Was EGW inspired the same as Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?


...or was her she inspired like Elijah, Samuel or John the Baptist? Or is all inspired writings the same?

(This question comes from a friend of mine who said that the writers of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John just wrote more of a historical record...)

I don't see how inspiration can be any different. Truth comes from God. The difference I see is how the Holy Spirit moved the church to form a cannon. Scripture has greater authority than Ellen White's writings by virtue of being a part of the cannon. But truth is truth, no matter what the source, and the Holy Spirit will enable any searcher of truth to recognize it.

Same inspiration but difference in authority in the sense that the inspired writings of EGW were regarded by her as the lesser light leading to the inspired writings of the Bible as the Greater Light.

"Matthew, Mark, Luke and John just wrote more of a historical record."

But the record includes the truths Jesus spoke. His words are spirit and life, light and truth.

John
6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life.

John
8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Acts
5:20 Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life.

True, there are discrepancies within the Gospels; but they are inspired discrepancies. That is, Jesus didn't work through the Holy spirit to prevent them from becoming a part of the canonized scriptures.

Was Sister White as inspired as other authors of the sacred canon? When she was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit her words are the testimony of Jesus Christ; albeit, a lesser light leading believers to the greater light.

In case anyone is interested, the expression "lesser light pointing to the greater light" comes from the temple services, where from one pulpit (to the right of the symbolic representation of God's throne) was read the law, and from the other, to the right of that one (nothing is ever on the left) was read the prophets. The prophets were the "lesser light pointing to the greater light."

The discrepances make the gospels more trustworthy as eyewitness accounts, as it is well known that if twelve men witness one event, you will get thirteen stories about what acctually happened. If each gospel would have been a carbon copy of the other three, a) why would we need four of them? b) it would look very much like something they invented in that upper room behind locks.

The twelve + Mattias + Paul, the apostles had their authority from the fact that they are the "only" ones who were eyewitnesses to Jesus ministry on earth. Prophethood could be inherited, such as when Elisha inherited Elijahs, but there is no second generation of eyewitness. They taught up others to follow them, Paul teaching Luke and Timothy, Peter teaching Mark and John teaching Polycarp. But these in the second generation, while being good leaders in the church, were not apostles.

Elijah, Samuel and John the Baptist; Samuel was God's apointed judge in Israel in his time. Elijah was a prophet who had great success in turning the people to God, but he was not the only prophet and Israel was no longer a theocrazy by this time. John the baptist was a preacher of repentance on a mission to prepear the people for the Lord. All of these were servants of God, but each in a different way compared to the others. Is there a lesson here for us?

Ellen, where does she fit in? She is obviously not an apostle, being born about 1800 years to late to be an eyewitness to Jesus ministry on earth. Was she a servant of God? Yes. Was her mission like the missions of previous workers of God? I think not, her own refusal to be identified with the prophethood suggests that her mission was unique for a unique time in history. What was this mission? Maybe that is the next thread?

Thomas, thank you very much for sharing your thoughts. Well done, and inspiring.

Did Paul know Jesus while He was here on earth? Or, did Jesus appear to him on the road to Damascus and during his escape to Arabia? If so, then how is this different than the times Jesus appeared to Sister White?

If Paul wasn't an eyewitness to Jesus ministry on earth, then Paul was no apostle. Simple as that.

So are you saying that Jesus can only communicate to man when he was flesh, and only during the short period before he was crucified........

No, I am only saying that apostleship requires eyewitness. Jesus communicates with all saints and with unsaved people aswell, at least occationally in the second case. Communication does not require apostleship.