adventist Church to a single teaching and the interpretation of a date supported by Ellen White for its continued validity.

According to the late Raymond Cottrell, even in the secret sanctuary committee, on which he sat, and that met on and off for five years in the early 1960s, there was a division of opinion; while agreeing that there was no biblical evidence for the traditional 1844 sanctuary-investigative judgement teaching, they reported back, much against his better judgement, that the teaching ought to be believed and held by the Denomination because White taught it. This was despite taking evidence from the Hebrew and Greek scholars of the Denomination who told them that the teaching could not be linguistically and contextually supported. In the end Ellen White’s position prevailed even against the Hebrew and Greek text of scripture. When one ponders on this situation, and the high position she has been given, it’s a wonder why any Adventist in the Heritage and Traditional school of thought bothers to study the Bible at all, beyond a handful of useful texts, when all that is required is to read and extrapolate quotes from what Ellen White wrote and believed.

Later, of course, in the 1960s-70s the Denomination battled with the perfectionist Wakening Movement led by Robert Brinsmead. He too marshalled a vast amount of material from Ellen White to establish and propagate his perfectionist case. The reason the Denomination’s leadership opposed him was not because of his theology, much of which they themselves leaned towards since he was quoting from her, but rather that his activities were disturbing the membership and creating a wide division of opinion, especially in Australia. Hence, Brinsmead was for a time, through his use of Ellen White and the authority of her writings, able to advance an erroneous way of thinking that he later renounced, when he was brought to his biblical senses.

This, of course, is what happens when one believes in the authority of a person whose extra-biblical writings are given more weight than they ought over matters of scripture and doctrine. It is also what happens when the idea of inspiration and the term Spirit of Prophecy is narrowed down to the activities and writings of a single person who lived from 1827-1915 to the exclusion of everyone else, even the Bible itself. She is, of course, embedded in the prophetic and remnant claim of the Denomination as a fulfilment of Revelation 12:17, 14:12 & 19:10, and as a mark of the last day Remnant Church; a position that when read within the context of the entire book of Revelation, (as well as elsewhere in the New Testament Canon) is untenable and flies in the face of the New Covenant provision and Christ’s teaching regarding the nature and definition of His Church, yet alone a few other vital matters.

The Issue of the Spirit of Prophecy.

Generally speaking, for decades Ellen White’s writings have come under the heading of spiritual gifts, or the Spirit of Prophecy. There is nothing wrong with asking members to believe in the gifts of the spirit, the problem is the narrow definition and application given by the Denomination. Every Adventist publication concentrating on Spiritual Gifts focuses on the spiritual claim made for Ellen White’s writings and visionary experiences as evidence of her being a latter-day prophetess and therefore proof that the Adventist Church is the true last day Remnant Church of Revelation.

The assumption behind the claim is not only that Ellen White demonstrated these gifts, but that only her writings constitute what is meant by the Spirit of Prophecy or the Testimony of Jesus in Revelation 12:17 & 19:10b. If this is the case, then the Christian Church has been without these gifts and devoid of the Spirit of Prophecy and therefore, the testimony or faith of Jesus, from the end of the Apostolic Age until almost the mid 19th century, with a few acknowledged lesser moments in between, such as Wycliffe, Huss, Luther and Calvin; these men being regarded as forerunners of the gift’s final revelation and demonstration in the guise and ministry of Ellen White, but no more than that.

However, this is not a credible position and makes little sense when one reads Revelation as an extended apocalyptic letter written by the exiled John on Patmos to 7 contemporary churches situated in the western provinces of Asia Minor towards the end of the 1st century AD. It is a letter that clearly states from the beginning that it is ‘the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ’. As such the entire book is a clear example of the Spirit of Prophecy in action, a point reinforced within the text of Revelation. The testimony or faith of Jesus according the John is not only what comes from Jesus as his last word or prophetic testimony to the church, but is also what the community of grace receives via the Holy Spirit and defends before a largely pagan and apostate world in any age up to the second coming.

Without the presence of the Holy Spirit we cannot know Christ, nor hear his voice. Nor can we understand, let alone preach and teach with any conviction, his gospel. The faith of Jesus and the presence of the Spirit of Prophecy which every believer possesses and demonstrates when Christ is upheld and has been present since the Day of Pentecost, (Acts 2) when the Holy Spirit was outpoured upon everyone present in the upper room, male and female; an outpouring which was associated with Jesus, after completing his work of atonement and redemption, taking his seat next to the Father; as is made clear in Hebrews 1:1-3, and stated by Peter in Acts 2:33, where the event of Christ being exalted next to the Father and the out pouring of the Holy Spirit are seen as commensurate.

So the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter [(Greek) Paracletos] promised by Jesus to his disciples in John 14:16,17 and 16:7-11, is given universal expression and fulfilment at the Feast of Pentecost, in harmony with Joel’s prophecy that the Spirit, ‘In the last days’ being from that time forward, would be poured out, on young and old, male and female without exception and they would see visions. This outpouring associated with Christ taking his seat in heaven begins the last days, and is an eschatological moment. From now on we would be living in the Age of the Spirit, who testifies to Jesus within the hearts and minds of every believer in generation to the consummation of the end of time.

Peter in his speech, quoting from Joel 2:28-32 says as much as he delivers the Kerygma of the Church, which is a Credo type witness concerning Jesus, who he was and is, his ministry, death, resurrection, his exultation to the right hand of the Father and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as proof of his enthronement, so to speak. As such by implication and in reality, in this last age all believers have direct access to the throne of grace, and all who accepted the gospel of Christ and repented there and then, at that very moment have their sins wiped out and their status instantaneously changed, moving spiritually from death to life.

In Acts 3:19 Peter makes this clear during his second speech delivered after the healing of the paralytic, a few days later. Peter associated the immediate blotting, or wiping out, of their sins as a present action and a reality the moment they turned to and accepted Christ as Lord and Saviour, not at some future date in history; a concept about which he has no knowledge of and is not taught in the Apostolic kerygma. In other words, every person who joined by faith the community of Christ accepting him as their Lord and Saviour became instantaneously a justified, wholly acquitted, righteously person covered by Christ’s perfection and is an adopted child of God. As such by that profession of faith they received a saved righteous status in Christ. All they had to do was to remain in him by faith and trust in him for their salvation. A reality that leads to witnessing for him with assurance and confidence.

Equally, according to Paul, writing in Ephesians 1:13-14, to the Ephesian gentile believers, the moment they accepted the gospel they were immediately included in Christ and sealed, there and then, with his mark which he says is the presence of the Holy Spirit. So the seal of Christ is the presence of the Holy Spirit working and operating in the life of every believer. In fact Paul in Ephesians 2:6 goes much further, for he states that all who are in Christ have been as it were raised up with him and are now, in Him, seated with him in the heavenly realms, where of course He is their (and our) representative and intercessor. In other words, we are by proxy in Christ seated with him next to the Father; that is how close the relationship between the believer and the Godhead has become as a result of what Jesus did for us and the continuous presence of the Holy Spirit dwelling in our personal sanctuaries.

Paul knows nothing of a heavenly sanctuary as defined in the 1844 sanctuary judgement teaching; nor does he know of an investigative judgement to see who is worthy of salvation. According to scripture, no one is worthy of salvation, or since the fall of mankind has been unable to achieve worthiness as everything is of Christ alone outside of whom everything is dust. The proposition devised by the early Adventists would seem incongruous with the gospel as understood and propagated by the apostles and Jesus himself. After all it is impossible to reconcile the 1844 sanctuary judgement message with either Jesus’ judgement statements, as found in John 3:18, 3:35-36 & 5:24-27, whereby he places himself and his actions for us at the centre and challenges us to come to him for eternal life to receive the judgement of life rather than condemnation, or Paul’s clear statement that ‘there is no condemnation for those who are in (into) Christ’. Those that do come and believe are no longer under any condemnation, they have the judgement stacked in their favour; they also constitute the true Church or ‘called out ones’ in any century since Jesus’ ministry and the Golgotha event. John’s statement in Revelation 14:13 “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord, from now on.”, resonates with a hope rooted in the fact that they as part of his Body have gone into the grave with Christ’s mark upon them as adopted saints and will rise in the first resurrection. It is at that moment when we are changed in a twinkling of an eye, from mortal to immortality that we gain perfection, and not till then.

A church, whatever its name or claims, that teaches otherwise is by scriptural definition not the true church and is outside Christ and under a different judgement; a judgement that is provoked by the inference that Jesus, and so Paul, either did not know what they were talking about, or that Jesus from the beginning was very economical with the truth about how a person is saved and so mislead Paul who claims in Galatians to have received the gospel from Christ himself. I leave the reader to contemplate the seriousness of this conclusion. .

According to the New Testament, and the apostolic kerygma, the Church, (Greek ekklesia, ‘the called out ones’) is by definition at any point in time since Pentecost, a called out community of believers who are already saved, already have the seal of God and are inside Christ seated by proxy where he is and has been since his ascension. As such, every member is an effective witness operating individually and collectively the Spirit of Prophecy; that is the presence of the Holy Spirit by which they are able to stand for Jesus and articulate (witness for) and defend the faith of Jesus. This is what is shown in Revelation 14:12 and defined in 12:17 and 19:10.

As with all three texts they have a context and to remove them from that context so giving them a limited historical shift narrowing the wider universal intention for sectarian purposes is to debase the force of their meaning and diminish the way they reinforce a clear marker between the unregenerate world under the control of Satan and those who are at any time in post-Golgotha history holding to the faith of Christ as members of his Body. It must also be remembered that Revelation is initially written against the backcloth of the enforcement of emperor worship, which the community of Christ holding to Christ’s faith and the commandments of God refused to accept, hence marking them out for persecution through social ostracism and economic discrimination.

In Revelation 12:17 the context is very clear. Satan, who is seen as a type of hydra, with dominion, authority and power, the source of evil, sin and death, symbolised by the colour of red, is defeated by the Christ child. The woman is a composite image. Firstly, she is the means by which the incarnation took place, a reference to Mary, and secondly, she is the Church and its congregations, the spouse of which Christ is the head; these communities of grace are attacked by the defeated Satan. As he cannot destroy the Church (the Woman) symbolically fleeing into the desert, a place of refuge and security, (as happened to the Christ child to escape from Herod) and because he cannot unpick Golgotha, Satan strikes at the offspring, the individual congregations by two methods spoken of in Revelation 13, and already established in the experience of the 7 churches in chapters 2-3 of Revelation.

The first is by external violent persecution and force through the State. The second is by ransacking the various congregations from within by more subtle strategies that, if possible, wean them gradually from Christ and his gospel, while maintaining some ethical and religious identity as Christians; a mode of Christian formalism, buttressed by humanistic, charitable and social activity is in evidence, but the congregation has lost its salvatic content and in reality for all the fine words has lost Christ. Only Smyrna and Philadelphia really stand, despite loss and discrimination; the rest for all their efforts, especially Sardis, a dead congregation on autopilot stifled by paralytic non-effort, are in various states of failure and denial where their spiritual condition is concerned.

This is, of course, what Jesus warned of in his Olivet sermon. They were to beware of false Christ’s and by implication false prophets and teachings that would undermine their faith in the all-sufficiency of Christ and the true gospel. The true community on the other hand would be one that despite all remains in the Spirit of the testimony while holding firmly to God’s commands, which is at its core to worship Him alone as creator and saviour, and to hold to the testimony of Jesus, which is the gospel faith, regardless of what is brought against them at the behest of an enraged and defeated Satan. Revelation 12:17 identifies and defines the true community of Christ at any time in history, not just at a specific point in time. It is clear that Satan has not been making war on the Church physically and spiritually since 1844.This crisis began after Golgotha and has continued in waves of intensity and subtly ever since.

If we examine the context of Revelation 14:12, it is clear again that there is a contrast between those who are pagans and anti-Christ, who receive the mark of the Beast (Satan) in its two manifestations, the forehead and the hand, and those of the ekklesia (called out ones), who receive the seal and mark of Christ and the Father which is always in the forehead, representing reasoning and mental assent. Again this is not something that is future referring to some special sealing event in prophetic time; rather it is ongoing and applies to every generation since Christ took his seat next to the Father in the 1st century to begin his on going ministry of intercession until he comes for his own at the end of time.

The three angles messages is not for the Church, but for the unregenerate world calling all to repent, worship the true creator God and to receive the eternal gospel of life, embodied in Christ. By making a decision (judgement) for Christ, they remove themselves from a world, defined as Babylon; a world, like its originator, which has already been in Christ’s death and resurrection judged to death and under notice. The tense is present, that is from the time it was written forward; ‘Babylon is fallen’, a last day statement of Divine decision and reality where the world is concerned; it is finished. The gospel call is made so that they may leave what is under notice and move symbolically speaking to mount Zion, the place of security and salvation, with the Lamb (Christ), the One who has saved and sealed them for eternity, in their midst. Revelation 14:1 is a picture of the entire saved community of Christ (144,000) sealed, adopted and co-opted into Him with His and the Father’s name upon them. Again this is in stark contrast to the mark of the Beast, the mark of Satan, to whom those outside of Christ belong, wittingly or unwittingly.

As for Revelation 19:10 the same argument and identity of the ekklesia is repeated. We also have a definition of what the Spirit of Prophecy is; it is the testimony of Jesus, which is also a definition of the entire text of Revelation since it is about Jesus, who is at the epicentre of prophecy. Connecting the three verses together, it is clear that the testimony is also the true eternal gospel which characterises the true community of grace, as a people who throughout time since Pentecost witness and testify to the faith of Jesus and who collectively and individually possess and operate the Spirit of Prophecy which is the faith and testimony of Jesus, to which they witness. This is the hall mark of the saved, and the activity and purpose of the ekklesia as defined in scripture. It is not the province of a small exclusive group or individual; such an interpretation goes against the wider meaning and understanding of the text.

The point is that there is no evidence from an open textual study of Revelation that a church at the end of time is to be raised up with a special last day message, outside the gospel of Christ and the faith of Jesus as first preached to the Jews at Pentecost and given to the Gentiles throughout the classical world by Paul and elsewhere by the other apostles; nor is such a specific church institution or organisation ever identified or promoted. The church, ekklesia, is by definition the Body of Christ, with all of its parts and its diverse spiritual gifts acting in unity with the head, which is Christ. It has also always been a remnant of his universal seed, on which Satan has made continuous war in one form or another since its inception and will do so to the end of time.

We are by grace either in Christ and have the seal and presence of the Holy Spirit or we are not in Christ and therefore, do not individually have the seal and the Holy Spirit’s presence. This is so, regardless as to what group, denomination or sect, a person chooses to worship with. Christ is the issue in Revelation along with the identity of all those who are by faith in Him and therefore witness to him and in and through him operate the Spirit of Prophecy.

In the New Covenant dispensation there are also no exceptions where the presence of the Holy Spirit is concerned and the faith of Jesus, because all are priests and prophets in Christ, and have direct access to the heavenly realm, where in Hebrew 9:24 Christ entered. In 1 Peter 2:9 we are told, “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light,”. Considering the import of Ephesians 2:6, whereby all are in Christ seated with him, the flow of spiritual gifts and the testimony of Jesus, the spirit of prophecy, must be given to all whom by faith and adoption belong to Christ.

To make an exception by giving any single individual prophetic status above that of the wider congregation is not only in breach of Jesus’ teaching and action, but is to hark back to the Old Covenant period which operated under different conditions because the Incarnate God, the Word made flesh prefigured in the ceremonies and cultus of the temple, had yet to appear. Once he appeared and fulfilled his mission the order changed and the Spirit came to all. As such all can have visions, all can receive the various spiritual gifts, and all can operate the Spirit of Prophecy, because all are given direct empowerment and authority to articulate the faith of Jesus and his gospel in line with scripture.

It is also clear that we are saved as individuals in Christ alone, not according to which segment of Christendom we belong to or whether or not we believe in Ellen White’s writings or for that matter the writings of any other Christian expositor. Equally, all that claims to be from God and of the Spirit must be judged by the scriptures and the testimony of Christ. This however is not licence for a free for all, as happened in the Corinthian congregation who where being led by a very different spirit even to the point of denying the resurrection.

Further to this, if one reads Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, he gives us a wider understanding of this reality in the context of worship and the Spirit. In John 4:21-24 he first points out that cultic centres and shrines of worship will be a thing of the past. Secondly, that salvation is from the Jews, because the Messiah (Christ) comes out of the Jews. Thirdly, that the true worshipper will worship the Father in spirit and in truth; that is because God is spirit.

What is being said here is that the idea of the true believer worshiping in a specific place or as a part of an efficacious religious organisation will be abolished. This is because in the New Covenant dispensation, we are not only all priests, with heavenly access, but are walking sanctuaries, temples of the Holy Spirit, by which we worship God in Spirit and in Truth from within. Jesus says that he is the Truth, so any who relate to him by faith and witness of Him and His Salvation are walking sanctuaries who worship the Father as he desires through the Son. This brings us back to Revelation 19:10 where the Spirit of Prophecy is associated with those who witness or testify for the faith of Jesus which is the province of every member of the ekklesia, the true community of Christ.

Finally, when the community of grace meets to worship on Sabbath, as the early believers did, they came each of them making a collective inner sanctuary to worship and praise the God of creation and salvation to whom they had individually and collectively free unfettered access and who empowered each of them with the presence and authority of the Holy Spirit to speak, preach and teach in His name, because they know Him. This is the identity of the true Church of Christ, His Body.

So what light does this understanding of Scripture shed on the Adventist understanding of the Spirit of Prophecy?

While it is true that the Adventist Communion, like many other organised Christian Denominations, pays lip service to the notion of the priesthood of all believers, the fact that it has a papal type structure and insists that its members accept the writings of a specific individual as authoritative, in the same way as an Old Testament prophet had authority, demonstrates that in reality the Communion does not really believe in the priesthood of all believers as understood and taught by Jesus and the Jerusalem Church. Rather it holds to a system of corporate pastoral authority on the one hand, while using writings of a single person on the other to establish its validity its status as the Remnant Church of Prophecy. As such the sole basis of Traditional Adventism in all of its variants, is founded on a specific and very narrow textual reading and interpretation of the Bible on the one hand, known as the proof text method, and the usage of Ellen White’s writings, where applicable, to give underpinning authority and credence to whatever position is espoused regardless of biblical validity. Once we do this and lift the writings of any person into a superior authoritative position making them a test of fellowship for every member, by which to be approved of God, we have become a Cult. It has also created within Adventism a dysfunctional schizophrenic communion, whereby a body of extra- biblical writings is used in a cavalier fashion to support some very questionable teachings; a state of being known as the wax nose syndrome.

It is clear that decades of propaganda from the White Estate and the selling of books carrying her name, along with the edited compilations in her name has programmed the membership to regard her as a superior spiritual being and her writings in total, (despite covering a wide range of topics from food and dress to more overt Christian issues) to constitute the Spirit of Prophecy. As such Ellen White has also become the very basis for a person being an Adventist, which is the very condition of a cult, despite protestations and insistence that the Communion holds the Bible as an authoritative source of truth.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Firstly, the General Conference building is built over the vault containing her writings. This means symbolically, as well as in practice, the General Conference considers her writings to be the foundation of the Communion rather than the Bible. As such the Communion is in contradiction of the principle of Sola Scriptura where faith, teaching and practice are concerned. Secondly, the General Conference has never retracted the thrust of an article in the Review which insisted that her writings were the final court of appeal for all Adventists, in matters of faith and doctrine; or for that matter repealed comments made in print and in the pulpit whereby all are told to believe in and obey his prophets leading up to the authority of Ellen White as the inspired prophetess of Adventism.

One cannot have two final courts of appeal for faith, teaching and practice. A point made by M.L. Andraesen in his Letters to the Churches. To do so results in the Communion engaging in principle in the type of conflict that took place at the Council of Constance where, in 1415, Jan Huss appealed to scripture and those opposing him appealed to the authority of the Church and its teachings, rooted in the Church Fathers and its Councils. History has shown that in such a conflict Scripture always looses the argument and becomes the main casualty; at Constance it certainly did. The lamentable history of the Christian Church is that the Church as an institution with its entrenched sectarian positions, traditions and interpretations prevails regardless as to its errors when placed fairly under the scrutiny and judgement of scripture and the gospel.

Throughout the history of Adventism, from the late 19th century onwards, there have been repeats of this syndrome. To my knowledge there have been four occasions in the 20th century when the Denomination had the God given opportunity to abandon its errors and has failed to do so because of vested interests. These opportunities were given in 1919, 1956-66, 1976 and 1980. On each occasion, despite the hopes of many, it failed. The reason for this failure was firstly, the vested interests of the Traditionalists, secondly, the protection of the Institution of the denomination, thirdly, support for traditional 1840s Adventism or its acceptable variants, fourthly, the protection of the traditionally held and officially endorsed narrative and identity of the Adventist Communion, and fifthly, the authority and status of Ellen White, linked to the income of the White Estate, and the support of that identity and narrative; these five reasons stand at the core of every failure to shift the Communion into a position where the Bible becomes dominant so allowing for an honest searching discussion and conclusion. The principle aim of all true Christians will always be to bring the Communion into line with the Jerusalem Church, its kerygma and teaching, which is its real and only purpose of Sabbatarian Adventism’s existence.

In fact, as a Communion we have done everything, but allow the Bible and the testimony of Jesus, as understood in the New Testament generally and Revelation specifically, to speak unfettered, as Wycliffe in the 1370s and early 1380s demanded in his own clash with the Church authorities of his day. Interestingly in 1408 the archbishop of Canterbury forbade the translation of any part of the Bible into English without permission on the grounds that giving people the means read for themselves gave the people the opportunity to challenge Church authority and accepted teachings. In principle a similar attitude has been taken by the Adventist leadership over the years when it comes to studying the Bible without Denominational direction and explanation, so precluding and discouraging any effective free biblical discussion and discovery, either in officially convened conferences, where the agenda is carefully controlled within tolerable bounds, and especially among the laity, whose pastors are expected to control.

So long as the present situation prevails within Seventh-day Adventism, there can be no free discussion of the Bible in the sense of real open discovery and therefore no fundamental reform of the Adventist Communion. In the end, like the medieval Church, the Institution knows best and sets the parameters for study and thought beyond which no member is expected to stray, regardless of expertise. It’s a mark of loyalty. This was made quite clear in the document relating to Theological and Academic Freedom and Accountability which was designed as a mental corset to ensure doctrinal conformity, despite the fact that over the last hundred or so years people of scholarly integrity have pointed out serious problems with the traditional positions, and sectarian claims of the Communion when place beside the arguments of Scripture and teachings endorsed by Christ and the kerygma of the Apostolic Church as found in the New Testament canon.

Some Words and Observations about Ellen White.

The first observation to make about Ellen White was that she was a child of her time. This may seem obvious, but it is an important point. Ever since the 18th century and the development of Methodism, in which she was raised, the spiritual character and moral reforming requirements of every citizen has been at the forefront of every non-conformist religious group. The 19th century was also a time of social, moral, religious and spiritual anxiety. This anxiety was not helped by the rise of eschatological expectations, which began in the 1780s, mixed with overt attacks on Christianity from those embracing the philosophical positions of the 18th century Enlightenment, whereby a more agnostic approach to life and doubts about religious experience abounded. She was born into the middle of this world.

Brought up inside the Methodism of her day and imbibing the strains of puritanism and temperance that lay at the heart of American Christianity, it is not surprising that she wrote as she did or used books that supported to some degree her religious moral psyche. The emphasis on holy character development and sanctification followed a pattern of thinking that in essence can be traced back to Thomas a Kempis’ work The Imitation of Christ, written for his Monastic Order in the 1440s and the Christian mystics of that time such as Julian of Norwich and Rolle, all of whom placed the emphasis upon being one with God, in mind and being and developing a form of holiness, a spiritual character that fitted the believer for the great judgement ahead.

It is also true that there was social milieu of doing, acting and becoming that was strong in the 19th century Anglo Churches; as well as in the schools founded by Christian individuals determined to forge a generation of morally fit Christian young men, men of real character and development. This was certainly the case in England, where minor public schools were established based on what has been described as ‘muscular Christianity’. It also reflected a form of Pelagianism, which has never really been weaned out of the Anglo Churches. When we think of something recognisably Christian we still see it in humanistic terms of doing good, right actions and living, a Christianised eight fold path, rather than something associated with a faith relationship and trust that ensures salvation.

While there is nothing wrong with having an ethical and moral lifestyle, after all we worship a Moral God who put ethical standards in the Decalogue, expanded in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, as well as in Jesus’ own expansive and devastating interpretation of the Law in the Sermon on the Mount, there is a tendency to emphasise how we ought to live, and even what we ought to believe, at the expense of faith in the One in whom we are asked to believe; sanctification at the expense of justification. This has been one of the major stumbling blocks for the Christian Church throughout its history. Spiritual and moral reform movements mixed with intense bouts of Christian mysticism, abound through Christian history especially from the 3rd century onwards. For reform movements like Methodism, trying to improve the behaviour of a working class largely unchurched and brutalised by developing industrialisation was at the heart of Wesley’s message out of which emerged the temperance movement of the 19th century. Both Charles and John Wesley had trouble with justification by faith, despite initially being Anglicans before launching off on their own, and the salvatic content of some of their best known hymns.

It has to be remembered that sanctification is a spirit driven life time process, and that Christian ethics and behaviour in and of itself has never saved anyone; it is more a spirit led response to an already saved life in Christ, and outwardly reveals a saved relationship in him. After all an atheist can be a moral and ethical person, and an effective humanist to the approval of all, but such a person is not saved.

In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus shows us how morally bankrupt fallen humanity is, for all its pretensions, in the sight of God. Sanctification, was never a solution to the fall, and so called Christian growth cannot give us the saved status we require. That is of Christ alone. We need to be justified, acquitted, vindicated and righteous in God’s sight and it cannot be done through rules, regulations, patterns of activity and attempts at so called religiosity and holy living. Jesus, and then Paul, following the Lord, makes this quite clear. The early Sabbatarian Adventists coming from the religious milieu of their time fell into this trap of salvation by what one believed, law keeping performance, sanctified action and upward character development and the expunging of sin as a way towards God and eternity; in other words salvation by increasing sanctification. It is a form of meritorious religion and it is deadly in its consequence.

The early Sabbatarian Adventists were for the most part young and also came from diverse Christian groups that had different views about certain key Christian doctrines, some of which were not strictly orthodox or mainstream. They accepted what Miller was saying out of conviction that he was right and that the end of the world was close at hand. Once all the prophetic projections failed to yield what was claimed for them innovation took over, and a tradition of thinking developed, especially among the Sabbatarian Adventists. This was the group that James and Ellen White joined and became most associated with from almost its inception. What she brought to the group was a very sensitive spirituality and all that she had imbibed from Methodism mixed with a belief that Miller’s mistake was based on his misunderstanding of scripture and the missing of the greater truth and meaning that could be found in those same scriptures pointing to a different eschatological event commencing on 22nd October 1844.

There is no doubt that Ellen White was instrumental in getting this group on the move, so to speak. The development of publishing a paper to propagate the Advent message, the building of sanatoriums, modelled on the ones she and her husband visited in the 1850s, the development of education, through the building of schools and colleges, and the medical and missionary work, as well as the organisation, is reputed to have much to do with her. It was a considerable achievement. Without her, Sabbatarian Adventism would not have had the vision, diversity and organisational structures to expand in the way it eventually did to become a global Communion with millions of members. There is no doubt that she was a remarkable woman, and that she did have spiritual insights. All this has been well documented and established.

How far she was instrumental in theological development during the Sabbath conferences of 1848, which laid down some of key beliefs of the group is unclear. We do know from her own testimony that she was lost in some of the discussions that took place among the group, and that some questionable ideas were being entertained, bust she appears to have done little to correct matters and often went along with the group’s conclusions. She was certainly having visions during this time, later published in Early Writings, one of which supported the traditional view of Christ entering in high priestly robes into the Most Holy Place in heaven on October 22nd 1844 to begin a work of judgement. He is shown standing in these robes acting as the High Priest of old. The visual image has been printed in illustrated form for years in Adventist literature, despite the fact that no such view of Christ exists in the New Testament and the idea, vision or no vision, has no apostolic sanction either in the recorded teachings of Jesus, or in Acts or the epistles, especially Hebrews. This also throws great doubt on the source of this particular vision, which is used in part to validate 22nd October 1844 as a date of eschatological and prophetic significance.

Psychologically, 1844 and the great disappointment experience at the time created an impasse over which they could not cross. The main thrust of doctrinal development and certain innovations devised to make 22nd October 1844 a date of some last day eschatological and prophetic significance, initially came from others in the group, even if she did agree to these innovations and claimed to have some visionary confirmation, despite the fact that these innovations were unscriptural, and despite attempts to justify them from a very narrow usage and interpretation of scripture. It must be remembered they knew no Hebrew or Greek and only had to hand the 1611 King James translation of the Bible. It also appears that they did not have access to the commentaries of the day. As such, with their experience as their ground, they moved forward into error and distinctive formulations of doctrine with confidence.

With the above observation in mind, it is at this point that we come to the thorny question as to whether or not Ellen White operated the Spirit of prophecy. It is clear that calling any of her writings the Spirit of Prophecy is problematic and untrue; it goes against a proper reading and usage of the term in Revelation, as has been argued above. If the argument stands within the ambit of the apostolic kerygma and understanding, and I believe it does, then the next question is whether or not she operated the Spirit of Prophecy at all in anything that she wrote and did? The answer with some qualification is yes, but only in those areas where she was clearly writing in conformity with scripture, Christ’s teachings and the apostolic kerygma; in other words only when she was supporting the faith and testimony of Jesus that was given to the gentiles, and only then was she operating the Spirit of Prophecy spoken of in Revelation 19:10. As to whether or not she always operated the Spirit of Prophecy in what she wrote or did, the answer is an unqualified no. Writing on matters of health, dress, deportment, morality, ethics, education, temperance, as well as private letters of individual import, while copying material from other books on these subjects has nothing to do essentially with the faith or testimony of Jesus, they are side issues.

Another point at issue is at what point do the sources she used for her books tracing the story of Israel, the life and ministry of Christ and the life and work of the apostles, especially Paul, and the historical information in The Great Controversy, become the Spirit of Prophecy? Were these authors whose work she utilised in writing about Israel and the life of Christ operating the Spirit of Prophecy in their works before she read their books and used their material, or did their sentences, paragraphs and thoughts only become the Spirit of Prophecy when she decided to use their words and ideas?

If it is true that the Spirit of Prophecy is the faith and testimony of Jesus, and the Spirit is for all, then it is clear that these books contained material, thoughts and reflections that were obviously published to enhance faith and belief in Jesus. As such like all works and sermons that do this, had authors who were operating under that same Spirit cited in Revelation 12:17 and 19:10. So it could be argued that she was taking writing from other authors whose thoughts and comments were already inspired by the Spirit; these she incorporated into her own works and nothing more. While a secondary activity, all the great commentaries of faith are to some degree inspired in the sense that their Christian authors see truth and have spiritually inspired insights regarding the texts of scripture about which they are making comment.

Ellen White, of course, never wrote an exegetical commentary on any book of the Bible, the late Raymond Cottrell pointing this out did not believe she was capable of writing such a work. Her productions and the books she used were more for devotional reading and information and their insights were taken into her works, as Rae shows; so in reality much of what is written in the books she and her associates put together was second hand, and even third hand rather than first hand. Apart from the fact that these works appealed to her and made an impression, it is difficult to see how any of her own productions in this area of writing could be regarded as conforming to the Spirit of Prophecy as defined in Revelation. It also goes against her own dictum that we ought not to be reflectors of other men’s thoughts. In fact her most promoted and widely read works are full of other people’s thoughts masquerading as her own or in some cases as God’s thoughts.

Walter Martin, who was given leave to read though all the manuscripts in the Ellen White estate, found writing that covered a wide range of topics and were in many cases full of contradictions and difficulties. Although the context is unclear, he pointed out that at one point she denied the deity of Christ, and then in his word later ‘wised up’. But the fact that such a statement was possible in a body of work purporting to be inspired by God, makes it very difficult to be persuaded of the genuineness of the divine source claimed for her writings. This is certainly not the exercise of the Spirit of Prophecy which is the faith of Jesus, when it is clear from the Gospels and the Epistles that Jesus not only claimed to be God in the flesh, but was openly supported as such by the apostolic writings in the light of what he did and achieved. No Biblically literate believer would have made such a blunder, let alone one claiming to be inspired by the Lord. But there again this is only one of many problems that throws doubt on the source of her visionary experiences and claims either she made or were later made for her.

It has, however, been pointed out that she never declare herself a prophetess. She did claim to be ‘the Lord’s messenger’, and she certainly believed it to be the case, and apparently took umbrage at any who questioned her claim, but to be the Lord’s messenger still requires a person to teach and support what the Lord taught, the gospel and the Apostolic kerygma. In this, I would argue, she failed to do, especially in her early years. The reason for this was that she supported notions that were unbiblical, and opposed to the teachings of Christ, the gospel and the apostles. If she had been operating the Spirit of Prophecy in line with Revelation or what Jesus says about the Holy Spirit’s work in John’s Gospel, whereby the Comforter testifies to and of Jesus, she would never have personally drifted into legalism, nor not warned the group under the Spirit’s guidance of the error their ways when it came to the gospel and the faith of Jesus. As Geoffrey Paxton in The Shaking of Adventism points out, the early Adventist went through and entertained every heresy in the book, many of them teachings that had been settled in the 4th century AD.

Reading through the early sermons of James White, the topics give some idea of how the group as a whole was thinking and believing. Topics such as, the Sabbath, the seal of God, the Law of God, the Mark of the Beast, and Babylon as opposed to the identity of God’s true Remnant people (by which using certain texts they identified themselves), and the Second Coming, were at the heart of their considerations. They were very keen on Biblical eschatology its development and understanding, and did make strides in this area of theology, as Paxton acknowledges, only to lament that they placed the law rather than Christ at the centre of that eschatology. The Adventist scholar Norvel Pease came to a similar conclusion. He lamented in the 1940s, and Paxton agrees, that there was no evidence that the early Adventists as a group, or Ellen White as an individual, understood or taught the gospel as found in the New Testament. He apparently called for corporate repentance; we are still waiting!

Equally, nowhere in the earliest writings of any of the founder members was there an understanding of justification by faith, the emphasis was always on spiritual growth, and sanctified character development for salvation and the growing belief that at the end of time only Sabbath keepers would be saved; the Sabbath being a test and a dividing line marking out those who had the Mark of the Beast (generally understood as Sunday keepers) and those who had the seal of God, the seal being the Sabbath. They also held in line with the judgement message the idea that the last generation would need to be sinless and seriously holy, in order to stand in the final moments of earth’s history before the second coming, hence reiterating a form of Wesleyan eschatological perfectionism, similar to that which Brinsmead was later to embrace in the later 1960s. In fact, some believed that for salvation to be activated one had to reach to a certain point in one’s sanctification, though what percentage of character improvement was required to energise salvation into action appears vague. Holy development and practice and the acceptance of certain teachings lay at the heart of salvation as understood by the early Adventists. All this Ellen White initially supported. There was no question that what they were teaching in regards to salvation was a form of Pelagius type legalism condemned in Galatians.

Paxton’s comment that the early Adventists placed the Law and the need to keep it at the heart of their soteriology and eschatology rather than Christ, is followed by the comment that because of this, no one was going to take Adventism seriously. This being the case the question one has to ask is, if the Spirit of Prophecy was active among the early Adventists, how did they make such a blunder when other Christian groups, who they disdained because of their Sunday keeping observance, could have told them the answer? It is also of significance that during this time, not a single vision had by Ellen White (certainly the one’s published in Early Writings) countered this legalistic trend, when one would have expected a concerned Lord, whose gospel was being diminished and salvatic efficacy undermined by legalism, to act through his ‘servant’ to correct matters. Especially since one of the key teachings and main thrust of Adventism was to take the eternal gospel of Revelation 14:6 to the world! How could it do so if it didn’t understand the Gospel itself?

There was a great deal of emphasis on the judgements of God, very little on the grace of God. The early Adventist view of God was decidedly draconian. They devised a judgement hour message based on Old Testament notions, not on a Gospel message; or a call to come to the Lord of creation and salvation, , to receive the judgement (decision) of life, which stands behind Revelation 14:6. Again Ellen White in the early days did not correct this perception. Her view of God was the same. The days when she stated that the First angel’s message was the gospel of righteousness by faith in action, was a much later conclusion.

As noted above she also supported a view of the sanctuary that could not be found in either the teachings of Jesus or the apostles. She supported Smith’s teaching of the investigative judgement starting on the 22nd October 1844, which was based on a misunderstanding of the word for cleansed in Leviticus 16 and Daniel 8:14. We now know that they are two different Hebrew words that have a different meaning and context. The teaching they embraced as a doctrinal foundation for and exposition of their very existence and identity was in total contradiction to what Jesus taught and that which was taught by the apostles and impossible to place beside the gospel as taught in the Pauline epistles. Surely, had she been the Lord’s messenger, she would never have supported something that flowed against the Lord’s teaching. In short her support for 1844 and the sanctuary judgement message proposed by Uriah Smith should not have existed. She should have opposed it from the beginning as not of God; she did not, even if James White for a time did.

What is worse, she claimed to have received a vision that confirmed this teaching, despite the fact that it flew in the face of the Gospel. Such a claim brings the divine source of her visionary experiences, especially this one, into serious doubt. If Jesus truly gave her such a vision then he was undermining the sanctuary and judgement teaching given in the New Testament, and according to that record taught by him and passed on through the apostles to the Jews and the Gentiles. Surely God was not going in the 1840s and 50s to render his own teachings, while here in the flesh, null and void, and change the condition and ground of salvation from Grace by faith alone to the opposite. A vision from the Lord always supports and enhances the received truth and faith; it does not cut across it, nor, as this teaching does, alter it to the point of undermining the kerygma and the Gospel.

Another perception of hers for which she claimed visionary confirmation was the ‘shut door’ teaching. This revelation has been widely criticised since it is clear that the ‘shut door’ idea focused on 1844 and was problematic to say the least. Ellen White claimed that in 1844 the door of heaven had been closed against the world and those who rejected Miller’s message, and therefore the Advent message. This supposedly closed door of judgement, which, like the unregenerate antediluvians, marked the point of no return for those who had rejected the Advent message, ensured that the group left behind was a complete remnant that could not expand. Then as time went on the door began to open a little, and then opened altogether, showing that it had never been shut in the first place, as they began to evangelise and expand their numbers first in America and then the world.

The problem is that the ‘shut door’ theory as some call it, was something that she taught within the group claiming to have visionary and therefore divine confirmation of this truth. Either the vision was correct, in which case the door of mercy has been shut since 1844, which means the Adventist group, like Noah’s family, a type of final remnant locked in the ark and waiting for the flood, was to wait in expectation for the second coming and could not expand; or the vision was totally out of her imagination, or if it was a real vision then it clearly came from a questionable source. As has been pointed out, the idea that the ‘shut door’ theory was taught by Ellen White under divine guidance, which proved to be false, or at least very economical with the truth, ought to have alerted people to the fact that she was not acting in reality under the Spirit of the Lord.

Another problem is her much quoted statement that the character of Christ has to be emulated in every believer before he can return. Even in recent sermons on the state we have to be in at the end of time, the statement is still quoted. It is an idea that if true supports sinless perfection via the development of law keeping and holiness of character. It also, of course, when judged by scripture is not only unscriptural, but inadvertently denies the doctrine of sin as an inherited condition, making the claim impossible to put into effect. It also undermines the doctrine of grace and the all-sufficiency of Christ in whose sinless persona by faith we are hidden. If Christ has to wait for such a transformation to happen, then either there has to be a complete genetic mutation and reversal in the human genome to effect the change required to make us unfallen (sinless) before he comes, or he will never return. In effect she was wrong.

In relation to the above there is another much quoted statement of hers whereby she said that the only thing that we could take to heaven was our characters. Exactly what she meant by this is again unclear. If she meant a sinless (unfallen) character, in line with her view that every believer should fully emulate the sinless character of Jesus in order to achieve heavenly status and so enter the kingdom, then again she is speaking more in line with Pelagius’ teaching, rather than scripture. Again the statement reveals a denial of the full impact and nature of the fall and the condition of sin while supporting a legalistic developmental approach to salvation, that undermines the notion of faith in a vicarious righteousness outside of the Law and grace being the only ground for salvation and our status as adopted sons and daughters of God. If we were able to reach a state of character development that was righteous enough to be acceptable to God, then why did Christ have to die? All he had to do was to give us a few more rules to follow and an easy to follow pattern of behaviour that was attainable, and to lay down a very different ground for salvation from that found in the Gospels and the Epistles. It is a point made by Paul in Galatians; that is, if they could achieve righteousness via the Law then Christ died for nothing.

If she was really operating the Spirit of Prophecy, had an awareness of the gospel, and realised the significance of Jesus’ interpretation of the Law in the Sermon on the Mount, where he clearly taught that even our inner thoughts and very being, let alone our actions, come under judgement and that our righteousness had to be greater than the Pharisees, she would never have entertained such an unbiblical notion. The entire thrust of the Sermon on the Mount exposes us at every level to the full penalty of the Law against a fallen nature that expresses itself in thought and action through a totally corrupt and sinful mind, psychological and in consciousness. At the end of his sermon, and having stripped human beings of any possibility of survival before God via a religious, ethical, legalistic or ritualised method of achieving righteousness, the hearer is supposed to be in despair, asking the question, ‘how can anyone be saved?’.

The thrust of the sermon, of course, points clearly towards salvation in Jesus alone, who is our only righteousness. Ethics and being a good moral Jew or Christian, while perfectly laudable, is not and never has been the ground of our acceptance with God. After all there are agnostics and atheists, even in our time, as in the past, acknowledged pagans, who have developed very moral, ethical and humanistic lives and values, demonstrating a wonderful human spirit towards the needs of humanity, yet they are not saved, nor do they for all this exhibition of ‘goodness’ have the required status before God.

What Ellen White, coloured by her Methodist upbringing, was indulging in was Pelagian theology, diminishing the impact of the fall, and by doing so the all-sufficiency of Christ’s achievement on the cross. This is hardly embracing the faith or testimony of Jesus, it is teaching a different and false gospel. I think that much of her writing on religious matters flirted with Pelagian ideas which were deep seated in Anglo-Christianity and its ethical expression and purpose. One point is clear, such a line of thinking on her part does not demonstrate the Spirit of Prophecy as defined in Revelation 12:17 or 19:10, nor does it reflect the statement in Revelation that those who are saved in Christ follow him wherever he goes, because of course they have total faith and trust in him and what he had done for them; so we are back again to the real identity of the true ekklesia.

As we have demonstrated above, one of the hallmarks of a Christian is to conform to the faith as found in the Word; by that I mean the revelation of Christ as the Logos made flesh. If a person teaches any innovation or gospel that differs from that revelation and the apostolic kerygma and teaching, then they are not writing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit regardless as to what they claim. Scripture cannot be added to, nor can anything be taken away. Spiritual development and the notion of progressive revelation, which has been used to excuse these innovations, has to be defined as a spirit led greater understanding of Christ, the faith and the scriptures as they stand. For Christ is the final revelation of God, made in his exact image, the distillation of the Godhead in human form. He is the final authority. All true believers in him bend to that reality and authority as final and to no one else. He is also the yardstick of truth by which everything must be tested. As it happens that written authority is found in the scriptures and the scriptures alone.

It is my contention that anybody operating the true Spirit of Prophecy and the testimony of Jesus cannot be led into legalism or devise innovations around texts of scripture that flow against the faith as taught and expressed by Christ while he was on earth; let alone against the apostolic record whereby the first hand witness of that faith and its expression has come down to us under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, so that we do not go astray. For this reason it is clear that something other was driving the early Adventists, and Ellen White, despite all the claims to the contrary. Landing on a true doctrine, but failing to see Christ at the centre of faith is a very beguiling activity that has caused many a group to became anything other than truly Christian. The most alarming thing about this is that people can convince themselves that they are on the right path and approved of God. They can even fashion their lives by certain codes of moral behaviour, exhibiting a type of conformist holiness, and yet be apostates, and no more than humanistic pagans where Christ is concerned. It is also a very thin line between the two as the history of the Christian Church has demonstrated time and time again.

During her life time, Ellen White wrote about a very wide range of topics, her religious works and moral and ethical writings were read and used in the pulpit, and used as an authority that for many was regarded as inspired of God; even verbally inspired and without error. In regards to the idea of inspiration, she did take the view that while God spoke, those so inspired, wrote using their own styles of writing and thought processes. It is clear that she did not consider something that was God inspired to mean dictation, what is called verbal inspiration. So long as the concepts and information revealed by God was accurately written down for all to read and understand, that was sufficient. We certainly have examples of this in Daniel where it is clear that he writes down what he could remember of his visions, sometime days later after trying to recover from the shock of what he was shown.

The problem for the Adventist community was that legalism and the belief that salvation was based on keeping the law and especially Sabbath orientated as the seal of God, continued and only began to be challenged in the late 1870s-early 1880s; a challenge that to some degree sowed the seeds for undermining the remnant narrative and theological basis of American 19th century Adventism, and would lead to considerable problems among Adventists as the 20th century progressed. Despite the fact that Ellen White began to turn against legalism, she was never able to expunge it from the Adventist community. Nor, unfortunately, did she renounce her earlier writings with their legalistic leanings and unscriptural Pelagian errors; writings that are used by sub-groups within Heritage Adventism to this day. One of the legacies of this failure is that in many ways Adventism is a very split and divided house, and her writings for the most part stand at the epicentre of these divisions. However, the early Adventists as a whole, she included, did, reject Calvinistic predestination, while accepting Arminius’ view, which opposed Calvin’s teaching that some were born to be saved and others to be damned. But other errors and misconceptions continued to abound that were not so easy to reverse and have remained in vogue to this day.

Later to her credit and much in her favour Ellen White did grow, was in many cases pragmatic and willing to change her mind, a point mostly ignored by those who read her. She warned against quoting from her books in the pulpit, or using her name in the pulpit. She claimed to be tired of hearing ‘Mrs White says’ in sermons, arguing that they were supposed to be uplifting the Word and Christ in the pulpit not her. In Selected Messages she admitted that her works were full of errors which the learned men ought to correct, Selected Messages Book 1 page 164 and 165. (One contributor in this compilation cites 55 scriptural errors in her writings, some of them very embarrassing and basic that would put a well briefed Sunday School child to shame).

She also concluded in the 1870s that the legalism of the Adventist community was problematic, and that we had ‘preached the law until we were as dry as the hills of Gilbao’. She gradually shifted towards the idea of grace and the need for Christ alone where salvation was concerned. In regards to salvation she certainly concluded later that anyone who tried to get into heaven via their works would be considered traitors by the Lord. As already noted the problem with her shift away from legalism towards a more grace orientated theology is that she never openly repudiated what she had earlier written on this matter, nor did she repudiate any of her visions in Early Writings that encouraged anything but grace. Further she still published in 1888 an erroneous view of the judgement teaching in Great Controversy which was based on a perfectionist idea rooted in the investigative judgement. So despite gradual shifts, the inconsistences remained.

During the 1880s she supported Sola Scriptura (the Bible and the Bible only) as a principle denying the Communion the right to use her writings to settle doctrinal disputes; a principle that the Adventist leadership during all the doctrinal considerations and disputes of the 20th century ignored. During the Galatian controversy of the mid-1880s she made it clear that the only way to settle the issue over the law in Galatians was to go to the text of Galatians rather than to ask her, or search for something she might have written or said years before. She also argued that if there was anything that could not be established by proper scriptural authority then it ought to be abandoned, and that what might have been thought to be true at one time might well have to be abandoned in the light of scripture, and that much would have to be unlearned in the process. 6T 068 003 CT 427 001 among many other quotes.

It is clear from these examples that she did not regard her writings as above scripture or as an authority to be used to settle scriptural questions. As it happened she took the view that Paul’s understanding of Law in Galatians included both the moral and ceremonial law, which was a reversal of the position held earlier, though she denied that she had made verbal or written statements to the contrary when challenged on this during build up to the contentious Minneapolis G.C. session in 1888. It was an issue that led to a rift between her and the G.C. President Butler, who claimed she had taught something else earlier on.

As for changing her mind, she certainly changed her mind over the question of divorce. In a letter written in the 1850s she was very much opposed, by the 1870s she was more inclined towards divorce. The White household was not as harmonious as people are led to believe; there were times, according to her diary, when she and James were not on speaking terms and had serious differences. Thirty years of living with James might explain her changed attitude towards divorce; but neither was she from the sound of it the easiest person with whom to live.

Then there is one quite pointed letter revealing her attitude towards the Christology propagated by A.T.Jones at the 1895 G. C. session. It is Jones who argued that Christ must have inherited from Mary a sinful nature, even if he did not sin; scripturally an impossible proposition, that Catholics got round by teaching that Mary was sinless, an immaculate, conception; another scripturally impossible proposition. Jones later published a book on Christ and Heredity, disowned by Daniels, the thrust of which was certainly not supported by White as can be discovered in the so called Baker letter, where she warned a certain brother Baker not to preach what Jones was saying and that he was talking about the holy and sinless one who was God. Yet the issue of the nature of Christ is still a point of issue within Adventism. Those propagating Heritage Adventism still believe in the blasphemous notion that Christ had a sinful nature but did not sin and was primarily our example. They also quote from her, as Andraesen did, to prove their case, despite the fact that the belief that Christ was incarnated sinless and is primarily our substitute is the official Christological position. Quotes are also taken from her to support this position. As late as the mid-1970s at Palmdale the Denomination was still struggling with it, as it was the doctrine of Justification by Faith, which is still defined wrongly in Adventist publications.

She differed from some in the group of the late 1840s by accepting a triune Godhead; most were Unitarians. And for the most part, despite Uriah Smith’s contention that the atonement was incomplete, she did hold to the opposite view, that the atonement was completed at the cross, but did not seem to recognise that one could not have two completed atonements; one at the cross and one in 1844; the latter belief and teaching being part of their raison d’etre as a movement. This issue too is still bedevilling the split house of Adventism, despite the fact that officially the Denomination teaches that the atonement was completed at the cross, and again uses quotes from her to demonstrate this fact. In the meantime detractors from the official position also use quote from her to establish the opposite view, revealing that her writings are suffering from a form of spiritual and theological schizophrenia.

She also wrote in a letter dated 19th April 1905, which was cited in the Glacier View document, that Christ at his ascension went into the Most Holy Place, bringing her thoughts closer to what is taught in Hebrews and the Apostolic kerygma. This statement, of course, does not sit well with that she believed, and supported in the 1850s, whereby it was taught that he did not enter the Most Holy Place until 22nd October 1844. The letter also counters what she claimed to see in vision regarding this matter, whereby she says that she saw Christ entering the Most Holy Place on 22nd October 1844. Again this throws great doubt on the authenticity of her vision; the contents of the letter countered the thrust of her early vision.

While these are just a few examples, one could say that there is enough evidence to suggest that she was over the last thirty years of her life moving away from the Adventism of the 1840s and changed her mind over matters. The problem was how a later generation regarded her and the fact that the White Estate after her death promoted her and her works, and even created more works under her name through a series of edited compilations; compilations that have been used to support contrary theological positions, to stifle or preclude biblical discussion, and to ensure that her authority along with sectarian interests and claims override scriptural and critical considerations.

Considering what she said about the use of her own works, it is unlikely that she would have approved of the way her works have been used in these discussions, or the way the various sub-groups within Adventism use them, to support a mass of contradictions and errors to which they seem oblivious. The attitude of ‘she says therefore it must be true’ regardless of the shifts in opinion within her writings remains. I am also convinced that she would have opposed article 18 of the present 28 articles.

For all the so called admiration for Ellen White that the Denomination claims and propagates, some of her most poignant comments about the use of her writings, her belief in Sola Scriptura to judge Denominational doctrines, and her advice that we should change position and abandon teachings when they are found by fair and open discussion of the scriptures to be false, are ignored. In fact the Denomination as the problems over scriptural and doctrinal matters came to the surface, decided on a policy of burying its head in the sand in an act of denial that has continued to this day. It is of interest that one of the contributors to the Ministry account of Glacier View in 1980 actually stated that ‘sola scriptura was evil’; the reason being that it undermined White’s authority; this is an astonishing proposition, of which she would not have approved, and demonstrates how fallen and apostate the Adventist Church became in 1980. Effectively, such a statement brings everything back to Andraesen’s assertion, only this time in an official organ of the Adventist Church.

This brief discussion brings us back to the issue of the Spirit of Prophecy defined as the faith of Jesus. Much of what she later wrote followed in part what every mainstream Christian author believed. The acknowledged commentaries of the time stated that Christ was sinless, that he went into the Most Holy Place at his ascension, and began a ministry of intercession in heaven which continued until the end of time. None of these commentaries supported a split in heavenly ministry even among those who wrote on Hebrews in some considerable detail as Brown did in the early 19th century. The innovations created to support 1844 were never going to be embraced by those who reading through the Greek text and following the Apostolic kerygma new.

The fact that White picked up ideas from the books she read, took them into her works and even propagated them does not necessarily show an example of the Spirit of Prophecy. Where this might well have been demonstrated as with all genuine believers, is where she preached and taught Christ as Lord and Saviour, and supported the testimony of scripture regarding Christ, which she certainly did. However, it is doubtful whether she really understood the ramifications of the doctrine of Justification by Faith, with which the Denomination is still struggling, and many in its portals deny, as did the Christian church for much of its history, until the Reformation.

Another aspect of her writings concentrated on some believed future events. Prophetic statements can only be considered credible if they come true. The narrative of the Adventist group, supported by Ellen White in her articles and books, not only placed themselves and their identity at the centre of their own eschatology, but developed an idea that at the end of time they would be persecuted over the Sabbath, as a result of a conspiracy between Rome and apostate Sunday keeping Protestantism backed by the State. The coming together of the state and apostate Christianity, like twins of evil, would lead to an imposition of Sunday around the world before the end of time. Fear over the rise of Rome and the re-establishment of the power of the papacy was rife in the 19th century. You could fill halls in Britain with lectures about the horrors of Rome in the 1800s and early 1900s. Many commentaries on Daniel pointed the finger at Rome as the wicked little horn power which would be casted down into the fires of destruction. Adventists were following a long established trend, except that they applied the persecuting outcome only to themselves.

In the present philosophical, religious and political climate of the 21st century, this view is impossible to entertain. The seeds of the 20th century were sown in the 19th century; the rise of materialistic secularism, existentialism and Darwinism, agnosticism, atheism and scientism all emerge from the 1840s onwards, and have their roots in the 18th century Enlightenment, and the cult of reason and scepticism. This is a society that she did not predict, where the majority of people have no interest in God, and even if they do believe in something, it is not the God of the Bible. While she believed that spiritualism would have a great influence over the world, which has a certain truth in it, she failed to see the rise of neo-paganism, or the fact that eastern religions, especially Buddhism in its variant forms would become so attractive to the western mind with its emphasis on questionable forms of transcendental meditation and the Buddha’s 8 fold path, that would never entertain persecuting any one keeping Sabbath or Sunday.

Concentrating on the rise of Rome as a persecuting power her predictions failed to see the rise of jihadist Islam, and the fact that it would be the only religion that would actively persecute Christians, including Catholics, burning their churches and killing their members. While it is true that Christians will be persecuted towards the end of time, this does not mean that Adventists will be separated for special attentive treatment, any more than it is true that the world is watching the Communion and waiting for its moment to strike. Basically, the secular world has no interest in the Adventist Communion or what it teaches; expect perhaps other Christians who happen to know of its existence or academics who study these things for their work and interest.

When it comes to the last day persecution of the saints mentioned in the Bible, it is always within the context of attacks on the faith of Jesus, which the community of grace embraces and promotes, with the Lord of life firmly at its centre. With the exception of the Seventh-day Baptists in the 17th century, the Christian church in the past never faced persecution over the day of worship, it was always over who they worshipped; for instance, they fell out with the Roman State over their refusal to deny Christ by worshipping the emperor or any deity he chose to be worshipped within the empire. The church resisted, insisting that Christ alone as Creator and Saviour and must be the centre of worship. This remains the position where the true Community of Grace is concerned to this day, and Christians (mostly Sunday keepers) to this day are dying due to their stand for Christ in various places, as Amnesty International and Open Doors have reported and consistently catalogued.

As for the West, the type of persecution at present faced in the West has to do with Christians falling foul of the Human Rights laws which deny them the right to say certain things, object to and criticise certain types of behaviour, or to raise up the faith of Jesus above all other faiths. Secular liberalism with its humanistic tendency believes everything is equal including all contending and diverse truth claims. Christians are falling foul of Post Modernism, whereby nothing is true and everything is true. For this reason the picture given by Ellen White of the state roughing up Adventists at the behest of Rome is a medieval picture that is difficult to squeeze into the shape of the present secular, scientific and anti-religious climate.

We live in a very different world from the 19th and early 20th century, and the pressures are different, as Christians of all persuasions face a secularised world that is hostile to the faith for a variety of diverse reasons. Even the influence of the Catholic Church on the European Continent is not what it was in the face of a changing and hostile world where Christians of every hue in the West see their influence and numbers dwindling by the decade and are having to band together to survive the very public and persistent assaults in books, TV programmes and across the internet made upon the faith by the new Atheists and their secularising supporters in their attempt to reduce Jesus to anything other than what he claimed to be and did.

The picture which White predicted and promoted of singularity, where one group is targeted and needs to keep together, circling the waggons as apostate Christendom in league with the authorities of the State attacks it, is very American. As is the idea of going off into the wilderness to escape persecution as the Mormons did. It’s a psychology that one finds in almost all the home grown churches of America, some of which I worked with professionally in the UK.

They see themselves as having prophetic significance, in some cases quoting the same texts which they interpret within the context of their own group or organisation; they claim a type of remnant theology for the group and see themselves as the sole object of last day persecution; they preach and emphasise a perfectionist and behaviourist message, quoting texts from various parts of the Bible in support of their ideas, usually out of context, so creating group conformity, all of which is part of the sectarian neurosis that feeds and enhances the exclusive belief in the group as spiritually superior to other contending apostate ‘counterfeit’ groups. Finally, they never preach the Gospel as understood in the New Testament, or show any understanding of Justification by Faith; they mix and confuse everything together to the point where belonging, conformity and lifestyle, and creating pretensions of Christian holiness, which they must attain before the second coming and judgement day, is seen as the way to eternity. Somewhere in the middle of all the striving to be better, more holy and ready, the Lord of faith the gospel, of assurance and peace gets drowned out. Ellen White, claiming some sort of divine credence, along with those who formed the Adventist group entered for the most part into that same neurosis.

The trouble is that this is the view running through Great Controversy, which is at heart a polemic against Rome, and that she put together from various Protestant authors each with their own bias; a bias which she took into her own work. The book also supports and places the Millerite and Advent Movement in a historical line that is very beguiling, while regarding Wycliffe, Huss, Luther, Zwingli and Calvin as lesser lights pointing the way. The fact is that these men, especially Luther and Calvin, seem to have operated more of the Spirit of Prophecy than she did. For it was the 16th century Reformers who asked the question, “What was the faith that was given to the Gentiles?” A question that to my knowledge I have never heard asked within Adventism, and was regarded as irrelevant by M.L. Andraesen. Nor did the original Adventist group realise that by 1563 the entire apostolic faith, parts of which Ellen White initially denied, had been retrieved including the second coming, which had always been in the Creed. The Great Controversy is a good read and has been very influential, but its sectarian nature and the Roman centric picture is nowhere near the way the world has drifted over that past 160 years.

The question posed by Jesus as to whether or not he would find faith on the earth when he returned in glory, is of course to be answered in the negative, as he knew. There is plenty of religion, plenty nominal and enthusiastic religiosity, plenty of charitable activity, plenty of other questionable activities too, plenty of unbelief and plenty of faith in anything, but no real faith in Him. If one wants to see the true believing remnant at the end of time, it is a universal community of faith struggling, against persecution at every level, as it always has, struggling with a vast sea of increasing deep seated unbelief and rejection of the Lord, mixed with the power of the occult, and a mass of contending religious, quasi-religious, scientific and philosophical voices all of which create total confusion, a true Babylonian concoction, to the moment of the Lord’s coming. Meanwhile the earth is slowly physically falling apart and in a form of revolt as a result of human abuse.

This is the picture Jesus in essence gives us. This is the picture that is coming true as time goes on, and as the Spirit, as in Noah’s day, becomes increasingly unable to bring people to the Lord of Life and his gospel of salvation. If we really want to know what the last days of earth’s confusing history will be like before the second coming, Jesus tells us clearly in Mark 13 and Matthew 24 within the context of the prediction of the destruction of the Temple, as does Revelation, which is an extension of the themes found in these two chapters.

As for her visions, I agree with James White that they are her business, but to appeal to them as a source of authority or confirmation for certain teachings is problematic. As I have repeatedly pointed out in this article, any such experience has to confirm the testimony of scripture not innovate outside of or against that testimony, add to it, or diminish any part of it. Some of the visionary material covering certain biblical questions and early Adventist beliefs has to be judged by the testimony of Jesus and the apostles as found in the New Testament. If a vision does not conform to the testimony of Jesus and the apostles, then it ought to be ignored and its source questioned. The statement laid down in Isaiah 8:20 against prophets speaking in his day, establishes a principle for testing visions and so called prophetic statements. In principle it covers the whole of scripture as a revelation moving towards the ultimate revelation of God, the arrival of Jesus, the God/Man who has spoken to us in the flesh. Jesus’ statement that he fulfilled the Law and the Prophets is the fulfilment of the Old Testament testimony, and his achievement is the centre of the testimony that is supported by the Holy Spirit and given to every believer.

If any statement or vision claiming to be from God to confirm a teaching, does not conform to the testimony of Christ and the Kerygma, then it must according to Isaiah’s principle be rejected, however intriguing, on the grounds that there is no Divine light in it. If judged by this, Ellen White’s visionary activities, where she clearly supported and believed in unbiblical teachings falls short of the requirement. This being the case, she cannot be regarded as a divinely inspired authority for anyone, let alone ‘a continuing authority’ where doctrine and teaching is concerned. The only authority that is safe is the scriptural canon, because of whom is at its centre, namely Jesus Christ.. I agree with her on this point. Which is why article 18 of the present 28 Fundamentals is a perversion of the truth and ought to be removed.

I do, however, make one proviso, and a distinction between visions that support teachings and visions that are giving the person direction as to how to deal with things. To see something wrong, or to face a difficult moment and to be given in some kind of spiritual experience that reveals a truth or a way that can be and often is given by the Lord to believers. This is especially the case when there is spiritual warfare or the need to operate the gifts of the Spirit in action. It is possible that Ellen White exercised this gift, especially in her letters to various individuals, as do many Christians; it is certainly not peculiar to her. Despite this, such experiences still have to be tested by the Spirit, and be attested. While these experiences might enhance personal faith, they do not entirely, or necessarily conform to the Spirit of Prophecy in the sense that the term is understood in Revelation 9:10.

Having said this, at the moment we are seeing examples of the Spirit of Prophecy in operation outside the Christian Communions, especially among Jews and Moslems who in places where there is no Christian witness are having visions of Christ and are experiencing his presence, and becoming believers in Him, despite the difficulties this causes in their specific cultures. So there is Divine activity which brings these people to faith and to believe in the Lord of Life. Any activity that does this and brings someone to the faith of Jesus and to accept his testimony as to who he is, has to be characterised as the Spirit of Prophecy in action, which is a work of the Holy Spirit, the Paracletos of John’s Gospel who testifies to Jesus and brings us to faith in him.

Conclusion.

For those reading this, I have written the above as a very concerned and deeply troubled member of the Adventist Communion. There has been for many years now a doctrinal civil war going on within the Adventist Church. The epicentre of that war is Ellen White and the authority of her writings as a means to interpret scripture. Instead of taking her advice that the communion must bend the knee to the authority of scripture alone, to Christ’s own testimony about himself, and the Apostolic witness, which is their testimony about him which has come down to us in the Gospels and the Epistles, the Adventist leadership has made a grave mistake by placing her writings as an authoritative break on scripture, whereby she gets read, and is allowed to act, as Walter Martin said, like a pope or arbiter of scripture and as a result the faith of Jesus suffers.

By this error, the leadership has reinforced the charge of those both friendly and hostile to the Communion, that it is a Cult. If ever the Communion wanted to dispel this charge, as Froome and others tried to do in the late 1950s and early 1960s, it has certainly undone and betrayed everything they did to direct the Adventist Church towards becoming a solely Biblically centred community, following the apostolic verities and authority.

The Communion has spent a great deal of time and effort covering up what Rae discovered, about the method Ellen White and her associates used to write her books and articles, counteracting the impact of such a revelation in one article after another for popular membership consumption in order to maintain a position and a traditional sectarian claim that is on examination devoid of credibility. Unfortunately, we have a diverse body of writing filled with advice as well as her own prejudices and spiritual preferences covering a wide range of issues, some of which have nothing to do with the Faith of Jesus, yet are lumped together under the general title of Spirit of Prophecy. It is not a question of whether or not she saw this or that building being built with a certain number of rooms, or that she wrote that she saw an angel creating havoc over the Union battle lines at the first battle of Bull Run, or had a health vision, which evidence shows she never really obeyed despite trying to get everybody else to, or whether she regarded chess to be a waste of time, or objected to certain sports, bicycles, the wearing of jewellery and the like; the issue is much more serious than that.

We have passages in her writings that are contradictory of scripture and the Apostolic kerygma, that are now being upheld as an officially approved authority and a test of fellowship. There are passages where she teaches incremental perfectionism as part of the faith to get ready for the second coming, supporting ideas of a Pelagian nature. While placing religious practice, especially the Sabbath, along with spiritual development and holy living at the centre of salvation, she had great difficulty, certainly in her early years, with the Gospel as understood in the New Testament. She supported a view of judgement that is at odds with Jesus’ own teaching, at odds with the Gospel, and not in line with Apostolic teaching. She also claimed to have a vision of Christ doing something in 1844, that the New Testament tells us he did at his ascension. She also supported a view of the heavenly sanctuary and Jesus’ intercession in that sanctuary that is impossible to substantiate from an unbiased reading of the relevant chapters in the New Testament. She also supported the idea of a sealing at the end of time, suggesting that only at a certain point in time could this sealing take place, and certainly after 1844.

Apostolic teaching is that all who come to Jesus by faith at any time, are sealed and have the presence of the Holy Spirit which links them personally to the living Lord. Jesus does not know of, nor does he teach a special time for this event, nor does Paul.

None of the above positions, which counter the Kerygma and Jesus’ teachings, could have come from the Spirit of Prophecy, because none of these ideas relate to the Faith of Jesus as understood by the Apostolic Church. The fact that later on she changed her mind about the legalism she had once supported as of God, or where Christ actually went at his ascension, does not prove the case for her as a reliable continuous authority for anybody. This is certainly the case when we realise that much of her work that is in line with what could be called orthodox Christianity, came not from Divine revelation, but from the books and sermons she read, was impressed and influenced by, and from which she copied; publishing the products of her copying under her own name.

However, the Denomination knowing all this has decided to ignore it, and to some degree ignore her own advice concerning her writings and the limits to which they were to be used. The Denomination has use her to stifle or limit the impact of inconvenient biblical questions and discussion, so in practice she is used very much like the institution of the Roman Church and how it acts in regards to doctrinal questions, whereby the authority is not ultimately found in scripture but inherently elsewhere. Her writings have almost become canonical in the minds of many Adventists.

As a result of the promotion of her works and persona over the years, creating a form of “Ellenology”, we have the rise and development of a so-called Heritage 1840s movement inside the Denomination. These diverse sub-groups not only place everything she wrote at the centre, but have been teaching the next generation of Adventists to do the same; instructing them how to use her writings in the pulpit, despite the fact that she tells us not to do this. She is used to support the reiteration of every heresy that the early Adventists believed, as if the Denomination is still in the 1840s and has never moved on scripturally in its understanding, as she said it was to do. In fact they resist any movement as heresy and un-Adventist.

What is more alarming, is that the leadership has done nothing to deal with, or condemn, groups within the Denomination who teach a false understanding of the atonement, a blasphemous Christology, insist on incremental sinless perfectionism, deny the doctrine of Original Sin diminishing the impact of the fall to sinful actions only, rather than an inherented condition, and resist to the point of denial the true Gospel by undermining the all-sufficient Christ and his completed achievement on the cross. Further for much of this they use quotes from Ellen White, whose writings since 1980 officially became an ‘on-going authority’. How anyone can teach this, or tolerate such unbiblical heresy inside a Church that claims to be the Remnant of Prophecy and in possession of the Spirit of Prophecy is incredulous. The fact that it does tolerate this theological heterodoxy, paralysed by the fact that these Heritage Adventist groups quote from her, shows how far the Denomination is from being a true community of the living Christ, and how little of the true Spirit is functioning in the Denomination as an organisation claiming to be of God.

The situation regarding Ellen White’s writings and the authority claimed for them in article 18 is not credible. It needs to be removed, as the late Raymond Cottrell believed, and should not be countenanced by any Gospel and Christ centred Adventist. The energy used to promote her and her writings and the way she had been used is also undermining the real witness of the Church which should be of Jesus and him alone; and can be seen as a diabolical tactic working from within to blunt the giving of the true Christo-centric Gospel of salvation to the world.

It must be remembered that the Head and ultimate authority of the Church, the ekklesia, is Christ, for the true church is His Body, and the only body of literature that can be considered an ‘on-going authority’ for any believer, regardless of denomination, is the witness of the Apostolic community who knew Jesus and who experienced the historical and historic events that are at the heart of the Faith of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels and supported in the Epistles and the Christian Apocalypse.

It is to this faith, and the saving Lord who is at its centre, that the Paracletos, the Holy Spirit and Comforter, testifies. It is to Christ alone that every believer is to look, engage with, take comfort from, preach about, believe in, trust and rest in for complete salvation as a justified (acquitted) sealed and adopted child of God. If we are not in (inside) Christ by faith as his disciples, it does not matter what denomination or sect one belongs to, or how many concocted volumes of extra-biblical writings it declares authoritative for its adherents, or how much it uses bits of scripture to bolster up its sectarian and triumphalist claims, according to Jesus, salvation in the end will be denied. This is alas a dire conclusion. We need a newly re-orientated properly constituted Christ-centred Adventism solidly based on the Word and the Rock, not sand.

Biography

Ellen Gould Harmon White

When Ellen Gould Harmon White (1827-1915) was 17, she received a message from God in the form of a vision. It was the first of some 2,000 visions White experienced in her lifetime. The visions formed the basic teachings of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, which White and her husband co-founded in 1863. White served as the church's spiritual leader throughout her life. She wrote 26 books based on her visions, led a health reform movement, and established schools and sanitariums.

White and her twin sister Elizabeth were the youngest of eight children born to Robert and Eunice Harmon. When the twins were born on November 26, 1827, the family lived on a farm near Gorham, Maine. A few years later, Robert Harmon gave up farming and moved the family to Portland, where he worked out of his home making hats. The whole family, including young Ellen, helped in the hat-making enterprise.

An unfortunate incident occurred when White was nine years old. While walking home from school, a classmate threw a rock at White, hitting her in the face and knocking her unconscious for three weeks. White was left disfigured and for the rest of her life she suffered from recurring health problems, including nervousness, tremors, and dizziness. The symptoms made it impossible for her to complete her schoolwork and she was forced to withdraw from school. White considered this incident to be a defining moment in her life; her ill health caused her to become withdrawn and she became deeply interested in religion.

The Harmons were Methodists and in 1840, when White was 12, she attended a church camp meeting where she devoted her life to God, received baptism, and became a member of the Methodist Church. White was devoted to the church, but she feared that she was not worthy of salvation.

During the early 1840s, the Harmon family attended Adventist meetings. The Adventist church was a Christian denomination that believed that the coming of Christ, or advent, was imminent. The Harmons were especially taken with the views of William Miller who predicted Christ's return on October 22, 1844. The conflict between the Methodist and Millerite beliefs resulted in the Harmon family's removal from the Methodist Church in 1843.

October 22, 1844, passed without Christ's return. The event, called the Great Disappointment, caused many Adventists to waver in their faith. White remained earnest and tried to make sense of the failed prediction. In December 1944, while praying with four other women, White experienced the first of many visions she had during her life. The vision showed her that Adventists had misunderstood the significance of October 22. It was the beginning of a special time of preparation that would culminate in the coming of Christ. When White revealed her vision to others, they accepted it as a gift from God. White had subsequent visions and she began to travel, sharing her visions with other Adventists. She believed that God had selected her as a prophet through whom God would communicate to the world and prepare for Christ's second coming. She helped rally Adventists, who had become scattered after the Great Disappointment.

White was only 17 when she began her mission as God's messenger. She experienced some 2,000 visions in her lifetime. Without warning, she would go into a trance, which began when she shouted "Glory!" three times. If no one caught her, she then swooned to the floor. The trances lasted from a few minutes to several hours, during which time her eyes were open and her heart and respiration rate slowed to an almost imperceptible level. Sometimes she exhibited extraordinary physical strength during the trance. When she came out of it, she sometimes remained blind for a few days. In later years, White's daytime trances stopped and her visions occurred in nighttime dreams.

Skeptics offered various explanations for White's visions. Some believed they were the result of hypnotism. Others thought she suffered from hysteria or other mental disorder. But most Adventist followers accepted her as a prophet who received messages from God. White believed it was her mission to relay the messages she received, although she was somewhat uncomfortable with the responsibility. Although she was young and frail, suffering from breathing difficulties, fatigue, and fainting spells, she traveled to churches and camp meetings, where she was accepted as a messenger of God.

Married James White

In her travels, White met James White, a Millerite minister, whom she married in 1846. Like his wife, James had lifelong health problems. The couple traveled throughout the eastern states preaching their message and living off the charity of Adventists they visited along the way. When their children, Henry and James Edson were born, the parents left them in the care of friends so they could continue their mission. Being separated from her children distressed White, but she felt God was calling her to preach.

James White encouraged his wife to write down the messages received in visions and in 1849 the couple began publishing her teachings. The Present Truth was an eight-page semimonthly newspaper containing Ellen White's prophetic views. Later, they published the Review and Herald and Youth's Instructor. White's first book, A Sketch of the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, was published in 1854. James White was the driving force behind his wife's publishing.

In 1852, the Whites stopped traveling and the impoverished family settled down in Rochester, New York. In 1854, their third child, Willie, was born. White gave birth to her fourth son, Herbert, in 1860. He died three months later.

In 1853, the family moved to Battle Creek, Michigan, where Adventist believers built them a headquarters for their Review and Herald Publishing Company. The following years were spent writing and publishing messages from White's visions, which became the basis of the church's teachings. In 1858, White wrote her most important book, The Great Controversy Between Christ and His Angels and Satan and His Angels. The book was based on a vision and described the war between good and evil and the second coming of Christ. It was the first of four volumes published under the title, Spiritual Gifts. Up until this time, the Adventists were a scattered, unorganized group of believers. In 1863, the movement that White led was formally organized as the Seventh Day Adventist Church. The name came from the belief, from a vision, that the Sabbath should be observed on Saturday, the seventh day of the week. James White took on much of the church's administrative duties, although he turned down the opportunity to serve as president. Ellen White was the church's spiritual leader.

Led Health Reform Movement

Shortly after establishing the church, White had a vision that showed the connection between physical health and spirituality. She published a series of pamphlets titled Health, or How to Live that described her guidelines for healthy living. Thus began a lifelong crusade for health reform.

White advocated a strict vegetarian diet that included whole grains and only two meals a day. Butter, tea, and coffee were strictly forbidden as were medicine, tobacco, and alcohol. Hydratherapy, the use of water baths and wraps, was used as a treatment for disease. These were not unique ideas in the mid-nineteenth century. Before the Civil War, preachers and medical doctors advocated fresh air, vegetarianism, and abstinence from tobacco and alcohol as alternatives to traditional medical treatments such as blood letting, blistering, and purging. Medical clinics, called water cures, opened across the country before the Civil War. These health reform ideas were readily available in publications and some people suggested that White took her ideas from medical doctors who had previously published articles on the topic. White claimed that she never read their articles before writing down the ideas she received in visions.

In 1865, a vision inspired White to establish the church's first health institute to care for the sick and to teach preventive medicine in an atmosphere of Adventist spirituality. The Western Health Reform Institute (later the Battle Creek Sanitarium) was established in Battle Creek in 1866. It operated under the direction of John Harvey Kellogg, who later invented Cornflake breakfast cereal and founded the Kellogg Company. The institute attracted patients from around the world. The sanitarium left the control of the church in 1906 following a dispute between White and Kellogg.

Continued Preaching and Publishing

Despite the fact that health reform was a defining characteristic of the church, the White family continued to suffer health problems throughout their lives. Henry White died of pneumonia at the age of 16 in 1863.

During the 1870s, the Whites traveled extensively on behalf of the church. Much of their work was in the west, where they established Pacific Press Publishing Association. White spoke at camp meetings, churches, conferences, in town squares, and even prisons. Temperence was a frequent topic and in 1877 it was reported that White spoke on that topic to an audience of 20,000 people in Groveland, Massachusetts.

The Whites also established schools, beginning with Battle Creek College (later Andrews University) in 1874. The church's membership increased five-fold between 1863 and 1880. James White's health deteriorated in the late 1870s and he died on August 6, 1881. White became even more involved in the church and her son Willie took on more responsibilities. In the 1880s, White began spreading the Adventist message worldwide. She traveled to Europe in 1885-1889 and lived in Australia for nine years beginning in 1891. White established a bible school and a sanitarium in Australia. When she returned to the United States at the age of 71, she moved to Elmshaven, a rural town in northern California, from which she traveled throughout the South preaching to African Americans. She founded Oakwood College, a school for African Americans, in Huntsville, Alabama, and established the Southern Publishing Association in Nashville, Tennessee.

White spearheaded a reorganization of the church in 1901. In 1903, she moved its headquarters from Battle Creek to suburban Washington, D.C. She also established medical schools to train doctors for the church's health facilities. In 1909, she founded the College of Medical Evangelists at Loma Linda, California, which is now Loma Linda University and Medical Center. White continued writing, completing a number of books and articles between 1910 and 1915. In total, White wrote 26 books and numerous articles and pamphlets. Together with her diaries and other writings, she produced more than 100,000 pages in her lifetime.

In February 1915, White broke her hip in a fall. She was confined to a wheelchair and died five months later, on July 16, 1915, in Elmshaven, California, at the age of 87. She was buried beside her husband and sons in Battle Creek, Michigan.

After White's death, the Seventh Day Adventist Church continued to grow and draw inspiration from her teachings. Church membership increased from 135,000 in 1915 to more than 12.3 million in 2001. The church's network of schools and hospitals has also expanded.

White's books are still considered a major source of inspiration in the church. They've been translated into 320 languages. All are still in print and are available and searchable on the official website of the Ellen G. White Estate, a corporation established in her will, at www.whiteestate.com.

Books

Numbers, Ronald L., Prophetess of Health: A Study of Ellen G. White, Harper & Row, 1976.

Women in World History: A Biographical Encyclopedia, Anne Commire, editor, Yorkin Publications, 1999.

Online

"139th Annual Statistical Report-2001," General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, www.adventist.org (February 21, 2003).

American Decades CD-ROM, Gale Research, 1998.

White, Arthur L., "Ellen G. White: A Brief Biography," The Ellen G. White Estate Inc. web site, www.whiteestate.org (February 20, 2003). The Bible says

Rev. 12: 17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Rev. 19: 10 And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

The text says that the remnant church of God, those who are loyal to Jesus in whichever age it exists, will have the testimony of Jesus. That is the ability to testify of Jesus. Testify of Jesus means to be able to speak about and to explain about our own living relationship with Jesus which has saved us. Furthermore the next text tells us that the testimony of Jesus, the ability to witness for and of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy. The Spirit being the comforter, the Holy spirit of God (John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.) When we remember that the Church of God is all who believe in Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. We see that this ability is to be something that identifies those who belong to Jesus. In other words, when we have Jesus as our Lord and Saviour and develop a living relationship with Him, we will want to testify of Jesus so that others can share in the Joy that only our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ can bring.

According to the following texts the Bible encourages all believers to be asking God for the gift of prophecy. Thus placing it among the highest of the Holy Spirits gifts to every church member. It is not something that only one person in the church should claim, but something all true believers have, a part of their personal living experience with Christ.

Romans 12: 5 So we, being many, are one body (the church) in Christ, and every one members one of another. 6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith;

1 Corinthians 12:28 28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Ephesians 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

Ephesians 2:20 – the ability to testify of Jesus (prophesy) helped to establish the Christian church.

Acts 13:1, 2 – the ability to prophecy was in many people in the Christian church. Not any one person.

1 Corinthians 14: 3, 4 Paul says that the ability to testify of Jesus edifies the church. Obviously, if a person uplifts Jesus, they uplift those who follow Jesus at the same time.

Ephesians 4:11 – 15 tells us that we unify the church by testifying on Jesus. Jesus is the only means of unifying the church. When our minds are all focused on Jesus as in the upper room, the Holy Spirit will be able to work on us and enable us to testify of Jesus as did the disciples on the day of Pentecost.

In short, the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy which is the ability through the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives, to testify of Jesus. As the Spirit spoken of here is of the Holy Spirit, we are not nor can any human being be the Spirit of Prophecy. To make such a claim is blasphemy, for it is to claim that such a person is God. We can however enact the Spirit of Prophecy (testify of Jesus) in our lives, and in fact the Bible is very clear on this subject, all God’s followers should be witnesses for Jesus, utilising the gifts that we have in this purpose.

Where does this leave the claims of many sincere believers inside the Seventh - day Adventist church regarding the idea that Ellen White is the Spirit of Prophecy and is as a consequence the last court of appeal for truth and doctrine.

In Selected Messages Book 1 page 164 Ellen White says that her writings should not be used to define doctrine, nor should they be used by preachers in the pulpit. In the same book on page 165 she admits to there being mistakes in her books which she asks the learned men in the church to correct.

In the Review and Herald July 26 1906 Ellen white states that “To claim to be a prophetess is something that I have never done. Also found in the book, “The Seventh-Day Adventist Believe”. Page 255 para 3

So it is clear Ellen White never claimed to be a prophetess, though she had no problem with people saying that she enacted the Spirit of Prophecy in her work. Which she did to the best of her ability as a good Christian follower of Jesus. Unfortunately she also made claims to represent as some have interpreted it, the “thoughts of Jesus”.

"Ellen White makes it very clear that we should always use the Bible and only the Bible as our guide in our lives and learning about Jesus. The Seventh-Day Adventist Believe page 247 para 1 “The Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested”. Page 258 para 2 , 3 further states that Ellen Whites writings are not a substitute for the Scriptures but are subject to the Scriptures. Page 259 Para 2 She saw her writings as leading people back to the Scriptures, (Testimonies Vol. 5. 663) these statements contradict the statement in Seventh-Day Adventists Believe, chapter 18 page 247 where it states that Ellen G Whites writings are “a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction”. For we cannot have both Ellen Whites writings as the continuing authoritative source of truth and the Bible the Holy Scriptures as one the same. Either we test doctrines by the Scriptures or by Ellen White. You cannot make her writings thus unless you canonise Ellen White’s writings. If you do this and make Ellen Whites writings equal to Scriptures, you go against the advice of Ellen White and make the denomination into a cult.

On a personal basis, we can now with this understanding see that God has His servants and prophets all around us. Stott in 20th century London, who came from the Anglican Church would by his actions fit this description. Desmond Ford 20th century of the Seventh-day Adventist church would also fit this description. As would Froom, and many other servants of God too numerous to mention. Which includes each one of the true followers of Jesus, when we share our belief in Jesus with others.

One of the problems that this blasphemous belief inside our denomination has, is that it entrenches the denomination’s ideology and beliefs in the light of Ellen White writings. Thus stifling study of the Bible and further revelation of the great truths the Bible contains. When Hebrew and Greek scholars have pointed out problems with interpretations of the Holy Scriptures, Ellen White has been used by the leaders of the denomination to stifle spiritual growth and understanding. The denomination using her as the final court of appeal, a position that only the Holy Scriptures should be given. When members and ministers say something about the need for change, they are judged, and in the case of many ministers, sacked, unless they can conform to the exact liturgy of the book “Seventh-Day Adventists Believe”, (Which includes these erroneous beliefs in Ellen White) and in the case of many members, outcast for their Biblical stand.

These problems are all available for view and to read on the internet. Hence the need for an immediate remedy of this problem. For the denominations entrenchment in this area is causing converts and probable converts to turn their back on the denomination and to look for Jesus elsewhere. This is sad when we remember that the Seventh-Day Adventist denomination, even with its faults, in the light of this author’s research, is the closest denomination in teachings to the Jerusalem Church which Jesus set up.

A continuance of these beliefs by the denomination will restrict it in its attempts to follow the church’s commission to take the Gospel to the entire world, while it holds to these false beliefs.

Ellen White is like any good Christian leader in the Christian Church, like Martin Luther, or John Wesley, they were great reformers and leaders who pointed to Jesus as our Lord and Saviour. It is true to say, when studying the history of the Seventh day Adventist church, that our church may not have existed now, or at least have had the evangelical fervour that it has, nor the infrastructure of schools and hospitals were it not for her leadership. However, that does not make her a prophet, nor does it edify her writings as equal or above the Bible. The Bible does not teach this, nor does Ellen White. The Seventh-Day Adventist denominations problem with its use of Ellen G White.

The Seventh-day Adventist denomination has a problem with its use of Ellen White. In the book Seventh-Day Adventists Believe, chapter 18 page 247 it states that Ellen G Whites writings are “a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction”. The problem is that for those of us who view ourselves as Seventh-day Adventist Christians, this statement is blasphemous. For only God can claim to be “a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction”through the Holy Scriptures, the Bible.

In the gospel of John Jesus tells us that He is sending us the Holy Spirit to provide comfort and instruction. John 14: 26 But the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. NIV 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. KJV John 15: 26 "When the Counsellor (Comforter) comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me”. John 16: 7 But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counsellor (Comforter) will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; 10 in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11 and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned. 12 "I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. Although the words utilised by the denomination may duplicate themselves and be different to those used by Jesus, they mean the same. Jesus is sending us as individuals the Holy Spirit to provide us with comfort, guidance, instruction and correction.

So what of the promise in Amos 3:7 that God will provide His church with His servants the prophets. Surely the Sovereign LORD does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets.

Firstly the word for servant means bond man or slave servant. In other words, it is a person who is totally dedicated to his masters will and works towards their Lord’s ends, not their ebed eh’ slave, servant) So anyone who does the will of God‘ עבד own ends. (Strongs 05650 is His servant. In fact all of God’s people are commanded to do the will of Jesus, that is to do as Jesus did. John 14:12 I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. That is why I do the things that I do, including keeping the Seventh day Sabbath.

Secondly, what is a prophet? To most of us, we think of a prophet as someone who foretells ,nabiy’ naw-bee’ a spokesman נביא things. However this is not the case. (Strongs 05030 speaker, prophet). So we see it has a far greater meaning then just that of a person who foretells. It is someone who speaks on behalf of God. It is someone who publically speaks. It is someone who points to the consequences of peoples actions. Above all a Prophet is someone who points people to Jesus. Very little of the prophets writings actually foretell anything. However, nowhere does the Bible teach us that a person who acts as a prophet is without fault or cannot make mistakes. In fact the Bible is full of examples of prophets who made mistakes.

So in a matter of fact, every time a person sees a spiritual falsehood and speaks out for Jesus; they are acting as a prophet. Every time a person shares with people the messages of Jesus, the Gospel, they are acting as a prophet. However, that does not make everything that we say prophetic, nor always accurate. We all grow in faith and understanding as we progress through our lives. God moves through His people and leads us to an understanding through our own individual growth path in our personal relationship with Him. Only as and when we are mentally able does the Holy Spirit lead us to a new understanding (further light) about the salvation that Jesus has brought for us. We become a prophet when we share this light and discuss it so as to ascertain its accuracy in the light of Scripture, with others who also have a similar experience. In this sense, Ellen White, like her husband and many other great reformers in God’s church down through the ages have acted as did the prophets. That does not edify the person, nor make that person “a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction and correction”. (Seventh-Day Adventist Believe. 247) Such a statement made about any person in fact edifies the person to the position which should only in truth be held by and given to God. Such a statement is in fact a blasphemy and makes the perpetrators of such a statement a cult. (I use the word church to refer to all the saints of God, not to the members of any one denomination.)

Ellen White contradicts the

Bible over fifty times

By Robert K. Sanders and Sydney Cleveland

1. Was the plan of salvation made after the fall?

EGW: YES "The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race" (Great Controversy, p. 347).

BIBLE: NO 1 Pet 1:18 - 19 (NIV) 18For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.

BIBLE: NO Eph 1:4 (NIV) 4For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.

Note: The Gospel of salvation through grace by faith in Jesus Christ was already in existence before the creation of this world. EGW contradicts the Bible by claiming the plan of salvation was devised after the fall of Adam and Eve.

2. Was Adam with Eve when she was tempted in the garden?

EGW: NO "The angels had cautioned Eve to beware of separating herself from her husband while occupied in their daily labor in the garden; with him she would be in less temptation than if she were alone. But absorbed in her pleasing task, she unconsciously wandered from his side. On perceiving that she was alone, she felt an apprehension of danger. ... She soon found herself gazing with mingled curiosity and admiration upon the forbidden tree" (Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 53, 54). BIBLE: YES Gen 3:6 (NIV) 6When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

3. Was Adam deceived by Satan?

EGW: YES "Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law" (Evangelism, p. 598).

BIBLE: NO 1 Tim 2:14 (NIV) 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Note: Who showed E. G. White that Satan deceived Adam, when the Bible says Adam was not deceived? So who is deceiving us?

4. Who spoke to Cain?

EGW: ANGEL "Through an angel messenger the divine warning was conveyed: 'If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?'" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 74).

BIBLE: Gen 4:6 - 7, (NIV) 6Then the LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it.”

Note: It is the Lord speaking to Cain in Gen 4: 6, 7, 10, 13, 15-16 not an angel messenger. SDAs often try to reconcile this contradiction by claiming the Lord spoke to Cain through an angel. If so, then why didn't the Bible tell us the truth? When Moses wrote this account, why didn't God tell Moses He spoke to Cain through an angel? Why would our omniscient God let Moses write down the wrong thing? And, if EGW is right, then Jesus was wrong when He said in John 17:17, "Your word is truth." For EGW to be right, the Bible, Moses, and Jesus Christ all have to be wrong!

5. Did pre-flood humans mate with animals and give birth to new sub-human species and races?

EGW: YES "But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 64). EGW: YES "Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 75).

BIBLE: NO Gen 1:24 - 25 (NIV) 24And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

Note: Five times in these two verses God states that animals can only reproduce according "to their own kinds." Horses cannot mate with birds and produce offspring -- neither can humans mate with monkeys and produce offspring. Even SDA scientists and the Ellen White Estate admit EGW was simply wrong.

6. Did god or an angel shut the door of Noah's ark?

EGW: ANGEL "An angel is seen by the scoffing multitude descending from heaven clothed with brightness like the lightning. He closes that massive outer door, and takes his course upward to heaven again" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 68, written in 1864).

EGW: GOD "... God had shut it, and God alone could open it" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 98, written in 1890).

BIBLE: GOD Gen 7:16 (NIV) 16The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the LORD shut him in.

Note: The Bible says the Lord shut Noah in, EGW disagreed in 1864 saying it was an angel who shut the door. Then twenty-six years later in 1890, she changed her mind and wrote that it really was God who shut the door. First she contradicted the Bible and then she contradicted herself. SDAs try to reconcile EGW with the Bible by saying, "Oh, God used an angel to shut the door." If so, then why doesn't the Bible tell us that? Why is it that none of the Bible prophets knew God "used an angel"? Why was this information only available to Christians through EGW? And why does her information contradict every one of the Bible writers? If the OT Bible record was wrong, then why did Jesus say the Bible is "truth" (John 17:17)? For EGW to be right, the Bible, Moses, Jesus and Ellen White herself have to be wrong!

7. Was the tower of Babel built before the flood?

EGW: YES "This system was corrupted before the flood by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God, and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 301).

BIBLE: NO Gen 9:28, 11:4 (NIV) 28After the flood ... they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth"

Note: This was one of the first EGW contradictions that SDAs found and corrected. They claimed it was just a typographical error, forgetting that EGW claimed the "very word" she wrote came from God!

When writing these precious books, if I hesitated, the very word I wanted to express the idea was given to me (Selected Messages, vol. 3, pp. 51,52). 1907).

I am just as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in relating or writing the vision as in having the vision (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, p. 293).

8. Was the tower of Babel built to escape another flood?

EGW: YES "The dwellers on the plain of Shinar disbelieved God's covenant that He would not again bring a flood upon the earth. Many of them denied the existence of God and attributed the Flood to the operation of natural causes. ... One object before them in the erection of the tower was to secure their own safety in case of another deluge. By carrying the structure to a much greater height than was reached by the waters of the Flood, they thought to place themselves beyond all possibility of danger. And as they would be able to ascend to the region of the clouds, they hoped to ascertain the cause of the Flood" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 119).

BIBLE: NO Gen 11:4 (NIV) 4Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

9. Was Moses' wife Zipporah, a "Cushite?

EGW: YES "(Miriam) complained of Moses because he married an Ethiopian (Cushite) woman" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4, p. 19). EGW: NO "Though called a 'Cushite woman' (Numbers 12:1, R.V.), the wife of Moses was a Midianite, and thus a descendant of Abraham" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 383).

BIBLE: YES Num 12:1 (KJV) 1And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for he had married an Ethiopian woman.

10. Were the Israelites destroyed by gluttony?

EGW: YES "God granted their desire, giving them flesh, and leaving them to eat till their gluttony produced a plague, from which many of them died." (Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 148).

BIBLE: Num. 11:4 - 11:6 (NIV) 4The rabble with them began to crave other food, and again the Israelites started wailing and said, "If only we had meat to eat! 5We remember the fish we ate in Egypt at no cost—also the cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic. 6But now we have lost our appetite; we never see anything but this manna!"

Num. 11:3 - 34 (NIV) 31Now a wind went out from the LORD and drove quail in from the sea. It brought them down all around the camp to about three feet above the ground, as far as a day’s walk in any direction. 32All that day and night and all the next day the people went out and gathered quail. No one gathered less than ten homers. Then they spread them out all around the camp. 33But while the meat was still between their teeth and before it could be consumed, the anger of the LORD burned against the people, and he struck them with a severe plague. 34Therefore the place was named Kibroth Hattaavah, because there they buried the people who had craved other food.

Note: EGW says the Israelites died because their gluttony produced a plague. The Bible says God struck them with a "severe plague" because they "craved other food". Numbers 11:4, 31-35.

SDAs try to justify EGW's error by appealing to Psalm 105:40 which says: "They asked, and he brought them quail and satisfied them with the bread of heaven." However, Psalm 105:40 refers to the first time God gave His people quail to eat at the same time He began giving them manna (Exodus 16:11-13). There's nothing in Exodus 16:11-13 or Psalm 105:40 about gluttony or people dying because they ate too much meat or manna. Anyone thinking EGW was referring to Exodus 16:11-13 has to admit she contradicted the Bible by saying people died from gluttony when there was no gluttony and no one died from eating quail!

The fact is Ellen White was referring to the second time God sent quail (Numbers 11:13, 18-23, 31-34). God told them He would give them enough meat to eat for a month -- enough to eat until it "came out their nostrils!" The Bible says a wind from God blew quail into the camp until they were piled three feet deep all around the camp. And the Bible says the people went out and gathered quail all day, all night, and all another day. The Bible says after they gathered it, and spread it around the camp, the "anger of the Lord burned against the people, and he struck them with a severe plague "when the meat was still within their teeth." EGW plainly contradicted the Bible by claiming they died from gluttony when no gluttony occurred in either incident!

11. Did God send ravens to feed Elijah?

EGW: NO "There He honored Elijah by sending food to him morning and evening by an angel of heaven" (Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 288 written in 1873).

EGW: YES "He who fed Elijah by the brook, making a raven His messenger" (Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 253 written in 1876).

BIBLE: YES 1 Kin 17:4, 6(NIV) 4...I have ordered the ravens to feed you there... The ravens brought him bread and meat"

Note: In 1873 EGW contradicted the Bible when she said Elijah was fed by an angel. Then three years later in 1876 she changed her mind and agreed with the Bible that it really was a raven. Then, a year after her death, her editors tried to smooth things over by omitting any reference to either an angel or a raven—they changed EGW's words to say Elijah was just "miraculously provided with food" (Prophets and Kings, p. 129 published in 1916).

12. Did Samson disobey God when he married a Philistine?

EGW: YES "A young woman dwelling in the Philistine town of Timnath engaged Samson's affections, and he determined to make her his wife. ... The parents at last yielded to his wishes, and the marriage took place. ... The time when he must execute his divine mission -- the time above all others when he should have been true to God -- Samson connected himself with the enemies of Israel. ... He was placing himself in a position where he could not fulfill the purpose to be accomplished by his life. ... The wife, to obtain whom Samson had transgressed the command of God, proved treacherous to her husband" (Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 562,563).

BIBLE: NO Judg 14:3- 4 (NIV) But Samson said to his father, “Get her for me. She’s the right one for me.” 4 (His parents did not know that this was from the LORD, who was seeking an occasion to confront the Philistines; for at that time they were ruling over Israel.)

13. Did the high priest carry the blood of sacrificed animals into the holy place each day? EGW: YES "The most important part of the daily ministration was the service performed in behalf of individuals. ... By his own hand the animal was then slain, and the blood was carried by the priest into the holy place and sprinkled before the veil, behind which was the ark containing the law that the sinner had transgressed. By this ceremony the sin was, through the blood, transferred in figure to the sanctuary" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 354).

BIBLE: NO Apart from the annual Day of Atonement, the priest only sprinkled blood "before the veil" in the Holy Place on two occasions: (1) when a priest sinned (Leviticus 4:3- 12); (2) when the whole Israelite community sinned (Leviticus 4:13-21). Blood was never taken into the Holy Place on a daily basis when a leader sinned (Leviticus 4:22-26), nor when an individual sinned (Leviticus 4:27-35).

Note: Thus EGW contradicted the Bible by saying the sins of the individual were "transferred in figure to the (Holy Place of the) sanctuary" "through the blood" sacrificed on a daily basis.

14. Did Christ resemble other children?

EGW: Yes 1896 "He was to be like those who belonged to the human family and the Jewish race. His features were to be like those of other human beings, and he was not to have such beauty of person as to make people point him out as different from others" (Christ Our Saviour, p. 9, Edition 1896).

EGW: No 1898 "No one, looking upon the childlike countenance, shining with animation, could say that Christ was just like other children" (Questions on Doctrine, p. 649, 1957).

BIBLE: Yes Isa 53:2 (NIV) 2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

15. Was the man Jesus Christ also truly God?

EGW: NO "The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129).

BIBLE: YES Isa 9:6 (NIV) For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

BIBLE: YES Rev 1:7-8 (NIV) Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. 'I am the Alpha and the Omega,' says the Lord God, 'who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty. BIBLE: YES Phil 2:9 (NIV) "Therefore God exalted him (Jesus) to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name.

16. While tempting Jesus, did Satan claim to be the angel who had saved Isaac from certain death?

EGW: YES "As soon as the long fast of Christ commenced in the wilderness, Satan was at hand with his temptations. He ... tried to make Christ believe that God did not require Him to pass through self-denial and the sufferings He anticipated. ... He (Satan) also stated he was the angel that stayed the hand of Abraham as the knife was raised to slay Isaac" (Selected Messages) vol. 1, p. 273).

Note: You may read the Bible from cover to cover and you will not find any evidence to validate this supposed conversation between Christ and Satan.

17. Who chose Judas to be one of Jesus' twelve disciples?

EGW: CHRIST CHOSE JUDAS "When Judas was chosen by our Lord, his case was not hopeless" (Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 41).

EGW: DISCIPLES CHOSE JUDAS "The disciples were anxious that Judas should become one of their number. ... They commended him to Jesus" (The Desire of Ages, p. 294).

EGW: JUDAS CHOSE HIMSELF "While Jesus was preparing the disciples for their ordination, one who had not been summoned urged his presence among them. It was Judas Iscariot, a man who professed to be a follower of Christ. He now came forward soliciting a place in this inner circle of disciples. ... He hoped to experience this through connecting himself with Jesus" (The Desire of Ages, pp. 293, 717).

BIBLE: JESUS CHOSE JUDAS

Luke 6:13 - 16 (NIV) 13When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them, whom he also designated apostles: 14Simon (whom he named Peter), his brother Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, 15Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, 16Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.

John 6:70 - 71 (NIV) 70Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!” 71(He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.) John 15:16 (NIV) 16You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.

18. Did dogs eat Judas' remains?

EGW: YES " His weight had broken the cord by which he had hanged himself to the tree. In falling, his body had been horribly mangled, and dogs were now devouring it. His remains were immediately buried out of sight;" (The Desire of Ages, p. 722).

BIBLE: NO Mat 27:5 (NIV) So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.

"With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out." (Acts 1:18 NIV)

Note: The Scripture is very plain, no dogs were involved in feasting on Judas's remains. This is more of EGW's, "precious light from the throne."

19. Did Herod place a tattered robe on Jesus?

EGW: YES "At the Suggestion of Herod, a crown was plaited from a vine bearing sharp thorns, and this was placed upon the sacred brow, of Jesus; and an old tattered purple robe, once the garment of a king, was placed upon his noble form." 3 Spirit of Prophecy p.138, 1887 Edition. "Behold Him clothed in that old purple robe" (1Testimonies, p. 241).

BIBLE: NO Luke 23:11 (NIV) Then Herod and his soldiers ridiculed and mocked him. Dressing him in an elegant robe, they sent him back to Pilate.

Note: Was it a tattered robe or an elegant robe that was placed on Jesus? Why would God give Ellen a different picture than the one given in Scripture?

20. Did Jesus faint three times under the cross?

EGW: YES "He was weak and feeble through pain and suffering, caused by the scourging and blows which he had received, yet they laid on him the heavy cross upon which they were soon to nail him. But Jesus fainted beneath the burden. Three times they laid on him the heavy cross, and three times he fainted" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 57).

BIBLE: NO Matt 27:32 (NIV) As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross.

BIBLE: NO Mark 15:21(NIV) A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross.

BIBLE: NO Luke 23:26 (NIV) As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus.

Note: Nowhere in the Bible is there a single statement that Jesus fainted even once, much less three times! The Bible writers were careful to mention that there was three people crucified that day, but somehow they didn't see Jesus faint three times!

21. Did Satan tempt Christ?

In this case EGW agrees with the Bible record that Jesus was tempted at the beginning of the forty day fast. But makes heretical statements.

EGW: Start of forty days: As soon as the long fast of Christ commenced in the wilderness, Satan was at hand with his temptations. He came to Christ, enshrouded in light, claiming to be one of the angels from the throne of God, sent upon an errand of mercy to sympathize with him, and to relieve him of his suffering condition. He tried to make Christ believe that God did not require him to pass through self-denial and the sufferings he anticipated; that he had been sent from Heaven to bear to him the message that God only designed to prove his willingness to endure. Satan told Christ that he was only to set his feet in the blood-stained path, but not to travel it. Like Abraham he was tested to show his perfect obedience. He also stated that he was the angel that stayed the hand of Abraham as the knife was raised to slay Isaac, and he had now come to save his life; that it was not necessary for him to endure the painful hunger and death from starvation; he would help him bear a part of the work in the plan of salvation. (Review and Herald, August 4, 1874) Note: Where in the Bible does it teach that Satan offered to help Jesus with the plan of salvation? If you accept this heresy, then you will not have any problem accepting the rest of EGW's claims that Satan made.

1. sent upon an errand of mercy to sympathize with him, and to relieve him of his suffering condition.

2. God did not require him to pass through self-denial and the sufferings he anticipated;

3. sent from Heaven to bear to him the message that God only designed to prove his willingness to endure.

4. He also stated that he was the angel that stayed the hand of Abraham as the knife was raised to slay Isaac, and he had now come to save his life;

5. that it was not necessary for him to endure the painful hunger and death from starvation;

EGW: Start of forty days: "As soon as the long fast of Christ commenced, Satan was at hand with his temptations...Satan told Christ ...that it was not necessary for him to endure this painful hunger and death from starvation" (Redemption of the Temptation of Christ, p. 37 1874 Edition).

Note: Where does the Bible teach Satan telling Jesus, "that it was not necessary for him to endure this painful hunger and death from starvation"?

EGW: Start of forty days: "As soon as Christ began his fast, Satan appeared as an angel of light, and claimed to be a messenger of heaven. He told him it was not the will of God that he should suffer this pain and self denial" (Christ Our Saviour p. 45. 1 Selected Messages p.273).

Note: Where does the Bible teach Satan telling Jesus, "it was not the will of God that he should suffer this pain and self denial"?

EGW: Start of forty days: "Forty days He was tempted of Satan" (Early Writings p.155).

EGW: After Fast : " When Jesus entered the wilderness, He was shut in by the Father’s glory...But the glory departed, and He was left to battle with temptation. For forty days he fasted and prayed... Now was Satan’s opportunity. Now he supposed he could overcome Christ." (The Desire of Ages p.118)

BIBLE: After Fast: Matt 4:1 - 4 (NIV) 1Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. 2After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.” 4Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God. BIBLE: Start of forty days: Mark 1:12 - 13 (NIV) 12At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert, 13and he was in the desert forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him.

BIBLE: Start of forty days: Luke 4:1 - 2 (NIV) 1Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the desert, 2where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. (Luke then records Satan's three temptations at the end of the forty days. Vs 3-13 to make bread out of stones, given kingdoms to worship Satan and to prove his is the Son of God by jumping off of the Temple.)

22. Was Mary led away from the scene and Jesus' bones broken during his crucifixion?

EGW: YES "The mother of Jesus was agonized, almost beyond endurance, and as they stretched Jesus upon the cross, and were about to fasten his hands with the cruel nails to the wooden arms, the disciples bore the mother of Jesus from the scene, that she might not hear the crashing of the nails as they were driven through the bone and muscle of his tender hands and feet" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 58, written in 1858).

EGW: NO "His hands stretched upon the cross; the hammer and the nails were brought, and as the spikes were driven through the tender flesh, ..." (The Desire of Ages, p. 744, written in 1898).

BIBLE: NO Luke 23:27, 49, 55 (NIV) "A large number of people followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him. ... All those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things (the crucifixion). The women who had come with Jesus from Galilee followed Joseph and saw the tomb and how his body was laid in it".

BIBLE: NO John 19:25 (NIV) Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.

BIBLE: NO John 19:25, 36 (NIV) ... These things happened so that the scriptures would be fulfilled: 'Not one of his bones will be broken'".

Note: There is no Bible record of Mary being led from the scene so she wouldn't hear the crashing of the nails through his bones. The Bible says she stood nearby with the other women watching the crucifixion and then followed the burial party to watch his interment in the tomb. The Bible tells us that Jesus, as symbolized by the Passover Lamb, was not to have any of his bones broken: Exodus 12:46; Numbers 9:12; Psalm 34:20. When EGW compiled the Desire of Ages, 40 years after she first wrote that the nails were driven through his "bone and muscle," she changed her account to read: the nails were driven "through the tender flesh."

23. Did Jesus' humanity and divinity die on the cross?

EGW: YES "In him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. Men need to understand that Deity suffered and sank under the agonies of Calvary." (Manuscript 44, 1898, and the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 907).

EGW: NO "The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary" (Letter: 1899, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 5, page 1129).

BIBLE: YES 1 Thess 4:14 (NIV) We believe that Jesus died and rose again.

Note: The Bible repeatedly states that Jesus, the total Person, died on the cross. Four of the first heresies Christianity faced (Appolinarianism, Arianism, Docetism and Nestorianism) denied that Jesus was fully human and fully Divine as a person. Orthodox Christianity maintained the complete unity of Christ's nature in both His life and death. Thus Ellen White not only contradicted the Bible and orthodox Christianity, she also contradicted herself.

24. Did Jesus die to give us a second probation?

EGW: YES "Death entered the world because of transgression. But Christ gave his life that man should have another trial. He did not die on the cross to abolish the law of God, but to secure for man a second probation" (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 134).

BIBLE: NO 2 Cor 6:2 (NIV) I tell you, now is the time of God's favor, now is the day of salvation.

BIBLE: NO Heb 2:3 (NIV) How shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation?

BIBLE: NO Heb 9:27-28 (NIV) Man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

Note: The Bible clearly teaches that there is no second chance for salvation. Everyone living before Christ was saved exactly the same way as everyone living after Christ -- during their lifetime everyone accepts either God's gift of salvation through Christ or is excluded from eternal life. Jesus death on the cross was not an afterthought, not a second probation and not a second chance.

25. Was the atonement for sin completed at the cross?

EGW: NO "Instead of ... Daniel 8:14 referring to the purifying of the earth, it was now plain that it pointed to the closing work of our High Priest in heaven, the finishing of the atonement, and the preparing of the people to abide the day of His coming" (Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 58).

EGW: NO "Jesus entered the most holy of the heavenly (sanctuary), at the end of the 2300 days of Daniel 8, in 1844, to make a final atonement for all who could be benefited by His mediation" (Early Writings, p. 253).

EGW: YES "He [Christ] planted the cross between Heaven and earth, and when the Father beheld the sacrifice of His Son, He bowed before it in recognition of its perfection. "It is enough," He said. "The Atonement is complete." The Review and Herald, Sept. 24, 1901.

BIBLE: YES John 19:30 (NIV) When he had received the drink, Jesus said, 'It is finished.' With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.

BIBLE: YES Rom 3:21-25 (NIV) But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood.

BIBLE: YES Rom 5:9 -11 (NIV) Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through him! For if, when we were God's enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! Not only is this so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Note: The Bible totally rejects EGW's idea of the 2300 days and an investigative judgment in the heavenly sanctuary beginning in 1844. Notice how the Bible texts quoted above were all written less than thirty years after Jesus' resurrection, and all clearly state that Christians living then were already fully justified, redeemed, sanctified and reconciled to God through Christ's death on the cross. As cult-watchers, Martin and Barnhouse stated: "The (SDA sanctuary doctrine) is the most colossal, psychological, face-saving phenomenon in religious history! We personally do not believe that there is even a suspicion of a verse in Scripture to sustain such a peculiar position. And we further believe that any effort to establish it is stale, flat, and unprofitable."

26. Does the blood of Christ cancel sin?

EGW: NO "The blood of Christ, while it was to release the repentant sinner from the condemnation of the law, was not to cancel sin ... it will stand in the sanctuary until the final atonement" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 357).

BIBLE: YES "In him we have ("have" is present tense) redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins" (Ephesians 1:7). BIBLE: YES 1 John 1:7 (NIV) And the blood of Jesus, his son purifies us from every sin.

BIBLE: YES Rom 4:7-8 (NIV) Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him".

Note: To forgive means to pardon, give up all rights to punish, to forever cancel a debt. Jesus did all that for us when He shed His blood for us. The Bible says that forgiven sins are never counted against an individual. However Ellen White contradicts the Bible by claiming God stores up our sins and later punishes us for them if we do not measure up to His standard before the final atonement. This idea causes millions of SDAs agony as they question whether or not they will be saved.

27. Are confessed sins transferred to the heavenly sanctuary by the blood of Christ?

EGW: YES "As the sins of the people were anciently transferred in figure, to the earthly sanctuary by the blood of the sin-offering, so our sins are, in fact, transferred to the heavenly sanctuary by the blood of Christ." (Great Controversy p. 266 1886 Edition).

EGW: YES "As anciently the sins of the people were by faith placed upon the sin offering and through its blood transferred in figure to the earthly sanctuary so in the new covenant the sins of the repentant are by faith placed upon Christ and transferred, in fact, to the heavenly sanctuary." (Great Controversy p. 421 1911 Edition).

BIBLE: NO Eph1:7 NIV) But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin. 1 John 1:7 (NIV) In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace.

Note: There is no Scripture to support E. G. White’s teaching that confessed sins are transferred to the heavenly sanctuary "by the blood of Christ" in 1886 and she changed it to read, "by faith placed upon Christ" and transferred to the heavenly sanctuary to be dealt with at a later date in an Investigative Judgment. The Bible teaches our confessed sins are completely covered by the blood of the Lamb.

28. Who bears our sins?

EGW: SATAN "It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. ... Christ will place all these sins upon Satan, ... so Satan, ... will at last suffer the full penalty of sin" (Great Controversy, p. 422, 485, 486). BIBLE: JESUS 1 Pet 2:24 (NIV) He himself (Jesus Christ) bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed.

29. Does God require a trespass offering before he pardons us?

EGW: YES "You cannot make every case right, for some whom you have injured have gone into their graves, and the account stands registered against you. In these cases the best you can do is to bring a trespass offering to the altar of the Lord, and He will accept and pardon you" (Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 339).

BIBLE: NO 1 John 1:9 (NIV) If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.

Note: Sins are forgiven by having faith in Jesus. Mark 2:5 (NIV) 5When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Son, your sins are forgiven.” EGW contradicts the Bible by telling you to bring a trespass offering in order to be pardoned.

30. Can we say we are saved right now by Christ's grace?

EGW: NO "Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or feel that they are saved. ... Those who accept Christ, and in their first confidence say, I am saved, are in danger of trusting to themselves" (Christ's Object Lessons, p. 155).

BIBLE: YES 1 John 5:13 (NIV) I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

31. Can the faith of believing parents save their children?

EGW: YES "I know that some questioned whether the little children of even believing parents should be saved, because they have had no test of character and all must be tested and their character determined by trial. The question is asked, 'How can little children have this test and trial?' I answer that the faith of the believing parents covers the children" (Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 313).

BIBLE: NO Eze 14:17- 20 (NIV) If I bring a sword against that country ... and I kill its men and their animals, as surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, even if these three men (Noah, Daniel and Job) were in it, they could not save their own sons or daughters. They alone would be saved. Or if I send a plague into that land and pour out My wrath upon it, ... even if Noah, Daniel and Job were in it, they could save neither son nor daughter. They would save only themselves by their righteousness".

BIBLE: NO Eze 18:20 (NIV) The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him (Ezekiel 18:20).

BIBLE: NO Eze 33:20 (NIV) I will judge each of you according to his own ways.

32. Will the sins of the slave be transferred to the slave master?

EGW: YES "I saw that the slave master will have to answer for the soul of his slave whom he has kept in ignorance; and the sins of the slave will be visited upon (transferred to) the master" (Early Writings, p. 276).

BIBLE: NO Eze 33:20 (NIV) "I will judge each of you according to his own ways.

BIBLE: NO Eze 18:20 (NIV) The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him. Did Judas Have a Conviction to Confess His Sin?

33. Can ignorant slaves be saved?

EGW: NO "God cannot take to heaven the slave who has been kept in ignorance and degradation, knowing nothing of God or the Bible, fearing nothing but his master's lash, and holding a lower position than the brutes" (Early Writings, p. 276).

BIBLE: YES "The true light (Jesus) that gives light to every man was coming into the world" (John 1:9).

34. Can we legitimately say "I have ceased to sin?

EGW: YES "Christ died to make it possible for you to cease to sin, and sin is the transgression of the law" (Review and Herald, vol. 71, No. 35, p. 1, August 28, 1894.)

EGW: YES "To be redeemed means to cease from sin" (Review and Herald, vol. 77, No. 39, p. 1, September 25, 1900).

EGW: YES "Those only who through faith in Christ obey all of God's commandments will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his transgression. They testify to their love of Christ by obeying all his precepts" (Manuscript 122, 1901, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 6, p. 1118).

EGW: YES "To every one who surrenders fully to God is given the privilege of living without sin, in obedience to the law of heaven. ... God requires of us perfect obedience. We are to purify ourselves, even as he is pure. By keeping his commandments, we are to reveal our love for the Supreme Ruler of the universe" (Review and Herald, September 27, 1906, p. 8).

BIBLE: NO 1John 1:8- 9 (NIV) The blood of Jesus, his son, purifies us from all sin. If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.

BIBLE: NO Eph 2:8 - 9 (NIV) For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith -- and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God -- not by works, so that no one can boast.

35. Will obeying the commandments earn me God's favor?

EGW: YES "To obey the commandments of God is the only way to obtain (earn) His favor" (Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 28).

BIBLE: NO Isa 64:6 (NIV) All our righteous acts are like filthy rags.

BIBLE: NO Gal 3:11 (NIV) "Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, 'The righteous will live by faith'.

36. Does our obedience and faith reconcile us to God?

EGW: YES "Man, who has defaced the image of God in his soul by a corrupt life, cannot, by mere human effort, effect a radical change in himself. He must accept the provisions of the gospel; he must be reconciled to God through obedience to his law and faith in Jesus Christ" (Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 294).

BIBLE: NO "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast" (Ephesians 2:8, 9).

BIBLE: NO Col 1:21 - 22 (NIV) Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. But now he has reconciled you by Christ's physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation.

37. As a Christian do I still stand condemned before God?

EGW: YES "At the time the light of health reform dawned upon us, and since that time, the questions have come home every day, 'Am I practicing true temperance in all things? ' 'Is my diet such as will bring me in a position where I can accomplish the greatest amount of good?' If we cannot answer these questions in the affirmative, we stand condemned before God" (Counsels on Diet and Foods, pp. 19, 20).

BIBLE: NO Rom 8:1 (NIV) Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

BIBLE: NO John 3:17-18 (NIV) 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

BIBLE: NO John 5:24 (NIV) I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.

38. Must I be perfect before Christ will accept me?

EGW: YES "From what was shown me, there is a great work to be accomplished for you before you can be accepted in the sight of God" (Testimonies, vol. 2, p. 84).

EGW: YES "You have a great work to do. ... It is impossible for you to be saved as you are" (Testimonies, vol. 2, p. 316).

EGW: YES "As you are, you would mar all heaven. You are uncultivated, unrefined, and unsanctified. There is no place in heaven for such a character as you now possess. ... You are further today from the standard of Christian perfection ... than you were a few months after you had received the truth" (Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 465).

BIBLE: NO Eph 2:4 - 5 (NIV) 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.

BIBLE: NO Rom 15:7 (NIV) 7Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God.

BIBLE: NO Acts 15:8 - 9 (NIV) 8God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith.

39. Did Jesus enter the most holy place of the heavenly temple before October 22, 1844?

EGW: NO "I was shown that ... the door was opened in the most holy place in the heavenly sanctuary, where the ark is, in which are contained the ten commandments. This door was not opened until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the holy place of the sanctuary in l844. Then Jesus rose up and shut the door of the holy place, and opened the door into the most holy, and passed within the second veil, where he now stands by the ark" (Early Writings, p. 42).

BIBLE: YES Heb 8:1 - 2 (NIV) The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man (Hebrews 8:1, 2 written in 60 AD).

BIBLE: YES Heb 9:12 (NIV) He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption (Hebrews 9:12 written in 60 AD).

Note: Both these Bible texts were written in 60 A.D., and they both state Jesus was already ministering the in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary at least 1,824 years before 1844. Ellen White's 1844 scenario simply contradicts the clearest Scriptures!

40. Are the forgiven sins of the saints not blotted out until the great day of final award?

EGW: YES "The blood of Christ, while it was to release the repentant sinner from the condemnation of the law, was not to cancel the sin; it would stand on record in the sanctuary until the final atonement. ... In the great day of final award, the dead are to be 'judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works' (Revelation 20:12). Then by virtue of the atoning blood of Christ, the sins of all the truly penitent will be blotted from the books of heaven" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 357).

BIBLE: NO Heb 8:12 (NIV) For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

BIBLE: NO Isa 43:25 (NIV) I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more.

Note: The Bible is very certain that the moment God forgives our sins they are forever removed, blotted out, canceled and forgotten. First John 1:9 tells us the instant we confess our sins we receive God's forgiveness through his grace. By contradicting these Scriptures EGW turns God's overwhelming mercy into a sham. God is recreated into a lying, malevolent, heavenly bookkeeper who manipulates Divine records to make it only appear that we are forgiven. For EGW, our forgiveness does not depend upon God's grace, but upon our "works."

41. Did Paul learn the gospel from men in the church?

EGW: YES "Paul must receive instruction in the Christian faith and move accordingly. Christ sends him to the very disciples whom he had been so bitterly persecuting, to learn of them. ... Now Paul was in a condition to learn of those whom God had ordained to teach the truth. Christ directs Paul to His chosen servants, thus placing him in connection with His church. The very men whom Paul was purposing to destroy were to be his instructors in the very religion that he had despised and persecuted" (Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 430).

BIBLE: NO Gal 1:11 - 12 (NIV) I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

BIBLE: NO Gal 1:16 - 19 (NIV) ...to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

42. What is "the seal of God"?

EGW: SABBATH "The enemies of God's law, from the ministers down to the least among them, have a new conception of truth and duty. Too late they see that the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is the seal of the living God" (Great Controversy, p. 640).

BIBLE: HOLY SPIRIT Eph 1:13 (NIV) And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,

BIBLE: HOLY SPIRIT Eph 4:30 (NIV) And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

43. Are we required to kneel every time we pray?

EGW: YES "Where have our brethren obtained the idea that they should stand upon their feet praying to God? One who has been educated about five years in Battle Creek was asked to lead in prayer before Sister White should speak to the people. But as I beheld him standing upright upon his feet while his lips were about to open in prayer to God, my soul was stirred within me to give him an open rebuke. Calling him by name, I said, "Get down on your knees! This is the proper position always" (Selected Messages, book 2, p. 311).

EGW: YES "Both in public and private worship, it is our duty to bow down before God when we offer our petitions to Him" (Selected Messages, book 2, p. 311).

EGW: YES "To bow down when in prayer to God is the proper attitude to occupy" (Selected Messages, book 2, p. 312).

EGW: NO "We need not wait for an opportunity to kneel before God. We can pray and talk with the Lord wherever we may be" (Selected Messages, book 3, p. 266).

EGW: NO "It is not always necessary to bow upon your knees in order to pray" (Selected Messages, book 3, p. 267).

BIBLE: NO Luke 18:13 (NIV) But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, "God have mercy on me, a sinner.

BIBLE: NO Mark 11:25( NIV) And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive him so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.

Note: This is just another example of EGW contradicting herself and the Bible. Elder D. E. Robinson, EGW's secretary from 1902- 1915 said he had been present "repeatedly at camp meetings and General Conference sessions in which sister White herself has offered prayer ... standing'" (Selected Messages, book 3, p. 266).

44. Will people be lost because their pastor is untidy?

EGW: YES "The loss of some souls at last will be traced to the untidiness of the minister" (Selected Messages, book 3, p. 25l).

BIBLE: NO Eze 33:20 (NIV) I will judge each of you according to his own ways.

BIBLE: NO Eze 18:20 (NIV) "The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.

45. Is it a sin to be sick?

EGW: YES "It is a sin to be sick; for all sickness is the result of transgression" (Counsels on Health, p. 37). BIBLE: NO Job 2:7 (NIV) So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and afflicted Job with painful sores from the soles of his feet to the top of his head. Job 2:10 (NIV) 10... In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.

Note: It is a matter of record that Ellen White was sick a lot --does that mean she sinned a lot?

46. Will God prevent the wicked from killing his people who refuse to receive the mark of the beast?

EGW YES "God would not suffer (allow) the wicked to destroy those who were expecting translations and who would not bow to the decree of the beast or receive his mark. I saw that if the wicked were permitted to slay the saints, Satan and all his evil host and all who hate God, would be gratified. ... The swords that were raised to kill God's people broke and fell powerless as a straw. Angels of God shielded the saints" (Early Writings, pp. 284, 285).

BIBLE: NO Rev 20:4 (NIV) I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshipped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

47. Do the wicked try to repent as they experience the seven last plagues?

EGW: YES "The plagues were falling upon the inhabitants of the earth. Some were denouncing God and cursing Him. Others rushed to the people of God and begged to be taught how they might escape His judgments (repentance). -- Those who had not prized God's Word were hurrying to and fro, wandering from sea to sea, and from the north to the east, to seek the Word of the Lord (repentance). ... What would they not give for one word of approval from God (repentance)! But no, they must hunger and thirst on" (Early Writings, p. 28l).

BIBLE: NO Rev 16:9 - 11 (NIV) 9They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him. 10The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony 11and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done. Rev 16:21 (NIV) ...And they cursed God on account of the plague of hail, because the plague was so terrible.

Note: Once again, the "vision" Ellen White saw is contrary to the Bible record.

48. Can Satan answer prayers directed to God? EGW: YES "Satan appeared to be by the throne, trying to carry on the work of God. I saw them (Christians) look up to the throne, and pray, 'Father, give us Thy Spirit.' Satan would then breathe upon them an unholy influence ..." (Early Writings, p. 56).

BIBLE: NO Matt 7:11( NIV) If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!

BIBLE: NO Matt 18:19 (NIV) Again, I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything you ask for, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven.

Note: The idea that Satan answers prayers address to our heavenly Father not only contradicts the Bible -- it also makes a complete mockery of the power of God. Ellen White's "god" is so impotent that Satan can take His place!

49. Will we know the exact day and hour of Christ's second coming?

EGW: YES "As God has shown me in holy vision ... we heard the voice of God like many waters, which gave us the day and hour of Jesus' coming" (Early Writings, pp. 15, 34, 285).

BIBLE: NO Matt 25:13 (NIV) Therefore, keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

BIBLE: NO Matt 24:36 (NIV) "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angles in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

50. Does Jesus return to earth at the stroke of midnight?

EGW: YES "It was at midnight that God chose to deliver his people. As the wicked were mocking around them, suddenly the sun appeared, shining in his strength, and the moon stood still" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 205).

BIBLE: NO Matt 25:13 (NIV) Therefore, keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

BIBLE: NO Acts 1:7 (NIV) "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

51. Will the saved have wings in the resurrection?

EGW: YES "We gathered about Jesus, and just as He closed the gates of the city, the curse was pronounced upon the wicked. The gates were shut. Then the saints used their wings and mounted to the top of the wall of the city" (Early Writings, p. 53).

BIBLE: NO Phil 3:21 (NIV) "Who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.

52. Could Jesus see through the portals of the tomb?

EGW: NO "The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice" (The Desire of Ages p. 753).

BIBLE: YES "The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again." (Luke 24:7 NIV) "Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days." (John 2:19 NIV) "The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again." (John 10:17 NIV) "No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." (John 10:18 NIV)

BIBLE: YES Matt 26:64 (NIV) Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

Note: E. G. White tells us Jesus could not see through the portals of the tomb and yet he told his followers what would happen after his death, He would rise up after three days. Jesus also told Caiaphas, "In the future" he would return. Who is telling the truth, Jesus or EGW? Who or what prompted Mrs. White to tell us this deception?

53. Did Enoch think to save Sodom?

EGW: Yes "He [Enoch] did not make his abode with the wicked. He did not locate in Sodom, thinking to save Sodom. He placed himself and his family where the atmosphere would be as pure as possible. Then at times he went forth to the inhabitants of the world with his God-given message. Every visit he made to the world was painful to him. He saw and understood something of the leprosy of sin. After proclaiming his message, he always took back with him to his place of retirement some who had received the warning. Some of these became overcomers, and died before the Flood came. But some had lived so long in the corrupting influence of sin that they could not endure righteousness (MS 42, 1900). S.D.A. Bible Commentary Vol. 1, page 1087, paragraph 10. BIBLE: NO This statement contradicts the Bible, as there is no reference to Sodom existing before the flood. The first reference to Sodom is after the flood. There is no Bible truth that Enoch was thinking about saving Sodom when it did not exist in Enoch's day. Why did the publishers of Maranatha, leave out all EGW references to Enoch and Sodom? "He [Enoch] did not make his abode with the wicked. . . . He placed himself and his family where the atmosphere would be as pure as possible. Then at times he went forth to the inhabitants of the world with his God-given message. . . . After proclaiming his message, he always took back with him to his place of retirement some who had received the warning." Maranatha p. 184.

54. Does Jesus pray to the Father for us?

EGW: YES At the very first expression of penitence, Christ presents the humble suppliant's petition before the throne as his own desire in the sinner's behalf. He says, "I will pray the Father for you." (Youth's Instructor, Jan. 16, 1896 par. 4; see also Review and Herald, May 18, 1876 par. 38)

BIBLE: NO John 16:26-27 (NIV) In that day you will ask in my name. I am not saying that I will ask the Father on your behalf. No, the Father himself loves you because you have loved me and have believed that I came from God.

ADDENDUM: Additions to EGW Contradictions

EGW: "Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, had invaded Canaan fourteen years before, and made it tributary to him. Several of the princes now revolted, and the Elamite king, with four allies, again marched into the country to reduce them to submission" (emphasis supplied). Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 134.

Bible: Gen 14:8-9 (NIV) Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) marched out and drew up their battle lines in the Valley of Siddim against Kedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of Goiim, Amraphel king of Shinar and Arioch king of Ellasar—four kings against five.

"Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar)" (verse 2; cf. verse 8, where only the towns are mentioned).

The Bible itself explicitly summarizes the number of allies for us as "four kings against five" (verse 9), the four being foreign, and the five being local. We are not to consider the occurrence of 'four' in verse 11 in the NIV, as that isn't the original wording. In any case, it is obvious that Kedorlaomer had three allies. So much for inspiration and visions of the great controversy! The visions seem to have been somewhat blurred.

SUMMARY

Ellen White once stated: "The Bible must be your counselor. Study it and the testimonies God has given; for they never contradict His Word" (Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 32).

From the evidence you have seen, do you think Ellen White's writings ("testimonies") "never contradict" God's Word? Isn't it clear that even by denying that she contradicts the Bible, she is simply proving that she cannot be trusted?

Ellen G. White's Additions to the

Holy Bible

1. Did Satan repent after his fall?

EGW: YES "After Satan was shut out of heaven, with those who fell with him, he realized that he lost all the purity and glory of heaven forever. Then he repented and wished to be reinstated in heaven. He was willing to take his proper place, or any place that might be assigned him. ... He and his follower repented, wept and implored to be taken back into the favor of God. But no, their sin their hate, their envy and jealousy, had been so great that God could not blot it out. It must remain to receive its final punishment" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 18, 19).

Note: Not Biblical But, in Matthew 18:21-22, Jesus told Peter to forgive seventy times seven (490 times). If Ellen White was right, then it is strange that God expected more from Peter than He was willing to do Himself by refusing to forgive Satan! Wouldn't Christ have been willing to die in Satan's place—had Satan repented? Is God really unmerciful and unforgiving?

2. Adam was more than twice as tall as men today.

EGW: YES "As Adam came forth from the hand of his Creator....He was more than twice as tall as men now living upon the earth....Eve was not quite as tall as Adam. Her head reached a little above his shoulders." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. III p. 34).

EGW: YES "Adam’s height was much greater than that of men who now inhabit the earth. Eve was somewhat less in stature;" (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 45). Note: Not Biblical The Bible does not tell us the height of Adam and Eve, but Ellen does not leave us in doubt as to their height.

3. In the fires of hell, do the wicked feel pain as long as there is one piece of flesh left?

EGW: Yes "I saw that some were quickly destroyed, while others suffered longer. ... Some were many days consuming, and just as long as there was a portion of them unconsumed, all the sense of suffering was there" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 217).

Note: Not Biblical What if their brain is consumed first; will they still feel pain? Can a finger feel pain after the rest of the body is destroyed? Where is a Bible text to support this error?

4. Did Judas have a conviction to confess his sin?

EGW: 1898 YES "When the Saviour’s hands were bathing those soiled feet, and wiping them with the towel, the heart of Judas thrilled through and through with the impulse then and there to confess his sin." (The Desire of Ages, p. 645).

EGW: 1902 NO "As Christ celebrated this ordinance with His disciples, conviction came to the hearts of all save Judas." (Evangelism, p. 275).

Note: Mrs. White said yes in 1898 and God and Ellen changed their minds in 1902 and said no. This kind of inspiration is very hard to keep up with. I am thankful that the prophets of the Bible did not have this problem.

5. Was John cast into a caldron of boiling oil before being banished to the Isle of Patmos?

EGW: YES "John was cast into a caldron of boiling oil; but the Lord preserved the life of His faithful servant even as he preserved the three Hebrews in the fiery furnace. By the emperor’s decree John was banished to the Isle of Patmos" (Acts of the Apostles, p. 570).

Note: Not Biblical The miracles of life preservation have been recorded in Scripture to glorify God and to give us confidence in God’s mercies. It seems strange that John chose not to glorify God with this miracle as Paul did when God delivered him and as recorded in Daniel of the fiery furnace and Daniel in the Lion’s den. If this miracle happened to me, being delivered from boiling oil, I would be shouting it from the housetops. It took God 2000 years to get this information to us by way of Ellen G. White. Why was it important for the Seventh-day Adventist Church to know about this miracle and not to have it recorded in Scripture for the encouragement of the Saints that went through persecutions? To believe this, one must have tremendous faith or be a deluded individual.

6. The Herod mistake and cover-up.

E. G. White was under the impression that the Herod that took part in Jesus’ trial was the same Herod that took the life of James. She did not realize that it was Herod Antipas who took part in Jesus’ trial and Herod Agrippa I who put James to death. This mistake was due to her ignorance of the Bible and Bible history.

Writing under inspiration; E. G. White wrote in 1858 that, "Herod’s heart grew still harder, and when he heard that JESUS had arisen, he was not much troubled. He took the life of James; and when he saw that this pleased the Jews, he took Peter also, intending to put him to death." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol 1, p.71).

Note: The cover-up This error was never corrected in the revisions of Early Writings. But when the error was discovered the authors tried to fix it by a footnote on page 185 of Early writings saying it was, "the same Herodian spirit only in another personality." Notice Ellen was talking under inspiration about an individual, Herod, not the spirit of an individual or their attributes. Jesus certainly knew the difference between the Herods and the reason Ellen did not, was that she was not inspired and did not have the gift of prophecy.

7. John the Baptist knew that he was going to die.

EGW: YES "He knew that when Jesus should establish himself as a teacher, he must die" (Spiritual Gifts Vol. 1, p. 29).

Note: Not Biblical There is no Bible record of John knowing when he was going to die.

8. Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus, was Mary Magdalene, and she was led into sin by Simon.

EGW: YES The Feast At Simons’ House. "Simon had led into sin the woman he now despised. "It was Mary who poured upon His head the precious anointing oil, and bathed His feet with her tears. Mary was first at the tomb after the resurrection." (The Desire of Ages p. 566,568).

Note: Mary, the sister of LAZARUS is never identified as Mary Magdalene, nor is it ever suggested from the Bible that Simon led Mary into sin and despised her.

9. Jesus’ brothers were older than he and they were the sons of Joseph and sided with the rabbis.

EGW: YES "All this displeased His brothers. Being older than Jesus, they felt that He should be under their dictation. His brothers, as the sons of Joseph were called, sided with the rabbis. They insisted that the traditions must be heeded, as if they were the requirements of God." (The Desire of Ages, p.86,87.)

Note: Not Biblical Ellen G. White adds to the Bible the same way that Joseph Smith does in the "Book of Mormon". How can Adventist claim that the Bible is the source of their faith and accept this as "the truth", and do it with a straight face?

10. Angels need a gold card to get into and out of heaven.

EGW: YES "All angels that are commissioned to visit earth hold a golden card, which they present to the angels at the gates of the city." (Early Writings, p. 39).

Note: Not Biblical If this statement came from Joseph Smith would you accept it? No, because it is not found in the Bible. Then using the same principle for defining you faith how can you believe EGW's nonsense as truth? Does God who can number the hairs on our head, need a gold card to identify the angels? Why have angels at the gate when an ATM machine would work just as well?

11. Ellen G. White the only prophet given wings while in vision.

EGW: YES "The Lord has given me a view of other worlds. Wings were given me, and an angel attended me from the city to a place that was bright and glorious." (Early Writings p. 39).

Note: Not Biblical No Bible prophet was ever given wings at any time. Why were wings given to Ellen White in her vision? In vision they would not be necessary for travel. She certainly had a vivid imagination.

12. Marriages are to be discouraged.

EGW: YES In 1885 EGW wrote, "In this age of the world, as the scenes of earth’s history are soon to close and we are about to enter upon the time of trouble such as never was, the fewer the marriages contracted, the better for all, both men and women." 5 Testimonies, p. 366. Also in 1885, "The time has come when, in one sense, they that have wives be as though they had none." (Ellen G. White, MS 34, The White Estate, 1885. Quoted in Are Seventh-Day Adventists False Prophets? p.29 by Wallace D. Slattery).

Note: Not Biblical To my knowledge Adventist Pastors today have not been discouraging any marriages. This is evident that they do not accept this teaching. The Bible was written for us and it does not ever discourage Christian marriages. The Bible does speak about marriage in the last days, calling those that forbid marriages, "liars."

"The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth" (1 Timothy 4:1-3 NIV).

13. Do we have power in ourselves?

EGW: NO 1862 "If Satan can so befog and deceive the human mind as to lead mortals to think that there is an inherent power in themselves to accomplish great and good works, they cease to rely upon God to do for them that which they think there is power in themselves to do" (1 Testimony, p. 294).

EGW: YES 1870 "We all have a warfare before us, and must stand in a position to resist the temptations of Satan; and we want to know that we possess the power in ourselves to do this (Councils on Diet and Foods, p.169).

14. Is tithe paying a pre-requisite for praying for the sick?

EGW: YES "Prayer For the Sick ¾ We should first find out if the sick one has been withholding tithes or has made trouble in the church" (Healthful Living, p. 237).

Note: Not Biblical This teaching would prohibit praying for sick non Christian friends and relatives as well as Christians of other faiths that are sick that do not believe tithing is a requirement for the Christian Church. I could not find any example of Jesus or the Apostles checking on anyone’s tithing performance before they healed them. I have never seen any Adventist Pastor follow Ellen’s ("inspired?") on this teaching. If you really believe that Ellen G. White is a prophetess then you will have to check and see if the sick is a tithe payer before you pray for them. Put your faith to the test, are you going to follow Jesus or Ellen?

15. The redeemed are to fill the vacancies in heaven left by Satan and his angels. EGW: YES "The vacancies made in heaven by the fall of Satan and his angels will be filled by the redeemed of the Lord" (Watchman Nov. 78, 1905).

EGW: YES "It was God’s purpose to repopulate Heaven with the human race, if after the test and trial they proved to be loyal to Him" (Signs of the Times, May 29, 1909).

Note: Not Biblical The Bible never mentions that the redeemed will take the place of Satan and the fallen Angels nor does Scripture say that it is God's purpose to repopulate heaven with the human race. The Scripture does say that God is creating a New Earth for the redeemed. See Revelation 21:1.

Seventh-day Adventism's claim

Seventh-day Adventism claims to be people of the Bible and that their beliefs are supported by Scripture. They reject the Roman Catholic Church beliefs such as, praying to Mary and the saints, the confessional, rosary, holy water, the Pope as head of the church, etc. They reject Joseph Smith and his book of Mormon, they reject Mary Baker Eddy and her book Science and Health with Keys to Scripture. They reject the Jehovah’s Witnesses, which have the Watchtower to guide them. SDAs reject all beliefs that cannot be supported by the Bible. The paradox is, that the church accepts Ellen White's additions to the Bible and her contradictions without question. And then, like any other cult, expects members to do likewise. These additions to Scripture may seem too trivial to even mention. However, the church insists all these additions and contradictions came straight from God, thus making God a part of their deception.

How is this possible? Seventh-day Adventism tells us:

"The writings of Mrs. E. G. White were never designed to be an addition to the canon of Scripture. They are, never-the less, the messages of God to the remnant church and should be received as such as were the messages of the prophets of old. As Samuel was a prophet to Israel in his day, as Jeremiah was a prophet to Israel in the days of the captivity, as John the Baptist came as a special messenger of the Lord to prepare the way for Christ’s appearing, so we believe that Mrs. White was a prophet to the Church of Christ today. And the same as the messages of the prophets were received in olden times, so her messages should be received at the present time" (Review and Herald, October 4, 1928).

Note: Christians accept the writing of the prophets, Samuel, Jeremiah, as inspired by God and their writings as Holy Scripture. To follow what the SDA Church tells its members, then those who believe that E. G. White is inspired would have to regard her writings as Scripture (the same way) as they do the Bible prophets. But then the church tells them her writings are not "an addition to the canon of Scripture!" Does this confuse you? If you understand how it is possible, please explain it to me!

Did Ellen G. White claim infallibility for the Testimonies? Yes. "Yet, now when I send you a testimony of warning and reproof, many of you declare it to be merely the opinion of Sister White. You thereby insulted the Spirit of God." Testimonies 5, p. 64.

"In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision--the precious rays of light shining from the throne." Testimonies 5, p. 67.

"If you lessen the confidence of God’s people in the testimonies He has sent them, you are rebelling against God as were Korah, Dathan, and Abriam." Testimonies 5, p. 66.

"The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil. In arraying yourself against the servants of God you are doing a work either for God or for the devil." Testimonies 4, p. 230.

A Request to the readers of this website

Please feel free to make copies of this material to pass on to others. The only request we make is that you not delete or alter any portion of the contents.

Contradictory Statements

Ellen G. White said she did not use the Willie C. White said his mother found words of others to describe what God had pleasure in using words of others to shown her in vision describe what God had shown her in vision "She admired the language in which other writers had presented to their readers the "Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit scenes which God had presented to her in of the Lord in writing out my views as I am vision, and she found it both a pleasure, and in receiving them, yet the words I employ a convenience and an economy of time to in what I have seen are my own, unless use their language fully or in part in they be spoken to me by an angel, which I presenting those things which she knew always enclose in marks of quotation." (Ellen through revelation, and which she wished to G. White, "Review and Herald" October 8, pass on to her readers." (Willie C. White, 1867; Selected Messages Book 3, p. 49) Selected Messages Book 3, par. 460, Appendix C)

Another Bible Contradiction!

May, 2006, via e-mail from Tom Swift, USA You tell me! Am I crazy? Or is Ellen White adding words to and changing what God said?

The Original True Word of God Ellen White's Modification to God's Word

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, "God gave man no permission to eat animal and replenish the earth. And the fear of you food until after the flood. Everything had and the dread of you shall be upon every been destroyed upon which man could beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of subsist, and therefore the Lord in their the air, upon all that moveth [upon] the necessity gave Noah permission to eat of the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into clean animals which he had taken with him your hand are they delivered. Every moving into the ark." (Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. thing that liveth shall be meat for you; 373) even as the green herb have I given you all things. (Gen. 9:1-3)

Can it be any more obvious? God didn't just say it once. He said it twice! He said every "thing that liveth" and then He added, "all things". One question: Are unclean animals alive? If yes, then Ellen White added words to God's word which proves she was a liar:

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Prov. 30:6)

White Contradicts Her Own Testimony on X-rays!

December, 2005, via e-mail from Tom Swift, USA

Get this, on June 17, 1906, she warned Adventists not to get X-ray treatments:

"I have been instructed that the X-ray is not the great blessing that some suppose it to be. If used unwisely, it may do much harm. The results of some of the electrical treatments are similar to the results of using stimulants. There is a weakness that follows." ("Testimonies and Experiences Connected With The Loma Linda Sanitarium", p. 19, Spalding and Magan Collection, p. 390)

Then, five years later, she turns around and gets X-ray treatments herself at Loma Linda!

"For several weeks I took treatment with the X-ray for the black spot that was on my forehead. In all I took twenty-three treatments, and these succeeded in entirely removing the mark. For this I am very grateful." (Letter 30, 1911, to her son J. E. White, Selected Messages Book 2, p. 303)

I guess whoever "instructed" her did not make much of an impression on her!

White Contradicts Genesis 14

October, 2005, via e-mail from Eduardo Martínez, Spain In Genesis 14 it is clearly indicated that there were two sets of military alliances involved. First of all, we have four invaders, namely,

"Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Kedorlaomer king of Elam and Tidal king of Goiim" (verse 1; cf. verse 9), Kedorlaomer being the leader.

On the other hand, we have five local kings of the land of Canaan, namely,

"Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar)" (verse 2; cf. verse 8, where only the towns are mentioned).

The Bible explicitly summarizes the number of allies for us as "four kings against five" (verse 9), the four being foreign, and the five being local. It is obvious that Kedorlaomer had three allies. And yet, Patriarchs and Prophets says:

"Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, had invaded Canaan fourteen years before, and made it tributary to him. Several of the princes now revolted, and the Elamite king, with four allies, again marched into the country to reduce them to submission." PP 134 (emphasis supplied)

Are Eggs Hindering Parents' Prayers?"

April, 2005, via e-mail from Angela Wingerman, USA

1870--EGW said God would not answer the prayers of parents who fed eggs to their corrupt, unruly, evil children:

"You should be teaching your children. You should be instructing them how to shun the vices and corruption's of this age. Instead of this, many are studying how to get something good to eat. You place upon your tables butter, eggs, and meat and then your children partake of them. They are fed with the very things that will excite their animal passions, and then you come to meeting and ask God to bless and save your children., How high do your prayers go? You have a work to do first. When you have done all for your children which God has left you to do then you can with confidence claim the special help that God has promised to you. You should be studying temperance in all things. You must study in what you eat and in what you drink. And yet you say: 'It is nobody's business what I eat or what I drink, or what I place upon my table.' It is somebody's business, unless you take your children and shut them up, or go into the wilderness where they will not be a burden to others, and where your unruly, vicious children will not corrupt the society in which they mingle." (Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 362)

1897--Twenty seven years after Ellen G. White told parents not to feed eggs to their corrupt, unruly children, she had this amazing dream showing raw eggs in wine as nourishing food:

"I dreamed of having the care of a child that was weak, and seemed unable to rally. I thought the same physician stood by the cradle, and said, 'Have you any wine in the house? Beat up a raw egg and give it to the child with grape wine three times a day. He will rally.'" (Letter 112a, 1897, Manuscript Releases Vol. 3, p. 321)

Was Jesus Ugly or Beautiful?"

March, 2005, via e-mail from Angela Wingerman, USA

"Christ, the Majesty of heaven, laid aside His robes of royalty and came to this world...He traveled on foot, teaching His followers as He went. His garments were dusty and travel- stained, and His appearance was uninviting. But the simple, pointed truths which fell from His divine lips soon caused His hearers to forget His appearance, and to be charmed, not with the man, but with the doctrine He taught..." (Testimonies Vol. 4, p. 373)

VERSUS

"His tender compassion fell with a touch of healing upon weary and troubled hearts. Even amid the turbulence of angry enemies. He was surrounded with an atmosphere of peace. The beauty of His countenance, the loveliness of His character, above all, the love expressed in look and tone, drew to Him all who were not hardened in unbelief ...." (The Desire of Ages, p. 254)

EGW Calls Sabbath Laws "Senseless Restrictions"

July, 2004, via e-mail from Robert Sanders, USA

God commanded the Jews not to light a fire in their dwellings on the Sabbath day.

"For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death. Do not light a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day.” (Ex 35:2 - Ex 35:3 NIV)

The Desire of Ages, page 204, paragraph 1:

The Jews had so perverted the law that they made it a yoke of bondage. Their meaningless requirements had become a byword among other nations. Especially was the Sabbath hedged in by all manner of senseless restrictions. It was not to them a delight, the holy of the Lord, and honourable. The scribes and Pharisees had made its observance an intolerable burden. A Jew was not allowed to kindle a fire nor even to light a candle on the Sabbath. As a consequence the people were dependent upon the Gentiles for many services which their rules forbade them to do for themselves. They did not reflect that if these acts were sinful, those who employed others to perform them were as guilty as if they had done the work themselves. They thought that salvation was restricted to the Jews, and that the condition of all others, being already hopeless, could be made no worse. But God has given no commandments which cannot be obeyed by all. His laws sanction no unreasonable or selfish restrictions.

EGW accuses the Jews of perverting the Sabbath, making it a yoke of bondage and calls God's law "senseless restrictions". Then EGW blames the scribes and Pharisees of making the Sabbath "an intolerable burden" because the Jews were not allowed to "kindle a fire or light a candle on the Sabbath." It was God that commanded not lighting a fire on the Sabbath, not the scribes and Pharisees. This shows she is a false prophetess.

Reading Novels Makes you Insane?

Oct., 2003, via e-mail from Tom Swift, USA

"That mind is ruined which is allowed to be absorbed in story-reading. The imagination becomes diseased, sentimentalism takes possession of the mind, and there is a vague unrest, a strange appetite for unwholesome mental food, which is constantly unbalancing the mind. Thousands are today in the insane asylum whose minds became unbalanced by novel reading, which results in air-castle building and love-sick sentimentalism." --The Signs of the Times, February 10, 1881. {MYP 290.3}

Perhaps that could account for Mrs. White's condition. Dr. John Waller, head of the English Department at Andrews University studied Ellen White and her use of fiction. Mrs. White kept large scrapbooks of stories and articles. When she read something she liked, she clipped it out and put it in a scrapbook. She made at least nine scrapbooks of stories and articles. Five of those are in control of the White Estate. Dr. Waller examined these five scrapbooks and found many of the clippings were from fiction, and included well-known fictional writers of her time, such as Hans Christian Andersen, noted for his fairy tales, and Harriet Beecher Stowe, the author of Uncle Tom's Cabin. Ellen White called John Bunyan's novel Pilgrim's Progress, a "wonderful allegory" (Great Controversy, p. 252).

Okay for Pregnant Mothers to Drink Wine?

Sep., 2002, via e-mail from W.C., USA

Here is her advice to a pregnant lady:

B has been very deficient. While in her best condition of health, his wife was not provided with a plenty of wholesome food and with proper clothing. Then, when she needed extra clothing and extra food, and that of a simple yet nutritious quality, it was not allowed her. Her system craved material to convert into blood, but he would not provide it. A moderate amount of milk and sugar, and a little salt, white bread raised with yeast for a change, graham flour prepared in a variety of ways by other hands than her own, plain cake with raisins, rice pudding with raisins, prunes, and figs, occasionally, and many other dishes I might mention, would have answered the demand of appetite. If he could not obtain some of these things, a little domestic wine would have done her no injury; it would have been better for her to have it than to do without it. (Testimonies, vol. 2, p. 383)

Later on, she wrote:

"Neither let her drink wine nor strong drink," was the angel's instruction for the wife of Manoah, "nor eat any unclean thing; all that I commanded her let her observe." The child will be affected for good or evil by the habits of the mother. She must herself be controlled by principle, and must practice temperance and self-denial, if she would seek the welfare of her child. (Testimony Studies on Diet and Foods (1926) Chapter 9 - Diet During Pregnancy and Lactation, p. 30)

Comments: As a nurse who works with mothers and babies, I have strong objections to the belief that any pregnant person would be told any amount of any alcohol is acceptable.

"Was His Visage Marred? Or Not?"

June, 2002, via e-mail from Bob, USA

Desire Of Ages, p. 735 Testimonies for the Church Vol. 2, p. 207

There stood the Son of God, wearing the robe of mockery and the crown of thorns. Stripped to the waist, His back showed the long, cruel There the glorious Son of God was stripes, from which the blood flowed freely. His "wounded for our transgressions, He was face was stained with blood, and bore the marks bruised for our iniquities." He bore insult, of exhaustion and pain; but never had it mockery, and shameful abuse, until "His appeared more beautiful than now. The visage was so marred more than any Saviour's visage was not marred before His man, and His form more than the sons of enemies. Every feature expressed gentleness men." [Isa. 52:14] and resignation and the tenderest pity for His cruel foes.

Editor's Note: Ellen White did write Jesus' visage was marred during the wilderness temptation (DA 118) and at the Garden of Gethsemane (DA 690). Neither of these is the fulfillment of Isaiah 54:14. First, Isaiah 54:14 says that "many" were astonished at the sight of Jesus. This could not possibly have been in the garden, in the dark, where few people were around. It had to have been in a lighted area with a crowd of people around, such as in the judgment hall or on the road to Golgotha. His visage was marred, not so much by sweat, but by a crown of thorns and having been beaten in the face. Secondly, the verse says his form was marred, which leaves the impression his body was injured. This happened during the whipping that tore the flesh on his trunk, both back and front, to shreds. His form was not marred in the Garden of Gethsemane.

"Passing Through the Red Sea"

June, 2002, via e-mail from Ray Pitts, USA

Read carefully these two stories by Ellen White. See the big difference between Testimonies and Spiritual Gifts? They both can't be right!

Testimonies for the Church volume 4 Spiritual Gifts In the darkness and confusion they rush on ....In the morning, as they came up to the in their pursuit, not knowing that they have sea, lo, there was a dry path, the waters entered upon the bed of the sea and are were divided, and stood like a wall upon hemmed in on either hand by beetling walls either side, and the children of Israel were of water. They long for the mist and half way through the sea, walking on dry darkness to pass away and reveal to them land. They waited a while to decide what the Hebrews and their own whereabouts. course they had better pursue. They were The wheels of the chariots sink deep into the disappointed and enraged, that, as the soft sand, and the horses become entangled Hebrews were almost in their power, and and unruly. Confusion prevails, yet they they were sure of them, an unexpected way press on, feeling sure of victory. At last the was opened for them in the sea. They decided mysterious cloud changes to a pillar of fire to follow them. "And the Egyptians pursued, before their astonished eyes. The thunders and went in after them to the midst of the sea, roll and the lightnings flash, the waves roll even all Pharaoh's horses, his chariots, and about them, and fear takes possession of their his horsemen.... (3SG pp.234, 235) hearts. Amid the terror and confusion, the lurid light reveals to the amazed Egyptians ...They overtook the Hebrews at the Red Sea. the terrible waters massed up on the right This place was appointed for the last display hand and on the left. They see the broad of the power of God before the infatuated path that the Lord has made for His people Egyptians. In the morning, they came up to across the shining sands of the sea, and the Red Sea and saw the Hebrew host behold triumphant Israel safe on the walking upon a dry path prepared for farther shore. (pp. 24, 25) them in the sea, while high walls of water stood upon either side, congealed by the power of God.... (1SG p. 219)

"Who is the Wave Sheaf?"

May, 2002, via e-mail from Dr. Adrian Bury, Hungary

In the quote below, the wave sheaf from the festival of first fruits (Lev 23: 15 ff.) is not Jesus, but others who were raised from the dead at the same time as He was:

‘But he waves them back. Not yet; he cannot now receive the coronet of glory and the royal robe. He enters into the presence of his Father. He points to his wounded head, the pierced side, the marred feet: He lifts his hands bearing the prints of the nails. He points to the tokens of his triumph; he presents to God the wave sheaf, those raised with him as representatives of that great multitude who shall come forth from the grave at his second coming. He approaches the Father…’ Desire of Ages, p. 834.

In the quote below, the wave sheaf is Jesus himself, and there will be no others raised (permanently) until he comes again. I believe this latter quotation reflects correct Biblical teaching:

‘The sheaf of first fruits, which at the time of the Passover was waved before the Lord, was typical of the resurrection of Christ. Paul says, in speaking of the resurrection of the Lord and of all His people: “Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at His coming.” 1 Corinthians 15: 23. Like the wave sheaf, which was the first ripe grain gathered before the harvest, Christ is the first fruits of the immortal harvest of redeemed ones that at the future resurrection shall be gathered into the garner of God.’ The Great Controversy, chap 22, p. 399.

"Two Meals a Day--When??"

August, 2001, via e-mail from Elaine Bowerman, USA

"For thirty-five years I have practiced the two-meal system" (CD 178) Note: This would place the commencement of her eating of two meals a day in 1868.

"No eating should be allowed between our meals. I have eaten two meals each day for the last twenty-five years." Ms. 15, 1889 (3 SM 294) Note: This statement places the commencement of her eating of two meals a day in 1864.

"For thirty years, I have taken only two meals a day, and I have not eaten between meals." Letter 324, November 27, 1905, to Elder W. W. Simpson, an evangelist in Los Angeles, California. (TDG 340) Note: This statement places the commencement of her eating of two meals a day in 1875.

"For more than twelve years we have taken only two meals each day, of plain, unstimulating food." Health Reformer, May 1, 1877. Note: This statement places the commencement of her eating two meals a day in 1865, or perhaps a little earlier.

"For seventeen years we have eaten only two meals a day while engaged in almost incessant labor." HR, November 1, 1880. Note. This statement places the commencement of eating of two meals a day in 1863.

"I have lived for eight months upon two meals a day." {CD 482.3} (1864) Note: This must have been the beginning!

"For more than forty years I have eaten but two meals a day." Letter 50, 1908 {CD 492.4} Note: Statement places the two-meal system in 1868 or before.

Butter Contradiction

May, 2001, via e-mail from Elaine Bowerman, USA

Here is a letter written February 15, 1874, from Santa Rosa, California, to "My dear Clarence [Willie]":

You cannot live too plainly when you are studying so constantly. Your father and I have dropped milk, cream, butter, sugar, and meat entirely since we came to California. We are far clearer in mind and far better in body. We live very plainly. We cannot write unless we do live simply. Your father bought meat once for May while she was sick, but not a penny have we expended on meat since. (Manuscript Releases, vol. 14, p. 322)

Contrast that letter with Letter 76 written in 1895

We have a large family, and besides have many guests, but neither meat nor butter is placed upon our table. We use the cream from the milk of the cows which we feed ourselves. We purchase butter for cooking purposes from dairies where the cows are in healthy condition, and have good pasture. (Counsels on Diet and Foods p. 488)

First the White's drop butter "entirely" from their diet in 1874, but by 1895, they were using it again. Apparently butter is unfit for use at the table but fine for cooking! And what, pray tell, is the difference between cream and butter? They both are from the same material.

From what I read on "the light given" to Ellen White on diet reform, I can only conclude that nothing in her writings is consistent but her inconsistencies.

Great Controversy Contradiction

Mar., 2001, via e-mail from Elaine Bowerman, USA

Quoting from The Great Controversy, we read:

"These having been translated from the earth, from among the living, are counted as 'the first fruits unto God and to the lamb.' . . . These are they which came out of great tribulation, they have passed through the time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation. . . . (page 649)

The following quote is from Adventist pioneer, J.N. Loughborough:

If there is still a doubt of the resurrected Sabbath keepers' being numbered with the 144,000, consider the following from Sister White's words in 1909. At the general Conference in 1909, Elder Irwin had a stenographer accompany him in a call upon Sister White. He wished to ask her some question, and have an exact copy of the words of the replies. Among other questions was this one: "Will those who have died in the message be among the 144,000?" In reply, Sister White said: "Oh, yes, those who have died in the faith will be among the 144,000. I am clear on that matter. These were the exact words of question and answer, as Brother Irwin permitted me to copy from his stenographer's report." (J.N. Loughborough, Questions on the Sealing message, page 31, published 1916.)

Obviously, Loughborough is trying to show, from the writings of Ellen White, that the Sabbath keepers who are raised during the special resurrection of Daniel 12:2, will go through the time of Jacob's trouble and be translated and among the 144,000.

PLEASE COMPARE THE ABOVE STATEMENT RE: THE 144,000 AND TIME OF TROUBLE WITH THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT FROM THE PEN OF ELLEN G. WHITE ON THE DEATH OF MRS. HASTINGS:

I hardly know what to say to you. The news of your wife's death was to me overwhelming. I could hardly believe it and can hardly believe it now. God gave me a view last Sabbath night which I will write.... I saw that she was sealed and would come up at the voice of God and stand upon the earth, and would be with the 144,000. I saw we need not mourn for her; she would rest in the time of trouble, and all that we could mourn for was our loss in being deprived of her company. I saw her death would result in good. {2SM 263.3} (1850). In one case we have those faithful Sabbath keepers raised during the special resurrection and enduring the time of trouble with the 144,000. In the other case, we have Mrs. Hastings resting during the time of trouble and joining the 144,000 later.

Yet Another Great Controversy Contradiction!

Oct., 2000, via e-mail from L. Russell, USA

On page 557 of The Great Controversy, Ellen White wrote (emphasis added):

"The apostles, as personated by these lying spirits, are made to contradict what they wrote at the dictation of the Holy Spirit when on earth. THEY DENY THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE, and thus tear away the foundation of the Christian's hope, and put out the light that reveals the way to Heaven. SATAN IS MAKING THE WORLD BELIEVE THAT THE BIBLE IS A MERE FICTION, OR AT LEAST A BOOK SUITED TO THE INFANCY OF THE RACE, BUT NOW TO BE LIGHTLY REGARDED, OR CAST ASIDE AS OBSOLETE. And to take the place of the Word of God he holds out spiritual manifestations. Here is a channel wholly under his control; by this means he can make the world believe what he will. THE BOOK THAT IS TO JUDGE HIM AND HIS FOLLOWERS HE PUTS IN THE SHADE, JUST WHERE HE WANTS IT; the Saviour of the world he makes to be no more than a common man. And as the Roman guard that watched the tomb of Jesus spread the lying report which the priests and elders put into their mouths to disprove his resurrection, so do the believers in spiritual manifestations try to make it appear that there is nothing miraculous in the circumstances of our Saviour's life. After thus seeking to put Jesus in the background, they call attention to their own miracles, declaring that these far exceed the works of Christ."

Then, on page 588 of the same book, Ellen White writes (emphasis added):

"As spiritualism more closely imitates the nominal Christianity of the day, it has greater power to deceive and ensnare. Satan himself is converted, after the modern order of things. He will appear in the character of an angel of light. Through the agency of spiritualism, miracles will be wrought, the sick will be healed, and many undeniable wonders will be performed. AND AS THE SPIRITS WILL PROFESS FAITH IN THE BIBLE, and manifest respect for the institutions of the church, their work will be accepted as a manifestation of divine power."

So, according to what Ellen White has written...

Page 557 Page 588 Satan and other evil spirits will impersonate Evil spirits will impersonate the apostles. angels of light.

These "apostles" will "call attention to their These "angels of light" will perform own miracles" so that Satan "can make the "undeniable wonders" in order to "deceive world believe what he will." and ensnare." These "apostles" will "DENY THE DIVINE These "angels of light" will "PROFESS ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE." FAITH IN THE BIBLE."

It seems to me that there is an obvious contradiction here. The "apostles," on one hand, will be "DENY(ING) THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE." Meanwhile, the "angels" will be "PROFESS(ING) FAITH IN THE BIBLE." Shouldn't Satan and his fallen angels be cooperating since each of them has the same goal, which is to "deceive and ensnare" all Christians? Didn't Jesus say that "Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand (Matthew 12:25-26,NIV)?"

Hastening the Lord's Coming

Sept., 2000, via e-mail from sister C.H., USA

By giving the gospel to the world it is in our power to hasten our Lord's return. The Desire of Ages, p. 633. (1898)

By giving the gospel to the world, it is in our power to hasten the coming of the day of God. Had the church of Christ done her appointed work as the Lord ordained, the whole world would before this have been warned, and the Lord Jesus would have come to the earth in power and great glory. God's Amazing Grace, p. 353

It is the privilege of every Christian, not only to look for, but to hasten the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Were all who profess His name bearing fruit to His glory, how quickly the whole world would be sown with the seed of the gospel. Quickly the last great harvest would be ripened, and Christ would come to gather the precious grain. Christ Object Lessons, p. 69 (1900)

VERSUS

Let no one overtax his God-given powers in an effort to advance the Lord's work more rapidly. The power of man cannot hasten the work; with this must be united the power of heavenly intelligences. . . . Though all the workmen now bearing the heaviest burdens should be laid aside, God's work would be carried forward. Testimonies, vol. 7, p. 298 (1902).

God's Attitude Toward Erring Children

Sept., 2000, via e-mail from sister Elaine Bowerman, USA

Here are a few quotes from the Spirit of Prophecy that should make your children's day: God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. Be obedient, dear children. . . . But wicked children God does not love. He will not take them to the beautiful City, for he only admits the good, obedient, and patient children there. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong. When you do right and overcome wrong feelings, the Lord smiles upon you. . . . Although he is in heaven, and you cannot see him, yet he loves you when you do right, and writes it down his book; and when you do wrong, he puts a black mark against you. Now, dear Willie, try to do right always, and then no black mark will be set down against you; and when Jesus comes he will call for that good boy Willie White, and will put upon your head a wreath of gold, and put in your hand a little harp that you can play upon, and it will send forth beautiful music, and you will never be sick, never be tempted then to do wrong; but will be happy always, and will eat of rich fruit, and will pluck beautiful flowers. Try, try, dear boy, to be good. An Appeal to Youth, 1864, pp. 42, 62, 63

These tender words were written by an inspired, loving mother to her sons in 1864. What joy must have surged through the youthful hearts of Ellen White's children at the constant thought that their every action might displease God. What a merry hell she must have created for her offspring.

However, Mrs. White apparently had a change of heart over the next 28 years, because she later advised parents:

Do not teach your children that God does not love them when they do wrong; teach them that he loves them so that it grieves his Spirit to see them in transgression, because he knows they are doing injury to their souls. Do not terrify your children by telling them of the wrath of God, but rather seek to impress them with his unspeakable love and goodness, and thus let the glory of the Lord be revealed before them. Signs of the Times, Feb. 15, 1892

s Ellen White False?

Internet Blog site comments

I have been told by proponents of Ellen White that “ It was Jesus who gave Ellen White all of the ideas behind what she wrote”.

I made this reply.

Realistically speaking this statement is totally incorrect. We know from the work of denominational scholars that up to 80% of what she wrote in dome of her books was simply copied from other books. In the Great Controversy the percentage is higher. Walter Rea's work which demonstrates the way that she wrote her books was verified by Fred Veltman who wrote his conclusions in the Ministry magazine in 1990 It was also supported by the Glendale gathering in 1980 in which they stated:-

"It is not just the fact that Ellen White copied from other writers and didn't give credit, it is the amount and the method. We are not talking about a few words or sentences here and there. We are talking about whole paragraphs, chapters and even books and it was passed off as if they were from her or from God. She took complete chapter headings and copied them into her works and then used the author's thoughts, ideas and exact phrases to produce the content of the book and then called it her own. This was never more evident than in books like Patriarchs and Prophets, E.G.W. 1890. Rea lists 65 Chapter headings from this book that are almost word for word identical to Bible History/Old Testament, Alfred Edersheim 1876-80."

In the 1919 Bible Conference, Prescot argued that the denomination should make public the way that Ellen White's books were written, but he was opposed by W. C. White, Ellen Whites son and the church establishment. Prescot argued that one day the truth would come out. Marian Davis, one of Ellen Whites secretaries shared with Kellogg’s sister the way that she helped in gathering together the material that Ellen White used to build her books from. When what Marion had said to Kellogg’s sister was found out, she was sacked as book sales could be adversely affected if it were made public.

If the statements made by her supporters were true then the authors of the books Ellen White copied from and those who helped her had the same if not higher authority than Ellen White had. For she only copied or paraphrased what had already been written.

A point to note, Ellen White is dead, Jesus is our living authority.

Let me make it clear, I am certain that the Lord is behind the Adventist movement, but we cannot expect God to support something that in simple terms is fraudulent.

In my experience, the greatest cause of apostasy in our denomination is this continued fraud. It’s a shame that people are supporting such a fraud, for they are actually defeating the purpose for which the church claims itself to be in existence for, to take the Gospel to every nation. Not Ellen White or our doctrines to every nation, but the Gospel of Jesus, in other words the good news of Jesus, what He said. If we can support this work by utilizing the quotations and paraphrases that agree with what Jesus said that Ellen White and other authors have shared with us, then fine. But let us remain loyal to Jesus and accept that only through Jesus is found salvation. Not in any belief in a prophet or any set of doctrines. JESUS SAVES.

Furthermore, when I point out these facts, I am not pushing my own agenda, but stressing the fact that our salvation depends on Jesus who is God, not on a human being.

Firstly, Jesus is God and God does not change His mind or make mistakes. Ellen White did both.

Secondly she did copy and paraphrase from the books in her library. This gives us a problem as Jesus doesn’t need men to tell Him what He wants written. He is God. As the primary source of her written material, that is the books in her library that she used, they therefor hold more credibility than she does, as she is using them to copy from for her work? If we say that she was inspired then we are actually saying that the authors of these books that she used were directly inspired by Jesus and that what they wrote are the thoughts of Jesus. For if what she copied and paraphrased are the thoughts of Jesus these sources must be also.

I accept that there were times when the Holy Spirit used Ellen White as He does all of Jesus’ followers. Remember that in the Gospel of John chapters 14 to 16 Jesus tells us that when we become a believer He sends us the Holy Spirit to dwell within us. Not just Ellen White, but all believers. This is what Jesus says, not me. So it’s not me that is pushing any agenda. It’s what Jesus says and if we disagree with Jesus we become an antichrist.

Next, it undermines the commission of the church, to take the Gospel of Jesus to the entire world. Nowhere are we told to take Ellen White or a belief in Ellen White as a prophet to all the world, which is what some appear to be doing. It's a case of priorities. Jesus comes first, foremost and He alone is our continuing and authoritive source of truth providing comfort (through the Holy Spirit) guidance, instruction and correction (through His words as recorded in Holy Scriptures). If we claim to have another source than Jesus (Ellen White, Mohammed or Joseph Smith for example) then we delegate Jesus to a lower level of authority than the person we promote. This is blasphemy as Jesus is God. As Jesus is our only source of salvation, we must keep our eyes on Jesus. This does not distract from my admiration of Ellen White as a business woman and Christian leader. I see her in a similar mode to the Wesley brothers and Martin Luther.

Was Ellen White a Plagiarist?

A denominational defence produced by the E. G. White Estates. http://www.Ellen-White.com

For further unbiased evidences see the following chapters.

One cannot study the allegations against Ellen White without inevitably coming across the charge that she was a plagiarist. Obviously this is a serious issue and should be studied carefully by both supporters and critics of Ellen White. While this web site is designed to take a closer look at the charges and methods of her critics, supporters of Ellen White often have room for improvement as well. If Adventists shut their ears and eyes to the charges against her, claiming that she's right simply "because she's the Lord's prophet" then they are actually doing her writings, the church, and themselves a disservice. Critics would then be correct in saying that Adventist logic in defending Ellen White is no better than some of the other churches out there who claim to have a prophet (a sentiment that is often expressed). Therefore we will take the approach of looking at the actual evidence.

It may surprise some to know that the plagiarism charge against the Lord's faithful servants is nothing new. John Wesley and John Bunyan were both accused of this practice (see John Bunyan: Mechanick Preacher, by William York Tindall, New York: Russell & Russell, Inc., 1964, pp. 194ff and "John Wesley's 'Calm Address': The Response of the Critics," Methodist History, October, 1975, pp.13-23). While this by no means gets Ellen White off the hook, it does show us that this sort of allegation is really nothing new.

In 1982 a new book came out which brought this charge and others against Ellen White. The book was called The White Lie, and it definitely had an influence in Adventist circles. To read a response to its author's methods and conclusions, we recommend a booklet prepared by the Ellen White Estate called The Truth About "The White Lie." If you are reading a printed version of this page (and don't have Internet access) you can order a copy of the book from the Ellen White Estate (12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, Maryland 20904; Phone: 301-680-6540; FAX: 301-680-6559). There is a minimal charge.

The White Lie revealed various "parallel lines" between Ellen White's writings and other authors. The findings prompted an awareness of the need to study into this matter more intensely than Adventists had done in the past. While it had for decades been known that Ellen White had used the writings of others to enhance her own (EGW herself had addressed this), it was the volume of such use that was now under fire.

Adventist Reaction Quoted By Critics

Examining the reaction of various Adventist leaders from both ends of the theological spectrum has become a key part of the entire plagiarism charge. In fact, as we have read through the allegations we have found that a surprisingly large portion of the material out there focuses on what was said by this or that leader regarding the findings. Quote after quote from Adventist articles and personal letters are displayed to the reader. While it may be interesting and even historically relevant to study such reactions, it has little to do with the writings themselves. Two years before the book came out General Conference President Neil Wilson had commented on the issue. His statement is quoted the following way by one critic:

"...in her writings Ellen White used resources more extensively than we have heretofore been aware of or recognized..."

Neil Wilson, President of General Conference, in a March 20, 1980 Adventist Review article

What Wilson stated was indeed true. Everyone recognized this as the research continued. (We will post more of what Wilson said on this subject, and his conclusions, in the near future.)

Here is a quote by Arthur White, exactly as it appears on the critic's page:

"Now it is true that the intensive work in a study of the relationship between portions of certain E.G. White books and the writings of commentators and historians has disclosed a wider use by Ellen white of other writings, than either the white estate or present church leaders were aware of. the staff down through the ages has been much too small and too busy in meeting the demands upon it to give time to probing for answers to questions now being asked." (emphasis added)

--Arthur White, grandson of EGW, head of White Estate, 18 Jan 1981

And so it goes. Such statements, however, don't reveal a loss of confidence in the writings at all (and even if they did, this is not the issue), they merely present a fact: as the subject had been studied more, Adventists realized that Ellen White's use of other writings involved more than they had previously recognized.

How Much? So what does all of this mean in light of the plagiarism charge? Having established that she had utilized more of other writings than they thought, the question became "How much DID she use?" In 1983 the Ellen White Estate underwent an extensive "marking project" using all of Ellen White's published works. They would highlight each and every line that was known to have a parallel in another author's book. The definition of "parallel" included all lines which showed a clear verbal connection, including paraphrasing. The Estate incorporated not only their own findings but everything that was in The White Lie and anything else that critics could bring forward. The end result? Although this is an ongoing project, after 17 years of compiling data the studies show that less than 2% of all of her published work contains parallel lines.

Keep in mind that this research is ongoing and the White Estate's database will be updated as more information comes in. Anyone is welcome to present their findings to the Estate for inclusion in the project. At least one critic has challenged Adventists to prove that Ellen White wrote more than 20% of the content in her books. In any court of law the burden of proof is on the accuser. If 80% of her writings can be shown to contain similarities, then let the accuser freely bring forth the evidence and add it to the less than 2% that has already been discovered by the combined efforts of her most vocal critics and supporters alike.

As pointed out earlier, the "reaction of Adventists" seems to have become a focal point in the presentation of the charges. Suppose in 20 years from now it is discovered that Ellen White's use of other writers was actually double what we believe it to be today. The quotes of astonished Adventists in that day might paint a grim picture, but this increase would actually raise the total volume to only 4% (meaning 96% did not contain parallel lines). Even if all of her critics accumulated enough evidence over a 20 year period to quadruple the current percentage it would still mean that 92% of her work did not contain parallel lines. But what about parallel lines themselves...

A Copyright Attorney Examines the Writings

In 1981 the church hired copyright attorney Vincent L. Ramik of the law firm Diller, Ramik and Wight to examine Ellen White's writings and present them with his conclusions. Two factors should be considered here, which make the story even more fascinating:

1) Ramik had been raised a Roman Catholic (though not a "practicing" Catholic at the time of his research [read interview below]) and one of the books he examined was, in fact, The Great Controversy—not exactly flattering to that Church or the Pope. 2) Ramik later admitted in an interview that he had been biased against Ellen White when he went into the project, for he had read the work of many of her critics from D.M. Canright right up to the pre-publication manuscript of The White Lie itself.

Nevertheless, after more than 300 hours of researching approximately 1,000 relevant cases in American legal history, Ramik's conclusions were as follows:

"Based upon our review of the facts and legal precedents, we conclude that Ellen G. White was not a plagiarist and her works did not constitute copyright infringement/piracy." (Adventist Review, Sept. 17, 1981)

"Considering all factors necessary in reaching a just conclusion on this issue, it is submitted that the writings of Ellen G. White were conclusively unplagiaristic." (Ibid) Regarding the specific portions of other writers that she had used, Ramik said that she had "modified, exalted, and improved" the writings of others in an ethical, as well as legal, manner. (Ibid.)

In Ramik's conclusion he points out several factors that should be carefully considered when one attempts to accuse Ellen White of literary theft or deceit. 1) Her selections "stayed well within the legal boundaries of 'fair use.'" 2) "Ellen White used the writings of others; but in the way she used them, she made them uniquely her own"--adapting the selections into her own literary framework. 3) Ellen White urged her readers to get copies of some of the very books she made use of-- demonstrating that she did not attempt to conceal the fact of her use of literary sources, and that she had no intention to defraud or supersede the works of any other author.

We should keep in mind that Ramik's conclusions were based on studying not only Ellen White's writings, but approximately 1,000 cases involving literary property rights from the years 1790-1915. While we realize that the conclusions of one attorney will not convince everyone, we do think that his research was valid, fair, and extensive.

Ramik's examination and conclusions are usually mentioned only in passing (if mentioned at all) by the critics when their allegations are presented. His research is treated in such a non- chalant way that it would be easy to underestimate the significance of his findings. One brother who took issue with Ramik points to the fact that in one of the cases studied a defendant was found guilty. Ramik had, however, studied 1000 cases in his research, and many are referred to in his full report above. What is important is Ramik's conclusions after studying all of the case histories and comparing them to Ellen White's writings, not the outcome of one of the cases studied. When that many trials are examined, inevitably the results will show both guilty and not guilty verdicts. We hope that by making the reports and interviews available many seekers of truth will be blessed and many questions will be answered.

When asked how he would sum up the legal case against Ellen White as far as charges of plagiarism, piracy, and copyright infringement were concerned, Ramik answered:

"If I had to be involved in such a legal case, I would much rather appear as defense counsel than for the prosecution. There simply is no case!" (Adventist Review, Sept. 17, 1981)

"What About the Veltman Report?!"

In 1988 Fred Veltman, Ph.D., finished his eight-year study of Ellen White's use of literary sources in writing The Desire Of Ages. The October and December, 1990 issues of Ministry magazine (a magazine for Adventist pastors and theologians) ran a two-part article, written by Veltman himself, which summarized what was in the full report, known as "The Desire of Ages Project." Critics have circulated this article and highlighted certain statements Veltman made that seem to help their cause. In light of the entire article, however, Veltman's words hardly do Ellen White damage. Ellen White.com wants to get permission from magazines, etc. before we upload any copyrighted articles. We will either have the article uploaded here in its entirety or inform our visitors where they can receive a copy of it. Critics of Ellen White will even be able to freely share it with others if they wish. In the next few days we will be looking at some of the statements Veltman made and examine them in their context.

Robert Olson of the Ellen White Estate was asked how he felt about Veltman's study. His response was as follows:

"I am totally satisfied with this study. No one could have done a better job—no one. He did it as a neutral person would have and not as one who is an apologist." (Ministry, Dec. 1990, p. 16)

When Veltman himself was asked if he thought Ellen White was guilty of plagiarism, his answer, after eight years of study was:

"As I pointed out in my report, the investigation did not treat the issue of plagiarism. While we cannot settle that issue here, nor do I wish to minimize its importance, my personal opinion is that she was not guilty of this practice." (Ministry, Dec. 1990, p. 14)

Veltman's final conclusions:

"While I do not have all the answers to the questions being addressed to the writings of Ellen White, my belief in her inspiration is not seriously compromised." (Ministry, Dec. 1990, p. 15)

"Actually, as a result of my reading many of her writings in their handwritten and typescript form, I find that my respect for and appreciation of Ellen White and her ministry have grown." (Ibid)

"I find compelling reasons for viewing her as a nineteenth-century prophetic voice in her ministry to the Adventist Church and to the larger society as well. Her voice out of that Christian community of the past still deserves to be heard today in those timeless messages that speak to the realities of our world at the end of the twentieth century." (Ibid)

The White Lie! Chapter 5: That High shelf

by Walter Rea

Patriarchs and Prophets

 Historical note: J. N. Andrews had taken a copy of Paradise Lost to Ellen White when he recognized that her account of the "Great controversy" was similar to that of John Milton in his epic poem of 1667. According to Arthur L. White, she had put it up on a " high shelf " and not read it....  Well it appears that Ellen reached for that "high shelf" quite often! The years of 1860 through the 1880 s were busy years for Ellen and her staff. Perhaps remembering the book given to her by J.N. Andrews, she got Paradise Lost down from that "high shelf" and went to work on her vision of the great controversy-which was to become the theme of not only one book but the entire four volumes of The Spirit of Prophecy ( predecessor of the Conflict of the Ages Series). 1

John Milton's Paradise Lost was a great help to her. His ideas of the fight for justice in the courts above, as well as some of his very words, were woven into a fabric so vivid that even today some people have nightmares reading it. Ellen's story expands the Milton poem and takes m not only the war in heaven but the war on earth, from beginning to end. Satan is mostly in charge, dashing here and there in human events, wherever God might allow, and causing a general mess, until he gets his comeuppance in the seven last plagues, the destruction of the earth, and the final curtain call, the lake of fire.

Now this may all sound familiar to some-and it was. Others, including the Canon, had used this theme to a greater or lesser degree But Ellen's readers were to come to think that her portrayals were brighter and clearer and more authentic than all that went before. The Review and other Adventist advertising journals were to herald her writings and "visions" as the greatest thing going 2 Thus, lo and behold people began to buy. The early first volume of The Spirit of Prophecy (1870) was to follow the general outline of her previous printing of the small Spiritual Gifts-but with much "expansion."

It was not only in theology that Ellen saw things others may or may not have seen before. She began to get into health matters at this time. In this subject, again as with Milton's Paradise Lost, that "high shelf" was a help. Some of her contemporaries at this time were writers on the subject of health, like Jackson, Trall, Coles, Shew, Graham, Alcott, and others 3 She had more than a casual acquaintance with some, and there was talk of not returning what she had taken-which according to a dictionary would be stealing. To this criticism she replied:

It was at the house of Brother A. Hillard, at Otsego, Michigan, June 6, 1863, that the great subject of Health Reform was opened before me in a vision. I did not visit Dansville till August, 1864, fourteen months after I had the view. I did not read any works upon health until I had written "Spiritual Gifts," vol. iii and iv, "Appeal to Mothers," and had sketched out most of my six articles in the six numbers of "How to Live," and I did not know that such a paper existed as the Laws of Life, published at Dansville, New York. I had not heard of the several works upon health written by Dr. J. C. Jackson, and other publications at Dansville, at the time I had the view named above.

As I introduced the subject of health to friends where I labored in Michigan, New England, and in the State of New York, and spoke against druas and flesh meats, and in favor of water, pure air, and a proper diet, the reply was often made, "You speak very nearly the opinions taught in the Laws of Life, and other publications, by Doctors Trall, Jackson, and others. Have you read that paper and those works?" My reply was that I had not, neither should I read them till I had fully written out my view, lest it should be said that I had received my light upon the subject of health from physicians and not from the Lord 4

Others, as before in the case of Paradise Lost, were to suggest:

The information that came to Mrs. White from the Author of Truth, was bound to be in agreement with such truths as had been discovered by others. 5 Ellen was to say, as Grandson Arthur would imply nearly a hundred years later, that she got the "truths" first-even though subsequent studies might show that the ideas were the same and that the language expressing them was much the same as others had used first. It might have been the old argument of which came first, the chicken or the egg. Ellen said:

And after I had written my six articles for "How to Live," I then searched the various works on hygiene and was surprised to find them so nearly in harmony with what the Lord had revealed to me. And to show this harmony, and to set before my brethren and sisters the subject as brought out by able writers, I determined to publish "How to Live," in which I largely extracted from the works referred to [italics added] 6

Ronald L. Numbers, in Prophetess of Health, does a commendable job of showing that Ellen's "extracted" parts made up much of the whole, and that in some cases the whole was more than the sum of the parts- an equation that is just as hard to believe in religion as it is in mathematics?

It was not just in health matters that conflict arose. Those "testimonies" were coming in for a lot of criticism. In the early days there were those who felt that James White might be influencing his wife in her writings or might express an idea or two himself under her name. There is nothing as magic as a seal to give things weight and authority, and she was the seal. James, on the other hand, felt that others were doing the same with Ellen and might be gaining an edge over him:

She is humble, and must be treated tenderly, or she can do nothing. Elders Butler and Haskell have had an influence over her that I hope to see broken. It has nearly ruined her. These men must not be suffered by our people to do as they have done until all our ministers are fully discouraged. Young men are kept out of the ministry by their narrow blind counsel 8

John Harvey Kellogg, a protégée of the Whites, had some of these same complaints for years. Too many, he thought, were doing too much under the name of inspiration through Ellen and her writings. Years later when he was interviewed by some of the men of the church he would say:

I want to tell you another thing you do not know about, a testimony I have from Sister White which she has not published and that none of them have published, that these men have frequently cut out large chunks of things that Sister White had written that put things in a light that was not the most favorable...or did not suit their campaigns that way, that they felt at liberty to cut them out and so change the effect and tenor of the whole thing, sending it out over Sister White's name. 9

What in essence he seems to be saying is that some of the boys had obtained a stamp with Ellen's name on it and were stamping some of anything and everything with it. Later in the interview Kellogg was to point to William C. White, son of Ellen, as the culprit in some cases:

Will White got those letters and took a paragraph here, and a paragraph there and a paragraph from the other one and put them together and made up a thing and sent them out with his own name signed to it. It is a "testimony" from Willie. If you look that document over, you will see her name IS not signed to that at all, but Willie has made it up from letters that Sister White had written to those personal friends... Now Willie's name is signed to it and not hers; yet that thing is being carried all over Europe and all over the world and read in public as a testimony from the Lord. And that is what I told you is the gigantic fraud that IS being perpetrated, and the ministry of the denomination and the whole machinery of the denomination have set themselves to work to perpetrate impositions and frauds upon people. If the truth were known it would bring the whole denomination into ignominy and contempt. 10

Years afterward it would be argued that the good doctor's statements were made after he had broken with the Whites and the church, and that therefore these were not reliable comments. It would be suggested that he had ulterior motives and should not be considered a qualified witness, although it is acknowledged that he had held honors along with those still in power, that he had been privileged to sit in high councils, and that he had personally been very close to Ellen. Criticism of Kellogg might be valid if he alone had seen and said what he did. But he was not alone.

William S. Sadler, another wellknown physician and personal friend of the White family, had also been having second thoughts about the methods used and the excuses offered in the name of Ellen and inspiration. In April 1906 he was to recall to her some of the problems that he had seen over the years in her writings and conduct. This letter was written while he was still very much a true believer and supporter of Ellen and in response to her own invitation to ask questions. He, too, as others, had heard the voice of Ellen. But like Isaac before him, he had found that the hands were the hands of another-Will White's. Sadler's statements make it clear that a good deal of license had been taken for twenty years or more:

Another matter: that is, Willie's influence over the Testimonies. I came into the truth about 20 years ago, and just before I was baptized by Elder Wm. Covert, (about 18 years ago) I thoroughly made up my mind concerning the Testimonies. In short, I accepted them; but from that day to this, especially the last ten years, and more especially since your return to this country from Australia, 1, have been hearing it constantly, from leaders, ministers, from those sometimes high in Conference authority, that Willie influenced you in the production of your Testimonies; or, as they would often designate it, the "letters" you send out.

This talk made little or no impression on me. I resolutely refused to believe it, year after year. I have been given a copy of the communication written by you under date of July 19th, 1905, addressed to Brethren I. H. Evans and J. S. Washburn, and I have since then not known what to do or say concerning this matter. I refer to the following quotation:

"After seeing the representation, I awoke, and I fully expected that the matter would take place as it had been presented to me. When Elder Haskell was telling me of the perplexity that they were in to carry forward the Southern work, I said, "Have faith in Cod; you will carry from this meeting the five thousand dollars needed for the purchase of the church!""

"I wrote a few lines to Elder Daniel's suggesting this be done, but Willie did not see that the matter could be carried through thus, because Elder Daniel's and others were at that time very much discouraged in regard to the condition of things in Battle Creek. So I told him that he need not deliver the note. But I could not rest. I was disturbed, and could not find peace of mind." Please won't you help me to understand this? It is the most serious of all the difficulties I have encountered in my experience concerning the testimonies.

Had Sadler known what others have come to know--that in addition to Willie's hand being in the pie, Ellen and her helpers were involved also in some highly creative book writing from the materials of others--he surely would have been more disturbed. Others were to raise similar issues in later years; but their questions, as Sadler's, were never answered to anyone's knowledge or satisfaction.

By the 1870s and 1880s, some were making distinctions in their thinking between a "testimony" (that is, as a private letter from the prophet) and that material which was being copied and adapted from other wrlters and placed in books as her own. Ellen did not accept this separat~on. She wrote to the Battle Creek church in 1882:

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...

When I went to Colorado I was so burdened for you that, in my weakness ...I arose at three o'clock in the morning to write to you. God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, it was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision-the precious rays of light shining from the throne. 12

The transition was now complete. Ellen had arrived. She had reached her position of authority, and it was not to be questioned. Her letters, be they private or soon to be public, her copying from others, her talks on whatever subject, in fact, just about anything that might come off that "high shelf" would now be considered from God and blessed by his Spirit.

No claimant in religion has ever asked the people for such a blank check with an uncertified signature. But this claimant did. And to this day most Adventists have never questioned her endorsement nor her ability to fulfill her claim. Not only are the "testimonies" considered inspired (including that which was copied, even portions up to a hundred percent) but any writings that she was known to have approved, or touched, or been even near while she was alive are considered to have some special significance or "inspiration." Even that which she didn't include when she copied is deemed significant. It has been suggested that-like Gutzon Borglum (the sculptor of the Mount Rushmore faces) who from the valley below supervised all the rock throwing-Ellen was considered to be directing by some heavenly radar all the material that came out under her name, whether she ever saw it or would recognize it as hers. 13

With such an endorsement as had never been given to any mortal before, Ellen was now ready to reshape the events of the past and, by her visionary interpretations of the Bible, likewise the events of the future. Already she had started on this idea of the great controversy in her first pocketsize edition in 1858 of Spiritual gifts. But that small work was crudely composed. And it had some competition-for the same year Hastings had published a volume with the identical title. 14 Ellen's 219page volume did not show much promise and, unlike the later book The Great Controversy, was never heralded as widely in the way of truth and light, form and content, prose and style. But it was a beginning and therefore was to be used.

It is not hard even for the blind to see that if continuing revelations, and inspirations, and instructions were to take an obtuse angle and conflict with what had gone before, such a course would raise much more serious questions than those already being raised. If the material copied, if the authors used, if the new visions or instructions were to clash in any major way with the old, this would be hard to explain. Some inconsistency would take place, but the method used was (like the shell game) to keep the eyes occupied while the hands shifted the objects around so fast that the beginnings were forgotten. And that's what happened. Few readers today know that Spiritual Gifts is the forerunner of the fourvolume set of The Spirit of Prophecy, and even fewer know that the fivevolume set of the Conflict of the Ages Series traces its origin back to its fourvolume predecessors.

The importance of this progression can't be overlooked, for what God said in 1858 he had to repeat in 1870, and even later in 1890, and so on. Now with God being God, that would be no problem for him; but with Ellen and her team, it wasn't that easy. Each new author copied had to mesh with the others who had gone before. Each new enlightenment or vision had to dovetail with all that had been put on record previously. Inconsistency had to be caught and either eliminated or clarified if anything slipped through-often again and again over a period of sixty years or more. There would be those, however, who would notice the change in style and the evolution of structure:

The first printed visions were characterized by a naive style, and the subject matter reflected what one would expect in a young mystic among the disappointed Millerites. Gradually the prophet developed into a different type of messenger, however, and the Conflict Series mark the production of the mature EGW. In fact the evolution is so great that It IS somewhat surprising to know that the same person wrote the two kinds of books. Even the different stages in the same series show striking improvements in style and contents. In the final editions the reader may peruse whole chapters without observing anything reminding him of visions. How this remarkable development came about in an intriguing assignment for the serious historian? 15

What was remarkable in the development was the cosmetic skill with which Ellen's team rearranged events so that criticism (as it would come) did not undermine the total project in its beginnings. By the time the number of dissents built up to a crescendo in the 1890s and beyond, the power of the legend of Ellen's invincibility (while she said she carried God's shield) helped her to win every battle, destroy all opposition, dismiss any dissenter from her employment (or for that matter the employment of the church), and banish, in the name of God and religion, some of the strongest characters in the medical and theological history of the church. No wonder that in 1980, at the Glacier View (Colorado) meeting about Desmond Ford's views, one of the princes of the church would write:

The time has come to be critical of our own method. We as Seventhday Adventists have felt secure in that we have got the revealed truth; and no matter what others may say against us, we have God on our side and the prophet, Ellen G. White. Now we are discovering that much of what she wrote in Desire of Ages and Great Controversy was copied from others. How do we really know what we claim to know? We are thus forced to ask questions on matters of interpretation.... It is a historical fact that most of the bright lights that have left our church have left because of the authority assigned to the writings of Ellen White. 16

What that prince may not have known when he wrote that article is that not only The Desire of Ages and The Great Controversy were drawn largely from other writers, but the beginning of beginnings, Spiritual Gifts, and then volume one of The Spirit of Prophecy, the forerunner of Patriarchs and prophets (of the Conflict Series too) were also drawn from other writers. In that middle version of the series, Milton's Paradise Lost was given a greater part. From the two or three pages in Spiritual Gifts, Milton's theme was expanded to over thirtyseven pages and was to crop up, sometimes identically, in other of her writings. Now, however, new authors were found to fill in the gaps to make it all readable! 17 The brethren were not shy about heralding the virtues of the first volume of The Spirit of Prophecy.' 18 Even the name of the series suggests that it had the special approval of God and should be in the homes of all believers. Although the new volume was an improvement over the old Spiritual Gifts (another book with a title suggesting divine sanction), it did not turn the trick that was expected of it. Not until the later edition came out under the special title of Patriarchs and Prophets did the amplified material begin to hit its stride. It was to be the cornerstone of the fivevolume Conflict of the Ages set that Adventists would use to establish most interpretation and translation and evaluation of the Scriptures. Used in all Seventhday Adventist schools and colleges as authoritative on Old Testament matters, Patriarchs and Prophets has been accepted by Adventists as the final word. No deviation from this norm is accepted in matters of ideas concerning Creation, geology, theology, or Christology.

There were a few bad moments with the book, however. In the early writing, Ellen had Jacob and his night of wrestling in one version. In the later portrayal, however, the picture is almost the opposite in its details. Note her differing views in the italicized portions in the examples which follow:

The Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. I, pp. Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 19697 11819 E. G. White E. G. White 1890 Jacob's wrong, in receiving his brother's blessing by fraud, is again brought forcibly before him, and he is It was a lonely, mountainous region, the haunt of wild afraid that God will permit Esau to take his life. In his beasts and the lurking place of robbers and murderers. distress he prays to God all night. An angel was Solitary and unprotected, Jacob bowed in deep distress represented to me as standing before Jacob, presenting upon the earth. It was midnight. All that made life dear his wrong before him in its true character. As the angel to him were at a distance, exposed to danger and death. turns to leave him, Jacob lays hold of him, and will not Bitterest of all was the thought that it was his own sin let him go. He makes supplications with tears. He which had brought this peril upon the innocent. With pleads that he has deeply repented of his sins, and the earnest cries and tears he made his prayer before God. wrongs against his brother, which have been the means Suddenly a strong hand was laid upon him. He thought of separating him from his father's house for twenty that an enemy was seeking his life, and he endeavored years. He ventures to plead the promises of God, and to wrest himself from the grasp of his assailant. In the the tokens of his favor to him from time to time, in his darkness the two struggled for the mastery. Not a word absence from his father's house. All night .Jacob was spoken, but Jacob put forth all his strength, and did wrestled with the angel, making supplication for a not relax his efforts for a moment.... The struggle blessing. The angel seemed to be resisting his prayer, continued until near the break of day, when the stranger by continually calling his sins to his remembrance, at placed his finger upon Jacob's thigh, and he was the same time endeavoring to break away from him. crippled instantly. The patriarch now discerned the Jacob was determined to hold the angel, not only by character of his antagonist [italics added] 20 physical strength, but by the power of living faith. In his distress Jacob referred to the repentance of his soul, the deep humility he had felt for his wrongs. The angel regarded his grayer with seeming indifference [italics added].19

Such discrepancies have caused concern among Adventist clergy from time to time, but not many helpful answers have come forth. In reply to a letter of 1943, Arthur White wrote for the White Estate:

Your second question relates to what you feel is a discrepancy in the account of Jacob's wrestling with the angel as recorded in "Patriarchs and Prophets," and the earlier books "Spiritual Gifts" and "Spirit of Prophecy." You ask for the official explanation of our denomination on this matter. I am in no position to speak for the denomination. The General Conference has not given study to this question which you raise, and there is no official pronouncement available. I have in my mind what seems to me to be a satisfactory explanation. After I have talked it over with some others here, I shall write to you again, but when I do so I shall be writing for Arthur White and not for the denomination.

In brief, I might ask for an explanation of the type of inspiration which permits some conflict in the accounts in connection with the ministry of Christ as recorded by the different gospel writers 21'

Always careful to connect whatever problems that occurred in the writings of Ellen with problems that might occur with Scripture writers, the early apologists for Ellen began to sound as if God does not have to be truthful or accurate. To that tendency they have added a new twist. He just had to be God, and they would tell all who he was when it was necessary to do so. That argument was to carry over into the 1980s.

Still, one can't fault that final edition too much. With the help of John Milton, David March, Alfred Edersheim, Frederic W. Farrar, Friedrich W. Krummacher, and an evergrowing staff of researchers, finalist Ellen (and God) did produce a body of work that was to stand as the Adventist cornerstone for over a hundred years. That "high shelf" that was meant to be the protection of the prophet from temptation had also produced a profit of ideas.

Examples of how E.G. White copied Patriarchs and Prophets from Adersheim's Bible History: Old Testament, vols. 14

Chapter 5 Selected Exhibits

Sources from Which She Drew: Books Written by: Ellen White Edersheim, Alfred Bible History: Old Testament, vols. 14. (1876:1880) Reprint Grand Rapids by Eerdmans 1949. March, Daniel Patriarchs and Prophets; Mountain View, California, Pacific Press (1890,1913). Night Scenes in the Bible

Philadelphia, Zeigler, McCurdy Page in 1958 edition (White) Page in volume 1 (Edersheim) 33 Why Was Sin Permitted? xi Introduction 44 The Creation 17 Creation 52 The Temptation and Fall 17 The Fall 63 The Plan of Redemption 71 Cain and Abel Tested 23 Cain and Abel-The Two Ways 80 Seth and Enoch 23 Seth and His Descendants 90 The Flood 44 The Flood 105 After the Flood 51 After the Flood 111 The Literal Week 117 The Tower of Babel 57 Babel-Confusion of Tongues 125 The Call of Abraham 72 The Calling of Abram 132 Abraham in Canaan 72 His Arrival in Canaan 145 The Test of Faith 97 Trial of Abraham's Faith 156 Destruction of Sodom 88 The Destruction of Sodom 171 The Marriage of Isaac 106 The Marriage of Isaac 177 Jacob and Esau 106 Birth of Esau andJacob 183 Jacob's Flight and Exile 115 Jacob Is Sent to Laban 195 The Night of Wrestling 132 The Night of Wrestling 204 The Return to Canaan 132 Jacob Settles at Hebron 213 Joseph in Egypt 142 Joseph's Early Life 224 Joseph and His Brothers 161 Joseph Recognizes His brothers

Page in 1958 edition (White) Page in volume 2 (Edersheim) 241 Moses 35 The Birth and the Training of Moses 257 The Plagues of Egypt 63 The Ten "Strokes," or Plagues 273 The Passover 78 The Passover and Its Ordinances 281 The Exodus 78 The Children of Israel Leave Egypt 291 From the Red Sea to Sinai 89 The Wilderness of Shur 303 The Law Given to Israel 105 The "Ten Words," and Their Meaning 315 Idolatry at Sinai 331 Satan's Enmity against the Law 121 The Sin of the Golden Calf 343 The Tabernacle and 133 The Rearing of the Tabernacle Its Services 359 The Sin of Nadab and Abihu 137 The Sin of Nadab and Abihu 395 The Rebellion of Korah 171 The Gainsaying of Korah 114 Civil and Social Ordinances- The "Covenant Made 363 The law and the Covenants by Sacrifice" 374 From Sinai to Kadesh 156 [March into the Wilderness] 387 The Twelve Spies 163 The Spies Sent to Canaan 406 In the Wilderness 171 The Years in the Wilderness 411 The Smitten Rock 184 The Sin of Moses and Aaron 422 The Journey around Edom 433 The Conquest of 193 Journey of the Children of Israel in the Land of Bashan Edom

Page in 1958 edition (White) Page in volume 3 (Edersheim) 438 Balaam 11 Character and History of Balaam 453 Apostasy at the Jordan 23 The End of Balaam 462 The Law Repeated 33 The Second Census of Israel 469 The Death of Moses 42 Death and Burial of Moses 481 Crossing the Jordan 53 The Miraculous Parting ofJordan 487 The Fall of Jericho 58 The Miraculous Fall of Jericho 499 The Blessings and the Curses 73 The Blessing and the Curse on Gerizim and Ebal 505 League with the Gibeonites 72 The Deceit of the Gibeonites 510 The Division of Canaan 87 Final Division of the Land 521 The Last Words of Joshua

525 Tithes and Offerings 96 Joshua's Farewell Addresses

530 God's Care for the Poor 537 The Annual Feasts 33 Sacrificial Ordinances 543 The Earlier Judges 105 Summary of the Book of Judges 560 Samson 163 The History of Samson

Page in 1958 edition (White) Page in volume 4 (Edersheim) 569 The Child Samuel 1 Birth of Samuel 575 Eli and His Sons 10 The Sin of Eli's Sons 581 The Ark Taken by the Philistines 16 Taking of the Ark 592 The Schools of the Prophets 26 Samuel's Administration 603 The First King of Israel 26 The Demand for a King 616 The Presumption of Saul 56 Saul's Disobedience 627 Saul Rejected 56 The Rejection of His Kingdom 637 The Anointing of David 79 The Anointing of David 643 David and Goliath 79 Combat between David and Goliath 649 David a Fugitive 94 David's Flight to Samuel 660 The Magnanimity of David 109 David end Jonathan 675 The Death of Saul 147 Death of Saul 683 Ancient and Modern Sorcery 136 Saul... the Witch of Endor 690 David at Ziklag 136 Capture of Ziklag by the Amalekites 697 David Called to the Throne 147 David King at Hebron 703 The Reign of David 163 David... King over All Israel 717 David's Sin and Repentance 190 David's Great Sin... Repentance References and Notes

1. J. N. Andrews had taken a copy of Paradise Lost to Ellen White when he recognized that her account of the 'Great controversy" was similar to that of John Milton in his epic poem of 1667. According to Arthur L. White, she had put it up on a "high shelf" and not read it.... EGW's The Spirit of Prophecy was published by the Pacific Press first in four volumes (1870777884). A facsimile reproduction was issued in 1969 by the Review and Herald Publishing Association....The Conflict of the Ages Series, last, was to include five books The Great Controversy (1888), Patriarchs and Prophets (1890), The Desire of Ages (1898), The Acts of the Apostles ( 1911), and Prophets and Kings ( 1916).

2. An editorial notice about the forthcoming volume two of The Spirit of Prophecy appearing in the Review of 30 November 1876 said: "We are prepared to speak of this volume, now just issued, as the most remarkable volume that has ever issued from this Office." The paragraph was initialed by editor Uriah Smith.

3. Ronald L. Numbers deals with the endeavors of these "health reformers" in his Prophetess of Health: A Study of Ellen G. White (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1976). Their views were published in periodicals of the 1800s and these books, among others: (1) Willlam A. Alcott, Lectures on Life and Health (Boston: Phillips, Sampson, and Co., 1853); (2) Larkin B. Coles, Philosophy of Health: NaturatPrincihhes oJ Health and Cure (Boston: William D. Ticknor & Co., 1849), (3) Sylvester Graham, Lectures on the Science of Human Life (New York: Fowler and Wells, 1858); (4) James Caleb Jackson, The Sexual Organism (Boston: B. Leverett Emerson, 1862); (5) Russell T. Trall, Pathology of Reproductive Organs (Boston: B. Leverett Emerson, 1862); (6)Joel Shew and Trall, editors of the WaterCure Journal (184562).

4. Ellen G. White, Forward, Health or How to Live (Photographic reproduction, Mokelumne Hill, Calif., 1957); Review 30 (8 October 1867), p. 260.

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid.

7. Ronald L. Numbers, Prophetess of Health: A Study of Ellen G. White (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1976).

8. Ingemar Linden, The Last Trump, p. 202. James White to Dudley M. Canright, 24 May 1881.

9. [Iohn Harvey Kellogg], "An authentic Interview between Elder G. W. Amadon, Elder A. C. Bourdeau, and Dr.John Harvey Kellogg in Battle Creek, Michigan, on October 7th, 1907." A notarized stenographic report.

10. Ibid.

11. William S. Sadler to EGW, 26 April 1906, pp. 34.

12. EGW, Testimonies, vol. 5, pp. 6667. EGW to Battle Creek Church, 20 June 1882.

13. Jack W. Provonsha, Sabbath School Study Tape, 2 February 19.80. Glendale Committee Review, 28- 29January 1980.

14. H[orace] L[orenzo] Hastings, The Great Controversy between God and Man (Boston: Private printing by the author, [1858]).

15. Linden, The Last Trump, p. 211.

16. Earl W. Amundson, "Authority and Conflict-Consensus and Unity," photocopied (Paper presented at Theological Consultation, Glacier View Ranch, Ward, CO, 1520 August 1980), pp. 12, 16.

17. See Appendix, Chapter 5 Comparison Exhibits. 18. Guy Herbert Winslow, "Ellen Gould White and Seventhday Adventism" (Dissertation, Clark University, Worcester, MA 1932) p. 290. See also Robert W.Olsen "The Desire of Ages," photocopied (Washington: EGW)

19. EGW, The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. l, pp. 11819.

20. Ellen G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets (Mountain View: PPPA, 1890), pp.

21. Arthur L. White to Henry F. Brown, 23 September 1943.

By Walter T. Rea

Chapter 6: Sources from Which She Drew

The Desire of Ages by Walter Rea

If Patriarchs and Prophets was the cornerstone of Adventist theology The Desire of Ages was the keystone in the arch of Adventist thinking and Christological views. In the preface of volume two (1877) of its forerunner, The Spirit of Prophecy, it was said:

When the Publishers issued the first volume of this work, they felt that it supplied a want long realized by the Christian world, in illuminating a subject which is of great interest to the Christian mind, the relation of the son of God to the Father, and his position in Heaven, together with the fall of man and the Mediatorship of Christ between him and his Great or.

In this second volume the author continues with renewed interest the subject of the mission of Christ, as manifested by his Miracles and Teachings. The reader will find that this book furnishes invaluable aid in studying the lessons of Christ set forth in the Gospels. The author, as a religious writer and speaker, has labored for the public during more than twenty Years. Being aided in the study of the Scriptures, and her work as a religious teacher, by the special enlightenment of the Spirit of God, she is peculiarly qualified to present the facts of the Life and Ministry of Christ, in connection with the divine plan of human redemption, and to practically apply the lessons of Jesus to the simple duties of life [italics added].

One of the most pleasing features of this book is the plain and simple language with which the author clothes thoughts that glow with truth and beauty. 1

A lot of trouble and embarrassment would have been avoided in years to come if a few others than the "Spirit of God" had gotten some credit. Although the Scriptures do make it plain that every good and perfect gift comes from God, some of Ellen's gifts of writing were found to have come through quite a few human sources. In the late 1970s Robert W. Olson, for the White Estate (which is always pushed to keep its readers and the church members up to date on such things), issued a rather late concession that Ellen had indeed been peeking at the work of other authors when she wrote The Desire of Ages:

Ellen White's indebtedness to other authors has long been acknowledged by Seventh-day Adventists.... The exact extent of Ellen White's borrowings in The Great Controversy is not known....

Studies by Raymond Cottrell and Walter Specht have shown that Ellen White borrowed about 2.6 percent of her words in The Desire Of Ages from William Hanna's Life of Christ .... However, W. C. White and Marian Davis both mention other books on Christ's life which Ellen White used. It is also evident that she borrowed from some works not named by W. C. White or Miss Davis, such as John Harris's The Great Teacher....

Ellen White's literary borrowing was not limited to the three books discussed above....

Ellen White can hardly be called a "copyist" since she almost invariably rewrites, rephrases, and improves on the original author when she does use another's material....

Concerning the writing of The Desire of Ages in particular, W. C. White states

"Previous to her work of writing on the Life of Christ and during the time of her writing to some extent, she read from the works of Hanna, Fleetwood, Farrar, and Geikie. I never knew of her reading Edersheim. She occasionally referred to Andrews."-W. C. White to L. E. Froom, January

Comparison of The Desire of Ages with the various lives of Christ available in her day show that she drew, more or less [italics supplied] not only from the authors mentioned above by W. C. White, but from March, Harris, and others as well. 2

Olson's article, which may be one of the most revealing concessions to date by the White Estate, deserves detailed study. Had it been circulated, or even leaked, to the general public and the church at large (which it hasn't as I write), this book might not have been written. Often only the "insider" gleaning socalled "top secret" information knows where to send for what-if he is privileged to know that such information exists at all.

To write or say that "Ellen White's indebtedness to other authors has long been acknowledged by Seventhday Adventists" is only an extension of the white lie. Although it is technically true that, as far back as the 1880s, the church has been righting a rear guard action concerning the use of others' material in the name of God and Ellen, the declarations have always been made with defensiveness and quick justification.

William S. Peterson's article in a Spectrum issue of 1971, for example, was to bring down upon him a chorus of spiritual invectives that, in the language of the truck driver or stevedore, would curl the paint on any container at thirty paces. That Ellen had borrowed just was not so, it was said From that autumn issue until the 1980s the journal has carried continuing charges and counter charges, denials and counter denials that try to refute any suggestion that she would have incorporated anyone's vocabulary or been influenced in any of her writing. 3

Not until Neal C. Wilson, president of the General Conference, wrote the eighteen members of the special Glendale Committee set up to review the amount of certain findings about Ellen's "borrowing" were the readers of the Adventist Review to learn that she had used the works of others for "descriptive, biographical, historical, spiritual, and scientific information." 4 As one member of the committee was to point out to Wilson, "That hardly seems to leave much except direct revelation. Is that the issue the panel is to decide?" 5 Surely the personnel of the White Estate must have known all along that most of the church has been uniformed about the amount and extent of her "borrowing."

At least a great many church scholars who have tried to pry loose White Estate historical material that would help in making comparisons with others' writings know they have received very little help and encouragement from those guarding the sacrosanct vault of the Estate. The policy of "selective revelation" (that is, the Estate selects what may be revealed) has had such a hold that only when members of the Clan pass from the scene may the church expect access to information that may reveal the truth. Time and again the men from that office, while riding the national circuit-which they do rather often to help quiet the restless natives-have had to meet the question of why the vault cannot be open to all researchers and information made available to friend and foe alike, and why picking and choosing is always left to the Clan Plan.

The 1980 "Adventist Review" article:

Even those who might have had their own key to the vault (so to speak) found It fascinating that the shut door might have a possibility of being opened even a little. Donald R. McAdams, himself a competent researcher on Ellen and her writings, sounded a hopeful note over just such prospects in an article in Spectrum in 1980:

In the March 20 1980, Adventist Review in an article entitled "This I Believe About Ellen G. White " Neal Wilson informed the church about the Rea [Glendale] Committee. The initial report indicates that "in her writing Ellen White used sources more extensively than we have heretofore been aware of or recognized...." [italics added.]

The statement is a most significant article to appear in the Review in this century. The president of the General Conference is openly and honestly acknowledging the facts about Ellen White's use of sources and pointing the church toward a definition of inspiration that will be new to most Adventists an threatening to some. A full response to Walter Rea must wait until he as presented his evidence to the church in definitive written form. 6

Inevitably McAdams would react as he did, because he is an honest historian who himself spent much time in 197273 examining a chapter of The Great Controversy, comparing a chapter of it with half a chapter of historian James A. Wylie, and finding irrefutable evidence of dependence. The interesting and significant part of this story, as he tells It, is that the White Estate would not allow this church historian to release his work or conclusions to the church or the world. 7

McAdams had another reason to be concerned about what was taking place. He was one of the members of the special Glendale Committee to whom Wilson wrote. He had seen some of the evidence, had heard the January 2829, 1980, presentation, and had himself stated to his colleagues that the evidence was indeed "startling. He had even suggested that "if every paragraph in The Great Controversy were footnoted in accordance with proper procedure, almost every paragraph would be footnoted." It is of interest that those committee members present from the White Estate did not challenge him. 9

How could they? They were sitting there with privileged information. Ronald D. Graybill, assistant secretary of the White Estate was present at the meeting. He too had been working in the files and had completed in May 1977 a comparison of Ellen White and her close paraphrasing of another historian, Merle d'Aubigne. As he continued his study, what should appear to his wondering eyes-not d Aubigne at all, but a popularized version of d'Aubigne prepared by the Reverend Charles Adams for young readers, and this material had been published first, not in The Great Controversy, but in the October 11,1883, Signs of the Times article entitled "Luther in the Wartburg. The conclusions of this rather simple cloakanddagger story were, as McAdams quotes Graybill:

There does not appear to be any objective historical fact in Mrs. White's account that she could not have gained from the literary sources on which she was drawing, except in one detail: ... The over all impression gained from this study by this researcher is that it sustains McAdams' main point- that the objective and mundane historical narrative was based on the work of historians, not on visions.

So why didn't we say so in the first place? The nearest that we had ever come to that type of acknowledgment was from son Willie White

(letter of 4 November 1912):

When writing out the chapters for Great Controversy, she sometimes gave a partial description of an important historical event, and when her copyist who was preparing the manuscripts for the printer, made inquiry regarding time and place, Mother would say that those things are recorded by conscientious historians. Let the dates used by those historians be inserted. At other times in writing out what had been presented to her, Mother found such perfect descriptions of events and presentations of facts and doctrines written out in our denominational books, that she copied the words of these authorities. 12

Willie's statements would be modified in a 1969 statement by his son Arthur: "Mrs. White ever sought to avoid being influenced by others." 13

There was another member of the White Estate group who likewise sat quietly through that January 1980 meeting without tipping his hand. He was Robert W. Olson, appointed to head the White Estate on the retirement of Arthur L. White in 1978. Olson, more than perhaps anyone else in the room except W. Richard Lesher (the head of the Adventist Biblical Research Institute) knew where some of the bodies were buried, because some of those bodies were being resurrected faster than the burying services could be performed.

In 1977 and 1978 Olson received a number of letters that were opening new avenues of information on the relationship of Ellen to her book Patriarchs and Prophets. To Olson, the research had taken a nasty turn as it began to get close to The Desire of Ages. When he was asked about the persistent rumor that Ellen had received some rather human help in the preparation of Desire, he didn't seem to recall the letters or materials that he was getting except to express that the report of help was overdrawn and there was no reason to believe that The Desire of Ages was anything but the work of Ellen White. 14

He knew well that the trail to Ellen's "borrowing" was getting warm, for he had written a remarkable letter concerning it to the Estate staff on November 29, 1978, just two years before the meeting where he was now denying that any problem existed. The letter was a sensitive one and was not for public notice. To ensure fairness, I include the entire letter in the appendix section of this chapter. Portions are given here: About eight or ten months ago Elder Rea sent me a copy of some of his research which in his opinion showed that Ellen White was highly dependent upon Edersheim for some of the things she had written in Desire of Ages, as well as for the very organization of the book itself, and the use of many chapter titles.

I wrote to Elder Rea at the time and asked him not to move forward with any plans for publishing his findings until I had a chance to talk to him personally at the Southern California Conference Camp Meeting to be held late in July 1978. To this suggestion Elder Rea readily agreed. When I attended the camp meeting near Palmdale, California, last July, I spent several hours talking with Elder Rea and obtained his consent to withhold the advertising of his work on any kind of a broad scale until we had had opportunity ourselves to look at it first.... Elder Rea has agreed to give us What ever time we need before he takes any further steps on his own....

Through Jim Nix at Loma Linda and Ed Turner at Andrews University, I have learned of someone in the Loma Linda area who is making comparisons between the Desire of Ages, and Hanna's book on "The Life of Christ." Jim Nix told me that he saw Hanna's book and that it is heavily underlined m both red and blue and that this is supposed to be the very copy of the book which was used in the White Estate office when Mrs. White was preparing her book The Desire of Ages. Jim Nix has Xeroxed a copy of this book and sent it to us, so we have it here in our office.... [Italics added.]

Ed also told me about a professional man, a dentist as I recall, who lived m the Victorville area....This professional man recently had access to Hanna's "Life of Christ," and after reading it, told Ed that it practically "blew his mind" to see the close resemblance that he discovered between Hanna and Ellen White. 15

The solution suggested by this man of God, sworn to disseminate truth and light, was as follows:

The only alternative [of four outlined] which seems sensible to me is the last one. It will cost the White Estate nothing for Jim's [Cox] time, and I do believe that we can stay close enough to him so that the conclusions he arrives at would be essentially the same as the conclusions we would come to were we doing the work ourselves. We could ask Jim to make a report every two or three weeks to a committee. 16

Later it was explained at the Glendale Committee meeting that the letter was only a poor selection of words and their meaning could be misconstrued. 17 There was no misconstruing Arthur White's words, however, when he wrote at the same time on the same subject to the same group:

Keep in mind that the training in the universities to accept and believe only that which can be proved to the satisfaction of the researcher can easily lead to a skeptical approach which does not take into account that there may be disturbing features in inspired writings, resulting in the need of faith as made clear by Ellen White as she discussed investigations of the Bible and her writings...

"All who look for hooks to hang their doubts upon will find them...."

"Distrust of God is the natural outgrowth of the unrenewed heart...." "Satan has ability to suggest doubts and devise objections to the pointed testimony that God sends.

From The Great Controversy, p. 527; Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 675. 18

One can close his eyes and hear that door clanging shut again still tighter, while the lost riders of fear and guilt go charging through the sky. It did not sound like an opendoor policy when he continued:

If participated in by Andrews University-are the scholars trained in methods of research by universities known to have demolished faith in the Bible and its dependability of Biblical accounts, capable of passing proper judgment in areas where absolute honesty in the acceptance of records and faith based on evidence are important factors? In making decisions when multiple choices are before the researcher will faith in Ellen White's inspiration fail? 19

It would be difficult to conclude from these two confidential missives that the people of the Adventist Church are encouraged to know all the truth about Ellen-including her skill in using others' material minus credit lines for her own works.

One further bit of information needs to be added to the picture to make it complete. Robert Olson was sitting through the meetings of the Glendale Committee with an ancient but haunting document virtually on his lap. It had been "discovered" only a few weeks before in the hall of the Estate offices by Desmond Ford in his search for truth. It was so revealing that had Olson read it or used it in the meeting the session might have been shortened by half a day or more. It came from the pen of W. W. Prescott (an earlier longtime leader and former General Conference vice president of the Adventist Church) who turned over some rocks himself. The letter was dated April 6 1915 and was written to Ellen's son Willie with whom Prescott from the contents of the letter had worked long end hard:

It seems to me that a large responsibility rests u on those of us who know that there are serious errors m our authorized books and yet make no special effort to correct them. The people and our average ministers trust us to furnish them with reliable statements and they use our books as sufficient authority in their sermons but we let them go on year after year asserting things which we know to be untrue. I cannot feel that this is right. It seems to me that we are betraying our trust and deceiving the ministers and people. It appears to me that there is much more anxiety to prevent a possible shock to some trustful people than to correct error.

Your letter indicates a desire on your part to help me but I fear that it is a little late. The experience of the last six or eight years and especially the things concerning which I talked with you have had their effect on me in several ways. I have had some hard shocks to get over and after giving the best of my life to this movement I have little peace and satisfaction in connection with it and I am driven to the conclusion that the only thing for me to do IS to do quietly what I can do conscientiously and leave the others to go on without me. Of course this [is] far from a happy ending to my lifework but this seems to be the best adjustment that I am able to make. The way your mother's writings have been handled and the false impression concerning them which is still fostered among the people have brought great perplexity and trial to me. It seems to me that what amounts to deception through probably not intentional has been practiced in making some of her books and that no serious effort has been made to disabuse the minds of the people of what was known to be their wrong view concerning her writings. But it is no use to go into these matters. I have talked with you for years about them but it brings no change. I think however that we are drifting toward a crisis which will come sooner or later and perhaps sooner. A very strong feeling of reaction has already set in. 20

Evidence related later shows why Prescott was even more concerned than his letter indicates. He himself with the blessing of other officers had helped write some of the very books he was complaining about. How could he in good conscience (we have no evidence that he was not a man of good conscience) let the church go on believing that what he and others had helped to write in the name of devotional material was now to be received as the final authoritative voice of God and to become the basis of Adventist worldwide Christology (itself a subject that was of special interest to Prescott).

It is now evident-from the information that the White Estate possesses and from materials being leaked from other sources-that the church is in trouble in the matter of Ellen and her shoplifting. Too much is being identified from the places where she had shopped. As McAdams wrote in his Spectrum article:

About the time the White Estate was responding to the evidence that Ellen White had borrowed extensively from the Protestant historians m the preparation of The Great Controversy, another researcher was bringing to their attention evidence that she also borrowed from secular authors for other books in the Conflict of the Ages series especially Prophets and Kings and The Desire of Ages. Walter Rea pastor of the Long Beach California Church asserted on the basis of inconclusive evidence presented m several unpublished papers that the major source for Prophets and Kings was Bible History: Old Testament by Alfred Edersheim originally published in seven volumes between 1876 and 1877 and that Edersheim s The Life and Times of Jesus, the Messiah, first published in 1883 was a major source for The Desire of ages....

Now the growing awareness in Adventist circles of Walter Rea's research and the studies of The Great Controversy called for another response in the Review.

Judging from the samples used by Arthur White to illustrate Ellen White's relationship with Hanna in articles 4 6 and 7 he must have already had available to him the very thorough and careful study by Walter Specht. Desiring to know the truth about Ellen White's sources for The Desire of Ages and not wishing to be caught unprepared by the research of Walter Rea or someone else, the White Estate commissioned two eminent Adventist scholars to study thoroughly the relationship of The Desire of Ages to William Hanna's The Life of Our Lord. Raymond F. Cottrell longtime book editor at the Review and Herald Publishing Association took the first 45 chapters; and Walter F. Specht professor of New Testament at Loma Linda Umversity took chapters 46 to 86. 21

With the assigning of Cottrell and Specht to the task of Ellen's The Desire of Ages, the church was throwing the heavies into the breach. It was thoroughly understood in high places that if the flood tide of facts and information washed away the foundation of The Desire of Ages, then the keystone in Saint Ellen's arch would be seriously jeopardized and the white lie exposed. Not everywhere was this understood but many leaders were well aware and very apprehensive.

It was a calculated risk, therefore, when the Adventists summoned two of their finest from retirement back to the war. The credentials of the two were impeccable. Cottrell, a third- generation Adventist, had served the church in various highlevel capacities, including that of book editor at the Review and Herald, most of his life. Specht had been known as a scholar, department chairman, and dean at some of the church's finest institutions. Both men would be expected to bring to the task not only their lifetime of experience but their integrity as well.

The report issued at the end of six months of study was a shocker- not so much for what it said as for what it revealed by what it did not emphasize. The very fact that such highlevel input was used showed that the church as a whole had not known about the white lie and that the leaders were determined to see that the church received only information that was acceptable to those leaders.

Both men would take the high road in the report. Specht, while conceding that Hanna had been used by Ellen throughout both the early edition of The Spirit of Prophecy (volumes two and three) and the later edition of The Desire of Ages, concluded that he still liked Ellen's paraphrasing of Hanna better than Hanna's own work. 22 Although he had found that the copying from Hanna had begun at the beginning and ended at the ending, he felt that the matter was not as serious as some had made it.

Cottrell, less cautious, calculated that 2.6 percent of Hanna had been taken by Ellen. 23 To obtain these incredible figures, he showed the kind of "creative bookkeeping" he had used.

Attention was given to the possibility that Ellen White may have relied to some extent on Hanna for t e passages of Scripture she quotes, and/or for the order in which she sometimes introduces them. Two considerations, however, preclude the possibility of any firm conclusion with respect to any relatedness in the Scriptures quoted....

Furthermore, White and Hanna both used the King James Version of the Bible...probably m editions with marginal references.... Also, both probably used the same concordance. . . to locate related Bible passages. Thus even if neither writer ever saw what the other wrote, they would both be likely to refer to other passages of Scripture in approximately the same order Beyond this, two persons equally familiar with the Bible would find much the same related passages of Scripture coming to mind, and introduce them in approximately the order suggested by the Gospel narrative....

To me. . . these facts. . .suggest that any similarity between the passages of Scripture cited, or the order in which they occur, is at least largely, if not entirely coincidental and completely useless for determining whether, or to what extent, Ellen White made use of Hanna...

Only where both writers use identical or unusual words in such a sequence could literary relatedness be established beyond a doubt. [italics added.] 24

Cottrell had fallen into the trap from which Francis D. Nichol had never extricated himself- using the study to prove that Ellen had not directly "quoted" from others as much as had been said. He seemed to overlook the fact that paraphrasing is the most subtle and potentially deceptive form of copying. Even McAdams said in his Spectrum article:

Indeed, there are some closely paraphrased paragraphs and other paragraphs where, although Ellen White's words are different, It is clear she is following the ideas presented by Hanna. [Italics added.] 25 After endeavoring to diminish the influence of other authors on the writing of The Desire of Ages, Cottrell did concede:

Nevertheless, there are numerous instances of clear literary correlation which prove conclusively that Ellen White made use of some of the words, phrases, ideas and thought sequence. 26

In answer to his statement that "in no instance did either Dr. Specht or I find even one sentence in DA identical with LC, or even substantially so," 27 I suggest that the reader see the exhibit section for this chapter. 28 Better yet, one should obtain a copy of Hanna from a library and enlighten himself in person.

Although the text of the report as a whole was not given wide circulation; the 2.6 percent figure was quoted and repeated everywhere. Adventists grabbed onto it like a drowning man would clutch a lifejacket and head for shore shouting he was saved. In reality, the study was so limited in scope that some of the most serious matters remain to be dealt with. For example: a. The church as a whole has indeed not known the extent of the white lie-and "the brethren" are not anxious to have the members know. b. At least as early as the 1870s, and as late as the early 1900s, Ellen and her helpers were deeply and widely involved in drawing material from the writings of others. c. If even Cottrell's percentage (however accurate it might be) were to be extended to the evergrowing list of authors identified as having been used by Ellen and her helpers, the church and their prophet would be seen to be in enormous trouble and something would beam unraveling. d. Ellen's use of Hanna, and other sources as well, was not "selected revelation," with God's permission, to fill in a scene here and there to help a fading prophet's memory, but was a running commentary and paraphrase of each passage or chapter selected-often with pauses for a personal homily, but likewise often expanding that homily to be strikingly similar to the devotional material of the author copied. 29 e. Perhaps the most damaging evidence emerging is that whatever help Ellen had, human or divine, she had uncanny ability to go back and pick up new material each time the return was made. Sometimes the thoughts, words, and sentences that had been taken from one author in the early stages (187084) were deleted in the later product (The Desire of Ages). Sometimes an amplification of the same author's material was substituted. But sometimes (especially when the early copying had been extensive) material would be drawn from other sources or other authors in such a way that the color of the new threads did not clash with the ultimate pattern of the fabric being woven through the years. Clearly, the human planners knew well the maps they were using for all the trips of all those years. 30

However, by nature and practice an honest scholar, Cottrell later allowed his integrity to overcome his Adventist heritage and prejudice. His silence was broken on September 19, 1981, when the Los Angeles Times, in an article by John Dart, religious editor, quoted from an upcoming missive by Cottrell: The combination of Ford's and Rea's research and treatment of the two men by church administrators presents a crisis "with the very real threat of schism in the church we love,' according to a leading Adventist biblical scholar, Raymond F. Cottrell. Cottrell, book editor for more than 30 years for the Adventist Review, blamed church administrators for the "Ford- Rea crisis" in an article for an upcoming issue of the independent journal Spectrum, published by the reformminded Adventist Forums.

Ford and Rea "are both friends of the church, not enemies, despite the fact that, in both cases, the wisdom of some of their tactics may be open to question," Cottrell wrote. To future historians, Cottrell continued, "the FordRea crisis will appear as the logical, perhaps inevitable, climax to nearly a century of burying the issues to which they have recently called attention, under the denominational rug." 31

Cottrell's preliminary draft itself ("Our Present Crisis: Reaction to a Decade of Obscurantism") was even more specific and devastating for Its finger pointing, as it went on to say:

The only new elements are Ford's extended application of the apotelesmatic principle, which everyone in the church follows to some extent, and Rea's demonstration of the extent of Ellen White's literary dependence. There is documentary evidence of the fact that our Bible scholars were well aware of all the exegetical problems our traditional interpretation of Daniel and

Hebrews conjures up, at least twentyfive years ago, and also of Ellen White's literary dependence. But repeated, positively motivated attempts during the intervening years (ninety and seventyfive years respectively)' often by competent Bible scholars whose loyalty to the church cannot be questioned, the church has consistently, officially, and more or less effectively buried, and in some instances the people who presumed to ask the questions, as well. 32

And finally he laid the blame on specific administrators:

The decade 1969 to 1979 provides the immediate historical background of our present dilemma. Prior to this decade our Bible scholars were quietly at work on these problems, individually and in scholarly circles, fully aware of the fact that the church was approaching a crisis concerning which it was at best but dimly aware. In my personal tales, accumulated over the years, ~s extensive contemporary documentation of what was being done, and of official General Conference measures to stifle this scholarly investigation. This record of wellintentioned obfuscation is vital to an understanding of our present dilemma because it was this more than any other single factor that led Ford and Rea, and especially Ford, to "go public" with their questions. Their present course of action is a response to obfuscation, not a gratuitous attempt to embarrass the church. The church itself is basically responsible for the crisis, not Ford or Real

Most of the following incidents during the decade 1969 to 1979 can be documented from my personal files. For the few items not covered in my personal files documentary evidence is available elsewhere, and/or other persons can verify the facts.

It was Robert H. Pierson's announced policy as president of the General Conference that administrators, and not Bible scholars or theologians, were to make theological decisions for the church. Over these years he reiterated this policy to individuals and to General Conference committees, and implemented it in his appointment of nonscholars (particularly Willis Hackett and Gordon Hyde) to ride herd on the Adventist scholarly community, to govern the Biblical Research Committee and the Geoscience Advisory Committee, and in his restructuring of these committees in a way designed to assure effective administrative control over them. 33

Cottrell was only one of the many runners with more bad news for the church in its crisis. Fred Veltman, according to theA~lventist Review in the fall of 1980, was the man upon whose shoulders the mantle of truth was to rest. Because of the disturbance of the Rea study, reported the Review:

After careful examination of the data, it [the January 2829, 1980, Glendale Committee] concluded that Ellen White's use of sources had been more extensive than we had realized and recommended that a scholar framed m literary analysis undertake a thoroughgoing study of The Desire of Ages. This suggestion was adopted by the General Conference. Already Dr. Fred Veltman, a New Testament scholar on the faculty of Pacific Union College, is engaged full time in the project, which is expected to take about two years. 34

After surveying the material on the Ellen G. White controversy available to him, Veltman had written a detailed critique for the Presidents Executive Advisory Committee in Washington. In that report he quoted that same Raymond Cottrell as saying:

Walter Rea's evidence and his conclusions will be and are most damaging to the faith of our membership in EGW.

To say that "I saw" and similar expressions refer to cognizance and not to heavenly origins of the content of the visions is asking people to disbelieve what they have been taught all their lives. The obvious reading of the expression in its context would have you understand a heavenly source for the vision. This explanation forces the people to conclude that EGW's integrity cannot be assumed. 35

Edward Heppenstall, a longtime Adventist theologian, is likewise quoted by Veltman:

Walter's material will have a shattering effect upon the church membership Many of the answers now being offered are not really satifying to those who have looked at the data. 36

Even Desmond Ford, the Australian theologian, gives a devastating summary as reported in Veltman's words:

Des does not believe that EGW intended to deceive. At the same time he cannot agree to the positions being taken or already held in the church that EGW writings are an extension of the canon, are authoritative for church doctrine, and are inerrant.

Des views Walter Rea as being reluctant to publish and desiring to go with the brethren if they will only take the issue and the evidence seriously. 37

Veltman himself concludes: The answers which the church spokesman give as Walter raises the questions are for the most part not a equate. In addition, the credibility of the church leaders drops with each new release. The church is continually taken by surprise and on the defensive. And each point the church admits is a "score" for Walter. The church should be on the front lines doing the study and informing the church when the data has been carefully evaluated. What IS so hard to understand is why the church is unwilling to work with Walter when he is willing to work with the church

Walter is dedicated to get to the bottom of the problem and to let the church know. He does not want another generation to go through his personal agony of disillusionment. This for Walter is a nonnegotiable and it is hard to fault him on his conviction in view of the evidence and the history of this problem in the church.

The question over the "I was showns" is probably the hardest one to answer. 38

The leaders of the church indeed found it hard to face reality, but it was obvious that something must be done, and done quickly. So, as always, the tired old men from PREXAD (the President's Executive Advisory Committee) and the White Estate, turned to the source they so often deny their members-the law. It seemed to be their last hope of quelling the storm which would not go away and for which they were unprepared.

SDA Church lawyer determines that White was not legally guilty of plagiarism because of the time in which she lived

The September 17, 1981 Review, heralded that their Catholic lawyer had declared that. Ellen White was not legally a plagiarist according to the lawyer's definition, and therefore her works did not constitute copyright infringement. 39 This report-clearly not coming to grips with the moral, spiritual, or theological implications at the heart of the matter-drew very little comfort and brought few sighs of relief from knowledgeable readers.

To add to all the confusion, Arthur Delafield, another tired but willing warrior, was called back to the fray. Delafield, who had been a circuit rider for the White Estate for over twenty- five years, wrote a reply to a letter from a lay member in Australia. In addition to raising questions, this layman had stated a conviction:

:

I must admit to feeling, at times, somewhat angered and disillusioned. Not with Walter Rea but with the "system." The question is not how to silence or to discredit Waiter Rea (or Forum, or anybody else for that matter), but whether what he says is true. I can live with the truth about Ellen White, but 1 would find it difficult to be enthusiastic about belonging to, let alone supporting and promoting, an organization which relied on falsehoods or intimidation m order to survive.

Delarleld's reply was a thriller. In typical pontifical style he declared:

Your letter of May 27 addressed to the president of the General Conference has arrived in this of fice. Elder Wilson certainly wishes to be remembered to you with warm brotherly feelings. His Administrative Assistant, Arthur Patzer, has asked that I respond since I have spent 25 years in the Ellen G. White Estate offices as one of the secretaries and now made a lifetime trustee of the White Estate board....

Walter [Rea] has spent more time looking for parallels in the writings of Ellen White with noninspired sources than anyone outside of the White Estate. He has placed these parallels side by side and the weight of evidence would seem to indicate that Ellen White was almost a creature of her times - a plagiarizer with enormous capacity for incorporating the writings of others m her own written messages and getting credit for it herself.

I say that the foregoing would seem to be what Walter Rea has proven. The careful researcher, however ... is greatly distressed by Walter Rea's "evidence." I say this not because there is so much, but because he thinks there is so much of it and he is wrong. Dreadfully wrong. He has grossly exaggerated the situation. 41

Finally, his punch line came on page five:

I highly respect many of our Seventhday Adventist theologians. I have sat at their feet and been taught by them. I admire and respect them highly. I would like to remind you, however, that you can search the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and you will not find a single text marking out theologians as having the gift of the Holy Spirit. The Scriptures indicate, however, that prophets have a gift of the holy Spirit. Ellen White had that gift and she was canonical insofar as doctrinal interpretation authority is concerned [italics added].42

Inasmuch as Delafield, now retired, was writing his reply on official General Conference stationery and invoking the name of the head divine of the church, Neal C. Wilson, as his authority for writing, it would seem that "the church" had finally unofficially rejected their controversial stand taken some twentyfour years before, when under some controversy and duress a "representative group of Seventhday Adventist leaders, Bible teachers and editors" had declared through the official Adventist press:

We would note...

1. That we do not regard the writings of Ellen G the sacred canon of Scripture.

White as an addition to

2. That we do not think of them as of universal application, as is the Bible, but particularly for the Seventhday Adventist Church.

3. That we do not regard them in the same sense as the Holy Scriptures, which stand alone and unique as the standard by which all other writings must bejudged.

Seventhday Adventists uniformly believe that the canon of Scripture closed with the book of Revelation. We hold that all other writings and teachings, from whatever source, are to bejudged by, and are subject to, the Bible, which Is the spring and norm of the Christian faith. We test the writings of Ellen G. White by the Bible, but in no sense to do we test the Bible by her writings....

We have never considered Ellen C. White to be in the same category as the writers of the canon of scripture [emphasis added].43 Despite the best efforts of the 1957 "representative group" who had published the foregoing statements in Questions on Doctrine, now, in the old warrior's 1981 letter the blueprint of the past's extreme and paranoid views had finally come clear. Adventists, through tired old men, were telling the world that despite all the doubletalk of the past and the deceptions of the present, they do indeed cast their lot with Ellen as their final authority, their first among equals. Through him, they, In effect, are proud to tell the world they represent a sect and are not about to become associated with nonmembers of their cult or any of the rest of the Christian community!

Truth has a way of eluding a "true believer" when the church spokesmen seem to be willing to overlook most of the information, most of its friendly critics, and all of the evidence In their endeavor to hide from reality.

Even another statement that surfaced from no less than W. C. White, Ellen's son, did not change the view that all she said must have come from God. In 1905 he was supposed to have said:

Some of the most precious chapters of Desire of Ages are made up of matter first written in letters to men laboring under trying circumstances, for the purpose of cheering and instructing them regarding their work. Some of these beautiful lessons about Christian experience illustrated m the life of our Saviour, were first written in letters to my brother Edson, when he was struggling with many difficulties in his work in Mississippi. Some were written first to Elder Corliss, when he was holding a discussion with a wily Campbellite in Sydney. Note: Sister White wrote on original copy of this manuscript In her own handwriting the following words: I have read this. It is correct." 44

But is was no use. There would always be those who would say if Ellen touched it, or saw it, or was even aware of it-it had to come from God and was all inspired! Even that statement of oftquoted by the Adventists that some librarian from the hallowed halls of the Library of Congress had designated The Desire of Ages one of the ten most impressive books on the life of Christ was found to have been muttered by some Adventist preacher on the way to work. But knowing this would not shake loose the true believer. Of such things are the white lies of this life made.

References and Notes

1. Ellen C. White, The Spirit of Prophecy (Battle Creek: Review and Herald, 18701884), vol. 2, p. 5.

2. Robert W. Olson, "EGW's Use of Uninspired Sources," photocopied (Washington: EGW Estate, 9 November 1979), pp. 14, 7, 8.

3. William S. Peterson, "Ellen White's Literary Indebtedness," Spectrum 3, no. 4 (Autumn 1971): 7384. Since Peterson's article, others have appeared in Spectrum each year since 1971.

4. Neal C. Wilson to Glendale Committee on EGW Sources, 8 January 1980.

5. Jerry Wiley to Neal C. Wilson, 14 January 1980.

6. Donald R. McAdams, "Shifting views of Inspiration Spectrum 10, no. 4 (March 1980): 38. 7. Ibid., pp. 3435.

8. Glendale Committee, "Ellen G. White and Her Sources," tapes (2829 January 1980), McAdams remarks.

9. Ibid.

10. McAdams, "Shifting Views, "Spectrum 10, no. 4 (March, 1980): 35.

11. Ibid.

12. EGW, The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, supplement quoting W. C. White's letter to W. W. Eastman, 12 May 1969, pp. 54546.

13. Ibid., p. 535.

14. Olson, "Ellen C. White and Her Sources," tapes of address to Adventist Forum at Loma Linda, CA (January 1979).

15. Olson to EGW Estate Trustees, 29 November 1978, pp. 12.

16. Ibid., p. 5.

17. Glendale Committee, tapes, 2829 January 1980.

18. Arthur L. White, "(Confidential) Comments on the Proposed Study of 'Desire of Ages,"' photocopied (Washington: EGW Estate, 5 December 1978),

19. Ibid., p. 5.

20. W. W. Prescott to DF 198).

W. C. White, 6 April 1915 (Washington: EGW Estate.

21. McAdams, "Shifting Views," Spectrum 10, no. 4 (Autumn 1971): 3637.

22. Raymond F. Cottrell and Walter S. Specht, "The Literary Relationship between he Desire of Ages, by Ellen G. White, and The Life of Christ, by William Hanna, 2,pts, photocopied (Loma Linda University Library, Archives and Special Collections, I November 1979), pt. 2.

23. Ibid., pt. l.

24. Ibid., pt. l, pp. 34.

25. McAdams, "Shifting Views," Spectrum 10, no. 4 (Autumn 1971): 37.

26. Cottrell and Specht, "The Literary Relationship between EGW and WH," pt. l, p. 5.

27. Ibid. 28. See Appendix, Chapter 6 Comparison Exhibits showing Ellen G. White and William Hanna similarities.

29. Ibid.

30. Ibid.

31. John Dart, "Adventists Cite Legal Opinion To 'Clear' Prophet of Plagiarism, "Los Angeles Times (19 September 1981).

32. Raymond F. Cottrell, "Our Present Grisis: Reaction to a Decade of Obscurantism," photocopied draft.

33. Ibid.

34. [Unsigned editorial announcement], Adventist Review (27 November 1980).

35 Fred Veltman, "Report to PREXAD on the E. G. White Research Project; photocopied (Angwin, CA Life of Christ Research Project, n.d. [April 1981]), p. 21.

36. Ibid., p. 21.

37. Ibid., p. 22.

38. Ibid., pp. 2425.

39. [Unsigned editorial announcement], "Ellen White's Use of Sources," Adventist Review (17 September 1981), p. 3. Also interviews Wlt attorney Victor L. Remik, pp. 46, and Warren L. Johns, p. 7.

40. Peter C. Drewer to Neal C. Wilson, 27 May 1981, p. 3.

41. D. Arthur Delafield to Peter C. Drewer, 24June 1981, pp. 1, 5.

42. Ibid., p. 5.

43. [Seventhday Adventists], Seventhday Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine (Washington: RHPA, 1957), pp.899u.

44 W. C. White, "The Integrity of the Testimonies," presented at College View; Nebraska, 25 November 1905. EGW Estate DF 10 i, pp. 78, 11. Ellen White's Plagiarism

www.ellenwhiteexposed.com pla-gia-rize: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (a created production) without crediting the source : to commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source. --Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary.

Ellen White Quote

"Although I am dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are my own." --Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, Oct. 8, 1867

Bible Quote

"Therefore," declares the Lord, "I am against the prophets who steal from one another words supposedly from me." Jeremiah 23:30

Some examples of clear plagiarism

The term "apocrypha" is derived from the Greek word meaning "hidden" or "secret". These books are considered by scholars to be of doubtful authorship or authenticity. They were not accepted into the Jewish canon formed late in the 2nd century AD. The Reformers did not consider these books on a par with the rest of the Scriptures; thus the custom arose of making the Apocrypha a separate section in the Protestant Bible, or sometimes even of omitting them entirely. In 1827, Protestant Bible societies took a definite stand against it. The Catholic view, expressed as a doctrine of faith at the Council of Trent, is that the Apocrypha is canonical Scripture.

In their early career, Ellen and James White held the Apocrypha in high regard. In 1847, James quoted from it in his publication "A Word to the Little Flock", and Ellen made the following comments from a vision she had several years later:

I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it. (Manuscript 4, 1850)

Early Writings 2nd Esdras

Before entering the city, the saints were arranged in a I, Ezra, saw on Mount Zion a great multitude, perfect square, with Jesus in the midst. He stood head which I could not number, and they all were and shoulders above the saints and above the angels. ... praising the Lord with songs. In their midst was a As Jesus called for the crowns, angels presented them to young man of great stature, taller than any of the Him, and with His own right hand, the lovely Jesus others, and on the head of each of them he placed the crowns on the heads of the saints. (p. 287- placed a crown, but he was more exalted than 288) they. And I was held spellbound. 2:42,43 (RAPC)

I saw that if the saints had food laid up by them or in the field in the time of trouble, when sword, famine, and They will be like madmen, sparing no one, in pestilence are in the land, it would be taken from them plundering and pillaging those who still fear the by violent hands and strangers would reap their fields. ... Lord. For they will pillage and plunder their Houses and lands will be of no use to the saints in the property, and drive them out of their houses. time of trouble, for they will then have to flee before 16:71,72 infuriated mobs, and at that time their possessions cannot be disposed of to advance the cause of present truth. (p. 56)

I will send you help, my servants Isaiah and Mount Zion was just before us, and on the mount was a Jeremiah. According to their counsel I have glorious temple, and about it were seven other consecrated and prepared for you twelve trees mountains, on which grew roses and lilies. And I saw the loaded with various fruits, and the same number of little ones climb, or, if they chose, use their little wings springs flowing with milk and honey, and seven and fly, to the top of the mountains and pluck the never- mighty mountains on which roses and lilies grow; fading flowers. (p. 18) by these I will fill your children with joy. 2:18,19

Ellen White 2nd Maccabees

Among the righteous still in Jerusalem, to whom had been made plain the divine purpose, were some who determined to place beyond the reach of ruthless It was also contained in the same writing, that the hands the sacred ark containing the tables of stone on prophet, being warned of God, commanded the which had been traced the precepts of the Decalogue. tabernacle and the ark to go with him, as he went This they did. With mourning and sadness they forth into the mountain [Nebo] Moses climbed up, secreted the ark in a cave, where it was to be hidden and saw the heritage of God. And when Jeremy from the people of Israel and Judah because of their came thither, he found an hollow cave, wherein he sins, and was to be no more restored to them. That laid the tabernacle, and the ark, and the altar of sacred ark is yet hidden. It has never been disturbed incense, and so stopped the door. And some of since it was secreted. (Prophets and Kings, p. 453) those that followed him came to mark the way, but they could not find it. Which when Jeremy perceived, Then there appears against the sky a hand holding two tables of stone folded together. Says the prophet, "The he blamed them, saying, As for that place, it shall be heavens shall declare His righteousness; for God is unknown until the time that God gather his people judge himself." [PS. 50:6.] That holy law, God's again together, and receive them unto mercy. Then righteousness, that amid thunder and flame was shall the Lord shew them these things, and the glory proclaimed from Sinai as the guide of life, is now revealed to men as the rule of judgment. The hand of the Lord shall appear, and the cloud also, as it opens the tables, and there are seen the precepts of the was shewed unto Moses . . . 2 Macc. 4:8 decalogue, traced as with a pen of fire. The words are so plain that all can read them. (Great Controversy, 1888 edition, p. 639)

Jewish scholars printed the book in Hebrew in Venice in 1625. It was published in English in New York in 1840. Nearly all scholars agree that the Book of Jasher was most likely written in Spain about the twelfth century A.D.1 Goodspeed and other scholars believe the book was composed by an author compiling many old Jewish traditions (called Midrash) dating back to around the time of Christ and fabricating a few of his own.

Some of the writings of Ellen White's kindred prophet, Joseph Smith, appear to have also been taken from the Book of Jasher. The Mormon prophet quoted from it as a source which had "not been disproved as a bad author." (Times and Seasons, 1 Sep 1842, 3:902).

The Book of Jasher contains many questionable stories, such as "snow" falling before the flood (3:38), and a wolf talking to Jacob (43:40-46). It also contradicts the Bible in a number of places. For example, it lists 15 plagues that fell on Egypt instead of the 10 Biblical plagues. It has other bizarre passages, including Rachel talking to Joseph from the grave (42:30-41), and a description of Zepho killing a being that was half man and half beast (61:15).

Patriarchs and Prophets Book of Jasher

3:20. And he [Enoch] did in this manner for many After remaining for a time among the people, laboring years, and he afterward concealed himself for six to benefit them by instruction and example, he days, and appeared to his people one day in seven; [Enoch] would withdraw, to spend a season in and after that once in a month, and then once in a solitude, hungering and thirsting for that divine year, until all the kings, princes and sons of men knowledge which God alone can impart. Communing sought for him, and desired again to see the face of thus with God, Enoch came more and more to reflect Enoch, and to hear his word; but they could not, as all the divine image. His face was radiant with a holy the sons of men were greatly afraid of Enoch, and light, even the light that shineth in the face of Jesus. they feared to approach him on account of the As he came forth from these divine communings, Godlike awe that was seated upon his countenance; even the ungodly beheld with awe the impress of therefore no man could look at him, fearing he might heaven upon his countenance. (p. 86) be punished and die.

If one chose to take the wives, or cattle, or anything belonging to his neighbor, he did not regard justice or right, but if he could prevail over his neighbor by 4:18. And their judges and rulers went to the reason of strength, or by putting him to death, he did daughters of men and took their wives by force from so, and exulted in his deeds of violence. They loved to their husbands according to their choice, and the sons destroy the lives of animals. ... But if there was one of men in those days took from the cattle of the sin above another which called for the destruction of earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, the race by the flood, it was the base crime of and taught the mixture of animals of amalgamation of man and beast one species with the other... which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere. (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, p. 64)

Amid the prevailing corruption, Methuselah, Noah, 5:9. And Noah and Methuselah spoke all the words of and many others labored to keep alive the knowledge the Lord to the sons of men, day after day, constantly of the true God and to stay the tide of moral evil. (p. speaking to them. 94) 5:10. But the sons of men would not hearken to them, nor incline their ears to their words, and they were They were unwilling to renounce their sins. (p. 95) stiffnecked. 5:11. And the Lord granted them a period of one Had the antediluvians believed the warning, and hundred and twenty years, saying, If they will return, repented of their evil deeds, the Lord would have then will God repent of the evil, so as not to destroy turned aside His wrath, as He afterward did from Nineveh. (p. 97) the earth.

6:11. And on that day, the Lord caused the whole earth to shake, and the sun darkened, and the But upon the eighth day dark clouds overspread the foundations of the world raged, and the whole earth heavens. There followed the muttering of thunder was moved violently, and the lightning flashed, and and the flash of lightning. Soon large drops of rain the thunder roared, and all the fountains in the earth began to fall. The world had never witnessed were broken up, such as was not known to the anything like this, and the hearts of men were struck inhabitants before; and God did this mighty act, in with fear. (pp 99) order to terrify the sons of men, that there might be no more evil upon earth.

6:18. And they called to Noah saying open for us that Others were frantic with fear, stretching their hands we may come to thee in the ark-and wherefore shall toward the ark and pleading for admittance. But their we die? entreaties were in vain. Conscience was at last 6:23. [Noah replied:] "But now you come and tell me aroused to know that there is a God who ruleth in the this on account of the troubles of your souls, now also heavens. They called upon Him earnestly, but His ear the Lord will not listen to you, neither will he give was not open to their cry.(pp 100) ear to you on this day, so that you will not now succeed in your wishes."

28. And the ark floated upon the face of the waters, and it was tossed upon the waters so that all the living creatures within were turned about like pottage in a cauldron. The massive ark trembled in every fiber as it was 29. And great anxiety seized all the living creatures beaten by the merciless winds and flung from billow that were in the ark, and the ark was like to be to billow. The cries of the beasts within expressed broken. their fear and pain. But amid the warring elements it 30. And the living creatures that were in the ark were continued to ride safely. (p. 100) terrified, and the lions roared, and the oxen lowed, and the wolves howled, and every living creature in the ark spoke and lamented in its own language, so that their voices reached to a great distance...

Paradise Lost

Paradise Lost was first published by John Milton in 1667. This poetic novel is about Adam and Eve--how they came to be created and how they came to lose their place in the Garden of Eden [Paradise]. It is the Genesis story expanded by Milton into a very long, detailed, narrative poem. It also includes the story of the origin of Satan. Originally, he was called Lucifer, an angel in heaven who led his followers in a war against God, and was ultimately sent with them to hell. Thirst for revenge led him to cause man's downfall by turning into a serpent and tempting Eve to eat the forbidden fruit. Patriarchs and Prophets Paradise Lost

The serpent was then one of the wisest and most beautiful creatures on the earth. It had wings, and while flying through the air presented an appearance With burnisht Neck of verdant Gold, erect Amidst his of dazzling brightness, having the color and brilliancy circling Spires, that on the grass Floted redundant: of burnished gold. Resting in the rich-laden branches pleasing was his shape, And lovely, never since of of the forbidden tree and regaling itself with the Serpent kind. (Book 8) delicious fruit, it was an object to arrest the attention and delight the eye of the beholder. (p. 53)

On th' other side, ADAM, soon as he heard The fatal Trespass don by EVE, amaz'd, Astonied stood and An expression of sadness came over the face of Adam. Blank, while horror chill Ran through his veins, and He appeared astonished and alarmed. (p. 56) all his joynts relax'd; (Book 8)

The Book of Jasher

How the Seventh-day Adventist ‘Spirit of Prophecy’ was Born

Proof the "I was shown..." statements were copied!

By Walter T. Rea

During the mid seventies, I along with many others, was doing work concerning the writings of Ellen G. White, the Seventh-day Adventist prophet. What we were all finding was disturbing, to say the least. It was not that others before us had not known about the copy work from other authors, that was done in the writings of the materials under Ellen's name. It was not even the amount. If we who were doing the research have made any contribution to Adventist thinking and scholarship, it was the extent of copy work that was not known before by the members of the Church as a whole, which we all uncovered. That amount was so overwhelming that it prompted the 1980 Glendale Committee called to review the evidence to state that

1. THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT ELLEN WHITE, IN HER WRITINGS, USED VARIOUS SOURCES MORE EXTENSIVELY THAN WE HAD PREVIOUSLY BELIEVED. 2. THAT, AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, A PLAN BE DEVELOPED FOR THOROUGHLY INFORMING OUR CHURCH ADMINISTRATORS CONCERNING THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF ELLEN WHITE’S USE OF SOURCES. Because others within the Church had from the earliest beginnings of Adventism discovered that Mrs. White had plagiarized and had said so, the fact of her doing so was never seriously challenged by the Church authorities.

How much was plagiarized?

The defense for her actions that was used up until our time was that the amount was the important issue and that that amount varied from 8% to 10%, depending upon which apologist one read or wanted to believe. It was not until the Church hired Dr. Fred Veltman to study the book Desire of Ages that the figure was raised to 30% or more depending upon the chapters chosen in the book one was using. After great expense and almost eight years, Veltman confirmed what other studies showed, that depending upon the material used from Ellen White’s writing, the copy work could be as much as 90%. In fact, Dr. Don McAdams, an Adventist scholar, had stated in the 1980 Glendale meeting that "If every paragraph in the book Great Controversy, written by Ellen White, was properly footnoted, then every paragraph would have to be footnoted." That statement has never been seriously challenged by any member of the Church.

It is clear to any reasonable scholar that the Church has not dealt with the real issues that the many studies have raised, nor have they followed through with their first commitment that they would keep in touch with me and inform the Church as a whole what the real issues are. Instead, they have continued to cloud the issues of copying and plagiarizing with other less important issues, such as what is the proper interpretation of inspiration? The interpretation or even the thought of inspiration is a word and concept that theologians have argued and debated and even killed each other over for almost two thousand years. Administrators or scholars of the Adventist Church still have not answered their own hired scholar, Dr. Fred Veltman, when after finishing his study, he asked, why did Ellen G. White deny that she ever copied? Another false issue that is often raised is that she only did what all the Bible writers did. To raise this reasoning is hardly worth refuting, in as much as Adventists have always made it clear to the general public, if not the membership at large that they did not consider Ellen White equal to, or similar to the Bible writers and their works.

The real issue, of course, is one that the Church will not or date not debate or discuss in public debate with me or any scholar who has studied her writings. But that real issue is greatly discussed and debated by scholars of the Church and honest thinkers and lay members who want to know the truth concerning the Church and its writings and its ‘Spirit of Prophecy.’ The real issue is, of course, how much was the copy work in all of her writings of human function and origin and how much of it, if any, was of divine origin or a supernatural gift from God? How reliable is the information contained in the books under Ellen White's name? A related issue, depending upon how one answers the first issue, is what kind of a God does the Seventh-day Adventist Church worship? Is it one who is above deceit and lying and one who does not need the words of others to deliver ideas and thoughts in the mouth or mind of another who has been copied, or is He a God who would play tricks and clever games on His creation?

"I was shown..." statements copied from other authors This study, which I call HOW THE THOUGHTS AND SUPPOSITIONS OF OTHERS WRITERS BECAME GOD’S ABSOLUTES THROUGH ELLEN G. WHITE, will show that each time Ellen White said ‘I was shown’ to give the impression that God was speaking through her, she was in reality copying other people's thoughts and impressions, often word for word, without giving credit to her human sources. The study will also show that as she copied, starting at the very beginning of her writings to the very end, that even in her most serious, and some think ‘sacred’ ‘testimonies’, she was turning the suppositions and fantasies of those writers she was copying into her absolutes from God, as if she was getting her ‘insights’ and ‘inspiration’ from a higher source.

No reasonable person after checking the references given and the copy work presented could seriously argue in public or private that ‘God’ had anything to do with such deception. If any other group or denomination on earth presented such information and writings and they were exposed as the study shows, Seventh—day Adventists would be the first to condemn the material as false and seriously flawed as far as having anything to do with a reasonable God. Indeed, they have done just that in the book The Great Controversy, supposedly communicated by God to the world through Ellen White. The book attacks almost every religious system in the civilized world but yet makes it clear that God only approves of those Adventists who believe, live and practice what Ellen White, their prophet, has said God told them to believe. If Adventist would confess that they have been in error in their assessment of Mrs. White and her writings, they could then go on to a more sensible approach by using what she wrote as instruction for her time, by men and woman of their time, reaching as they and all of us are, for a better understanding of God and how he instructs men and woman of our time. This is what I hope this study will accomplish for those that read it without anger or prejudice.

As a former minister of the Seventh—day Adventist Church who was relieved of my Church credentials because I allowed the Church and public to know of my findings, what I discovered does not shake my faith in God or His plan of salvation through His Son Jesus Christ. In fact, it was my desire to move Adventism away from many of its fanatical views given through the ‘insights’ of Ellen White. Recognizing the Adventist mind set, there will be those that will call down Heaven's wrath upon me and this study, as has always been the case when some one past or present attempts to change men’s thinking in any age about anything. Perhaps it would be well to quote from a well-known author, M. Scott Peck and his book The Road Less Traveled-. pg.46.

What happens when one has striven long and hard to develop a working view of the world, a seemingly useful, workable map, and then is confronted with new information suggesting that that view is wrong and the map needs to be largely redrawn? The painful effort required seems frightening, almost overwhelming. What we do more often than not, and usually unconsciously, is ignore the new information. Often this act of ignoring is much more than passive. We may denounce the new information as false, dangerous, heretical, the work of the devil. We may actually crusade against it, and even attempt to manipulate the world so as to make it conform to our view of reality. Rather than try to change the map, an individual may try to destroy the new reality. Sadly, such a person, may expend much more energy ultimately in defending an outmoded view of the world than would have been required to revise and correct it in the first place.

What he is suggesting is that it takes more honesty and courage to change than to continue to believe a White lie. It is very fair to ask the question: Did Ellen G. White, the Seventh-day Adventist prophet, receive her instructions, insights, information and wisdom from human sources or from divine revelation and inspiration as is claimed?

In order to be as objective as possible it is only fair and proper to present what Ellen White herself said in public and in her writings as to her source of material. There are many such statements but only a few are necessary in as much as none of the statements, from the beginning to the end of her life ever changed from the thought that God was behind it all. Hundreds of ‘I was shown’ were used in her early writings, and no doubt was ever left as to who showed her what. It was always an angel of God or of the Spirit of God and not man. Note the following:

“God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, it was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision --the precious rays of light shining from the throne…” (letter to Dr. Paulson; St. Helena, California, June 14, 1906, Selected Messages pp 24—37)

“You have thereby insulted the Spirit of God. You know how the Lord has manifested himself through the Spirit of prophecy. Past, present, and future have passed before me. . . if you 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. . . God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, it was a letter but prompted by the Spirit of God. To bring before your minds things that had been shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision.-The precious rays of light shining from the throne . . .” (The Testimonies Slighted; Healdsburg, California June 20, 1882, Testimony for the Church vol. 5: pp 62—70)

And yet, in spite of these absolute, unequivocal statements, what followed in the next paragraph and for several after, was word for word, thought for thought, sentence for sentence, copy work from another author. Without giving any credit to any human source, leaving the impression to anyone reading that it all came by ‘what God has opened before in vision’ or ‘things that had been shown me.’ or ‘prompted by the Spirit of God.’ (read the White Lie by Walter Rea for these comparisons) Certainly this is a different concept of ‘vision or the Spirit of God’ than the Church has been taught in the past.

Night Scenes in the Bible Testimony for the Church, vol. 5; p. 68

Daniel Marsh 1868—1870 Ellen G. White. June 20, 1882

We must not defer our obedience till every shadow of If you refuse to believe until every shadow of uncertainty and every possibility of mistake is uncertainty and every possibility of doubt is removed removed. The doubt that demands perfect knowledge you will never believe. The doubt that demands will never yield to faith, for faith rests upon perfect knowledge will never yield to faith. Faith rests probability, not demonstration . . .we must obey the upon evidence, not demonstration. The Lord requires voice of duty when there are many other voices us to obey the voice of duty, when there are other crying against it, and it requires earnest heed to voices all around us urging us to pursue an opposite distinguish the one which speaks for God. We must course. It requires earnest attention from us to cherish the impulse of conscience in the moment distinguish the voice which speaks for God. We must when it urges us to action, lest it cease from its resist and conquer inclination, and obey the voice of promptings and we be left to the blind guidance of conscience without parleying or compromise, lest its appetite and passion. prompting cease and will and impulse control.

Testimony for the Church, Letter to Dr. Paulson, June 14, 1906 Selected vol. 3; p. 258, 1872—5 Messages vol. 1, pp 27—28

I was shown that God has laid upon on my husband If you refuse to believe until every shadow of and me a special work. . . and many will defer their uncertainty and every possibility of doubt is removed, obedience to the warning and reproofs given, you will never believe. The doubt that demands perfect waiting till every shadow of uncertainty is removed knowledge will never yield to faith. faith rests upon from their minds. The unbelief that demands perfect evidence, not demonstration. The Lord requires us to knowledge will never yield to the evidence that God obey the voice of duty, when there are other voices all is pleased to give. He requires of His people faith around us urging us to pursue an opposite course. It that rests upon the weight of evidence, not upon requires earnest attention from us to distinguish the perfect knowledge. Those followers of Christ who voice which speaks from God. We must resist and accept the light that God sends them must obey the conquer inclination, and obey the voice of conscience voice of God speaking to them when there are many without parleying or compromise, lest its promptings other voices crying out against it. It requires cease and will and impulse control. discernment to distinguish the voice of God.

In all of these cases, Ellen White is promoting her authority as the voice of God, her instructions as first from God. Yet, in spite of the fact that she is using the words, thoughts, and sentence structure of another, we are suppose to believe that God is speaking what she is saying. He is not.

"Visions" originated with others

The conviction or assumption that God was showing Ellen White all that she said she saw from whatever source she gleaned the information, started very early with Ellen. In a book written by Delbert W. Baker, a black Adventist minister, entitled The Unknown Prophet, Baker produces some interesting information. Foy, who is Baker’s unknown prophet, had his ‘vision’ from 1842—1845. On page 123 Baker states that Mrs. White in 1912 said

“He had all these before I had them. They were written out and published. She indicates that at one time she possessed a copy of them.”

In Dec. 1844, at the age of 17, Ellen had her first vision, which was full of ‘I saw’, or ‘I was shown, or ‘the angel said,’ it was a duplication of Foy’s ‘vision’ and on pages 95 and others of Baker’s book, a list of the similarities are given. The garments, countenance, eyes, legs, feet, crown, arm, hand, voice and some of the scenes are identical, often with Ellen using the same words. Only a few examples need be given of the many to make the point that Ellen’s ‘vision’ was not given by God to Ellen, but was taken from Foy. Wherever he claimed he got it, it is possible that she believed God gave it to her, but others did not always believe as she did.

Christian Experience of E.G.W. Christian Experience of W. E. Foy 1846

“I then see countless millions of shining ones coming with “‘All the angels that are commissioned to visit cards held in their hands. These shining ones became our the earth hold a golden card which they guides. The cards, they bore shone above the brightness present to the angels at the gates of the city as of the sun; and they placed them in our hands but the we pass in and out. Evangelism, p. 39 names of them I could not read. “On either side of the chariot were wings and “There were countless millions of bright angels, whose beneath it wheels. As the chariot rolled wings were like pure gold, and they sang with loud voices, upward, the wheels cried ‘holy and the wings while their wings cried, holy. as they moved, cried holy.

“Behind the angel I beheld countless millions of bright “And as the chariot rolled upward the wheels chariots...each chariot had four wings like flaming fire and cried, ‘holy’ and the wings as they moved, an angel followed after the chariot, and the wings of the cried, ‘holy and the retinue of holy angels, chariot, and the wings of the angel cried as one voice around the cloud cried, ’holy’ ‘holy’ Lord God saying, ‘holy.’ Almighty;

The Unknown Prophet, pp 10-11, 18 Evangelism p. 35; Spiritual Gifts vol. 1, p. 287

In spite of Delbert Baker’s provocative title and his presuppositions about God and the ‘visions’ that William Foy was supposed to have had, there is no evidence given in his book that Foy was a prophet, let alone an unknown one. Nothing that he said he saw or what was later copied by Ellen White has proven to be true or a prophecy. It cannot even be said that the ‘people of God’ of the ‘visions’ had anything to do with the Seventh-day Adventist Church, as Ellen White would have people believe, in as much as there was no Seventh-day Adventist church at that time, and none of the rest of the events listed can be examined or proved.

Perhaps one of the greatest shocks to the Adventist myth of Ellen’s ‘divine visions’ came with the publication by Harper's Row of Ronald Numbers book Prophetess of Health in 1976. In the book, Numbers documents dozens of parallels where Ellen White is paraphrasing or even using the same words, thoughts and language of others and insisting that what she was seeing was coming directly from God. But Numbers had only scratched the surface as the following references will show Ellen was copying not just from the doctors of her time, but from many, many others in every field of thought she wrote about, always making sure that the ‘vision’ or ‘scene’ sounded as if she herself was there to ‘see’ or ‘hear’ what was actually taking place.

Even the "Testimonies" were copied from other writers

Beginning with the first volume of the Testimonies to the Church, covering the period from 1855-1868, to the last volume nine, Ellen used whatever writers she wished to agree with and claimed it all came from God, but always to her first, never giving credit to any other source. Listed below are hundreds of references in her writings where she has taken and used the thoughts, words, and even the suppositions of other uninspired writers and made them inspired by insisting that what she was seeing and saying was coming directly from God. Time and space will not allow side by side comparisons as has been done in the book The White Lie, but anyone wishing to do so can do so if they are able to obtain the books listed, many of which were listed by the E.G. White Estate as being in Ellen’s own library while she was working with her helpers on her writings for the Church. The names of the authors that Ellen used are listed and where the statements that she copied can be found.

Ellen G. White Authors copied by Ellen White

Testimonies for the Marsh p. 90: Our Fathers House Church p. 371: I was shown pp. 494-5 Wiley . pp . 29—33 vol. 1: U. Smith, Prophetess of Health p. 112 1855—1868

What the Lord has shown me. pp 60—67, 96 Cole, Philosophy of Health p.60- Look to Jesus p. 123 Marsh, home life, pp. 210,607 I have been shown, p. 347 vol. 2: Cole, pp. 266,267 p. 362, On Health Miller, the cause of exhausted vitality pg. pp.364,384 114 1868—1871 The Lord has given me a view of some of the Cole, pg. 538 corruption pp 391,403 Miller pp. 39, 43, 110, 114, 350 409, 486

In the view given me pp. 68—72 Cole, The Health Reformer 9—144 pp. 138—142 Horace Mann, Cole, How to Live, pg. 135 I was shown that God had laid upon . . . me Marsh, Night Scenes pp. 68-70 vol. 3: pp. 258—259 Marsh, Night Scenes pp. 200,334,339 1872—1875 pp. 273—274, Elijah pp. 49—50 Mirror of the Soul, 1835 pp. 333—4 Marsh, Night Scenes, pp. 58-62 pp. 368—370 Cole, pp 79, 104 pp. 487,562—5

Melville, Sermons by Melville ii 3-5 p. 60 Biographies Cole p. 127 pp 144-148 Obedience Marsh, Night Scenes pp 47—9,203, 60— pp.163,253 62, 242, 98, 45—60 pp.280—2, Spirit of the Lord vol. 4: Gardener, Ministry of Healing, 1892 p. 374 Marsh, Walks, pp. 313—4 p. 409 Melville, pg 95 1876—1881 p. 444 Marsh, Night Scenes, 98,99, 101 p. 480 Harris, pp 150—60 p. 543 Marsh, our fathers house pp 190-1 p. 594 Melville, last prophecy

pp. 68—70 I was told Marsh, Night Scenes, pp. 201—204 pp. 118—121 Melville, pp. 163—168 p. 133 Marsh, Night Scenes p 263 vol. 5: pp. 154—156 Harris, pp. 150—156 pp. 204—206 Harris, pp. 19,30,45, 48. pp. 266—268, 270 Harris, pp. 9,98 1882— 1889 p. 314 Miller, p. 27 p. 467 Marsh, Walks, p. 133 pp. 512—516 Marsh, Night Scenes, p. 352 Secrets pp. p. 686 68—69 p. 704 Melville, p. 190 p. 707 Harris, p. 9 pp. 735—736 Melville, p. 369 p. 737 Melville, p. 68, 83 Harris, pp 113—117

Harris, pp. 17, 20 xiv pp. 58—60 He said Harris, The Great Teacher, pp. 151—160 p. 91 vol. 6: Melville, Sermons vol; 2, p. 42 pp. 185— 186 Marsh, Our Fathers House, p. 104 p. 340 Andrews, J. N., History of the Sabbath, 1990-1 pp. 349—5 1 22-pp. 105—108 pp. 363—4 Harris, pp. 105-108 vol. 7: p. 16 The Church Harris, p. 160 p. 148 Harris, p. 71 p. 159 Harris, p. 125 1902 p. 276 Harris, p. 318

Harris, p. 32 p. 15 Harris, p. 27 p. 21 vol. 8: Harris, pp. 107—8 pp 177-8 Harris, p. 112 p. 201 Melville. pp. 42—45 1904 pp 259-60 Andrews, J.N., History of the Sabbath pp 309—310 Harris, pp. 51, 278, 294 vol. 9: pp. 50-51 Melville, pp. 192—199—200 p. 97 Harris, p. 64 1909 p. 256 Marsh, p. 16,134

In this study we have shown examples of how all through the years of writing for the Testimonies for the Church from vol. 1 through 9, from the years 1855 to 1909, Ellen White was using the thoughts, words and structure of other writers for her ‘I was shown’. From the beginning with the ‘vision’ of William Foy to the end of her life she used the ‘inspiration’ of others to promote Adventism and her concept of its life style that was necessary’ to please her God.

Ellen White Copied from…

Saul of Tarsus, ... bore a leading part in the discussions which Saul was also present, and took a leading part here took place. .this is evident from the fact that he was against Stephen . . . after the death of appointed to an important ecclesiastical and political office Stephen, he was elected a member of the immediately afterwards. Sanhedrim council, in consideration of the part he had acted on that occasion. Conybeare E. G. White. pp. 38—72 & Howson pp 9-20

It was doubtless overruled for good that it An overruling providence permitted the apostle to be delayed. should be so, E.G.W. 194—206 C. & H. 585—619 There must have flourished up in their minds Thrilling were the memories that they recalled of the days many a touching reminiscence of the days when the light which shone upon the face of Stephen when the light of heaven, which had once upturned to heaven as he suffered martyrdom. shone on the face of Stephen upturned to heaven in the agony of martyrdom. E.G.W. p. 204 Farrar, pp. 519-20

The memory of that scene, and of his own efforts, to secure That moment could hardly be forgotten by the condemnation of the servant of Christ, came vividly him, but he looked steadily at his inquisitors. before his mind. Conybeare & Howson pp. 621—652 E.G.W. pp. 214—234

These words were not an outburst of passion. Under the If we consider these words as an outburst of influence of the Holy Spirit Paul uttered a prophetic natural indignation, we cannot severely blame denunciation similar to that which Christ had uttered in them... If we regard them as a prophetic rebuking the hypocrisy of the Jews. The judgment denunciation they were terribly fulfilled when pronounced by the apostle was terribly fulfilled when the this hypocritical president of the Sanhedrin iniquitous and hypocritical high priest was murdered by was murdered by the assassins in the Jewish assassins in the Jewish war. But the bystanders regarded the war. words of Paul as profane, and exclaimed with horror... Conybeare & Howson pp. 621—652 Ellen G. White. pp. 214—234

And Julius who can hardly have been absent Here Julius, the centurion who had listened to the apostle’s from the brilliant throng who had listened to address before Agrippa. Paul’s address before Agrippa. Ellen G. White pp. 262—271 Farrar pp. 562—573

Conclusion

Thus over and over again, hundreds of times in all her writings she took the speculations, assumptions, and even the fantasies of other writers she was copying and made them absolutes, and in some cases, by her own testimony, the words of the holy Spirit. It seems a deliberate attempt to use the works and words and ideas of others to make those that read her believe that Ellen was carried back in time and was able to read the mind and thoughts and intents of each situation and then interpret for God the times and events of those events she was describing. She does not, as some have tried to argue, follow the thoughts of scripture narrative, but is totally projecting the speculations of others as the thoughts of God.

There are hundreds of other pages that could be given, each with its copy work from other authors, never giving credit to anyone but God and I was shown. An interesting aside can be found in vol. 2 of the Testimonies, p. 116, where Ellen said of her thoughts from a ‘vision’ ‘I was deeply impressed’. And again in the same volume p. 565, ‘Yesterday I had some time for reflection and now have a few thoughts that I wish to present to you.’ Had words such as these been given in the place of I was shown, Ellen White would not have reached the statue of infallibility that her writings did, nor would she have been canonized as we have done! Every sincere priest, every honest prophet, every devout pastor, when they have spoken or written, have believed homiletically, they were delivering God’s message, through them by all their 'I was shown' no matter how or where they got their ‘inspiration.’ Most congregations recognize that a person was speaking in the name of God, not God speaking in the name of a person. What a difference it could have made in Adventism, if we had accepted the same wisdom.

A careful or even casual observation of history will convince any honest researcher that it is made up of the records of people, nations, tribes, or families that have ‘borrowed’ or ‘stole’ without returning or giving credit, someone else's, ideas, words, possessions or goods and land, and then they have claimed throughout all future time that they didn’t do it and have died defending their lies. But only a few have been able to survive, some with great respect and following, by claiming that God either helped them do what they did or at least told them how and where to do it. And why is this done in humanity? The reason is also very clear. We want to possess or control those around us and what better way to do this than to make God our partner and ally. Thus, we have the history of politics and religion since the beginning of time. The Making of a Prophet

How Ellen White turned FICTION into "truth"

By Walter T. Rea

Adventist Currents, March 1987

Copyright ©1984 Mars Hill Publications Inc.

The central theme in a series of books by Theodore H. White about recent American presidents is that presidents are not so much born as they are made, by events, supporters, the media—but especially by the media.1

It might be argued similarly that the nineteenth-century prophets were not so much called as they were made, by events, true believers, books—but especially, in the case of Ellen G. White, by the books. And that fact makes it all the more interesting to discover how the books that made the prophet were made.

During the last few years comparison studies undertaken by this author and others indicate that Mrs. White relied continually, and without credit, on the work of eighteenth-and nineteenth-century authors for the ideas, language, facts, and organization of her books.

A General Conference-sponsored study of this phenomenon was begun in 1980 under the direction of Dr. Fred Veltman, professor of religion at Pacific Union College. Veltman and his volunteers have compared…Desire of Ages with all the available published works that they could reasonably expect might contain sources for Mrs. White’s writing on the life of Christ…. Using a very conservative method of calculation, Veltman has documented source material that accounts for 34 percent of the fifteen chapters from Desire of Ages that he randomly chose for scrutiny.

More interesting than this 34 percent figure, however, is the kind of source Veltman discovered Ellen White sometimes used: fiction!

One of the Desire of Ages chapters Veltman included in his study concerns John the Baptist and the Wedding Feast at Cana. In a forerunner to Desire of Ages, volume two of Spirit of Prophecy, the following two paragraphs are included:

Rumors had reached Mary concerning her son and his sufferings. John, one of the new disciples, had searched for Christ and had found him in his humiliation, emaciated, and bearing the marks of great physical and mental distress. Jesus, unwilling that John should witness his humiliation, had gently yet firmly dismissed him from his presence. He wished to be alone; no human eye must behold his agony, no human heart be called out in sympathy with his distress.

The disciple had sought Mary in her home and related to her the incidents of this meeting with Jesus, as well as the event of his baptism, when the voice of God was heard in acknowledgment of his Son, and the prophet John had pointed to Christ, saying, “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world.”3

In the later Desire of Ages these two fanciful paragraphs were omitted. Perhaps the more mature Ellen White, or her “bookmaker,” Marian Davis, recognized that scripture does not give authority to such thoughts or expressions. But one author had, an author whose work was in Mrs. White’s library—the Reverend J.H. Ingraham, a writer of spiritual fiction.

In his volume entitled The Prince of the House of David, first copyrighted in 1859, Ingraham had fictionalized the very thoughts just quoted from The Spirit of Prophecy that were excluded later from The Desire of Ages.4

In his preface Ingraham wrote:

The letters comprising the present volume were written for the purpose of presenting, perhaps, in a new aspect, and from a new point of view, the advent of the son of Mary, Christ the Lord, . . .

Adina, the writer, a Jewess, is assumed to have been a resident of Jerusalem during the last four years of our Saviour’s life, and to have written to Alexandria, to her father, numerous letters, describing all events of interest, and especially giving a minute narrative of the wonderful events of the life of Christ,. . .(emphasis supplied)5

How strange that Ellen White should be inspired to use acknowledged fiction on the life of Christ. How odd that she and/or her helpers were inspired later to leave it out. This phenomenon is even more curious in the context of what Mrs. White had to say about fiction:

It is often urged that in order to win the youth from sensational or worthless literature, we should supply them with a better class of fiction.... The only safety for the inebriate, and the only safeguard for the temperate man, is total abstinence. For the lover of fiction the same rule holds true. Total abstinence is his only safety.6 But it was not just fiction that Ellen White wrote against. She also denigrated the very kinds of books that burdened the shelves of her own library and on which she depended so heavily for her published and unpublished works.

As a preparation for Christian work, many think it essential to acquire an extensive knowledge of historical and theological writings. They suppose that this knowledge will be an aid to them in teaching the gospel. But their laborous study of the opinions of men tends to the enfeebling of their ministry... As I see libraries filled with ponderous volumes of historical and theological lore, I think, Why spend money for that which is not bread.7

It was Mrs. White’s unacknowledged use of the fictions, fantasies, suppositions, and conjectures of others—a lifetime practice that her son, Willie, called her“habit”—that gave naive readers the impression that God was regularly providing her insights that others never had.8

Here are several examples of this “habit,” beginning with an example from her own husband. James White had written this in Life Incidents:

They flocked in from the neighboring towns; a revival commenced, and it was said that in thirteen families all but two persons were hopefully converted... I am of the opinion that not less than one hundred persons...are brought to believe.... (emphasis supplied)9

Ellen White makes what husband James reported as hearsay and opinion fact:

His first lecture was followed by a religious awakening in which thirteen entire families, with the exception of two persons, were converted.10

The conjecture of Daniel March:

There are more listeners in the public assembly than can be seen by the speaker’s eye.... We have only to turn to the sacred record to learn that these high and mighty ones, whose home is in some far distant world, have borne an active part both in the common and in the great events of this world.... They have taken the form of men, and shown themselves to human eyes, and spoken aloud in the languages of earth.... talking with men under the shadows of trees and tents and temple roofs,...

And these celestial visitants have come from their far distant homes to take part in the affairs of men. They have shown themselves better acquainted with human history and better able to do our work than we ourselves.11

March’s conjecture made fact by White:

In the form of men, angels are often in the assemblies of the righteous;...

Though the rulers of this world know it not, yet often in their councils angels have been spokesmen. Human eyes have looked upon them; human ears have listened to their appeals; ...In the council hall and the court of justice these heavenly messengers have shown an intimate acquaintance with human history; they have proved themselves better able to lead the cause of the oppressed than were their ablest and most eloquent defenders... Celestial beings have taken an active part in the affairs of men.12

The guesswork of Conybeare and Howson:

If we consider these words as an outburst of natural indignation, we cannot severely blame them, ... If we regard them as a prophetic denunciation, they were terribly fulfilled, when this hypocritical president of the Sanhedrin was murdered by the assassins in the Jewish war.13

Coneybeare and Howson’s guesswork was reified by one who we have been told was privileged to see it all in vision:

These words were not an outburst of passion... Paul uttered a prophetic denunciation.... The judgment pronounced by the apostle was terribly fulfilled when the iniquitous and hypocritical high priest was murdered by assassins in the Jewish war.14

Reverend Frederic Farrar wrote cautiously:

. . . Julius, who can hardly have been absent from the brilliant throng who had listened to Paul’s address before Agrippa,..15

Ellen White adjusted Farrar’s caution to her liking:

Here Julius, the centurion who had listened to the Apostle’s address before Agrippa,...16

Farrar again is tentative:

There were no means of cooking; no fires could be lighted; the caboose and utensils must long ago have been washed overboard; the provisions had probably been spoiled and sodden....(emphasis supplied)17

Again, Mrs. White throws Farrar’s caution to the wind:

...the utensils had been washed overboard, and most of the provisions were water-soaked and spoiled.18

Some church leaders and a few laymen have known since the turn of the century that Mrs. White, in the book Sketches from the Life of Paul, depended considerably on two similar books, one by Conybeare and Howson and one by Bishop Farrar. What they did not know, however, was that her chapter 27, “Caesar’s Household,” was taken entirely from a published sermon of the same title written by the English cleric Henry Melvill.19

Melvill’s assumptions and speculations became, through Mrs. White’s claims, the words of the Holy Spirit. But there is no substantive point in the entire chapter that had not already come to Melvill before her. The thoughtful guesswork of other uncredited authors pervades Ellen White’s most appreciated works—contributing unwittingly to the making of this prophet. Here is one such contribution from William Hannah:

They were practised hands that navigated this boat, who knew well the lake in all its moods, not open to unreasonable fear; but now fear comes upon them, and they are ready to give up all hope. Where all this while is he at whose bidding they had embarked? They had been too busy for the time with the urgent work required by the sudden squall, to think of him; the mantle of the night’s thick darkness may have hidden him from their view. (emphasis supplied)20

This is how Ellen White used his contribution in Desire of Ages:

Those hardy fishermen had spent their lives upon the lake, and had guided their craft safely through many a storm; but now their strength and skill availed nothing. They were helpless in the grasp of the temptest, and hope failed them.... they remembered at whose command they had set out to cross the sea.... But the dense darkness hid Him from their sight. (emphasis supplied)21

It would require books to produce all the instances of Ellen White’s unacknowledged source usage represented as special inspiration. But church leaders exhibit no shame for their continuing efforts toward the making and maintaining of the prophet; even though it has become increasingly obvious that the Seventh-day Adventist church made Sister White as much as Sister White made the Seventh-day Adventist church.

FOOTNOTES:

1. White, Theodore H., The Making of the President (New York: Atheneum Publishers, 1960, 1964, 1968, 1972).

2. Adventist Review, General Conference Bulletin no. 9, July 11, 1985, p. 18.

3. White, Ellen G., The Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 2 (Battle Creek: Steam Press, 1877), pp. 99, 100.

4. Ingraham, JIH., The Prince of the House of David (Boston: Roberts Brothers, Publisher, 1890), pp. 156—159.

5. Ingraham, The Prince of the Ho use, preface, pp. ix, x.

6. White, Ellen G., Ministry of Healing (Mountain View: Pacific Press, 1905), p. 446.

7. White, Ministry of Healing, p. 441.

8. White, Ellen G., Selected Messages, Vol. III (Washington, D.C.: Review & Herald Publishing Association, 1980), appendix C, p. 460.

9. White, James, Life Incidents (Battle Creek: Steam Press, 1868), pp. 62, 63.

10. White, Ellen G., The Great Controversy (Mountain View: Pacific Press, 1911), p. 331.

11. March, Daniel, Night Scenes in the Bible (Philadelphia: Zeigler and McCurdy, 1868—1870), pp. 452, 453. 12. White, Great Controversy, pp 631, 632.

13. Conybeare, WI, Howson, IS., The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (New York: Crowell, 1852), p. 590.

14. White, Ellen G., Sketches from the Life of Paul (Mountain View: Pacific Press, 1883) p. 222.

15. Farrar, Frederic W, The Life and Works of St. Paul (New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1874), p. 563.

16. White, Sketches from the Life of Paul, p. 222.

17. Farrar, The Life and Works of St. Paul, p. 569.

18. White, Sketches from the Life of Paul, p. 266.

19. Melvill, Henry, Sermons (New York: Stanford & Swords, 1844), pp. 466-476.

20. Hanna, William, The Life of Christ (New York: American Tract Society, 1863), p. 262.

21. White, Ellen G., Desire of Ages (Mountain View: Pacific Press, 1898), p. 334.

E.G. White’s Literary Work: An Update

Ron Graybill, Associate Secretary, Ellen G. White Estate

An edited and annotated transcript of a tape recording of presentations made in the morning worship services at the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Nov. 15-19, 1981

In closing, let me read a summary of statements that I think capsulize [sic] what we know at this point about the scope and the nature of Ellen White’s literary borrowing.

1. Mrs. White read carefully and extensively in the books and articles written by conservative Protestant religious figures of her time. She had several favorite authors. She made use of a number of books from each of them. She also drew materials from a wide range of other books and articles. Thus, we can say that she read more widely in non-Adventist sources and made more extensive use of those sources then we had previously understood. And as I pointed out, we still have some of these books in the Ellen G. White library. 2. Next, Mrs. White borrowed not only the words and phrases used by these authors, but in some cases, followed the outline of their expositions and drew from [their] facts, illustrations, thoughts, and concepts. 3. The material borrowed by Mrs. White included historical, geographical, and chronological information, as well as devotional material, theological concepts—we saw some of those in the material that we presented from Melvill—and scriptural and prophetic expositions. She also employed extra-Biblical comments on the lives of various Biblical characters, often turning the speculations and conjectures of her sources into statements of positive fact. Sometimes similar use was made of their comments on the thoughts and activities of supernatural beings, that is, God, Satan, and their respective angels. 4. These borrowings—now we’re going to talk about Mrs. White’s books as a whole and which of them involved borrowings—these borrowings occurred not only in the historical sections of the Great Controversy, but also in its prophetic sections. They appear in descriptions of the content of specific visions given to Mrs. White. It would be unwise at this point to assert that there is any particular book written by Mrs. White or any type of writing from her pen in which literary borrowing will not be found. 5. In cases where we have Mrs. White’s handwritten draft of something she borrowed, this handwritten version is usually closer to the literary source than is the published version which followed. This difference should generally be attributed to the work of Ellen White’s literary assistants in editing her material for publication—a work that she approved. There are also times when Mrs. White uses a borrowed idea on several different occasions herself, using slightly different words each time. 6. Many of the beautifully expressed thoughts, that is, many of the literary gems found in Mrs. White’s writings were borrowed from other authors. This fact, together with the knowledge that her writings were polished by literary assistants, leads us to avoid the suggestion that the literary beauty of her writings is an evidence of her divine inspiration. 7. It is impossible at this time to say what percentage of Mrs. White’s writings involve borrowed material. This is so because only a fraction of the many books she owned and read have been examined. The borrowings range from vaguely similar thoughts and verbal echoes to very close and continuous borrowing of long phrases and nearly complete sentences. Verbatim borrowing of complete sentences is extremely rare, but in portions of Ellen White’s writings where borrowing has been noticed, close paraphrasing is very common. Another reason why it is difficult to say what percentage of Mrs. White’s writings involved borrowed material is that much of what Mrs. White wrote first appeared in letters, later in articles, and finally in books. This means that there is a great deal of repetition of the same or similar material. Because of this repetition it is difficult to say how much writing Mrs. White actually did, and thus impossible to say with statistical precision what percentage of the total might involve borrowing from other authors.

The Paraphrasing Prophet

By Walter Rea, 2005

Warren Johns, Ellen G. White Estate Ellen White's Claims Official Statement "Evidence for literary borrowing can be "I have my work to do, to meet the misconceptions of those who substantiated in virtually all nine volumes suppose themselves able to say what is testimony from God and of the (1) Testimonies for the Church, in what is human production. . . . Those who have helped souls to her (2) Review and Herald and Signs of the feel at liberty to specify what is of God in the Testimonies and Times articles, and in (3) all of the books what are the uninspired words of Sister White, will find that they published during her lifetime. The only were helping the devil in his work of deception."2 exception may be Early Writings. At this time I am not aware of any significant "I am glad that you are having success in selling my books for literary borrowing in that work, but it thus you are giving to the world the light that God has given me. These books contain clear, straight, unalterable truth, and would not be surprising if it should come to they should certainly be appreciated. The instruction they 1 light" contain is not of human production."3

James's White's claim for Ellen White:

"In her published works there are many things set forth which cannot be found in the writings of others, that are new to the most intelligent readers and hearers. And if they are not found in print...from what source has she received the new and rich thoughts which are to be found in her writings... She could not have learned them from books, from the fact that they do not contain such thoughts... The Spirit of God has revealed to her..."4

Arthur White's claim for Ellen White:

"In this broader field of writing, from which there seemed to be no respite, she was impelled to bear testimony to what was revealed to her in scores and hundreds of visions through 70 years of her ministry. In writing these messages of instruction, counsel, encouragement, and correction, she sought no human source of information and was not influenced by those about her. In all her works, we see her moving under the bidding and guidance of the Spirit of God."5

Contrast the statements of James and Arthur White with this recent statement from the Ellen G. White Estate's Warren John:

"Ellen White was unusually well read in the light of the amount of formal eduction she received. The ground covered in her reading amounted to several hundred books perhaps covering several tens of thousands of pages...Ellen White incorporated a wealth of material from that which she read into what she wrote. Without saying how extensive it is, we can conclude at this time that she made an extensive use of sources in order to convey the unique truths and the pointed messages needed by God's Church..."6

Ellen White's claim:

"I have not been in the habit of reading any doctrinal articles in the paper, that my mind should not have any understanding of anyone's ideas and views, and that not a mold of any man's theories should have any connection with that which I write."7

Ellen White Borrowed for Volume 3 of Spiritual Gifts

Ellen White's description of how earthquakes were formed after the flood8, according to Warren Johns, was borrowed from other sources: "In the 1915 inventory [of Ellen White's library of books] is listed an entry, 'Earthquakes, Bound collection of pamphlets on.' This particular collection, which has no author or date indicated, is the most likely source for Ellen White's statements on earthquakes and volcanic phenomena."9

In the preface to Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, Ellen White stated:

"In presenting this, my third little volume, to the public, I am comforted with the conviction that the Lord has made me His humble servant in shedding some rays of precious light upon the past..."10

According to Dr. Ronald Graybill, former Associate Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate:

"Mrs. White borrowed not only the words and phrases used by these authors, but in some cases followed the outline of their expositions and drew from them facts, illustrations, thoughts, and concepts."11

Dr. Graybill also noted:

"These borrowings occured not only in the historical sections of The Great Controversy but also in its prophetic sections. They appear throughout the Conflict of the Ages and in the Testimonies for the Church as well as other Ellen White books. They occur in letters and specific testimonies to individuals. They appear in descriptions of the content of specific visions given to Mrs. White. It would be unwise at this point to assert that there is any particular book written by Mrs. White or any type of writing from her pen in which literary borrowing will not be found.

"In cases where we have Mrs. White's handwritten draft of something she borrowed, this handwritten draft is usually closer to the literary source than is the published version which followed. This difference should generally be attributed to the work of Ellen White's literary assistants in editing her material for publication--a work that she approved.

"Many of the beautifully expressed thoughts, that is, many of the literary gems found in Mrs. White’s writings were borrowed from other authors. This fact, together with the knowledge that her writings were polished by literary assistants, leads us to avoid the suggestion that the literary beauty of her writings is an evidence of her divine inspiration."12

In spite of the mounting evidence from the Ellen G. White Estate regarding Ellen White's literary borrowing practices, she herself warned the Church:

"They [Adventist ministers] profess to be teachers of the word, but they sadly neglect to search the Scriptures for themselves. They are content to use the arguments which are prepared in pamphlets and books, and which others have labored earnestly to search out; but they are not willing to tax their minds to study them out for themselves. In order to make full proof of their ministry, those who open the word of God to others should search the Scriptures diligently. They should not be content to use other men's thoughts, but should dig for truth as for hid treasures. While it is perfectly right to gather ideas from other minds, they should not be satisfied to take those ideas and repeat them in a poll-parrot manner. Make these ideas your own, brethren; frame the arguments yourselves, from your own study and research. Do not borrow the productions of other men's brains and pens, and recite them as a lesson; but make the most of the talents, the brain power, that God has given you."13

In 1905, when Dr. David Paulson asked permission to publish some selections from Ellen G. White's writings for his publication "Life Boat", permission was granted; however, only on the condition Ellen G. White be given full credit. Responding to Dr. Paulson's request, Mrs. White's son, Willie C. White, Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate, stated:

"Mother instructs me to say to you that you may be free to select from her writings short articles for the Life Boat. Or you may make extracts from these MSS and from similar writings, in your articles, in each case giving the proper credit."14

Plagiarized from Daniel March "Dear daughter [in-law] Mary: This week we shall commence to live in the new house. ... I have now finished a line-by-line comparison, Send books, red-covered Jewish page-by-page, and chapter-by-chapter, of Ellen Antiquities and the Bible Dictionary. Is White's five books of the Conflict of the Ages Night Scenes of the Bible there? If so, series, as well as other material she was supposed send it."15 to have written. Using the books and material that have been acknowledged and are available from her library, this study will show by using only one author (Daniel March) how extensive her paraphrasing was in all of her writings.

Daniel March, Night Scenes in the Bible, 1868 Ellen G. White Books

Pages 201-220 Selected Mesages, book 1, pp. 27-28

Page 363 Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, pp. 343-344

Page 313 Desire of Ages, p. 83

Pages 459-460 Acts of the Apostles, p. 146

Pages 193-198 Prophets and Kings, pp. 119-120

Pages 200-207 Prophets and Kings, pp. 121-128

Pages 208-216 Prophets and Kings, pp. 143-165

Pages 292-299 Prophets and Kings, pp. 523-531

Page 255 Messages to Young People, p. 103

Page 336 Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, p. 44

Pages 25-42 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 156-179

Pages 47-55 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 147-155

Pages 85-102 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 195-203

Pages 105-127 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 281-290 Pages 127-144 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 283-290

Pages 147-164 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 675-682

Pages 165-186 Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 727-745

Pages 189-222 Prophets and Kings, pp. 143-176

Pages 225-244 Prophets and Kings, pp. 265-272

Pages 285-302 Prophets and Kings, pp. 522-538

Pages 343-360 Desire of Ages, pp. 377-382

Pages 363-374 Desire of Ages, pp. 447-454

Pages 377-394 Desire of Ages, pp. 673-694

Pages 397-410 Desire of Ages, pp. 685-697

Pages 413-430 Desire of Ages, pp. 795-808

Pages 433-448 Desire of Ages, pp. 809-817

Pages 451-466 Acts of the Apostles, pp. 146-148

Pages 469-488 Acts of the Apostles, pp. 214-217, 231

Pages 491-508 Acts of the Apostles, pp. 442-445

ONE EXAMPLE

Daniel March, Night Scenes in the Bible, Ellen White, Selected Messages Book 1, p. 28 pp. 201-202, 1868 If you refuse to believe until every shadow of We must not defer our obedience till every shadow of uncertainty and every possibility of doubt is uncertainty and every possibility of mistake is removed, you will never believe. The doubt that removed. The doubt that demands perfect demands perfect knowledge will never yield to faith. knowledge will never yield to faith, for faith rests Faith rests upon evidence, not demonstration. The upon probability, not demonstration. ... We must Lord requires us to obey the voice of duty, when there obey the voice of duty when there are many other are other voices all around us urging us to pursue an voices crying against it, and it requires earnest heed opposite course. It requires earnest attention from us to distinguish the one which speaks for God. to distinguish the voice which speaks from God.

NOTES

1. Warren Johns, Ellen G. White Estate, Ellen G. White, Literary Dependence, and Science, p. 2.

2. Ellen White, Selected Messages Book 3, p. 70. 3. Ellen White, letter 339, 1904. Editor's Note: This letter has not (as of September 10, 2005) been released to the public by the Ellen G. White Estate.

4. James White, Life Sketches, pp. 328-329, 1880 edition. Written one year prior to James White's death, but borrowed from Joseph Smith's apostle, John Taylor, who used nearly identical phrasing one year before, in 1879, to describe the Mormon prophet, Joseph Smith's work.

5. Arthur White, "Inspiration and the EGW Writings", Review and Herald, 1978, p. 39.

6. Warren Johns, pp. 12,13.

7. Ellen White, letter 37, 1887.

8. Passage on earthquakes is found in Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, pp. 79-83.

9. Warren Johns, page not given.

10. Ellen White, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, page v.

11. Dr. Ronald Graybill, "Ellen G. White's Work - An Update", taken from an edited and annotated transcript of a tape recording of presentations made in the morning worship services at the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Nov. 15-19, 1981. Emphasis supplied.

12. Ibid.

13. Ellen White, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, April 6, 1886.

14. Willie C. White, letter to Dr. David Paulson, Feb. 15, 1905.

15. Ellen G. White, Letter 60, 1878, p. 1. Does Mrs White Pass the Biblical Tests of a Prophet?

Importance of Testing

In the year 2006 over one billion people called themselves Moslems. It is the biggest religion on the planet and the fastest growing in terms of numbers of new adherents. The whole religion is based upon the writings of prophet Muhammad. Now, when we say writings, we must remember that Muhammad was illiterate, so he depended upon literary assistants to do his writing for him. If you decided to follow Muhammad it would impact every aspect of your life. It would impact what you eat and drink. It would impact what you say and to whom you say it. It would impact how and when you worship. It would impact your perception of who God is and what He expects of you. It would impact what you do and say. It would impact how you relate to others that are "outside" your group. Islam impacts every area of your life! If you are following a prophet, and what that prophet tells you is false, that wrong teaching could have far-reaching effects upon almost every aspect of your life. It could impact your health, your relationships with others, even your relationship with God. That is why the Word of God says:

I hate every false way (Psalm 119:104) Prophet Joseph Smith * Advocated health reforms A man finds a Book of Mormon in his hotel room and reads it. years ahead of science He heart is warmed by the stories of love for God and courage. * Predicted future events He says, "Whoever penned such beautiful, encouraging words * Guided his church to must be a prophet of God." He ends up joining the "Latter Day amazing membership Saints" without ever studying the merits of the prophet Joseph growth Smith. * Wrote many beautiful, inspiring words Many are born into a church with a prophet. They grow up accepting it and never challenge the idea during their entire life. Many do not realize that following a prophet's teachings can have a tremendously powerful impact on every area of their life. They devote little time to researching the prophet, to testing him or her to find out if their claims are true. How many Moslems, Mormons, or Seventh-day Adventists have really taken the time to sit down and study out whether or not their prophet is everything they claimed to be? With so much on the line, isn't it worth a little investigating?

One of the duties of a Christian is to test the prophets. It is commanded in the Bible, and failure to do so is disobedience to God's Word:

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1)

The reason given that we are to test the prophets is because there are "many" false ones out there. Jesus recognized this problem would face His people in the future. "Beware of false prophets", he warned, "And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many." (Matt. 7:15, 24:11) He went on to warn that even good Christians, intelligent people--"the very elect"--could be deceived:

For there shall arise...false prophets...insomuch that if were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. (Matt. 24:24)

These warnings by Jesus should be enough to emphasize the importance of validating the claims put forth by a prophet or by the followers of a prophet. Jesus would not have bothered to make such strong statements unless He believed His followers would face a significant threat from "false prophets" in the future.

With so many prophets out there in the world today, how can we determine which ones are true and which ones are false prophets? Have you ever asked someone why they believe a prophet?

 "Mary Eddy Baker's writings on health and spirituality have been such a blessing to my life. She must have been inspired."  "How could Muhammad have written such masterful works without any education? God must have assisted him."  "Joseph Smith predicted the Civil War would start in South Carolina 29 years before it started! God must have inspired him."  "Nostradamus predicted the rise of Hitler and World War II!"  "Muhammad's teachings on diet and health are only now being validated by scientists after a 1,000 years!"

If you are a Seventh-day Adventist, those answers will sound familiar to you. Reasons similar to these are frequently cited in favour of Ellen White. Interestingly enough, none of these reasons is a Biblical test of a prophet. "But wait," you say, "Doesn't making a predication that comes true prove a person to be a prophet?" Not according to the Bible! You see, anyone can predict a future event, and by luck or chance, that future event may actually take place. Predicting a future event does not prove someone to be a prophet; however, if a prophet makes a prediction of a future event, and that event does not take place, then the Bible tells us that prophet is not a true prophet. That is the first of seven Biblical tests of a prophet.

We cannot trust our feelings or our emotions. We must have an objective set of criteria-- specific, measurable rules--that can be applied to every person claiming to be a prophet; otherwise, everyone and his neighbour could be a prophet! That criteria exists as the seven Biblical tests outlined below. When one candidly examines all the evidence presented below, one will find sufficient evidence to make an educated decision regarding the prophetic calling of Ellen White. Using these seven tests we can easily distinguish the true prophets from the false ones.

TEST #1: Prophecies Must be Fulfilled

When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shalt not be afraid of him. (Deut. 18:22)

A prophet does not have to make predictions in order to be a prophet. A prophet is defined as "somebody who interprets or passes on the will of a deity." (Encarta Dictionary) Typically, however, Biblical prophets do make predictions about future events. These predictions help to establish the claims and validity of a prophet because knowledge of future events surpasses human ability and resides in the domain of omnipotent power. Jeremiah writes that… ...when the word of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known, that the LORD hath truly sent him. (Jer. 28:9)

When a prophet first arises, he may not be believed by the people at first, but when his predictions start coming to pass, then people begin to have faith and confidence in that prophet. However, any "prophet" can get lucky and make a guess about the future which, by chance, comes to pass. Therefore, the Bible places a much more stringent test upon the prophet. Moses told the people to keep a score card. If the prophet's predictions come to pass, then keep on eye on him. If the prophet ever fails, even once, then ignore him. He is not a true prophet. Why? Because anyone can make a lucky guess but only God can get the future right every single time. This is what differentiates God's prophets from all the other false prophets in the world. This is what sets them apart. This is how we can identify a true prophet of God. God's prophets are correct about the future 100 percent of the time. It is that simple. Now, let us examine some of the predictions made by Ellen White. As soon as you begin analysing Mrs White's predictions, something becomes immediately evident. Most of Mrs. White's specific predictions were made early in her career, and virtually every single one of them failed to come to pass. The further she progressed in life, the less predictions she made, and if she did make a prediction, it was usually something vague and ambiguous, such as "crime will worsen", "cities will be more polluted", or "the earth will become more and more corrupt." It appears that Mrs White learned from her early failures, and was more careful in later predictions to make them obscure and ambiguous enough so that she could not be accused by her detractors of making false predictions.

With that in mind, let us now examine some of the predictions she made. Remember to keep score because a true prophet of God will never make a false prediction, not even one.

Prediction #1: Jesus will return in June, 1845

Lucinda Burdick and Ellen Harmon [White] were close friends during the mid-1840s. Mrs. Burdick, the wife of a pastor, had many opportunities to hear Mrs. White's prophecies.

The following is Mrs. Burdick's eyewitness testimony of a prophecy Mrs. White made:

"During the year 1845 I met Miss Ellen G. Harmon several times at my uncle's house in South Windham, Me. The first of these meetings was in the month of May, when I heard her declare that God had revealed to her that Jesus Christ would return to this earth in June, the next month." (Lucinda Burdick, notarized letter, published in Limboline)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Ellen Harmon said "God revealed to her" that Jesus would come in June of 1845. This is a failed prophecy.

Prediction #2: Jesus will return in September, 1845

Mrs. Burdick again testifies:

"During the haying season I again met her in company with James White at the same place, and heard my uncle ask her about the failure of the Lord to appear in June according to her visions. She replied that she had been told in the language of Canaan which she did not understand; but that she had since come to understand that Christ would return in September, at the second growth of grass instead of the first." (Ibid.)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Did Christ return in September of 1845? Obviously not.

Prediction #3: Whites to be Thrown in Prison in 1846

Mrs. Burdick again testifies of statements made by Ellen White in 1846: "Once, when on their way to the eastern part of Maine, she saw that they would have great trouble with the wicked, be put in prison, etc. This they told in the churches as they passed through. When they came back, they said they had a glorious time. Friends asked if they had seen any trouble with the wicked, or prisons? They replied, 'None at all.' People in all the churches soon began to get their eyes open, and came out decidedly against her visions" (Ibid.)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

It is obvious that the very people she told her vision to thought she was describing an imminent imprisonment that would occur on their trip to the east. That is obvious from the facts that (1) the people specifically asked them about the imprisonment when they got back, and (2) when they found out there was no imprisonment, they came out decidedly against her visions. This failed prophecy was enough to convince the people in the Maine churches she was a false prophet, and it should be enough to convince us today!

We could stop right here and know that, according to Deut. 18:22, we have nothing to fear from this prophet. She has proven to be wrong, thus indicating she does not speak for God. But let us be careful. The Bible warns us not to accept anything on the voice of just one eyewitness. Can Mrs. Burdick's story be corroborated in any way?

Mrs. White made several statements about the imminent return of Christ in the 1840s and 1850s which would seem to validate Mrs. Burdick's statements. It does appear that in the early days of her career Mrs. White had a bad habit of predicting the return of Christ. So let us turn to the writings of Ellen White.

Prediction #4: The Great Pestilence that Never Came

In 1849, Mrs. White penned these memorable words:

"What we have seen and heard of the pestilence [of 1849], is but the beginning of what we shall see and hear. Soon the dead and dying will be all around us." (Present Truth, Sept. 1849).

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

The "pestilence" she was describing turned out to be a local phenomenon, not a sign of the imminent end of the world. Not long after this prophecy was penned the pestilence ended and the United States entered a period of peace and prosperity that lasted for many years. She said "soon the dead and dying will be all around us." What does soon mean? It has been nearly 160 years! She said the dead would be around "us". That included her. She was saying the dead would be around her. This never happened in her lifetime. Another prophetic failure.

Prediction #5: Jesus to come in "months"

In 1850 Sister White tells us what her angel told her: "My accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished. Get ready, get ready, get ready.' . . . now time is almost finished. . . and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

The context of this statement is undeniable. New converts will have to learn the doctrines in a "few months" because "now time is almost finished." The reduction in learning time is not because new converts are smarter than the older ones, nor is it because the Adventists developed an accelerated learning course. No, the context clearly states the reason they will have to learn quickly: "time is almost finished."

What is a reasonable definition of the phrase "a few months"? Three? Five? If your friend called you up and said, "I'll be over to visit in a few months", when would you expect him? Three or four months, perhaps six at the most? Well, as of the end of 2006 it has been about one thousand eight hundred and seventy-two months since Mrs. White said only a "few months" remained! She was certainly saying there were not "years" or "decades" left, because she said that what earlier converts had learned in "years", recent converts would have to learn in "months."

How can this failure be explained? Perhaps this is yet another case of her misunderstanding what her angel said. Perhaps her angel spoke in the language of Canaan again!

Prediction #6: Some at 1856 Conference to see Jesus return

Finally, Mrs. White concluded a 10-year string of failures predicting the return of Christ with a notorious statement that, unlike the previous failures, got widespread attention. She made this statement at a church conference in 1856 and it received notoriety because it was published in her "Testimonies to the Church" and many church members read it. Mrs. White describes her "vision":

"I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel: 'Some food for worms, some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.'" Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 131

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Everyone at this conference passed away generations ago. Not a single one was "alive" and "upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus." After this prophecy utterly failed the church was in quandary as to what to do with this statement. It was finally decided to declare this to be a "conditional prophecy" even though there were no conditions stated or implied in the prophecy (unlike conditional Biblical prophecies which always had the conditions stated explicitly or implicitly in the passage--for a further discussion on conditional prophecy, click here).

A review of Mrs. White's 1856 statement indicates there are no conditions stated explicitly or even implied in the prophecy. Mrs. White simply says that some of those at the conference will be alive when Christ returns. There is no condition such as "If you work hard, and give lots of offerings, then Christ will return..." The prophecy was never understood as conditional during Mrs. White's lifetime. It was only after the last person attending the conference died that the brethren were forced to come up with the explanation that the prophecy was conditional.

Prediction #7: Earth to be depopulated soon

Mrs. White continued her unbroken string of failed predictions in 1864 when she wrote:

"The human family was presented before me, enfeebled. Every generation has been growing weaker, and disease of every form visits the human race.... Satan's power upon the human family increases. If the Lord should not soon come and destroy his power, the earth would soon be depopulated." Testimony #8, p.94, in Spiritual Gifts III-IV

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Again we find the word "soon". In 1864 she said the earth would "soon" be depopulated. Did that happen soon after 1864? Well, by 1900 the earth's population had soared to 1.6 billion people. Today there are over 6 billion. By 2050 there may be 25 billion people on the planet. Because of better nutrition, advances in medicine, and improved living conditions, each generation is living longer, healthier, stronger, and taller. Diseases which once ravaged mankind have been eliminated or rendered harmless by powerful medications. Sadly, all that Mrs. White could foresee in the future was darkness, disease, and death. Had she truly had divine foresight she would never have made this statement.

Prediction #8: Slavery to Revive in the South

Here is another infamous prediction made by Mrs. White:

"Slavery will again be revived in the Southern States; for the spirit of slavery still lives. Therefore it will not do for those who labour among the coloured people to preach the truth as boldly and openly as they would be free to do in other places. Even Christ clothed His lessons in figures and parables to avoid the opposition of the Pharisees." (Spalding & Magan Collection, page 21 and 2 MR #153, page 300)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Was slavery ever revived "in the Southern United States"? Of course not! Since the Civil War ended it has been a federal crime to engage in slavery. Since the end of the Civil War there have been a few criminal operations that engaged in slave-labor, but when they are discovered by authorities, they are shut down and the owners are jailed. Slavery was permanently abolished and it will never be revived again in the United States. Any person can choose to live and work any place they want to. Thanks be to God, slavery is dead and gone. This is another prophetic debacle. More on this subject-->

Prediction #9: Slave Masters to Suffer Seven Last Plagues

Here Mrs. White predicts that slave masters will experience the seven last plagues described in the book of Revelation: "I saw that the slave master will have to answer for the soul of his slave whom he has kept in ignorance...the master must endure the seven last plagues and then come up in the second resurrection and suffer the second, most awful death." (Early Writings, p. 276)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

This "prophecy" was given in the context of the slavery then existing in the United States. We have calculated that the oldest slave masters in the United States died in the early 1900s, nearly 100 years ago!

Prediction #10: Sick man to recover

In 1873, the editor of the Swedish edition of Advent Herald, Mr. C. Carlstedt, had become seriously ill with Typhoid fever. Mrs. White and others were called to his bedside to pray for Carlstedt. On their way home from the prayer meeting, Mrs. White remarked that the Lord was...

"present with his restoring power, to raise Carlstedt, whose sickness was not unto death, but to the glory of the Son of God." (Charles Lee, Three Important Questions for Seventh-Day Adventists to Consider)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Charles Lee, who at that time was a Seventh-day Adventist minister, was at the prayer meeting and was a witness to Mrs. White's prediction. Sadly, Mrs. White was dead wrong. Carlstedt was dead within one week of her statement. A horrific failed prediction.

Prediction #11: Rappings will increase

Mrs. White claimed she saw in vision from God the rappings of the Fox Sisters and others would increase:

"I saw that soon it would be considered blasphemy to speak against the rapping, and that it would spread more and more, that Satan's power would increase and some of his devoted followers would have power to work miracles and even to bring down fire from heaven in the sight of men." Early Writings, p. 59.

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

This prophecy was a marked failure. Even though the Spiritualism movement increased in popularity for a short period during the mid-1800s, it eventually died down. The movement was already on the decline prior to the Fox sisters' admission in 1888 that the rapping was faked, and after their deaths in the 1890s it continued to decline. Today, if you were to ask almost anyone about "rapping" they would think you were talking about a form of music, not a form of communicating with the dead. Rapping has completely vanished from the public awareness. We have seen no evidence it was ever considered "blasphemy to speak against the rapping." The entire Spiritualist movement fizzled out in the 1920s after popular magician Harry Houdini exposed numerous popular mediums as fakes and frauds. For a more detailed discussion of Spiritualism, the Fox Sisters, and the modern New Age movement, Did any of her predictions come true?

Mrs. White made some vague predictions about crime worsening and cities becoming more polluted. These types of predictions are difficult to judge, because many other people of her day were saying the same thing. The problem is that if we considered everyone who made such generalized predictions to be prophets, then we would literally have thousands of prophets. General predictions about worsening crime and pollution simply do not substantiate a prophet's claims. A prophet must be measured on specific predictions and specific results.

What about the predictions in the Great Controversy?

Some have suggested that the predictions written out in the Great Controversy, such as the United States in prophecy and enforced Sunday observance, appear to be coming to pass, and this proves Mrs. White to be a prophet. The truth is that the United States is moving away from a National Sunday Law. What about the predictions of the papacy uniting with Apostate Protestantism? Mrs. White warned of this, but many other non-Adventist Christians were sounding the same alarm during that time period. Does that mean these other people are prophets also?

What about the San Francisco Earthquake?

Perhaps the closest Mrs. White got to making an accurate prediction of the future was her 1903 statement regarding the destruction of San Francisco:

"San Francisco and Oakland are becoming as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Lord will visit them. Not far hence they will suffer under His judgments."--Ms 30, 1903.

Although she never specified what the "judgment" would be, she was 50% correct on this prediction, because San Francisco was hit by an earthquake three years later, in 1906. However, Oakland was not seriously damaged. Oddly enough, even though she lived in Northern California, Mrs. White never made any attempt to personally go and warn the residents of San Francisco of the impending earthquake. Test #1 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

We have cited eleven instances when her predictions failed. Remember, it only takes one failure to disqualify a prophet. Even if we were generous and gave Mrs. White credit for predicting the San Francisco earthquake--although she never specifically said it would be an "earthquake" and the warning was only penned in a manuscript and not published until after the event--she still would have only made one out of twelve predictions correct. That is less than 10%. That would put her about equal with the psychics of today, who happen to get lucky about so often. However, she is far from matching the Biblical prophets, who were correct 100% of the time. In Bible times, you had to be correct 100% of the time, or else you risked losing your life. Given that, it is unlikely Mrs. White would have dared to proclaim herself the "spirit of prophecy" back in Bible times.

TEST #2: Cannot have falsehoods in their visions

Behold, I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD. Jer. 23:32

There are some instances in the life of Ellen White where she prophesied falsehoods that caused her "people to err." The most significant of these were the shut door visions. Falsehood #1: Door of Salvation is Shut

When Christ failed to return in 1844 there was great confusion among the followers of William Miller. Most of the Millerites returned to their churches, but others were too ashamed to admit their error or felt too humiliated to return. It was among these people that the "shut door" teaching developed. The teaching is based upon the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25. These people firmly believed that they had given the "midnight cry" (Matt. 25:6) and that Jesus, the Bridegroom, came to the "marriage supper" on October 22, 1844:

And while they [foolish virgins] went to buy, the Bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with Him to the marriage; and the door was shut. (Matt. 25:10)

They taught that on October 22, 1844, Christ got up and moved from the Holy Place into the Most Holy Place. In so doing, Christ shut the door of salvation to all except those Advent believers who had joined Miller's 1844 movement. They believed that Jesus was "shut in" with His special people, preparing them to receive His kingdom. They believed that since October 22, 1844, Christ was ministering only to the "little flock" or "Israel" (the Advent believers). They taught that Christ was testing His children on certain points of truth, such as the Sabbath, and that their work for the salvation of others was finished.

Ellen White had visions supporting this "shut door" doctrine, and James White's paper-- Present Truth--trumpeted the shut door teaching up until late 1850. Most Adventists, including William Miller and most of the leaders in the Millerite movement, rejected the doctrine. It was accepted by only a small number of followers of Joseph Bates and the Whites. In early 1850 the "shut door" began to slip open. Those who were Christians in 1844, but had not had opportunity to hear Miller's time-setting message were allowed to enter the church. Near the end of 1850 the "shut door" opened a little further. The Adventists were shocked when a man who was a non-believer in 1844 accepted the Adventist message in August, 1850, and started attending their meetings. It was their first conversion of an unconverted man since 1844!

By 1851 the teaching had fallen out of favour and so the Whites modified their teaching on the "shut door." James White abandoned the Present Truth magazine and started a new magazine, the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald. He reprinted his wife's visions in 1851, but was careful to remove those parts referencing the erroneous "shut door" doctrine. The doctrine disappeared from the writings of the leaders and most of the new converts into the church never heard of it nor had any idea that their prophet had seen a "shut door" of salvation in her visions.

In the period of 1844-1850, a time when Mrs. White was receiving frequent public visions, she claimed on a number of occasions to have seen in vision the door of salvation shut and that Adventists no longer needed to work for the salvation of the world. Otis Nichols, a fervent believer in Ellen White, wrote thus to William Miller: "Her message was...that our work was done for the nominal church and the world, and what remained to be done was for the household of faith." --DF 105, Otis Nichols to William Miller, April 20, 1846.

Adventist minister Isaac Welcome testifies:

"I was often in meeting with Ellen G. Harmon and James White in 1844 and '45. I several times caught her while falling to the floor, --at times when she swooned away for a vision. I have heard her relate her visions of these dates. Several were published on sheets, to the effect that all were lost who did not endorse the '44 move, that Christ had left the throne of mercy, and all were sealed that ever would be, and no others could repent." (An Examination of Mrs. Ellen White's Visions, Miles Grant, Boston: Published by the Advent Christian Publication Society, 1877)

Although she later denied having visions supporting a shut door of salvation, there is ample evidence from eyewitnesses and from her own pen that she taught a shut door on the basis of her visions. In one of her earliest visions she describes how impossible it is for the rejected world to get onto the path leading to heaven:

"Others rashly denied the light behind them, and said that it was not God that had led them out so far. The light behind them went out leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and got their eyes off the mark and lost sight of Jesus, and fell off the path down in the dark and wicked world below. It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected." (A Word to the Little Flock, 1847)

In 1849 she wrote about the condition of those in other chuches:

"My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners as used to be. I looked, but could not see it; for the time for their salvation is past." (Present Truth, August, 1849)

To illustrate how Mrs. White's visions about the "shut door" of salvation led people to err, consider her vision in Exeter, Maine. Here is a specific example of how Ellen White saw a falsehood in vision (the shut door of salvation), and then related that vision to other people who then accepted the false teaching:

"While in Exeter, Maine, in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others, many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand. There was one sister there that was called very spiritual. She had travelled and been a powerful preacher the most of the time for twenty years. She had been truly a mother in Israel. But a division had risen in the band on the shut door. She had great sympathy, and could not believe the door was shut. (I had known nothing of their differences.) Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad. At length my soul seemed to be in an agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the Holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom. They were all deeply interested in the view. They all said it was entirely new to them. The Lord worked in mighty power setting the truth home to their hearts. ... When I came out of vision, my ears were saluted with Sister Durben's singing and shouting with a loud voice. Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door." Manuscript Releases Vol. 5, p. 97

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Notice this carefully. Prior to the vision, Sister Durben "could not believe" the door of salvation was shut. Mrs. White says Sister Durben had "great sympathy". Sympathy for whom? For those upon whom the door of salvation had been shut! She could not believe that God would abandon these people to eternal death. After the vision, Sister Durben accepted the shut door. Therefore, the vision of Ellen White convinced Sister Durben to accept and believe a falsehood. (To learn more about the Falsehood #2: Sealing Time Visions

Mrs. White's visions of the "sealing time" provide unequivocal evidence that she failed the tests of a prophet. To begin, let us review Ellen White's teaching regarding the sealing time, as written in her landmark book, The Great Controversy:

"When the final test shall be brought to bear upon men, then the line of distinction will be drawn between those who serve God and those who serve Him not. While the observance of the false Sabbath in compliance with the law of the state, contrary to the fourth commandment, will be an avowal of allegiance to a power that is in opposition to God, the keeping of the true Sabbath, in obedience to God's law, is an evidence of loyalty to the Creator. While one class, by accepting the sign of submission to earthly powers, receive the mark of the beast, the other choosing the token of allegiance to divine authority, receive the seal of God." (Great Controversy, p. 605)

Note the following: 1. The "final test" involves choosing Sabbath observance over a false Sabbath enforced by the government 2. The "final test" was yet future when Great Controversy was published in 1911. Mrs. White writes in the future tense saying "When the final test shall be brought..." 3. Those "sealed" must "prove" their allegiance to God by choosing to follow God's laws rather than the laws of the state 4. The "seal of God" is given to those who pass the "final test" by choosing God's Sabbath over the state-enforced Sabbath 5. In order to receive the "seal of God" one must pass the "final test". Therefore, the sealing could not have begun prior to 1911, because the "final test" had not yet come by 1911

In Great Controversy Mrs. White outlines the specific characteristics of the 144,000 as thus:

"None but the hundred and forty-four thousand can learn that song; for it is the song of their experience--an experience such as no other company have ever had. "These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth." These, having been [1] translated from the earth, from among the living, are counted as "the first fruits unto God and to the Lamb." Revelation 15:2, 3; 14:1-5. [2] "These are they which came out of great tribulation;" they have passed through the time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation; [3] they have endured the anguish of the time of Jacob's trouble; [4] they have stood without an intercessor through the final outpouring of God's judgments. ... -[5] They have seen the earth wasted with famine and pestilence, the sun having power to scorch men with great heat, and they themselves have endured suffering, hunger, and thirst." (Ibid. p. 649)

From the above it is obvious that the 144,000-those who have received the Seal of God-are identified by the following: 1. Were alive and translated at Jesus' return 2. Went through the great time of trouble 3. Went through "Jacob's time of trouble" 4. Stood without an intercessor 5. Lived through the final judgments of God upon the earth

Obviously no one living in the 1800s had gone through any of these experiences, and thus it is clear that no one in the 1800s was either sealed or a part of the 144,000.

It is obvious the prophetess believed in 1911 that the sealing time was yet future. Yet, her "visions" from 62 years earlier paint a far different picture. In the 1840s she taught the sealing time was is in full progress.

"Satan is now using every device in this sealing time, to keep the minds of God's people from the present, sealing truth; and to cause them to waver. I saw a covering that God was drawing over his people, to protect them in the time of trouble; and every soul that was decided on the truth, and was pure in heart, was to be covered with the covering of Almighty God." (Present Truth, August 1, 1849)

"I saw that Satan was at work in these ways to distract, deceive, and draw away God's people, just now in this sealing time." (Ibid.)

On January 31, 1849, the Whites published a pamphlet entitled "To Those who are Receiving the Seal of the Living God." In that pamphlet Mrs. White wrote:

"The sealing time is very short, and soon will be over. Now is the time to make our calling and election sure, while the four angels are holding the four winds."

Mrs. White even went so far as to identify some of those who had received the seal of God during the sealing time...

"I saw that she [Mrs. Hastings, who had just died] was sealed and would come up at the voice of God and stand upon the earth, and would be with the 144,000. I saw we need not mourn for her; she would rest in the time of trouble." (Letter 10, 1850, 2SM 263)

Later, she wrote that some of the elderly men in the church had the "seal of God" upon them:

"There are living upon our earth men who have passed the age of fourscore and ten. The natural results of old age are seen in their feebleness. But they believe God, and God loves them. The seal of God is upon them, and they will be among the number of whom the Lord has said, 'Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord.'" (SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 982)

In his book, A Seal of the Living God, published in 1849, Joseph Bates quotes a vision that Ellen White had of the sealing time. In this vision Mrs. White claims that "not all" of the saints have been sealed yet, implying that the sealing was in progress and some had already been sealed:

"The angels are holding the winds. It is God that restrains the powers. The angels have not let go, for the saints are not all sealed. The time of trouble has commenced. It has begun. The reason why the four winds are not let go, is because the saints are not all sealed. It [the trouble] is on the increase more and more; that trouble will never end until the earth is rid of the wicked. Why, they [the winds] are just ready to blow. There is a check put on because the saints are not all sealed." (A Seal of the Living God, pp. 25,26)

There is no doubt Mrs. White taught from her visions the sealing was in progress in 1849. And yet, in 1911, she describes the sealing as a future event, an activity that takes place at the time of the "final test." While most Adventists were probably unaware of Mrs. White's earlier statements, there were apparently some who noted the discrepancy, because Mrs. White later complained of the queries she was receiving on the subject:

"Letters will come asking questions in regard to the sealing of the people of God, who will be sealed, how many, and other prying questions. I think we must tell them to read and speak of the things that are plainly revealed. We have encouragement in the Word that if we walk humbly with God, we shall receive instruction. But prying curiosity is not to be encouraged." (S.D.A. Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 918)

Perhaps one of those "prying questions" Mrs. White was at a loss to explain was how the sealing started in 1849, apparently stopped, and was now yet future. Mrs. White's response, in effect, was to say, "Stop asking me questions about the sealing!"

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Mrs. White's early visions indicated the sealing had begun, which was a falsehood because the sealing had not begun. Later in life, in the Great Controversy Mrs. White indicates the sealing was yet future, and would be triggered by a government-enforced Sunday law. Many Adventists are not aware of the false sealing teaching because, according to Adventist historian Isaac Wellcome, who was baptized by James White in 1845, Elder White suppressed the early visions:

"Eld. White had published several of Ellen's visions on small sheets for general distribution; but as time passed on the theology of her later visions was materially different from former ones, and they were suppressed... but these visions as published now are greatly in conflict with those which acquaintances and witnesses in New England were accustomed to hear from her lips, after recovering from her clairvoyant state, or to read on sheets as published at first, by Eld. White." (History of the Second Advent Message, p. 407)

Falsehood #3: Tall people living on Jupiter!

In 1846 Mrs. White had a "vision" of the solar system. Mrs. Truesdail, a dedicated and sincere Adventist, was present during the vision. She describes how Mrs. White saw a "tall, majestic people" living on either Jupiter or Saturn:

"Sister White was in very feeble health, and while prayers were offered in her behalf, the Spirit of God rested upon us. We soon noticed that she was insensible to earthly things. This was her first view of the planetary world. After counting aloud the moons of Jupiter, and soon after those of Saturn, she gave a beautiful description of the rings of the latter. She then said, 'The inhabitants are a tall, majestic people, so unlike the inhabitants of earth. Sin has never entered here.'" (Taken from Mrs. Truesdail's letter, Jan 27, 1891)

Pass or Fail? FAILURE!

Could it be true? Are there tall, majestic people living on Jupiter and/or Saturn? This may have seemed plausible in 1846, but with all we know about these planets today, we know it is impossible. Conditions on both planets are extremely inhospitable to life as we know it:

1. These planets have no solid surface like the earth. The surfaces consist entirely of a sea of liquid hydrogen, hundreds of miles deep. 2. The atmospheric pressure is millions of times greater than the earth's. The pressure is enough to crush the strongest metals. 3. Numerous space probes have examined these planets using advanced technology and have not detected any sign of life whatsoever. No plants. No animals. No tall people. Nothing but hydrogen, helium and other gases.

To Mrs. White's credit, her false vision about tall people living on Jupiter probably did no harm to the church. However, it helps to illustrate the fact that God was not the source of her "visions". Falsehood #4: Satan has a body!

Mrs. White had a vision in which she claimed to have seen the body of Satan. The vision was published in Spiritual Gifts and the 1888 version of Great Controversy, but was later removed and no longer appears in the Great Controversy sold by the SDA Church today. Perhaps the publishers believed the statement would cause a great controversy because it contradicts the Bible teaching on the nature of Satan. Here is what Mrs. White saw in vision:

"I was then shown Satan as he was, a happy, exalted angel. Then I was shown him as he now is. He still bears a kingly form. His features are still noble, for he is an angel fallen. But the expression of his countenance is full of anxiety, care, unhappiness, malice, hate, mischief, deceit, and every evil. That brow which was once so noble, I particularly noticed. His forehead commenced from his eyes to recede backward. I saw that he had demeaned himself so long, that every good quality was debased, and every evil trait was developed. His eyes were cunning, sly, and showed great penetration. His frame was large, but the flesh hung loosely about his hands and face. As I beheld him, his chin was resting upon his left hand. He appeared to be in deep thought. A smile was upon his countenance, which made me tremble, it was so full of evil, and Satanic slyness." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 27)

Ellen White states that Satan is a fallen "angel". She then goes on to describe a number of physical characteristics: 1. Receding forehead 2. Penetrating eyes 3. Large frame 4. Loose flesh on the hands and face

Pass or Fail? FAILURE! The Bible teaches that angelic beings are not composed of flesh and blood as we are:

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Eph. 6:12)

The Bible consistently refers to evil beings as beings "spirits":

...he cast out the spirits with [his] word... (Matt. 8:16) ...he gave them power [against] unclean spirits, to cast them out... (Matt. 10:1) ...the evil spirits went out of them... (Acts 19:12) ...in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits... (1 Tim. 4:1) ...For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles... (Rev. 16:4)

Satan, the leader of the fallen angels, is described in the Bible as an "angel":

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. (2 Cor. 11:14)

In Hebrews we find that angelic beings are described as "spirits":

And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits... Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? (Heb. 1:7,14)

These verses show the Bible teaches that angelic beings are "spirits", and that spirit beings, do not have a body composed of "flesh and blood". This "vision" directly contradicts the Bible and illustrates that her visions did not originate with God. Test #2 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

We have cited four incidents where Mrs. White saw falsehoods in her visions and led her people astray. She taught a shut door of salvation from her visions. She claimed the sealing started in the 1840s when it had, in fact, not started at all. And, she taught there were tall people living on other planets in our solar system. She taught Satan had a physical body. More could be mentioned, but these are sufficient to prove that her visions did not come from God.

TEST #3: Cannot steal their writings from others

The Bible identifies false prophets as those who steal their writings from others:

I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. ... Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbour. Jer. 23:25,30

Much has been written on Mrs. White's extensive plagiarism of the writings of others. Prior to the publication of Walter Rea's The White Lie in 1983, Adventists maintained that 8% to 10% of Mrs. White's work was copied. The SDA church hired Adventist scholar Dr. Fred Veltman to examine the Desire of Ages and he found 30% or more, depending upon the chapter examined. After great expense and almost eight years of research, Veltman confirmed what other studies showed, that depending upon the material examined, the copy work could be as much as 90%.1 Dr. Veltman noted:

"Implicitly or explicitly, Ellen White and others speaking on her behalf did not admit to and even denied literary dependency on her part...

"I must admit at the start that in my judgment this is the most serious problem to be faced in connection with Ellen White's literary dependency. It strikes at the heart of her honesty, her integrity, and therefore her trustworthiness." (Ministry, Dec. 1990, p. 11,14)

Dr. Don McAdams, an SDA scholar, stated in the 1980 Glendale meeting:

"If every paragraph in the book Great Controversy, written by Ellen White, was properly footnoted, then every paragraph would have to be footnoted."2

There evidence is so massive that we cannot put it all on this page. Below are links to various other pages which spell out the plagiarism in much greater detail:  The Testimonies were copied from Marsh, Wiley, Uriah Smith, Cole, Miller, Horace Mann, Melville, Harris, J.N. Andrews, and others  Warren Johns of the Ellen G. White Estate made the following statement: "Evidence for literary borrowing can be substantiated in virtually all nine volumes of the (1) Testimonies for the Church, in her (2) Review and Herald and Signs of the Times articles, and in (3) all of the books published during her lifetime. The only exception may be Early Writings. At this time I am not aware of any significant literary borrowing in that work, but it would not be surprising if it should come to light"  Patriarchs and Prophets copied from Edersheim's Bible History: Old Testament, vols. 14  Desire of Ages copied from 23 sources, including fiction  Steps to Christ written by Fannie Bolton.  The Great Controversy copied from others  Early Visions copied from William Foy  Health Reforms borrowed from others  Even the "I saw..." statements were copied!  Perhaps the most flagrant example of Mrs. White's plagiarism is her book, Sketches From the Life of Paul, published in 1883. Much of the material in the book was taken directly from W. J. Conybeare and J. S. Howson's Life and Epistles of Saint Paul, written some 30 years earlier. The book was withdrawn from print and is no longer available from the church. Test #3 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

The evidence is overwhelming that she stole her "inspired writings" from her "neighbors." This indicates she failed the third test of a prophet. To examine all the evidence of plagiarism in more detail,

TEST #4: Cannot contradict the Word of God

To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isa. 8:20 Mrs. White made many strong endorsements of the Bible throughout her prophetic career. She frequently encouraged her followers to be read the Bible, study it, and memorize Scripture. Given this, many Adventists are surprised to discover that Mrs. White contradicted the Bible a number of times in her writings.

There are several examples that are too lengthy to be included in this web page, but we list them here for you to research:

1. Was the 1844 Movement a fulfillment of the first and second angels' messages? 2. The Investigative Judgment

There is insufficient room on this page to detail all of Mrs. White's other contradictions of Scripture, but here is a small sampling:

1. Did Satan Deceive Adam?

Ellen White Holy Bible

Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a And Adam was not the one similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, deceived; it was the woman who that he would not die if he transgressed the law. was deceived and became a sinner. 1 Evangelism, p. 598. Timothy 2:14

NOTE: 1 Tim. 2:14 says Adam was NOT deceived (Greek apato: To cheat/beguile/deceive) whereas Eve was "apato" (cheated/beguiled/deceived). 2nd Corinthians 11:3 says "the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty (Greek panourgia: craftiness/cunning)". In 1 Tim. 2:14 Paul contrasts Eve, who had the wool pulled over her eyes, with Adam who was NOT deceived or beguiled. This is an obvious comparison-contrast. Paul is juxtaposing Eve being tricked with the fact that Adam was not tricked, was not deceived, and was not fooled by the serpent.

2. Was Israel destroyed by Gluttony?

Ellen White Holy Bible God granted their desire, giving them But while the meat was still between their teeth flesh, and leaving them to eat till their and before it could be consumed, the anger of the gluttony produced a plague. Counsels Lord burned against the people, and he struck them on Diet and Foods, p. 148 with a severe plague. Numbers 11:33

NOTE: The plague fell before the people could even eat the food. The people were punished for coveting, not gluttony. Coveting is a craving for something forbidden by God. Gluttony is habitual over-eating. Coveting and gluttony are two very different sins. Gluttony is never mentioned in Numbers 11:33-34. The Bible is clear the people died for the sin of craving. They never had a chance to be gluttons because they died while the food was still in their mouth, as the New King James Version says, "before it was chewed."

The Israelites had violated the 10th commandment which forbids man from coveting that which is unlawful for him to have. Because craving or coveting is forbidden by God's covenant with Israel, God could execute capital punishment upon the lawbreakers. On the contrary, gluttony is not explicitly forbidden in God's covenant with Israel. So why would God punish people with death for a sin which was not forbidden in His covenant with Israel? God punishes people according to the degree of their sin. If the Israelites' sin was a violation of God's covenant with Israel (the 10 commandments) then God was justified in delivering the appropriate punishment for that violation--death in this case. However, gluttony was not a violation of the 10 Commandments, and nowhere in the Bible do we find over-eating being punished by death.

3. Can we be certain of our salvation?

Ellen White Holy Bible

Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere These things have I written unto you that their conversion, should never be taught to say believe on the name of the Son of God: or feel that they are saved. Christ's Object that ye may know that ye have eternal Lessons, p. 155 life... 1 John 5:13

NOTE: The reason the apostle John wrote his letter was to assure the believers that they had obtained eternal life. In Ephesians 2:8 the New King James Version Bible says, "For by grace you HAVE BEEN saved..." The Greek verb for "have been" is este which is in the perfect tense. The perfect tense conveys a completed action.

4. A sin to be sick?

Ellen White Holy Bible

So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, It is a sin to be sick; for all sickness and smote Job [a "perfect and upright man" (Job is the result of transgression. Health 2:3)] with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his Reformer, Aug. 1, 1866 crown. Job 2:7

NOTE: How could all sickness be the result of transgression? God said that Job was "a perfect and an upright man." (Job 2:3) Paul had a "thorn" in his body that was making him weak (see 2 Cor. 12:7-10). Was it a sin for Paul to have this condition in his body? It seems odd for Mrs. White to have made this statement, because she was often sick herself. Her husband and two of her children died of sickness. Are we to believe their sins led to their deaths?

5. Christians to make trespass offerings?

Source: Cultic Doctrine, p. 371 Ellen White Holy Bible Bring in your trespass-offerings, your thank- He, having offered one sacrifice for all offerings, and your freewill-offerings; humble your time... Now where there is forgiveness hearts before the Lord, and He will be found ever of these things, there is no longer any ready to receive and pardon. Review and Herald, offering for sin. Heb. 10:12,18 July 8, 1880

NOTE: This may have been good for SDA church finances, but under the New Covenant, Jesus paid the price for sin for all people for all time.

6. Who spoke to Cain?

Source: www.truthorfables.com Ellen White Holy Bible

"Then the Lord said to Cain, 'Why are you angry? "Through an angel messenger the Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right divine warning was conveyed: 'If thou will you not be accepted?' ... So Cain went out doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?'" from the Lord's presence" (Genesis 4:6, 7, 10, 13, (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 74). 15, 16).

7. Is Jesus the Almighty God?

Source: www.truthorfables.com Ellen White Holy Bible

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and "The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord the government will be on his shoulders. And he God Almighty" (Letter 32, 1899, quoted will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (Isaiah Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129). 9:6).

8. Does God hate wicked children?

Ellen White Holy Bible "God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love "But God commendeth his those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little love toward us, in that, children who try to do right, and he has promised that they while we were yet sinners, shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not Christ died for us." (Rom. love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and 5:8) fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if "Love your enemies" (Luke you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42, 61, 62) 6:27).

NOTE: Ellen White was supposedly in constant communication with heaven through dreams, visions, and angelic visits. How could someone with a direct line to heaven be so terribly wrong about the character of God? Mrs. White said God does not love wicked children. This is in direct opposition to the teaching of Christ.

"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing..." (1 Tim. 6:3,4)

Test #4 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

While it is true that Mrs. White's writings agree with the Bible in the majority of instances, we have shown that she does, at times, contradict the Bible. Should we overlook the fact that she contradicts the Bible in some instances because the majority of her writings agree with the Bible? Is it therefore okay to mix truth with a small amount of error? Not only do some of Mrs. White's teachings contradict the Bible, she adds to the Bible with countless restrictions and rules that are found nowhere in Scripture. Therefore, we believe the evidence shows that she failed this test of a prophet. To examine further evidence,

TEST #5: Must bear good fruit

Beware of false prophets... Ye shall know them by their fruits. Matt. 7:15,16

This is perhaps the most subjective of the Biblical tests. One person may perceive a fruit to be "good" while another may not. One person may love sour apples, while another prefers sweet apples. If they both pick an apple from the same tree, one may love it while the other may hate it. There is a great controversy regarding the fruits of Mrs. White's ministry.

Good Fruits: On the positive side, many people have claimed to have been blessed by the books published under the name of Ellen White. There are many beautiful and inspiring statements in her writings (although some of those inspiring statements were actually written by other authors). Many people, including the editor of this web site, have found the books Steps to Christ and Desire of Ages to be particularly inspiring. Some Adventists claim to have been saved by reading her writings. Some Adventists claim that Ellen White's testimonies helped them overcome sin, lead a better life, improve their health, or become a better person. Millions of Ellen White's books have been published and distributed throughout the world. There can be no doubt that Ellen White's writings have touched untold thousands of lives in a positive way. These are good fruits and they are to be applauded.

Mixed Fruits: Mrs. White was a guiding force for the Seventh-day Adventist Church during its formative years. Opponents of Ellen White point to the fact that Ellen White led the church astray on several key doctrines. In her early years she put her prophetic stamp of approval on some very questionable doctrines, such as the Investigative Judgment and the Shut Door. Proponents of Ellen White point out that she introduced health reform to the church which has apparently benefited some church members, although there is not complete consensus on this point. Mrs. White helped guide the church away from an Aryan view of Christ toward a more orthodox, Trinitarian view of the God head. When A.T. Jones and E.J. Waggoner began preaching the "1888 message" of righteousness by faith, Mrs. White, to her credit, was fully behind the proclamation of the message.

Bad Fruits: There are a number of statements, particularly in the Testimonies, where Mrs. White reveals a harsh, critical, legalistic, judgmental nature. This is especially true of her opponents, whom she frequently characterized as being under the influence of satanic agencies. Unfortunately, some Adventists have claimed that they acquired the same harsh, critical, judgmental and legalistic spirit after reading her writings. Some say her writings have held the church back from advancing into new truth. They say her writings have locked the church into prophetic interpretations that no longer make sense in today's world. Some comment that her multitude of rules and regulations take much of the fun and enjoyment out of life, turning it into a legalistic tedium. Some say her emphasis on character perfection results in church members feeling inadequate and burdened with a load of guilt.

Test #5 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

There is no doubt that Mrs. White's ministry has produced some good fruit. Not even the fiercest critic can deny this. There is also little doubt her ministry has produced some bad fruit. Not even the most loyal follower can deny it. Some say that the good outweighs the bad. Others say there is more bad than good. In all fairness to Ellen White, we cannot say she failed this test. However, because of the negative fruits of her ministry noted above, we also cannot say definitively that she passed this test. This one is left as a question mark for the reader to decide. Each person will have to use their God-given judgment and their own personal experience as guides to decide for themselves whether or not Mrs. White's fruits have been good or bad.

TEST #6: Prophets Must Encourage and Build Up Others

He who prophesies speaks to men for their up building and encouragement and consolation. 1 Cor. 14:3 RSV

Few Seventh-day Adventists have struggled to read through the multitude of testimonies written by Ellen White. They are told that Mrs. White's testimonies were encouraging to her followers, and they never bother to read them for themselves to find out if this is true. There certainly are some instances where Mrs. White built up, encouraged, and consoled others. However, a serious examination of her testimonies reveals that she frequently tore down, discouraged, and grieved others. As we examine some examples, keep in mind that these are not isolated incidents. The general tone of her testimonies was negative, fault-finding, accusatory, and critical. In the remainder of this section we will examine how Ellen White tore down and discouraged her enemies, her church members, her family, her co-workers, and national leaders.

Treatment of Her Enemies

Mrs. White saved her most brutal barbs for her enemies. Mrs. White would tolerate different views on some subjects, but one thing she would absolutely not tolerate under any circumstances was someone who questioned her prophetic gift. According to her former friend, Israel Dammon, those who "took a stand against the visions, she saw them 'doomed, damned, and lost for ever, without hope.'" (An Examination of Mrs. White's Visions, 1877) Here is but a tiny sample of the derogatory statements she made of her opponents:

 D.M. Canright: "Satan's special agent to work the ruin of soul." (Letter 1, 1880)  A.T. Jones: "You have been weighed in the balance and found wanting." (Kress Collection, p. 33)  A.F. Ballenger: "Elder Ballenger is led by satanic agencies and spiritualistic, invisible leaders." (Manuscript Release #760, p. 4)  Dr. Kellogg: "prompted by Satan if a man ever was." (Letter 2, 1881)  Those who rejected William Miller: "the time for their salvation is past." (Present Truth, Aug. 1, 1849)  Pastors who rejected Miller's 1844 date: "They did not love Jesus near. They knew that their unchristian lives would not stand the test." (Early Writings, p. 233)  Adventists who rejected the shut door: "They shall die the death." (Manuscript 11, 1850)

It quickly becomes apparent that if one disagreed with the prophet, or worse yet, if one dared to question her prophetic calling, Ellen White would vehemently and unmercifully assassinate their character.

Treatment of Her Followers

Mrs. White did not tolerate "light" coming to the church through any other means besides herself. In the early days of the church, before health reform was promoted, many members, including the Whites, ate pork. Sister Curtis was interested in ways to improve health, and when she discovered the dangers of eating pork, she reported her findings to Mrs. White. She was quickly silenced by a stinging "testimony" from Mrs. White:

"If God requires His people to abstain from swine's flesh, He will convict them on the matter. He is just as willing to show His honest children their duty, as to show their duty to individuals upon whom He has not laid the burden of His work. If it is the duty of the church to abstain from swine's flesh, God will discover it to more than two or three. He will teach His church their duty." (Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 206)

H.E. Carver, who was close friends with the Curtis family, relates the event:

"Sister Curtis was a very conscientious woman, and becoming satisfied (long before any movement was made in that direction by Eld. and Mrs. White) that pork-eating was injurious, she tried to banish it from the table. This produced trouble. Sister C. was a sincere believer in Mrs. White's divine inspiration, and from the extract given above, it appears that she must have written to her for instructions, which she received as above; and that professedly through vision." (Mrs. E.G. White's Claims to Divine Inspiration Examined, 2nd edition, 1877)

One would think that Ellen White would be appreciative that Sister Curtis discovered the dangers of eating pork. Many years later, Mrs. White adopted the very same reforms. However, since the "light" did not come through her, we find Mrs. White discouraging Sister Curtis from promoting this health reform.

Treatment of Church Mrs. White was apparently fond of standing up in church and rebuking the sins of the audience members from the pulpit. More than one Adventist Church felt the wrath of Mrs. White. Dr. Ronald Graybill, former associate director of the White Estate, relates one such incident:

"James [White] defended the style as well as the content of his wife's messages by putting her sharp rebukes in the best possible light. She called the congregation in Wright, Michigan, together one afternoon in 1867 to hear her read 51 pages of 'testimony' she had written concerning various church members. 'Those reproved,' James reported, 'were, of course, surprised to hear their condition described, and were thrown in great trial.'" (Power of Prophecy, p. 9)

Imagine the utter humiliation of having the prophet parade your "sins" in front of the entire church! Worse yet, those "sins" may or may not have been accurate, depending upon from whom the prophet obtained her information!3

Here is one example of how Mrs. White derided an ill church member in one of her "testimonies":

"I was shown...nearly all your thoughts are now upon yourself...In your present state of mind you are not fit to marry. There is no one that would wish you, in your present helpless, useless condition. If one should fancy he loved you; he would be worthless; for no sensible man could think for a moment of placing his affections upon so useless an object... At the present time your condition is not acceptable in the sight of God..." (Testimonies, Vol. 2, pp. 324,325)

Treatment of Children

Dr. Graybill helps us understand how Ellen White's son Edson was viewed by her and James:

"Edson often found himself left in the care of one family and then another. When his parents were with him, they interpreted his frequent illnesses as a part of Satan's attack on the fledgling movement and his healings as evidence of God's endorsement of their public efforts. Thus even in his sufferings he was only an adjunct to their careers." (Ibid., p. 62)

"A nomadic childhood was not Edson's only burden. He also chafed under the constant unfavourable comparisons which his parents made between him and his brother Willie. From the time Willie was born, Edson received constant rebuke and condemnation, while his little brother got constant praise and encouragement. Willie was a 'good natured' baby who seldom cried; Edson had 'more life and roughery.'" (Ibid., p. 63)

"Edson seems to have been caught in a vicious cycle. Because he often failed, he was expected to fail, and probably because he was expected to, he failed again and again. Doubtless he was plagued by guilt as well; for the advice and rebuke he received was overlaid with a heavy sense of sinfulness and neglected 'duty.' Ellen often reminded him that his life was 'a mistake,' 'worse than useless' and 'a failure'." (Ibid., p. 66, citing letter 6, 1869, letter 14, 1869, letter 2a, 1872) Sister White's treatment of Edson is consistent with her false teaching that God does not love the disobedient (see test #4 above).

Treatment of Co-workers

To illustrate how Ellen White treated her fellow workers, we will examine the case of Adventist pioneer J.N. Andrews. In 1860 Mrs. White, in a 24-page letter to Andrews and his wife, complains about him refusing to accept her "testimonies":

"I saw that Bro. John had suffered in his mind extremely. ... Bro. John has been driven to almost insanity. ... I saw that his family do not stand clear. ... They will not stand in the light until they wipe out the past by confessing their wrong course in opposing the testimonies given them of God. ...He unsettled the mind of Henry Nichols in regard to the visions, and Henry has never recovered. ... The visions are either of God or the Devil. There is no half way position to be taken in the matter." (1860 letter "To Brother J. N. Andrews And Sister H. N. Smith")

Despite his doubts regarding Mrs. White's inspiration, Andrews continued to serve the church. Andrews suffered a difficult life. In 1872 his wife Angeline died. In 1874 he sailed to Europe as a missionary with his two children. In 1878 Andrews returned to bury both his daughter, Mary, and his brother. Andrews was in poor health and did not return to Europe until the following year. Joseph Smoot, in the spring 1984 issue of Adventist Heritage, reports that in 1883 Mrs. White wrote a letter to B.L. Whitney sharply criticizing Andrews:

"She said Andrews had 'given the impression of suffering when he has endured no more than ordinary laborers in their first experience in this work.' She regarded Andrews as having 'a diseased mind.' Mrs. White thought that John Andrews would die and said she 'could not pray for his life, for I consider he has held and is still holding [up] the work in Switzerland.' ... She concluded that she did not want Andrews 'injured, neither do I want the cause of God to bear the the hindrance and the mold of his diseased imagination.'" (Smoot op. cit. Adventist Currents, vol. 1, #6, p. 7)

It is astonishing that Mrs. White could not even bring herself to pray for Andrews, a pioneering missionary and author who had devoted his entire life to the work of the SDA Church! Contrast this with Stephen who prayed for his murderers while they were stoning him to death. Contrast this with Jesus who not only asked God to forgive those who were murdering him, but also said, "pray for them which despitefully use you." (Luke 6:28)

Mrs. White then wrote Andrews a letter that Smoot describes as "the most severe rebuke she had ever given to him."

"She said that 'if you go down into the grave, I do not want you should go down in deception.' ...she proceeded to enumerate his character defects. Feeling that the Andrews and Stevens families had been a bad mix from the beginning, she believed they had fostered his desire "to crave for sympathy, to love to be pitied, to be regarded as one suffering privations and as a martyr. She told him of his sin of dwelling on himself, of mourning for his wife and daughter as he had done... Dwelling at length on his rejection of her counsel regarding remarriage [he never did], she told him that he had not been a good father to his son, Charles." (Ibid., pp. 7,8) Smoot concludes "this letter must have broken Andrews' spirit and will to live." Andrews died a few months later on Oct. 21, 1883.

G.I. Butler

When Butler was president of the General Conference, he endured a scathing attack from Sister White. He describes the assault in a letter to J.H. Kellogg:

"Sister White called me up to your Hospital, and talked to me two or three hours, when my head seemed as though it would just about wreck me. It seemed as though it would split. I nerved up, with every ounce of energy I had, and listened to it all. Some things, I tell you, were about as cutting as a man could hear. Occasionally I would throw in a word. She said, 'you ought to have been out of office for years.'" (Butler letter to Kellogg, June 9, 1904, published in Adventist Currents, vol. 1, no. 5)

Abraham Lincoln Insulted

D.M Canright describes how Mrs. White rejected the pleas of Abraham Lincoln for a day of prayer and fasting for the war-wracked nation:

"Mr. Lincoln, in his need, asked the prayers of all Christians, and appointed days of fasting and prayer. Of these Mrs. White said: 'I saw that these national fasts were an insult to Jehovah. . . A national fast is proclaimed! Oh, what an insult to Jehovah!' (Testimonies, Vol. I., p. 257). That was the way she sympathized with Mr. Lincoln and the nation in the hour of need.

"A day before the awful battle of Gettysburg, on which the destiny of the nation would turn, Mr. Lincoln spent the night in agonizing prayer to almighty God. So his biographer testifies. But neither Mrs. White nor any of her followers offered a single prayer for him or the nation. I was with her - and with them - and know. During the entire twenty-eight years I was an Adventist I never offered one prayer for the President, for Congress, for a Governor, or any one in authority. I never heard Mrs. White, Elder White, or any one of them, do it. I have often attended their large meetings since then, but never heard a prayer offered for any Government official." (Canright, Life of Mrs. E.G. White: Her False Claims Refuted, chapter 15)

Test #6 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

As we read these accounts, particularly the disturbing cases of J.N. Andrews and Edson White, we are faced with the stark realization that Ellen White was not fulfilling the prophet's duty to represent the character of God through "upbuilding and encouragement." While some of Mrs. White's counsels and testimonies could truthfully be described as "encouraging", all too often they were vindictive, discouraging, and destructive. TEST #7: Prophets Must Acknowledge Paul's Writings as Commandments

If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. 1 Cor. 14:37

Did Mrs. White follow Paul's commandments? Mrs. White said that the writings of Christ's apostles were "dictated by the Holy Ghost" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 176). Therefore, since Mrs. White regarded Paul as an apostle, she must have considered Paul's writings in 1st Corinthians 14:37 to be inspired by God. Just three verses earlier Paul gives his commandment regarding how women should conduct themselves in the church:

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak [Greek: laleo - "to utter a voice or emit a sound / to speak / to use the tongue or the faculty of speech / to utter articulate sounds / to talk"]...for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. 1 Cor. 14:34,35

Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 1 Tim. 2:11,12

Elder Benjamin Warfield explains the meaning of these passages:

The [Greek] word [laleo] is in its right place in 1 Corinthians 14:33ff, therefore, and necessarily bears there its simple and natural meaning. If we needed anything to fix its meaning, however, it would be supplied by its frequent use in the preceding part of the chapter, where it refers not only to speaking with tongues, but also to the prophetic speech, which is directly declared to be to edification and exhortation and comforting (verses 3-6). It would be supplied more pungently, however, by its contrasting term here — "let them be silent" (verse 34). Here we have laleo directly defined for us: "Let the women keep silent, for it is not permitted to them to speak." Keep silent — speak: these are the two opposites; and the one defines the other.

It is important to observe, now, that the pivot on which the injunction of these verses turns is not the prohibition of speaking so much as the command of silence. That is the main injunction. The prohibition of speech is introduced only to explain the meaning more fully. What Paul says is in brief: "Let the women keep silent in the churches." That surely is direct and specific enough for all needs. He then adds explanatorily: "For it is not permitted to them to speak." "It is not permitted" is an appeal to a general law, valid apart from Paul's personal command, and looks back to the opening phrase — "as in all the churches of the saints." He is only requiring the Corinthian women to conform to the general law of the churches. And that is the meaning of the almost bitter words that he adds in verse 36, in which — reproaching them for the innovation of permitting women to speak in the churches — he reminds them that they are not the authors of the Gospel, nor are they its sole possessors: let them keep to the law that binds the whole body of churches and not be seeking some new- fangled way of their own.

The intermediate verses only make it plain that precisely what the apostle is doing is forbidding women to speak at all in the church. His injunction of silence he pushes so far that he forbids them even to ask questions; and adds with special reference to that, but through that to the general matter, the crisp declaration that "it is indecent" — for that is the meaning of the word — "for a woman to speak in church." It would be impossible for the apostle to speak more directly or more emphatically than he has done here. He requires women to be silent at the church meetings; for that is what "in the churches" means, there were no church buildings then. And he has not left us in doubt as to the nature of these church meetings. He had just described them in verses 26ff. They were of the general character of our prayer meetings. Note the words "let him be silent in the church" in verse 30, and compare them with "let them be silent in the churches" in verse 34. The prohibition of women speaking covers thus all public church meetings — it is the publicity, not the formality of it, which is the point. And he tells us repeatedly that this is the universal law of the church. He does more than that. He tells us that it is the commandment of the Lord, and emphasizes the word "Lord" (verse 37).

The passage in 1 Timothy 2:11ff. is just as strong, although it is more particularly directed to the specific case of public teaching or ruling in the church. The apostle had already in this context (verse 8, "the men," in contrast with "women" of verse 9) pointedly confined public praying to men, and now continues: "Let a woman learn in silence in all subjection; but I do not permit the woman to teach, neither to rule over the man, but to be in silence." Neither the teaching nor the ruling function is permitted to woman. The apostle says here, "I do not permit," instead of as in 1 Corinthians 14:33ff., "it is not permitted," because he is here giving his personal instructions to Timothy, his subordinate, while there he was announcing to the Corinthians the general law of the church. What he instructs Timothy, however, is the general law of the church. And so he goes on and grounds his prohibition in a universal reason which affects the entire race equally. ...

What must be noted in conclusion is: (1) That the prohibition of speaking in the church to women is precise, absolute, and all-inclusive. They are to keep silent in the churches — and that means in all the public meetings for worship; they are not even to ask questions; (2) that this prohibition is given especial point precisely for the two matters of teaching and ruling covering specifically the functions of preaching and ruling elders; (3) that the grounds on which the prohibition is put are universal and turn on the difference in sex, and particularly on the relative places given to the sexes in creation and in the fundamental history of the race (the fall).4

Not only did Mrs. White ignore Paul's command to be silent in church, but she also broke his command about prophesying with her head uncovered:

But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 1 Cor. 11:5

Mrs. White and the Adventist Church seemed to have adopted the view that Paul's commandments did not apply to them in the "modern age". It is quite convenient when faced with a Biblical prohibition that one dislikes to simply dismiss the prohibition as being "out- of-date" or "only applies to that culture at that time period." If one were to follow this philosophy, one could dismiss virtually any prohibition in the Bible as being "out-of-date". Test #7 - You Decide: Pass or Fail?

While one may argue over whether Paul's prohibitions apply to the "modern age", it cannot be denied that Mrs. White broke these particular commandments. She was often found in the church pulpit, giving sermons, lectures, and teaching the people. In all the descriptions of her prophesying there is never any indication that she ever bothered to cover her head. Therefore, since it is obvious that Mrs. White disregarded these commandments of Paul's in her life, we can only conclude that Mrs. White failed this test of a prophet.

Adventist Tests of a Prophet

Adventists have developed their own unique set of "tests" that they use to prove to others that Mrs. White passed their "tests" of a prophet. When examined, it can be shown that these are not really tests at all. Using these "tests" virtually anyone could qualify as a prophet of God!

Questionable test #1: Christ came in the flesh

One text frequently quoted in favour of Ellen White is 2 John 1:7:

"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh."

Virtually every modern Christian prophet teaches that Christ came in the flesh, so passing this "test" is a small hurdle indeed. Joseph Smith, Mary Eddy Baker, and countless other "prophets" pass this test. Even Muhammad taught Christ was a real human being. So this "test" is of minor relevance because virtually any Christian believer could pass this test.

Questionable test #2: Predictions come to pass

Another "test" that is sometimes used is the test of future predictions. If a prophet makes a prediction about the future, and that prediction comes to pass, then supposedly that is evidence that person is a true prophet. However, this is only valid when combined with Deut. 18:22, which says that a prophet cannot make a false prediction. Just making a true prediction about the future does not make one a prophet. Psychics often give vague prophecies about the future, and on rare occasion they get lucky and the event actually does occur as predicted. If a psychic gets lucky on a prediction does that mean he is a prophet?

Consider the case of Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. He made these prophecies in 1832, nearly 30 years before the start of the U.S. Civil War:

"1. Verily, thus saith the Lord concerning the wars that will shortly come to pass, beginning at the rebellion of South Carolina, which will eventually terminate in the death and misery of many souls; . . . . "3. For behold, the Southern Sates shall be divided against the Northern States, and the nations, even the nation of Great Britain, as it is called, and they shall also call upon other nations against other nations in order to defend themselves against other nations; and then war shall be poured out upon all nations."

These prophecies were fulfilled with stunning accuracy. A Civil War between the northern and southern states did start in the state of South Carolina. Does this prove Joseph Smith to be a prophet? Not unless he also was accurate in all of the other predictions he made. A prophet must be 100% accurate according to the Biblical rule.

Questionable test #3: Inspirational writings

Sometimes Adventists will point to books such as Desire of Ages and Steps to Christ as evidence of Mrs. White's prophetic calling. Even if Ellen White never plagiarized a single word from other authors, and even if Ellen White did not have a staff of talented writers that assisted her, the fact that she produced an inspiring book would never qualify her to be a prophet. If writing an inspiring book proved a person to be a prophet, then we would have untold thousands of prophets, because thousands upon thousands of inspiring books have been written by Christian authors.

Some point to the fact that Mrs. White suffered a severe head injury when she was in the 3rd grade which forced her to drop out of school. They point to her later writings and proclaim: "How could someone with only a 3rd-grade education write such wonderful books?" Those asking this question are implying that Mrs. White must have received supernatural assistance in writing her books. The truth is Mrs. White had more than a third grade education (CLICK HERE to find out how much education she received).

Followers of the prophet Muhammad, the founder of Islam, point to the writings of this illiterate man as evidence of his divine inspiration. They say, "How could an illiterate man write such wonderful works, such as the Quran, without divine assistance?" The truth is that Muhammad had secretaries who assisted him in writing. Likewise, Mrs. White almost always had assistance with her writing. In the beginning it was James White. Later, as their financial situation improved, she hired a professional staff to write her books, articles, and even her personal letters. She hired Marian Davis who was a professional writer to assist her with her books. Her secretary Fannie Bolton was also involved in writing for Mrs. White for many years.

As discussed earlier, Mrs. White also received substantial assistance in writing by copying from some of the top Christian authors of her time. While there is some debate as to the exact amount of material that was plagiarized from other authors, in some books it is believed that up to 90% of the material has been copied.

Whether or not Mrs. White had supernatural assistance in writing her books we cannot judge. However, it is clearly evident that she had plenty of human assistance.

Do her inspirational writings provide evidence of supernatural assistance? What if you were given permission to copy any material you wanted from the top Christian authors in the world and put it into a book? And what if you had a staff of competent editors and writers to assist you in this effort? Do you think you could put together an inspiring book? Of course you could! In this regard, Mrs. White's inspiring books do not prove her to be any more of a prophet than you are!

Questionable test #4: Supernatural feats

Some Adventists point to supposed supernatural events that were reported to have occurred in some of Mrs. White's earlier visions as evidence she was a prophet. For example, there are reports of her not breathing during vision or holding up heavy objects with supernatural strength. Advocates of Ellen White claim that these phenomena are similar to those encountered by the prophet Daniel. Whether or not Mrs. White exhibited the same characteristics as Daniel is a matter of great debate, but General Conference President A.G. Daniells cuts right to the heart of the matter:

"Now with reference to the evidences: I differ with some of the brethren who have put together proofs or evidences of the genuineness of this gift, in this respect, - I believe that the strongest proof is found in the fruits of this gift to the church, not in physical and outward demonstrations. For instance, I have heard some ministers preach, and have seen it in writing, that Sister White once carried a heavy Bible - I believe they said it weighed 40 pounds - on her out-stretched hand, and looking up toward the heavens quoted texts and turned the leaves over and pointed to the texts, with her eyes toward the heavens. I do not know whether that was ever done or not. I am not sure. I did not see it, and I do not know that I ever talked with anybody that did see it. But, brethren, I do not count that sort of thing as a very great proof. I do not think that is the best kind of evidence. If I were a stranger in an audience, and heard a preacher enlarging on that, I would have my doubts. That is, I would want to know if he saw it. He would have to say, No, he never did. Then I would ask, 'Did you ever see the man that did see it?' And he would have to answer, 'No, I never did.'

"Well, just how much of that is genuine, and how much has crawled into the story? - I do not know. But I do not think that is the kind of proof we want to use. It has been a long time since I have brought forward this sort of thing, - no breath in the body, and the eyes wide open. That may have accompanied the exercise of this gift in the early days, but it surely did not in the latter days, and yet I believe this gift was just as genuine and exercised just the same through these later years as in the early years." (1919 Conference on the Spirit of Prophecy)

None of us were present at the visions, so we do not know for sure what did happen and what did not happen. However, that is not relevant. With so many magicians and trick artists in the world it would not make any sense to have a "test" based upon a display of "supernatural" powers. Biblical prophets were not judged upon whether they exhibited supernatural feats, but upon their prophetic word and their character.

Questionable test #5: Was years ahead of science

Another claim put forward is that Mrs. White's understanding on health was years ahead of science. Contrary to popular myth, Mrs. White brought few, if any, new health reforms to the world. Other popular health reformers were promoting most, if not all of her teachings on health, before she began teaching them. (To review that evidence,

Mary Eddy Baker, Joseph Smith, and the prophet Muhammad all proposed health reforms to their followers, and today their followers all claim that these health reforms are only now being validated by science and that this is evidence of divine guidance. The truth is that initiating a health reform is no proof of prophet hood. Thousands of health reforms have been instigated by various people over the centuries of human history. Are these health reformers thus prophets because they started a successful health reform? Of course not!

Questionable test #6: Maintains Unity in the Church One claim put forward by some Adventists is that the writings of Mrs. White help to keep the church unified by resolving theological differences over Bible passages, helping to maintain the "unity of the brethren". Those making this claim must acknowledge that this unity means that one's individual view of a particular Biblical topic must be brought into harmony with Ellen White's view. If one fails to bring their view into subjection to Ellen White, then that individual is ostracized by the church at large. This seems a heavy price to pay for unity, and elevates the role of Ellen White to chief interpreter of the Bible, a role not too far different from that of the Pope.

In reality, the writings of Ellen White stifle investigation into the true meaning of Scriptures because a "good Adventist" cannot study a Scripture and come to a conclusion that is different from the accepted "Ellen White" position.

While some measure of unity on Biblical interpretation is attained by strictly adhering to the dictates of Ellen White, this does not necessarily translate into unity within the church. In fact, over the years, many people have testified about the lack of unity within the SDA Church. It is very likely that a large part of the disunity seething under the covers in today's SDA Church is directly related to Ellen White.

Some members question Ellen White's role and authority in the church. These members may not follow all of Sister White's dictates or agree with all her interpretations, and thus they find themselves locked in mortal combat with devotees to Ellen White who believe she was God's mouthpiece for the church.

Another source of disunity is the writings of Ellen White herself. The Bible, although written by dozens of authors over a period more than 1,000 years, displays a surprising continuity throughout. In contrast, the writings of Ellen White, written by one person over 75 years, display a surprising number of contradictory and confusing statements.

The young Ellen White forbids seeing doctors. The older Ellen White visited doctors herself. The young Ellen White wrote long and prolifically against solitary vice. The older Ellen White wrote not a single word about it the last 40 years of her life. The young Ellen White stressed the law. The older Ellen White stressed grace. Again and again, throughout her career, Ellen White contradicts her own writings. Add to that the fact she wrote over 100,000 pages--about 100 times more writings than is found in the Bible--and there are plenty of contradictions to be found on almost any subject by anyone who takes the time to look.

These contradictory and confusing statements are a continual source of irritation between various factions within the church. There are controversies raging over the nature of Christ, last day events, dress and entertainment, sports, diet, the Investigative Judgment, jewelry, marital excess, education, and countless other issues. If anything, the disunity in the SDA Church is magnified by the presence of such a large body of "authoritative writings" that contain so many seemingly irreconcilable contradictions.

Destroyers of the Bible

Inevitably, when some Adventists are faced with the overwhelming evidence that Mrs. White failed the seven tests of a prophet, instead of acknowledging the truth, they will turn upon the Biblical prophets and proclaim that Ellen White was no worse than the Bible prophets. They claim, "there are errors in the Bible also." Their reasoning is, the Bible prophets made mistakes and are still considered prophets, so it is okay for our prophet to make mistakes. If one were to follow this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, a so-called prophet could make as many flawed predictions and prophetic blunders as they like while still being considered a prophet of God. Such reasoning is flawed, and can be used to a make a prophet out of anyone, such as Branch Davidian David Koresh.

A lot of effort has been put forward by Adventists in recent years to attack the credibility of Biblical prophets in order to sustain the role of Ellen White. Attempts have been made to confuse the Bible tests with issues that are not tests at all. In order to clear up the confusion we need to understand the following four points.

First, when discussing the "failures" of a prophet, let us be careful not to confuse "moral failures" with failing the "tests of a prophet." There is no prophetic test that says a prophet can never sin. Balaam and Saul prophesied in the name of the Lord, and yet we are well aware of their failures. Therefore, there is no basis for rejecting a prophet merely on the basis of a moral shortcoming.

Second, there are other instances recorded in Scripture where prophets have made what appears to us today to be mistakes or failures of judgment. For example, Nathan apparently spoke to David without consulting God first when telling David that he could build a temple.

Third, there are instances in Scripture where the prophet did not fully understand his mission. Jonah apparently did not understand, or perhaps did not want to understand, that the message of destruction he was delivering to Ninevah was conditional. Therefore, it is not required of a prophet to completely understand his mission in order for him to fulfil the role of a prophet.

Fourth, Bible critics point to a number of Old Testament prophesies that seem to them to have failed. It is far beyond the scope of this page to test every Biblical prophet. Whole books have been written defending the Bible writings. It is very possible that facts we are completely unaware of--facts that have been buried in long-lost history, or have been confused by language translation or by transcription errors--could account for the supposed failed prophecies. If we could go back thousands of years and see and hear things exactly as they happened, then we might realize there was no failure at all. We may find out the only failure was our own jumping to conclusions without adequate information.

To summarize, the Bible indicates some of the prophets made moral mistakes, used poor judgment on occasion, sometimes did not fully understand their mission, and had prophecies which appear to those of us living thousands of years later to have failed. Only the fourth criteria is a valid reason for rejecting a prophet. But herein lies the difficulty of attacking the Bible prophets. While it may be possible for us to apply one or two of the tests of a prophet to the Bible prophets, we are so far removed from them in history, it is difficult for us to apply all the tests of a prophet to them. Perhaps it appears to us they failed one test, but our knowledge of their life and times is so limited that we cannot make an accurate assessment.

The people who knew the Bible prophets personally or who lived in the same generation or shortly thereafter are the best ones to judge whether or not they passed the tests. Since we cannot accurately judge all aspects of their lives at this point in history, we have to accept by faith that these men were inspired based upon the following:  Their acceptance by the people who personally knew the prophets at that time  The testimony of Jesus  The wisdom and knowledge of those who assembled the holy writings and decided which ones were canonical and which were not

These people were in a far better position to judge the prophets and we should respect their judgments. Being removed from the Bible prophets by thousands of years of history and language and cultural differences makes it very difficult for us to sit as their judges. There is just too much information that we simply do not know about them.

As far as we can tell, Jesus never cast doubt upon the prophets of the Old Testament, but his testimony indicates he upheld them as authoritative, saying he did not come to "destroy the law, or the prophets" (Matt. 5:17). Jesus used the law, the psalms, and the "prophets" as evidence to convince the men on the road to Emmaus that His death and His mission were legitimate (Luke 24:44). Would Jesus have used the writings of the prophets as evidence of His mission if He did not believe they were authoritative?

Now, let us contrast this situation with that of Ellen White. It is incumbent upon the generations that personally knew Ellen White or who lived shortly thereafter to put her to the test (1 John 4:1). That is the duty proscribed to us in Scripture. We would be failing our duty if we did not put Ellen White to the test. Unlike the Bible prophets of long ago, we have a wealth of information and personal testimonies about Ellen White. We share her language, and to a large degree, her culture. We have no eyewitness reports of the Bible prophets, while we have thousands of eyewitness reports of Ellen White. We have far less than 1,000 pages of writings for all the Old Testament prophets combined, while we have 100,000 pages of Ellen White's writings. Therefore, we are in a much stronger position to judge her prophetic claims. Just as we depend upon past generations to verify the claims of past prophets, future generations will depend upon the accuracy of our judgment of Ellen White's claims.

It is flawed logic to use the imagined failures of Bible prophets as an excuse for Ellen White's failures because, as already noted, we are not capable of evaluating the Bible prophets to the same degree that we are able to evaluate the prophets of our generation. Even if we could make an accurate evaluation, and even if we were to find a Bible prophet had actually failed a Biblical test, that does not mean the test is invalid. The tests are the objective rule by which all must be judged. God put those tests in the Bible for a purpose, so that we could identify false prophets. Those who point to the failures of other prophets are merely attempting to divert attention away from their own prophet's failures. Rather than attempting to justify their own prophet's failures by attacking Bible prophets, the admirer of Ellen White should re- evaluate whether she can stand on her own merits.

Conclusion

Sooner or later, every child grows up and realizes that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy are myths. It is not our fault we believed those silly stories. We were told by the ones we trusted to believe in them. As a child, whenever I lost a tooth, I put the tooth under my pillow and went to sleep believing the Tooth Fairy would take my tooth away and deposit a coin in its place. And sure enough, every time I woke up in the morning I would find a bright shiny quarter. One day, however, the tooth fairy stopped coming. Why? I had grown up. My knowledge increased. I was no longer so gullible to believe in such silly stories.

When you started reading this page, you may have been a believer in Ellen White. You believed what you were told by those whom you trusted. You believed something because you had only been told half the story--the half that made it appear she was a prophet. Now you know the full story. You have grown up. The time has come to walk away from the fairy tales of childhood. They served you well, for a time, but when the truth comes, the fairy tales lose their luster. You are no longer satisfied with fairy tales. You want the truth.

You may be upset. You may be disappointed. You may be asking yourself, "How could I be so gullible to believe such stories?" Remember, it is not your fault. You were doing the best you could do based upon the incomplete information you were given. You cannot change the past. But you can change the future. You can share with others the truth you have learned on this page. You can continue studying to find out how many more of your beliefs are based upon myths. Jesus promised,

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:32)

NOTES:

1. Walter T. Rea, Ph.D., "How the Seventh-day Adventist ‘Spirit of Prophecy’ was Born", p. 1.

2. Ibid.

3. H.E. Carver, D.M. Canright, and J.H. Kellogg all testified that they supplied information about people to Ellen White which she later used in writing out "testimonies" to these same people. See Mrs. E.G. White's Claims to Divine Inspiration Examined, 2nd edition, 1877, Merritt G. Kellogg's Statement, 1908, Interview between Elder G. W. Amadon, Elder A. C. Bourdeau, and Dr. John Harvey Kellogg at Dr. J. H. Kellogg's House in Battle Creek, Michigan, October 7th, 1907, as printed in Spectrum, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 61-62, and the March 20, 1889, edition of the Healdsburg Enterprise newspaper.

4. Benjamin B. Warfield, "Paul on Women Speaking in Church", The Presbyterian, October 30, 1919.

Did Mrs. White Practice what she

Preached on Diet?

M. Chugg and D. Anderson

Mrs. White said of her testimonies, "it is God and not an erring mortal who has spoken."1 In a testimony to Elder G.A. Irwin she states that "those who do not accept the light God has given on health reform...can not represent the truth to others".2 From this statement it is clear by her own definition that Mrs. White could not represent the truth to others if she was not a vegetarian. We could take this one step further and ask the question: If she ignored the light of heaven on meat eating, and thus according to her own testimony could not "represent the truth to others," then how could she hold the position of church prophet--a role whose sole responsibility is to represent the truth to others?

Mrs. White emphasized that eating meat would destroy not only physical health, but also spiritual life:

"Is it not time that all should aim to dispense with flesh foods? How can those who are seeking to become pure, refined, and holy, that they may have the companionship of heavenly angels, continue to use as food anything that has so harmful an effect on soul and body?"3

Mrs. White said eating meat had a "harmful" effect upon the "soul". As you read on, you will discover that all the while Mrs. White was the prophetess of the Adventist church, she was secretly "harming her soul" by eating meat. 1869 - I've Stopped Eating Meat!

In 1869 Mrs. White wrote:

"I have not changed my course a particle since I adopted the health reform. I have not taken one step back since the light from heaven upon this subject first shone upon my pathway. I broke away from everything at once, from meat and butter, and from three meals. ....I left off those things from principle. I took my stand on health reform from principle."4

Mrs. White said she had "not taken one step back". Is that the honest truth? Let us examine the evidence to see just how many steps back she really took... 1873 - How about a little deer and some duck? Mrs. White claimed to have taken her vegetarian stand prior to 1869, yet four years later we find her eating deer and duck on a trip in the mountains of Colorado:

"Our provisions have been very low for some days. Many of our supplies have gone. . . . We expected supplies three days ago certainly, but none has come. Willie went to the lake for water. We heard his gun and found he had shot two ducks. This is really a blessing, for we need something to live upon."5

Here we find Willie going down to the lake for water. It seems a little odd that he would be toting a rifle with him on his trip to fetch water. Perhaps he planned to fetch more than just water. Willie returned with two dead ducks. From this we can gather that it is okay to let the health reform principles slide a little when supplies are short. Here is another quote from the same trip:

"A young man from Nova Scotia had come in from hunting. He had a quarter of deer. He had travelled 20 miles with this deer upon his back. ... He gave us a small piece of the meat, which we made into broth. Willie shot a duck which came in a time of need, for our supplies were rapidly diminishing."6

What happened to the stand she had made upon principle? Apparently there are exceptions to her health rules, at least for herself. Even though Mrs. White deplored the "laxness" of others when it came to obeying her health reforms, she broke the rules herself:

"I was at times placed where I was compelled to eat a little meat... When I could not obtain the food I needed, I have sometimes eaten a little meat..."7

"Those who digress occasionally to gratify the taste in eating a fattened turkey or other flesh meats, pervert their appetites, and are not the ones to judge of the benefits of the system of health reform. They are controlled by taste, not by principle. ... The lack of stability in regard to the principles of health reform is a true index of their character and their spiritual strength. They are deficient in thoroughness in their Christian experience."8

Perhaps meals on Christmas day are excluded from the health restrictions. In 1878 we find Sister White enjoying some venison for Christmas...

"I suppose you will be interested to know how we spent Christmas... Christmas morning we all took breakfast together--James Cornell; Florence and Clara, their two girls; Brother and Sister Moore and their three children; Sister Bahler and Etta, a girl living with them; and Sister Daniells, our cook, Father, and myself. We had a quarter of venison cooked, and stuffing. It was as tender as a chicken. We all enjoyed it very much. There is plenty of venison in market."9

1880 - Chicken to go, please...

Mrs. White had still not given up eating meat by 1880. The following is an excerpt from a letter she wrote to her sister Elizabeth while traveling:

"Thursday morning we arose from our births refreshed with sleep. At eight o'clock we took a portion of the pressed chicken food liberally furnished us by the matron of the sanitarium, put the same in a two-quart pail, and placed it on the stove, and thus we had good hot chicken broth and enjoyed our breakfast. The morning was very cold and this hot dish was very palatable. ... We have plenty of room, good food and plenty of it. Sister McComber scalded up the chicken. Will scald the meat tomorrow morning."10

There appears to have been ample food available at the Sanitarium, yet Sister White ate chicken that was furnished by the Matron of the Sanitarium. Then she took the pressed chicken with her on her trip and ate it in the train for breakfast: "We again made a nice hot broth of our pressed chicken."11 Certainly Mrs. White could have planned a vegetarian diet for this trip. This was her fifteenth trip on this route so she knew exactly what to expect. Yet while she indulged in meals of chicken, she advised Adventists contemplating this journey to "Take your lunch baskets with you, well filled with fruits and plainly cooked bread".12 No, they were not permitted to violate the health reform principles and enjoy a little "palatable" chicken. They must follow the health reform and subsist on bread and fruit!

1882 - Oysters and Herrings?

Mrs. White was still privately eating unclean meat a full 13 years after her public commitment! In this 1882 excerpt from a letter to her daughter-in-law, Mary Kelsey White, she expresses her fondness for herring and oysters:

Mary, if you can get me a good box of herrings - fresh ones - please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy cans, say (a) half dozen cans of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them.13

This letter gives credence to Fannie Bolton's claim that Ellen White was discovered in a restaurant "very gratified in eating big white raw oysters with vinegar, pepper and salt".14

Some find it difficult to believe that Sister White actually ate oysters because her testimonies tell Adventists they should refuse to eat them:

His stronghold seems to be giving way; his hitherto brave heart is growing weak. He is invited to accompany them for a walk, and they lead him to a saloon. Oysters or other refreshments are called for, and he is ashamed to draw away and refuse the treat.15

1887 - What's a campmeeting without chicken?

According to Dr. John Kellogg, Mrs. White celebrated her return from Europe in 1887 with "a large baked fish." When she visited the Battle Creek Sanitarium during the next several years, she "always called for meat and usually fried chicken," much to the consternation of Kellogg and the cook who were both vegetarians.16

At the various camp meetings she attended, her lax dietary habits became common knowledge, thanks in no small part to her own children. Kellogg recalled once hearing Edson (J.E.) White standing in front of his mother's tent calling out to a meat wagon that regularly visited the grounds:

"Say, hello there! Have you any fresh fish?" "No," was his reply. "Have you got any fresh chicken?" Again the answer was "no," and J.E. bawled out in a very loud voice, "Mother wants some chicken. You had better get some quick."17 Years after his mother's death Willie White told of his mother's difficulty in giving up meat. He described the difficulty in finding vegetarian cooks, and of lunch baskets filled with turkey, chicken, and tinned tongue.18 "

Oysters as an Aphrodisiac

Already during the time of the Roman Empire oysters enjoyed a randy reputation, which only increased over the ages. During the "Golden Century" in the Netherlands (the 17th century) oysters were the symbol, the very incarnation of an aphrodisiac. Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love, sprang forth from the sea on an oyster shell and promptly gave birth to Eros, hence the origin of the word, "aphrodisiac". The great Casanova also used to start his meals with 12 dozen oysters."19

According to Leviticus 11:10 anything from the waters without fins or scales is "unclean." In addition, oysters have long been considered an aphrodisiac. Surely James White must have recognized this because in 1870 he lambasted those who ate oysters:

"What kinds of edibles command the highest price in the market? Those that stimulate this passion, and because they create impure desires. What mean those oyster stews, and crab parties, and terrapin soups, and squab suppers, wild fowls, cloves, and a host of other like things? Eaten, in many instances in high (?low) life, expressly to beget unhallowed desires! Oh! shame, where is thy blush! Do you want more proof? Behold the fertile South. But particulars are too revolting, both as regards the beastly indulgence of whites with blacks, and the number of rakes [immoral men] and harlots among the latter! Our world is literally FULL of sensuality!"20

James blasted those who ate oysters because of their supposed power to stimulate "sensual desires." Yet surprisingly, his own wife fostered a love for these forbidden, unclean creatures. In 1907, Adventist physician Dr. Charles Stewart wrote a letter to Mrs. White questioning why she ate oysters:

"Three parties, all Seventh-day Adventists, two of them officially connected with the denomination, state for a number of years after you received the light on health reform, that you ate meat and oysters. Two of these persons within the past ninety days told me personally that you ate oysters in their own home, on one occasion as late as 1890. Another stated that he saw you eating oysters in a restaurant.

"If you deny that you ate oysters and state that the statements of these two men are false, I will make an affidavit to this statement and give you the names of the two persons referred to so that they can be asked for an explanation."21

Mrs. White never responded to Dr. Stewart's letter, nor did she deny the statements of the two men who saw her eating oysters. 1894 - 25 years after her 1869 pledge... It was not until 1894 that Mrs. White finally gave up meat eating at the insistence of a Catholic woman!

"I have a large family, which often numbers sixteen. In it there are men who work at the plough, and who fell trees. These have most vigorous exercise, but not a particle of the flesh of animals on our table. Meat has not been used by us since the Brighton (Australia) Campmeeting (January, 1894). It was not my purpose to have it on my table at any time, but urgent pleas were made that such a one was unable to eat this or that, and that his stomach could take care of meat better than it could anything else. Thus I was enticed to place it on my table. The use of cheese also began to creep in, because some like cheese; but I soon controlled that. But when the selfishness of taking the lives of animals to gratify a perverted taste was presented to me by a Catholic woman, kneeling at my feet, I felt ashamed and distressed. I saw it in a new light, and I said, I will no longer patronize the butchers. I will not have the flesh of corpses on my table."22

Apparently her heavenly communications with angels were not enough to convince Mrs. White to give up meat. It took a Catholic woman begging her to give up meat on the basis that it was wrong to take the lives of animals! It makes one wonder how much confidence she had in her own visions!

1894 - Switched to Eating Fish

In 1896 Ellen White writes a letter indicating that 25 years after the angels told her it was wrong to eat meat, she finally came to the same conclusion. So what did she do? She switched over to eating fish!

"Two years ago [1894] I came to the conclusion that there was danger in using the flesh of dead animals, and since then I have not used meat at all. It is never placed on my table. I use fish when I can get it. We can get beautiful fish from the saltwater lake near here. I use neither tea nor coffee. As I labor against these things, I cannot but practice that which I know to be best for health, and my family are all in perfect harmony with me. You see, my dear niece, that I am telling you matters just as they are."23

Mrs. White and butter

We noted at the top of this page that Mrs. White said she gave up eating butter in 1869. In a letter to her son written May 25, 1869, Mrs. White encourages Edson to follow her "strict" example in giving up meat and butter:

"We have in diet been strict to follow the light the Lord has given us. You are acquainted with that light, and we trust you will have the fear of the Lord continually before you and will respect the light He has given and be no less strict than we have been. We have advised you not to eat butter or meat. We have not had it on our table. ... All know that we do not put butter on our table. If they see you, our son, eat the things we have condemned, you weaken our influence and lower yourself in their estimation."24

She further stated in 1870: "No butter or flesh-meats of any kind come on my table."25

In 1872 she bore postive testimony against it:

"We bear positive testimony against...butter..."26

In 1874, she wrote the following to her son Willie:

"Your father and I have dropped milk, cream, butter, sugar, and meat entirely since we came to California."27

But did she really drop it "entirely"? In 1895 she mentions that she uses butter "for cooking purposes":

"We purchase butter for cooking purposes from dairies where the cows are in healthy condition, and have good pasture."28

By 1901 it seems that God had changed His mind on butter, because Sister White sent out a testimony taking butter off the banned list:

"When the time comes that it is no longer safe to use milk, cream, butter, and eggs, God will reveal this... No extremes in health reform are to be advocated. The question of using milk and butter and eggs will work out its own problem. At present we have no burden on this line."29

Perhaps that time came in 1903--34 years after she supposedly received instruction to stop eating butter--because Mrs. White claimed she had finally stopped eating butter:

"As for myself, I have settled the butter question. I do not use it."30

Despite that claim, it appears she was eating butter again the very next year in 1904. E.S. Ballenger, a former SDA minister, wrote of Mrs. White contradicting her 1872 testimony against butter:

"Mrs. White did not follow her own testimonies. She ate butter at my table 32 years after giving this definite instruction..."31

Seventh-day Adventist president A.G. Daniels, who knew Mrs. White for over 40 years, stated in 1919:

"I have eaten pounds of butter at her table myself, and dozens of eggs. I could not explain that in her own family if I believe that she believed those were the Lord's own words to the world."32 Did Mrs. White believe her own testimonies?

After reviewing this evidence it is now painfully obvious Mrs. White failed to follow the very health principles that she claimed to have received from God and insisted others follow. Her health practices were clearly not in line with her health teachings. She either chose to disobey the instruction of God, or perhaps she did not follow her testimonies because they did not come from God at all, but from the writings of other health reformers. There can be no doubt Mrs. White claimed her insight on meat came straight from her "visions":

"It was at the house of Brother A. Hilliard, at Otsego, Michigan, June 6, 1863, that the great subject of health reform was opened before me in vision."33

The following statements leave no doubt about her stance on meat-eating:

"I do not preach one thing and practice another. I do not present to my hearers rules of life for them to follow while I make an exception in my own case..."34

"Above all things, we should not with our pens advocate positions that we do not put to a practical test in our own families, upon our own tables. This is a dissimulation, a species of hypocrisy."35

Mrs. White even went so far as to condemn those who ate meat as being unfit for God's service:

"No man should be set apart as a teacher of the people while his own teaching or example contradicts the testimony God has given His servants to bear in regard to diet . . . His disregard of health reform unfits him to stand as the Lord's messenger..."36

Jesus had something to say about hypocrites who placed burdensome requirements on others while not obeying those requirements themselves:

For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.37

In the Didache, an early Christian document believed to have been written around the first century A.D., the author advises early Christians on how to identify a false prophet:

“If any prophet teaches the truth, yet does not practice what he teaches, he is a false prophet.”38

More EGW Quotes on Meat-eating

"Let not any of our ministers set an evil example in the eating of flesh-meat. Let them and their families live up to the light of health reform. Let not our ministers animalize their own nature and the nature of their children."39

"If ever there was a time when the diet should be of the most simple kind, it is now. Meat should not be placed before our children. Its influence is to excite and strengthen the lower passions, and has a tendency to deaden the moral powers. Grains and fruits prepared free from grease, and in as natural a condition as possible, should be the food for the tables of all who claim to be preparing for translation to heaven.""40

"You should be teaching your children. You should be instructing them how to shun the vices and corruption's of this age. Instead of this, many are studying how to get something good to eat. You place upon your tables butter, eggs, and meat and then your children partake of them. They are fed with the very things that will excite their animal passions, and then you come to meeting and ask God to bless and save your children. How high do your prayers go?"41

"Those who have received instruction regarding the evils of the use of flesh foods...will not continue to indulge their appetite for food that they know to be unhealthful. God demands that the appetites be cleansed, and that self-denial be practiced in regard to those things which are not good. This is a work that will have to be done before His people can stand before Him a perfected people."42

NOTES

1. Ellen G. White, Testimonies vol. 5, p. 682.

2. E.G. White, Testimony to Elders Irwin, Prescott, Waggoner, and Jones, February 21, 1899.

3. E.G. White, Ministry of Healing, p. 317.

4. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, pp. 371-372.

5. E.G. White, Manuscript 12, 1873, p. 3. Published in Manuscript Releases, vol. 7, p. 346.

6. E.G. White, Manuscript 11, 1873. Released by the Ellen G. White Estate Washington, D.C. April 11, 1985. Published in Manuscript Releases, vol. 14, p. 353.

7. E.G. White, Manuscript Release 852, p. 2.

8. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 487 (1871).

9. E.G. White, Manuscript Releases Vol. 14, p. 318-319, written December 26, 1878, from Denison, Texas, to "Dear Family at Battle Creek--Willie, Mary, Aunt Mary, Edith, Addie and May, and Brother and Sister Sawyer."

10. E.G. White, Letter 6a, 1880. Published in Manuscript Releases, Vol. 11, pp. 142, 147.

11. E.G. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 20, p. 302.

12. E.G. White, Review & Herald, June 17, 1880 para. 19.

13. E.G. White, Letter 16, 1882, dated May 31, 1882, from Healdsburg, California. Also found in MR852 - Manuscript Release No. 852: The Development of Adventist Thinking on Clean and Unclean Meats (1981), complied by Ronald Graybill.

14. Letter from Fannie Bolton to Mrs. E. C. Slawson, Dec. 30, 1914, as quoted in The Fannie Bolton Story, pp. 107-109 and published on www.TruthorFables.com. Fannie Bolton wrote: "I left to go with Sr. White on the very day when my brother was to be married. At the depot Sr. White was not with her party, so Eld. Starr hunted around till he found her behind a screen in the restaurant very gratified in eating big white raw oysters with vinegar, pepper and salt. I was overwhelmed by this inconsistency and dumb with horror. Eld. Starr hurried me out and made all sort of excuses and justifications of Sr. White's action; yet I kept thinking in my heart, 'What does this mean? What has God said? How does she dare eat these abominations?' On the cars out to California, W. C. White came into the train with a great thick piece of bloody beefsteak spread out on a brown paper and he bore it through the tourist car on hi own two hands. Sarah McEnterfer who is now with Sr. White as her attendant, cooked it on a small oil stove and everyone ate of it except myself and Marian Davis who I found out afterwards was more the author of the books purported to be Sr. White's than she was herself. I was with Mrs. White for seven and a half years like a soul on a rock, because of all kinds of inconsistencies, injustices, and chicaneries. I have seen Sr. White eat meat chicken, fish, fowl, shrimps, rich cake, pies, etc. etc. I cannot go into detail but Sr. Daniells told me she herself had cooked meat for Sr. White on the campground. Eld. Horn told me his wife had done the same thing. Sr. Rousseau told me that she too had done so. Dear Sister, Sr. White has written that when we do not live up to the testimonies we retract them. She has vitiated (made lifeless) her own claims..."

15. E.G. White, Testimonies Vol. 4, p. 435.

16. Ronald Numbers, Prophetess of Health, p. 171.

17. J.H. Kellogg letter to Ballenger, Jan. 9, 1936.

18. Numbers, p. 172.

19. https://www.eroticy.com/Discovery/Education/Item.asp%3fID=135%26Type=aphrodisiacs.

20. James White, A Solemn Appeal, "Evils and Remedy".

21. Dr. Charles Stewart letter to Ellen G. White, May 8, 1907.

22. E.G. White, Spalding and Magan, p. 38.

23. E.G. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 14, p. 330; Letter 128, 1896.

24. E.G. White, Letter 5, 1869, Manuscript Releases Vol. 14, p. 312.

25. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 487.

26. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 21.

27. E.G. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 14, p. 322.

28. E.G. White, Counsels on Diet and Foods p. 488.

29. E.G. White, Counsels on Diets and Foods, p. 353.

30. E.G. White, Letter 45, 1903, Counsels on Diets and Foods, p. 350. 31. E.S. Ballenger, Gathering Call, June 1944, p. 28.

32. A.G. Danniels, Minutes of the 1919 Bible and History Teachers Conference, August 1, 1919. (http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/1919bc/0801-1919bc.htm)

33. E.G. White, Review & Herald, Oct. 8, 1867; Counsels on Diets and Foods, p. 481.

34. E.G. White, Selected Messages, Book 2, p. 305.

35. E.G. White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 468.

36. E.G. White, Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 378.

37. Jesus in Matthew 23:4.

38. Didache, 11:10.

39. E.G. White, Spalding and Magan, p. 211.

40. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 352.

41. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 2, p. 362, 1870.

42. E.G. White, Testimonies, Vol. 9, p. 153.

Glendale Research –

Examination of Prophetic Claims of Ellen G. White

http://www.bible.ca/7-seventh-day-adventist-false-tim-sly.htm

The story of a Seventh-day Adventist (Tim Sly) who grew up in that church, only to learn the difficult truth, that his parents had raised him in a cult!

Forward

This paper is being written to two groups. One is my family and friends who are members of the Seventh-Day Adventist (SDA) church, which is most of them, and the other includes those who are not members or don't know much about the SDA church. For this reason there may be some explanations about the church or its beliefs that are boringly obvious to SDA's reading this but not to others.

I was reared in the SDA church from day one up to 21 years of age. I attended church every Sabbath (Saturday) and faithfully studied my Sabbath school lessons during the week. My mother sacrificed to send us to SDA schools, both elementary and high school academy, and later two years at Walla Walla College to study theology. I did it all right, I followed all the rules, I thought I was living right for God and doing what I was supposed to. I even got "the most spiritual student on campus" award engraved on a wood plaque at high school graduation. The problem was, it was me doing it. I was trying to live right. The bible says our righteousness is like filthy rags. All this stuff won't get a person one step closer to God. Only by accepting Christ's perfect life to cover our tainted lives can we enter God's presence. "In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence." (Ephesians 3:12) I had read things like this many times but I was still caught up in doing the works. It didn't hit my heart until I heard preaching by Dr. Desmond Ford, a gifted scholar who used to be in the SDA church. Everyone's experience of finding God comes in a different way at different times. This time it hit me when I heard him preach the cross of Christ and that it had all been done for me and I knew right then that I had eternal life (1 John 5:11-13). A weight was lifted and it changed me forever. No longer did I have to hope to get to heaven by doing it right.

After this event that made me a child of God, some of my "stable" beliefs that I had held to started to unravel. Desmond Ford was also teaching on Daniel 8:14, the heavenly sanctuary and Christ our high priest in Hebrews. But what really floored me was that Ellen G. White's writings and Adventist doctrine contradicted the Bible in the book of Hebrews. How could she be wrong? I did not know how to react because I had always been taught that she was a true prophet of God and we believed all her writings. Ultimately I had to make a choice and it was not Ellen White. I did not leave the church immediately. I kept studying and searching within Seventh-Day Adventism. I spent 2 years at Walla Walla College studying theology and did not find the answers there either. There is no explanation. It either lines up with the Bible or it doesn't.

The SDA church made it clear which way they would go in 1980. The Sanctuary Review Committee, made up of SDA administrators and scholars, met in Glacier View, Colorado to discuss Dr. Ford's views presented in his 991 page manuscript Daniel 8:14, The Day of Atonement and the Investigative Judgment.1 Instead of a discussion it turned into a trial where scholars' voices went unheard and administrators took over and proclaimed to the church that they would follow Ellen White and traditional doctrine. Reports I've read say that most of the members didn't even read Ford's manuscript. The scholars made a list of key points on which they agreed with Dr. Ford. Later a small group of administrators wrote a list of 10 points to use against him and proceeded to can him to the shock of the scholars who were promised it wouldn't be a trial. The end result, one of the brightest scholars in the church was stripped of his pastoral ordination and fired. The fall-out in the early 1980's resulted in over 100 ministers leaving the Adventist church because they had to stay true to their consciences, many members and some whole congregations went with them. I was one of these casualties. I guess you can't blame the church administrators. If they admitted their prophet and some of their doctrines were wrong, they probably feared the whole thing would fall apart. Or they just plain feared the unknown because they believed in Ellen so strongly, as I did.

See Appendix A at the back of this paper to read about a huge church denomination in 1986 that was confronted with just such a crisis.

I have not written formally to most of you on the subject of Ellen White since 1984 when I wrote the booklet The Search for Truth to explain to family and friends why I was leaving the church I had grown up in. Why write about Ellen White now? Several reasons. After the tragedy of September 11 we had a relative over who was "singing the praises" so to speak of Ellen White and how she had predicted this tragedy in New York. This got me interested in looking into it further. I found this quote on the Ellen G. White Estate Home Page on the web:

Contrary to unsubstantiated reports, Ellen White made no prediction concerning the destruction of a twin-towered building in New York or any other place in the world. She did foresee great disasters of various kinds resulting in the loss of magnificent buildings and many lives in the large cities before Jesus' return. She spoke of demonic forces exercising their power in earthquakes, fires, and other calamities. She also warned that the time will come when defiant rejection of God's Spirit will result in the complete removal of His restraining power over such destructive elements in the earth.

Due to the many inquiries received by the Ellen G. White Estate since the devastating events of September 11, we have gathered some of Ellen White's statements on the general topic of conflicts in the last days, mostly as found in the compilation Last Day Events and the devotional book Maranatha. This collection has been prepared with no attempt to make any specific application to recent events, places, or individuals. 4 (bold letters are in the original)

Turns out she didn't make this prediction. This got me motivated to revisit the whole issue of the prophetic claims of Ellen White. I finally took the time to read the book The White Lie, by Walter Rea (available at Amazon.com). I had only skimmed through parts of it in the past but now it will form a large part of the source content for this paper. The tone of the book can be offensive but the facts outlined in it are shocking and undeniable. In the 1980's when I was struggling with all this stuff it was enough for me just to find out where she contradicted Scripture, which we will discuss later. That was all I needed to turn me away. But now all the other details do matter as it makes up the whole picture of her credibility. Especially when you rub elbows with those who believe she was a true prophet who had special inspiration from God.

Believe me, it is a big deal to "leave" the SDA church because the members feel that they are the remnant of God, the one true church. It was very similar to the feelings involved when my wife Debbie left the Catholic church. Strict Catholics believe it is the one true church and that their system is the way to God.

There is no system that leads us to God, it is only through Christ. "Jesus answered, 'I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'" (John 14:6)

There is a remnant, a true church of God that remains but it is not the Jews, the Catholics, the SDA's, or any other church or system. It is those who trust in Christ alone as their only way of being saved and they rest under that grace.

"So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace." (Romans 11:6)

The Bible translation quoted in this paper is the New International Version. Any underlining or bold type in the Bible texts has been added.

The Prophet

Ellen Gould White- in the mid 1800's was one of the early founders and prophet of the newly forming Seventh-Day Adventist church. She died in 1915 but her legacy continues strong.

She wrote scores of books and volumes of other articles and sermons. She claimed to have had over 2000 visions from God. Her books are cherished by Adventist members and she is regarded as a true modern day prophet. Many of the unique foundational doctrines of the church were formed by her interpretation and visions. Her writings add a lot of details to the Biblical account that are not found in Scripture. And in practice, some Adventists hold her visions and writings with equal authority to Scripture. I know this because I lived in the system for many years. And as I write this I know some of you will deny this statement and if you do, then why is it so difficult or impossible for you to consider that she could be wrong in an interpretation or a doctrine? I have other Adventist friends who consider her as more of just a good Christian writer/helper, while I believe the bulk of the church holds her as inspired and prophetic. And that is the church's official stance. It was not just those around her who elevated her to this status. She herself made it clear when she made statements like this:

"...I am presenting to you what the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas, they are what God has opened before me in vision- precious rays of light shining from the throne." 5

An Adventist that I spoke with claims that he gets his beliefs and doctrines directly from the Bible and not from Ellen White. The only way you could do that is if you were isolated completely from anyone with just your Bible and the Holy Spirit and that is the only input you ever had since childhood. All of us are products of our environments and the people and institutions that taught us. If you were reared in a Seventh-Day Adventist environment, or attended one of their churches or schools, read their material, read their Sabbath school lessons, heard their sermons, etc, etc then you have been taught through the eyes of Ellen White. The bulk of it stems from her interpretation of the Bible. If you believe Adventist doctrine as they teach it, you didn't come up with it independently with just you and your Bible.

Sometimes as you go through the system, ideas start blending together and what you might think is Biblical is actually only found in Ellen White's writings. One example that I have shared before: I was discussing the end times with an Adventist that lives near me and he claimed that this quote was in the Bible, that "the Sabbath is the Seal of the living God" and it would be the deciding factor in the end times. He was absolutely sure it was in the Bible and that it was in Revelation. I told him to search for it and let me know where it is written. He never found it in the Bible because it was a statement Ellen White made in The Great Controversy p.561 (paperback). In his mind it was a certain Biblical principle.

Plagiarism?

This word is defined as the act of taking another's works and passing them off as your own without giving credit.6 Until recent times Ellen White's use of other authors was little known in the church at large. The problem had shown its head a number of times over the last hundred years but it had always been stifled. Evidence kept mounting and it could no longer be ignored until finally the flood gates were opened when Walter Rea released his book in 1982.

It had all started when Rea, an Adventist minister for 36 years before he was fired, was studying for his Ph.D. and came across some Old Testament history books by Edershiem that had language strikingly similar Ellen White's book Patriarchs and Prophets. In fact he found that "Edersheim's chapter titles, subtitles, and page headings paralleled and were many times almost identical with the chapter titles of Ellen White's Patriarchs and Prophets (1890)." 7 He started finding other books that were very similar to her writings also and his shock turned into a determination to get to the bottom of it. When Rea's research started getting out, the White Estate's first reaction was to try to cover it up and eventually it led to Rea's dismissal from the church. I will include this passage from his book. The Robert Olson mentioned here is from the Ellen White Estate:

"Olson took to the stump in an all-out effort to blunt the impact that my findings were beginning to have, for by now people in various regions of North America were asking for the evidence found in my research. At an afternoon presentation by Olson in January 1979 at Loma Linda university in California, someone in the audience asked about Mrs. White's borrowing from published sources. Olson's reply was to the effect that there was nothing to it, that all of her writings were her own. He then volunteered that there was some minister in Southern California making waves with allegations about borrowed material for her key book, The Desire of Ages, but that there was nothing to these rumors.

To say that I was in a state of shock after the meeting is to put it mildly. My file at that very time already held several letters from that same Olson encouraging me to keep sending him my comparisons of Ellen with her contemporaries. Furthermore, he had personally talked with me when he was in California only a short time before and had sought my promise that I would not publish any report on my work until he and the White Estate staff had been given additional time to survey the material. I had agreed to his request, and the fact of the agreement had been recorded in the in-house memo that he wrote afterward and that I held in my files.

So now I knew that Robert Olson either had a very short memory or was telling a white lie. In any case, it was obvious that the White Estate people knew much more that they were telling.

The files of the White Estate had referred to a book by William Hanna called The Life of Christ. Within twenty-four hours after the Loma Linda meeting, therefore, I had obtained Hanna's book. From that time on, I have learned more than I ever wanted to know.

Spectrum, a journal published independently by the Association of Adventist Forums, gave a background account of a January 1980 committee meeting at Glendale, California. This meeting was called by General Conference President Neal C. Wilson at my urging that con- sideration be given to the scope of the findings of Ellen White's literary indebtedness. Eighteen of the church's appointed representatives went on record that what my research showed was alarming in its proportions but that the study should continue - with additional help.7

Likewise, Spectrum later reported my dismissal by the church8 (after thirty-six years of service) primarily because of the disclosure article initiated and written by religious editor John Dart and published in the Los Angeles Times.9 Not one of the officials doing the firing had ever talked with Dart. Not one had seen the research on which the article was based. The heart of the issue itself was not important to church officials. It was necessary only that someone be punished so that others would stay in line and so that both Ellen White and the Seventh-day Adventist Church would appear to be innocent of any wrongdoing.

In view of what I have observed, experienced, and learned, I have thought it proper and necessary to record for future generations the findings of my ongoing study. These coming generations will want to know the truth about what has been unearthed from the past. It will be a part of what they will take into consideration in their religious experience and judgments." 7

It is not just the fact that Ellen copied from other writers and didn't give credit, it is the amount and the method. We are not talking about a few words or sentences here and there. We are talking about whole paragraphs, chapters and even books and it was passed off as if they were from her or from God. She took complete chapter headings and copied them into her works and then used the author's thoughts, ideas and exact phrases to produce the content of the book and then called it her own. This was never more evident than in books like Patriarchs and Prophets, E.G.W. 1890. Rea lists 65 chapter headings from this book that are almost word for word identical to Bible History/Old Testament, Alfred Edersheim 1876-80.8

Rea has included in his book hundreds of pages of side by side comparisons of Ellen White's writings to passages from other books published before hers. She had nearly 400 books in her personal library and she made use of many.

The Desire of Ages, 1898, one of Ellen's most beautifully written books, did not originate with her. Rea shows side by side comparisons from all these books that were copied to produce The Desire of Ages: o The Great Teacher, John Harris 1836 o The Life & Times of Jesus the Messiah, Alfred Edersheim 1883 o The Life of Christ, William Hanna 1863 o The Life of Christ, Ferederic W. Farrar 1877 o Walks and Homes of Jesus, Daniel March 1856 o Night Scenes in the Bible, Daniel March 1868-1870 o The Life of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, John Fleetwood 1844 o The Life and Works of Christ, Cunningham Geikie 1883

Here are some comparisons:

The Desire of Ages

Ellen G. White 1898

[466] No external force is employed. Under the influence of the Spirit of God, man is left free to choose whom he will serve. In the change that takes place when the soul surrenders to Christ, there is the highest sense of freedom. The expulsion of sin is the act of the soul itself....

The only condition upon which the freedom of man is possible is that of becoming one with Christ. "The truth shall make you free;" and Christ is the truth. Sin can triumph only by enfeebling the mind, and destroying the liberty of the soul.

Subjection to God is restoration to one's self, to the true glory and dignity of man. The divine law, to which we are brought into subjection, is the "law of liberty."

The Great Teacher

John Harris 1836 (1870 ed.)

[126] No external force is employed....It is true, the change is necessitated; but that moral necessity is the highest form of freedom. It is true that the mind is brought under the authority of a new law; but that law is the royal law of liberty....He comes to the emancipation of the will from a state of slavery; (for sin can only triumph by enfeebling the mind and extinguishing the liberty of the soul;) and hence [he]....calls into exercise its noblest powers. Even the expulsion of sin is the act of the soul itself...."The only condition on which the freedom of a finite will is possible, is, by its becoming one with the will of God" ...so that subjection to him is restoration to one's self.9

(Underlining was added)

The Desire of Ages

Ellen G. White 1898 [419] Jesus calls to His side three of His disciples... and leads them across the fields, and far up a rugged path, to a lonely mountainside .The Saviour and His disciples have spent the day in traveling and teaching, and the mountain climb adds to their weariness. Christ has lifted burdens from mind and body of many sufferers; He has sent the thrill of life through their enfeebled frame;... He is wearied with the ascent....

The light of the setting sun still lingers on the mountaintop....

The disciples do not venture to ask Christ whither He is going, or for what purpose. He has often spent entire nights in the mountains in prayer.

Walks and Homes of Jesus

Daniel March 1856

[150] The Master calls the three favorite disciples to himself, and makes his way... across the open fields... and up the steep ascent of the mountain. ... The light of the setting sun lingers long upon the top ....

He has spent the day in travel and in teaching, and this mountain climb at night adds a heavy weight to the weariness His hand has lifted the burden of infirmity from many shoulders, and sent the thrill of life into many a worn and wasted frame. But he himself is as much fatigued with the steep ascent as the impetuous Peter or the gentle John. They do not ask him whither he is going, or for what purpose.... They have known him many times to spend the whole night in desert places, or upon lonely mountains in prayer. 10

The thoughts expressed in The Desire of Ages aren't Ellen's original ideas, they aren't her beautiful words and they aren't visions from God. They are the expressions from all these writers from whom she copied.

Rea describes it this way, "Ellen's use of Hanna, and other sources as well, was not 'selected revelation,' with God's permission, to fill in a scene here or there to help a fading prophet's memory, but was a running commentary and paraphrase of each passage or chapter selected—often with pauses for a personal homily, but likewise often expanding that homily to be strikingly similar to the devotional material of the author copied." 11

Since her copying had become a well known fact, the White Estate took it upon themselves to catalog the percentages of her material they believe to be copied. They emphasize that this is the amount "presently known" and that it is an ongoing process. I believe it is just the tip of the iceberg and as they keep searching they keep finding more and more. It is painstakingly time consuming to find all these comparisons as you must read hundreds of books and then try to find the parallels in the other books. The White Estate lists 43 of her books that contain copied material. Even if you take the conservative numbers they say that 20% of the book The Great Controversy was copied, 12% of Sketches From the Life of Paul, 6% of Steps to Christ and so on.12 If I copied every 5th sentence of this essay without giving credit could I call it my own?

On their web page, the White Estate also quotes an attorney who proclaims that her use of other author's writings and making them her own was within the legal boundaries and it was not plagiarism.13 Excuse me, that is the definition of plagiarism! Where did they get this guy? Taking someone's material and passing it off as one's own was not right or acceptable in the 1800's and is it not right or acceptable now.

They go on to say, "Ellen White urged her readers to get copies of some of the very books she made use of—"14 I would be very interested if anyone could find one place where she said that. She never said it in any of her books. In fact, the only book where the publishers added some general comments about other sources being used was when The Great Controversy was republished in 1911, and that was only done because of the growing controversy over it.14

Some use the argument that she was shown in vision all these truths and ideas and that she wrote them down before she opened the books on her shelves containing the exact words and ideas written before that time. Hmmm.

The book The Great Controversy, 1886, had the most misuse of all. Besides the huge amount of content that was copied from James S. Wylie's book The History of Protestantism, 1876, they even took the pictures and illustrations from his book and deleted some of the artists' signatures or copied over them with "Pacific Press, Oakland, Cal." and put them into The Great Controversy. 15 Rea quotes a scholar named Don McAdams who did some research on this book:

"The historical portions of The Great Controversy that I have examined are selective abridgements and adaptation of historians. Ellen White was not just borrowing paragraphs here and there that she ran across in her reading, but in fact following the historians page after page, leaving out much material, but using their sequence, some of their ideas, and often their words. In the examples I have examined I have found no historical fact in her text that is not in their text. The hand-written manuscript on John Huss follows the historian so closely that it does not even seem to have gone through an intermediary stage, but rather from the historian's printed page to Mrs. Whites manuscript, including historical errors and moral exhortations." 16

Here are some comparisons:

The Great Controversy

E.G. White 1888 (1911 ed.)

[631] Celestial beings have taken an active part in the affairs of men. They have appeared clothed in garments that shone as the lightning; they have come as men in the garb of wayfarers. Angels have appeared in human form to men of God. They have rested, as if weary, under the oaks at noon. They have accepted the hospitalities of human homes. They have acted as guides to benighted travelers. They have, with their own hands, kindled the fires at the altar. They have opened prison doors and set free the servants of the Lord. Clothed with the panoply of heaven, they came to roll away the stone from the Saviour's tomb.

In the form of men, angels are often in the assemblies of the righteous.... Night Scenes in the Bible

Daniel March 1868-1870

[453] These high and mighty ones ... have borne an active part both in the common and in the great events of this world.... They have taken the form of men, and shown themselves to human eyes, and spoken aloud in the languages of earth....

And these celestial visitants have come from their far distant homes to take part in the affairs of men....

[454] They have rested under the shadow of oaks at noon as if weary... they have received hospitality in human homes at evening... they have guided and protected travelers on their way... they have rolled away the stone from the tomb... they have kindled the fire of the altar... they have clothed themselves in garments that shone like the lightning, and they have appeared in so common a garb as to be taken for wayfaring men.17

The Great Controversy

E.G. White 1888 (1911 ed.)

[399] The slaying of the Passover lamb was a shadow of the death of Christ. Says Paul: "Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us."

1 Corinthians 5:7. The sheaf of first fruits, which at the time of the Passover was waved before the Lord, was typical of the resurrection of Christ. Paul says, in speaking of the resurrection of the Lord and of all His people: "Christ the first fruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming." 1 Corinthians 15:23. Like the wave sheaf, which was the first ripe grain gathered before the harvest, Christ is the first fruits of that immortal harvest of redeemed ones that at the future resurrection shall be gathered into the garner of God.

Life Incidents

James White 1868

[162] The slaying of the Passover lamb was a type of the crucifixion of Christ. Paul says, Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. 1 Cor. v, 7.

The sheaf of the first fruits of the harvest, which was waved before the Lord, was typical of the resurrection of Christ. Paul again says, in speak of the resurrection of the Lord and all his people, Christ, the first fruits, afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 1 Cor. xv, 23. As this sheaf was like the grain in all t he wide harvest-field, only that it was the first ripe grain, so Christ arose from the dead a sample of all the just to be raised at his second coming. Then all the saints will have glorious bodies, like that of their divine Lord. Phil. iii, 21. 18

Steps to Christ E.G. White 1892

[96] Another element of prevailing prayer is faith. "He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him." Hebrews 11:6....

But to claim that prayer will always he answered in the very way and for the particular thing that we desire is presumption.

God's Will Known and Done

Almon Underwood 1860

[291] Another requisite of prevailing prayer, is faith. 'He that cometh unto God, must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him." Heb. 11:6.... You are not to expect it to come in a particular way, nor necessarily at Jus t such a time.19

Testimonies to Ministers

E.G. White 1923

[16] Consider ... His church, to be His own, His own fortress, which He holds in a sin- stricken, revolted world; and He intended that no authority should be known in it, no laws be acknowledged by it, but His own.

Satan has a large confederacy, his church. Christ calls them the synagogue of Satan because the members are the children of sin. The members of Satan's church have been constantly working to cast off the divine law, and confuse the distinction between good and evil...

The Great Teacher

John Harris 1836 (1870 ed.)

[158] It is the only fortress which he holds in a revolted world; and he intended, therefore, that no authority should be known in it, no laws acknowledged, but his own.... His high design is, that, as Satan has a church, (he himself speaks of the synagogue of Satan,) consisting of the children of sin, -- a church in which men have been always laboring to cast off the divine law, and to confound the distinctions between good and evil....20

Here are some questions raised by Walter Rea:

"The fact of Ellen White's borrowing or plagiarizing has been documented and acknowledged by recognized representatives of the Seventh-day Adventist Church over the years. But the information revealing the extent of her literary dependence has been deliberately kept from lay members until independent researchers began to make the facts public. Thus new problems arise because of these discoveries that have not yet been faced by the Adventist people or their present leaders. For example: 1. "Why did Ellen change most, if not all, of the copied author's speculations and suppositions into absolutes, so that the copywork made it appear that she was always on the scene of action in some "visionary" form, when obviously she wasn't?

2. "How do the footnotes and Bible texts she copied as fillers from others meet the criteria established for inspiration?

3. "How do the abuse and misuse of others' material on an extensive scale fit into the ethics of either her time or ours?

4. "Inasmuch as the extent of the copywork makes it certain that for Ellen to have done it all herself was humanly impossible, who among her helpers gets the credit for her "inspiration"?

5. "Whose authority are we now dealing with?"21

The Bible

This is probably the most serious area where I have convictions regarding Ellen White and her writings. This discussion will focus on several areas where she contradicts the Bible. When I first discovered some of these it was a hard pill to swallow. I could not believe that she could ever contradict the Bible. My upbringing had led me to believe that she was an instrument of God and that she regularly had visions from Him or had an angel standing by her dictating the messages that she was to write. God would not contradict Himself and inspire her with things that contradicted His Word.

Perfectionism

The first topic is perfectionism. Ellen White teaches, in no uncertain terms, that we must achieve perfect characters BEFORE Christ returns and He will not remove any defects or sin from us at that time because we will have already reached perfection, but will instead just give us the "finishing touch of immortality" before we step into heaven.22 And with Christ's help through a lot of our own toil and effort can work out ALL of our character defects and become perfect in this life just like Christ was perfect!

These are her own words on the subject:

"When He comes He is not to cleanse us of our sins, to remove from us the defects in our characters, or to cure us of the infirmities of our tempers and dispositions. If wrought for us at all, this work will all be accomplished before that time. When the Lord comes, those who are holy will be holy still. Those who have preserved their bodies and spirits in holiness, in sanctification and honor, will then receive the finishing touch of immortality. But those who are unjust, unsanctified, and filthy will remain so forever. No work will then be done for them to remove their defects and give them holy characters. The Refiner does not then sit to pursue His refining process and remove their sins and their corruption. This is all to be done in these hours of probation. It is now that this work is to be accomplished for us....

"But as we lay hold upon the truth of God, its influence affects us. It elevates us and removes from us every imperfection and sin, of whatever nature. Thus we are prepared to see the King in His beauty and finally to unite with the pure and heavenly angels in the kingdom of glory."23 "Paul describes the work of God's ambassadors as that by which every man shall be presented perfect in Christ Jesus. Those who embrace the truth of heavenly origin should be refined, ennobled, sanctified through it. It will require much painstaking effort to reach God's standard of true manhood....

"Perfection of character is a lifelong work, unattainable by those who are not willing to strive for it in God's appointed way, by slow and toilsome steps."24

"None need fail of attaining, in his sphere, to perfection of Christian character. By the sacrifice of Christ, provision has been made for the believer to receive all things that pertain to life and godliness. God calls upon us to reach the standard of perfection and places before us the example of Christ's character. In His humanity, perfected by a life of constant resistance of evil, the Saviour showed that through co-operation with Divinity, human beings may in this life attain to perfection of character. This is God's assurance to us that we, too, may obtain complete victory."25

"We are not yet perfect; but it is our privilege to cut away from the entanglements of self and sin, and advance to perfection. Great possibilities, high and holy attainments, are placed within the reach of all."26

"A well-balanced character is formed by single acts well performed. One defect, cultivated instead of being overcome, makes the man imperfect, and closes against him the gate of the Holy City. He who enters heaven must have a character that is without spot or wrinkle or any such thing. Naught that defileth can ever enter there. In all the redeemed host not one defect will be seen."27

"The precious hours of probation are granted that you may remove every defect from your character, and this you should seek to do, not only that you may obtain the future life, but that you may useful in this life." 28 (underlining added)

I don't believe the Bible ever teaches that we can achieve a perfect character like Christ or be without sin in this life. The difference is that Christ was born without sin and never committed any. He "had no sin" in Him. (2 Cor. 5:21) We, on the other hand, were born into sin and continue to "fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). We have a sinful nature, Christ did not.

"If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:8,9)

We cannot get to the point in this life where we are without sin and are ready to step into heaven and all we need is for God to just give us the immortality part. The point at which this will occur, that is, to be changed into Christ's likeness, made perfect and void of a sinful nature is at Christ's return.

"Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is." (1 John 3:2) "and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained all this, or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me." (Philippians 3:11,12)

"So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable, it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power, it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body." (1 Corinthians 15:42-44)

These verses show us that we are changed when Christ appears, and the resurrection from the dead and being made perfect happen at the same event. And we go to the grave in dishonor and weakness and are raised in glory and power. Here is good news:

"And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all." (Hebrews 10:10)

Christ has become "our righteousness, holiness and redemption."(1 Corinthians 1:30)

Although our goal is to be Christ-like, the only way we can be fit for heaven is by accepting Christ's perfect life to cover our lives and having His righteousness and holiness to stand in place of ours. It is not by us "removing every defect from our characters" through "slow and toilsome steps."

Saying or Feeling Saved

The next topic I want to discuss is the place where Ellen White says that we should not say that we are saved. Here is a passage from her book Christ's Object Lessons:

"Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or feel that they are saved. This is misleading. Every one should be taught to cherish hope and faith; but even when we give ourselves to Christ and know that He accepts us, we are not beyond the reach of temptation.29 (Underlining added)

One of the reasons she gives for not saying we are saved is that we might fall into temptation. But even if we fall into temptation and sin, it doesn't mean that we are not saved. None of us are sinless. The Bible teaches and emphasizes repeatedly that we are saved.

"And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved." (Acts 2:47)

"We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved..." (Acts 15:11)

"For in this hope we were saved." (Romans 8:24)

"By this gospel you are saved..." (1 Corinthians 15:2)

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith..." (Ephesians 2:8)

"who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth." (1Timothy 2:4) "who has saved us and called us to a holy life--not because of anything we have done..." (2 Timothy 1:9)

"he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit," (Titus 3:5)

"I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life." (1 John 5:13)

The Heavenly Sanctuary

The topic we have just discussed could lead to interesting theological discussions in many different religious circles. But the next one I want to show is very clear. To me it is black and white. There is no mistaking what Ellen White says and what the book of Hebrews says. She differs completely from the Bible in this next doctrine. It is concerning Christ our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. The Israelites had a sanctuary or tabernacle that consisted of a "holy place", the first apartment and a "most holy place", the second apartment behind the curtain. The priests carried on ceremonies daily in the holy place year round but only the High Priest could enter the most holy place where God's presence lived and that was only once a year on the day of atonement. (Exodus chapters 25-40, Hebrews 9:1-12) In the New Testament Christ is our High Priest pleading on our behalf. After his death and resurrection he went into the most holy place in heaven in God's presence and acts as our High Priest. The book of Hebrews explains this in detail. Ellen White taught that Christ only entered the holy place at his ascension and didn't go into the most holy place until the year 1844.

Ellen White writes:

"For eighteen centuries this work of ministration continued in the first apartment of the sanctuary (Holy Place)"

"...when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as fortold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy place, to perform the last division of His solemn work- to cleanse the sanctuary."

"...instead of coming to the earth at the termination of the 2300 days in 1844, Christ then entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary to perform the closing work of atonement preparatory to His coming." 30

(Underlining added)

The Bible says:

"We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, where Jesus, who went before us, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek."

(Heb 6:19-20)

"He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption." (Heb 9:12) (See also: Hebrews 8:1-2, Hebrews 9:1-12, Hebrews 9:24, Hebrew 10:19-20)

Christ entered the Most Holy Place in God's presence at his ascension. This is recorded in Hebrews which was written back in the 1st century! He did not wait until the year 1844. Christ entered the Most Holy Place almost 2000 years before Ellen White says he did. What makes this more significant is that she claimed that God told her this interpretation in a vision. God does not contradict Himself!

This doctrine has more meaning to Ellen White and the Seventh-Day Adventist church than a casual observer would notice. This understanding or interpretation is what saved the movement when this church was just beginning. A little history will clarify how this came about.

Big revivals were happening in the United States during the 1830's and many new churches/sects started up like the Mormons, Christian Science, Jehovah's Witness, etc. There was a Baptist minister/scholar named William Miller who had about 200,000 followers and they were called the Millerites. Miller preached that Christ would return to earth on Oct. 22, 1843 based on his interpretation of Daniel 8:13,14. When Christ didn't return on that date there was a falling out of some of the followers while others recalculated and realized they missed a year in the calculation so the date should have been Oct. 22, 1844. The revival resumed only to collapse when Christ didn't come back again in 1844. What followed was called The Great Disappointment. Many believers left the movement disheartened. Ellen Harmon (Ellen White's maiden name) was one of the ones who stayed to figure out what happened. The movement was saved when Hirum Edson and Ellen Harmon reported seeing visions of Christ entering the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary and concluded that this is what took place in 1844. So they believed this was the correct interpretation of Daniel 8:13,14. This offshoot from the Millerite movement became the Seventh-Day Adventist church. Sadly, this 3rd interpretation was also incorrect, but it has stuck with the church ever since. Over the years, some of the brightest scholars have left the church because of this doctrine and the use of Ellen White's writings.

Instead of believing that Daniel 8:13,14 foretold Christ's return in 1844, now they believed that the heavenly sanctuary was defiled by the sins of the saints and needed cleansing. They also believed the erroneous view that Christ did not go to the Most Holy Place in the presence of God at his ascension but only went to the Holy Place and stayed there until 1844 when He finally moved into the Most Holy Place to start an "Investigative Judgement" of the saints. Ellen White explains in The Great Controversy that in 1844 the "books of record" were opened and Christ started judging those who are "professed people of God" starting with the dead and moving on to the living.31 She writes: "Names are accepted, names rejected. When any have sins remaining on the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the books of life" 32 This is not judgment of the wicked, this is judgment of God's people from 1844 until now and your name could come up at any moment. According to this teaching, Christ is going over the books to see if you have any sins that might have been left on the books unrepented or unforgiven, and if He finds one, you are out of luck. This is not the God of the Bible I see! This "Investigative Judgement" is NOT Biblical! Yes God will judge the wicked but He rewards those who are His. When those who are covered by Christ's blood face the judgment, He hands out rewards not condemnation. Where in the Bible does it say God records the sins of His saints and then later uses it to blot their names out of the book of life? The only place where the New Testament mentions blotting out someone's name is actually affirming that He will never blot out his name.

"He who overcomes will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before my Father and his angels." (Revelation 3:5)

The Bible never gives the idea that God will blot our names out of the book of life if he happens to find one sin left on the books. This is what I see the Scripture saying:

"Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord," (Acts 3:19)

"However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

"Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered."

"Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him.""

(Romans 4:4-8)

"as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us." (Psalms 103:12)

"I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more." (Isaiah 43:25)

"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,"

(Romans 8:1)

"I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life." (John 5:24)

This "Investigative Judgement" that is woven into this doctrine does more to damage the Gospel than anything. It makes a person feel unsettled and unsure of his salvation.

When Ellen White and the early founders made this 3rd incorrect interpretation of

Daniel 8 they totally disregarded the context. Daniel 8:9-14 relates to an evil force (the little horn) desolating the earthly sanctuary NOT the sins of God's people desolating the heavenly sanctuary!

The prophecy in Daniel 8 refers to the earthly Jewish sanctuary. The 2300 days mentioned in Daniel 8:14 does not equal 2300 years, as they are assuming, which wrongly stretches it out to the year 1844. This prophecy was literally fulfilled in history (171-165 B.C.). Antiochus Epiphanes and his armies murdered the high priest, stopped the daily sacrifices and desecrated Israel's earthly sanctuary by slaughtering pigs on the alter. Judas Maccabees won back control of Jerusalem and reconsecrated the temple in 165 B.C. and the Jews still celebrate the Feast of Hanukkah to commemorate it. This terrible reign of Antiochus over Israel and their temple fits in the 2300 literal days of the Daniel 8:14 prophecy.33

Christ does have a ministry in the heavenly sanctuary as explained in Hebrews 8, 9, 10 but it has nothing to do with Daniel 8.

Stories of the Bible

Ellen White wrote (or copied) volumes of material filling in great details to the accounts and stories that are recorded in the Bible. She writes these details as if they are facts and that God gave her this extra knowledge and understanding. As I have written on this subject previously, her accounts of stories like Noah, the tower of Babel and Jacob's night wrestling with the angel are different and inaccurate from the Bible account. Who are we to believe when we see inaccuracies and we know much of this material didn't come through a vision from God but rather from other religious writers of her day?

Conclusion

To dispel any doubts about what she claimed for her own writings I will include these quotes as pointed out in Rea's book, page 52 & 189. Keep in mind that she refers to her writings collectively as the "testimonies" and there is a multi-volume set of her books called the Testimonies for the Church.

"In ancient times God spoke to men by the mouth of prophets and apostles. In these days he speaks to them by the Testimonies of His Spirit." 34

"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." 35

"Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are my own." 36

"Abundant light has been given to our people in these last days. Whether or not my life is spared, my writings will constantly speak, and their work will go forward as long as time shall last. My writings are kept on file in the office, and even though I should not live, these words that have been given to me by the Lord will still have life and will speak to the people." 37

"When I went to Colorado I was so burdened for you that, in my weakness, I wrote many pages to be read at your camp meeting. Weak and trembling, I arose at three o'clock in the morning to write you. God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, it was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been shown me. In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you what the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas, they are what God has opened before me in vision- precious rays of light shining from the throne." 38 All of these issues concerning Ellen White wouldn't matter so much if only she had claimed to be just another Christian writer and her followers believed the same. But she claimed that she had a direct connection with God, received thousands of visions and at times had an angel standing next to her showing her what to write. This puts her a cut above all the rest. And it makes her an inspired prophet of God as officially held by the Seventh-Day Adventist church.

I can't go down this road any longer because of all the reasons I've shared in this paper. Each one has to make their own decision. I know that for many Adventists who read this it will have no effect at all. But I still have the hope that for someone it may spark an interest as to what the truth is concerning all of this.

I know I am very dogmatic. I see things as black & white. I don't have time for truth mixed with error. There is barely enough time to study the truth. I can get emotionally charged when discussing this. I only hope that I haven't put this forward in an offensive manner causing it to take away from the meaning.

Even though these issues have a huge bearing on one's beliefs and practice, I know that the most important issue is what you do with Christ when confronted with the truth about Him.

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." (John 3:16-18)

Footnotes

1. Desmond Ford, Daniel 8:14, The Day of Atonement and the Investigative Judgment

(Euangelion Press, 1980)

2. 3. 4. 5. Ellen White, Testimonies, Volume 5, p.67 6. Walter Rea, The White Lie, (M & R Publications, 1982), p. 48-49 7. Ibid, 3rd & 4th page of the Prologue 8. Ibid, p. 77 9. Ibid, p. 313 10. Ibid, p. 313 11. Ibid, p. 91-92 12. 13. 14. Walter Rea, The White Lie, (M & R Publications, 1982), p. 49-50 15. Ibid, p. 147 16. Ibid, p. 164 17. Ibid, p. 361 18. Ibid, p. 238-239 19. Ibid, p. 379 20. Ibid, p. 381 21. Ibid, 6th page of the Prologue 22. Ellen G. White, Christian Temperance, Vol.2, p. 355 23. Ibid, p. 355 24. Ellen G. White, Testimony for the Church, Vol.5, p. 500 25. Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 530 26. Ibid, p. 565 27. Ellen G. White, Messages to Young People, p. 144 28. Ibid, p. 415-416 29. Ellen G. White, Christ's Object Lessons, p. 155 30. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 372-3 (paperback) 31. Ibid, p. 422-425 32. Ibid, p. 425 33. The 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel Eight, Bible Advocate Press, 1981, p. 36-38 34. EGW, Testimonies for the Church, vol.4, pp.147-148 Testimony 27 (1876)

35. Ibid, vol.5, p. 66 Testimony 31 (1882)

36. EGW, Selected Messages, Book 1, p. 37

37. General Conference of SDA, Exec Committee to W.C.White, Oct.3, 1921 p. 3

38. EGW, Selected Messages, Book 1, p. 27

Ellen White and the Idolatry of Photography

By Ray Pitts

Mrs. White unequivocally condemned photography as a waste of money and a violation of the second commandment:

"During the night I was sorely distressed. A great burden rested upon me. I had been pleading with God to work in behalf of his people. My attention was called to the money which they had invested in photographs. I was taken from house to house, through the homes of our people, and as I went from room to room, my Instructor said, 'Behold the idols which have accumulated!'"1

"This making and exchanging of photographs is a species of Idolatry. Satan is doing all he can to eclipse heaven from our view. Let us not help him by making picture-idols. We need to reach a higher standard than these human faces suggest. The Lord says, 'Thou shall have no other Gods before me.'"2

"After going from home to home, and seeing the many photographs, I was instructed to warn our people against this evil. This much we can do for God. We can put these picture-idols out of sight. They have no power for good, but interpose between God and the soul."3 "Every true child of God will be sifted as wheat, and in the sifting process every cherished pleasure which diverts the mind from God must be sacrificed. In many families the mantel- shelves, stands, and tables are filled with ornaments and pictures. Albums, filled with photographs of the family and the photographs of their friends, are placed where they will attract the attention of visitors. ... Is this not a species of Idolatry?"4

"As I visit the homes of our people and our schools, I see that all the available space on tables, what-nots, and mantlepieces is filled up with photographs. On the right hand and on the left are seen the pictures of human faces. God desires this order of things to be changed. Were Christ on earth, He would say, 'Take these things hence.' I have been instructed that these pictures are so many idols, taking up the time and thought which should sacredly devoted to God."5

"We have for years been waging war with spiritual idolatry...... I am pained to see the photographs multiplied and hanging everywhere."6

Did she practice what she preached?

Amazingly, in the midst of writing these testimonies, while "waging war" against the evil of photography, Mrs. White was having pictures of herself and her family taken! Here is the evidence:

"I do not think I shall ever get a picture to equal the one Dunham has made for me. He says I had better have the large one put on a small card. What do you think of this plan?"7

"Dunham gave me one dozen of these pictures of yours. Shall I send them to you? What do you think of them? I told him I did not like them. They did not look natural, but you can use them. If so let me know."8

Nine years earlier, Mrs. White had made a public apology for her picture-taking activities9:

We acknowledge our error. We deeply regret that we ever consented to sit for our pictures. For years I would not consent to have our pictures taken, although solicited to do so. How many times I have wished we had remained steadfast. But all we can do now is to confess our wrong and ask God to forgive us, and entreat the forgiveness of our brethren and sisters."10

In public she acknowledged and repented of her mistake in 1867, but in private she was still making picture idols in 1876. Ten years later, in 1886, we find Mrs. White privately encouraging others to make photographs, even offering to pay the expenses:

Well, Addie [Walling], I would be pleased to have you get your pictures taken and write to May [Walling] to do the same. I will settle the bills. I want to see the faces of my children once more.11

She must have had a significant collection of pictures when she died because she goes through the trouble of mentioning them in her will:

NINTH: My household furniture, dishes, carpets, pictures, photographs, and clothing, I give and bequeath in equal parts to my sons, James Edson White and William C. White.12 Adventists reap the fruit of Mrs. White's testimony

Apparently some Adventists in Europe took Mrs. White's testimonies to be the Word of God and started burning their pictures. Mrs. White relates the events that happened in Christiana in 1886:

Some had been bringing in false tests, and had made their own ideas and notions a criterion, magnifying matters of little importance into tests of Christian fellowship, and binding heavy burdens upon others. Thus a spirit of criticism, fault-finding, and dissension had come in, which had been a great injury to the church. And the impression was given to unbelievers that Sabbath-keeping Adventists were a set of fanatics and extremists, and that their peculiar faith rendered them unkind, uncourteous, and really unchristian in character. Thus the course of a few extremists prevented the influence of the truth from reaching the people.

Some were making the matter of dress of first importance, criticising articles of dress worn by others, and standing ready to condemn every one who did not exactly meet their ideas. A few condemned pictures, urging that they are prohibited by the second commandment, and that everything of this kind should be destroyed.

These one-idea men can see nothing except to press the one thing that presents itself to their minds. Years ago we had to meet this same spirit and work. Men arose claiming to have been sent with a message condemning pictures, and urging that every likeness of anything should be destroyed. They went to such lengths as even to condemn clocks which had figures, or "pictures," upon them. Now we read in the Bible of a good conscience; and there are not only good but bad consciences. There is a conscientiousness that will carry everything to extremes, and make Christian duties as burdensome as the Jews made the observance of the Sabbath. The rebuke which Jesus gave to the scribes and Pharisees applies to this class as well: "Ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God." One fanatic, with his strong spirit and radical ideas, who will oppress the conscience of those who want to be right, will do great harm. The church needs to be purified from all such influences. ...

It is true that altogether too much money is expended upon pictures; not a little means which should flow into the treasury of God is paid to the artist. But the evil that will result to the church from the course of these extremists is far greater than that which they are trying to correct. It is sometimes a difficult matter to tell just where the line is, where the picture- making becomes a sin. ...

A few in Christiania had gone so far as to burn all the pictures in their possession, destroying even the likenesses of their friends. While we had no sympathy with these fanatical movements, we advised that those who had burned their pictures should not incur the expense of replacing them."13

Notice that she blames the members of the Christiana church for interpreting the 2nd commandment to apply to pictures when she herself had taught it for years from her testimonies which supposedly came from God. She even claimed Christ would say, "Take these things hence", and that an Angel had told her in vision that these photographs were "idols." It is no surprise the people reacted the way they did. They were simply following their consciences in obeying what they thought was a testimony from God Himself! By burning their photographs they were following Mrs. White's instructions to their logical conclusion. If God said a photograph was an idol, then it should be destroyed!

Mrs. White was the one who had been teaching the people that photographs were idols; therefore, she was the origin of the "criticism, fault-finding, and dissension" in the Christiana Adventist Church. She condemns the Christiana people for their "false test" while failing to mention that she was the one who originated that test. In essence, she is saying that to take her testimonies literally and obey them is to be "fanatical" and "extreme".

Photographic Expenses

Photography was a very expensive art in the late 1800s. The Whites had pictures of James taken, as is indicated by Mrs. White's letter to her son W.C. after James' death:

"If you have your father's pictures, please bring them. I want to show them. My pocket album I left at Healdsburg."14

Where did these photos of James come from? One possibility is suggested from this letter written to James in 1876:

"Lathrop is as pleased a man as you ever saw with the pictures, especially of you. He says that she will sell you the negative for five hundred dollars. Beside what we take, it will bring him that much custom. He thinks Ingleson's a flat affair. He [Lathrop] has your picture in the window for show."15

$500 for one negative! That equals 1000 days wages for the average working man in those days! How can this expense be justified in light of what she wrote:

"In the vision given me in Rochester, Dec. 25, 1865, I was shown that picture-taking had been carried to too great lengths by Sabbath-keeping Adventists; and that much means had been spent in multiplying copies which was worse than lost. This means should have been invested in the cause of God. I was shown that we had done wrong in expending means in picture-taking."16

"Again I plead that instead of spending money for pictures of yourself and your friends, you should turn it into another channel. Let the money that has been devoted to the gratification of self, flow into the Lord's treasury [SDA Church] to sustain those who are working to save perishing souls."17

"These photographs cost money. Is it consistent for us, knowing the work that is to be done at this time, to spend God's money in producing pictures of our own faces and the faces of our friends? Should not every dollar that we can spare be used in the upbuilding of the cause of God? These pictures take money that should be sacredly devoted to God's service; and they divert the mind from the truths of God's word." 18

Conclusion

Why did Ellen White tell others that photographs were (1) idols, (2) self gratification, (3) a waste of money, (4) diverting minds from God's Word, (5) eclipsing heaven from our view, (6) interposing between God and the soul, and (7) taking up time and thought that should be devoted to God while at the same time she was privately having photographs taken of herself and her family at great expense? Could it be that she did not really believe her testimonies came from God?

NOTES

1. Ellen White, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Sep. 10, 1901.

2. Ellen White, Messages to Young People, p. 316.

3. Ibid., p. 318.

4. Ellen White, Bible Echo and Signs of the Times, Jan. 14, 1901.

5. Ellen White, Messages to Young People, p. 316.

6. Ellen White, The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, p. 887.

7. Ellen White, Letter 17, 1876, p. 2 (To James White, April 30, 1876).

8. Ellen White, Letter 21, 1876, p. 2 (To James White, May 5, 1876).

9. Regarding her activities prior to 1867, in 1865 we find Mrs. White apparently planning to distribute photos of herself to the people at the Dansville clinic:

"Please send to us at Our Home, Dansville, New York, one half a dozen of our pictures, both on one card, and one dozen each separate; also two of James, large, and two of mine, the best you can find." - Letter 6, 1865 (To 'Dear Children,' September 22, 1865. Source: "Manuscript Releases" Vol. 5, p. 385)

10. Ellen White, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Mar. 26, 1867.

11. Ellen White, Letter to Addie and May Walling, July 21, 1886; quoted in Manuscript Releases, Vol. 8, p.79.

12. Ellen White's Last Will and Testament

13. Ellen White, Historical Sketches, pp. 211-212.

14. Ellen White, Letter 15, 1882, p. 1. (To W. C. White, May 23, 1882).

15. Ellen White, Letter 1a, 1876, p.1. (To James White, March 24, 1876).

16. Ellen White, Review, Mar. 26, 1867.

17. Ellen White, Home Missionary, June 1, 1893. 18. Ellen White, Review, Sep. 9, 1901.

Did Ellen White Wear Jewellery?

S. Cleveland and D. Anderson

"A fantastic dress, a display of gold chains and gaudy laces, is a certain indication of a weak head and a proud heart." -- Ellen G. White, 3SM 244

Mrs. White condemned the wearing of jewellery as idolatry against God:

"The Lord God of heaven calls upon man to put away their idols, to cut off every extravagant desire, to indulge in nothing that is simply--for display and parade, and to study economy in purchasing garments and furniture. Do not expend one dollar of God's money in purchasing needless articles. Your money means the salvation of souls. Then let it not be spent for gems, for gold, or precious stones."1

Mrs. White makes it clear God is calling on Adventists to "put away their idols" of jewelry that are used "for display and parade". Could it be that Ellen White, while telling others to put away their jewelry, was herself indulging in the "idols"?

On the left is a photograph of Ellen White with her twin sister Elizabeth at age 51. Notice that Ellen is displaying a decorative brooch on her collar and is parading a decorative chain. This photograph was taken 15 years after she condemned others for wearing similar "idols" of jewelry:2

"To dress plainly, abstaining from display of jewelry and ornaments of every kind, is in keeping with our faith."3

Mrs. White said she was "pained" to see the youth wearing golden chains and that it was a sign of "religious declension":

"I have marked with pain your religious declension and your disposition to trim and ornament your apparel. Some have been so unfortunate as to come into possession of gold chains or pins, or both, and have shown bad taste in exhibiting them, making them conspicuous to attract attention."4

One might ask, What about Mrs. White wearing of a golden chain? Was it a sign of religious declension in her life? Let us give Sister White the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps she made one slip-up for a private photo, but as a practice, did she really wear jewellery in public? To answer that question, we need to ask the eyewitnesses. In his defence of Ellen White, Adventist author Herbert E. Douglass, writes:

"In 1957-1959, Horace Shaw, long-time professor of speech at Emmanuel Missionary College (Andrews University), developed a list of 366 people who had heard Ellen White speak. He asked them to recall her platform manner, whether the event was public or private, what impressed them most, and what they remembered about her message."5

Notice what the eyewitnesses said regarding her appearance:

"Twenty-nine referred to her dress material, describing it as 'black velvet or silk,' 'two-piece garment,' 'dress did not seem to adorn her, she seemed to adorn the dress.' As an accent to the black, Mrs. White often wore white cuffs and collar. Other accessories mentioned were a 'gold watch chain' with a 'silver watch in her pocket, and a simple brooch.'"6

The eyewitnesses indicate Mrs. White adorned herself with a gold watch chain, silver watch, and brooch. Contrast this with her rebuke of an Adventist woman who wore jewellery:

"In answer, the lady displayed a gold ring on her finger, given her by an unbeliever, and said she thought it no harm to wear such ornaments. 'We are not so particular,' said she, 'as formerly. Our people have been over scrupulous in their opinions upon the subject of dress. The ladies of this institution wear gold watches and gold chains, and dress like other people. It is not good policy to be singular in our dress; for we cannot exert so much influence.' We inquire, Is this in accordance with the teachings of Christ? Are we to follow the Word of God, or the customs of the world?"7

According to Mrs. White, those who wear "golden chains" are not "in accordance with the teachings of Christ."

The mere fact that Mrs. White sat for a photograph is also contrary to what she taught:

"This making and exchanging of photographs is a species of Idolatry. Satan is doing all he can to eclipse heaven from our view. Let us not help him by making picture-idols. We need to reach a higher standard than these human faces suggest. The Lord says, 'Thou shall have no other Gods before me.'"8

Many Adventists are surprised to learn that Mrs. White wore jewelry and made photographs in private, while at the same time telling her followers that God was displeased with such activities. The fact that she engaged in activities so opposed to her own testimonies could lead one to question whether she really believed that what she wrote came from God. Did she really have confidence in her own testimonies? Or did she know then what many Adventists are just finding out today, that her testimonies did not originate with God at all, but originated in the teachings of the strong personalities around her? Perhaps these testimonies were written to support the teachings of Adventist leaders, but deep in her heart, Mrs. White did not really believe they came from God. This might explain why she advocated certain teachings in public, but did not follow them in her private life.

"If I write one thing and act another, I am a hypocrite" --Ellen White, Manuscript Releases Vol. 19, p. 31

White Estate Doctors Photographs In the following pictures take note of the one on the left. It is the original photo of Mrs. White with her granddaughter, Ella Robinson. On the right is the retouched photo appearing in Ellen G. White, The Later Elmshaven Years, with Ella's necklace noticeably absent. Apparently the White Estate is not only adept at altering the words of Ellen White but they are also proficient at altering photographs. The alteration is necessary in order to perpetuate the myth that early SDA's did not wear jewellery.

Sister White Acknowledges Wearing Expensive Jewellery

Notice the following quote where Mrs. White acknowledges receiving a costly piece of jewelry and wearing it repeatedly:

"Sister Kerr took me into her parlour bedroom, and opened a box of ruches [A STRIP OF LACE, NET, RIBBON, OR THE LIKE, USED IN PLACE OF A COLLAR OR CUFF] for the neck, and desired me to accept the entire box. Her husband is a merchant in Honolulu, and though not a believer, he is a very liberal man. She also presented me with three yards and a half of silk, costing three dollars a yard with which I was to make a sack. [A SHORT COAT OR JACKET FITTING SOMEWHAT LOOSELY] I saw that she was very desirous that I should have this, and I could not refuse without greatly disappointing her. It was beautiful silk left from a dress which she had. She also gave me a silk scarf, and a ten dollar pin, composed of white stones, very plain and serviceable. I thought I could not accept this, but she looked so sorry, that I finally did take it, and have worn it ever since, for it is handy and becoming, while it is not showy at all."9

Note: A "ten dollar pin" in 1891 is equivalent to a $205 pin in 2005.10 This could hardly be considered a cheap piece of jewellery. In 1890 the average female labourer received a salary of $4.50 per week.11 Therefore, a ten dollar pin represents more than two weeks worth of pre- tax wages.

One must wonder why Mrs. White did not rebuke Sister Kerr for not giving the money to the poor. After all, in an earlier "testimony", Mrs. White resoundly condemned her followers for spending money on jewelry instead of giving it to the poor:

"God calls upon the young to deny themselves of needless ornaments and articles of dress, even if they cost but a few dimes, and place the amount in the charity box. He also calls upon those of mature age to stop when they are examining a gold watch or chain, or some expensive article of furniture, and ask themselves the question: Would it be right to expend so large an amount for that which we could do without or when a cheaper article would serve our purpose just as well? By denying yourselves and lifting the cross for Jesus, who for your sakes became poor, you can do much toward relieving the suffering of the poor among us; and by thus imitating the example of your Lord and Master, you will receive His approval and blessing."12

Finally, let us contrast Mrs. White's practice of wearing jewellery with what she wrote:

"The ornamentation of the person with jewels and luxurious things is a species of idolatry. ... Expensive dress and adornments of jewellery give an incorrect representation of the truth that should always be represented as of the highest value."13 Perhaps we should heed what is written in the Didache, an early Christian document believed to have been written around the first century A.D. The Didache advises early Christians on one sure method of identifying a false prophet:

"If any prophet teaches the truth, yet does not practice what he teaches, he is a false prophet." 14

NOTES

1. Ellen White, Welfare Ministry, p. 267.

2. Photograph taken in 1878 at Battle Creek, Michigan. Photo is on file at the James White Research Library, Andrews University. The digitally scanned image of Ellen White and her twin sister wearing jewelry was provided by www.bible.ca. Another digitized version of the same photograph is available from the Loma Linda University Library's web site, although the image is smaller and the tone appears to have been altered to diminish the presence of the chain somewhat. The images of Ellen White's granddaughter were scanned in from the book White-Washed by Sydney Cleveland. For more photos of Ellen White and her family wearing jewelry, please get Pastor Cleveland's 233-page book Click Here.

3. Ellen White, Testimonies, Vol. 3, p. 366.

4. Ibid., pp. 366-367.

5. Herbert E. Douglass, Messenger of the Lord: The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White, chapter 12.

6. Ibid.

7. Ellen G. White, Evangelism, p. 271.

8. Ellen White, Messages to Young People, p. 316. For more Ellen White quotes on the idolatry of photography,

9. Ellen White, Letter 32a, 1891, pp. 2, 3. To J.E. and Emma White, December 7, 1891. Parenthetical quotes, in caps, were supplied by the White Estate.

10. The Morgan Inflation Calculator. What cost $10 in 1891 would cost $205.25 in 2005.

11. "Work and the American Dream" by Linda Maynard, © 2005 by the Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1980/6/80.06.06.x.html.

12. Ellen G. White, Testimonies Vol. 4, p. 511.

13. Ellen White, Bible Training School, May 1, 1908.

14. Didache, 11:10 New Age/Occult Markings

on Ellen G. White's Writings

-- "Mother Earth", "Vital Force"

The late Ellen G. White (November 26, 1827-July 16, 1915), known to Seventh-day Adventists as "God's Messenger" or "God's Prophet," used New Age/occult terminology and taught New Age doctrine via some of the pages of her voluminous published works.

For the sake of brevity I did not cite all the passages in which Mrs. Ellen G. White used the New Age term, "vital force" or "vital forces." Below are selected citations from Mrs. White's complete published works found at http://www.whiteestate.org. [Quotations are used in accordance with the Fair Use Copyright Law. Bold emphasis added]

New Age/Occult terms: Mother earth, Mother Nature

--Cited from The Health Reformer, March 1, 1871 and The Health Reformer, May 1, 1871

Ellen G. White referred to the earth as Mother Earth:

May has come, with all her beauties of the sunshine, clothing nature with a glorious dress. Mother earth has laid off her brown mantle, and wears her cheerful robes of green. The trees and shrubs upon the lawn are decorated with their opening buds and flowers of varied tints. The peach and cherry are covered with blossoms of pink and white, and the pure music from a thousand of nature's happy and cheering songsters, unite to awaken joy and thankfulness in our hearts. {HR, "The Beautiful May" May 1, 1871 par. 1} (Emphasis added)

The trees, shrubs, and flowers, will soon be attractive to the eye, inviting all who delight in the beauties of nature to enjoy life out of doors. The flowers and green foliage have not appeared, but mother earth has thrown from her bosom her white mantle, and she even now bears a cheerful aspect in the bright sunshine and shadows. All should now seek employment some hours every day out of doors. {HR, March 1, 1871 par. 3} (Emphasis added)

Ellen G. White chose Beltane (the highest holiday in Druid witchcraft) as the time to cite a lengthy passage by Fanny B. Johnson that contains New Age terminology and teaches New Age doctrine:

Lovely May is here. Enjoy her, all you who can, while she is with us. Read what Fanny B. Johnson, in Laws of Life, says under the caption, {HR, "The Beautiful May" May 1, 1871 par. 4}

Mrs. White endorsed Fanny Johnson's highly New Age passage in which she urged Mother Nature's children to "come out of doors, and take part in the grand entertainment which she has gotten up with wondrous skill, taste, and power":

OUT OF DOORS. IN BEHALF OF OUR GOOD MOTHER NATURE, I HEREBY INVITE AND ENTREAT ALL HER CHILDREN WITHIN SOUND OF MY VOICE OR SIGHT OF MY PENTRACES TO COME OUT OF DOORS, AND TAKE PART IN THE GRAND ENTERTAINMENT WHICH SHE HAS GOTTEN UP WITH WONDROUS SKILL, TASTE, AND POWER. {HR, May 1, 1871 par. 5} (Emphasis added)

Johnson presented Mother Nature (not the Lord Jesus Christ) as the way for poverty-stricken, burden-bearing human beings to escape from their condition:

MOTHER NATURE WILL TAKE YOU IN HER LAP, WILL WOO YOU WITH THE BREATH OF APPLE BLOSSOMS AND CLOVERS, WILL FAN YOUR CHEEK WITH PERFUME-LADEN AIRS, WILL SOOTHE YOU TO SLEEP WITH DROWSY HUM OF BEES, AND MURMUR OF STREAMS, AND RUSTLE OF MYRIAD FLUTTERING LEAVES, WILL WAKEN YOU WITH JOYOUS VOICES, WILL TAKE AWAY FROM YOUR SPIRITS THE PEEVISHNESS AND LITTLENESS THAT IS SURE TO GATHER IN A NARROW ROUND OF CARE, AND PUT IN THEIR PLACE SOMETHING OF HER SPIRIT OF CHARITY, AND LARGENESS, AND HARMONY, AND BRING YOU INTO SYMPATHY WITH THE DIVINE.

THERE WAS NEVER BETTER CHANCE FOR POVERTY-STRICKEN, BURDEN- BEARING HUMAN BEINGS TO ESCAPE FROM THEIR CONDITION AND INDULGE IN LUXURIES FURNISHED WITHOUT MONEY AND WITHOUT PRICE. I PROMISE YOU NATURE WILL SHOW NO FAVORS ON ACCOUNT OF WORLDLY DISTINCTIONS. SHE WILL MINISTER NO MORE GRACIOUSLY TO THE QUEEN OF A REALM THAN TO HER HUMBLEST MENIAL, PROVIDED THAT MENIAL BE LOYAL TO HERSELF. BUT TO THOSE WHO LOOK UPON HER WITH "LOVERS' EYES" SHE MUST OF NECESSITY BE PARTIAL. SHE SHOWS THEM WONDROUS THINGS IN HER PAGES, AND REVEALS HERSELF TO THEM AS SHE CANNOT TO OTHERS. {HR, May 1, 1871 par. 6} (Emphasis added)

Ellen G. White did not disclaim any of Fanny Johnson's New Age teachings and warn her readers to refrain from being wooed by the devil in Mother Nature's garb. An ambassador of the Lord Jesus Christ would contradict Fanny Johnson and insist that Jesus Christ's invitation to the weary is the only one that is valid:

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." (Matthew 11:28)

The Lord Jesus Christ offers the only legitimate spiritual rest but the devil seeks to ensnare the weary with a counterfeit rest via Ellen G. White's endorsement of Johnson's "Mother Nature," who is known to New Agers as Earth Mother, or Gaia.

New Age/Occult term: Vital Force Ellen G. White favored the occult term, "vital force." Vital Force is a foundational concept in New Age doctrine. Vital Force is another name for Chi which is commonly known in the West as life force, vital force, universal energy, subtle energy, etc.

Chi (also ki, qi or ji) - A “life force” pervading the universe that sustains the body & the material world. These terms & concepts come from Eastern beliefs but are most prominently used in the martial arts and in alternative healing. Both ki & chi can be seen in the following terms: Aikido, Tai Chi, Reiki (energy healing). This force may also be known as the life force, vital force, the vital energy, bioenergy, universal life force, or universal energy. The belief in such a force is at the heart of occultism and is also found in New Age beliefs. (1) [Emphasis added]

New Agers believe that Vital Force (subtle energy) is a nonmaterial force that sustains life: vital force (bioenergy, cosmic energy, cosmic energy force, cosmic force, cosmic life energy, cosmic life force, elan vital, energy of being, force of life, force vital, inner vital energy, internal energy, life, life energy, life force, life force energy, life power, life source energy, nerve energy, nerve force, personal energy, spirit, subtle energy, universal energy, universal life energy, universal life energy power, universal life force, universal life force energy, universal life principle, vital cosmic force, vital element, vital energy, vital energy force, vitality, vital life force, vital life force energy, vitalistic principle, vitality energy, vital life spirit, vital magnetism, vital principle, vital spirit): An alleged nonmaterial "force" that sustains life. (2)

Subtle Energy, vital force, universal life force, etc. (demon spirits) can be manipulated and sent on assignment to perform lying wonders (2 Thess. 2:9) via various forms of witchcraft that are often disguised as alternative medical treatments--such as Reiki and acupressure. Man cannot control or manipulate God (or healings from God)--ever.

Man can manipulate demons (which disguise themselves under sophisticated and scientific- sounding terms) if he submits to the occult methodology necessary for their cooperation but the result of such sin (even if it is engaged in under the guise of New Age alternative medicine) is eternal destruction in the Lake of Fire.

Examples of Ellen G. White's use of the term, "vital force."

[Bold emphasis is added.] Please note that Mrs. White used the term, "vital force" in the same manner New Agers do today:

God has endowed us with a certain amount of vital force. He has also formed us with organs suited to maintain the various functions of life, and He designs that these organs shall work together in harmony. If we carefully preserve the life force, and keep the delicate mechanism of the body in order, the result is health; but if the vital force is too rapidly exhausted, the nervous system borrows power for present use from its resources of strength, and when one organ is injured, all are affected. [The Ministry of Healing, pg. 234] (3) [Note: in this passage Ellen G. White teaches that God gives vital force.]

Food should not be eaten very hot or very cold. If food is cold, the vital force of the stomach is drawn upon in order to warm it before digestion can take place. [The Ministry of Healing pg. 305] (4) Sometimes the result of overeating is felt at once. In other cases there is no sensation of pain; but the digestive organs lose their vital force, and the foundation of physical strength is undermined. [The Ministry of Healing pg. 306](5)

These unpleasant symptoms are felt because nature has accomplished her work at an unnecessary outlay of vital force and is thoroughly exhausted. The stomach is saying, "Give me rest." But with many the faintness is interpreted as a demand for more food; so instead of giving the stomach rest, another burden is placed upon it. As a consequence the digestive organs are often worn out when they should be capable of doing good work. [The Ministry of Healing pg. 307] (6)

[Note: in the passage above, Ellen G. White attributed vital force to nature. Mrs. White's practice of citing God and nature as the source of vital energy is an example of Christian/New Age syncretism.]

Where wrong habits of diet have been indulged, there should be no delay in reform. When dyspepsia has resulted from abuse of the stomach, efforts should be made carefully to preserve the remaining strength of the vital forces by removing every overtaxing burden. [The Ministry of Healing pg. 308] (7)

In the following passage, Ellen G. White links Christian growth with vital force:

Let a living faith run like threads of gold through the performance of even the smallest duties. Then all the daily work will promote Christian growth. There will be a continual looking unto Jesus. Love for Him will give vital force to everything that is undertaken. [From Christ’s Object Lessons, pp. 356-360] (8)

Those who think that perhaps Mrs. White used these terms unknowingly and innocently taught New Age doctrine, please understand that New Age teachings were not widely known in the United States in the 1800s. Ellen G. White learned these doctrines from someone...and that someone was not God.

Ellen G. White's "Christ" bestowed vital force:

He was the originator of all the ancient gems of truth. Through the work of the enemy, these truths had been displaced. . . . Christ rescued them from the rubbish of error, gave them a new, vital force, and commanded them to shine as jewels, and stand fast forever. [Manuscript 25, 1890.] (9)

[Note: The context of this quote has to do with Mrs. White's defense of her practice of claiming authorship of material she did not write but she did use the occasion to link Christ with vital force. I ask which "Christ" might that be? It is the New Age Christ who afflicts his followers with subtle energy.]

In the next passage Ellen G. White was correct to warn against the dangers of drugs but that does not negate the fact that she was functioning as an early spokeswoman for the New Age Movement by her continual promotion of the idea that vital force keeps the body in good health. We see Christian/New Age syncretism at work again via Ellen G. White's attribution of vital energy to nature in some passages and to God in others: People need to be taught that drugs do not cure disease. It is true that they sometimes afford present relief, and the patient appears to recover as the result of their use; this is because nature has sufficient vital force to expel the poison and to correct the conditions that caused the disease. [The Ministry of Healing, pg. 126] (10)

Here Mrs. White attributed vital force to God:

The Lord will put new, vital force into His work as human agencies obey the command to go forth and proclaim the truth. . . . The truth will be criticized, scorned, and derided; but the closer it is examined and tested, the brighter it will shine. . . . [Selected Messages, book 1, p. 201] (11)

God endowed man with so great vital force that he has withstood the accumulation of disease brought upon the race in consequence of perverted habits, and has continued for six thousand years. . . . [From My Life Today, page 126] (12)

According to Mrs. White, vital force is highly desirable and parents should take care not to deny this force to future generations:

If the mother is deprived of the care and comforts she should have, if she is allowed to exhaust her strength through overwork or through anxiety and gloom, her children will be robbed of the vital force and of the mental elasticity and cheerful buoyancy they should inherit. [The Ministry of Healing, pg. 375] (13)

Children who are robbed of that vitality which they should have inherited from their parents should have the utmost care. [Vital Vigor and Energy 204] (14)

Rather than tell her followers not to overwork lest they become too tired and run down, Ellen G. White presented the New Age concept that overexertion depletes vital force to the hurt of one's health:

Those who make great exertions to accomplish just so much work in a given time, and continue to labor when their judgment tells them they should rest, are never gainers. They are living on borrowed capital. They are expending the vital force which they will need at a future time. [From My Life Today - Page 142] (15)

Mrs. White promoted the New Age teaching that drugs destroy vital force:

Break Down Vital Forces.--Drugs always have a tendency to break down and destroy vital forces.--[Medical Ministry, p. 223 (General Manuscript entitled "Sanitarium," 1887).] (16)

According to Mrs. White, frequent child-bearing depletes women of vital energies. This of course conflicts with God's command to multiply and be fruitful and 1 Timothy 2:15: "...she shall be saved in childbearing..."

Everywhere you may look you will see pale, sickly, care-worn, broken-down, dispirited, discouraged women. They are generally overworked, and their vital energies exhausted by frequent child-bearing. [Vital Vigor and Energy 203] (17)

While it is a fact that frequent child-bearing can be physically exhausting, giving birth has nothing do with losing a nonmaterial "force" that sustains life.

Mrs. White taught that snacking causes the unnatural stimulation and wearing of the vital forces. The context suggests that an imbalance of the vital forces leads to sin:

Children are generally untaught in regard to the importance of when, how, and what they should eat. They are permitted to indulge their tastes freely, to eat at all hours, to help themselves to fruit when it tempts their eyes, and this, with the pie, cake, bread and butter, and sweetmeats eaten almost constantly, makes them gormands and dyspeptics.

The digestive organs, like a mill which is continually kept running, become enfeebled, vital force is called from the brain to aid the stomach in its overwork, and thus the mental powers are weakened. The unnatural stimulation and wear of the vital forces make them nervous, impatient of restraint, self-willed, and irritable. . . . It is difficult to arouse them to a sense of the shame and grievous nature of sin. [Selected Messages, book 1, p. 201.] (18)

The God of the Bible is NOT the god of Vital Force

Ellen G. White, regardless of what she may have stated in her other writings, chose to repeatedly use the occult phrase, "vital force" to promote the pagan belief that "an alleged nonmaterial force sustains life."

The Bible clearly states that it is by the Lord Jesus Christ that all things consist:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: Colossians 1:16

And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Colossians 1:17

It is in Jesus Christ that we live, move and have our being: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; Acts 17:28

The Holy Bible refutes the New Age lie of vital force. It is by Jesus Christ himself, not a nonmaterial force, that all things consist. It is in Jesus Christ (not vital force) that Christians live and move and have their being. (Also see: Who Holds the Universe Together -- God or Life Force?)

It is God, not Vital Force That Sustains Mankind

This passage was cited earlier in the article, but in conclusion, please note that Ellen G. White taught her followers that vital force has enabled man to live on earth for six thousand years without becoming extinct:

God endowed man with so great vital force that he has withstood the accumulation of disease upon the race in consequence of perverted habits, and has continued for six thousand years. . . . If Adam, at his creation, had not been endowed with twenty times as much vital force as men now have, the race, with their present habits of living in violation of natural law, would have become extinct. [From My Life Today, page 126]

It is God himself, not a nonmaterial "vital force" who has mercifully sustained mankind's existence upon the earth for all these years.

Ellen G. White promoted the "vital force" doctrine of devils long before Eastern religious thought became prevalent in the United States and other parts of the western world.

This series is under development.

MORE ARTICLES --New Age Markings on Ellen G. White's Writings

Notes:

(1) http://cana.userworld.com/cana_occultTerms.html (2) http://www.rodsmith.org.uk/alternative-health/Alternative-health-glossaryU-Z.htm (3) www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/mh/mh17.html - 11k (4), (5), (6), (7) http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/mh/mh23.html (8) http://www.whiteestate.org/message/littlethings.asp (9) http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/whitelie.html (10) http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/mh/mh8.html (11) http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-insp.html (12) http://egwlists.whiteestate.org/Lists/devotional/Message/1185.html (13) http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/mh/mh31.html (14) http://healthyliving.benabraham.com/html/vital_vigor_and_energy.html (15) http://egwlists.whiteestate.org/Lists/devotional/Message/1201.html (16) http://www.egwtext.whiteestate.org/cgi- bin/egw2html?C=59292588&K=015422082410817998 (17) http://healthyliving.benabraham.com/html/vital_vigor_and_energy.html

(2) (18) http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/rev-insp.html#footnote-28

The Book of Jasher