Either we take her for what she has claimed for herself..or we..reject her as liar, a lunatic..the only logical options. Clifford Goldstein
32 minutes ago from web
We must remember that prophets are not always on duty—that is, they are not speaking constantly for God.
40 minutes ago from web
Ellen White was not infallible...she never claimed infallibility. She grew, changed her mind on issues...was constantly open for more light.
42 minutes ago from web
In a night vision (2 Sam. 7:4-17), however, God told Nathan that what he had told David was wrong and that he had to go and tell David so.
44 minutes ago from web
..Nathan was a..God-fearing man, but not everything a prophet says..is..inspiration. In..David’s plan, Nathan had..not..spoken..as a prophet
about 1 hour ago from web
1 Ch.22:8 But the word of the LORD came to me..Thou..shed blood abundantly... made great wars: thou shalt not build an house unto my name..about 1 hour ago from web
"For sixty years I have been in (touch) with heavenly messengers, and...been...learning..divine things, and...the way (of) God" Ellen White
about 1 hour ago from web
...it became necessary to study and compare the various revelations to get a balanced and comprehensive view of the messages from Heaven.
about 1 hour ago from web
Prophets got increased light as history unfolded and they were able to get it. They studied the word, as Daniel illustrates in Dan. 9:2.
about 1 hour ago from web
1 Peter 1:10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:about 1 hour ago from web
Dan 8:27....afterward I rose up, and did the king's business; and I was astonished at the vision, but none understood it.
about 1 hour ago from web
Prophets didn't get all of God’s light at one time. They faithfully ministered as the Lord’s servants & got more light and understood better
about 1 hour ago from web
...God is speaking directly to the reader. The prophet’s responsibility was to bring these messages & apply them to the audience’s situation
about 1 hour ago from web
“the Word of the Lord came unto . . .” means that (a) their messages carry Divine authority; (b) they get them from the Lord in thoughts
about 1 hour ago from web
Ezekiel 7 1Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying..
about 1 hour ago from web
Jeremiah 1:4 (King James Version) 4Then the word of the LORD came unto me, saying..
about 1 hour ago from web
In 1981 GC asks a non-Adventist copyright lawyer to study her books, after time spent researching, he said Ellen White wasn't a plagiarist
about 1 hour ago from web
1 Kings 22: 27...Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of afflictionabout 1 hour ago from web
Throughout history, God’s prophets have endured hardship because they refused to change their testimony to suit their contemporaries.
about 2 hours ago from web
King Ahab, in spite of the prophet’s warning, went to war and was killed; King Jehoshaphat, weak, supported Ahab, barely saved his life.
about 2 hours ago from web
Older »
Ellen White explained in print how she used the writings of others, and why. She even recommended that people read certain books she used
about 2 hours ago from web
Read for This Week's Study: 2 Sam. 7:1–7, 1 Kings 22:10–18, Jer. 43:2–4, Dan. 8:27.
Memory Text:about 2 hours ago from web
THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROPHETIC GIFT “As the Lord lives, whatever my God says, that I will speak” (2 Chronicles 18:13, NKJV).
about 2 hours ago from web
Friday, February 27, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
THE INTEGRITY OF THE PROPHETIC GIFT
Read for This Week's Study:
2 Sam. 7:1–7, 1 Kings 22:10–18, Jer. 43:2–4, Dan. 8:27.
Memory Text:
“As the Lord lives, whatever my God says, that I will speak” (2 Chronicles 18:13, NKJV).
CHAPTER 3
The Integrity of the Prophetic Message,* or “Who Told Sister White?”
[Return to the Table of Contents][Back to Online Books Menu][Return to the Homepage]
Section TitlesCharged With Being Influenced by the BrethrenThe Bible Prophets and the Question of InfluenceEllen G. White on the Question of InfluenceThe Question of Influence and the Early BooksThe Visions Give SignificanceSalt Provides an IllustrationAttempts to Influence Ellen G. WhiteEllen G. White Refrained From Certain ReadingA Significant Experience in AustraliaMrs. White's Literary AssistantsDoes the Expression “I Saw” Give a Clue?Ellen White's Acknowledgment
It is sometimes suggested that in certain positions taken by Ellen G. White she was influenced by the thinking of the times, that her statements reflected the ideas of those about her, and that we must take this into account when we evaluate her writings and use them today. Akin to this was the early-day suggestion that the visions resulted from natural causes, mesmerism, spiritism, or physical injury. In later years the shift was to the suggestion that most likely she was influenced by her associates.
Early in her experience, hypnosis was much in the public eye and it was suggested to Ellen Harmon that, when the visions were given to her she was mesmerized. Some asserted, “She is a weak woman, easily influenced and therefore a good subject for mesmerism.” This troubled her and she went into the woods to pray, and while alone in the woods, visions would be given to her. When she told the people of this, they declared, “You mesmerize yourself.”
* This material was presented at the North American Academy Principals' Council held at Blue Mountain Academy, Hamburg, Pennsylvania, June 27, 1965.
[80]
Ellen pondered, has it come to this? The next time she discerned that a vision was about to be given to her, she resisted it. “I'll not have it,” she said to herself. “It is mesmerism!” Like Zacharias of old, who was stricken dumb for his doubts, she was stricken dumb because she doubted. She was taken off in vision, and in the vision she was shown that never again should she question, never again should she doubt, and that in less than twenty-four hours she again would be able to speak. She reached for a slate and wrote concerning her experience and her condition. The next day she was able again to speak, but never again did she question or doubt her experience. See Early Writings, pages 22-24.
Dr. Brown and the Visions
As our preachers went into Parkville, Michigan, some thirty miles southwest of Battle Creek, in 1860, and held evangelistic meetings, the people were told, among other things, about the visions given to Mrs. White. A spiritualist physician lived there, a certain Dr. Brown. He had boasted that he could explain it all in terms of spiritualism. He asserted that the visions that were given to Ellen White were just a form of spirit-mediumship, and that if he should ever be present when she was in a vision, he could bring her out of it in just one minute. That's all the time he would need.
An Adventist church building was erected in Parkville in 1860 and was dedicated on Sabbath, January 12, 1861. Elder and Mrs. White, Elder J. N. Loughborough, Elder Uriah Smith, and some others went down from Battle Creek to be present for the service. In connection with the afternoon meeting, Ellen White was taken off in vision. Elder White always gave ample opportunity for any who wished
[81]
to examine Ellen White while in vision to do so, and this time was no exception. He asked whether there was a physician who could be called who could examine Mrs. White while in vision and report to the people as to her condition. Remembering his boast, the people urged Dr. Brown, who happened to be present, to respond and conduct the examination.
Dr. Brown began to examine Ellen White but soon turned deathly pale and began to shake all over. Elder White asked, “Will the physician please report to the congregation concerning his findings?”
“Oh,” he said, “she does not breathe,” and he started for the door. When he got near the door, the brethren blocked it and said, “Go back and do like you said you would. You said you could stop the vision in one minute.” “Oh no,” he replied. “Well, what is it?” they asked. “God only knows,” he replied. “Let me out of this house.” He jerked the door open and ran.
Charged With Being Influenced by the Brethren
The visions given to Ellen White could not be controlled by herself or by others. She could not have a vision if she wished to, nor could she refrain from having a vision if she did not wish to have it. It was entirely in the hands of God, entirely beyond any human influence about her. But as I have mentioned, in later years it was suggested, perhaps kindly, “You know, Sister White is not too strong, and she is surrounded by men of strong intellect and character. There is her own husband, James White, George I. Butler, Dr. John Kellogg.” In later years, they talked of W. C. White, and of her being influenced by him.
If the messages borne by Mrs. E. G. White had their origin
[82]
in surrounding minds or influences, then the Spirit of Prophecy has no claims on our allegiance. If the messages on organization can be traced to the ideas of James White or G. I. Butler; if the counsels on health have their origin in the minds of Drs. Kellogg, Jackson, or Trall; if the instruction which came on education was based upon the ideas of G. H. Bell or W. W. Prescott; if the high standards upheld in the Spirit of Prophecy counsels were inspired by the strong men of the cause, then the Spirit of Prophecy can mean no more to you or to me than good ideas and helpful advice.
The Bible Prophets and the Question of Influence
The suggestion that the prophets were influenced by others is nothing new in the history of inspiration. The scriptures in Jeremiah 43:1-3 bring to us just such a picture. Jeremiah was the Lord's messenger to Judah. He had borne a solemn message to the leaders of Judah.
Note the words: “And it came to pass when Jeremiah had made an end of speaking unto all the people all the words of the Lord their God, for which the Lord their God had sent him to them, even all these words, then spake Azariah the son of Hoshaiah, and Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the proud men, saying unto Jeremiah, Thou speakest falsely: the Lord our God hath not sent thee to say, Go not into Egypt to sojourn there: but Baruch the son of Neriah setteth thee on against us, for to deliver us into the hand of the Chaldeans.”
Jeremiah had borne Heaven's message to the people. One of the leaders got up and said, “Jeremiah, you are a liar. Baruch, your secretary, wanted you to say that, and you said it. God never gave you the message.” History, however, made clear that the message came from God.
There is another interesting story that has a bearing on
[83]
this topic, found in 2 Chronicles 18. We find Jehoshaphat was king of Judah and Ahab king of Israel. Jehoshaphat was a man of God, Ahab was not. A marriage between the families had taken place, and an alliance between the two kingdoms was formed. Jehoshaphat should not have permitted this, but he had. There came a day when there was to be a family reunion in Samaria, and Jehoshaphat took his family and went over to Samaria, and took part of his army along for review and all that goes with kingly visits.
Ahab thought this would be a good time to go out and fight his enemies, for with Jehoshaphat in Samaria, he had some reinforcements. He proposed to Jehoshaphat that they go up and fight his enemies. Without first seeking divine guidance, Jehoshaphat replied, “I am as thou art, and my people as thy people; and we will be with thee in the war.”
But then Jehoshaphat thought better of it and said to Ahab: “Enquire, I pray thee, at the word of the Lord to day” (verse 4). So Ahab called in his 400 prophets. They knew what kind of answer Ahab wanted, and they said, “Go up; for God will deliver it [Ramoth-gilead] into the king's hand.”
Jehoshaphat knew that these men were false prophets, so he turned to Ahab and said, “Is there not here a prophet of the Lord besides, that we might enquire of him?” (verse 6). And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, “There is yet one man, by whom we may enquire of the Lord: but I hate him; for he never prophesied good unto me, but always evil: the same is Micaiah the son of Imla. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so.” Jehoshaphat evidently made it clear to Ahab that he would get nowhere with his enterprise without hearing from Micaiah first. So an officer was called and sent to Micaiah's home to summon him to come and prophesy concerning the proposed expedition.
The messenger who went to call Micaiah knew the answer
[84]
that had been given by the 400 false prophets. He knew his master, and he knew that if Micaiah was unwise enough to prophesy disaster to Ahab's enterprise, he would probably lose his head. Thinking to do Micaiah a kindness, the officer advised him to give Ahab a favorable reply. But Micaiah fearlessly replied, “As the Lord liveth, even what my God saith, that will I speak” (verse 13).
It made no difference to Micaiah what his reply might mean to him personally. There was only one answer he could give when he went before the king. There were a few bantering words of introduction, and then Micaiah predicted disaster to the enterprise and death to King Ahab. At this Ahab turned to Jehoshaphat and said, “Didn't I tell you he would prophesy evil and not good? Officer, take Micaiah. Put him in the dungeon, feed him bread and water till I come back victorious.” But Ahab never came back. He died on the battlefield that day. The point is, God's prophets were not influenced.
Ellen G. White on the Question of Influence
In 1893, one of our brethren wrote to Sister White. He thought she did not understand a certain matter, and he was going to straighten her out. She wrote back to him and said, “You think individuals have prejudiced my mind. If I am in this state, I am not fitted to be entrusted with the work of God.”—Selected Messages, book 2, p. 63.
On one occasion back in 1850, one of our sisters told Sister White about one of the ministers and some of the things he had done that he should not have done. It was not long after she related these facts to Ellen White that a testimony arrived for this minister. When the sister who had reported to Sister White heard about this testimony she felt chagrined and said to herself, “I shouldn't have told Sister White those things.” She then sat down and wrote a letter to Ellen White
[85]
and told her she was sorry she had said anything and thought she shouldn't have told her all those things.
Ellen White wrote as follows:
What if you had said ever so much, would that affect the visions, that God gives me? If so, then the visions are nothing…. God has shown me the true state of Brother ——— [the erring minister]. I know from the vision that his influence has been bad. … What you or anyone else has said is nothing at all. God has taken the matter in hand…. What you have said, Sister ———, influenced me not at all. My opinion has nothing to do with what God has shown me in vision.—Letter 1, 1851.
The Question of Influence and the Early Books
The great controversy vision was given to Ellen White at Lovett's Grove, Ohio, on March 14, 1858. Shortly thereafter at meetings in Battle Creek over a weekend, she told the high points of what had been shown to her in that vision. Elder J. N. Andrews happened to be in Battle Creek at the time, and he was very much interested in what Ellen White related. After one of the meetings he came to her and said, “Sister White, some of the things you have told us sound to me quite a bit like a book I have read.” Then he asked, “Have you ever read Paradise Lost?” She said, “No.” “Well,” he said, “I think you would be interested in it.”
She forgot about the conversation, but a few days later Brother Andrews came to the White home with a copy of Paradise Lost and left it with Ellen White. She was busily engaged in writing out what had been shown to her, and she took the book, hardly knowing just what to do with it, looked at it, but didn't open it. She took it to the kitchen and put it up on a high shelf, determined that if there was anything in that book similar to what God had revealed to her in vision she was not going to read it until she had first written out what the Lord had revealed to her. Her subsequent
[86]
writings indicate that later she did read at least portions of Paradise Lost. Thus, for example, one phrase from this work is quoted in Education.
But to go back. Ellen White proceeded with the writing out of the great controversy story as she did in Spiritual Gifts, volume 1 (now available in a facsimile reprint), without first reading Paradise Lost. This volume of Spiritual Gifts is a little book consisting of 219 pages. It merely touches the high points of the great controversy story as we have it now in the last part of Early Writings. The vision created in her mind a deep interest in the history of the Reformation. After completing Spiritual Gifts, volume 1, within six months of the time of the vision, she turned to some of the histories. In the vision she had seen essential portions of this history. The vision brought to her new light on the whole matter of the conflict between the forces of righteousness and the forces of evil. With that interest, the White family read for worship in the next several months most of D'Aubigné's History of the Reformation. They observed with interest those things that were in harmony with what had been shown to her.
So when in 1884 she was rewriting the great controversy story more fully as it was presented in Spirit of Prophecy, volume 4, and then later was carried into The Great Controversy, she quoted from some of these historians. She tells us that she did so not because she was dependent upon them for the information which is there presented but because their presentation afforded “a ready and forcible presentation.” As a matter of convenience she had made use of such quotations. She explains this in the third from the last paragraph in her introduction to The Great Controversy.
When the health reform vision was given to Ellen White on June 6, 1863, she began to tell the people about what had been shown to her. Of this she wrote in 1867:
As I introduced the subject of health to friends … and spoke
[87]
against drugs 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 until I had fully written out my views, lest it should be said that I had received my light upon the subject of health from physicians and not from the Lord…. I did not read any works upon health until I had written Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3 and 4, and Appeal to Mothers, and had sketched out most of my six articles in the six numbers of How to Live.—Review and Herald, Oct. 8, 1867.
If you are familiar with these publications, you will recognize them as the basic early writings on the subject of health. The six articles in How to Live are now in the Appendix of Selected Messages, book 2.
After having written out the basic presentation as it was made to her, Ellen White and her husband read with interest what had been written by physicians who were pioneering in the field of physiology and nutrition, and they measured what they read by the light given to Ellen White. Some things they could accept, because it was in harmony with what had been shown to her; other things they could not accept.
It should be pointed out that the Lord did not show Ellen White how to give fomentations, but the Lord did make it clear to her that water was a very important agency to be employed in the recovery of the sick. The Lord never gave the visions to take the place of initiative, of study, of hard work, or of faith. The principles were set forth in vision. The Spirit of Prophecy pointed the way. Then they studied what others were doing in health lines to find out in a detailed way how to apply these principles.
Ellen White in her books does not tell how to give fomentations. The Whites did apply in their own personal experience what they learned from others in these matters. In
[88]
1867 she wrote, speaking of the subject of health, “My views were written independent of books, or the opinions of others” (MS. 7, 1867). Either this statement is true or it is not. If it is true, as Seventh-day Adventists believe, Ellen White's teachings on health were not derived from doctors, but came from God.
In this connection it should be pointed out that God is the Author of the laws of nature, and if men through their painstaking research and experimentation discover those laws or if God reveals them through vision through His servant, there is bound to be harmony. Both came from the same source. So we need not be dismayed if we find some similarity between the writings of Ellen White and of physicians leading out in reforms.
The Visions Give Significance
As noted in Chapter 1, Seventh-day Adventists have never claimed to be the originators of all the principles of health reform they hold. This was acknowledged in the article appearing in the Review and Herald of August 7, 1866, written by Elder J. H. Waggoner and quoted in The Story of Our Health Message, pages 79, 80. (See pages 39, 40.) Waggoner points out that there are others who are working in the field of reform in health, but when the Lord calls these things to our attention in the visions given to Ellen White, they take on special significance to us, “to be received with the blessing of God, or rejected at our peril.”
What is said concerning this in the field of health reform might also be said in the field of education. It is well known that there were those in a few places who were leading out in educational reforms in advance of Ellen White. However, it was the visions given to her that drew our attention to these things and the importance of these things that made them a
[89]
part of the Seventh-day Adventist philosophy and working program. We have valued highly the work that others have done, but these things take on significance to us because of the visions given to Ellen White.
Some people have been perplexed about this fact. They have said, “Yes, it isn't new, and so how do we know that Ellen White got it from God?” To those who might say Ellen White was influenced by those about her, let's bring in a little illustration.
Salt Provides an Illustration
The Whites had great respect for Dr. R. T. Trall, a physician in New Jersey who was leading out in reforms in the matter of diet, the care of the sick, and so forth. He was not a Seventh-day Adventist. John Kellogg went over in 1872 to take medical training at Dr. Trall's. He spent six months there. In those days medical training was largely apprenticeship rather than study. Then Dr. Kellogg went on from there to New York, to Bellevue, at the expense of James and Ellen White, and got the best and most thorough medical education that could be had in North America. James and Ellen White were determined that if we were entering the medical field, our work must stand at the very top. They felt that a religious body of four or five thousand people could not afford to enter the field of medicine unless they had a work of high quality. It would have been natural, if Ellen White was influenced by those who were about her, to have been influenced by Dr. Trall, because of her high regard for him, but not so.
In the Health Reformer (our monthly health journal) of July, 1869, there is a page or two given over to questions and answers provided by Dr. Trall. One question was “Is it all right to eat a little salt?” Dr. Trall, a scientist,
[90]
gave the answer: “Salt being a poison should not be used at all.” That was the counsel that went out in our medical journal. But what did Ellen White write?
I use some salt, and always have, because from the light given me by God, this article, in the place of being deleterious, is actually essential for the blood. The whys and wherefores of this I know not, but I give you the instruction as it is given me.—Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 344.
Here Ellen White tells us that the Lord gave her instruction in regard to salt. It is essential to the blood. Of course anyone today who understands blood chemistry knows why it is essential for good health. This was not understood in Ellen White's day, and she frankly acknowledged: “I don't know why, but I am giving to you that which God has given to me.” That was the basis of the position she took in opposition to the view that was held by one who was influencing many Seventh-day Adventists.
Since salt is essential to good health, shall we eat a lot of it? No. In 1884 in the Review and Herald she wrote, “Do not eat largely of salt.” (See The Ministry of Healing, p. 305.) Why not? Probably the reason was not revealed to her. She simply sounded a caution.
Now note the scientific confirmation:
In 1956 at Brookhaven National Laboratory, scientists checked on fellow employees, and found that of 135 who never added salt to their food, only one had unexplained high blood pressure; of 630 who added salt sometimes after tasting food, 43 had the disease; among 581 who always added salt without bothering to taste, 61 had it.—Time, April 30, 1956.
Who told Ellen White about salt years and years in advance of the discoveries of nutritionists and physiologists? Was it Dr. Trall? Or was it the Lord? The answer seems evident—Ellen White was not influenced by the erroneous opinions of others.
[91]
Attempts to Influence Ellen G. White
Although Ellen White was not influenced by the erroneous opinions of others, there were some of her brethren who nevertheless tried to influence her. For example, there was a leader in Europe who when she visited Europe in 1885-1887 was heading up our work in the Scandinavian countries. Ellen White, visiting Stockholm, Sweden, wrote in her diary:
Brother ——— [the leader's name] suggests that it would please the people if I speak less about duty and more in regard to the love of Jesus. But I wish to speak as the Spirit of the Lord shall impress me. The Lord knows best what this people needs. I spoke in the forenoon from Isaiah 58. I did not round the corners at all.—Manuscript 26, 1885.
In 1892 while Ellen White was in Australia, Dr. John Harvey Kellogg wrote a letter to her in which he expressed his observations concerning the question of influence:
There are so many who are ready to say that Sister White has been influenced to do or to say this or that. I often hesitate about writing to you concerning things I would like to write to you about, so that in case remarks of that sort are made I can say with the utmost of confidence that there had been no possible opportunity for you to be influenced by me at any rate. It has been to me a source of more confidence and satisfaction than I can express to you, that I have often seen in my acquaintance with you and your work, wrong set to right through the special leading of your mind by the Lord.
I used often to make a test in my mind, saying nothing to anybody. I would say to myself, Now here's an evident wrong. Sister White knows nothing about it, or if she knows anything about it, the circumstances are such as would produce a personal prejudice in favor of the wrong rather than against it. If the Lord leads her to denounce and correct this evil, I shall know that she is being especially led. In not a single, single instance did the test fail, and so my confidence grew. I mention these facts very often to those whom I find doubting.—J. H. Kellogg Letter to Ellen G. White, September 9, 1892.
[92]
Within the next ten years, Dr. Kellogg lost his way in pantheistic philosophy. He lost his way in the concept of the medical missionary work as it related to Seventh-day Adventist work as a whole. Medical missionary work had been set before us as the right arm of the message, but Dr. Kellogg began to envision it as the whole body and he the head. He, in spite of his earlier declarations, also seemed to forget that Ellen White was not influenced by his opinions or the opinions of others.
In 1902 Dr. Kellogg thought he had an opportunity to influence Ellen White, and he set out to do just that. If there was any man in this denomination who could have influenced Ellen White, John Harvey Kellogg was the man. The White family and the Kellogg family grew up together. James and Ellen White had sent John to medical school. He stood firm for the principles of health reform as set before her and as she had set them before the world. He led out in our medical work.
In 1901 Arthur G. Daniells was elected leader of the church. The next year Daniells planned a council in Europe, and Dr. Kellogg was asked to attend. After the council Kellogg began to look around in England for property for a sanitarium. He had been leading out in establishing some sanitariums here and there. Sister White had called for the establishment of small medical institutions, and he felt the time had come to begin in England. He found a very acceptable property and cabled Elder Daniells, who was in Germany, to come and look at it. Soon after, Elder Daniells came over and looked the property over. He was pleased with it. It could be purchased for some thirty or forty thousand dollars. Daniells told Kellogg that he was pleased with the property, and he asked, “Where will you get the money?” “Oh,” Kellogg replied, “I'll get the money from the General Conference.”
[93]
Now at that time the General Conference was virtually bankrupt. It had more obligations than it had assets. Up to this time, our work had not been operated on a budget. We had borrowed money to send missionaries overseas. Heretofore Dr. Kellogg had been particularly skillful in persuading the General Conference Association to assume large indebtednesses on the sanitariums that he began around the United States. However, when Daniells came into a position of leadership, he declared that the church could not continue to operate on a deficit program and that we must have the money before we spent it. He was determined to bring to a stop the procedures that resulted in ever-mounting debt.
With this in mind Daniells told Kellogg that the General Conference did not have the money. He said, “Doctor, when you find the money I am willing that you should move forward and purchase this institution.” Dr. Kellogg replied, “We will get the money from the General Conference.” Elder Daniells said, “No, John, the General Conference does not have the money, and we cannot go on into debt. When you find the money, you can go ahead.” Kellogg replied, “I'll get the money from the General Conference and I'll show you!” Soon afterward the two men parted, not in the best of spirits. Elder Daniells went back to Germany, and Dr. Kellogg took the boat for New York and from there went by train to Battle Creek.
On the way Kellogg planned his strategy. He knew, of course, of Ellen White's burden for the medical missionary work and of her many appeals for this kind of service. He determined he would get her on his side. He would write a letter to her and in the strongest possible light place before her the wonderful opportunities that lay ahead of us if we only purchased the property in England, and pointing out that the only thing standing in the way of availing ourselves of this golden opportunity was Daniells' stubbornness.
[94]
When Dr. Kellogg got to Battle Creek he called in his secretary and began dictating a letter to Ellen White. When he got to ten pages he was only nicely started. On page 20 he was well into his subject. Finally on page 71 (the letter was double spaced) he signed his name and sent the letter to Ellen White, who was at Elmshaven in California. He left nothing out that would influence her to favor what he was planning and to see Daniells' unreasonableness and narrow-mindedness.
In due time Elder Daniells returned from Europe, and when he got to the General Conference office in Battle Creek, his secretary, who happened to be a close friend of Dr. Kellogg's secretary, told him about the 71-page letter that had been written to Ellen White and what was in it. As Elder Daniells related the story to me he said, “I could just feel the blood pressure rising.” He declared to himself, “That's not fair, that's not right, that's not just.”
At the close of the day he went home, and after supper he took some sheets of paper saying to himself, “I must give Sister White my side of the story.” And he wrote a page, and a second page, and he was beginning the third page when he thought, What am I doing? If Ellen White is God's prophet, I don't need to tell her anything about this. He tore the sheets to bits and threw them in the wastebasket. He said nothing to anyone, but in his heart he pondered, How will Sister White receive me when I see her at Oakland in California at the General Conference session a few weeks from now?
The time came to go to the session. Elder Daniells crossed the continent to Oakland and went to the Pacific Press, then in Oakland, to pull things together for the opening of the conference the next day. (We held no precouncils in those days.) As night drew on, the burden of the meeting rolled upon his heart. There were great issues at stake. He
[95]
knelt to pray there in the Pacific Press office room. As the burden of the cause swept over his heart he agonized with God. The next thing he knew he was prostrate on the floor clutching at the floor boards pleading with God to save His cause. All night he prayed. Then as the beams of the sun shone through the window in the morning, the impression swept over him as clearly as if a voice had spoken to him, “If you stand by my servant till her sun sets your sun will not set in obscurity.”
Elder Daniells arose, went to his room, cleaned up, got ready for the session, and then went to greet Ellen White, welcoming her to the conference. He knew she was in Oakland, and he knew where she was staying—in a cottage she had rented not far from the church where the session would be held. It was a beautiful spring day. The door to her cottage was open, and as he stepped up on the porch he noticed that Ellen White was in the kitchen at the end of the hallway, so he opened the screen door and walked down through the hallway. She heard him coming. She got up and came into the hall, saw who it was, and reached out her hand warmly and grasped his hand, and said, “Elder Daniells, we are in a crisis. Every man must stand true to principle. We can't concede now.”
This was enough for Elder Daniells. He knew by her firm handshake and the tone of her voice that Ellen White had not been influenced one whir by Kellogg's letter. At the conference Elder Daniells received her steadfast support.
At that conference Kellogg, angered, told Daniells, “You think you've got a General Conference. You come back to Battle Creek and I'll show you who has a General Conference.” Soon afterward Kellogg did call a great medical missionary congress, with about three times the number of delegates as had attended the General Conference of 1903. But as for his letter influencing Ellen White to support his position,
[96]
all his arguments had not moved her by one hair's breadth. W. C. White, her son, observed this fact also.
Ellen G. White Refrained From Certain Reading
No, Ellen White was not influenced. She was careful not to read certain things. In a letter written in 1887, she declared:
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, so that not a mould of any man's theories should have any connection with that which I write.—Letter 37, 1887.
Again, from another letter:
Sara [McEnterfer, Ellen White's traveling companion and private secretary] tells me that she has a letter for me from you, but I tell her not to give it to me yet; for I have something to write to you before I see your letter. You will understand this.—Letter 172, 1902.
Another such experience is recorded in 1905. Writing to a brother she said:
You may blame me for not reading your package of writings. I did not read them, neither did I read the letters that Dr. Kellogg sent. I had a message of stern rebuke for the publishing house, and I knew that if I read the communications sent to me, later on, when the testimony came out, you and Dr. Kellogg would be tempted to say, “I gave her that inspiration.”—Letter 301, 1905.
This experience makes it clear that Ellen White refrained from reading what might be thought to influence her.
In Special Testimonies to the Review and Herald Office she wrote in 1896:
Unbelief is expressed by the words “Who has written these things to Sister White?” But I know of no one who knows them as they are, and no one could write that which he does not suppose has
[97]
an existence. Some one has told me,—He who does not falsify, misjudge, or exaggerate any case.—Page 16.
Again in 1903 she wrote:
Some, in their self-confidence, have dared to turn from that which they knew to be truth, with the words, “Who has told Sister White?” These words show the measure of their faith and confidence in the work the Lord has given me to do.—Review and Herald, May 19, 1903.
At another time she wrote:
Some are ready to inquire: Who told Sister White these things? They have even put the question to me: Did anyone tell you these things? I could answer them: Yes; yes, the angel of God has spoken to me. But what they mean is: Have the brethren and sisters been exposing their faults?—Testimonies for the Church, vol. 3, pp. 314, 315.
A Significant Experience in Australia
My father in his long association with Ellen White usually refrained from telling his mother certain things. He was a member of the General Conference Committee from 1884 to the close of his life in 1937, with the exception of four years while in Australia. He knew what was going on in the cause, but he seldom told her about the problems that existed. He would bring to her the good reports, the encouraging things, but seldom the problems.
He reasoned that if he brought the problems to her and the Lord then gave her light on that point and she wrote it out, some would say, “W. C. White tells his mother, and she has a vision, and writes a testimony.” It was his custom, therefore, not to tell Ellen White the problems that confronted the cause. In the late 1890's Ellen White and her son were in Australia, starting the college at Cooranbong. Times were very hard financially. During one crisis the problems were so large that the school board met over a period of several days.
[98]
W. C. White was chairman of the board, and he knew that often when leading men were wrestling with problems in committees the Lord would open up those matters to Ellen White in vision. Each morning before walking over to the college to meet with the board W. C. White would stop at his mother's home, ask about her health, and hope that she had some message of guidance for him.
The second or third morning she inquired, “Willie, how are you getting on?” He replied in general terms, “Quite well, Mother.” She said, “Willie, what are your problems, what are you dealing with?” “Oh,” he said, “Mother, I shall not tell you. If the Lord wants you to know He'll tell you.” She said, “Willie, I want you to tell me what you are doing on the board.” He said, “No, Mother, I shall not tell you. If God wants you to know, God will tell you.”
Then she took him by the lapels of his coat as a mother would a little boy and pulling him close she said, “Willie White, I want you to tell me what you are doing at the board meeting.” He said, “Mother, why do you ask?” She replied, “I have been shown that when you get to a certain place in your deliberations, I am to come in and bear my testimony. I want to know where you stand.” He told her briefly, and she said, “Today isn't the day. I will come in a little later.” She recognized that by the next day or two they would get to the point where her message should be given. At the right time she went in and bore her testimony.
This kind of situation placed W. C. White in a difficult position. He had to be very careful. Often before Ellen White had had time to write out a vision she would tell those about her what she had been shown. At times many months were involved in writing what was shown in a single vision. But frequently after a vision she would bring out in conversation certain principles that had been revealed to her. Often it would happen that a little later my father would be in a
[99]
committee meeting where the church leaders would be facing the same kind of problems as Ellen White had seen in vision. How could he do otherwise than let his influence be felt along the line concerning which he had heard his mother speak? Yet when she wrote out the testimony, frequently some said, “Willie White said that in committee, and now his mother comes out with a testimony. She gets her inspiration from him.” This situation was not easy to explain to those who wished to doubt.
Mrs. White's Literary Assistants
There were others who were prone to say, “Well, Sister White has her editors. How can we be sure of what she did write?”
It is true that Ellen White did have literary assistants. She valued their help highly. She wrote in a statement now in Selected Messages, book 1, page 50:
While my husband lived, he acted as a helper and counselor in the sending out of the messages that were given to me. We traveled extensively. Sometimes light would be given to me in the night season, sometimes in the daytime before large congregations. The instruction I received in vision was faithfully written out by me, as I had time and strength for the work. Afterward we examined the matter together, my husband correcting grammatical errors and eliminating needless repetition. Then it was carefully copied for the persons addressed, or for the printers.
Then of subsequent years she said:
As the work grew, others assisted me in the preparation of matter for publication. After my husband's death, faithful helpers joined me, who labored untiringly in the work of copying the testimonies and preparing articles for publication.
But the reports that are circulated, that any of my helpers are permitted to add matter or change the meaning of the messages I write out, are not true.—Ibid.
One faithful helper who assisted her for 25 years was
[100]
Marian Davis, a sister-in-law of Will K. Kellogg of corn flake fame. On this question of the work of her assistants in helping her with preparation of her books Ellen White wrote:
The books are not Marian's productions, but my own, gathered from all my writings. Marian has a large field from which to draw, and her ability to arrange the matter is of great value to me. It saves my poring over a mass of matter, which I have no time to do.—Letter 61a, 1900 (quoted in Messenger to the Remnant, p. 60).
One of Mrs. White's secretaries, Fannie Bolton, declared in 1901:
The editors in no wise change Sister White's expression if it is grammatically correct, and is an evident expression of the evident thought. Sister White as human instrumentality has a pronounced style of her own, which is preserved all through her books and articles, that stamps the matter with her individuality. Many times her manuscript does not need any editing, often but slight editing, and again a great deal of literary work; but article or chapter, whatever has been done upon it, is passed back into her hands by the editor.—Messenger to the Remnant, p. 60.
It would have been an unprofitable use of Ellen White's time were she to attempt to do all the painstaking work of a copy editor. Ellen White had three years in school. The Lord did not miraculously instruct her in all the rules of writing, teaching her spelling and telling her where to put in all the commas, and so forth. She valued highly the help of skilled literary assistants, who were instructed closely as to what their work was. They would copy the material, and if they found a misspelled word it would be corrected. If they found an imperfection in grammar they would correct it. Ellen White one time said that there is no salvation in misspelled words and poor grammar.
If there was repetition, the statements would be brought to one place. If there was redundancy of words, a synonym might be used. But the copied material would come back to Ellen White triple spaced, and she would read it over
[101]
carefully and edit it. She often added a bit here, strengthened a statement there, put in quotation marks the copyist left out, corrected a word the copyist had misspelled, and so on. Then it would go back to the copyist to be recopied. It would come back to Mrs. White, and she would look it over carefully and sign it. She might even edit it further, and it would be copied again. She was ever endeavoring to find the best and clearest way of setting forth the truths that had been opened to her mind, that they might reach the people in a way that would accomplish their work effectively.
Ellen White was instructed as to whom she could trust as literary assistants and whom she could not trust. Two individuals who worked for her were dismissed, one of them three times, when Ellen White in vision was warned that they were tempted to change the writings as they passed through their hands. God was controlling the work—not a mechanical control, but His hand was over it. I have heard my father say that Mrs. White's secretaries would as soon put their right hand in the fire and have it burned off as they would think of changing the messages that passed through their hands as they went from Ellen White to the people. Ellen White had no ghost writers. She was fully responsible for what went out under her name.
Does the Expression “I Saw” Give a Clue?
In her earlier writings Ellen White frequently employed the words “I saw” or “I was shown,” and she continued to do so until her death. Some readers would evaluate the writings as inspired or uninspired, depending on the use of such phrases. As pointed out elsewhere, Ellen White deliberately chose to omit such phrases in her books that would come before the general public lest the reader unfamiliar with her call and work be distracted from the message she was presenting.
[102]
Inasmuch as her writings were based on the visions God gave her and she assumed that everyone understood this fact, she frequently presented light and instruction without employing such phrases. We present an illustration:
Dores Robinson was a young man 21 years of age. His father was the president of the Australasian Union Conference. A physician in South Africa where Dores had previously resided had promised to put him through the medical course at Edinburgh, and he had studied there a couple of years. Then the doctor's finances failed, and he had to withdraw his help from Dores. So in 1900 Dores was in Australia doing secretarial work for Ellen White. His first work was copying the manuscript of Christ's Object Lessons.
His uncle, Elder E. W. Farnsworth, working in Australia, proposed: “Dores, we have no children. You have started the medical course. If you want to go on, my wife and I will see you through.”
What a generous offer that was! Dores went to talk with Ellen White about it. Would it be the wise course to follow? He visited with her for half an hour and then walked out of the room with absolutely no intimation from her as to whether he should or should not go on with the medical course. He was right where he was when he went in to see her.
Consequently, he made up his mind to accept his uncle's offer. On Wednesday he went down to Sydney and made his booking to go the next week to Europe. He was back at Sister White's office on Thursday. Friday was to be his last day. As he went in he picked up from the typewriter a long envelope addressed “Dores Robinson.” He opened and read it. It began, “You asked me at one time what I thought in regard to your becoming a physician. I would say that the most useful lessons for you to learn will not now be found in taking a medical course of study.” She went on to point out
[103]
that with his physical stamina, with his mental frame of mind, to pursue the medical course would leave him a physical and mental wreck. She pointed out that he should choose a lifework of a different nature entirely.
What should he do? He looked carefully all the way through that letter to see whether he could find some such expression as “I saw” or “I was shown.” He could not find one. There was nothing to indicate special light from God.
“Well,” he said, “this is good counsel. I should get exercise. I will get some exercisers and I'll exercise and I'll walk.” But in his heart he was not at all clear. He decided to make a test of the matter. As he prayed about it he made up his mind that he would go back down to Sydney, and if he could get his travel money back, all of it, he would take that as a sign that he should not go on with the medical course. On Monday morning he took the train and rode three hours to Sydney. He went directly to the booking office, and as he approached the counter he said, “My name is Robinson.” “Oh, Mr. Robinson,” the clerk replied, “we're sorry, we had to cancel your booking. The British Government has commandeered the boat for troop movement to the Boer War. We think we can get you on a later boat, or we can give your money back.” He replied, “I'll take my money back.”
Now Ellen White told his father, Elder Asa T. Robinson, that in vision she saw an angel standing by the side of Dores saying to him what she said in that letter. But in the letter there wasn't an intimation that there was any special illumination. However, he knew, when he talked with her a few days earlier that she had no counsel to give and now the letter did contain counsel. This testimony, part of which may be found in Medical Ministry, changed his lifework.*
* Note: Dores Robinson taught church school; served many years as one of Mrs. White's secretaries; married her eldest granddaughter; served in school, publishing, and mission work; and then until his retirement served in the White Estate.
[104]
But what if she had no light? Did she speak or was she silent?
For example, Dr. B. E. Fullmer, who resided in southern California, had some new ideas about the 144,000. In the year 1914 he was teaching that the 144,000 would all be from America and none from any other country. The union conference president, Elder Elmer E. Andross, wanted to know whether there was anything that Ellen White had written that would help the conference in dealing with this teaching. He wrote to Sister White's Elmshaven office and made inquiry. Elder Clarence C. Crisler, the secretary in charge, took the matter to Sister White. Her comments were taken down stenographically. “I have no light on the subject,” she declared.
Please tell my brethren I have nothing presented before me regarding the circumstances concerning which they write, and I can set before them only that which has been presented to me.—C. C. Crisler Letter to E. E. Andross, Dec. 8, 1914.
This is a significant statement. We would expect her to slap down the foolish teaching. Instead she said, “I have no light on the subject, and I can set before them [her brethren] only that which has been presented to me.”
Ellen White's Acknowledgment
I can assure you that when you read the counsels, when you read Ellen White's books, you may know, except for the purely biographical material, that what she has there set forth was based on the visions that God gave her. She said once in connection with the question of who told Sister White:
[105]
There are those who say “Someone manipulates the writings.” I acknowledge the charge. It is One who is mighty in counsel, One who presents before me the condition of things…. I have an Elder Brother on the throne, who has paid an infinite price to redeem the human race from the curse of sin.—Letter 52, 1906.
“Yes,” Ellen White declared, “there are those who say that I am influenced; I acknowledge the charge. It is true. The one who influences me is Jesus Christ.”
ELLEN WHITE ESTATES: http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egww/EGWWc03.html
2 Sam. 7:1–7, 1 Kings 22:10–18, Jer. 43:2–4, Dan. 8:27.
Memory Text:
“As the Lord lives, whatever my God says, that I will speak” (2 Chronicles 18:13, NKJV).
CHAPTER 3
The Integrity of the Prophetic Message,* or “Who Told Sister White?”
[Return to the Table of Contents][Back to Online Books Menu][Return to the Homepage]
Section TitlesCharged With Being Influenced by the BrethrenThe Bible Prophets and the Question of InfluenceEllen G. White on the Question of InfluenceThe Question of Influence and the Early BooksThe Visions Give SignificanceSalt Provides an IllustrationAttempts to Influence Ellen G. WhiteEllen G. White Refrained From Certain ReadingA Significant Experience in AustraliaMrs. White's Literary AssistantsDoes the Expression “I Saw” Give a Clue?Ellen White's Acknowledgment
It is sometimes suggested that in certain positions taken by Ellen G. White she was influenced by the thinking of the times, that her statements reflected the ideas of those about her, and that we must take this into account when we evaluate her writings and use them today. Akin to this was the early-day suggestion that the visions resulted from natural causes, mesmerism, spiritism, or physical injury. In later years the shift was to the suggestion that most likely she was influenced by her associates.
Early in her experience, hypnosis was much in the public eye and it was suggested to Ellen Harmon that, when the visions were given to her she was mesmerized. Some asserted, “She is a weak woman, easily influenced and therefore a good subject for mesmerism.” This troubled her and she went into the woods to pray, and while alone in the woods, visions would be given to her. When she told the people of this, they declared, “You mesmerize yourself.”
* This material was presented at the North American Academy Principals' Council held at Blue Mountain Academy, Hamburg, Pennsylvania, June 27, 1965.
[80]
Ellen pondered, has it come to this? The next time she discerned that a vision was about to be given to her, she resisted it. “I'll not have it,” she said to herself. “It is mesmerism!” Like Zacharias of old, who was stricken dumb for his doubts, she was stricken dumb because she doubted. She was taken off in vision, and in the vision she was shown that never again should she question, never again should she doubt, and that in less than twenty-four hours she again would be able to speak. She reached for a slate and wrote concerning her experience and her condition. The next day she was able again to speak, but never again did she question or doubt her experience. See Early Writings, pages 22-24.
Dr. Brown and the Visions
As our preachers went into Parkville, Michigan, some thirty miles southwest of Battle Creek, in 1860, and held evangelistic meetings, the people were told, among other things, about the visions given to Mrs. White. A spiritualist physician lived there, a certain Dr. Brown. He had boasted that he could explain it all in terms of spiritualism. He asserted that the visions that were given to Ellen White were just a form of spirit-mediumship, and that if he should ever be present when she was in a vision, he could bring her out of it in just one minute. That's all the time he would need.
An Adventist church building was erected in Parkville in 1860 and was dedicated on Sabbath, January 12, 1861. Elder and Mrs. White, Elder J. N. Loughborough, Elder Uriah Smith, and some others went down from Battle Creek to be present for the service. In connection with the afternoon meeting, Ellen White was taken off in vision. Elder White always gave ample opportunity for any who wished
[81]
to examine Ellen White while in vision to do so, and this time was no exception. He asked whether there was a physician who could be called who could examine Mrs. White while in vision and report to the people as to her condition. Remembering his boast, the people urged Dr. Brown, who happened to be present, to respond and conduct the examination.
Dr. Brown began to examine Ellen White but soon turned deathly pale and began to shake all over. Elder White asked, “Will the physician please report to the congregation concerning his findings?”
“Oh,” he said, “she does not breathe,” and he started for the door. When he got near the door, the brethren blocked it and said, “Go back and do like you said you would. You said you could stop the vision in one minute.” “Oh no,” he replied. “Well, what is it?” they asked. “God only knows,” he replied. “Let me out of this house.” He jerked the door open and ran.
Charged With Being Influenced by the Brethren
The visions given to Ellen White could not be controlled by herself or by others. She could not have a vision if she wished to, nor could she refrain from having a vision if she did not wish to have it. It was entirely in the hands of God, entirely beyond any human influence about her. But as I have mentioned, in later years it was suggested, perhaps kindly, “You know, Sister White is not too strong, and she is surrounded by men of strong intellect and character. There is her own husband, James White, George I. Butler, Dr. John Kellogg.” In later years, they talked of W. C. White, and of her being influenced by him.
If the messages borne by Mrs. E. G. White had their origin
[82]
in surrounding minds or influences, then the Spirit of Prophecy has no claims on our allegiance. If the messages on organization can be traced to the ideas of James White or G. I. Butler; if the counsels on health have their origin in the minds of Drs. Kellogg, Jackson, or Trall; if the instruction which came on education was based upon the ideas of G. H. Bell or W. W. Prescott; if the high standards upheld in the Spirit of Prophecy counsels were inspired by the strong men of the cause, then the Spirit of Prophecy can mean no more to you or to me than good ideas and helpful advice.
The Bible Prophets and the Question of Influence
The suggestion that the prophets were influenced by others is nothing new in the history of inspiration. The scriptures in Jeremiah 43:1-3 bring to us just such a picture. Jeremiah was the Lord's messenger to Judah. He had borne a solemn message to the leaders of Judah.
Note the words: “And it came to pass when Jeremiah had made an end of speaking unto all the people all the words of the Lord their God, for which the Lord their God had sent him to them, even all these words, then spake Azariah the son of Hoshaiah, and Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the proud men, saying unto Jeremiah, Thou speakest falsely: the Lord our God hath not sent thee to say, Go not into Egypt to sojourn there: but Baruch the son of Neriah setteth thee on against us, for to deliver us into the hand of the Chaldeans.”
Jeremiah had borne Heaven's message to the people. One of the leaders got up and said, “Jeremiah, you are a liar. Baruch, your secretary, wanted you to say that, and you said it. God never gave you the message.” History, however, made clear that the message came from God.
There is another interesting story that has a bearing on
[83]
this topic, found in 2 Chronicles 18. We find Jehoshaphat was king of Judah and Ahab king of Israel. Jehoshaphat was a man of God, Ahab was not. A marriage between the families had taken place, and an alliance between the two kingdoms was formed. Jehoshaphat should not have permitted this, but he had. There came a day when there was to be a family reunion in Samaria, and Jehoshaphat took his family and went over to Samaria, and took part of his army along for review and all that goes with kingly visits.
Ahab thought this would be a good time to go out and fight his enemies, for with Jehoshaphat in Samaria, he had some reinforcements. He proposed to Jehoshaphat that they go up and fight his enemies. Without first seeking divine guidance, Jehoshaphat replied, “I am as thou art, and my people as thy people; and we will be with thee in the war.”
But then Jehoshaphat thought better of it and said to Ahab: “Enquire, I pray thee, at the word of the Lord to day” (verse 4). So Ahab called in his 400 prophets. They knew what kind of answer Ahab wanted, and they said, “Go up; for God will deliver it [Ramoth-gilead] into the king's hand.”
Jehoshaphat knew that these men were false prophets, so he turned to Ahab and said, “Is there not here a prophet of the Lord besides, that we might enquire of him?” (verse 6). And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, “There is yet one man, by whom we may enquire of the Lord: but I hate him; for he never prophesied good unto me, but always evil: the same is Micaiah the son of Imla. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so.” Jehoshaphat evidently made it clear to Ahab that he would get nowhere with his enterprise without hearing from Micaiah first. So an officer was called and sent to Micaiah's home to summon him to come and prophesy concerning the proposed expedition.
The messenger who went to call Micaiah knew the answer
[84]
that had been given by the 400 false prophets. He knew his master, and he knew that if Micaiah was unwise enough to prophesy disaster to Ahab's enterprise, he would probably lose his head. Thinking to do Micaiah a kindness, the officer advised him to give Ahab a favorable reply. But Micaiah fearlessly replied, “As the Lord liveth, even what my God saith, that will I speak” (verse 13).
It made no difference to Micaiah what his reply might mean to him personally. There was only one answer he could give when he went before the king. There were a few bantering words of introduction, and then Micaiah predicted disaster to the enterprise and death to King Ahab. At this Ahab turned to Jehoshaphat and said, “Didn't I tell you he would prophesy evil and not good? Officer, take Micaiah. Put him in the dungeon, feed him bread and water till I come back victorious.” But Ahab never came back. He died on the battlefield that day. The point is, God's prophets were not influenced.
Ellen G. White on the Question of Influence
In 1893, one of our brethren wrote to Sister White. He thought she did not understand a certain matter, and he was going to straighten her out. She wrote back to him and said, “You think individuals have prejudiced my mind. If I am in this state, I am not fitted to be entrusted with the work of God.”—Selected Messages, book 2, p. 63.
On one occasion back in 1850, one of our sisters told Sister White about one of the ministers and some of the things he had done that he should not have done. It was not long after she related these facts to Ellen White that a testimony arrived for this minister. When the sister who had reported to Sister White heard about this testimony she felt chagrined and said to herself, “I shouldn't have told Sister White those things.” She then sat down and wrote a letter to Ellen White
[85]
and told her she was sorry she had said anything and thought she shouldn't have told her all those things.
Ellen White wrote as follows:
What if you had said ever so much, would that affect the visions, that God gives me? If so, then the visions are nothing…. God has shown me the true state of Brother ——— [the erring minister]. I know from the vision that his influence has been bad. … What you or anyone else has said is nothing at all. God has taken the matter in hand…. What you have said, Sister ———, influenced me not at all. My opinion has nothing to do with what God has shown me in vision.—Letter 1, 1851.
The Question of Influence and the Early Books
The great controversy vision was given to Ellen White at Lovett's Grove, Ohio, on March 14, 1858. Shortly thereafter at meetings in Battle Creek over a weekend, she told the high points of what had been shown to her in that vision. Elder J. N. Andrews happened to be in Battle Creek at the time, and he was very much interested in what Ellen White related. After one of the meetings he came to her and said, “Sister White, some of the things you have told us sound to me quite a bit like a book I have read.” Then he asked, “Have you ever read Paradise Lost?” She said, “No.” “Well,” he said, “I think you would be interested in it.”
She forgot about the conversation, but a few days later Brother Andrews came to the White home with a copy of Paradise Lost and left it with Ellen White. She was busily engaged in writing out what had been shown to her, and she took the book, hardly knowing just what to do with it, looked at it, but didn't open it. She took it to the kitchen and put it up on a high shelf, determined that if there was anything in that book similar to what God had revealed to her in vision she was not going to read it until she had first written out what the Lord had revealed to her. Her subsequent
[86]
writings indicate that later she did read at least portions of Paradise Lost. Thus, for example, one phrase from this work is quoted in Education.
But to go back. Ellen White proceeded with the writing out of the great controversy story as she did in Spiritual Gifts, volume 1 (now available in a facsimile reprint), without first reading Paradise Lost. This volume of Spiritual Gifts is a little book consisting of 219 pages. It merely touches the high points of the great controversy story as we have it now in the last part of Early Writings. The vision created in her mind a deep interest in the history of the Reformation. After completing Spiritual Gifts, volume 1, within six months of the time of the vision, she turned to some of the histories. In the vision she had seen essential portions of this history. The vision brought to her new light on the whole matter of the conflict between the forces of righteousness and the forces of evil. With that interest, the White family read for worship in the next several months most of D'Aubigné's History of the Reformation. They observed with interest those things that were in harmony with what had been shown to her.
So when in 1884 she was rewriting the great controversy story more fully as it was presented in Spirit of Prophecy, volume 4, and then later was carried into The Great Controversy, she quoted from some of these historians. She tells us that she did so not because she was dependent upon them for the information which is there presented but because their presentation afforded “a ready and forcible presentation.” As a matter of convenience she had made use of such quotations. She explains this in the third from the last paragraph in her introduction to The Great Controversy.
When the health reform vision was given to Ellen White on June 6, 1863, she began to tell the people about what had been shown to her. Of this she wrote in 1867:
As I introduced the subject of health to friends … and spoke
[87]
against drugs 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 until I had fully written out my views, lest it should be said that I had received my light upon the subject of health from physicians and not from the Lord…. I did not read any works upon health until I had written Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3 and 4, and Appeal to Mothers, and had sketched out most of my six articles in the six numbers of How to Live.—Review and Herald, Oct. 8, 1867.
If you are familiar with these publications, you will recognize them as the basic early writings on the subject of health. The six articles in How to Live are now in the Appendix of Selected Messages, book 2.
After having written out the basic presentation as it was made to her, Ellen White and her husband read with interest what had been written by physicians who were pioneering in the field of physiology and nutrition, and they measured what they read by the light given to Ellen White. Some things they could accept, because it was in harmony with what had been shown to her; other things they could not accept.
It should be pointed out that the Lord did not show Ellen White how to give fomentations, but the Lord did make it clear to her that water was a very important agency to be employed in the recovery of the sick. The Lord never gave the visions to take the place of initiative, of study, of hard work, or of faith. The principles were set forth in vision. The Spirit of Prophecy pointed the way. Then they studied what others were doing in health lines to find out in a detailed way how to apply these principles.
Ellen White in her books does not tell how to give fomentations. The Whites did apply in their own personal experience what they learned from others in these matters. In
[88]
1867 she wrote, speaking of the subject of health, “My views were written independent of books, or the opinions of others” (MS. 7, 1867). Either this statement is true or it is not. If it is true, as Seventh-day Adventists believe, Ellen White's teachings on health were not derived from doctors, but came from God.
In this connection it should be pointed out that God is the Author of the laws of nature, and if men through their painstaking research and experimentation discover those laws or if God reveals them through vision through His servant, there is bound to be harmony. Both came from the same source. So we need not be dismayed if we find some similarity between the writings of Ellen White and of physicians leading out in reforms.
The Visions Give Significance
As noted in Chapter 1, Seventh-day Adventists have never claimed to be the originators of all the principles of health reform they hold. This was acknowledged in the article appearing in the Review and Herald of August 7, 1866, written by Elder J. H. Waggoner and quoted in The Story of Our Health Message, pages 79, 80. (See pages 39, 40.) Waggoner points out that there are others who are working in the field of reform in health, but when the Lord calls these things to our attention in the visions given to Ellen White, they take on special significance to us, “to be received with the blessing of God, or rejected at our peril.”
What is said concerning this in the field of health reform might also be said in the field of education. It is well known that there were those in a few places who were leading out in educational reforms in advance of Ellen White. However, it was the visions given to her that drew our attention to these things and the importance of these things that made them a
[89]
part of the Seventh-day Adventist philosophy and working program. We have valued highly the work that others have done, but these things take on significance to us because of the visions given to Ellen White.
Some people have been perplexed about this fact. They have said, “Yes, it isn't new, and so how do we know that Ellen White got it from God?” To those who might say Ellen White was influenced by those about her, let's bring in a little illustration.
Salt Provides an Illustration
The Whites had great respect for Dr. R. T. Trall, a physician in New Jersey who was leading out in reforms in the matter of diet, the care of the sick, and so forth. He was not a Seventh-day Adventist. John Kellogg went over in 1872 to take medical training at Dr. Trall's. He spent six months there. In those days medical training was largely apprenticeship rather than study. Then Dr. Kellogg went on from there to New York, to Bellevue, at the expense of James and Ellen White, and got the best and most thorough medical education that could be had in North America. James and Ellen White were determined that if we were entering the medical field, our work must stand at the very top. They felt that a religious body of four or five thousand people could not afford to enter the field of medicine unless they had a work of high quality. It would have been natural, if Ellen White was influenced by those who were about her, to have been influenced by Dr. Trall, because of her high regard for him, but not so.
In the Health Reformer (our monthly health journal) of July, 1869, there is a page or two given over to questions and answers provided by Dr. Trall. One question was “Is it all right to eat a little salt?” Dr. Trall, a scientist,
[90]
gave the answer: “Salt being a poison should not be used at all.” That was the counsel that went out in our medical journal. But what did Ellen White write?
I use some salt, and always have, because from the light given me by God, this article, in the place of being deleterious, is actually essential for the blood. The whys and wherefores of this I know not, but I give you the instruction as it is given me.—Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 344.
Here Ellen White tells us that the Lord gave her instruction in regard to salt. It is essential to the blood. Of course anyone today who understands blood chemistry knows why it is essential for good health. This was not understood in Ellen White's day, and she frankly acknowledged: “I don't know why, but I am giving to you that which God has given to me.” That was the basis of the position she took in opposition to the view that was held by one who was influencing many Seventh-day Adventists.
Since salt is essential to good health, shall we eat a lot of it? No. In 1884 in the Review and Herald she wrote, “Do not eat largely of salt.” (See The Ministry of Healing, p. 305.) Why not? Probably the reason was not revealed to her. She simply sounded a caution.
Now note the scientific confirmation:
In 1956 at Brookhaven National Laboratory, scientists checked on fellow employees, and found that of 135 who never added salt to their food, only one had unexplained high blood pressure; of 630 who added salt sometimes after tasting food, 43 had the disease; among 581 who always added salt without bothering to taste, 61 had it.—Time, April 30, 1956.
Who told Ellen White about salt years and years in advance of the discoveries of nutritionists and physiologists? Was it Dr. Trall? Or was it the Lord? The answer seems evident—Ellen White was not influenced by the erroneous opinions of others.
[91]
Attempts to Influence Ellen G. White
Although Ellen White was not influenced by the erroneous opinions of others, there were some of her brethren who nevertheless tried to influence her. For example, there was a leader in Europe who when she visited Europe in 1885-1887 was heading up our work in the Scandinavian countries. Ellen White, visiting Stockholm, Sweden, wrote in her diary:
Brother ——— [the leader's name] suggests that it would please the people if I speak less about duty and more in regard to the love of Jesus. But I wish to speak as the Spirit of the Lord shall impress me. The Lord knows best what this people needs. I spoke in the forenoon from Isaiah 58. I did not round the corners at all.—Manuscript 26, 1885.
In 1892 while Ellen White was in Australia, Dr. John Harvey Kellogg wrote a letter to her in which he expressed his observations concerning the question of influence:
There are so many who are ready to say that Sister White has been influenced to do or to say this or that. I often hesitate about writing to you concerning things I would like to write to you about, so that in case remarks of that sort are made I can say with the utmost of confidence that there had been no possible opportunity for you to be influenced by me at any rate. It has been to me a source of more confidence and satisfaction than I can express to you, that I have often seen in my acquaintance with you and your work, wrong set to right through the special leading of your mind by the Lord.
I used often to make a test in my mind, saying nothing to anybody. I would say to myself, Now here's an evident wrong. Sister White knows nothing about it, or if she knows anything about it, the circumstances are such as would produce a personal prejudice in favor of the wrong rather than against it. If the Lord leads her to denounce and correct this evil, I shall know that she is being especially led. In not a single, single instance did the test fail, and so my confidence grew. I mention these facts very often to those whom I find doubting.—J. H. Kellogg Letter to Ellen G. White, September 9, 1892.
[92]
Within the next ten years, Dr. Kellogg lost his way in pantheistic philosophy. He lost his way in the concept of the medical missionary work as it related to Seventh-day Adventist work as a whole. Medical missionary work had been set before us as the right arm of the message, but Dr. Kellogg began to envision it as the whole body and he the head. He, in spite of his earlier declarations, also seemed to forget that Ellen White was not influenced by his opinions or the opinions of others.
In 1902 Dr. Kellogg thought he had an opportunity to influence Ellen White, and he set out to do just that. If there was any man in this denomination who could have influenced Ellen White, John Harvey Kellogg was the man. The White family and the Kellogg family grew up together. James and Ellen White had sent John to medical school. He stood firm for the principles of health reform as set before her and as she had set them before the world. He led out in our medical work.
In 1901 Arthur G. Daniells was elected leader of the church. The next year Daniells planned a council in Europe, and Dr. Kellogg was asked to attend. After the council Kellogg began to look around in England for property for a sanitarium. He had been leading out in establishing some sanitariums here and there. Sister White had called for the establishment of small medical institutions, and he felt the time had come to begin in England. He found a very acceptable property and cabled Elder Daniells, who was in Germany, to come and look at it. Soon after, Elder Daniells came over and looked the property over. He was pleased with it. It could be purchased for some thirty or forty thousand dollars. Daniells told Kellogg that he was pleased with the property, and he asked, “Where will you get the money?” “Oh,” Kellogg replied, “I'll get the money from the General Conference.”
[93]
Now at that time the General Conference was virtually bankrupt. It had more obligations than it had assets. Up to this time, our work had not been operated on a budget. We had borrowed money to send missionaries overseas. Heretofore Dr. Kellogg had been particularly skillful in persuading the General Conference Association to assume large indebtednesses on the sanitariums that he began around the United States. However, when Daniells came into a position of leadership, he declared that the church could not continue to operate on a deficit program and that we must have the money before we spent it. He was determined to bring to a stop the procedures that resulted in ever-mounting debt.
With this in mind Daniells told Kellogg that the General Conference did not have the money. He said, “Doctor, when you find the money I am willing that you should move forward and purchase this institution.” Dr. Kellogg replied, “We will get the money from the General Conference.” Elder Daniells said, “No, John, the General Conference does not have the money, and we cannot go on into debt. When you find the money, you can go ahead.” Kellogg replied, “I'll get the money from the General Conference and I'll show you!” Soon afterward the two men parted, not in the best of spirits. Elder Daniells went back to Germany, and Dr. Kellogg took the boat for New York and from there went by train to Battle Creek.
On the way Kellogg planned his strategy. He knew, of course, of Ellen White's burden for the medical missionary work and of her many appeals for this kind of service. He determined he would get her on his side. He would write a letter to her and in the strongest possible light place before her the wonderful opportunities that lay ahead of us if we only purchased the property in England, and pointing out that the only thing standing in the way of availing ourselves of this golden opportunity was Daniells' stubbornness.
[94]
When Dr. Kellogg got to Battle Creek he called in his secretary and began dictating a letter to Ellen White. When he got to ten pages he was only nicely started. On page 20 he was well into his subject. Finally on page 71 (the letter was double spaced) he signed his name and sent the letter to Ellen White, who was at Elmshaven in California. He left nothing out that would influence her to favor what he was planning and to see Daniells' unreasonableness and narrow-mindedness.
In due time Elder Daniells returned from Europe, and when he got to the General Conference office in Battle Creek, his secretary, who happened to be a close friend of Dr. Kellogg's secretary, told him about the 71-page letter that had been written to Ellen White and what was in it. As Elder Daniells related the story to me he said, “I could just feel the blood pressure rising.” He declared to himself, “That's not fair, that's not right, that's not just.”
At the close of the day he went home, and after supper he took some sheets of paper saying to himself, “I must give Sister White my side of the story.” And he wrote a page, and a second page, and he was beginning the third page when he thought, What am I doing? If Ellen White is God's prophet, I don't need to tell her anything about this. He tore the sheets to bits and threw them in the wastebasket. He said nothing to anyone, but in his heart he pondered, How will Sister White receive me when I see her at Oakland in California at the General Conference session a few weeks from now?
The time came to go to the session. Elder Daniells crossed the continent to Oakland and went to the Pacific Press, then in Oakland, to pull things together for the opening of the conference the next day. (We held no precouncils in those days.) As night drew on, the burden of the meeting rolled upon his heart. There were great issues at stake. He
[95]
knelt to pray there in the Pacific Press office room. As the burden of the cause swept over his heart he agonized with God. The next thing he knew he was prostrate on the floor clutching at the floor boards pleading with God to save His cause. All night he prayed. Then as the beams of the sun shone through the window in the morning, the impression swept over him as clearly as if a voice had spoken to him, “If you stand by my servant till her sun sets your sun will not set in obscurity.”
Elder Daniells arose, went to his room, cleaned up, got ready for the session, and then went to greet Ellen White, welcoming her to the conference. He knew she was in Oakland, and he knew where she was staying—in a cottage she had rented not far from the church where the session would be held. It was a beautiful spring day. The door to her cottage was open, and as he stepped up on the porch he noticed that Ellen White was in the kitchen at the end of the hallway, so he opened the screen door and walked down through the hallway. She heard him coming. She got up and came into the hall, saw who it was, and reached out her hand warmly and grasped his hand, and said, “Elder Daniells, we are in a crisis. Every man must stand true to principle. We can't concede now.”
This was enough for Elder Daniells. He knew by her firm handshake and the tone of her voice that Ellen White had not been influenced one whir by Kellogg's letter. At the conference Elder Daniells received her steadfast support.
At that conference Kellogg, angered, told Daniells, “You think you've got a General Conference. You come back to Battle Creek and I'll show you who has a General Conference.” Soon afterward Kellogg did call a great medical missionary congress, with about three times the number of delegates as had attended the General Conference of 1903. But as for his letter influencing Ellen White to support his position,
[96]
all his arguments had not moved her by one hair's breadth. W. C. White, her son, observed this fact also.
Ellen G. White Refrained From Certain Reading
No, Ellen White was not influenced. She was careful not to read certain things. In a letter written in 1887, she declared:
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, so that not a mould of any man's theories should have any connection with that which I write.—Letter 37, 1887.
Again, from another letter:
Sara [McEnterfer, Ellen White's traveling companion and private secretary] tells me that she has a letter for me from you, but I tell her not to give it to me yet; for I have something to write to you before I see your letter. You will understand this.—Letter 172, 1902.
Another such experience is recorded in 1905. Writing to a brother she said:
You may blame me for not reading your package of writings. I did not read them, neither did I read the letters that Dr. Kellogg sent. I had a message of stern rebuke for the publishing house, and I knew that if I read the communications sent to me, later on, when the testimony came out, you and Dr. Kellogg would be tempted to say, “I gave her that inspiration.”—Letter 301, 1905.
This experience makes it clear that Ellen White refrained from reading what might be thought to influence her.
In Special Testimonies to the Review and Herald Office she wrote in 1896:
Unbelief is expressed by the words “Who has written these things to Sister White?” But I know of no one who knows them as they are, and no one could write that which he does not suppose has
[97]
an existence. Some one has told me,—He who does not falsify, misjudge, or exaggerate any case.—Page 16.
Again in 1903 she wrote:
Some, in their self-confidence, have dared to turn from that which they knew to be truth, with the words, “Who has told Sister White?” These words show the measure of their faith and confidence in the work the Lord has given me to do.—Review and Herald, May 19, 1903.
At another time she wrote:
Some are ready to inquire: Who told Sister White these things? They have even put the question to me: Did anyone tell you these things? I could answer them: Yes; yes, the angel of God has spoken to me. But what they mean is: Have the brethren and sisters been exposing their faults?—Testimonies for the Church, vol. 3, pp. 314, 315.
A Significant Experience in Australia
My father in his long association with Ellen White usually refrained from telling his mother certain things. He was a member of the General Conference Committee from 1884 to the close of his life in 1937, with the exception of four years while in Australia. He knew what was going on in the cause, but he seldom told her about the problems that existed. He would bring to her the good reports, the encouraging things, but seldom the problems.
He reasoned that if he brought the problems to her and the Lord then gave her light on that point and she wrote it out, some would say, “W. C. White tells his mother, and she has a vision, and writes a testimony.” It was his custom, therefore, not to tell Ellen White the problems that confronted the cause. In the late 1890's Ellen White and her son were in Australia, starting the college at Cooranbong. Times were very hard financially. During one crisis the problems were so large that the school board met over a period of several days.
[98]
W. C. White was chairman of the board, and he knew that often when leading men were wrestling with problems in committees the Lord would open up those matters to Ellen White in vision. Each morning before walking over to the college to meet with the board W. C. White would stop at his mother's home, ask about her health, and hope that she had some message of guidance for him.
The second or third morning she inquired, “Willie, how are you getting on?” He replied in general terms, “Quite well, Mother.” She said, “Willie, what are your problems, what are you dealing with?” “Oh,” he said, “Mother, I shall not tell you. If the Lord wants you to know He'll tell you.” She said, “Willie, I want you to tell me what you are doing on the board.” He said, “No, Mother, I shall not tell you. If God wants you to know, God will tell you.”
Then she took him by the lapels of his coat as a mother would a little boy and pulling him close she said, “Willie White, I want you to tell me what you are doing at the board meeting.” He said, “Mother, why do you ask?” She replied, “I have been shown that when you get to a certain place in your deliberations, I am to come in and bear my testimony. I want to know where you stand.” He told her briefly, and she said, “Today isn't the day. I will come in a little later.” She recognized that by the next day or two they would get to the point where her message should be given. At the right time she went in and bore her testimony.
This kind of situation placed W. C. White in a difficult position. He had to be very careful. Often before Ellen White had had time to write out a vision she would tell those about her what she had been shown. At times many months were involved in writing what was shown in a single vision. But frequently after a vision she would bring out in conversation certain principles that had been revealed to her. Often it would happen that a little later my father would be in a
[99]
committee meeting where the church leaders would be facing the same kind of problems as Ellen White had seen in vision. How could he do otherwise than let his influence be felt along the line concerning which he had heard his mother speak? Yet when she wrote out the testimony, frequently some said, “Willie White said that in committee, and now his mother comes out with a testimony. She gets her inspiration from him.” This situation was not easy to explain to those who wished to doubt.
Mrs. White's Literary Assistants
There were others who were prone to say, “Well, Sister White has her editors. How can we be sure of what she did write?”
It is true that Ellen White did have literary assistants. She valued their help highly. She wrote in a statement now in Selected Messages, book 1, page 50:
While my husband lived, he acted as a helper and counselor in the sending out of the messages that were given to me. We traveled extensively. Sometimes light would be given to me in the night season, sometimes in the daytime before large congregations. The instruction I received in vision was faithfully written out by me, as I had time and strength for the work. Afterward we examined the matter together, my husband correcting grammatical errors and eliminating needless repetition. Then it was carefully copied for the persons addressed, or for the printers.
Then of subsequent years she said:
As the work grew, others assisted me in the preparation of matter for publication. After my husband's death, faithful helpers joined me, who labored untiringly in the work of copying the testimonies and preparing articles for publication.
But the reports that are circulated, that any of my helpers are permitted to add matter or change the meaning of the messages I write out, are not true.—Ibid.
One faithful helper who assisted her for 25 years was
[100]
Marian Davis, a sister-in-law of Will K. Kellogg of corn flake fame. On this question of the work of her assistants in helping her with preparation of her books Ellen White wrote:
The books are not Marian's productions, but my own, gathered from all my writings. Marian has a large field from which to draw, and her ability to arrange the matter is of great value to me. It saves my poring over a mass of matter, which I have no time to do.—Letter 61a, 1900 (quoted in Messenger to the Remnant, p. 60).
One of Mrs. White's secretaries, Fannie Bolton, declared in 1901:
The editors in no wise change Sister White's expression if it is grammatically correct, and is an evident expression of the evident thought. Sister White as human instrumentality has a pronounced style of her own, which is preserved all through her books and articles, that stamps the matter with her individuality. Many times her manuscript does not need any editing, often but slight editing, and again a great deal of literary work; but article or chapter, whatever has been done upon it, is passed back into her hands by the editor.—Messenger to the Remnant, p. 60.
It would have been an unprofitable use of Ellen White's time were she to attempt to do all the painstaking work of a copy editor. Ellen White had three years in school. The Lord did not miraculously instruct her in all the rules of writing, teaching her spelling and telling her where to put in all the commas, and so forth. She valued highly the help of skilled literary assistants, who were instructed closely as to what their work was. They would copy the material, and if they found a misspelled word it would be corrected. If they found an imperfection in grammar they would correct it. Ellen White one time said that there is no salvation in misspelled words and poor grammar.
If there was repetition, the statements would be brought to one place. If there was redundancy of words, a synonym might be used. But the copied material would come back to Ellen White triple spaced, and she would read it over
[101]
carefully and edit it. She often added a bit here, strengthened a statement there, put in quotation marks the copyist left out, corrected a word the copyist had misspelled, and so on. Then it would go back to the copyist to be recopied. It would come back to Mrs. White, and she would look it over carefully and sign it. She might even edit it further, and it would be copied again. She was ever endeavoring to find the best and clearest way of setting forth the truths that had been opened to her mind, that they might reach the people in a way that would accomplish their work effectively.
Ellen White was instructed as to whom she could trust as literary assistants and whom she could not trust. Two individuals who worked for her were dismissed, one of them three times, when Ellen White in vision was warned that they were tempted to change the writings as they passed through their hands. God was controlling the work—not a mechanical control, but His hand was over it. I have heard my father say that Mrs. White's secretaries would as soon put their right hand in the fire and have it burned off as they would think of changing the messages that passed through their hands as they went from Ellen White to the people. Ellen White had no ghost writers. She was fully responsible for what went out under her name.
Does the Expression “I Saw” Give a Clue?
In her earlier writings Ellen White frequently employed the words “I saw” or “I was shown,” and she continued to do so until her death. Some readers would evaluate the writings as inspired or uninspired, depending on the use of such phrases. As pointed out elsewhere, Ellen White deliberately chose to omit such phrases in her books that would come before the general public lest the reader unfamiliar with her call and work be distracted from the message she was presenting.
[102]
Inasmuch as her writings were based on the visions God gave her and she assumed that everyone understood this fact, she frequently presented light and instruction without employing such phrases. We present an illustration:
Dores Robinson was a young man 21 years of age. His father was the president of the Australasian Union Conference. A physician in South Africa where Dores had previously resided had promised to put him through the medical course at Edinburgh, and he had studied there a couple of years. Then the doctor's finances failed, and he had to withdraw his help from Dores. So in 1900 Dores was in Australia doing secretarial work for Ellen White. His first work was copying the manuscript of Christ's Object Lessons.
His uncle, Elder E. W. Farnsworth, working in Australia, proposed: “Dores, we have no children. You have started the medical course. If you want to go on, my wife and I will see you through.”
What a generous offer that was! Dores went to talk with Ellen White about it. Would it be the wise course to follow? He visited with her for half an hour and then walked out of the room with absolutely no intimation from her as to whether he should or should not go on with the medical course. He was right where he was when he went in to see her.
Consequently, he made up his mind to accept his uncle's offer. On Wednesday he went down to Sydney and made his booking to go the next week to Europe. He was back at Sister White's office on Thursday. Friday was to be his last day. As he went in he picked up from the typewriter a long envelope addressed “Dores Robinson.” He opened and read it. It began, “You asked me at one time what I thought in regard to your becoming a physician. I would say that the most useful lessons for you to learn will not now be found in taking a medical course of study.” She went on to point out
[103]
that with his physical stamina, with his mental frame of mind, to pursue the medical course would leave him a physical and mental wreck. She pointed out that he should choose a lifework of a different nature entirely.
What should he do? He looked carefully all the way through that letter to see whether he could find some such expression as “I saw” or “I was shown.” He could not find one. There was nothing to indicate special light from God.
“Well,” he said, “this is good counsel. I should get exercise. I will get some exercisers and I'll exercise and I'll walk.” But in his heart he was not at all clear. He decided to make a test of the matter. As he prayed about it he made up his mind that he would go back down to Sydney, and if he could get his travel money back, all of it, he would take that as a sign that he should not go on with the medical course. On Monday morning he took the train and rode three hours to Sydney. He went directly to the booking office, and as he approached the counter he said, “My name is Robinson.” “Oh, Mr. Robinson,” the clerk replied, “we're sorry, we had to cancel your booking. The British Government has commandeered the boat for troop movement to the Boer War. We think we can get you on a later boat, or we can give your money back.” He replied, “I'll take my money back.”
Now Ellen White told his father, Elder Asa T. Robinson, that in vision she saw an angel standing by the side of Dores saying to him what she said in that letter. But in the letter there wasn't an intimation that there was any special illumination. However, he knew, when he talked with her a few days earlier that she had no counsel to give and now the letter did contain counsel. This testimony, part of which may be found in Medical Ministry, changed his lifework.*
* Note: Dores Robinson taught church school; served many years as one of Mrs. White's secretaries; married her eldest granddaughter; served in school, publishing, and mission work; and then until his retirement served in the White Estate.
[104]
But what if she had no light? Did she speak or was she silent?
For example, Dr. B. E. Fullmer, who resided in southern California, had some new ideas about the 144,000. In the year 1914 he was teaching that the 144,000 would all be from America and none from any other country. The union conference president, Elder Elmer E. Andross, wanted to know whether there was anything that Ellen White had written that would help the conference in dealing with this teaching. He wrote to Sister White's Elmshaven office and made inquiry. Elder Clarence C. Crisler, the secretary in charge, took the matter to Sister White. Her comments were taken down stenographically. “I have no light on the subject,” she declared.
Please tell my brethren I have nothing presented before me regarding the circumstances concerning which they write, and I can set before them only that which has been presented to me.—C. C. Crisler Letter to E. E. Andross, Dec. 8, 1914.
This is a significant statement. We would expect her to slap down the foolish teaching. Instead she said, “I have no light on the subject, and I can set before them [her brethren] only that which has been presented to me.”
Ellen White's Acknowledgment
I can assure you that when you read the counsels, when you read Ellen White's books, you may know, except for the purely biographical material, that what she has there set forth was based on the visions that God gave her. She said once in connection with the question of who told Sister White:
[105]
There are those who say “Someone manipulates the writings.” I acknowledge the charge. It is One who is mighty in counsel, One who presents before me the condition of things…. I have an Elder Brother on the throne, who has paid an infinite price to redeem the human race from the curse of sin.—Letter 52, 1906.
“Yes,” Ellen White declared, “there are those who say that I am influenced; I acknowledge the charge. It is true. The one who influences me is Jesus Christ.”
ELLEN WHITE ESTATES: http://www.whiteestate.org/books/egww/EGWWc03.html
Saturday, February 14, 2009
THE AUTHORITY OF THE PROPHETS
Introduction
"The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. 'Where there is no vision, the people perish' (Prov. 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God's remnant people in the true testimony."--Letter 12, 1890 (1SM 48). (Emphasis supplied.)
The two marked phrases above clearly predict that the last deception will be to challenge the authority of Ellen White. Two further points: (1) The opposition will be Satan-inspired, and (2) it will occur among God's remnant people.
This study will consider the authority of Ellen White, with special emphasis on her role in the development of doctrine among Seventh-day Adventists.
I. The Matter of Authority
A. Definitions of Authority
"A right to command or to act; power exercised by a person in virtue of his office of trust."--Webster.
"That right or power to command action or compliance, or to determine belief or custom, expecting obedience from those under authority, and in turn, giving responsible account for the claim or right to power."--Bernard Ramm, The Pattern of Religious Authority, p. 10.
B. Types of Authority
1. Imperial: "That power possessed by persons or ruling bodies by reason of superior position such as that of a king, the general of an army, the president of a firm, or the principal of a school."--Ramm, p. 10.
Such authority may be gotten by inheritance, election, force, or custom. God supersedes all human imperial authority because He is Creator and Sustainer of all.
2. Delegated: "The authority of act, to compel, to have access to, in virtue of right granted by imperial authority."--Ramm, p. 11.
Such authority must prove its origin from imperial authority. This might be a document, credentials, signature, etc. The prophet was such. The Bible offers tests by which we are to determine whether one claiming to be a genuine prophet is really authentic.
3. Veracious: "Authority possessed by men, books, or principles which either possess truth or aid in the determination of truth."--Ramm, p. 12.
A book may be authoritative because it is recognized as containing reliable or truthful information. A genuine prophet must meet this
Page 2
criteria. The Bible substantiates its claim to be veracious or truthful.
How does authority become such? There must be a recognition of it.
Martyrs died because they refused to recognize in traditions what they perceived as false authority.
The wicked will finally perish for not recognizing God and His message as true and authoritative.
"If the Scriptures are the truth of God, they are authoritative whether they are personally accepted or not, but the Scriptures function as an authority only to the believer."--Ramm, p. 14.
C. Authority Under Attack
Sacred history, especially, provides a long record of resistance and opposition to authority, beginning with Lucifer in heaven. It was such an important consideration there that he was cast out of heaven as a rebel with his angels. Similar opposition to authority has been carried on by sinners on earth. Prophets were opposed. So was Jesus. his disciples, too. Ellen White has been under the same attacks. These include claims that the messages or work are of the devil, only human, or part human and part divine.
D. The Prophet's Attitude on Authority
In the Old Testament, Jeremiah perhaps best illustrates such authority. Repeatedly he states that his message is "the word of the Lord." He speaks, by contrast, of false prophets as giving "a vision of their own hearts, and not out of the mouth of the Lord" (Jer. 23:16).
The prophet's attitude may be stated thus: He is modest about himself, but not his message.
Paul
(1) Himself (1 Cor. 9:16; 15:9; 2 Cor. 12:7; 1 Tim. 1:15).
(2) His message (Acts 26:29; 1 Cor. 2:4; Gal. 1:1).
Ellen White
(1) Herself: "I have no special wisdom in myself; I am only an instrument in the Lord's hands to do the work He has set for me to do."--3SM 46. (See also pp. 48, 49.)
(2) Her message: "Others have called me a prophetess, but I have never assumed that title. . . . My work includes much more than this name signifies. I regard myself as a messenger, entrusted by the Lord with messages from His people."--1SM 36. (See also 5T 661.)
In vision she was told: "In all your communications, speak as one to whom the Lord has spoken. He is your authority."--Letter 186, 1902.
Page 3
E. Ellen White on Authority (The Great Controversy Introduction)
"The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible revelation of His [God's] will. They are the standard of character, the revealer of doctrines, and the test of experience. . . . Yet the fact that God has revealed His will to men through His Word, has not rendered needless the continued presence and guiding of the Holy Spirit."--p. ix.
"During the ages while the Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament were being given, the Holy Spirit did not cease to communicate light to individual minds, apart from the revelations to be embodied in the Sacred Canon."--p. x.
"Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, the scenes of the long-continued conflict between good and evil have been opened to the writer of these pages."--p. xii.
C. S. Lewis on Christ
"People often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can pit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."--Mere Christianity, p. 56.
Ellen White on Ellen White
"This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work . . . bears the stamp of God or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the matter. The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil."--4T p. 230.
II. Ellen White's Role in the Church
This role might be illustrated in several areas. It was not the same in all of them. Sometimes she took a leading part, while at other times she was supporting, confirming, or corrective. We will focus primarily on doctrinal development, with only a brief summary of three other major roles first.
A. Church Development and Organization
Ellen White was very active in church development and in organization, definitely taking a leading role from the beginning. Her counsels led directly to church order and discipline, a publishing business, health care
Page 4
institutions, a complete educational system, including a fully recognized medical training school, and a world-wide mission program.
With her husband, she promoted organization in general terms, as well as specific, even participating in choosing our church name. Later reorganization in 1901 was effected as her personal counsel was followed. Systematic giving, a developing tithing system, and even retirement provision for ministers can be traced to her counsel.
B. Last-Day Reforms
The Scriptures provide basis principles of reform, but Ellen White was asked by God to institute last-day reforms in a broad spectrum including diet, dress, recreation, health habits, education, and many other areas. These reforms, especially in diet and health habits, have made Seventh-day Adventists a people ahead of their time. Confirmation for this counsel continues to come in regularly from secular sources even today.
C. Personal Counsel, Correction, and Encouragement
In hundreds of letters, by public presentation, and in face-to-face contact, Ellen White gave counsel directly from vision and based on a vast store of experience as a messenger of the Lord. Scores of testimonies from those thus counseled have verified the authenticity and accuracy of the counsel thus received.
D. Doctrinal Development
We will place our major emphasis on her role in this area. The Scriptures often speak of the significance of doctrine. These statements clearly show it to be important what we believe. (See Eph. 4:4; Heb. 13:9; 2 Tim. 4:3, 4; 1 Tim. 4:1; Acts 20:29, 30.)
Especially in the earliest years of the Advent Movement, the Lord called upon Ellen White to issue cautions and correctives that helped believers to avoid extremes and fanaticism. But in later years as well, she opposed such teachings as pantheism from Doctor J. H. Kellogg, and heresies regarding the sanctuary advanced by A. F. Ballenger.
Before church organization the pioneers met, especially in 1847 and 1848, to study doctrine. The Whites were present. In these meetings, however, Ellen White was not an active participant, at least at their beginnings. She spoke of a "locked" mind. She could not understand their discussions. The meetings would continue sometimes for many days.
Then, when the group had done all they could from Bible study, Ellen would be given vision to confirm, correct, or help in the study in which they had been engaged. The visions were accepted as from God. The Adventist pioneers knew that when not in vision she was largely a bystander to their study. She has written several accounts of these meetings. (See 2SG 47-49; 1T 75-87; Ms 135, 1903; 1SM 206, 207; Ms 46, 1904; TM 24-26, 1902.)
Page 5
1. The Sanctuary
As with many other doctrines, understanding of the sanctuary was gradual. William Miller had preached that the earth was the sanctuary, and that it was to be cleansed by fire at Christ's second advent in fulfillment of Daniel 8:14.
The day after the expected advent, Hiram Edson was given understanding that Christ has begun a new phase of His ministry in heaven's sanctuary on October 22, 1844. With two friends he went back to the Bible for study. One of the friends, O. R. L. Crosier, wrote two articles to explain this study--one was published in the Day Dawn in 1845, and the other in The Day-Star in February, 1846. Ellen White endorsed Crosier's presentation as correct (see A Word to the Little Flock, p. 12).
The sanctuary was further explained in the writings of Uriah Smith, J. N. Andrews, and James White through the pages of the church paper and in books growing out of these articles.
What was Ellen White's role? The pioneer presentations were all based on Scripture, not on her writings. Her role was a supportive one, pointing also to the Scripture for proof. A series of visions in which she was privileged to visit heaven's sanctuary further reinforced the Bible foundation for it. She also led in opposition to heretical teachings on it throughout her lifetime. And, of course, she wrote in some detail in articles and books supporting this doctrine as scriptural.
2. The Sabbath
The Sabbath first came to the attention of Adventists in Washington, New Hampshire, through Rachel Oakes, a Seventh-day Baptist. Frederick Wheeler, the pastor, and two brothers, Cyrus and William Farnsworth, accepted it early. Others later joined them.
Joseph Bates in Fairhaven, Massachusetts, heard of Sabbathkeeping in Washington and traveled there in 1845 to examine it for himself. He returned home a Sabbathkeeper. He became the apostle of the Sabbath, writing articles and tracts. At the time of their marriage in August, 1846, the Whites accepted the Sabbath from one of Bates's tracts.
Bates's presentation, however, had a flaw. He believed that the Sabbath began at 6:00 p.m. on Friday. Some Adventists believe that it began at sunrise, midnight, or sunset. This variety of practice continued for about ten years.
In 1855, James White asked J. N. Andrews to study the subject and to present his finding to the others. His conclusion from Bible study was that the Sabbath begins at sunset. Bates and Ellen White still doubted. A vision was then given to Ellen White supporting the sunset time. Unity resulted among Adventists. (See 1T p. 116.)
Writing a few years later about this experience, James White stated: "It does not appear to be the desire of the Lord to teach His people by the gifts of the Spirit on Bible questions until His servants have diligently searched the Word."--Editorial, RH Feb. 25, 1868. (See Appendix, 1T pp. 713, 714 for the more complete statement.)
Page 6
E. The Bible and the Bible Only
The Protestant position is that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice. Adventists from the beginning have been challenged that they are not true Protestants because of their acceptance of a modern prophetic messenger. Following are several statements from the early leaders giving their reasons for belief.
Uriah Smith.
"The Protestant principle of 'the Bible and the Bible alone,' is of itself good and true; and we stand upon it as firmly as anyone can; but when reiterated in connection with outspoken denunciations of the visions, it has specious appearance for evil. So used it contains a covert insinuation, most effectually calculated to warp the judgment of the unguarded, that to believe the visions is to leave the Bible, and to cling to the Bible is to discard the visions. . . .
"When we claim to stand on the Bible and the Bible alone, we bind ourselves to receive, unequivocally and fully, all that the Bible teaches."--"Do We Discard the Bible by Endorsing the Visions?" RH Jan. 13, 1863.
J. N. Andrews.
"The work of the Holy Spirit may be divided into two parts: First, that which is designed simply to convert and to sanctify the persons affected by it. Second, that which is for the purpose of opening the truth of God, and of correcting error, and of reproving and rebuking secret sins. This part of the work is wrought by what the Scriptures term spiritual gifts. . . .
"Now it is plain that those who reject the work of the Spirit of God under the plea that the Scriptures are sufficient, do deny and reject all that part of the Bible which reveals the office and work of the Holy Spirit."--"Our Use of the Visions of Sister White," RH Feb. 15, 1870.
G. I. Butler.
"If all Scripture is profitable, we suppose those portions are which teach the perpetuity of spiritual gifts, and that tell us they will be in the church in the last days, and tell us how to distinguish between the false and the genuine. These prove the visions under consideration to be of the right stamp."--"Visions and Prophecy--Have They Been Manifested Among Seventh-day Adventists?" RH June 9, 1874.
James White.
"We exhort you to shun the counsel of those who profess to take the Bible as the rule of faith and practice, but slight or reject that part
Page 7
of it which teaches us to seek and expect the power and gifts of the Spirit."--"Conference Address," RH July 24, 1856.
"The Bible is a perfect and complete revelation. It is our only rule of faith and practice, and future fulfillment of His Word, in these last days, by dreams and visions; according to Peter's testimony. True visions are given to lead us to God and His written word; but those that are given for a new rule of faith and practice, separate from the Bible, cannot be from God and should be rejected."--A Word to the Little Flock, p. 13.
Ellen White.
"I recommend to you, dear reader, the Word of God as the rule of our faith and practice. By that Word we are to be judged. God has, in that Word, promised to give visions in the 'last days;' not for a new rule of faith, but for the comfort of His people, and to correct those who err from Bible truth."--EW p. 78.
III. A Final Thought on Authority
Doing what is right is fundamental to Christian living. How to determine such does not come naturally. The answer is directly related to authority. As sinners, we cannot save ourselves, nor can we solely trust our own judgment. As Israel traveled to the promised land, they were instructed that if they "did what was right in God's sight" they would prosper. (See Exodus 15:26.) They did not always do this. Later, during the time of the judges, the Bible record says "every man did what was right in his own eyes." (See Judges 17:6; 21:25.) This was one of the lowest points in their history.
How did this happen? Earlier in the time of the judges we find an answer. While Joshua and the early elders lived, the record says, "The people served the Lord." But when those died who “had seen all the great works of the Lord," the people "forsook the Lord God" (Judges 2:7, 10-12).
Modern spiritual Israel faces the same kind of situation. The pioneers are dead. If we forget our past, we can predict our future in that of ancient Israel. But their experience does not need to be ours. From the pen of Ellen White we have the following encouraging word:
"In reviewing our past history, having traveled over every step of advance to our present standing, I can say, Praise God! As I see what the Lord has wrought, I am filled with astonishment, and with confidence in Christ as Leader. We have nothing to fear for the future except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history."--LS p. 196.
from ELLEN WHITE ESTATES http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/Docdev.html#D.%20The%20Prophet's%20Attitude%20on%20Authority
"The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. 'Where there is no vision, the people perish' (Prov. 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God's remnant people in the true testimony."--Letter 12, 1890 (1SM 48). (Emphasis supplied.)
The two marked phrases above clearly predict that the last deception will be to challenge the authority of Ellen White. Two further points: (1) The opposition will be Satan-inspired, and (2) it will occur among God's remnant people.
This study will consider the authority of Ellen White, with special emphasis on her role in the development of doctrine among Seventh-day Adventists.
I. The Matter of Authority
A. Definitions of Authority
"A right to command or to act; power exercised by a person in virtue of his office of trust."--Webster.
"That right or power to command action or compliance, or to determine belief or custom, expecting obedience from those under authority, and in turn, giving responsible account for the claim or right to power."--Bernard Ramm, The Pattern of Religious Authority, p. 10.
B. Types of Authority
1. Imperial: "That power possessed by persons or ruling bodies by reason of superior position such as that of a king, the general of an army, the president of a firm, or the principal of a school."--Ramm, p. 10.
Such authority may be gotten by inheritance, election, force, or custom. God supersedes all human imperial authority because He is Creator and Sustainer of all.
2. Delegated: "The authority of act, to compel, to have access to, in virtue of right granted by imperial authority."--Ramm, p. 11.
Such authority must prove its origin from imperial authority. This might be a document, credentials, signature, etc. The prophet was such. The Bible offers tests by which we are to determine whether one claiming to be a genuine prophet is really authentic.
3. Veracious: "Authority possessed by men, books, or principles which either possess truth or aid in the determination of truth."--Ramm, p. 12.
A book may be authoritative because it is recognized as containing reliable or truthful information. A genuine prophet must meet this
Page 2
criteria. The Bible substantiates its claim to be veracious or truthful.
How does authority become such? There must be a recognition of it.
Martyrs died because they refused to recognize in traditions what they perceived as false authority.
The wicked will finally perish for not recognizing God and His message as true and authoritative.
"If the Scriptures are the truth of God, they are authoritative whether they are personally accepted or not, but the Scriptures function as an authority only to the believer."--Ramm, p. 14.
C. Authority Under Attack
Sacred history, especially, provides a long record of resistance and opposition to authority, beginning with Lucifer in heaven. It was such an important consideration there that he was cast out of heaven as a rebel with his angels. Similar opposition to authority has been carried on by sinners on earth. Prophets were opposed. So was Jesus. his disciples, too. Ellen White has been under the same attacks. These include claims that the messages or work are of the devil, only human, or part human and part divine.
D. The Prophet's Attitude on Authority
In the Old Testament, Jeremiah perhaps best illustrates such authority. Repeatedly he states that his message is "the word of the Lord." He speaks, by contrast, of false prophets as giving "a vision of their own hearts, and not out of the mouth of the Lord" (Jer. 23:16).
The prophet's attitude may be stated thus: He is modest about himself, but not his message.
Paul
(1) Himself (1 Cor. 9:16; 15:9; 2 Cor. 12:7; 1 Tim. 1:15).
(2) His message (Acts 26:29; 1 Cor. 2:4; Gal. 1:1).
Ellen White
(1) Herself: "I have no special wisdom in myself; I am only an instrument in the Lord's hands to do the work He has set for me to do."--3SM 46. (See also pp. 48, 49.)
(2) Her message: "Others have called me a prophetess, but I have never assumed that title. . . . My work includes much more than this name signifies. I regard myself as a messenger, entrusted by the Lord with messages from His people."--1SM 36. (See also 5T 661.)
In vision she was told: "In all your communications, speak as one to whom the Lord has spoken. He is your authority."--Letter 186, 1902.
Page 3
E. Ellen White on Authority (The Great Controversy Introduction)
"The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible revelation of His [God's] will. They are the standard of character, the revealer of doctrines, and the test of experience. . . . Yet the fact that God has revealed His will to men through His Word, has not rendered needless the continued presence and guiding of the Holy Spirit."--p. ix.
"During the ages while the Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament were being given, the Holy Spirit did not cease to communicate light to individual minds, apart from the revelations to be embodied in the Sacred Canon."--p. x.
"Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, the scenes of the long-continued conflict between good and evil have been opened to the writer of these pages."--p. xii.
C. S. Lewis on Christ
"People often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can pit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to."--Mere Christianity, p. 56.
Ellen White on Ellen White
"This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work . . . bears the stamp of God or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the matter. The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil."--4T p. 230.
II. Ellen White's Role in the Church
This role might be illustrated in several areas. It was not the same in all of them. Sometimes she took a leading part, while at other times she was supporting, confirming, or corrective. We will focus primarily on doctrinal development, with only a brief summary of three other major roles first.
A. Church Development and Organization
Ellen White was very active in church development and in organization, definitely taking a leading role from the beginning. Her counsels led directly to church order and discipline, a publishing business, health care
Page 4
institutions, a complete educational system, including a fully recognized medical training school, and a world-wide mission program.
With her husband, she promoted organization in general terms, as well as specific, even participating in choosing our church name. Later reorganization in 1901 was effected as her personal counsel was followed. Systematic giving, a developing tithing system, and even retirement provision for ministers can be traced to her counsel.
B. Last-Day Reforms
The Scriptures provide basis principles of reform, but Ellen White was asked by God to institute last-day reforms in a broad spectrum including diet, dress, recreation, health habits, education, and many other areas. These reforms, especially in diet and health habits, have made Seventh-day Adventists a people ahead of their time. Confirmation for this counsel continues to come in regularly from secular sources even today.
C. Personal Counsel, Correction, and Encouragement
In hundreds of letters, by public presentation, and in face-to-face contact, Ellen White gave counsel directly from vision and based on a vast store of experience as a messenger of the Lord. Scores of testimonies from those thus counseled have verified the authenticity and accuracy of the counsel thus received.
D. Doctrinal Development
We will place our major emphasis on her role in this area. The Scriptures often speak of the significance of doctrine. These statements clearly show it to be important what we believe. (See Eph. 4:4; Heb. 13:9; 2 Tim. 4:3, 4; 1 Tim. 4:1; Acts 20:29, 30.)
Especially in the earliest years of the Advent Movement, the Lord called upon Ellen White to issue cautions and correctives that helped believers to avoid extremes and fanaticism. But in later years as well, she opposed such teachings as pantheism from Doctor J. H. Kellogg, and heresies regarding the sanctuary advanced by A. F. Ballenger.
Before church organization the pioneers met, especially in 1847 and 1848, to study doctrine. The Whites were present. In these meetings, however, Ellen White was not an active participant, at least at their beginnings. She spoke of a "locked" mind. She could not understand their discussions. The meetings would continue sometimes for many days.
Then, when the group had done all they could from Bible study, Ellen would be given vision to confirm, correct, or help in the study in which they had been engaged. The visions were accepted as from God. The Adventist pioneers knew that when not in vision she was largely a bystander to their study. She has written several accounts of these meetings. (See 2SG 47-49; 1T 75-87; Ms 135, 1903; 1SM 206, 207; Ms 46, 1904; TM 24-26, 1902.)
Page 5
1. The Sanctuary
As with many other doctrines, understanding of the sanctuary was gradual. William Miller had preached that the earth was the sanctuary, and that it was to be cleansed by fire at Christ's second advent in fulfillment of Daniel 8:14.
The day after the expected advent, Hiram Edson was given understanding that Christ has begun a new phase of His ministry in heaven's sanctuary on October 22, 1844. With two friends he went back to the Bible for study. One of the friends, O. R. L. Crosier, wrote two articles to explain this study--one was published in the Day Dawn in 1845, and the other in The Day-Star in February, 1846. Ellen White endorsed Crosier's presentation as correct (see A Word to the Little Flock, p. 12).
The sanctuary was further explained in the writings of Uriah Smith, J. N. Andrews, and James White through the pages of the church paper and in books growing out of these articles.
What was Ellen White's role? The pioneer presentations were all based on Scripture, not on her writings. Her role was a supportive one, pointing also to the Scripture for proof. A series of visions in which she was privileged to visit heaven's sanctuary further reinforced the Bible foundation for it. She also led in opposition to heretical teachings on it throughout her lifetime. And, of course, she wrote in some detail in articles and books supporting this doctrine as scriptural.
2. The Sabbath
The Sabbath first came to the attention of Adventists in Washington, New Hampshire, through Rachel Oakes, a Seventh-day Baptist. Frederick Wheeler, the pastor, and two brothers, Cyrus and William Farnsworth, accepted it early. Others later joined them.
Joseph Bates in Fairhaven, Massachusetts, heard of Sabbathkeeping in Washington and traveled there in 1845 to examine it for himself. He returned home a Sabbathkeeper. He became the apostle of the Sabbath, writing articles and tracts. At the time of their marriage in August, 1846, the Whites accepted the Sabbath from one of Bates's tracts.
Bates's presentation, however, had a flaw. He believed that the Sabbath began at 6:00 p.m. on Friday. Some Adventists believe that it began at sunrise, midnight, or sunset. This variety of practice continued for about ten years.
In 1855, James White asked J. N. Andrews to study the subject and to present his finding to the others. His conclusion from Bible study was that the Sabbath begins at sunset. Bates and Ellen White still doubted. A vision was then given to Ellen White supporting the sunset time. Unity resulted among Adventists. (See 1T p. 116.)
Writing a few years later about this experience, James White stated: "It does not appear to be the desire of the Lord to teach His people by the gifts of the Spirit on Bible questions until His servants have diligently searched the Word."--Editorial, RH Feb. 25, 1868. (See Appendix, 1T pp. 713, 714 for the more complete statement.)
Page 6
E. The Bible and the Bible Only
The Protestant position is that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice. Adventists from the beginning have been challenged that they are not true Protestants because of their acceptance of a modern prophetic messenger. Following are several statements from the early leaders giving their reasons for belief.
Uriah Smith.
"The Protestant principle of 'the Bible and the Bible alone,' is of itself good and true; and we stand upon it as firmly as anyone can; but when reiterated in connection with outspoken denunciations of the visions, it has specious appearance for evil. So used it contains a covert insinuation, most effectually calculated to warp the judgment of the unguarded, that to believe the visions is to leave the Bible, and to cling to the Bible is to discard the visions. . . .
"When we claim to stand on the Bible and the Bible alone, we bind ourselves to receive, unequivocally and fully, all that the Bible teaches."--"Do We Discard the Bible by Endorsing the Visions?" RH Jan. 13, 1863.
J. N. Andrews.
"The work of the Holy Spirit may be divided into two parts: First, that which is designed simply to convert and to sanctify the persons affected by it. Second, that which is for the purpose of opening the truth of God, and of correcting error, and of reproving and rebuking secret sins. This part of the work is wrought by what the Scriptures term spiritual gifts. . . .
"Now it is plain that those who reject the work of the Spirit of God under the plea that the Scriptures are sufficient, do deny and reject all that part of the Bible which reveals the office and work of the Holy Spirit."--"Our Use of the Visions of Sister White," RH Feb. 15, 1870.
G. I. Butler.
"If all Scripture is profitable, we suppose those portions are which teach the perpetuity of spiritual gifts, and that tell us they will be in the church in the last days, and tell us how to distinguish between the false and the genuine. These prove the visions under consideration to be of the right stamp."--"Visions and Prophecy--Have They Been Manifested Among Seventh-day Adventists?" RH June 9, 1874.
James White.
"We exhort you to shun the counsel of those who profess to take the Bible as the rule of faith and practice, but slight or reject that part
Page 7
of it which teaches us to seek and expect the power and gifts of the Spirit."--"Conference Address," RH July 24, 1856.
"The Bible is a perfect and complete revelation. It is our only rule of faith and practice, and future fulfillment of His Word, in these last days, by dreams and visions; according to Peter's testimony. True visions are given to lead us to God and His written word; but those that are given for a new rule of faith and practice, separate from the Bible, cannot be from God and should be rejected."--A Word to the Little Flock, p. 13.
Ellen White.
"I recommend to you, dear reader, the Word of God as the rule of our faith and practice. By that Word we are to be judged. God has, in that Word, promised to give visions in the 'last days;' not for a new rule of faith, but for the comfort of His people, and to correct those who err from Bible truth."--EW p. 78.
III. A Final Thought on Authority
Doing what is right is fundamental to Christian living. How to determine such does not come naturally. The answer is directly related to authority. As sinners, we cannot save ourselves, nor can we solely trust our own judgment. As Israel traveled to the promised land, they were instructed that if they "did what was right in God's sight" they would prosper. (See Exodus 15:26.) They did not always do this. Later, during the time of the judges, the Bible record says "every man did what was right in his own eyes." (See Judges 17:6; 21:25.) This was one of the lowest points in their history.
How did this happen? Earlier in the time of the judges we find an answer. While Joshua and the early elders lived, the record says, "The people served the Lord." But when those died who “had seen all the great works of the Lord," the people "forsook the Lord God" (Judges 2:7, 10-12).
Modern spiritual Israel faces the same kind of situation. The pioneers are dead. If we forget our past, we can predict our future in that of ancient Israel. But their experience does not need to be ours. From the pen of Ellen White we have the following encouraging word:
"In reviewing our past history, having traveled over every step of advance to our present standing, I can say, Praise God! As I see what the Lord has wrought, I am filled with astonishment, and with confidence in Christ as Leader. We have nothing to fear for the future except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history."--LS p. 196.
from ELLEN WHITE ESTATES http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/Docdev.html#D.%20The%20Prophet's%20Attitude%20on%20Authority
THE WORK OF THE PROPHETS
Function of the Prophets
What use did God make of these men of diversified talents, experience, training, and education? What was the range of the activities of prophets in carrying out their prophetic function? In consideration of the exercise of the prophetic gift, attention has been focused so largely on the element of prediction that many times the broader aspects of the function of the prophets have been obscured or entirely lost from view. Theirs was a broad work, by no means restricted to foretelling the future. These were men who filled an important place in the history of God's people, not only because of their multiplied responsibilities in the community or nation, but because of the nature of the messages sent to the people through them. Not only were they used to reach the professed people of God; they were delegated to carry the word of the Lord to the world.
Spoke for God. The primary reason for the calling of a prophet was that he might serve as a mouthpiece for God. He was to say to the people what God would say if He should veil His glory and come personally among them as a man. The people's needs were numerous and diverse. Messages were needed by individuals, families, cities, and nations. To God's personal representative, the prophet, was entrusted the responsibility of delivering the messages.
43]
Revealed God's purposes. “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7. In the purposes of God, His plans are revealed to His people so that they might know how to co-operate with them. Long ago Christians would have given up in despair had it not been for the assurance, “I will come again.” John 14:3. To the Old Testament believer the promise of the coming Messiah was his sustenance when he saw the sin of his nation and the decay of its leadership. To the bitterly disappointed and disillusioned Israelites in Babylonian captivity Jeremiah's prediction of deliverance at the conclusion of seventy years of bondage was a star of hope. Insight into God's purposes for the future was intended to strengthen and encourage, to fortify and prepare men and women to meet the crisis. There were times when the most courageous hearts would have failed had it not been for the repeated assurances of the Lord's purpose to bring deliverance.
Because God can penetrate the future and man cannot, the Lord has used His knowledge of the future as one of the evidences that He is God. The striking nature of the predictions has directed such attention to them that other, equally important, phases of the work of the prophets have received scant thought. To many, “prophet” connotes “predictor.” When one recognizes the broader nature of the prophets' work he gains a better understanding of God's plan and has a deeper confidence in it.
Strengthened and guided rulers. An Assyrian army over which Sennacherib had placed Rabshakeh (Isaiah 36:2) surrounded the city of Jerusalem. Rabshakeh mocked Hezekiah and scorned the God of Israel. Hezekiah in his terror and grief sent a group to talk with Isaiah and to seek counsel from the Lord through the prophet. “And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say unto your master, Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid of the words that thou hast heard, wherewith the servants of
44]
the king of Assyria have blasphemed Me. Behold, I will send a blast upon him, and he shall hear a rumor [report], and return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land.” Isaiah 37:6, 7.
How courage and strength must have surged through Hezekiah when his servants hurried back with the word, “Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid.” Had there been no explanation of the Lord's plan attached to the message, Hezekiah would have been strengthened by the assurance that the Lord had promised to be with him in the crisis.
When David decided that he wanted to build a house for the Lord, he talked his plan over with Nathan the prophet. Nathan instantly agreed that the plan was a wise one, and he encouraged David to go forward with it. But this was not according to God's purpose, and that night the Lord spoke to Nathan and told him to give David the message that his son was to build the Lord's house. 2 Samuel 7. The word of the prophet was accepted as the word of the Lord to guide the king, and his cherished plan was abandoned. David's disappointment was at least partly relieved by the fact that he was permitted to gather materials for the temple, even though he was not to undertake its building. 1 Chronicles 22:14.
In war or peace, prosperity or adversity, the leaders who wished counsel might have it. Unfortunately many sought no help, and others to whom it was sent rejected it. Men in places of leadership were particular objects of God's concern. He made every approach possible to reach them and to give them the aid He knew they needed, even if they recognized no need themselves. He wanted them to be steadfast in their allegiance to Him and in upholding the high principles of the theocratic government. He desired to direct them so that they would make no mistakes in their leadership. With such backing and counsel, every one of the kings of ancient Israel might have made his reign an outstanding success and the people would have been greatly blessed.
45]
Encouraged the people to faithfulness. “If ye forsake the Lord,” Joshua warned the people shortly before his death, “and serve strange gods, then He will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that He hath done you good…. Now therefore put away, said he, the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Israel.” Joshua 24:20-
23.
“Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” Revelation 2:10. This was the Lord's encouraging message to His faithful children as given through John the revelator.
“He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much.” Luke 16:10. “Well done, thou good and faithful servant” were the words of the greatest of the prophets. Matthew 25:21.
Frequently words of encouragement are interwoven with reproofs and rebukes; seldom are they found standing alone. There are always new steps forward to be taken by God's people. One of the leading activities of the prophets was to encourage the people to hold fast the ground they had already gained and press on to new accomplishments. Every forward step meant that some fault needed to be overcome, some weakness strengthened, some desire subdued. Encouragement could in no way be separated from the instruction and reproof that also came through the messengers.
Protested against evils. Whether their burden was to resist social injustice, to root out idolatry, or to protest against immorality, the prophets were equally vigorous in their approaches. At times it seemed to the prophet that no other dissenting voice than his was raised, but in such a case his responsibility was increased rather than lessened. The prophet's protests were God's protests, and were delivered regardless of consequences.
“Woe to them that devise iniquity, and work evil upon their beds! when the morning is light, they practice it, because it is in the power of their hand. And they covet fields, and take
[46]
them by violence; and houses, and take them away: so they oppress a man and his house, even a man and his heritage. Therefore thus saith the Lord; Behold, against this family do I devise an evil, from which ye shall not remove your necks.” Micah 2:1-3.
“Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed Me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed Thee? In tithes and offerings…. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in Mine house.” Malachi 3:8-10.
“Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: for the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. By swearing, and lying, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out, and blood toucheth blood.” Hosea 4:1, 2.
In imagination we can see the prophets standing alone, as did Jesus in the court of the temple, proclaiming: “Take these things hence; make not My Father's house an house of merchandise.” John 2:16. Usually their words of protest were not their own, but were prefaced with “Thus saith the Lord.” Perhaps they would not have had courage to speak out if it had been left to their own initiative, but as God's spokesmen they could not refrain. At one time Jeremiah decided that he would speak no more. “Then I said, I will not make mention of Him, nor speak any more in His name. But His word was in mine heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay.” Jeremiah 20:9. Evil was rampant in Israel and Judah during the lifetime of most of the prophets, and through these men the Lord maintained a constant protest against corrupt practices and personal sins.
Directed activities. Destruction and building were both essential parts of the work of a prophet. The dual responsibility is well expressed in the Lord's commission to Jeremiah: “See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms,
[47]
to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.” Jeremiah 1:10. Many a modern city is engaged in a slum-clearing project in which handsome buildings replace dilapidated tenements. First, the ground must be cleared of the old before the new can be built. Tearing down is as essential as building up. Although it may appear that the words of the prophets were more of tearing down than of building, it must be remembered that this task had to be performed repeatedly. It is easier to allow a building to slip into decay than it is to keep it new in appearance. Each time the old timbers must be removed and replaced before more new building can be done. In every forward move in God's work the prophets were present, either in positions of leadership or in close counsel with the leaders.
As a prophet, Moses directed the building of the sanctuary. The Holy Spirit, through whom the prophets were guided, gave David detailed plans for the construction of the house of God that became Solomon's temple. 1 Chronicles 28:11, 12. In the days of the rebuilding of the temple, after the Babylonian exile, “Then rose up Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and began to build the house of God which is at Jerusalem: and with them were the prophets of God helping them.” Ezra 5:2. On the Day of Pentecost the spirit of prophecy possessed the apostles and directed them in the establishment of the early Christian church.
Paul was called to enter new territory and to open new areas for the preaching of the gospel. He went forward or held back as the Spirit indicated that he should do.
It is not difficult to trace through the Old and New Testaments the direct influence of the prophets in the constructive activities of God's people. The tragedy of the situation is that their counsel was seldom fully heeded. Had the instruction of the Lord, given through the prophets, been followed, the neighbors of Israel would have said, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” Deuteronomy 4:6.
[48]
Taught. The prophets were not classroom teachers as such, although some of them seem to have taught in this fashion. However, it was through them that the people learned the principles of the kingdom of heaven. They made plain the high standard required of all God's people. Their sermons were teaching sermons, filled with practical, helpful instruction. So fully does the Bible, given through the prophets, set forth the kind of life and character exemplified by Christ that it shares with Him the name “the Word.” Precept is laid upon precept, and line is added to line to round out the concept of a godly life. In true teaching fashion, problems are approached repeatedly from a variety of angles so that none need fail to understand how to apply the principles in his own life. To give this instruction to all generations “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:21.
Other responsibilities. It can also be shown that the men God chose as prophets served their nation as consultants and counselors for every phase of individual and national activity. In addition, they gave warnings of what would result from certain courses of action. They reproved sin in individuals and in the nation as a whole. They pronounced the judgments of God as consequences of sinful policies and evil conduct. There was no matter too small or too large to warrant the attention of God through the prophet, no corner so dark that light could not penetrate it and help be given. At times the performance of miracles figured prominently, as in the days of Elisha. Again, the preaching ministry was outstanding, as in the experience of Samuel and Jeremiah. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, these men did all the things that needed to be done. They were serving in God's stead, speaking for Him, acting for Him, representing Him before their fellow men.
The ministry of the prophets was not limited to the Hebrew nations. Through some of the prophetic messengers the Lord tried to win the Gentile nations to the truth. Abraham was sent
[49]
to witness for the true God in Egypt, where multiplied deities were worshiped. At least partly because of the failure of Abraham it was necessary for the Lord to send Joseph, and later to raise up Moses to give the Egyptians opportunity to learn of the true God. The story of Jonah is highlighted by the repentance of Nineveh in response to the preaching of the reluctant prophet. Daniel's prophetic ministry led to his elevation to one of the highest positions in Babylon, and resulted ultimately in the conversion of its greatest monarch. In freedom or captivity Paul reached out into Asia Minor, Greece, some of the Mediterranean islands, and Rome. All these and others, undoubtedly many unmentioned in the Bible, touched the lives of the nations with the word of the Lord. “Go ye into all the world” is not only a last-day injunction; it has been the Lord's objective for His people in every generation.
Prophets, then, were not unlike other men. They were men who needed the converting power of the Holy Spirit, who struggled with the temptations that are common to men, and they sometimes lost the battle in their own lives. They were men whose sorrows affected their lives as deeply as ours move us. They married, reared families, taught their children and learned from them, rejoiced in their triumphs, and grieved over their failures. They knew what it meant to see beloved children turn from the Lord. At least one knew what it meant to have an unfaithful wife. Another was not permitted to grieve over the death of his wife. They became weary and discouraged as did other men, and at times they chafed under the tasks the Lord gave them.
If you had lived in ancient Palestine, a prophet might have been your father. If so, he would have held you on his knee, smiled at you, talked to you, played with you as fathers always have. Or he might have been your next-door neighbor with whom you would have visited while he hoed his garden. Or you might have climbed trees with him when he and you were boys.
[50]
At the same time prophets were men in whom the Lord placed great confidence. A sense of responsibility weighed heavily on them. Whether they came from the royal palace, the plow, the herd, or the service of the temple, an inner compulsion made it impossible for them ever to be unconscious of their calling. These prophets were carefully chosen with attention given to their talents, weaknesses, and mental quirks. They were individuals whose personalities might be classified today as introverted or extroverted. Sometimes the tasks to which they were called were extremely distasteful to them, but God knew His men and used them to the extent of their abilities, even empowering them to go beyond what they or we would consider possible.
These little insights lurk everywhere through the Scriptures. When we find them, they make the men of the Bible, and the Bible itself, warmer and more alive. They enable us to put ourselves into the Bible picture to see how we belong to it and it to us. Far from taking away any of the dignity of the men or the solemnity of their messages, these pictures open doors of understanding that might otherwise be closed permanently to us. If we consider the ministry of Jesus, and then try to understand how God called men in many generations from all walks of life, and sought to accomplish through them as much as possible the same kind of ministry that Jesus performed, we will begin to gain a more adequate view of the significance and function of the Bible prophets.
from ELLEN WHITE ESTATES http://www.whiteestate.org/books/pay/PAYC03.html
What use did God make of these men of diversified talents, experience, training, and education? What was the range of the activities of prophets in carrying out their prophetic function? In consideration of the exercise of the prophetic gift, attention has been focused so largely on the element of prediction that many times the broader aspects of the function of the prophets have been obscured or entirely lost from view. Theirs was a broad work, by no means restricted to foretelling the future. These were men who filled an important place in the history of God's people, not only because of their multiplied responsibilities in the community or nation, but because of the nature of the messages sent to the people through them. Not only were they used to reach the professed people of God; they were delegated to carry the word of the Lord to the world.
Spoke for God. The primary reason for the calling of a prophet was that he might serve as a mouthpiece for God. He was to say to the people what God would say if He should veil His glory and come personally among them as a man. The people's needs were numerous and diverse. Messages were needed by individuals, families, cities, and nations. To God's personal representative, the prophet, was entrusted the responsibility of delivering the messages.
43]
Revealed God's purposes. “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but He revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets.” Amos 3:7. In the purposes of God, His plans are revealed to His people so that they might know how to co-operate with them. Long ago Christians would have given up in despair had it not been for the assurance, “I will come again.” John 14:3. To the Old Testament believer the promise of the coming Messiah was his sustenance when he saw the sin of his nation and the decay of its leadership. To the bitterly disappointed and disillusioned Israelites in Babylonian captivity Jeremiah's prediction of deliverance at the conclusion of seventy years of bondage was a star of hope. Insight into God's purposes for the future was intended to strengthen and encourage, to fortify and prepare men and women to meet the crisis. There were times when the most courageous hearts would have failed had it not been for the repeated assurances of the Lord's purpose to bring deliverance.
Because God can penetrate the future and man cannot, the Lord has used His knowledge of the future as one of the evidences that He is God. The striking nature of the predictions has directed such attention to them that other, equally important, phases of the work of the prophets have received scant thought. To many, “prophet” connotes “predictor.” When one recognizes the broader nature of the prophets' work he gains a better understanding of God's plan and has a deeper confidence in it.
Strengthened and guided rulers. An Assyrian army over which Sennacherib had placed Rabshakeh (Isaiah 36:2) surrounded the city of Jerusalem. Rabshakeh mocked Hezekiah and scorned the God of Israel. Hezekiah in his terror and grief sent a group to talk with Isaiah and to seek counsel from the Lord through the prophet. “And Isaiah said unto them, Thus shall ye say unto your master, Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid of the words that thou hast heard, wherewith the servants of
44]
the king of Assyria have blasphemed Me. Behold, I will send a blast upon him, and he shall hear a rumor [report], and return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land.” Isaiah 37:6, 7.
How courage and strength must have surged through Hezekiah when his servants hurried back with the word, “Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid.” Had there been no explanation of the Lord's plan attached to the message, Hezekiah would have been strengthened by the assurance that the Lord had promised to be with him in the crisis.
When David decided that he wanted to build a house for the Lord, he talked his plan over with Nathan the prophet. Nathan instantly agreed that the plan was a wise one, and he encouraged David to go forward with it. But this was not according to God's purpose, and that night the Lord spoke to Nathan and told him to give David the message that his son was to build the Lord's house. 2 Samuel 7. The word of the prophet was accepted as the word of the Lord to guide the king, and his cherished plan was abandoned. David's disappointment was at least partly relieved by the fact that he was permitted to gather materials for the temple, even though he was not to undertake its building. 1 Chronicles 22:14.
In war or peace, prosperity or adversity, the leaders who wished counsel might have it. Unfortunately many sought no help, and others to whom it was sent rejected it. Men in places of leadership were particular objects of God's concern. He made every approach possible to reach them and to give them the aid He knew they needed, even if they recognized no need themselves. He wanted them to be steadfast in their allegiance to Him and in upholding the high principles of the theocratic government. He desired to direct them so that they would make no mistakes in their leadership. With such backing and counsel, every one of the kings of ancient Israel might have made his reign an outstanding success and the people would have been greatly blessed.
45]
Encouraged the people to faithfulness. “If ye forsake the Lord,” Joshua warned the people shortly before his death, “and serve strange gods, then He will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that He hath done you good…. Now therefore put away, said he, the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Israel.” Joshua 24:20-
23.
“Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” Revelation 2:10. This was the Lord's encouraging message to His faithful children as given through John the revelator.
“He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much.” Luke 16:10. “Well done, thou good and faithful servant” were the words of the greatest of the prophets. Matthew 25:21.
Frequently words of encouragement are interwoven with reproofs and rebukes; seldom are they found standing alone. There are always new steps forward to be taken by God's people. One of the leading activities of the prophets was to encourage the people to hold fast the ground they had already gained and press on to new accomplishments. Every forward step meant that some fault needed to be overcome, some weakness strengthened, some desire subdued. Encouragement could in no way be separated from the instruction and reproof that also came through the messengers.
Protested against evils. Whether their burden was to resist social injustice, to root out idolatry, or to protest against immorality, the prophets were equally vigorous in their approaches. At times it seemed to the prophet that no other dissenting voice than his was raised, but in such a case his responsibility was increased rather than lessened. The prophet's protests were God's protests, and were delivered regardless of consequences.
“Woe to them that devise iniquity, and work evil upon their beds! when the morning is light, they practice it, because it is in the power of their hand. And they covet fields, and take
[46]
them by violence; and houses, and take them away: so they oppress a man and his house, even a man and his heritage. Therefore thus saith the Lord; Behold, against this family do I devise an evil, from which ye shall not remove your necks.” Micah 2:1-3.
“Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed Me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed Thee? In tithes and offerings…. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in Mine house.” Malachi 3:8-10.
“Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: for the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. By swearing, and lying, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out, and blood toucheth blood.” Hosea 4:1, 2.
In imagination we can see the prophets standing alone, as did Jesus in the court of the temple, proclaiming: “Take these things hence; make not My Father's house an house of merchandise.” John 2:16. Usually their words of protest were not their own, but were prefaced with “Thus saith the Lord.” Perhaps they would not have had courage to speak out if it had been left to their own initiative, but as God's spokesmen they could not refrain. At one time Jeremiah decided that he would speak no more. “Then I said, I will not make mention of Him, nor speak any more in His name. But His word was in mine heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay.” Jeremiah 20:9. Evil was rampant in Israel and Judah during the lifetime of most of the prophets, and through these men the Lord maintained a constant protest against corrupt practices and personal sins.
Directed activities. Destruction and building were both essential parts of the work of a prophet. The dual responsibility is well expressed in the Lord's commission to Jeremiah: “See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms,
[47]
to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.” Jeremiah 1:10. Many a modern city is engaged in a slum-clearing project in which handsome buildings replace dilapidated tenements. First, the ground must be cleared of the old before the new can be built. Tearing down is as essential as building up. Although it may appear that the words of the prophets were more of tearing down than of building, it must be remembered that this task had to be performed repeatedly. It is easier to allow a building to slip into decay than it is to keep it new in appearance. Each time the old timbers must be removed and replaced before more new building can be done. In every forward move in God's work the prophets were present, either in positions of leadership or in close counsel with the leaders.
As a prophet, Moses directed the building of the sanctuary. The Holy Spirit, through whom the prophets were guided, gave David detailed plans for the construction of the house of God that became Solomon's temple. 1 Chronicles 28:11, 12. In the days of the rebuilding of the temple, after the Babylonian exile, “Then rose up Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and began to build the house of God which is at Jerusalem: and with them were the prophets of God helping them.” Ezra 5:2. On the Day of Pentecost the spirit of prophecy possessed the apostles and directed them in the establishment of the early Christian church.
Paul was called to enter new territory and to open new areas for the preaching of the gospel. He went forward or held back as the Spirit indicated that he should do.
It is not difficult to trace through the Old and New Testaments the direct influence of the prophets in the constructive activities of God's people. The tragedy of the situation is that their counsel was seldom fully heeded. Had the instruction of the Lord, given through the prophets, been followed, the neighbors of Israel would have said, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” Deuteronomy 4:6.
[48]
Taught. The prophets were not classroom teachers as such, although some of them seem to have taught in this fashion. However, it was through them that the people learned the principles of the kingdom of heaven. They made plain the high standard required of all God's people. Their sermons were teaching sermons, filled with practical, helpful instruction. So fully does the Bible, given through the prophets, set forth the kind of life and character exemplified by Christ that it shares with Him the name “the Word.” Precept is laid upon precept, and line is added to line to round out the concept of a godly life. In true teaching fashion, problems are approached repeatedly from a variety of angles so that none need fail to understand how to apply the principles in his own life. To give this instruction to all generations “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” 2 Peter 1:21.
Other responsibilities. It can also be shown that the men God chose as prophets served their nation as consultants and counselors for every phase of individual and national activity. In addition, they gave warnings of what would result from certain courses of action. They reproved sin in individuals and in the nation as a whole. They pronounced the judgments of God as consequences of sinful policies and evil conduct. There was no matter too small or too large to warrant the attention of God through the prophet, no corner so dark that light could not penetrate it and help be given. At times the performance of miracles figured prominently, as in the days of Elisha. Again, the preaching ministry was outstanding, as in the experience of Samuel and Jeremiah. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, these men did all the things that needed to be done. They were serving in God's stead, speaking for Him, acting for Him, representing Him before their fellow men.
The ministry of the prophets was not limited to the Hebrew nations. Through some of the prophetic messengers the Lord tried to win the Gentile nations to the truth. Abraham was sent
[49]
to witness for the true God in Egypt, where multiplied deities were worshiped. At least partly because of the failure of Abraham it was necessary for the Lord to send Joseph, and later to raise up Moses to give the Egyptians opportunity to learn of the true God. The story of Jonah is highlighted by the repentance of Nineveh in response to the preaching of the reluctant prophet. Daniel's prophetic ministry led to his elevation to one of the highest positions in Babylon, and resulted ultimately in the conversion of its greatest monarch. In freedom or captivity Paul reached out into Asia Minor, Greece, some of the Mediterranean islands, and Rome. All these and others, undoubtedly many unmentioned in the Bible, touched the lives of the nations with the word of the Lord. “Go ye into all the world” is not only a last-day injunction; it has been the Lord's objective for His people in every generation.
Prophets, then, were not unlike other men. They were men who needed the converting power of the Holy Spirit, who struggled with the temptations that are common to men, and they sometimes lost the battle in their own lives. They were men whose sorrows affected their lives as deeply as ours move us. They married, reared families, taught their children and learned from them, rejoiced in their triumphs, and grieved over their failures. They knew what it meant to see beloved children turn from the Lord. At least one knew what it meant to have an unfaithful wife. Another was not permitted to grieve over the death of his wife. They became weary and discouraged as did other men, and at times they chafed under the tasks the Lord gave them.
If you had lived in ancient Palestine, a prophet might have been your father. If so, he would have held you on his knee, smiled at you, talked to you, played with you as fathers always have. Or he might have been your next-door neighbor with whom you would have visited while he hoed his garden. Or you might have climbed trees with him when he and you were boys.
[50]
At the same time prophets were men in whom the Lord placed great confidence. A sense of responsibility weighed heavily on them. Whether they came from the royal palace, the plow, the herd, or the service of the temple, an inner compulsion made it impossible for them ever to be unconscious of their calling. These prophets were carefully chosen with attention given to their talents, weaknesses, and mental quirks. They were individuals whose personalities might be classified today as introverted or extroverted. Sometimes the tasks to which they were called were extremely distasteful to them, but God knew His men and used them to the extent of their abilities, even empowering them to go beyond what they or we would consider possible.
These little insights lurk everywhere through the Scriptures. When we find them, they make the men of the Bible, and the Bible itself, warmer and more alive. They enable us to put ourselves into the Bible picture to see how we belong to it and it to us. Far from taking away any of the dignity of the men or the solemnity of their messages, these pictures open doors of understanding that might otherwise be closed permanently to us. If we consider the ministry of Jesus, and then try to understand how God called men in many generations from all walks of life, and sought to accomplish through them as much as possible the same kind of ministry that Jesus performed, we will begin to gain a more adequate view of the significance and function of the Bible prophets.
from ELLEN WHITE ESTATES http://www.whiteestate.org/books/pay/PAYC03.html
Thursday, February 5, 2009
TESTING THE PROPHETS
LESSON 6 *January 31 - February 6
Testing the Prophets
Memory Text:
“Do not despise prophecies. Test all things; hold fast what is good”
(1 Thessalonians 5:20, 21, NKJV).
How did God communicate to His prophets? What are the biblical tests of a true prophet? What is conditional prophecy? Are prophets infallible? Why do we believe that Ellen G. White’s visions and prophetic dreams were from God?
SUNDAY February 1
Dreams and Visions
“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions” (Joel 2:28).
In Scripture we learn that God used primarily dreams and visions to communicate with His messengers. Prophetic dreams played an important role in the time of the patriarchs (Gen. 20–41), in the ministry of Daniel (Dan. 1–7), and in the Nativity narratives (Matt. 1:20; 2:12, 19, 22). Visions frequently are mentioned in the writings of the prophets (Isa. 1:1, Ezek. 1:1, Dan. 8:1, Obad. 1:1, Nah. 1:1) and in the book of Acts (9:10, 10:3, 11:5, 16:9, 18:9).
Daniel 7: (King James Version)
1In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.
Acts 9: (King James Version)
10And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
MONDAY February 2
Agreement With the Bible
What is one of the most important tests of a true prophet (Isa. 8:20)? Why should this be so important?
Isaiah 8: (King James Version)
20To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Law (Heb. torah) is the common biblical term for the inspired writings of Moses (Deut. 4:44, 31:9); the testimony refers to the witness of the prophets (2 Chron. 23:11, John 3:32). In other words, what a prophet says must harmonize with what God has revealed already. Though later prophets may reveal additional insights regarding the plan of salvation, they will not contradict what God has said before. God’s unchangeableness (Mal. 3:6) is at stake in His revelations to humanity.
An example of this test of a true prophet is given in Jeremiah 28.
Every true prophet has made the writings of previous prophets the benchmark for his or her own ministry. The same is true for Ellen White. Anyone familiar with her books can testify that she used Scripture profusely. She immersed herself in the Bible and constantly referred to the biblical text, and what she wrote is in agreement with the Bible. Although she was not a theologian and did not write an exegetical commentary on the Bible, her message is in harmony with the message of Scripture.
TUESDAY February 3
Fulfilled Prophecy
The proof of a true prophet lies, in part, in the fulfillment of his or her predictions (see 1 Sam. 9:6, Jer. 28:9, Lam. 3:37). At the same time, though, not all predictions come to pass if the people involved have a change of heart. It’s what is known as conditional prophecy, and it’s important for us to understand.
Jeremiah 18:6-10 (King James Version)
6O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
7At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
8If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
9And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
10If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.
Jonah 3: (King James Version)
4And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
The fulfillment of most prophecies (exceptions are the end-time prophecies of Daniel and Revelation) is dependent on the actions and attitudes of the people concerned. Jonah made the clear-cut statement, given him from God, that in 40 days Nineveh would be “overturned” (Jonah 3:4, NIV). Yet, it never happened. Was Jonah a false prophet? Of course not. Instead, the prophecy was conditional; its fulfillment depended upon how the people responded to the message God had given them.
In the last volume of the Testimonies for the Church, published in 1909, she wrote, “If every soldier of Christ had done his duty, if every watchman on the walls of Zion had given the trumpet a certain sound, the world might ere this have heard the message of warning. But the work is years behind. While men have slept, Satan has stolen a march upon us.”—Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, p. 29
WEDNESDAY February 4
Confessing Jesus, the God-man
What was one of the issues John faced in his time; and what does he say is another mark of a true prophet?
1 John 4
1Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
One of the problems in John’s day was the question over the human nature of Christ. Was He really flesh and blood, or did He, as some taught, only appear to have a body? To understand and confess that Jesus was truly human became so important to John that he declared it to be a test of a true prophet.
Hebrews 4:
14Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
Acts 4:
12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
THURSDAY February 5
The Orchard Test
Matthew 7:
20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
The context of this statement is Jesus’ warning to the disciples to beware of false prophets (Matt. 7:15). Jesus applied the principle—that a good tree bears good fruit—to the life of the prophets. What kind of fruit do they bring forth? What influence do their teachings have on others
Matthew 7:15 (King James Version)
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves
The orchard test takes time. Ellen White lived and worked for seventy years under the critical eyes of millions of people, largely skeptical, doubtful, suspicious, and in some cases openly hostile. Errors, faults, and inconsistencies were and still are exposed with great satisfaction by her opponents. God alone is flawless; His messengers never are.
Jonah 1
1Now the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the son of Amittai, saying,
2Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.
3But Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the LORD, and went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish: so he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them unto Tarshish from the presence of the LORD.
Acts 15:36-39 (King James Version)
36And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the LORD, and see how they do.
37And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
39And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
FRIDAY February 6
Further Study:
Read Ellen G. White, “The Bible Prophets Wrote for Our Time,” pp. 338, 339, in Selected Messages, book 3; Arthur L. White, “Make It Known to Others,” pp. 60-72 in The Early Years: 1827-1862.
“Again, in his epistle to the Romans, he says: ‘The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light’ (Rom. 13:12). . . .
“The angels of God in their messages to men represent time as very short. Thus it has always been presented to me. It is true that time has continued longer than we expected in the early days of this message. Our Saviour did not appear as soon as we hoped. But has the word of the Lord failed? Never! It should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional.”—Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 67.
Testing the Prophets
Memory Text:
“Do not despise prophecies. Test all things; hold fast what is good”
(1 Thessalonians 5:20, 21, NKJV).
How did God communicate to His prophets? What are the biblical tests of a true prophet? What is conditional prophecy? Are prophets infallible? Why do we believe that Ellen G. White’s visions and prophetic dreams were from God?
SUNDAY February 1
Dreams and Visions
“And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions” (Joel 2:28).
In Scripture we learn that God used primarily dreams and visions to communicate with His messengers. Prophetic dreams played an important role in the time of the patriarchs (Gen. 20–41), in the ministry of Daniel (Dan. 1–7), and in the Nativity narratives (Matt. 1:20; 2:12, 19, 22). Visions frequently are mentioned in the writings of the prophets (Isa. 1:1, Ezek. 1:1, Dan. 8:1, Obad. 1:1, Nah. 1:1) and in the book of Acts (9:10, 10:3, 11:5, 16:9, 18:9).
Daniel 7: (King James Version)
1In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.
Acts 9: (King James Version)
10And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
MONDAY February 2
Agreement With the Bible
What is one of the most important tests of a true prophet (Isa. 8:20)? Why should this be so important?
Isaiah 8: (King James Version)
20To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Law (Heb. torah) is the common biblical term for the inspired writings of Moses (Deut. 4:44, 31:9); the testimony refers to the witness of the prophets (2 Chron. 23:11, John 3:32). In other words, what a prophet says must harmonize with what God has revealed already. Though later prophets may reveal additional insights regarding the plan of salvation, they will not contradict what God has said before. God’s unchangeableness (Mal. 3:6) is at stake in His revelations to humanity.
An example of this test of a true prophet is given in Jeremiah 28.
Every true prophet has made the writings of previous prophets the benchmark for his or her own ministry. The same is true for Ellen White. Anyone familiar with her books can testify that she used Scripture profusely. She immersed herself in the Bible and constantly referred to the biblical text, and what she wrote is in agreement with the Bible. Although she was not a theologian and did not write an exegetical commentary on the Bible, her message is in harmony with the message of Scripture.
TUESDAY February 3
Fulfilled Prophecy
The proof of a true prophet lies, in part, in the fulfillment of his or her predictions (see 1 Sam. 9:6, Jer. 28:9, Lam. 3:37). At the same time, though, not all predictions come to pass if the people involved have a change of heart. It’s what is known as conditional prophecy, and it’s important for us to understand.
Jeremiah 18:6-10 (King James Version)
6O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
7At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
8If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.
9And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it;
10If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.
Jonah 3: (King James Version)
4And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
The fulfillment of most prophecies (exceptions are the end-time prophecies of Daniel and Revelation) is dependent on the actions and attitudes of the people concerned. Jonah made the clear-cut statement, given him from God, that in 40 days Nineveh would be “overturned” (Jonah 3:4, NIV). Yet, it never happened. Was Jonah a false prophet? Of course not. Instead, the prophecy was conditional; its fulfillment depended upon how the people responded to the message God had given them.
In the last volume of the Testimonies for the Church, published in 1909, she wrote, “If every soldier of Christ had done his duty, if every watchman on the walls of Zion had given the trumpet a certain sound, the world might ere this have heard the message of warning. But the work is years behind. While men have slept, Satan has stolen a march upon us.”—Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, p. 29
WEDNESDAY February 4
Confessing Jesus, the God-man
What was one of the issues John faced in his time; and what does he say is another mark of a true prophet?
1 John 4
1Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
One of the problems in John’s day was the question over the human nature of Christ. Was He really flesh and blood, or did He, as some taught, only appear to have a body? To understand and confess that Jesus was truly human became so important to John that he declared it to be a test of a true prophet.
Hebrews 4:
14Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
Acts 4:
12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
THURSDAY February 5
The Orchard Test
Matthew 7:
20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
The context of this statement is Jesus’ warning to the disciples to beware of false prophets (Matt. 7:15). Jesus applied the principle—that a good tree bears good fruit—to the life of the prophets. What kind of fruit do they bring forth? What influence do their teachings have on others
Matthew 7:15 (King James Version)
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves
The orchard test takes time. Ellen White lived and worked for seventy years under the critical eyes of millions of people, largely skeptical, doubtful, suspicious, and in some cases openly hostile. Errors, faults, and inconsistencies were and still are exposed with great satisfaction by her opponents. God alone is flawless; His messengers never are.
Jonah 1
1Now the word of the LORD came unto Jonah the son of Amittai, saying,
2Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.
3But Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the LORD, and went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish: so he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them unto Tarshish from the presence of the LORD.
Acts 15:36-39 (King James Version)
36And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the LORD, and see how they do.
37And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
38But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
39And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
FRIDAY February 6
Further Study:
Read Ellen G. White, “The Bible Prophets Wrote for Our Time,” pp. 338, 339, in Selected Messages, book 3; Arthur L. White, “Make It Known to Others,” pp. 60-72 in The Early Years: 1827-1862.
“Again, in his epistle to the Romans, he says: ‘The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light’ (Rom. 13:12). . . .
“The angels of God in their messages to men represent time as very short. Thus it has always been presented to me. It is true that time has continued longer than we expected in the early days of this message. Our Saviour did not appear as soon as we hoped. But has the word of the Lord failed? Never! It should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional.”—Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 67.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)