This will speak for itself.
It comes from one of our biblical scholars.
Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D.,
Retired Professor of Theology, Andrews University
The many comments generated by the last newsletter (No. 73)
on "Ellen White: Prophet or Plagiarist?," by William Fagal, have
made me forcefully aware of the fact that Ellen White is perhaps more
controversial today than she has ever been in the past. Frankly, I
did not anticipate to receive so many negative comments from
Adventists who express their reservations about the prophetic
leadership of Ellen White.
What I find distressing is the method used by some to
discredit the writings and ministry of Ellen White. Simply stated the
method consists in appealing to some alleged mistakes to prove that
Ellen White was in error in everything she wrote or did. Incidentally
this is the method Dr. Robert Morey used this afternoon, September 6,
2001, in a debate on the Sabbath sponsored by a popular Christian
Radio Station (WTRU) in Winston-Salem, NC. I was invited to discuss
with him for two hours whether or not the Sabbath is still relevant
for Christians today. He began by attacking the Sabbath as the
creation of Ellen White-a mentally disturbed woman who was a false
prophet because of her statements on "amalgamation."
Rest assured that I responded immediately by exposing the
falsity of Dr. Morey's allegations. I told him that he was grossly
mistaken on two counts. First, because the Sabbath is a divine
creation and second, because a mentally disturbed woman could hardly
a guided the Adventist Church in its formative years and help her
become a global movement with 12 million members, who enjoy the best
educational, medical, and evangelistic programs any church has to
offer.
The strategy of attacking Ellen White on the basis of some
alleged mistakes she made, is faulty, because it ignores the
manyfold contributions that Ellen White has made to the educational,
medical, theological, evangelistic aspects of our Adventist message
and mission. The truth of the matter is that our Adventist church
would not be today a global movement with 12 million members, had it
not been for the enlightened leadership Ellen White gave to the
church during its formative years.
Few years ago four of us Adventist scholars had a fruitful
dialogue with delegates of the Church of God Seventh day, with its
headquarters in Denver, Colorado. At the end of a session on the
role of Ellen White in the Adventist church, one delegate of the
Church of God Seventh day said: "I wish that our Church of God had
had the prophetic leadership of someone like Ellen White. We would
not have experienced so many splits over the years."
To discredit the enduring contributions Ellen White has made
to the message and mission of our Adventist church , by focusing on
few alleged mistakes, it is like striking out at a beautiful forest
because few of its trees are ugly. It is unfortunate that some fail
to look at the larger picture of the contributions of Ellen White,
because they find fault with some of her statements. For example,
several subscribers to our newsletter wrote that they cannot accept
Ellen White because of her statements about "amalgamation."
Whether or not Ellen White's statements about the
amalgamation between humans and animals, are correct or incorrect, it
is not for me to decide. No one knows what happen before the Flood.
All what Scripture tells is that "the wickedness of man was great in
the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was
only evil continually" (Gen 6:5).
In my view the issue is not whether or not Ellen White's
statements about amalgamation or about anything else are accurate,
but whether such isolated statements can be legitimately used to
discredit her all her writings and contributions to the Adventist
church. This method reminds me of those who ask to have their
addresses immediately removed from the ENDTIME ISSUES subscription
list, when I express a view which is unacceptable to them. The least
that can be said about these people is that they are shortsighted.
They automatically reject anything or anyone who disagrees with them
in a particular area.
Do Inspired Writers Make Mistakes?
The method used to discredit Ellen White has been repeatedly
used by critics to discredit the Bible. They point to the alleged
mistakes and contradictions found in the Bible. This strategy is
based on the popular assumption that people inspired by God never
made a mistake, because they were constantly supervised by the Holy
Spirit in everything they said or wrote. This popular assumption is
faulty because it ignore the mysterious blending of the human and
divine elements present in inspired writers. A careful reading of
Scripture confronts us with the presence of the human element.
To illustrate this point, let us consider Paul's counsel
found in 1 Corinthians 7:8: "To the unmarried and the widow I say
that it is well for them to remain single as I do." There is no
question that Paul's terse advice contradicts God's explicit
statement: "It is not good that the man should be alone" (Gen 2:18).
If God Himself stated at creation that living alone without a marital
partner "is not good," what business did Paul have to encourage
people to remain single like himself? Would it not have been wiser
for Paul to keep his personal opinion to himself?
Undoubtedly Paul did not foresee the problems his personal
advice would cause during the course of Christian history. Many have
appealed to Paul's personal opinion found in the Bible, to exalt
celibacy as a superior life calling than that of a married life. One
of the many questions I plan to ask Paul on resurrection day, is
this: "Paul, why didn't you keep your personal opinion about
remaining single to yourself? Didn't you realize how many people
would appeal to your personal advice in order to promote priestly
celibacy-a practice that runs contrary to God's original design for
human beings? How do you reconcile your advice to remain single with
your own injunction that a church leader should be the husband of one
wife? (1 Tim 3:2)" I look forward to hear how Paul will answer these
and other important questions raised by his writings.
Frankly, I wish that the Holy Spirit had restrained Paul from
expressing his personal views and also guided him to write with
greater clarity on such important issues as the relationship between
law and grace. Countless scholars have tried to reconcile the
apparent contradictions between Paul's negation of the law (Rom 3:28)
on one hand and affirmation of the law (1 Cor 7:19) on the other
hand. Much of the existing confusion could have been avoided if the
Holy Spirit had controlled Paul's mind and literary style, to ensure
that the apostle would define relationship between law and grace with
clarity and simplicity for the lay person to understand.
It is evident that this is not the way God chooses to
operate. He does not suppress the individual freedom, even when
writing about eternal truths. What this means is that we do not
reject Paul's writings and discredit his ministry because some of the
things he wrote are unacceptable. We must recognize the fact that
Paul had the right to express his own opinions and that God did not
deem it necessary to prevent him from doing so. His contributions to
the mission and message of the Christian church are not diminished by
the few things we may find unacceptable or contradictory.
The Need for a Balanced Interpretation of Ellen White
The same principle applies to the writings of Ellen White.
She had the right to express her own views, especially when
dialoguing or writing to friends. The problem arises when we assume
that all the 100,000 plus pages she wrote, whether as personal
letters or formal writings, are the product of divine supervision and
consequently normative for defining beliefs and practices.
During the over twenty years of his ministry, Paul must have
written hundreds of letters to the churches he established. Of them
only 13 have been preserved and have become part of the New
Testament. By contrast, in the case of Ellen White, practically
everything she ever wrote, whether private letters to friends or
formal writings for the church, have been preserved. In fact all her
writings are readily available on a CD-ROM and are used without any
consideration to the time and circumstances in which they were
written.
Our church failure to develop a balanced and realistic use
and application of Ellen White writings, could be a reason for a
growing resentment toward her writings and influence. We are facing
today a paradoxical situation. Some Adventists, especially in some
European countries, do not want to hear any reference to Ellen
White's writings in sermons or articles. By contrast, other
Adventists have gone to the other extreme and have "canonized" Ellen
White into a "saint" like the Catholic have done with Mary. They
appeal to any statement Ellen White ever made, even in her private
correspondence, to promote their own agenda.
The solution to this divisive situation is the development of
a balanced understanding and use of Ellen White's writings. The same
applies to the Bible. This requires the use of common sense.
Unfortunately, common sense is becoming increasingly uncommon. Thus,
we need to pray daily for the Holy Spirit to grant us a larger
measure of common sense to rightly divide the words of truth. It is
my firm conviction that Ellen White still speaks to our spiritual
needs today. To discredit her writings and prophetic leadership, can
only leave us poorer, both as individuals and as a church. On the
other hand, a balanced use of her writings can enrich our understanding and experience of biblical truths.
------------------
Examine me, O LORD, and prove me: try my reins and my heart. Ps.26:2
It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in men.Ps.118:8
