OK.
Regarding Ellen White.
First (in no order of importance) let me say the following:
1. I do NOT think EGW is a "false prophet."
Good. Neither do I, so we are on the same page here.
2. I do NOT think that EVERYTHING she said, wrote, or was published is or was "inspired gospel" (for lack of a better term) and authoritative. (Recall my "continuum theory" of inspiration.
)
I partially agree here. Where I will differ is on your third concept, that of "published." I don't think, for example, Mrs. White's shopping list was inspired. She may have written it, but it was her personal list and had no special message for anyone but herself. However, it wasn't
published! The things which Mrs. White, as God's chosen messenger, wrote for publication were in a separate category, one in which God was blessing and using her to communicate to His people. Those things, to my understanding, were inspired by God.
3. I DO think she was a godly woman trying her best to do the will of God as she understood it. (In some ways this is the most important point, because it removes any malicious or nefarious motives or intent from her part. She is not a Jesuit sleeper agent, a member of the Secret Order of the Hidden Hand, a tool of the devil...you get the point.)
I would heartily agree with most of this, again, but would view the first part to be slightly compromised by the phrase which I italicized. I don't think God's prophets always understood what God was presenting through them. God was in charge, and they were merely His instruments. The following statement from Mrs. White should be carefully considered in light of several of the points you are here making, and I will put the quote here but it should be applied to them as well. It is three long paragraphs, but all three are extremely relevant to this discussion.
I have been shown faults and wrongs of individuals who professed perfect confidence in the visions, but found fault with the instrument. The natural feelings of their heart rise up in rebellion against the visions which had exposed their errors and evil. Instead of humbly acknowledging they had erred, they found fault with the manner in which it was delivered. They took the position that a part of it was correct, and a part of it was a mistake. I had been told circumstances, and thought that the Lord had shown them me in vision. Has God placed his work in such a careless manner that man could fashion it to suit his own inclinations, receive that which was agreeable to him, and reject a portion? Would God give visions to correct his people of their errors, and then trust to the erring one's judgment to receive or reject what portion of them he pleased? What would be the use of visions in the church if held in this light, or if erring individuals in their darkness were left to make what application of them they pleased? This is not the way God works. If God reproves his people through an individual he does not leave the one corrected to guess at matters, and the message become corrupt in reaching the person it is designed to correct. God gives the message and then takes especial care that it is not corrupted. {PH016 22.1}
The visions are either of God or the Devil. There is no half way position to be taken in the matter. God does not work in partnership with Satan. Those who occupy this position cannot
23
stand there long. They go a step further and account the instrument God has used a deceiver, and the woman Jezebel. If after they had taken the first step it should be told them what position they would soon occupy in regard to the visions, they would resent it as a thing impossible. But Satan leads them on blindfolded in regard to the true state of their feelings, until he takes them in his snare. Grievous sins have been rebuked in individuals whom the church was holding in close fellowship, believing them to be devoted, sincere Christians. The persons reproved have risen up against the visions, contradicted their truthfulness, and have received the sympathy of some of the church. But time has proved the visions correct; facts have been brought to confirm and establish them. At times I have had but little courage to write to individuals what I had been shown in regard to them, for so many take the visions which have been written to them with feelings of the deepest anguish and in tears, they lay it aside, some with a feeling of indifference, others say I believe the visions, but sister White has made a mistake in writing it. She has heard reports of these things and has got it mixed up with her visions, and thinks she saw it all. O what a fixing up is this! What foolish positions Satan will lead some to take in their blindness, who are unwilling to humble themselves, and see and confess their faults. The heart is deceitful above all things; and desperately wicked. Satan exults that he can lead individuals to deceive themselves into a belief that they are right, when God frowns upon their wrongs. God seeth not as man seeth, and when he shows what is in
24
erring man's heart, and the message is trampled under foot, and he turns from it, saying, There must be a mistake in the matter, I am about right, they are like the pharisee who repeated his good works, I fast twice a week and give tithes of all I possess. I thank God that I am not as other men. They comfort themselves with their good deeds, and Satan then directs their minds in a channel to please himself. Many times have I felt to say, O my soul, canst thou persevere in such a warfare as this? Then again I could say, The battle is the Lord's, and if I am co-worker with him the victory will be ours. When the Lord sees fit to give a vision, I am taken into the presence of Jesus and angels, and am lost to earthly things. I can see no farther than the angel directs me. My attention is often directed to scenes transpiring upon earth. {PH016 22.2}
At times I am carried far ahead into the future and shown what is to take place. Then again I am shown things as they have occurred in the past. After I come out of vision I do not at once remember all that I have seen, and the matter is not so clear before me until I write, then the scene rises before me as was presented in vision, and I can write with freedom. Sometimes the things which I have seen are hid from me after I come out of vision, and I cannot call to mind the first circumstance; but when brought before a company where that vision applies, the things which I have seen come to my mind with force. I am just as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in relating or writing a vision, as in having the vision. It is impossible to call up things which
25
have been shown me unless the Lord brings the same before me at the time and on the occasion that he is pleased to have me relate it.
E. G. White.
So, as Mrs. White would have put it, her writings are either of God or the devil. There can be no gray area between.
4. I do think her "theology" (again, for lack of a better term) changed over time. This is both good and bad.
To address this I would need some examples.
That being said...
These are some of the issues I have with EGW/Mrs. White/"The Pen of Inspiration"/"Spirit of Prophecy"/... I will enumerate each point and give a brief explanation of why I take issue with this, or why it causes me questions.
Again, do not apply priority to any point listed below based on its position in the list. The numbering is only to keep them organized.
1. Baggage. I immediately recognize that this relates to incorrect usage of EGW. In my experience, she is JUST NOT A NICE LADY.
Don't base your experience upon what people say about her, nor upon what people say she said or did, nor upon the manner in which people use or misuse her writings. I would recommend taking the time to read
for yourself some of her writings (not for trying to prove a point to anyone else) and see if they don't elevate you toward Christ.
2. Partial "Truth." I have this complaint against the church generally as well.* In the last 15 years or so, I have found that the things taught to me as "Truth" are actually "Truth (as seen by the SDA church through EGW glasses)" Thank God (Literally. Absolutely no blaspheme intended) for the Internet where I can research MANY views on a topic, not just be taught the party line.
Either Mrs. White was fully inspired by God, or she was not inspired at all--per her own words. (See earlier quote.) Every prophet presents "partial truth" to us. Jesus Himself did so, and said explicitly to His disciples that there were many things
more that He'd like to tell them but that they were not ready for them. Every message God gives adds truth and light to the picture we have so that the "partial" becomes more complete. As Mrs. White puts it regarding scripture (I read this recently but don't remember where), the difficulties in the Bible prove its divine authenticity--for if the Bible were all easy to be understood, how could we see evidence of an Omniscient and Omnipotent God in it?
3. EGW's changes (discrepancies, you might say) in her theology. If she is inspired, she MUST get it right the first time. Examples include, but are not limited to, the Shut Door doctrine.
I would accept this argument as having some merit if I did not see the same issue with other prophets in the Bible.
Consider Moses:
And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel the Midianite, Moses' father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel. (Numbers 10:29)
Moses told his father-in-law that Israel was going to Canaan, and was even then on its way there. Moses appears not to have realized that God would keep them in the wilderness for forty years, nor that he himself would never enter Canaan.
Consider Nathan:
(2 Samuel)
7:1 And it came to pass, when the king sat in his house, and the LORD had given him rest round about from all his enemies;
7:2 That the king said unto Nathan the prophet, See now, I dwell in an house of cedar, but the ark of God dwelleth within curtains.
7:3 And Nathan said to the king, Go, do all that [is] in thine heart; for the LORD [is] with thee.
7:4 And it came to pass that night, that the word of the LORD came unto Nathan, saying,
7:5 Go and tell my servant David, Thus saith the LORD, Shalt thou build me an house for me to dwell in?
7:6 Whereas I have not dwelt in [any] house since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle.
7:7 In all [the places] wherein I have walked with all the children of Israel spake I a word with any of the tribes of Israel, whom I commanded to feed my people Israel, saying, Why build ye not me an house of cedar?
7:8 Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote, from following the sheep, to be ruler over my people, over Israel:
7:9 And I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies out of thy sight, and have made thee a great name, like unto the name of the great [men] that [are] in the earth.
7:10 Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness afflict them any more, as beforetime,
7:11 And as since the time that I commanded judges [to be] over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. Also the LORD telleth thee that he will make thee an house.
7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
7:15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took [it] from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
7:17 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
Nathan misspoke. Nathan spoke as if he had the word of the Lord, but was corrected that night and had to go back to David and tell him that he was not the man to build God's temple.
Consider Balaam: His
published words are all inspired, but he was not always doing right at other times. Far from it!
Consider Jonah: He preached that Nineveh would be destroyed. It wasn't, and Jonah himself complained to God about it.
Consider Paul: "Then
we which are alive and remain...." Did Paul think he or others in his day would still remain alive upon the earth when Jesus returned?
4. EGWs use and application by the SDA church. This one is a lot easier to ascribe nefarious motive to.
I have no special argument in defense of nor counter to the church or its use of Ellen White's writings. But I would ask a simple question: Does what people say about a prophet have any relationship to the inspiration of that prophet? If so, can the uninspired remove a prophet's inspiration?
5. Plagarism. No matter what your view on this topic, from "She did not plagarise" to "Everything whe wrote was copied," one has to admit she did borrow, sometimes heavily, from other writers without giving proper credit.
Does one? The word "proper" causes me to admit no such thing. I would readily admit that she quoted without crediting. But I have no reason to think it was improper. Did not the Bible writers do the same thing?
Peter is Exhibit A in this department. He frequently quoted from other Bible authors without crediting them. Was Peter a "plagiarist?"
Jesus Himself quoted the Bible frequently without specifying a human author for it. I used the word "human" for a reason...where does Scripture originate? Is it right for us to
give credit to the sinful mortal who received the divine inspiration? or should we not rather credit God with the wisdom He has shared with us?
I don't believe in "plagiarism." I believe in "counter-plagiarism," that is, if we give credit to a human who wrote something good and wise, we are plagiarizing against God Himself who was the Source of it by saying that it was the human who originated that thought. To me, it it sometimes more egregious to do this than to leave no reference to the human author at all.
I'm sure you would also be aware that in Ellen White's days, laws for copyrights and etc. were not what they are today, so even in the "human" realm, she broke no laws nor did anything "unethical" for her time. But this is almost beside the point to my mind.
6. EGW's support of un-biblical doctrines. Examples include, but are not limited to, the Investigative Judgement (IJ) doctrine.
Are you sure this is unbiblical? What makes you think that it is?
7. OK. Here it is. She was hit in the head with a rock. This put her into a coma for three weeks. After which she started having visions. To me, this is a no-brainer.
(
I couldn't resist.)
I see Rosangela answered something in relationship to this already, but I would point out that God has at times chosen unlikely persons to be His messengers, and if He wished to use the rock itself, He could. A person's physical condition provides no indication to us of their candidacy for receiving the Spirit of prophecy.
8. Evangelism. If, in my discussions with people of other denominations or faiths, I resort to the use of EGW to support any point, and expect them to accept this authority, I must then, as a matter of academic and scholarly honesty, allow THEM to look for support to THEIR guru and accept THAT authority. I have found it far more convincing to simply appeal to one universally accepted authority,** The Holy Scriptures.
I tend to agree with this. When studying with the Mormons, I held that we should study from the Bible which we both accepted in common. When they pressed me to read their Book of Mormon, I pressed them to read from Mrs. White.
Therefore, given the above, there are just too many questions and uncertainties regarding Ellen White for me to either accept or study her writings as inspired gospel/Scripture, or to use her or accept her use to support any point of argument.
*(I was born and raised an SDA, and I love the church; I cannot imagine attending any else. But as Daryl has pointed out, I try to think of myself as a Christian who chooses to felowship with SDAs. This is a whole 'nuther topic.)
**By this I intend that most people recognize the place of Scripture in religion and the history of the world. They have never heard of EGW.
I would agree that with others we should start where they are at--using the Bible that they accept. We should be able to point the path to salvation strictly from the Bible. After having brought them to the truth, it is then our duty to also introduce them to the truths of Mrs. White as well, in such a manner as will put her in the most favorable position to be accepted by them.
Anytime we teach a truth, whatever the truth may be or however disagreeable it may seem, we must do our best to put it into a favorable light that it will be accepted. Tithe is one of those things that ministers are frequently reticent to present because it is viewed by them as something of a conflict of interest on their part and something to which their listener will object. But when it is presented as a practice that is amply blessed by God, those objections can be avoided. It is the duty of the one who brings someone to the truth to present all parts of it, rather than avoiding the less pleasant or more difficult parts.
If I haven't addressed any of these points with the detail you feel it deserves, feel free to let me know.
God bless,
Green Cochoa.
