Close Please enter your Username and Password
Reset Password
If you've forgotten your password, you can enter your email address below. An email will then be sent with a link to set up a new password.
Cancel
Reset Link Sent
Password reset link sent to
Check your email and enter the confirmation code:
Don't see the email?
  • Resend Confirmation Link
  • Start Over
Close
If you have any questions, please contact Customer Service


Tropical_Man 67M
6573 posts
10/3/2008 6:44 pm
Ellen White, the Myth and the Truth


This is long but good information about the truth behind the Cult

Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 6:45 pm

Ellen G White -- the Myth and the Truth

by Åsmund Kaspersen



A short historical background

The Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy" is a well-known phrase among Seventh-day Adventists, and with the phrase "the Spirit of Prophecy" they mean Ellen G. White and her writings.

It is hardly an exaggeration to say that without Ellen G. White's influence there would hardly be a Seventh-day Adventist church -- at least not the way we know it today.

Ellen Gould Harmon was born on November 26, 1827 and died on July 16, 1915 at the age of 87. In December 1844 she began to have visions, and kept having them until 1884, according to her grandchild Arthur L. White, and she had approx. two thousand visions altogether. After 1884 and unto her death, she had mainly "prophetic dreams" during the night.

On August 30, 1846, at the age of 19, Ellen Gould Harmon married James White, who was six years older. This was less than a year after James White had reprimanded two of their former friends for getting married, and in this way "denied their faith (in the shut door)" (The Day star, October 11, 1845). Mr. and Mrs. White participated actively in the years to follow with the formation of the early Adventist church, well supported by EGW's visions.

By the time of her death in 1915 she had authored 24 books, 4600 articles, more than 2000 tracts, 6000 manuscripts and 40 000 typewritten pages. Today, more then eighty years after her death, the number of books published under her name have grown to more than sixty.

It has been claimed that EGW wrote some 25 million words, and that all the material used was her own, and that nothing is in opposition with the word of God. These are strong words, which most people, including myself, did accept without any further questions. There has been a shortage of faithful Bereans who by their own studies has put EGW's writings to the test under the Bible. The reason, I guess, is that everyone without a doubt accepted the picture of their own prophet as a part of their Adventist upbringing. As a result there was no need for further questions. All the pieces of the puzzle fitted neatly together.

There shouldn't be any dissension about the Bible being the clear authority and that the Bible must test everything else that claims divine inspiration.

The Adventists are testing other "prophets" by the word of God, but don't want to bring their own prophet under the same test. Non-Adventists are testing Ellen G. White by the Bible, but neither they will neither try their own prophet (if they have any) with the word of God. Both parties claim, when confronted, that "there is no disharmony, it just depends on how you read it".

There are quite a few Adventists that through the years have stood up as faithful Bereans and put Ellen G. White to the test by the Word of God. These received neither gratitude nor reward for their discoveries, but were being accused by the prophetess herself to be inspired by satanic spirits. The treatment of A.F. Ballenger is a good example.

Several others were put out of the church because they "held to heretical teachings" as it were called. The same apply to members of other churches/denominations who have tried their own "prophets" and teachings by the Word of God and found that a great deal of the propaganda doesn't fit reality.

This booklet is intended for the noble Berean. Many no doubt will be offended, while others who are of a nobler spirit will think through what they have been reading. The intention here is to come with objective and well documented facts about the prophetess which the leaders of the Adventist church for different reasons, have been hiding for the rest of the church members. Some leaders have not been familiar with some of the information that has leaked out through the passing of time. For quite a number of years, The White Estate has been muffling a number of uncomfortable truths about Ellen G. White and the fundamental teachings. It was important to keep a right picture of their prophet and of the pioneer-times.

It is important that these things that have been hidden in darkness, and which now throw light over both EGW and Adventism from new and surprising angles, now comes to the surface. In this way each individual can evaluate the foundation whereupon he is standing and assure himself that he is building his faith on the right foundation, which is Jesus and his Word, and nothing else. See 1. Cor. 3:11.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 6:48 pm

by Å. Kaspersen

1 - Introduction

Islam has Mohammed and the Koran, Christian Science has Mary Baker Eddy and her writings, The Mormons have Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon.The Adventists have Ellen G. White and her writings which with the bound articles, make up a pile some ten feet (3 metres) high. The Bible becomes small and unimportant amongst such a pile of writings. That which is common for many adventists are that they let the writings of their prophet have the last word over the bible when it comes to questions on faith and rule of conduct. Christian Science says that Mary Baker Eddy's "Key to the Scriptures" is an addition to Bible. The Mormons go still further by saying that both the Bible and the book of Mormon are the word of God. In this way we also find the Adventist church, at least the conservative group of the church. Within this last group we also find the ultra-conservative, "historical" adventists with their nostalgic tendencies towards times past and zealous attitude towards all those that don't share their views. It is this group that uses Ellen White both as a Bible and a "mallet" against everything and everyone. For this group, "Ellen White says" is the final word that settles every dispute in any questions of faith and other things. In other words, "her word is the bottom line". My own experiences support this to the full, and I must to this day just deplore that I myself in earlier days also had this attitude. It is just one word that fit this description - fanaticism.The Bible has unfortunately been give the role as a prompter which is good to have as a pre-interpreted text to have as a "foundation" for EGW when needed. Many ultra-conservative groups of adventists on the sideline are using the phrase, "The Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy" as a motto in their work, but put into practise it is the opposite. It Is 95% EGW and 5% bible, if it is that much, and the 5% are always interpreted by the writings of EGW. In this way one gets the Bible to support things it doesn't say. God did not intend that his Word should be used in this way.

The figure of the Madonna and "Ellenism"

It is an irrefutable fact that the leaders of the Adventist church for years, and especially after the death of EGW in 1915, has built up a front figure with an infallible status, a "picture-prophet" (picture postcard-prophet), if we can use such an expression. This picture we find in the many books about Ellen G. White which has through the years come from our publishing houses, as well as the many illustrations which Adventist artists have made available for the use in standard propaganda. What all these books and writings have in common, is that they give a one-sided, glorified picture of EGW. They also keep silent, or they explain away a row of important things around the prophetess and her associates, as well as a number of visions, dreams, testimonies and writings. Just picture yourself in a case where the Jury is sitting on a pile of documents which undeniably shows that the accused is guilty. These documents are then suppressed during the case, which only builds on more or less dubious "evidence" and "testimony" to the opposite. Is this then a justifiable or valid way of doing a case? This is however how the leaders of the Adventist church for a long time have portrayed the person Ellen G. White and her writings, before the members of the church. The difference is just that the "case" is built on a number of external "evidence" which in a superficial way show that she is innocent. But the jury has all the time been sitting on a pile of documents that show all reason to suspect her of being guilty on a number of points. The White Estate has however kept these documents hidden in respect of the interests of the Adventist church and not to say the least, of an economic nature. This front figure has in the later years however began to show signs of cracks, and the picture postcard has began to fade.

This "Ellenism" of the Adventist church has become a sort of pseudo-science which doesn't tolerate (can't bear) closer scrutiny (investigation). New information, new and surprising facts from the pile of documents have started to see the light of day and have began to throw doubts about the credibility of both EGW and the Adventist's fundamental doctrines. This provokes understandably enough some reactions in the conservative group of Adventist. They look at this trend as a fulfilment of the words of EGW herself when she says that in the end time there will be created "a satanic hate against the testimonies", and that there will come those who will tear away our fundamental doctrines,

"But we must firmly refuse to be drawn away from the platform of eternal truth, which since 1844 has stood the test. . . . As a people, we are to stand firm on the platform of eternal truth that has withstood test and trial. We are to hold to the sure pillars of our faith. The principles of truth that God has revealed to us are our only true foundation. They have made us what we are. The lapse of time has not lessened their value. . . . The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization. . . . Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid. . . . Shall we not repudiate everything that is not in harmony with this truth?" (Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, pp. 50-56.)

This is just a foretaste of the many quotes from EGW that goes along the same track.

"Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid," she wrote in the above quote, and "shall we not repudiate everything that is not in harmony with this truth?"

In other words: every doctrine must be tried by the Advent message! Where do you find support for this kind of statement in the word of God? How do we handle such a statement when vital points in the advent message - yes, even the foundation itself - under close scrutiny shows that it goes against the word of God? Does God contradict himself? Does God lay down a foundation that goes against his own Word? He certainly doesn't. Something else that the above statement brings out, is that it is the Adventist doctrines that is our "only safe foundation" while The Bible says that no-one can lay another foundation than that which is already laid, and that is Jesus Christ (1 Cor 3:11). The foundation of the church is not a system of more or less biblical doctrines, but Jesus himself.

What shall we then throw away? The Adventist message definitely is not the testing probe that should try the Word of God, but rather the Adventist message should be tried by the same Word.The Bible is the only true testing probe by which all doctrines should be tested by.

The Adventists use the writings of Ellen White as a last resort when they get on slippery surface and have problems of keeping on their feet - eg. when they want to defend their faith in a convincing way from the Bible. For them Ellen White is a greater authority than The Word Of God, a "yes" and an "Amen" that settles it all.

What the Adventist church say about the authority of Ellen G. White

What does the Adventist church itself say about the authority of Ellen G. White?During the General Conference in 1980 the creed, or fundamental doctrines of the Adventist church were under revision. One of the revised points had to do with the role of Ellen G. White,,

"One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth and provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested." (Adventist Review, May 1, 1980, pp. 25-26.)

In 1928 you could read the following in the official paper of the Adventist church,

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

It is all the time being claimed that EGW's writings are not an addition to the Bible, and that it neither should be put alongside the Bible. The above statement reflects the fundamental confusion amongst Adventists about this matter. If the writings of EGW are visions from God, they are of course an addition to the Bible. And if the messages in her writings should be received in the same way as the messages from the old prophets - which are parts of the biblical canon - they will then of course, be on the same level as the Bible, and then they are an addition to the Bible. The above statement is really self-contradictory.

The same confusion we find in the book "Seventh Day Adventists Believe", put out in 1988 by the preaching department of the General Conference,

"The Writings of Ellen White are not a substitute for Scripture. They cannot be placed on the same level. The Holy Scriptures stand alone, the unique standard by which her and all other writings must be judged and to which they must be subject." (Seventh-Day Adventists Believe, p. 227. Emphasis supplied.)

If the writings of EGW were put alongside the messages of Jeremiah, Samuel etc. as the quotation from 1928 expresses, and that they must be received in the same way as the messages of the prophets in the Biblical canon, then EGW must of course be put on the same level as the Bible?

Ellen White are being compared with these Old Testament prophets, and since their messages are equal, then I guess they stand on the same level? These statements show the confusion and self-contradiction that is seen and expressed when belief and practice don't agree.

On the front page of Adventist Review, June 4, 1992, Ellen White is depicted together with Moses, Deborah and John the Baptist, and the text is saying "A prophet for our time". That Ellen White is put into the fellowship with these biblical prophets on the front cover of the denomination's official paper, show that the Adventist church put her on the same level as the prophets of the Bible. The logical conclusion to this must be that her writings stand on the same level as the Word of God.

Albion Fox Ballenger in his time did a thorough biblical study of the "veil" that he showed to a number of the leaders of the Adventist church at that time. Their commentaries were, according to Ballenger himself,

"Not one of these brethren attempted to show me my error from the Word. One wrote thus: 'Candor compels me to say that I can find no fault with it from a Bible standpoint. The argument seems to be unassailable.' Another said: 'I have always felt that it was safer to take the interpretation placed upon the Scriptures by the Spirit of Prophecy as manifested through Sister E. G. White rather than to rely upon my own judgment or interpretation.' This last quotation expresses the attitude of all those who have admitted that my position seemed to be supported by the Scriptures, but hesitated to accept it." (A.F. Ballenger, Cast Out for the Cross of Christ. 1909. pp. 106-112. Emphasis supplied.)

In other words, when the leaders of the Adventist church were confronted with certain differences between the Bible and the writings of Ellen G. White, and in this way had to make a choice between one or the other, they would then choose the last - the statements of EGW - as conclusive.

They admitted that the arguments were irrefutable from a biblical standpoint, but chose to keep to the writings of EGW though these did not agree. In this case the writings of EGW was put above the Word of God. This attitude we also find today in certain Adventist circles.

Ellen G. White about her own writings


Ellen G. White used some strong expressions (words) about her own writings,

"Sister White is not the originator of these books. They contain the instruction that during her life-work God has been giving her. They contain the precious, comforting light that God has graciously given his servant to be given to the world. From their pages this light is to shine into the hearts of men and women, leading them to the Saviour." (Review and Herald, Jan. 20, 1903.) Emphasis supplied.)

"While writing the manuscript of 'Great Controversy,' I was often conscious of the presence of the angels of God. And many times the scenes about which I was writing were presented to me anew in visions of the night, so that they were fresh and vivid in my mind." (Letter 56, 1911.)

We will later discover to our surprise that it is very little of the book "The Great Controversy"that comes originally from the pen of Ellen G. White. It is surprisingly enough a shade of truth in the first statement. Ellen G. White was not the source of these books. A great deal of the material was "borrowed" from other authors without references to the original source! But I guess that wasn't what EGW intended to say!

What is the "Spirit of Prophecy"?

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

"And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." (Rev.19:10.)

The sign of the church of God is that it has "the testimony of Jesus". The testimony of Jesus is further defined as "the spirit of prophecy". The Seventh-day Adventists are programmed to read themselves into these verses. They have all of the law of God, they say, and they have "the Spirit of Prophecy", which they refer to Ellen G. White. No one says this clearer than the well known Adventist preacher Joe Crews,

"But now let's finish reading this fantastic verse. 'And have the testimony of Jesus Christ.' (Rev 12:17.) Not only will this last-day church arise after 1798 and keep all the Commandmnents, but it will have the testimony of Jesus. But what is the testimony of Jesus? . . . The definition is provided by the word of an angel sent all the way from heaven to explain it to John. 'I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: Worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.' Rev. 19:10. . . .There it is! We know now without a shadow of doubt that the testimony of Jesus is is the Spirit of Prophecy. And this is the third great mark of identity for the last-day true church! . . .The only church fulfilling the prophetic description of the true remnant is the Seventh-day Adventist church. Arising around 1844 this movement of destiny began the predicted program of restoring truth which had been lost or distorted during the Dark Ages. One after another of the original doctrines of Christ and the early church were returned to their former luster and beauty. As the authority of the law and the Sabbath was re-established, God did exactly what he had promised to do: He restored the beautiful Spirit of prophecy to the remnant church. That gift was manifested through the life and teachings of Mrs. Ellen G. White." (Joe Crews, The Search for the True Church. Amazing Facts, 1984, pp. 15, 42-43. Emphasis supplied.)

There are found many similar references in the Adventists standard literature.

This view the Adventists themselves are accountable for. It is no one else than themselves that interpret these verses in a way like this. There is not found anywhere in the book of Revelation or any other places that "the Spirit of Prophecy" is Ellen G. White. This is both typical Adventist interpretation and sectarian. "The Spirit of Prophecy" is in short The Holy Spirit, which has inspired the Word of God and The prophetic word.

"All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. . ."(2 Tim. 3:16.)

"We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts. . ." (2 Pet. 1:19.)

The church of God then has the prophetic word, which they do well in heeding.

The book of Revelation itself is called "the prophetic word in this book" (Rev 1:3. 22.10.1. There are a number of Old testament prophets in the biblical canon, and the Word of God concludes with a prophetic book. It is "the Spirit of Prophecy" which has inspired these prophets that constitute a portion of the Bible. It is very sectarian to limit "the Spirit of Prophecy" to one certain person in one particular denomination, which is done by the Adventist church in respect to Ellen G. White, at least when it has to do with the last days and "the remnant". The church of God keeps his commandments, as it is written, and they have the prophetic word, The Holy Spirit, and in this conjunction "the Spirit of Prophecy" in the book of Revelation. Is it just the Adventists that have or have had "the Spirit of Prophecy"?

In Rev, 20:4 we read,


"And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." (Rev. 20:4.)

The testimony (witness) of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy. They had suffered a martyr's death on account of the prophetic message they preached. The Adventists say that the Spirit of Prophecy is Ellen White and her writings, consequently the servants of God suffered a martyr's death for the sake of Ellen White. This is the understanding one gets from putting Ellen White into Rev. 19: 10. Is there something wrong here?

"The testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy" eg. It is the Spirit of Prophecy - the Spirit that stands behind the words of the prophet - that bear the witness of Jesus.

"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me. . ." (John 15:26.)

This bible verse should make it clear for everyone who bears the testimony of Jesus. It is the Spirit of truth, The comforter. It is The Holy Spirit that bears the testimony of Jesus. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Prophecy, the testimony of Jesus.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 6:53 pm

by Å. Kaspersen

2 -The visions

According to Arthur White, his grandmother experienced about two thousand visions during her lifetime. A considerable number when one consider the biblical prophets and how few of their visions have found their place in the Bible. The Bible is a book of some one thousand pages, while the writings of Ellen G. White comprises more than 60 books, and thousands of articles, manuscripts and letters -- totaling about 100,000 pages, or one hundred Bibles! According to Ellen White and the SDA-denomination, all this material are direct communications from heaven, a "thus saith the Lord".

Right from the beginning, and down to this day, the "Spirit of Prophecy" has been a suitable instrument the denomination has been using against its members to keep people in line. Carefully selected quotes shared from pulpits and through official papers, are very useful ways of spiritually guiding the people when there is a need, and this happened quite often. Ellen White's writings are from God, they claim, and who dares to ignore them!

Adventists who carry on their own ministry "offside" the SDA-denomination, are in fact the most instrumental in using Ellen White's writings to justify their work, and to condemn their "mother church". They use her writings as a Bible to "prove" everything from French revolutions and Turkish sultans to earthquakes, chewing and number of meals a day.

There is a statistic, published by the SDA-denomination (Comprehensive Index to the Writings of Ellen G. White, vol. 3, pp. 2978-2984), which says that during a period of 71 years (1844-1915), there are 188 documented visions, averaging 2.5 visions a year. This is a reduction of 1812 visions from Arthur White's estimated two thousand. Even Arthur White, who launched this number, is unable to document the missing 1812 visions. He stated however, that there exists no complete documentation for all the visions. During the early years, the visions may have been relatively frequent. A few hundred (some claim four hundred) visions are a more reasonable number.

Ellen G. Harmon received her first vision in December, 1844. This vision was first published in the Day Star, January 24, 1846, then in the 1846 broadside To The Remnant Scattered Abroad(April 6), and republished in 1847 in the pamphlet A Word to the Little Flock. Later it was edited and put into the book Experience and Views (1851), and later into Early Writings (1882). More on this in chapter 3. In this vision, Ellen White describes among other things, a narrow path extending from earth to the New Jerusalem; a seven day travel from earth to heaven in a cloudy chariot, and Sion's temple on the new earth.

According to information which right now are beginning to come to light, Ellen White may have borrowed elements to this vision, and a number of other early visions, from the writings of the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith. More on this later.

Most SDA-people are not aware of the fact that Ellen White's prophetic career started out in wild fanaticism. These dark pages of SDA-history have been carefully screened by informed leaders to give room for the myth about the glorious pioneer-time, centered around the adventist madonna Ellen G. White. There is some reason however, to believe that many SDA-leaders are completely ignorant about this less flattering part of their adventist heritage and their revered prophet.

In later years, a steady stream of new information from early adventist history has been dug up, forcing quite a number of people to view both Ellen White and early Adventism from new angles. In later life, Ellen White claimed that she and her husband James were busy fighting fanaticism, but hides the fact that both she herself and James were enthusiastic participants in fanatical meetings in the period after the great disappointment in October, 1844. During these fanatical gatherings, the young Ellen Harmon -- the image of Christ, as she was called -- would lie on the floor with a pillow under her head, while she in trance described her visions. How many SDA's have heard about the Atkinson-incident in February/March 1845, where both Ellen Harmon and James White were involved? In fact, the documentation shows that James White was a leader of fanatical groups.

Fanaticism

In 1986 Bruce Weaver, a graduate student at Andrews University discovered an old newspaper report (legal report), describing the arrest and trial against a man by the name of Israel Dammon, an aquaintance of Ellen White. (Piscataquis Farmer, March 7, 1845, No. 31.) Some are of the opinion that the digging out of this report is one of the most significant discoveries about early adventist history ever being made.

For obvious reasons, this old newspaper report will never find its way into the official papers of the SDA-denomination, like Adventist Review. It was, however, published in Adventist Currents, vol. 3, No. 1, April 1988. The glorified image of Ellen White's prophetic call and early writings would begin cracking if this became generally known in the Adventist community.

To this time, adventists have to a large extent not been able to produce sources for their early history, other than Ellen White's own accounts, and from EGW-true pioneers. (Also some material from non-EGW true pioneers, which have largely been ignored.) The newspaper-report from 1845 however, where Ellen Harmon, James White, Dorinda Baker and others were involved, gives an unbiased report, and creates some doubt about the reliability of Ellen White's own biographical accounts.

In her autobiographical sketches, Ellen White points out that both she and her husband were busy fighting against various forms of fanaticism during the early years of Adventism. However, it now becomes clear that Ellen White herself was heavily involved in bizarre, fanatical activities, in which her "visions" played no insignificant role.

After the disappointment on October 22, 1844, the great majority of Millerites returned back to their respective religious denominations. A few -- Ellen Harmon included -- continued their gatherings in private homes. Quite a few of these private gatherings were marked by extreme fanaticism: "Holy kiss", shouting and screaming, promiscuity, bizarre, physical excercises, like crawling on the floor etc. A few, mostly female, "visionaries" were usually present, receiving "visions" during the gatherings.

Ellen White (Harmon at that time), travelled around with these fanatics. It is quite possible that she just avoided being arrested during one particular incident (in Orrington, Maine) by fleeing from the place, and it is possible that she in fact was arrested once, together with a Joseph Turner. in Poland, Maine (April, 1845).

On February 15, 1845, these extremists were gathered in the home of a James Ayer, in the little town of Atkinson, Maine. The meeting was headed by a former sea captain, Israel Dammon, and two visionaries, Ellen G. Harmon and Dorinda Baker were also present.

Here follows some excerpts from the trial in 1845, describing the type of gatherings Ellen and James White were involved in after the disappointment in 1844,

"J.W.E. HARVEY, sworn. Have attended their meetings two days and four evenings. First meeting lasted eight days - have known Dammon six weeks - Dammon, White and Hall were leaders. Dammon said the sinners were going to hell in two days. They were hugging and kissing each other - Dammon would lay on the floor, then jump up - they would frequently go into another room. Dammon has no means to support himself that I know of. The meeting appeared very irreligious - have seen him sit on the floor with a woman between his legs and his arms around her.

"WM. C. CROSBY, Esq. sworn. I was at the meeting last Saturday night, from about 7 o'clock to 9. There was a woman on the floor who lay on her back with a pillow under her head; she would occasionally arouse up and tell a vision which she said was revealed to her. They would at times all be talking at once, halloing at the top of their voices; some of them said there was too much sin there. After the cessation of the noise, Dammon got up and was more coherent - he complained of those that come there who did not believe in the advent doctrine. At one time Dammon said there was hogs there not belonging to the band, and pointed at me, and said, I mean you, Sir.

"LOTON LAMBERT, sworn. They were singing when I arrived - after singing they sat down on the floor - Dammon said a sister had a vision to relate - a woman on the floor then related her vision. Dammon said all other denominations were wicked - they were liars, whoremasters, murderers, &c. - he also run upon all such as were not believers with him. He ordered us off - we did not go. The woman that lay on the floor relating visions, was called by Elder Dammon and others, Imitation of Christ. Dammon called us hogs and devils, and said if he was the owner of the house he would drive us off - the one that they called Imitation of Christ, told Mrs. Woodbury and others, that they must forsake all their friends or go to hell. Imitation of Christ, as they called her, would lay on the floor a while, then rise up and call upon some one and say she had a vision to relate to them, which she would relate; there was one girl that they said must be baptized that night or she must go to hell; she wept bitterly and wanted to see her mother first; they told her she must leave her mother or go to hell - one voice said, let her go to hell. She finally concluded to be baptized. Imitation of Christ told her vision to a cousin of mine, that she must be baptized that night or go to hell - she objected, because she had once been baptized. Imitation of Christ was said to be a woman from Portland. A woman that they called Miss Baker, said the devil was here, and she wanted to see him - she selected me and said, you are the devil, and will go to hell. I told her she want [was not] my judge. Mr. [James] Ayer [Jr., owner of the house] then clinched me and tried to put me out door. I told him we had not come to disturb the meeting. The vision woman called [to] Joel Doore, said he had doubted, and would not be baptized again - she said Br. Doore don't go to hell. Doore kneeled to her feet and prayed. Miss Baker and a man went into the bedroom - subsequently heard a voice in the room hallo Oh! The door was opened - I saw into the room - she was on the bed-he was hold of her; they came out of the bedroom hugging each other, she jumping up and would throw her legs between his. Miss Baker went to Mr. Doore and said, you have refused me before, he said he had - they then kissed each other - she said "that feels good" - just before they went to the water to baptize, Miss Baker went into the bedroom with a man they called Elder White - saw him help her on to the bed - the light was brought out and door closed. I did not see either of them afterwards. Once I was in the other room talking with my cousin. Dammon and others came into the room and stopped our discourse, and called her sister and me the devil. Imitation of Christ lay on the floor during the time they went down to the water to baptize, and she continued on the floor until I left, which was between the hours of 12 and 1 o'clock at night.

"WM. C. CROSBY, reexamined. I saw no kissing, but heard about it. I did not stay late, went about 7, left about 9 o'clock. After the visionist called them up she told them they doubted. Her object seemed to be to convince them they must not doubt. Dammon called the churches whoremasters, liars, thieves, scoundrels, wolves in sheep's clothing, murders, &c. He said read the STAR. By spells it was the most noisy assembly I ever attended-there was no order or regularity, nor anything that resembled any other meeting I ever attended - Dammon seemed to have the lead and the most art. I don't say Dammon shouted the loudest; I think some others stronger in the lungs than he.

"DEACON JAMES ROWE, sworn. I was at Ayer's a short time last Saturday evening - Elder Dammon found fault with us for coming to his meeting-he spoke of other denominations as Esq. Crosby has just testified - said the church members were the worst people in the world. I have been young, and now am old, and of all the places I ever was in, I never saw such a confusion, not even in a drunken frolic. Dammon stood up on the floor and said, I am going to stand here - and while I stand here, they can't hurt you, neither men nor devils can't hurt you.

"JOSEPH MOULTON, sworn. When I went to arrest prisoner, they shut the door against me. Finding I could not gain access to him without, I burst open the door. I went to the prisoner and took him by the hand and told him my business. A number of women jumped on to him - he clung to them, and they to him. So great was the resistance, that I with three assistants, could not get him out. I remained in the house and sent for more help; after they arrived we made a second attempt with the same result - I again sent for more help - after they arrived we overpowered them and got him out door in custody. We were resisted by both men and women. Can't describe the place - it was one continued shout.

"JAMES AYER, JR., Affirmed. Saw the woman with a pillow under here head - her name is Miss Ellen Harmon, of Portland. I heard nothing said by her or others about Imitation of Christ. I saw Miss Baker laying on the floor. I saw her fall. Saw Miss Baker and Sister Osborn go into the bedroom - Sister Osborn helped her on to the bed, came out and shut the door.

"JOB MOODY, affirmed. I was at meeting Saturday evening. Brother Dammon said in relation to other churches they were bad enough; said they were corrupt; he spoke of the STAR - he did not say they were thieves, &c. I am not certain, but think he said that evening there was exceptions. Sister Harmon would lay on the floor in a trance, and the Lord would reveal their cases to her, and she to them.

"JACOB MASON, affirmed. I saw Elder White after Sister Baker went into the bedroom, near Sister Harmon in a trance - some of the time he held her head. She was in a vision, part of the time insensible. Cross-examined. Do not know who it was that went into the bedroom with Sister Baker - he was a stranger to me; he soon came out. Can't say how soon he went in again. I have heard Crosby testify, and think him correct. I thought her visions were from God - she would describe out their cases correct. She described mine correct. I saw kissing out door, but not in the house. A part of the time we sat on the floor - both men and women promiscuously.

"JOEL DOORE, affirmed. Reside in Atkinson - Elder Dammon said there was bad characters in the churches; I did no understand him to say all. He preaches louder than most people; no more noisy than common preachers of this faith. The vision woman would lay looking up when she came out of her trance - she would point to someone, and tell them their cases, which she said was from the Lord. She told a number of visions that evening. Brother Gallison's daughter wanted to see her mother before she was baptized, but finally concluded to be baptized without seeing her. Sister Baker got up off the floor, and went to Lambert to talk with him. I saw no more of her, until I heard a noise in the bedroom - they went and got her out, as the other witnesses have stated. Cross-examined. When she kissed me, she said there was light ahead. We believe her (Miss Baker's) visions genuine. We believe Miss Harmon's genuine - it was our understanding that their visions were from God. Miss Hammond [Harmon] told five visions Saturday night. I did not tell any person yesterday that it was necessary to have anyone in the room with her to bring out her trances. Sister Harmon said to my wife and the girls if they did not do as she said, they would go to hell. My wife and Dammon passed across the floor on their hands and knees. Some man did go into the bedroom. Heard Brother Dammon say the gift of healing the sick lay in the church.

"J.W.E. HARVEY, called. I have attended the meetings a number of times - I have seen prisoner on the floor with a woman between his legs - I have seen them in groups hugging and kissing one another. I went there once on an errand - Dam[mon] halloed out "Good God Almighty, drive the Devil away." I once saw Elder Hall with his boots off, and the women would go and kiss his feet. One girl made a smack, but did not hit his foot with her lips. Hall said "he that is ashamed of me before men, him will I be ashamed of before my Father and the holy angels." She then gave his feet a number of kisses. (Piscataquis Farmer, March 7, 1845, as related in Adventist Currents, April 1988, article Incident in Atkinson, by Bruce Weaver.)

It was during such circumstances, and in surroundings like these, that Ellen G. Harmon received her first visions. One might ask, how many of the biblical prophets received their visions this way?

We are to note the following,

1. Most of the witnesses were men of integrity, godly men who were present in court under oath, and who would not commit perjury.2. The witnesses were largely in agreement on most points. There were some disagreement on peripheral points, like who went into the bedrooms with whom, and if Ellen Harmon was called "the image of Christ".3. The hearing took place only two days after the saturday-gathering, when their memories were still fresh.

Ellen White's own account

In the book Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, pp. 40-42, Ellen White describes the arrest of Israel Dammon. Compare this version with the hearing of witnesses quoted above. The same incident is being described,

"From Exeter we went to Atkinson. One night I was shown something that I did not understand. It was to this effect, that we were to have a trial of our faith. The next day, which was the first day of the week, while I was speaking, two men looked into the window. We were satisfied of their object. They entered and rushed past me to Eld. Damman [sic.].The Spirit of the Lord rested upon him, and his strength was taken away, and he fell to the floor helpless. The officer cried out, "In the name of the State of Maine, lay hold of this man." Two seized his arms, and two his feet, and attempted to drag him from the room. They would move him a few inches only, and then rush out of the house. The power of God was in that room, and the servants of God with their countenances lighted up with his glory, made no resistance. The efforts to take Eld. D. were often repeated with the same effect. The men could not endure the power of God, and it was a relief to them to rush out of the house. Their number increased to twelve, still Eld. D. was held by the power of God about forty minutes, and not all the strength of those men could move him from the floor where he lay helpless. At the same moment we all felt that Eld. D. must go; that God had manifested his power for his glory, and that the name of the Lord would be further glorified in suffering him to be taken from our midst. And those men took him up as easily as they would take up a child, and carried him out." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 2, pp. 40-42. Emphasis supplied.)

This is one of Ellen Whites glorius tales about the pioneer time. We are, however, to note that her account is in strong variance with sheriff Joseph Moulton's sworn account,

"JOSEPH MOULTON, sworn. When I went to arrest prisoner, they shut the door against me. Finding I could not gain access to him without, I burst open the door. I went to the prisoner and took him by the hand and told him my business. A number of women jumped on to him - he clung to them, and they to him. So great was the resistance, that I with three assistants, could not get him out. I remained in the house and sent for more help; after they arrived we made a second attempt with the same result - I again sent for more help - after they arrived we overpowered them and got him out door in custody. We were resisted by both men and women. Can't describe the place - it was one continued shout." (Emphasis supplied.)

We are to note that none of the other witnesses argued with the sheriff with respect to his short, concise explanation. He says that both he and his men were being hindered in their business by men and women in the house, and that a "number of women" clung to Israel Dammon. This was definitely not the power of God.

Ellen White, however, makes it clear that "the power of God" was present in the house, where Moulton said there was "one continued shout". The faces of God's servants "lighted up with his glory", she says.

We are also to note that Israel Dammon at a later time rejected Ellen White's visions.

Ellen White also says that "one night I was shown something that I did not understand." We are to note that this very night, Ellen Harmon laid on the floor as enthusiastic participant in this bedlam and related her "visions".

At the end of the book Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, there are some fifteen lists over people who attested to the correctness of Ellen White's accounts in the book. Five of those lists have to do with the Israel Dammon-incident. In those five lists, 61 persons are named, but because there are many repetitions, the number shrinks down to 38 names. There have been made attempts to check out the names by going into the national register for the state of Maine for the year 1850. 28 of the 38 names have been identified. Two persons were already dead at the time when the names inSpiritual Gifts were compiled. It is quite significant that eight of the names were strongly condemned by Ellen White in 1860 for fanaticism -- the same year the names were published!

In his book History of the Second Advent Message and Mission, Doctrine and People (1874), pastor Isaac Wellcome tells that most of the people who had signed the lists in Spiritual Gifts, were as involved in fanaticism as Ellen and James White themselves, and that some of them in fact were leaders of fanaticism. (p. 408.)

One of the lists in Spiritual Gifts comprises five names,

"We bear cheerful testimony to the truthfulness of the statements relative to Elder Dammon, on pages 40, 41 [of Spiritual Gifts 2]. As near as we can recollect we believe the circumstances of his arrest and trial to be fairly stated. Wm. T. Hannaford, James Ayer, Sen., H.A. Hannaford, D.S. Hannaford, Mrs. R.W. Wood." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 2, p. 302.)

We are to note that none of the five persons named, were present at the Israel Dammon trial. Three of the names are also from the same family. With respect to Mrs. R.W. Wood, she denied very strongly having put her name on such lists,

"In a private letter dated May 16, 1888, Mrs. Wood denies that she ever signed this statement and she did not know that her name was attached to it until many years after. She also denies the accuracy of Mrs. White's statements regarding the [Dammon] affair. She was present and remembered the experience very well, and her account does not agree with Mrs. White's account. If they will forge Mrs. Wood's name to a document they would forge other names; therefore we have good reason for doubting the value of their testimonials." (Edward S. Ballenger, Early History of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. Unpublished manuscript, p. 117. Quoted inAdventist Currents, April 1988, p. 31.)

During the trial, it became obvious that Israel Dammon, James White and a Mr. Hall were the leaders of this fanatical group Ellen Harmon and other "visionary" young women mingled with in the "rosy-red pioneer times".

Holy laughter

In a letter from August, 1850, Ellen White tells about a case of "holy laughter" without connecting it to fanaticism. James White had suddenly become ill, and Ellen and several other sisters were present at his bed, praying for cure,

"Sister Harris and Clarissa were set entirely free and they prayed to God with a loud voice. The Spirit caused Clarissa to laugh aloud. James was healed every whit;. . ." (EGW letter to Bro. and Sis. Howland, August 15, 1850. Emphasis supplied. Quoted in Adventist Currents, April 1988, p. 30.)

It is strange that Ellen White removed the sentence "The Spirit caused Clarissa to laugh aloud" when she later published this story. Why?

Today, we have the so-called "Toronto-Blessing", or "laughter-movement" which is spreading like wildfire. This movement is characterized by the same strange, physical excercises which were manifested by fanatical movements in the 1840's and -50's -- the same kind of fanaticism Ellen White participated in: They crawled on the floor, making bizarre sounds, "holy laughter" etc. We might ask, which kind of spirit propels the "Toronto-blessing"? To all probability the same spirit which propelled the fanatical movements in the 1840's. The manifestations were quite similar.

During the Israel Dammon trial, the witness Joel Doore told that he had seen his wife and Israel Dammon "passed across the floor on their hands and knees". It was during this noisy gathering that Ellen Harmon laid on the floor, with a pillow under her head, relating "visions". It was during this same meeting that "the power of God" was manifested, according to the prophetess. We cannot find any parallels in the Bible, at least not at places where the Spirit of God was manifest.

A similar incident took place in the home of captain John Megquier in Poland, Maine. This incident was reported in the Norway Advertiser,

"They seldom sit in any other position than on the bare floor. . . .A woman, at the meeting he attended, got on her hands and knees, and crept over the floor like a child. A man, in the same position, followed her, butting her occasionally with his head. Another man threw himself at full lenght upon his back on the bed, and presently threewomen crossed him with their bodies." (The Norway Advertiser, March 28, 1845. Quoted in Adventist Currents, April 1988, p. 30.)

In her letters from the 1850's, Ellen White mentions several such meetings where she was present, and where strong, physical manifestations were common. James White tells in a letter from 1851 about a "mighty vision", and that Ellen, when she came out of "vision", shouted so loudly that she was taken into a new "vision".

In 1847, Ellen tells how she "fell from the chair, unto the floor", while she was taken in "vision", and that Str. Durben shortly after was "struck to the floor" by "the power of God" (letter to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847).

Otis Nichols describes how Ellen White (Harmon) later in 1845 spent four hours resting against the wall in a corner of the room while relating her visions in a "shrill voice". Later, Ellen White corrected the words "shrill voice" to "clear voice". But if we are to judge from the descriptions of the kind of meetings Ellen participated in, "shrill voice" would be a more appropriate word.

Lucinda Burdick

Lucinda Burdick knew Ellen White very well. Several times she had held Ellen's head in her lap while Ellen was in vision. However, in 1874, Lucinda Burdick gave a lenghty testimony in Isaac Wellcome's book The World Crisis,

"I became acquainted with James White and Ellen Harmon (now Mrs. White) early in 1845. At the time of my first acquaintance with them they were in a wild fanaticism, -- used to sit on the floor instead of chairs, and creep around the floor like little children. Such freaks were considered a mark of humility. They were not married, but traveling together."

We are to note that this testimony of Lucinda Burdick, who was not present at the Israel Dammon trial, but who at that time became aquainted with James and Ellen White, is in full harmony with the witnesses during the trial.

Visions on demand?

In her testimony in The World Crisis, Lucinda Burdick tells that Ellen was able to trigger visions when it suited her,

"It was ascertained by myself and others who saw her in vision, that she could throw herself into vision when she chose (this she confessed), but that James White could control them, and bring her out when he pleased" (emphasis supplied).

Here follows her testimony in its entirety,

"I became acquainted with James White and Ellen Harmon (now Mrs. White) early in 1845. At the time of my first acquaintance with them they were in a wild fanaticism, -- used to sit on the floor instead of chairs, and creep around the floor like little children. Such freaks were considered a mark of humility. They were not married, but traveling together. Ellen was having what was called visions: said God had shown her in vision that Jesus Christ arose on the tenth day of the seventh moth, 1844, and shut the door of mercy; had left forever the mediatorial throne; the whole world was doomed and lost, and there never could be another sinner saved. She very soon pretended to see that Saturday must be kept as the Sabbath. Her visions were something new, and there seemed to be first no decided opposition to them in the different churches where they traveled. They caused a great deal of discussion and excitement, and all seemed disposed to investigate. But, after a little while, her visions began to conflict one with the other. It was ascertained by myself and others who saw her in vision, that she could throw herself into vision when she chose (this she confessed), but that James White could control them, and bring her out when he pleased.

"There were also many failures. She pretended God showed her things which did not come to pass. At one time she saw that the Lord would come the second time in June 18. There were also many failures. She pretended God showed her things which did not come to pass. At one time she saw that the Lord would come the second time in June 185. [Here the last number is missing. Probably 1851, Ed.] The prophecy was discussed in all the churches, and in a little "shut-door paper" published in Portland, Me. During the summer, after June passed, I heard a friend ask her how she accounted for the vision? She replied that "they told her in the language of Canaan, and she did not understand the language; that it was the next September that the Lord was coming, and the second growth of grass instead of the first in June."

"September passed, and many more have passed since, and we have not seen the Lord yet. It soon became evident to all candid persons, that many things must have been "told her in the language of Canaan," or some other which she did not understand, as there were repeated failures. I could mention many which I knew of myself.

"Once, when on their way to the eastern part of Maine, she saw that they would have great trouble with the wicked, be put in prison, etc. This they told in the churches as they passed through. When they came back, they said they had a glorious time. Friends asked if they had seen any trouble with the wicked, or prisons? They replied, None at all. People in all the churches soon began to get their eyes open, and came out decidedly against her visions; and, just as soon as they did so, she used to see them "with spots on their garments," as she expressed it. I was personally acquainted with several ministers, whom she saw landed in the kingdom with "Oh! such brilliant crowns, FULL of stars." As soon as they took a stand against the visions, she saw them "doomed, damned, and lost for ever, without hope.

"Their traveling together, as they did, before marriage, brought a great scandal upon the cause. People generally felt that such intimacy should not exist between unmarried persons, and begged him to leave Ellen at home, and go himself and preach the gospel. He met them with insult and abuse, declaring that he never would bow to man. The churches all through the State of Maine (which is Ellen's native state) lost confidence in them. There was occasionally here and there a family, or individual, whom they seemed to hold under a kind of mesmeric influence, that stood by by and defended them. They were after awhile married, and worked West, where they were not much known; and perhaps she learned to be more cautious, and have more consistent visions. If these visions which she now has are of God, the first were; and if the first were of God, the door of mercy was close din 1844, and woe to the poor sinners this side of there. We know that God does not lie; and some of them did lie, to my certain knowledge. God does not contradict himself, and her visions have contradicted each other. I have been told that they deny on this coast that she ever saw the door of mercy closed; but there are thousands of living witnesses who know that a blacker lie could not be invented, and I am one of the number." (Isaac Wellcome, The World Crisis, 1874. Emphasis supplied.)

Ellen White vehemently denied this testimony of Lucinda Burdick. It becomes claim against claim. However, Lucinda Burdick's testimony was official, while Ellen White's denial was private. Accordingly, the reliability points in favor of Lucinda Burdick because Ellen White never was willing to come out with an official denial of an official testimony. This is quite understandable, because "the Shut Door" was an embarassing episode in her early works and writings. She wanted no more publicity about this matter, because it would damage her reputation as "God's prophet". More on the "Shut Door" in chapter 4.

The information on the Israel Dammon trial and the Atkinson-incident was taken from Adventist Currents, vol. 3, No. 1, April 1988.

Other visionaries

Ellen White was not the only person at that time who had "visions". Ann Lee, who founded the Shakers, claimed to have received visions from God. Like Ellen White, Ann Lee called her visionary messages "testimonies". After Ann Lee's death in 1784, her followers continued to exalt her as the "woman Messiah". They claimed that the first advent of Christ was in the form of a male, therefore the second advent of Christ would have to be in the form of a female, to "maintain balance". In the second half of the 1830's, during the emerging Miller-movement, an epidemic of visions began to spread among young girls in the Shaker-community,

"Suddenly some of them began to shake and whirl. In the evening, after they had retired, the senses of three of the children appeared withdrawn from the scenes of time, and absorbed as in a trance. They began to sing, talk about angels, and describe a journey they were making, under spiritual guidance, to heavenly places. The next morning their behavior was normal; but the experience was repeated several times, and when older classes, and finally adult members of the family were affected, it became apparent that the gifts received by Ann Maria Goff and her Shaker sisters were not an isolated phenomenon. . . . An atmosphere of intense expectation was created throughout the whole society: within a few months of its generation, the current of excitement was felt in Canterbury, Enfield (N.H.), Hancock, and as far west as North Union - first, in most instances, by groups of Shaker girls in the impressionable stages of early adolescence. . . . Often they would be struck to the floor, where they lay as dead, or struggling in distress, until someone near lifted them up, when they would begin to speak with great clearness and composure." E.D. Andrews, A People Called Shakers (1963-edition), pp. 152-153. Emphasis supplied. Dover Publications, Inc., New York.)

This was in 1837-38, a few years before the Miller-movement began. Compare this with Ellen White's experiences during her first visions, where she fell to the floor, talked about angels and performed journeys, guided by angels, to heavenly places,

"And while Sister White was thus speaking, reaching a point in her remarks of most intense solemnity, instantly, and unexpectedly to all present, she was taken off in vision, and fell to the floor." (A.L. White, EGW, Vol. 2, p. 236. Emphasis supplied.)

"...a sudden light came upon me. Something that seemed to me like a ball of fire struck me right over the heart. My strength was taken away, and I fell to the floor. I seemed to be in the presence of the angels." (Life Sketches (1915-edition), p. 71. Emphasis supplied.)

"Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad. At length my soul seemed to be in an agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom" (EGW, letter to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847. Emphasis supplied).

"Then another time, there was Foy that had had visions. He had had four visions. He was in a large congregation, very large. He fell right to the floor. I do not know what they were doing in there, whether they were listening to preaching or not. But at any rate he fell to the floor. I do not know how long he was [down] - about three quarters of a hour, I think - and he had all these [visions] before I had them." (Manuscript Release #17, p. 95-96. Emphasis supplied.)

"Eld. Damman [Dammon]. The Spirit of the Lord rested upon him, and his strength was taken away, and he fell to the floor helpless" (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, p. 40. Emphasis supplied).

"I saw an angel flying swiftly to me. He quickly carried me from the earth to the Holy City." (Early Writings, p. 32. Emphasis supplied.)

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

"Suddenly her voice broke clear and musical, and we heard the ringing shout, 'Glory to God!' We all looked up, and saw that she was in vision." (Rene Noorbergen, Ellen G. White, Prophet of Destiny. p. 41. Emphasis supplied. Keats Publishing, Inc., 1972.)

It is quite obvious that the experiences of Ellen White during her early visions, often coincides with what the Shaker girls experienced during their trances. Both of them were struck to the floor, and began speaking with "clear, singing voice". Both described journeys to heaven, guided by angels.

In the Shaker-movement, young girls were struck to the floor during their trances, or visions. This is also common during modern Maria-apparitions, where young girls (why always young girls?) are being struck to the floor and taken into ecstasy.

Joanna Southcott

Like Ellen White, Joanna Southcott did not have a formal education. In 1792 she proclaimed herself as a prophet and published more than sixty tracts, containing her visions and revelations. She kept the seventh-day sabbath, and like Ellen White she experienced trances and proclaimed the soon returning of Jesus. Like Ellen White, Joanna Southcott made a profitable business with her printed visions and revelations.

Joseph Smith

The Mormon prophet Joseph Smith began to receive visions and revelations in 1820-23. About 1830 the Mormon Church was organized. Joseph Smith was shot in August, 1844, while in jail.

As previously mentioned, source material is now beginning to emerge, indicating that Ellen White may have borrowed material to most of her early visions from Joseph Smith. It is a remarkable fact that several of Smith's books show similarities with Ellen White's writings, but Joseph Smith wrote his books years before Ellen White had her first vision, which was in December, 1844. According to Smith, the Mormons are "the saints", and the other christian denominations are "gentiles". According to Ellen White, the Adventists are "the saints", and the other christian denominations are "Babylon".

In the 1840's, visions were popular in the United States, particularly among advocates of the "Shut Door". An afro-american and "Shut Door"-preacher by the name of Houston claimed that God at times spoke to him in visions. During the later part of the Miller-movement, there were so much fanaticism around, that Joshua V.Himes, who was one of the leaders in the Miller-movement, remarked that there was "mesmerism. seven feet deep". It was still worse in Portland, Maine, Ellen White's hometown. According to Himes, it was a "continual, visionary nonsense". In March, 1845, Himes informed William Miller that a Str. Clemons in Portland, Maine, had become "very visionary, and disgusted nearly all the good friends here." Just two weeks later he told that another young woman in Portland, Maine, had received a vision, declaring that Miss Clemons was of the devil. Himes concluded that "things are really bad in Portland" (Ronald Numbers, Prophetess of Health, pp. 16-1.

"Her hometown of Portland, Maine, had been notorious for the 'continual introduction of visionary nonsense' and nothing proved more spontaneous and boundless than charisma. In large camp-meeting crowds or in small meetings in houses or barns, the 'gift of prophecy' poured itself out plentifully. . . .Shouts from the 'slain' were heard everywhere as were sighs from swooners." (Ronald L. Numbers and Jonathan Butler (ed.), The Disappointed, pp. 202-203. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, 1993.

"There is no question that Ellen White claimed, and no doubt came to believe firmly, that she received visions and messages directly from God. Today one may wonder why Ellen White was so easily accepted by others as a prophetess. During that period of history, prophets and prophetesses were rather common both in England and America. At this time Joseph Smith was accepted as a prophet, and Mormon missionaries claimed that their church had "the spirit of prophecy." Mary Baker Eddy, also a contemporary of Ellen White's, became the founder and spiritual leader of the Christian Scientists. Billington has pointed out that between 1830 and 1850, "women preachers were popular. Visions and trances were easily accepted." (Molleurus Couperus, The Significance of Ellen White's Head Injury. Adventist Currents, June 1985. Emphasis supplied.)

Jemima Wilkinson, who in 1790 founded the "Jerusalem Community", became known because of her visions and religious dreams.

Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910), who founded Christian Science, was another visionary woman in the 1800's. Like Ellen White, she too showed interest in health topics, and her most famous book,Science and Health, has been translated into 16 languages and sold into more than ten million copies. The disciples of Mary Baker Eddy believe that her writings are inspired and inerrant. The second officer on the Titanic, Charles H. Lightoller, claimed that his faith in Christian Science saved him from the shipwreck in 1912.

William E. Foy

While still a teenager, Ellen Harmon had met two Millerites she both reckoned as prophets. The mulatto William E. Foy claimed to have received two visions from God in 1842, which he later published in a little book, The Christian Experience of William E. Foy (1845). Hazen Foss, who was brother-in-law to Ellen White's sister Mary, also claimed to have had visions.

In 1844, Ellen Harmon was present during a meeting where Wm. Foy was relating his visions. Some time after the disappointment on October 22, 1844, a meeting was being held east of Portland, Maine, at which Ellen Harmon related her first vision (which she received in December, 1844). She was not aware of the fact that William Foy was present until he arose and declared that this was exactly what he had seen in his own visions.

However, Ellen White had been listening to Foy relating his visions before she herself received similar visions,

"Then another time, there was Foy that had had visions. He had had four visions. He was in a large congregation, very large. He fell right to the floor. I do not know what they were doing in there, whether they were listening to preaching or not. But at any rate he fell to the floor. I do not know how long he was [down] -- about three quarters of a hour, I think -- and he had all these [visions] before I had them. They were written out and published, and it is queer that I cannot find them in any of my books. But we have moved so many times. He had four." (Manuscript Release #17, p. 95-96. Emphasis supplied.)

Here is an example of Foy's visions,

"Behind the angel I beheld countless millions of bright chariots. Each chariot had four wings like flaming fire and an angel followed after the chariot, and the wings of the angel cried as one voice saying 'holy'." (William Ellis Foy, The Christian Experience of William E. Foy (1845). p. 18.)

Ellen White,

"And as the chariot rolled upward, the wheels cried, 'Holy,' and the wings, as they moved, cried, 'Holy,' and the retinue of holy angels around the cloud cried, 'Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty!'" (Early Writings, p. 35.)

Here is another example,

"Those who eat of the fruit of this tree return to earth no more." (Foy, p. 14.)

Ellen White,

"Those who eat of the fruit of this land, go back to earth no more." (A Word to the Little Flock, p. 17. The Day Star, Jan. 24, 1846.)

Ellen White says that William Foy had his visions before she herself got them, and that she was familiar with his visions. It is therefore quite possible that she, in addition to having borrowed from Joseph Smith, also borrowed material from William E. Foy as basis for her first visions.

But why do Adventists claim that William Foy "said no" to God, and that the task was given to Hazen Foss, who also "said no", and that the task therefore was given to "the tender vessel", Ellen Harmon, who "said yes"? The plain fact is that William Foy did not say "no". He travelled around, relating his visions, and published them as a booklet in 1845. The Adventist claim that he "said no" to God, is no more than a myth.

The time for beginning the sabbath

The Seventh-day Adventists got their teachings on the seventh-day sabbath from Joseph Bates, who in 1846 had been publishing the tract The Seventh-Day Sabbath a Perpetual Sign. Joseph Bates also teached that the sabbath should be kept from six PM to six AM. Both Ellen White and a majority of other Adventists at that time adopted Bates' view on this point. A number of years later (1855), both she and other Adventists adopted the "sunset-principle", based on "revelation". In other words, it was a "progressive light" in regards to this matter.

This is strange, when one consider that people like the Seventh-Day Baptists both had the seventh-day sabbath and the sunset-principle established long before there were any Seventh-Day Adventist around. The first Seventh-Day Baptist church was established in Amerika in 1671!

Revised picture

Perhaps some will take offence of what they have been reading so far, and some ultra-conservative Adventists may probably regard the information on Israel Dammon as sheer blasphemy. However, I am not the originator of this information. It is well-documented history, but somewhat in variance with Ellen White's own glorified account. I am just the informant, and can in no way be responsible for how certain people will react when they learn the truth. Truth can be extremely hard to digest at times, and people who have lived for years under a myth, will have problems digesting truth at all!

After the disappointment in October, 1844, the Miller-movement ended in wild fanaticism for a number of people, and Ellen Harmon and James White mingled with such people. It was under those circumstances that the foundation was laid for her later career and her visions and revelations. James White did a good job in travelling around, promoting the young Ellen G. Harmon.

"Her hometown of Portland, Maine, had been notorious for the 'continual introduction of visionary nonsense. . . . In large camp-meeting crowds or in small meetings in houses or barns, the 'gift of prophecy' poured itself out plentifully. . . .Shouts from the 'slain' were heard everywhere as were sighs from swooners Ellen might have faded into this inchoate charismatic background and entirely disappeared had not James White married her, in August of 1846, and served not only as her husband and protector, but her promoter and publisher." (R.L. Numbers and J.M. Butler (ed.), The Disappointed, pp. 202-203. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, 1993.)

We feel confident that this is an exact statement. There were many visionary young women in the state of Maine at that time, also within Ellen Harmon's own circle, but all these young women are completely forgotten today. They did not have the advantage of being married to an excellent promoter and organizer like James White. No one knows today what visionaries within Ellen Harmon's circle, like Dorinda Baker, saw in their visions, but during the Israel Dammon trial, the witness Joel Doore stated that they believed that both Ellen Harmon's and Dorinda Baker's visions were from God.

It should be quite obvious that the picture of early adventism and Ellen White's visions the SDA-denomination has been promoting through its official writings, does not square up with the documented facts that have come to light in recent years. I doubt if current, conservative Adventists who are reared in the myth, would feel comfortable during house-meetings like those Ellen Harmon, James White, Israel Dammon and other "pioneers" took part in -- even if "the power of God" rested over such meetings. Maybe they would be forced to revise their view of the adventist prophet, if they saw her laying on the floor in the dimly lit room, amidst din and noise from living room and bed rooms, while she related her visions. I do not say that this was common practise all the time, and at all places, but that this was more common than we have believed. There are no written accounts of all house-meetings that took place at that time. But a number of leaders in the SDA-denomination have been acquainted with the documentation available through a number of years, and in spite of that, still perpetuate the myths.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:04 pm

by Å. Kaspersen

3 -Dubious visions

In 1875, Ellen White wrote about "a young man" who had appeared to her for 26 years in her "visions" and "dreams".

"The following night I dreamed that a young man of noble appearance came into the room where I was, immediately after I had been speaking. This same person has appeared before me in important dreams to instruct me from time to time during the past twenty-six years." (Signs of the Times, Nov. 11, 1875; Counsels on Health, p. 465. Emphasis supplied.)

This was probably her "accompanying angel" she quite often mentions in her writings. 26 years backwards from 1875 leads us to 1849, a time when Ellen White and other early Adventists still were involved in fanaticism and "Shut Door" errors. Who was this "young man" if he was real at all? There's no doubt that he sometimes showed her false visions, failed prophecies and messages which did not come to pass. If so, he was definitely not an angel from God.

Ellen White often refers to this "young man" as "my accompanying angel": "My accompanying angel bade me...", "I asked my accompanying angel", "said my accompanying angel..." "The angel of God pointed..." etc. (Early Writings, p. 45,77,243; Testimonies, vol 4, p. 306 etc.).

In the book Early Writings, Ellen White often refers to the "angel" who spoke to her, and it is quite strange that in one vision, this angel spoke to her in modern English (you, your, p. 20,40,77), while in other visions the same angel spoke to her in King James English (ye, thee, p. 50,52,62,64,66,73 etc.). And in one particular vision, the angel spoke to her both in modern English and King James English (you,ye, p. 64,119).

Ellen White says (Letter 56, 1911) that she often felt the presence of God's angels while she was in the progress of writing the book The Great Controversy. It is, however, an established and incontrovertible fact that very little material in this book is original with Ellen White. The book is to a large degree compiled ("plagiarized") from various sources. It is difficult to imagine holy angels from God surrounding Ellen White while she practiced her literary kleptomania and stole material from other authors without giving them credit, in order to publish it under her own name. Does God sanction such practice?

Who was this "young man", the "accompanying angel" who followed Ellen White through most of her life. It is quite possible that he was fictitious, an imaginary person who Ellen White "saw" during her trances.

Fragrance of roses

Nowhere does the Bible tell us that the prophets sensed the fragrance of flowers during their visions. Ellen White, however, experienced such phenomena from time to time during her "visions",

"At the home of Brother Hicks, where she was entertained, she was visited by an old lady who was violently opposed in her Christian life by her husband. This interview lasted an hour. After this, weary, weak, and perplexed, she thought to retire to her room and pray. Climbing the stairs, she knelt by the bed, and before the first word of petition had been offered she felt that the room was filled with the fragrance of roses. Looking up to see whence the fragrance came, she saw the room flooded with a soft, silvery light. Instantly her pain and weariness disappeared. The perplexity and discouragement of mind vanished, and hope and comfort and peace filled her heart. Then, losing all consciousness regarding her surroundings, she was shown in vision many things relating to the progress of the cause in different parts of the world, and the conditions which were helping or hindering the work." (Life Sketches (1915-edition), p. 310. Emphasis supplied.) This incident happened in 1890.

It is remarkable that such incidents, connected with lights and fragrance of roses, often occur within psychic phenomena and spiritism. Also during Maria-apparitions, those who are in trance often sense the fragrance of roses.

It has also been reported that patients suffering from certain epileptic disorders sense the fragrance of flowers during their seizures.

False visions

Ellen White has described several visions which thinking persons in no way can accept as genuine visions from God.

One of these visions was triggered after one of her literary assistants in Australia, Francis Eugenia Bolton ("Fannie") complained to Dr. Merritt G. Kellogg that she constantly wrote articles for Ellen White, which subsequently were published in the Review under the name of Ellen White as a "Thus saith the Lord".

"I want to tell you that I am greatly distressed over this matter for I feel that I am acting a deceptive part. The people are being deceived about the inspiration of what I write. I feel that it is a great wrong that any thing which I write should go out as under Sister White's name, as an article specially inspired of God. What I write should go out over my own signature then credit would be given where credit belongs." (Merritt G. Kellogg, A Statement (190.)

But when Ellen White learned that Fannie had discovered her working-methods, she became very angry and received a convenient "vision", according to what she told G.B. Starr,

"There appeared a chariot of gold and horses of silver above me, and Jesus, in royal majesty, was seated in the chariot.... Then there came the words rolling down over the clouds from the chariot from the lips of Jesus, 'Fannie Bolton is your adversary! Fanny Bolton is your adversary!' repeated three times." (EGW letter to Marian Davis, Oct. 29, 1895; Letter 102, 1895, p. 42.)

And she further told that,

"I had the same vision seven years ago, when my niece Mary McClough was on my writings."

Ellen White could not in any way bear that other people pointed their finger at her writings, suggesting that something was wrong. In such cases she did not shrink from swearing false in the name of the Lord, claiming "heavenly visions" as support for her dishonesty. These are strong words, but fully justifiable, according to the documentation available. It is a serious matter to make Jesus an accomplice in dishonesty.

Ellen White fired Fannie Bolton and sent her back to America.

Now what did the secretary do which made Jesus come down from heaven in a golden chariot pulled by silvery horses, shouting three times that Fannie Bolton was an enemy of EGW? She had simply aired her concern to Dr. Merritt Kellogg about Ellen's methods of working and plagiarism. At this time the book Desire of Ages was published (189, a book plagiarized almost in its entirety from other authors. No wonder that Arthur G. Daniells, the president of the General Conference from 1901 to 1922, remarked during the Bible Conference in 1919, that when he was in Australia and saw how Desire of Ages came into being, he almost lost his faith and had to change his views on a number of things. More on this conference later.

Do we as normal, sensible persons really believe that the above mentioned visions about golden chariots etc. were genuine visions from God? Is God a defender of unjustice, lies and dishonest methods? Of course not. This vision was simply a false vision triggered by Ellen White's state of mind against Fannie Bolton. This is not the way God works.

On one occasion Ellen White slapped Fannie bolton in her face because she had mentioned this plagiarism. Dr. John Harvey Kellogg tells,

"Fanny Bolton was with her at that time. A year or two later she returned to Battle Creek. She left Mrs. White who incorporated in one of her books something she had herself written and without giving her credit. She said Mrs. White was in the habit of doing this, coping from various other books, so that she and Mary Ann Davis had to go over the material and transpose sentences and change paragraphs and in otherwise endeavor to hide the piracy. She spoke to Mrs. White about it and objected to having her own manuscript used without credit. Mrs. White was very angry and slapped her face. She mentioned the circumstance to one of the preachers and was forthwith dismissed from Mrs. White's employ and came back to America." (J.H. Kellogg to E.S. Ballenger, Jan. 9, 1936. Emphasis supplied.)

The Chicago incident

In 1900, the last of Ellen White's Australian years, she sent out a false vision which later would prove an embarassment both to herself and others.

She had been reading an article in a newspaper which proved to be untrue. This article claimed that Dr. John Harvey Kellogg had been spending several thousand dollars to erect a poor peoples home in Chicago. Based on this sensational newspaper article, Ellen White had a "vision" in which a sheet of paper was presented to her, presumably by the "young man". She sent this "vision" and a testimony to Dr. Kellogg in America.

Eight years later (190, one year after Dr. J.H. Kellogg had been disfellowshipped from the Battle Creek Church, Dr. Merritt G. Kellogg (half-brother of John Harvey) wrote a statement about the Chicago-incident,

"She [Ellen White] then told me that whenever she asked Dr J. H. Kellogg to have the Sanitarium send her money he always replied that they could not because of their heavy indebtedness. This, said Mrs. White was not the truth, Dr Kellogg lied to me about this matter, for at the very time when I was pleading with him so hard for money he was spending thousands upon thousands of dollars of the Sanitariums earnings in building up and carrying on the work which he is doing in Chicago, for the unworthy poor, a work which God has never called him to do.

"To this I replied, "Sister White I am confident that you are laboring under a mistake in this matter, for the following reasons, 1st, the charter of the Battle Creek Sanitarium forbids the use of its earnings outside of the State. That Sanitarium has no state, county, or city tax to pay on the ground that it is a charitable institution whose charities are to be expended wholly within the state of Michigan. 2nd, I am informed that the money used by Dr J.H. Kellogg in carrying on that Chicago work, is taken wholly from means donated for that special work, and that it came very largely from people outside of the Seventh Day Adventist Denomination. The following morning Sister White told me that I was mistaken in my view of the matter we had been discussing. Said she, "I have the proof right here that Dr Kellogg lied to me when he said the Sanitarium could not send me money I asked for. I have the proof that at that very time he was spending thousands of dollars of Sanitarium money in Chicago. She then handed me a copy of a New York paper "The Observer" I think, in which there was an article which purported to give a flattering account of a work conducted by Dr J.H. Kellogg for the poor of Chicago, whose homes were in the slums of that City. The article represented Dr Kellogg as a great philanthropist, said that he had expended much of his own private means in that work, and many thousand dollars of the Battle Creek Sanitarium's money. It further stated that the B. C. Sanitarium intended to keep right on spending many thousand dollars every year in that work."

"After reading the article through I said, "Sister White you must not place much confidence in the statements contained in this paper, for it is quite evident that the writer of the article which you asked me to read is either a newspaper reporter who seeks to make a sensational article, or a person who has a scheme of his own which he seeks to promote by means of the article. I know Dr J. H. Kellogg too well to believe that he would knowingly allow any such flattering stuff to be published, about either himself or his work in Chicago. I do not think he ever saw, or knew anything about this article until after it was published, if he had known anything of it.

"To this Mrs. White replied with some warmth, "I know what I am talking about. That article was written by your brother's own man, the man who always travels with him to do his writing. Your brother knew all about that article before it was published for he directed the writing of it, and it was published by his order."

"I again endeavored to show Sister White that she held a mistaken view of the matter but she closed my mouth by declaring with much warmth that she was not mistaken, that she knew where of she was speaking. She then exclaimed, "your brother has been expending vast sums of money in the erection of buildings and in caring on a work in Chicago to which God has never called him. It was his duty, and the duty of the Battle Creek Sanitarium to help us in establishing a Sanitarium here in Australia. He has always plead poverty and indebtedness as an excuse for not helping us, yet he has spent thousands in his own work in Chicago. A work which God never required at his hand. He has become exalted like Nebuchadnezzar, and like Nebuchadnezzar he must be humbled." (M.G. Kellogg, A Statement (190. Emphasis supplied).

A few months later, Dr. M.G. Kellogg learned that his brother had received two letters from Ellen White, accusing him (J.H. Kellogg) of having been spening several thousand dollars in Chicago. In 1906, Meritt Kellogg went to W.C. White, who showed him these letters. In these "testimonies" Ellen White made the claim of having seen in a vision a large building in Chicago, and that a sheet of paper was held before her, on which was written, "Consumers not producers" and rows of figures showing how much money had been wasted. These "testimonies" had been written in Australia in 1900. Dr. J.H. Kellogg refused to accept them because they were not true.

"When W.C. White told me this in explanation of the testimony which accused Dr. Kellogg of having squandered the Lord's money in erecting large buildings. I asked him if he thought it was fair treatment to accuse Dr J.H.K. with apostasy and rebellion because he did not acknowledge as true a testimony which accused him of having done what he had not done nor even contemplated doing a testimony based on a dream or night vision which Mrs. White said she misunderstood. W.C. White refused to give me any reply to this question. I then said, Bro White, just put yourself in Dr H. H. Kelloggs place, how would you have felt? What would you have thought? What would you have said? How would you have acted? Had you received such a testimony and then been compelled to wait two years, for any kind of an explanation, and then to receive such an explanation as you give to Dr Stewart here in 1906.W.C. White could not answer these questions. . . . The third and chief thing which, in my opinion, contributed most to the persecution of Dr J.H. Kellogg and his final expulsion from the church, was the fact that Mrs. White had sent him, as a testimony from God a charge that was not true, in any particular, a charge that was based on a dream which came to her as a result of reading the newspaper article concerning his work in Chicago and as a result of having seen in some of our denominational papers, a cut of the rented building in which the work in Chicago was conducted. Having made a mistake which she could not satisfactory explain or correct she and others then made the mistake of trying to humble the Doctor and bring him to terms by seeking to destroy his influence, by proclaiming him a pantheist, a hypnotized and a dangerous person. Not satisfied with this they sought to cripple the Sanitarium in its work by an endeavor to prevent it from getting nurses to care for the patients, by circulating all manner of vilifying stories about the Doctor and his helpers." (M.G. Kellogg, A Statement (190. Emphasis supplied.)

This incident put Dr. J.H. Kellogg into great embarassment. He knew that Ellen White claimed heavenly visions for something that was not true. In 1903, she wrote a letter to the doctor,

"Repeatedly it has been shown me that in many cases you have worded upon minds to undermine confidence in the Testimonies. They must not be left to retain impressions that have been made on their minds, as, after receiving a Testimony of reproof from me, you have said, 'somebody has told her these things, but they are not so.

"Over and over again you have told others how I once sent you a testimony reproving you for erecting a large building in Chicago, before any such building had been erected there. In the visions of the night a view of a large building was presented to me. I thought that it had been erected, and wrote you immediately in regard to the matter. I learned afterward that the building which I saw had not been put up.

"When you received my letter, you were perplexed, and you said, 'Someone has misinformed Sister White regarding our work.' But no mortal man had ever written to me or told me that this building had been put up. It was presented to me in vision. If this view had not been given me, and if I had not written to you about the matter, an effort would have been made to erect such a building in Chicago, a place in which the Lord has said that we are not to put up large buildings. At the time when the vision was given, influences were working for the erection of such a building. The message was received in time to prevent the development of the plans and the carrying out of the project.

"You should have had discernment to see that the Lord worked in this matter. The very feature of the message that perplexed you should have been received as an evidence that my information came from a higher source than human lips. But instead, you have over and over again related your version of the matter, saying that some one must have told me a falsehood." (EGW to J.H. Kellogg, Oct. 28, 1903. Emphasis supplied.)

We are to note that Ellen White admitted having had visions in which she was shown that Dr. Kellogg had erected a large building in Chicago, and that a sheet of paper was presented to her, showing how much money had been spent. There is good reason to believe that it was "the young man", "my accompanying angel" who showed her these figures which were not true.

Merritt Kellogg told Ellen White that she must have misunderstood, after having read an article in a newspaper while she was in Australia. This newspaper article was the source of Ellen White's "vision". She became angry and told M.G. Kellogg that she "knew what she was talking about". She bore false witness against another person - Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, in his absence, while his brother was listening to.

It took her two years to figure out how to "save" herself from the blunder. The 1903 letter to Dr. Kellogg is an attempt in that direction.

At this time Ellen White accused Dr. Kellogg for having "rejected" the Testimonies. However, in 1899, one year before she "saw" the Chicago-building, she stated that he had not rejected the Testimonies (see the paragraph on Dr. Kellogg later in this chapter). The truth was simply that Dr. Kellogg could not accept the "Testimony" regarding the Chicago-building because he knew that it was not true. This triggered Ellen White's ire, as always when somebody would not accept her messages, and she accused Dr. Kellogg of being an apostate who did not "believe the Testimonies".

Ellen White emphazised that she got her information directly from heaven, and not from any mortal man. This was not true. It was the false newspaper-article from 1900 which was the source for her false vision.

She never apologized to Dr. Kellogg for having lied on him and having put him into an embarassing situation.

In 1906, Dr. Kellogg wrote a letter to G.I. Butler,

"Six weeks before the General Conference of 1901 I had a frank talk with Eld. Daniells, W. C. White and with Sister White herself, with relation to the things she had written me. I told her plainly that the things she had written me were not the truth; that she had been misinformed; and I asked her to furnish me evidence of the truth of some of the things she had written. I have never retracted one word of what I said to her, and I can not, because I said nothing but the truth. I did not accuse her of misrepresentation, but that she had based her statements on wrong information. She said to me, "You have taken money from the Sanitarium to erect buildings in Chicago to harbor the unworthy poor." I asked her to show me the buildings. What would you say my friend, if a charge of that sort were brought against you?" (J.H. Kellogg to G.I. Butler, March 16, 1906. Emphasis supplied.)

Because Dr. Kellogg would not accept this vision and testimony as genuine, and rightly so, he was accused by the prophet of "rejecting the Testimonies". It is quite serious that EGW never apologized to other people for the embarassing situations she led them into by accusing them for having done things they were not guilty of. In this case she makes God an accuser of the brethren. It is a serious matter indeed to accuse other people for things they were not guilty of, but it is far more serious sending out a false accusation as a "vision from God", pretending it to be a "thus saith the Lord!"

The Salamanca vision

On November 3, 1890, Ellen White allegedly received a vision during her stay at Salamanca, New York. Because this vision apparently was fulfilled in a striking manner, it is often referred to as "proof" of her prophetic gift. However, a closer investigation of the circumstances around the vision and the alleged "fulfillment", throws serious doubts on Ellen White's honesty.

In short, she allegedly received a vision on November 3, 1890, which she was unable to recall. Four months later (March 8, 1891), she claimed that she was awakened by an angel in the midst of the night (the "young man"?) who instructed her to write down the vision she had received four months previous, but which she could not recall.

On the previous evening, March 7, 1890, the General Conference had been holding an important meeting behind closed doors. The matter in question was the magazine The American Sentinel, a forerunner of today's Liberty Magazine. Some people had been claiming that The American Sentinel should downplay its name and the sabbath in order to gain influence among politicians and other leading people in the United States.

Early in the morning, at 5:30 AM the following day (March , a few hours after Ellen White allegedly had been awakened by the angel and instructed to write down the vision she had received four months earlier, the General Conference was going to hold a preacher's meeting. Shortly after O.A.Olsen, the President of the GC, had opened the meeting, Ellen White entered the room, accompanied by her youngest son Willie. She then read the manuscript she had written down according to the instructions the angel had given her during the night. She told the congregation that she had been receiving a vision four months earlier in Salamanca, about what was going to happen during the meeting the night before, and that a hard and unchristian attitude was being manifested during this meeting.

When Ellen White was finished reading her manuscript, Albion F. Ballenger was the first man to arise to his feet and confess that they had been following a wrong course during the meeting. Other people gave similar confessions. This was being considered a direct intervention by God to prevent a mistake in regard to The American Sentinel, and a mighty proof for Ellen White's prophetic gift. After all, she had seen in a vision four months earlier what in fact did happen during the meeting the night before, but was instructed to write down the vision a few hours before the morning meeting, and read it before the preachers.

An analysis of this vision and the circumstances around it, could be read in Adventist Currents, September 1986, in an article by Douglas Hackleman. The conclusion is inevitable: Ellen White both lied and behaved as deceiver with the "Salamanca-vision".

Ellen White's diary from this time shows up with misdated entries, and matters of a later date which clearly had been put into previous entries to create the impression that the later matter was of an earlier origin. The matter in the diary which had been misdated 21. November 1891, gives no reason whatsoever to the claim that this was a "revelation" from God, and that it depicted a meeting to be held four months later. She had misdated four paragraphs in her diary to create the impression that she knew about things before she actually learned about them. She was in the habit of putting things of a later date into earlier matter in her diary. Douglas Hackleman says,

"The appearance of evil is then strong. The evidently false dating of these is a serious business that should become the basis for a more extensive study of White Estate manuscripts to ascertain the extent of this practice." (Douglas Hackleman, Adventist Currents, Sept. 1986.)

In her diary, under November 4, 1890 -- the day after the "vision" -- she wrote that she was very frustrated because she was not able to recall the vision, or to write down what she had been shown. But in a letter to W.P. Burke (October 1891), she writes about this experience, and that she "immidiately began to write it down" in her diary. However, no one is able to find this today - at least not with clear reference to Salamanca.

Ellen White makes it very plain that no one had told her anything before she wrote down the vision from 1890 during the night on March 8, 1891. Recalling this experience, she says,

"The circumstances were such that on this occasion the excuse could not possibly be used, 'SOMEONE HAS TOLD HER.' No one had an opportunity to see me or speak with me between the evening meeting [March 7] and the morning meeting that I attended [March 8]." (EGW Diary, May 20, 1905. Quoted in Adventist Currents, Sept. 1986. Emphasis supplied.

Because Ellen White during the morning-meeting could describe what had taken place during the evening-meeting the night before, the question arises: From where, or from whom did she get her information? There are just two possibilities: Either the information came from the vision four months earlier, which she was instructed to write down a few hours before the morning-meeting, or somebody had told her. She makes it plain, however, that no one had any opportunity to inform her, because "No one had an opportunity to see me or speak with me between the evening meeting and the morning meeting that I attended".

"The angel" awoke her sometime between 01:00 and 04:00 AM. Edna K. Steele, who slept in the room adjacent to Ellen White's room, recalled that Ellen told her secretary, Sara McEnterfeer, about five in the morning, that she had no intentions to be present at the morning-meeting, and that she (Sara) just could sleep on. Obviously Ellen did not wish her secretary to be present at that particular time for some reason.

Ellen White's statement that no one had had any opportunity to talk with her between the evening-meeting and the morning-meeting, does not square up with the statement in the bookLife Sketches of Ellen G. White (1915) about the same incident,

"Sunday morning, about 5:20, Brethren A. T. Robinson, W. C. White, and Ellery Robinson were passing Mrs. White's residence on their way to the early meeting. They saw a light in her room, and her son ran up to inquire about her health. He found her busily engaged in writing. She then told him that an angel of God had wakened her about three o'clock, and had bidden her go to the ministers' meeting and relate some things shown her at Salamanca. She said that she arose quickly, and had been writing for about two hours." (Life Sketches (1915-edition), p. 315.)

It becomes therefore plain that Ellen White contradicts herself in this respect. Her son William Clarence ("Willie") was with his mother early in the morning and accompanied her to the meeting.

The documentation shows that Willie was with his mother before the morning-meeting, and had ample opportunity to talk with her and give her information on what had been going on at the evening-meeting the night before, which he had attended. This is in contradiction with Ellen White's letter from 1905, where she strongly rejects any claims that somebody could have informed her because, as she said, no one had any opportunity to talk with her between the two meetings.

The circumstances regarding this "Salamanca-vision" are so full of contradictory statements, inaccuracies, undated and misdated entries in Ellen White's diary, and also later matter inserted in earlier matter in the diary, that her own version of the entire story has to be taken with a big pinch of salt. The Ellen White defenders are catching at straws when they use the "Salamanca-vision" as proof that she "saw" things in advance which later were exactly "fulfilled".

When Douglas Hackleman wrote to Arthur White in 1982 requesting a copy of Ellen White's hand-written diary for the period November 3, 1890 to March 8, 1891 (the period for the "Salamanca-vision" and the later meetings in the General Conference), he never received a reply from Arthur White. However, he discovered that his request had created some activity in the White Estate. Later in the year Mr. Hackleman went to Washington, D.C., and visited the White Estate in order to get an opportunity to see this diary. He had, however, called the Estate in advance, to inquire. During this call, the Estate informed him that the diary possibly was not there when he arrived. They informed him that somebody would do research in connection with the diary, and had loaned it. Mr. Hackleman pointed out that that would not be in harmony with the Estate's policy. The original manuscripts would never be removed from the vaults -- just copies. However, Mr. Hackleman took his chance and went to the White Estate. When he arrived, they informed him that he would not get permission to see the diary. He expressed his astonishment and told them that all who asked if there was anything in the vaults they would not be allowed to see, had been informed that church members could just come in and see everything they wanted -- including the so-called "Z-file", containing sensitive material.

Obviously, the prince of the vaults did not have clean hands in regards to this particular diary -- and possibly other things in the vaults. However, the person who in reality did not have clean hands, was Ellen White herself, the author of the diary.

The information on the Salamanca-vision has been taken from Adventist Currents, September 1986.

Charles Lee

In his book Three Important Questions for Seventh-Day Adventists to Consider (1876), Charles Lee recalls an experience he had with Ellen White. The editor of the Swedish edition of Advent Herald, Mr. C. Carlstedt, had become seriously ill. Charles Lee, James and Ellen White, and two other persons went on a visit to Br. Carlstedt,

"We all knelt in prayer for the sick man; and Mrs. W. praised the Lord because he was "present with his restoring power, to raise Carlstedt, whose sickness," she said, was "not unto death, but to the glory of the Son of God. . . .

"On our way back Mrs. W. said to me that the Lord was there with his restoring power, and she was confident that he would be restored to health again. I told her I did not realize it, and that it was darkness to me. She did not speak to me again that evening. As I parted from them, I went direct to Chicago, to continue my meetings. A few days after I came to Chicago, Mrs. W. sent me a written testimony; and in that she says she knew that I was under the influence of devils. The next day I received a dispatch that Mr. C. was dead. I read and re-read the testimony, and said to myself, "If she could see 3 years ago that Satan should take possession of my soul and body because I would not give myself entirely up to be led by her and her husband,why could she not see that Mr. C. would die a few days before he did, as her attention was called directly to his case? And if she saw my then pitiable condition so long before, why did she not warn me before Satan got me entirely under his influence?

"The brethren at B.C. wrote me to come right back to the Office. I did so. When there, Mr. J. Sawyer set me to work, and I thought he was authorized to do so. Then Eld. W. came, and, in a very harsh manner asked me, "Who has set you to work here? Do you intend to come here and run the whole business?" etc. I told him who had set me to work, but then he went out. This led to what he called "laboring meetings." When he could not gain his object he turned to his wife and said, "Mrs. White, what did you see in regard to Bro. Lee's case?" She answered, "I saw that we should have to meet Spiritualism in Bro. Lee," or, "I saw that if he does not yield his independent will to be led by the leading brethren, Satan will take possession of his soul." "There, that's it," he said. "If Bro. Lee does not accept the testimony, he is beyond our reach."

"Her testimony was considered above the word of God. I did not know before that Mrs. W. held such a position in the Advent church. It really astonished me. She said things that I never thought a human being would say. She said, "You, foreigners, must be moulded by us for eternity. . . . A few days before we were married, Mrs. W. sent for my wife (then Miss Deedon) to come and see her. She then told her that I was "the most deceived person in the world," and warned her against me. . . . A few weeks from this, the testimony of Mrs. W. came out against me in print,and I was looked upon as a doomed man." (Charles Lee, 1876. Emphasis supplied.)

Here we encounter the same spirit again: If anyone would gainsay Ellen White, that person would later receive a stinging "testimony from heaven", in which he/she would be accused of being agents of Satan, led by the devil, etc. This happened time and again.

Later, Charles Lee learned from Br. P. Hanson that Ellen White had instructed him (Hanson) to warn the Swedish brethren against Lee, who continues his story,

"Bro. Hanson was very friendly to me before he came under Mrs. W.'s influence. The day before I started to Chicago in the fall of 1874, he felt so interested in me that he came 3 miles purposely to relate a dream to me that he had dreamt the night before, which he declared God had given him for my good. He dreamt that I went to meet Miss Deedon, now my wife, and then he saw that we got into a great trouble. But we came out of the troubles at last. About that time a short woman, dressed in black reform dress, came to him and took him by the hand and led him off. She appeared to him as an angel of light. But soon he heard a voice calling to him, saying, "Beware of whom you are lead." At the same time the woman's hand turned cold as a piece of ice in his hand, and she appeared to him as a dark demon. This is the substance of the dream he told me.

"Bro. And Sr. Ericson felt very bad to hear such news about us. They did not know what to believe. It was hard for them to believe that I was led by Satan, for Sr. Ericson had been raised up from a severe illness twice by our prayer. Once while we were in B.C. We kept quiet and appealed to God to convince them of the truth. They also sought God for light in regard to us. The second morning at the family worship they were more free with us. At the breakfast table,

"Bro. E. related a dream to us, that he had had during the night. He said he saw a great multitude of people looking for Christ to come. In the midst of the mass was Mrs. White. -- He had never seen her, but described her perfectly. All at once it became very dark upon the earth. He looked about him, and found but a small company in comparison with the great mass he first saw. In anxiety he cried out, "Where are they all gone?" A voice answered him, "They are all lost with Mrs. White." At that he awoke terrified." (Charles Lee, 1876.)

Moses Hull

In 1862 the Adventist pioneer Moses Hull was in the progress of losing his faith in Adventism. Ellen White wrote him a testimony,

"If you proceed in the way you have started, misery and woe are before you. God's hand will arrest you in a manner that will not suit you. His wrath will not slumber." (Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 430-431.)

This never happened. He "proceeded the way he had started", but lived to a ripe old age without having experienced any of these threatenings. We may ask, what kind of God does Ellen White present here? Just because Moses Hull was losing his faith in Adventism, Gods wrath "would not slumber". Is our Heavenly Father a revengeful God? He does not force anybody. Ellen White did not present the God of the Bible to Moses Hull. Hundreds of thousands of adventists have lost their faith in Adventism without being struck by God's wrath and Ellen White's threatenings.

Sign-up periods

In 1888 Ellen White wrote the following testimony,

"The Sanitarium at Battle Creek has been built up under a pressure of difficulties. There have had to be decisive measures taken, contracts signed by those who were engaged as helpers that they would remain a certain number of years. This has been a positive necessity. After help has been secured, and by considerable painstaking efforts these have become efficient workers, wealthy patients have held out inducements of better wages to secure them as nurses for their own special benefit, at their own homes. And these helpers have often left the Sanitarium and gone with them, without taking into consideration the labor that had been put forth to qualify them as efficient workers. This had not been the case in merely one or two instances, but in many cases. Then people have come as patrons from other institutions, that are not conducted on religious principles, and in a most artful manner have led away the help by promising to give them higher wages." (Loyalty to Our Institutions, in "Health, Philantropic, and Medical Missionary Work, pp. 30-33. Emphasis supplied.)

And in 1893 she wrote the same,

"Before persons are admitted to our mission training schools, let there be a written agreement that after receiving their education they will give themselves to the work for a specified time. This is the only way that our missions can be made what they should be." (1893 GC Daily Bulletin, pp. 162-163. Emphasis supplied.)

But in 1903 she wrote something different,

"No man or woman is to bind himself or herself to serve for a certain number of years under the control of a medical association. This is not God's plan, but a plan of human devising. Human beings belong to the Lord, body, soul, and spirit, and they are to be guided and controlled by him. He has bought us. We are under obligation to be laborers together with him.No one should bind himself to serve for a certain number of years in any institution. I know that some have thought it advisable for the workers in our sanitariums to sign certain contracts. But I know also that it is not in accordance with God's plan for the workers to sign these contracts." (Testimony to Daniells, Prescott and W.C. White, Aug. 3, 1903. Spalding/Magan Collection, p. 307. Emphasis supplied.)

"Yesterday I sent you the letter containing the warning that has been given again and again: The workers in our sanitariums are not to sign contracts binding themselves to an association or an institution for a certain number of years. They are to be bound, not to men, but to God." Testimony to A.G. Daniells, Aug. 4, 1903. Emphasis supplied.

To make the confusion total, the original testimony from 1888, in which she reccomended the workers to bind themselves to the health institution a certain number of years, was published again in 1905.

In 1888 and 1893 it was God's will that people should bind themselves to the institutions a certain number of years.

In 1903 this was not God's will.

In 1905 it was God's will.


No wonder that Dr. Stewart wrote the following,

"Later the managers were severely criticized for doing what the testimony of 1903 above quoted advised." (Dr. Charles Stewart to EGW, 1907.)

Quite incomprehensible!

Dr. Kellogg

In 1899 Ellen White wrote this testimony,

"I know that when admonition and warnings have been given, Dr. Kellogg has not despised these warnings and set then aside. . . . God approves of his work in this line, let the brethren appreciate this work." (Testimony, Feb. 21, 1899. Quoted in Stewart's letter. Emphasis supplied.)

In 1902, she wrote this about Dr. Kellogg,

"I was instructed. . . I have a message for you to bear to Dr. Kellogg, I thought, It will do no good. He does not accept the messages that I bear to him unless these harmonize with his plans and devisings." (Testimony, Aug. 5, 1902. Quoted in Stewart's letter. Emphasis supplied.)

Three months later, in November the same year, she wrote,

"You tell me that you do not believe the messages I send you, but I know that this is not true." (Testimony to Dr. Kellogg, Nov. 12, 1902. Quoted in Stewart's letter. Emphasis supplied.

And in 1905 she wrote,

"When Dr. Kellogg receives the messages of warning given during the past twenty years: . . . then we may have confidence that he is seeking the light." (EGW, Tacoma Park, Wash., May 30, 1905. Emphasis supplied.)

Then we are left with this strange situation,

In 1899 Dr. Kellogg had not rejected the messages. God approved his work. He believed the Testimonies.

In 1902 Dr. Kellogg had not accepted the warnings. He did not believe the Testimonies.

Three months later, Dr. Kellogg stated that he did not believe, but EGW claimed that he did.

In 1905, Dr. Kellogg, according to Ellen White, had not accepted the warnings the last twenty years. Twenty years backwards from 1905 leads us to 1885, fourteen years before he, according to Ellen White's claims, believed the Testimonies. But in fact she approves of his work before 1899! The "twenty years" must be taken with a big pinch of salt.

In her letter to Ellen White, Dr. Charles E. Stewart writes,

"During the spring of 1901 when you stated before a large audience in the College library that God was in the medical missionary work and that he called Dr. Kellogg "My servant" and appointed him as "His physician," you also at this very time (April, 1901) recommended that Dr. Kellogg be ordained to the ministry, and in a testimony to Dr. S, dated October 12, 1901, stated as follows: ". . . God says of Dr. Kellogg, 'He is my physician.' Respect him and sustain him."

"During this period Dr. Kellogg was preparing the "Living Temple," the teachings of which you, two years later, claimed the Lord showed you would "sweep away the whole gospel economy."

"Is it possible that the Lord would so fully endorse a man and his work as you claim that the Lord did that of Dr. Kellogg, when he was engaged in preparing a work that would tend to undermine the principles of the Christian religion?" (Dr. Charles Stewart, A response to an Urgent Testimony, 1907. Emphasis supplied.)

Dr. Stewart never received a reply to his letter. More on this in chapter 7, "A letter from A.T. Jones." On the book "The Living Temple", see chapter 5. All this gives us some reflections with regards to the "pantheistic crisis". This strenghtens the suspicion that the whole affair was a foul play, supported by EGW -- who contradicts herself -- to get rid of the good doctor.

Masturbation

In 1864 Ellen White published a little book, entitled Appeal to Mothers. The purpose of this book was to warn the world against the unimaginable sufferings and diseases of the worst kind caused by "secret vice", or masturbation. She claimed to have seen this in visions,

"The state of our world was presented before me, and my attention was especially called to the youth of our time. Everywhere I looked, I saw imbecility, dwarfed forms, crippled limbs, misshapen heads, and deformity of every description. Sins and crimes, and the violation of nature's laws, were shown me as the causes of this accumulation of human woe and suffering."(An Appeal to Mothers, p. 17. Emphasis supplied.)

"Many sink into an early grave, while others have sufficient force of constitution to pass this ordeal. If the practice is continued from the ages of fifteen and upward, nature will protest against the abuse she has suffered, and continues to suffer, and will make them pay the penalty for the transgression of her laws, especially from the ages of thirty to forty-five, by numerous pains in the system, and various diseases, such as affection of the liver and lungs, neuralgia, rheumatism, affection of the spine, diseased kidneys, and cancerous humors." (Ibid, p. 18.)

"A Mr. - professed to be a devoted follower of Christ. He was in very feeble health. Our feelings of sympathy were called out in his behalf. He could not hold his head steady. His eyes had a glassy appearance, his hands trembled, and when he walked, his knees shook; he staggered like a drunken man, and often seemed ready to fall. He was obliged to fix his eyes upon an object in the distance before him, and then make for that object. He would thus gain force enough to reach the place he desired.

"His case was shown me in vision. I saw that he was deceived in regard to himself, that he was not in favor with God. He had practiced self-abuse until he was a mere wreck of humanity." (Ibid, pp. 24-25. Emphasis supplied.) This sound like a case of Parkinsonism.

"Females possess less vital force than the other sex, and are deprived very much of the bracing, invigorating air, by their in-doors life. The results of self-abuse in them is seen in various diseases, such as catarrh, dropsy, headache, loss of memory and sight, great weakness in the back and loins, affections of the spine, the head often decays inwardly. Cancerous humor, which would lay dormant in the system their life-time, is inflamed, and commences its eating, destructive work. The mind is often utterly ruined, and insanity takes place." (Ibid, p. 27. Emphasis supplied.)

These were terrible things indeed, but Ellen White was "shown" in several "visions" that this was the case. Most probably, it was "the young man" who showed her all this.

When James White somewhat later (1870) edited this material into the book A Solemn Appeal, he removed Ellen's words about having seen all this in visions.

The book A Solemn Appeal, published by James White in 1870, continues with still worse descriptions, gathered from various sources,

"There is hardly an end to these diseases" (diseases caused by this vice). She enumerates "dyspepsia, spinal complaint, headache, epilepsy, impaired eyesight, palpitation of the heart, pain in the side, bleeding at the lungs, spasms of the heart and lungs, diabetes, or incontinence of urine, fluor albus, or whites, inflammation of the urinary organs." Dr. Deslandes, besides many of these, instances rheumatism, affected perspiration, consumption, asthma, catarrh, polypus of the heart, affection of the bones, fevers, priapism strangury, polypus uteri, blood discharges, &c., &c." (A Solemn Appeal, p. 12. Emphasis supplied).

"A boy, about four years old, was afflicted with weakness and stiffness of limbs. (The exact symptoms the writer has not learned.) His parents at length carried him to a distant physician. The physician, after sufficient inquiry, told them that the child "handled bimself too much." They returned, doubting what this could mean. Suggesting the matter to some of their neighbors, their eyes were opened. "Well, said they, "we will stop that." And they did stop it, by bandaging the genitals. And lo! the child soon stopped being feeble and lame. He is now a healthy boy" (ibid, p. 12. Emphasis supplied).

"In the fall of 1844, the writer visited the Massachusetts State Lunatic Hospital. While being conducted through the various apartments; mingling promiscuously with the insane, our attention was suddenly arrested by the peculiarly haggard, frantic, wild, and fiendish appearance of a young man, turning from us with his eye turned back over his shoulder. Struck with his shocking aspect, we inquired of our attendant, a young physician, what was the cause of his insanitv. "Solitary vice, " was the ready reply. . . . it destroys the strength, and finally produces, in the patients, stupidity, phthisis, marasmus, and death" (ibid, p. 19. Emphasis supplied).

These last statements from A Solemn Appeal are not by EGW, but her statements in Appeal to Mothers, reflect the same ideas. Ellen White did really believe this herself. Even lung-tuberculosis was being caused by masturbation! Is there someone who can imagine why these two books vanished into darkness and never were reprinted by the SDA-denomination?

"Solitary vice is killing thousands and tens of thousands." (Testimonies, vol. 4, p. 97. Emphasis supplied.)

It is a fact that health-reformers in the first half of the 1800's believed that masturbation was the real cause of these terrible sufferings. Ellen White's "visions" on health reform from this time were strongly colored by strange myths and popular superstitions, but were published as "the Spirit of Prophecy".

In 1758, Samuel Tissott wrote (Treatise on the Diseases Produced by Onanism), that masturbation caused acne, rheumatism, mental derangement an hemorrhoids. Sylvester Graham (Lectures to Young Men (1834)), carried these ideas further. Graham wrote that the person who masturbates, grows up ". . .with a body full of disease, and with a mind in ruins, the loathsome habit still tyrannizing over him, with the inexorable imperiousness of a fiend of darkness." (Sylvester Graham, Lecture to Young Men (1834.). According to Graham, masturbation also caused fistulas, etc.,

"...ulcerous sores, in some cases, break out upon the head, breast, back and thighs; and these sometimes enlarge into permanent fistulas, of a cancerous character, and continue, perhaps for years, to discharge great quantities of foetid, loathsome pus; and not unfrequently terminate in death." (Ibid.)

Ellen White had access to all these writings, from which she liberally borrowed material for her own writings on health issues -- all the time while she claimed "heavenly visions" as the source. The descriptions of the terrible diseases caused by "secret vice", were even more elaborated in Ellen White's "health writings" from that time. However, every knowledgeable and thinking person will understand that this material did not come from "heavenly visions" -- despite EGW's claims to the contrary. The 1800's was flourishing with myths and superstitions of this kind, and Ellen White was being colored by these popular ideas. But because books like Appeal to Mothersand A Solemn Appeal carry the name on Ellen White on them, the strange ideas suddenly became "The Spirit of Prophecy", a "thus saith the Lord!"

Other strange health counsels

"By lacing, the internal organs of women are crowded out of their positions. There is scarcely a woman that is thoroughly healthy. The majority of women have numerous ailments. . . .Some women have naturally small waists. But rather than regard such forms as beautiful, they should be viewed as defective. These wasp waists may have been transmitted to them from their mothers, as the result of their indulgence in the sinful practice of tight-lacing, and in consequence of imperfect breathing." (The Health Reformer, Nov. 1871. Emphasis supplied.)

A woman equipped with a natural, narrow waist is then, according to Ellen White, to be regarded as "defective". At that time, people believed that aquired traits would be inherited from parents to their offspring. This forerunner of darwinism (lamarckism) explained, for example, that the giraffe got his long neck because he constantly stretched it still higher to be able to reach the leafs in the tree-tops. In this way, the neck growed still longer, and the offspring inherited the longer neck. People -- including Ellen White -- believed these superstitions, but that was a time prior to the discovery of the genetic material, DNA. Will someone claim that a son of a father who has lost his left hand in an accident, will be born without a left hand? At that time people seem to have believed such nonsense, and Ellen White was colored by such ideas. But when the ideas came under the name of Ellen White, they suddenly became a "thus saith the Lord!"

No one would argue that it is an unhealthy habit to lace the waists the way it was being done, but the idea that these laced waists could be transmitted to the daughters, is sheer superstition -- this is lamarckism from a bygone era.

Here comes another example of stray genetics, this time regarding the terrible consequences of letting children be nursed by strangers,

"A stranger performs the duties of the mother, and gives from her breast the food to sustain life. Nor is this all. She also imparts her temper and her temperament to the nursing child. The child's life is linked to hers. If the hireling is a coarse type of woman, passionate, and unreasonable; if she is not careful in her morals, the nursling will be, in all probability, of the same, or a similar type. The same coarse quality of blood, coursing in the veins of the hireling nurse, is in that of the child." (The Health Reformer, Sept. 1871. Emphasis supplied.)

According to this theory, one should expect that children being nursed on cow-milk would end up as grass-eaters, dairy-workers and cattle-breeders!

Not just stray genetics was published under the name of Ellen G. White. Also stray lungs carried her stamp of approval,

"At the hotel 'Dieu,' the great hospital at Paris, a young girl of eighteen lately presented herself to Breschet for his advice. On the right side of her throat, she had a tumor of variable size, but never larger than one's fist. It reached from the collar-bone as high as the thyroid cartilage. When pressed downward, it wholly disappeared; but as soon as the pressure was removed, it was indolent, soft, and elastic. It was observed to be largest when the chest was tightly laced with corsets. In short, by placing the ear on it, the murmur of respiration could be heard in the tumor which proves that a protrusion of the lungs had taken place, or, in other words, that the poor girl had been laced so tightly that her lungs, having no longer sufficient space in their natural position, were squeezed out of it, and were forcing their way up along the neck." (The Health Reformer, Dec. 1871. Emphasis supplied.)

There is no more to say about that. These health-related articles under the name of Ellen White, published as "the Spirit of Prophecy", vanished quite soon into the land of darkness, and for good reason.

"Many have lost their reason, and become hopelessly insane, by following this deforming fashion. Yet the slaves to fashion will continue to thus dress their heads, and suffer horrible disease and premature death, rather than be out of fashion." (The Health Reformer, Oct. 1871. Emphasis supplied.)

All these statements from The Health Reformer, which was the denomination's health magazine at that time, reflect popular superstitions and myths not medical facts. These articles under the name of Ellen White show clearly that she was being colored by her own time, but some people would make such statements into a "thus saith the Lord" because they carry the name of Ellen G. White. It should be quite obvious that all these articles had been borrowed from other health-reformers. A number of this material in The Health Reformer had been enclosed within quotation marks, to show that the material was being quoted from other authors. However, they all appeared under the name of Ellen G. White.

Swine's flesh and leprosy

In the book How to Live (copied from other authors and published as "the Spirit of Prophecy" in 1865), Ellen White says,

"The eating of pork has produced scrofula, leprosy and cancerous humors." (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4a, p. 146. Emphasis supplied.)

It is quite strange that the SDA-denomination still puts statements like that into their current books, or rather compilations, by EGW -- like Counsels to Diet and Foods (p. 393). Swine neither get leprosy nor transmit this disease to man. Leading authorities on animal diseases confirm that.

No more children to be born after 1885

In 1885 Ellen White received a testimony with "special light from heaven" to the effect that the time had come, it was now (1885) that no more children should be born. God would have very little to do with children born after that time, she claimed. This testimony was written to pastor Isaac D. Van Horn and his wife Adelia,

"This is the burden of the message, that in accordance with our faith we are required to make any and every sacrifice for the truth's sake; that at this time, when amid the trials of the last days, it was not in accordance with our faith or God's will, that our missionaries should fill their hands with cares and burdens which were not essential to the work... The message we have to bear requires much self-sacrifice, and if the workers make no change in their habits and in their practices, then worldlings in general, they are not letting their works correspond with their faith. I was shown that Brother and Sister Van Horn had departed from God's counsel in bringing into the world children. God required all there was of them in his work, and both could have done a good work for the Master, but the enemy came in, and his counsel was followed, and the cause of God was robbed of the attention it should have had... They were doing a work which was bringing upon them cares and burdens and retarding the work that God had given them to do. God will say to them, "Who required this at your hands?" ...

"When I learned that you were to soon have an increase in your family, I knew that you were not doing the will of God, but following your own inclination - to please yourselves. I have special light in regard to these things; but hardly know how to present it. The missionaries had better set the people an example in these things that correspond with our faith... I am distressed as I see the state of things among our workers. Brother and Sister Enoch professed gave themselves to the missionary work... How much better would have been their influence if they had not married, but both devoted their interests in God's cause, and after they were married, how much better for them if they had thoughtfully considered the situation, and decided that God should have all the power he had given them in the work of saving precious souls. Brother Cudney could have done a very good work for the Master, had he devoted himself to this work as the Lord's servant. When married, his work has not been more than one half what it might have been. Then he must bring a child into the world, and now he can do one-third what he might have done had he studied how he could but serve God who called him to be a soldier of the cross of Christ. If our workers were walking close to God, they see the situation,and would feel that it was no matter of rejoicing to bring a child into the world. A blessing is pronounced upon the eunuchs who keep the Sabbath (Isa. 65:3-5). . . .The time is and has been for years, that the bringing of children into the world is more an occasion of grief than joy. . . .Satan controls these children, and the Lord has but little to do with them. . . .The time has come when, in one sense, they that have wives be as though they have none. God wants us to be consistent people, our works corresponding to our faith ... I am thoroughly disgusted with the course of our preachers and workers." (Testimony DF 97 B, Feb. 15, 1885, Manuscript 34, 1885. Emphasis supplied.)

One would have to ask: What kind of God does EGW present in this testimony? At least not the God of the Bible, who said, "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." Matt 19:14.

This testimony had been given different archive numbers in the Estate, so that people, when asking, could be refused by a "sorry, there is no letter or manuscript with such and such number here". The letter was brought to light by Sherman A. Nagel in 1934, in his book God's Love, the Remnant Church. Obviously, Nagel ran into problems because he had published this embarassing testimony from "the Spirit of Prophecy".

"It was shown me", "I have special light on this", Ellen White claimed -- and she was "shown" in 1885, 114 years ago, that the time had come for married workers and preachers not to produce more children. Was it "the young man" who showed her this?

Can you imagine why this testimony would get different archive numbers in the vaults?

One does not know whether to weep or smile over the fruits this testimony produced. During the camp-meeting in Portland, Oregon the same year (1885), workers and preachers were summoned to a special adult's meeting where no children were allowed. Str. White would make it plain thatno more children were to be born. The workers, missionaries and preachers were to set an example before the rest of the congregations. But when sabbath came, two or three preachers entered the platform, with tears on their cheeks, confessing before the congregation that they had sinned against God and slept with their wives. They pleaded the people to pray for them, so they could be true to the testimony. But next sabbath they entered the platform again and confessed before their respective congregations that they had sinned again and slept with their wives!

This testimony and its fruits caused such consternation that a group of women -- preacher's wives -- marched against Str. White and demanded an explanation.

After all, it was a testimony from "the Spirit of Prophecy", a "special light from heaven" to the effect that the time was NOW (1885) for no more children to be born among adventists, and those who would not accept this, sinned against God.

Obviously the testimony did not apply to EGW's own son Willie. He had two children with his first wife, Mary Kelsey, and got five children with his second wife, Ethel May Lacey, whom he married in Australia in 1895, ten years after his mother had been declaring as "special light from heaven" that no more children were to be born. All in all, he had seven children. Their twins were born while he was working in Australia (1891-1900), several years after his mother wrote out her testimony. According to his mother, God would have very little to do with the children both he himself and other workers produced after that time.

It should be plain enough that we, who are reading this "testimony" 114 years after "the time had come" for no more children to be born, that this "special light" was more than dubious. Simply stated, it was a false testimony. In addition one would have to ask some questions about persons who would send out testimonies of this sort in the name of God.

Early Writings

The book Early Writings was published in 1882, with an "explanatory" preface,

"Footnotes giving dates and explanations, and an appendix giving two very interesting dreams, which were mentioned but not related in the original work, will add to the value of this edi


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:06 pm

by Å. Kaspersen

4 -The Shut Door

For seven years Ellen White, her husband, and several other adventist pioneers, believed that the door of mercy had been shut on October 22, 1844, and that there was no more mercy to obtain for the world and for sinners after that date. Ellen White claimed to have received visions confirming that.

This was the so-called "Shut Door". For seven years the early adventists worked solely within their own circle, which they called "the Little Flock", or "The Remnant". There is no documentation showing that these early adventists worked for outsiders. They thought it was useless, because the door of mercy had been shut to them.

About 1848 quite a few adventists had abandoned the "Shut Door" theory, but James and Ellen held on, mainly because of her "visions" and the theories of Joseph Bates, who had written in a tract that seven years of mediation in The Most Holy in heaven would pass for "The Little Flock", from October 1844 to October 1851. But the door of mercy had been shut for the world during this period.

About 1850 the "Shut Door" started creaking, and James and Ellen White made a small opening to let some outsiders in - mainly the pioneer's own children who had been born after 1844, and then some outsiders who wanted to join "the Little Flock". Finally, about 1851, James and Ellen swung the "Shut Door" wide open to the world in general. At length they had discovered that something was wrong with their "Shut Door" theory.

But the episode had created quite a problem, not least to Ellen White, whose "visions" had confirmed the heresy. What were they going to do now? Her revelations about the "Shut Door", had been put on print in publications like The Day Star, the broadside To The Remnant Scattered Abroad, A Word to the Little Flock and Present Truth. Should these visions now be denied?

These early writings made the basis for later publications, and an easy solution would be editing - removing - all statements with reference to the "Shut Door". By no means would they be allowed to appear in books like Christian Experience and Views and Early Writings, books mostly made up from material from these early publications which were replete with references to the "Shut Door". To preserve the image of the emerging prophetess, this embarassing matter ought to be forgotten as soon as possible. By this time it had dawned for the early adventists - James and Ellen White inclusive - that the "Shut Door" theory was a gross error. But what about Ellen's visions, which confirmed the error? If her early visions were from God, then later visions were also from God, but if her early visions were not from God, neither her later visions were from God. Obviously, they were caught in the horns of a dilemma.

Ellen White would not step back and say, "I was wrong. These visions did not tell the truth". People would then say, "So? Then the visions were not from God. You are a false prophet". Such retreat would of course be honorable, but damaging for her credibility as a prophet.

The simplest solution would be to remove all spurious statements from her visions an let the whole episode disappear quietly into a secluded grave.

We are going to check out a few testimonials from early adventists regarding the "Shut Door".

"We have done our work in warning sinners and in trying to awake a formal church. God in his providence has shut the door; we can only stir up one another to be patient" (William Miller inAdvent Herald, Dec. 11, 1844). Miller did, however, not hold to this theory for long.

In December 1844, Ellen Harmon received her first vision, which, among other things, supported the theory on the "Shut Door". However, this vision was not published until January 1846. Here Ellen Harmon describes the narrow path they (the Advent people) walked on on their way to the heavenly city. The ungodly, however, shared another fate,

"The light behind them went out leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they stumbled and got their eyes off the mark and lost sight of Jesus, and fell off the path down in the dark and wicked world below. It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected." (A Word to the Little Flock (1847), p. 14. Emphasis supplied. Compare Early Writings, p. 15, where the sentence ". . .It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected, had been removed).

This was her first vision. Later Ellen White was having still more "visions" which confirmed her first vision.

One early Adventist who witnessed such "visions" in his home, was John Megquier,

"We well know the course of Ellen G. White, the visionist, while in the State of Maine. About the first visions that she had were at my house in Poland. She said God had told her in vision that the door of mercy had closed, and there was no more chance for the world, and she would tell who had got spots on their garments; and those spots were got on by questioning her visions, whether they were of the Lord or not. Then she would tell them what to do, or what duty to perform, to get into favor with God again. Then God would show her, through a vision, who was lost, and who was saved in different parts of the State, according as they received or rejected her visions. She could put herself under their influence, just the same as any mesmeric person would." (John Megquier, quoted in Miles Grant, An Examination of Mrs. Ellen G. White's Visions (1877. Emphasis supplied.)

This is completely out of harmony with Scripture. Nowhere does the Bible say that people would be saved or lost on account of their belief in Ellen White's "visions". This is utter nonsense.

Lucinda Burdick knew Ellen White well. At several occasions she held Ellen's head in her lap while she was in vision. Later in her life, Lucinda Burdick wrote her testimony in two different publications.

"I became acquainted with James White and Ellen Harmon (now Mrs. White) early in 1845. . . .Ellen was having what was called visions: said God had shown her in vision that Jesus Christ arose on the tenth day of the seventh moth, 1844, and shut the door of mercy; had left forever the mediatorial throne; the whole world was doomed and lost, and there never could be another sinner saved. (The True Sabbath, p. 72. Emphasis supplied.)

"Ellen was having what was called visions: said God had shown her in vision that Jesus Christ arose on the tenth day of the seventh moth, 1844, and shut the door of mercy; had left forever the mediatorial throne; the whole world was doomed and lost, and there never could be another sinner saved. . . . If these visions which she now has are of God, the first were; and if the first were of God, the door of mercy was close din 1844, and woe to the poor sinners this side of there. We know that God does not lie; and some of them did lie, to my certain knowledge. God does not contradict himself, and her visions have contradicted each other. I have been told that they deny on this coast that she ever saw the door of mercy closed; but there are thousands of living witnesses who know that a blacker lie could not be invented, and I am one of the number." (Lucinda Burdick in Isaac Wellcome's book, The World Crisis, 1874. Emphasis supplied.

In 1908 she repeated her testimony, this time confirmed by the Notary Public.

"I first heard of Miss Ellen G. Harmon (afterwards Mrs. Ellen G. White) In the early winter (Jan. or Feb.) of 1845 when my uncle Josiah Little came to my father's house and reported that he had seen one Ellen Harmon in the act of having visions which she claimed were given her of God. He said that she declares that God revealed to her that the door of mercy was closed for ever, and that there was henceforth no salvation for sinners.

"This caused me great uneasiness and anguish of mind for I had not been baptized and my youthful heart was much disturbed as to my salvation if the door of mercy was really closed. During the year 1845 I met Miss Ellen G. Harmon several times at my uncle's house in South Windham, Me. The first of these meetings was in the month of May, when I heard her declare that God had revealed to her that Jesus Christ would return to this earth in June, the next month. During the haying season. I again met her in company with James White at the same place, and heard my uncle ask her about the failure of the Lord to appear in June, according to her visions, she replied that she had been told in the language of Canaan which she did not understand but that she had since come to understand that Christ would return in September, at the second growth of grass instead of the first.

"During the autumn of 1845 I was again visiting at my uncle's Josiah Little, South Windham, Me. One Saturday night in October a party of six came to my uncle's house for entertainment over Sunday; among them James White and Ellen G. Harmon. That night I roomed in company with Miss Mary E. Bodge and Miss Harmon. Ellen talked much about her visions and I expressed an earnest desire to see her have one. The next morning (Sunday) in the presence of myself and others, Miss Bodge reproved James White for travelling about with Ellen Harmon and charged him with bringing reproach and scandal upon the cause of Christ by persisting in such a course. He defended his course by claiming it his duty to carry her about that she might declare her visions. He angrily resented Miss Bodge's reproof, and disclaimed any intentions of marrying 'that little deform thing' which were his exact words as he pointed to her sitting in a chair. . . .

"Some time after the close of this afternoon service, Mary E. Bodge, Ellen G. Harmon and I went to a near by grove for a season of prayers, while I was engaged in prayer, suddenly, Ellen Harmon became rigidly prostrate upon the ground, Miss Bodge immediately sent for James White who she said, was the only one that could talk with her while in one of these spells. He and many others hurried to the spot and he immediately began to ask her a great variety of questions. . . .

"During this trance condition I heard Ellen G. Harmon declare that Jesus Christ had risen from the mercy seat and entered the Holy of Holies in Heaven, and that the door of mercy was shut forever and that the world was helplessly doomed. She also declared that the devil had taken possession of the mercy seat and was deceiving the people who were praying for the Holy Spirit, by casting upon them certain exhilarating influences which they mistook for the Spirit's power. These utterances she repeated several times.

"This trance condition lasted more than an hour and some one suggesting that the gathering dew would cause them to take cold, White said, 'I guess it will be the will of the Lord to bring her out', and immediately she arose and assumed her normal behavior." (Lucinda Burdick, Sept. 26, 1908. Emphasis supplied.)

Otis Nichols believed in Ellen White's visions, and he personally witnessed several of them,

"Her message. . .encouraged them to hold on to the faith, and the seventh month movement; andthat our work was done for the nominal church and the world, and what remained to be done was for the household of faith. (Otis Nichols to William Miller, April 20, 1846, DF 105. (Taken from A.L. White, The Early Years, Volume 1, pp. 75-76. Emphasis supplied.)

Gilbert Cranmer was another early Adventist who made the same claim,

"The "shut-door" doctrine formed a part of the doctrine of the church; that is, Mrs. White had seen in a vision that the day of salvation for sinners was past, and those that fully believed in her visions as coming from God, also accepted that doctrine." (Gilbert Cranmer, 1854. Quoted in R. Coulter, The Story of the Church of God, pp. 12-13. Emphasis supplied.

Owen R.L. Crosier, who was the originator of the Adventist sanctuary teaching, confirms this,

"I kept the seventh day nearly a year, about 1848. In 1846, I explained the idea of the sanctuary in an article in an extra double number of the Day Star, Cincinnati, O. The object of that article was to support the theory that the door of mercy was shut, a theory which I and nearly all Adventists who had adopted William Miller's views, held from 1844 to 1848. Yes, I know that Ellen G. Harmon now Mrs. White - held the shut door theory at that time. Truly yours, O.R.L. Crosier." (Owen R. L. Crosier to D. M. Canright, Des. 1, 1887. Emphasis supplied.)

Israel Dammon says,

"We were formerly acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. White, and for a time had confidence in her visions, but for a good many years have had none at all. When we saw that they conflicted one with another, we renounced them altogether, and betook ourselves to the word of the Lord.

"It has been some twenty years or more since we were associated with Mrs. W.; but we remember very perfectly that her first visions or vision was told both by herself and others (especially by Mrs. W.) in connection with the preaching of the "shut door," and went to substantiate the same. While under that influence, and preaching the visions, she, in vision, saw N.G. Reed and I. Damman, in the kingdom in an immortal state, and crowned. After that, she saw them finally lost. How could both be true? I think one was just as true as the other, and that God never told her any such thing." (Israel Damman, quoted in Miles Grant, An Examination of Mrs. Ellen White's Visions (1877). Emphasis supplied.)

Pastor Isaac C. Wellcome tells,

"I have heard her relate her visions of these dates. Several were published on sheets to the effect that all were lost who did not endorse the '44 move, that Christ had left the throne of mercy, and all were sealed that ever would be, and no others could repent. She and James taught this one or two years." (Quoted in Adventist Currents, Vol. 3, No. 1, April 1988. Emphasis supplied.)

In fact, James and Ellen White taught this, not for "one or two years", but for seven years, from 1844-1851.

In 1980 a letter which Ellen White wrote to Joseph Bates in 1847, was "discovered". Parts of this letter has previously been released by the White Estate, but the rest of it had been kept secret for obvious reasons. The whole meeting which Ellen White describes in her letter, has a strong savor of fanaticism.

"While in Exeter, Maine in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others, many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand. There was one sister there that was called very spiritual. She had traveled and been a powerful preacher the most of the time for twenty years. She had been truly a mother in Israel. But a division had risen in the band on the shut door. She had great sympathy, and could not believe the door was shut. (I had known nothing of their differences.) Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad. At length my soul seemed to be in an agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom. They were all deeply interested in the view. They all said it was entirely new to them. The Lord worked in mighty power setting the truth home to their hearts. Sister Durben knew what the power of the Lord was, for she had felt it many times; and a short time after I fell she was struck down, and fell to the floor, crying to God to have mercy on her. When I came out of vision, my ears were saluted with Sister Durben's singing and shouting with a loud voice. Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door." (EGW to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847. Emphasis supplied.)

This is a revealing letter indeed. Here Ellen White plainly says that she received a "vision" to confirm the people who were present at this particular meeting, including Israel Dammon, in a heresy - that the door of mercy had been shut on October 22, 1844. Was this a vision from God? Perhaps someone will say, "Ellen White misunderstood the vision, and conveyed this misunderstanding to the others who were present. What she in reality saw, was that Jesus arose from the throne of mercy and went into the Most Holy. For that reason, she believed that the door of mercy had been shut". Apart from the fact that the Bible nowhere says that Jesus went into the Most Holy in 1844, she clearly says that the purpose of the vision, was to confirm "the Shut Door", and accordingly, lead people into a heresy. These are not the fruits of a genuine, heavenly vision from God. The "revised" vision one will find in Early Writings, where these early visions are "edited". The fact that these visions are "revised" (eg. parts of them are deleted), casts a strange light over them. Genuine visions from God are in no need of "revision" and deletions. The very fact that they have been "revised", should tell every knowledgeable person that something was wrong with these visions in the first place. If she simply "misunderstood", then there was nothing wrong with the vision, as such, and it should not be revised. Who has the right to delete portions of a vision from God? The plain fact is that there was no "misunderstanding" at all. It eventually dawned, both to James and Ellen, that portions of her early visions was not in harmony with the Bible. For that reason, they "revised" these visions and deleted the offensive parts from them. Since the visions contained heresies, they were of course not genuine.

Ellen White wrote similar statements in other letters,

"I saw that Brother Stowell of Paris was wavering upon the shut door. I felt that I must visit them. Although it was fifty miles off and very bad going I believed God would strengthen me to perform the journey. We went and found they needed strengthening. There had not been a meeting in the place for above two years. We spent one week with them. Our meetings were very interesting. They were hungry for present truth. We had free, powerful meetings with them. God gave me two visions while there, much to the comfort and strength of the brethren and sisters.Brother Stowell was established in the shut door and all the present truth he had doubted." (EGW to Br. and Str. Hastings, March 24-30, 1849. Letter 5, 1849. Emphasis supplied.)

Here too, two years after she wrote her letter to Joseph Bates, Ellen White had "visions" to confirm the "Shut Door".

Ellen White's articles in The Present Truth from the years 1849-1850, are full of references to the "Shut Door". The following is an example, where she in fact places this teaching as a central part of the Advent message,

"There I was shown that the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated. . . . My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners as used to be. I looked, but could not see it; for the time for their salvation is past." (The Present Truth, August 1849. Emphasis supplied.)

In 1847 James White published a pamphlet, entitled A Word to the Little Flock. In this pamphlet we will find some of Ellen White's earliest visions - unedited.. In one of these visions she saw the advent people on a narrow path, on their way to heaven. Some fell off the path, and she says,

"It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected." (A Word to the Little Flock, p. 14. Emphasis supplied.)

This last sentence was cleverly removed when this vision was republished in Early Writings(1882).

The so-called "Camden vision" from 1851, is replete with "Shut Door"-ideas. In addition, Ellen White "saw" how we should "love" our neighbours,

"Then I saw that Jesus prayed for his enemies; but that should not cause US or lead US to pray for the wicked world, whom God had rejected - when he prayed for his enemies, there was hope for them, and they could be benefitted and saved by his prayers, and also after he was a mediator in the outer apartment for the whole world; but now his spirit and sympathy were withdrawn from the world; and our sympathy must be with Jesus, and must be withdrawn from the ungodly. I saw that God loved his people - and, in answer to prayers, would send rain upon the just and unjust - I saw that now, in this time, that he watered the earth and caused the sun to shine for the saints and wicked by our prayers, by our Father sending rain upon the unjust, while he sent it upon the just. I saw that the wicked could not be benefitted by our prayers now - and although he sent it upon the unjust, yet their day was coming. . . .Then I saw concerning loving our neighbors. I saw that scripture did not mean the wicked whom god had rejected that we must love, but he meant our neighbors in the household, and did not extend beyond the household; yet I saw that we should not do the wicked around us any injustice; - but,our neighbors whom we were to love, were those who loved god and were serving him." (The Camden Vision, June 29, 1851. Emphasis supplied.)

It becomes very obvious why this vision is being reckoned as dubious by persons who want to bury some less flattering parts of adventist history. But the "Camden vision" is in full harmony with other early visions by Ellen White which definitely are from her.

In June 1865, some fourteen years after the "Shut Door" had been opened, there was a private meeting, where James White, his wife Ellen, and B.F. Snook were present. "The Camden vision" was the subject under discussion. James and Ellen White admitted that the vision was genuine, but tried to explain it away by claiming that it only had "limited application". In the winter the same year, they claimed that the vision was only "partially genuine", and in 1867, they claimed that it was "not genuine". (H.E. Carver, The Claims of Mrs. E.G. White). This was the usual procedure, which had to do with editing away all previous statements about "the Shut Door".

The White Estate claims that the "Camden vision" is dubious, but both J.N. Andrews and Uriah Smith claimed it to be genuine. At least it is in full harmony with what both Ellen White and other pioneers believed at that time.

October 1851

In 1850, Joseph Bates published a tract, entitled The Typical and Anti-typical Sanctuary, in which he claimed that the atonement of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary would last seven full years, from October 1844 to October 1851, and that it would culminate with his second coming. He claimed that the last seven months of this atonement was the gathering of the saints.

Because both James and Ellen White had great confidence in Joseph Bates' knowledge, and needed his influence, they accepted without hesitation his theories. This is clearly being reflected in Ellen White's visions betweeen 1850 and 1851.

In September 1850, one year before Bates' seven years would end, Ellen White had a vision, which clearly reflects her belief in the theories of Joseph Bates,

"Some are looking too far off for the coming of the Lord. Time has continued a few years longer than they expected; therefore they think it may continue a few years more. . . .I saw that the time for Jesus to be in the most holy place was nearly finished and that time can last but a very little longer." (Early Writings, p. 58. Emphasis supplied.)

Because they believed that Jesus went into the Most Holy in October, 1844, six years had passed when she received this vision. It therefore remained one year of the seven years. This was in accordance with the theories of Joseph Bates, which were published a few months before she received this vision. What she "saw", was not a revelation from heaven, but what she had learned from Joseph Bates. Some insight into the hidden parts of early Adventist history, explain the true meaning of these, and other similar statements from the same years in the book Early Writings.

In another vision from 1850 (June 27), she was a little bit more specific,

"In a view given June 27, 1850, my accompanying angel said, 'Time is almost finished'. . . .But now time is almost finished, and what we have been years learning, they will have to learn in a few months." (Early Writings, pp. 64-67. Emphasis supplied.)

It is quite obvious that Ellen White had been deceived by Joseph Bates' erroneous theories to the effect that "time was finished" in October 1851, and that she received "visions" to confirm these erroneous theories.

At this time - about 1849 - while they still were involved in the "Shut Door" theories, James began publishing a paper which he called The Present Truth, in which he and other Adventist pioneers advocated, among other things, these errors.

"About the same time he began to publish a small sheet entitled, The Present Truth. . . .always before preparing them for the post office, we spread them before the Lord, and with earnest prayers mingled with tears, entreated that His blessing might attend the silent messengers." (Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 88.)

Later, when the "Shut Door" had been opened, it became necessary that these Present Truthpapers from 1849-1850 they had been praying for, and the pamphlet A Word to the Little Flockfrom 1847, be buried and forgotten as soon as possible, because they had been teaching gross errors. A few months before the ending of Bates' seven years, in October 1851, it dawned to James and Ellen White that the theories they had been advocating had been wrong, and must be buried. But this is not what Ellen says in her testimony, quoted above.

In September 1851 they published a small book, entitled Christian Experience and Views. James and Ellen White had taken material from A Word to the Little Flock and The Present Truth, without mentioning with a single word from where they had been copying the material. InChristian Experience, all references to the "Shut Door" and other dubious things had been edited away.

The pamphlet A Word to the Little Flock, and The Present Truth from 1849-1850, not to mentionThe Day Star and the 1846 broadside To The Remnant Scattered Abroad, had been buried so well that not even Uriah Smith knew of their existence until 28 years later. A Word to the Little Flockcame to his attention in 1868, 19 years after it had been written. These writings had been kept secret, that only few of the leading brethren knew about them, and the rest of the church had never heard of them at all. It was important to keep them secret because they contained heresy, supported by Ellen White's visions.

Early Writings

The book Early Writings was published in 1882 by the Review and Herald. The president of the General Conference, George I. Butler, wrote the following in the Review,

"The enemies of this cause, who have spared no pains to break down the faith of our people in the testimonies of God's Spirit and the interest felt in the writings of Sister White, have made all the capital possible from the fact that her early writings were not attainable. They have said many things about our 'suppressing' these writings, as if we were ashamed of them.

"Some have striven to make it appear that there was something objectionable about them, that we feared would come to the light of day, and that we carefully kept them in the background. These lying insinuations have answered their purpose in deceiving some unwary souls. They now appear in their real character, by the publication of several thousand copies of this 'suppressed' book, which our enemies pretended we were very anxious to conceal. They have claimed to be very anxious to obtain these writings to show their supposed error. They now have the opportunity." (G.I. Butler, Advent Review, Des. 26, 1882.)

Shortly after Early Writings had been published, A.C. Long published a tract, entitledComparison of the Early Writings of Mrs. White with Later Publications. Says Long,

"From the above quotations we gather the following points: First, these 'Early Writings' of Mrs. White were published under her eye and with her full approval. Second, they contain ALL her early visions. Third, those who have claimed that certain portions of her early visions were 'suppressed' are liars, since they are now all republished." (A.C. Long. Emphasis supplied.)

We are going to see that in this case, both Butler and Long are the ones who are the liars - probably because they did not know.

Already in the first vision, as related in Early Writings, four lines after 33 lines had been removed. After 72 lines, 22 lines had been removed, and a little further down two lines had been removed, an still further down, eight lines, and then nine lines had been removed. Most of the material which had been removed, had to do with the "Shut Door", but also other, dubious things. The original, unedited vision was printed in The Day Star, January 24, 1846, the broadside To The Remnant Scattered Abroad (April 6, 1846), and A Word to the Little Flock (1847).

The "Camden vision" has been completely omitted from Early Writings. This entire vision was replete with "Shut Door" ideas, and editing away that material would be next to impossible. It would be almost nothing left!

A vision which was related in Present Truth (August 1849), has been inserted in Early Writings, but eight lines, which had to do with the "Shut Door", had been removed.

In Present Truth, November 1850, three columns were devoted to another of Ellen White's visions. Two columns from this vision were omitted from Early Writings.

The statements from G.I. Butler and A.C. Long to the effect that Early Writings contained all the early visions, and that nothing had been removed, are clearly erroneous. Everyone who has A Word to the Little Flock and the Present Truth from 1849-50 can check this out for himself by comparing them with Early Writings. But how many SDA's have heard about this writings, not to say, have read them?

Ellen White denies

In 1874, and later, Ellen White denied having had visions about the "Shut Door",

"Dear Brother Loughborough hereby testify in the fear of God that the charges of Miles Grant, of Mrs. Burdick, and others published in the Crisis are not true. The statements in reference to my course in forty-four are false. With my brethren and sisters, after the time passed in forty-four I did believe no more sinners would be converted. But I never had a vision that no more sinners would be converted. And am clear and free to state no one has ever heard me say or has read from my pen statements which will justify them in the charges they have made against me upon this point" (Letter 2, 1874. Emphasis added).

She does not tell the truth in this statement. In A Word to the Little Flock and Present Truth, she had stated exactly what she now denied - and these early statements were based on "visions",

"There I was shown that the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated. . . . My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners as used to be. I looked, but could not see it; for the time for their salvation is past." (The Present Truth, August 1849. Emphasis supplied.)

Please note that she says that sinners could no longer be saved. Ellen White does not tell the truth in her statement from 1874, and she takes heaven as witness to that.

"It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected." (A Word to the Little Flock (1847), p. 14. Emphasis supplied.

This was her first vision, as related in A Word to the Little Flock from 1847 and earlier publications. Why did she remove the sentence about God having rejected the wicked world from her vision when she put it into Early Writings in 1882? Why did she remove all objectionable sentences about the "Shut Door" etc. from her early visions when this material were being put into later books? Some will say, "We cannot find something about this". No, but go to the original writings from 1846-1850, and you will find it there. Why remove all this material from "heavenly visions" if she had clean hands? A genuine vision from God is not to be manipulated that way. When God gives visions, the prophet is duty-bound to relate the vision so plainly that none are being led into heresies because the prophet had "misunderstood the vision", making it necessary to "edit" the vision.

"And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it" (Hab. 2:2).

In addition, Ellen White has a number of witnesses against her. All of them are saying the same thing, and probably several others who were not asked. On account of the mouth of two or three witnesses, a case shall be established,

"One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established" (Deut. 19:15).

The "Shut Door" became an embarassing matter for James and Ellen White and the early Advent movement. To save Ellen's reputation, it became a necessity to brew up a way of escape, and "editing" the visions, was for them the the best solution.

L.L. Howard tells,

"I was at Geo. Barker's house, in Norridgewock, Me., in 1869, when I asked Mrs. Ellen White, in the presence of several ministers, if she ever had a vision showing that the door of mercy was closed? She answered, 'I never did.' Soon after, Elder C. Stratton came into the room and asked the same question, and received the same answer. I affirm this to be true" (L.L. Howard, Boston, Sept. 28, 1874).

We are to note that Ellen White would never come up with a public denial against the charges the witnesses aimed at her, only private denials, in private letters. Consequently, the credibility goes in favor of the witnesses.

It is honorable when a person admits having made an error, after being shown what is truth. Ellen White never did that. She was squeezed into a corner, because an admission would have put heavy strain upon the credibility of her visions. She never admitted that the visions about the "Shut Door" were false, and even vehemently denied having had such visions. In stead, she allowed her husband and others to "edit" her early visions and remove all objectionable "I saw"-statements regarding the "Shut Door". Her position as God's true prophet among Seventh-Day Adventists was to be preserved at any cost.

In reality the idea about the "Shut Door" did not originate with Ellen White. She only received "visions" to confirm what she already was familiar with. In December 1844, Joseph Turner and Apollos Hale published a tract, trying to explain the "great disappointment" in October the same year, and in January, 1845, they published a pamphlet, entitled The Advent Mirror, where they proclaimed that "the door was shut", and that there was "no more mercy for the world". It is not possible that Turner and Hale could get this idea from Ellen White. She received her first vision in December 1844, but it was not published until February, 1846, in The Day Star Extra. Turner and Hale published their Advent Mirror in January, 1845, only a month after Ellen White's first vision. Joseph Turner was a friend of the White family. He was also a leader of fanaticism, and at one occasion, in April 1845, he was in fact arrested in the home of John Megquier.

In her letter to Joseph Bates (July 13, 1847), Ellen White says,

"I know not what time J. Turner got out his paper. I knew he had one out and one was in the house, but I knew not what was in it, for I did not read a word in it. . . . Very early next morning J. T. called, said he was in haste going out of the city in a short time, and wanted I should tell him all that God had shown me in vision. It was with fear and trembling I told him all. After I had got through he said he had told out the same last evening. I was rejoiced, for I expected he was coming out against me. . ." (EGW to Joseph Bates, July 13, 1847. Emphasis supplied.)

From this revealing letter, we are to note the following,

1. Ellen White admits that she knew of Turner's pamphlet, and that they had it in their home.2. She denied having read it.3. Joseph Turner did not knew of Ellen White's vision, so he called for her in order to ask about the vision.4. After having heard Ellen White relate her vision, he told her that he did say exactly the same the evening before.5. Ellen White rejoiced when she learned that Joseph Turner believed the same as she did.

As we have seen, the rest of the letter describes a meeting, where several people were attending. Some of them did not believe in the "Shut Door". Then Ellen White recieves a vision, confirming them into this theory, and most of the doubters "accepted the vision and were confirmed in the belief in the Shut Door".

Ellen White's denial of having read Turner's pamphlet is of no consequence in this connection. The "Shut Door"-doctrine was gross heresy, and Ellen's vision, confirming into it those who doubted this heresy, was certainly not from God. Joseph Turner had proclaimed the "Shut Door" prior to Ellen White. Because Ellen White did not receive this vision from God, she must have gotten the ideas from someone else. Possibly she had read Turners Advent Mirror after all, or she may have heard someone in the house relate its contents. She admitted having Turner's pamphlet in the house. It has been claimed that the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith in reality was the first to proclaim the "Shut Door" doctrine, and that the millerittes shut the door in 1844.

In 1883 Ellen White tried to "explain" the "Shut Door" blunder in 1844-1851,

"For a time after the disappointment in 1844, I did hold, in common with the advent body, that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world. This position was taken before my first vision was given me. It was the light given me of God that corrected our error, and enabled us to see the true position." (Selected Messages, vol 1, p. 63. Emphasis supplied.)

Once more, Ellen White is being caught in a lie. We have seen that it was the very first vision that led Ellen White and other early adventists into the "Shut Door" heresy. It is simply not true that the first vision "corrected" the error, as she claims. It was this very vision that brought them into the error! The documentation on this is very clear, but one will have to go to the original writings to see this, and not the edited books.

We have also seen that several other, and later, visions confirmed the "Shut Door". The letter to Joseph Bates tells about one such vision, and a letter to Br. and Str. Hastings tells about two such visions. In addition there were some visions related in The Present Truth from the years 1849-1850. We have already mentioned this. All these subsequent visions, after the first vision, were calculated to confirm doubting persons into the "Shut Door" heresy. It is absolutely clear that Ellen White does not tell the truth in her statement from 1883. The "Shut Door" visions had become an embarassing matter to Ellen White, and in order to save her credibility, she did not recoil from telling untruths. However, this only weakens her credibility still more.

If we are to accept her statement from 1883, then another question arises: If the first vision from December 1844 "corrected" the "Shut Door" error, as she claims, then why did Ellen White and the other early adventists continue to cling to the "Shut Door" for seven years after the first vision, which allegedly "corrected" the error? This is well worth considering. In this matter, is is absolutely clear that Ellen White contradicts herself and the documented facts, and does not tell the truth.

Later, Ellen White apologists have been trying to "explain" the "Shut Door" blunder and her failed visions from the early years of Adventism, by "re-interpreting" her visions about the "Shut Door". They say that Ellen White "misinterpreted" these visions, eg. she believed that what she saw in vision, was that the door of mercy had been closed for the world in 1844, while in reality what happened at that time, was that "the door" to the "first apartment" in the heavenly sanctuary had been closed, and the "door" to "the second apartement" had been opened. They say that Ellen White "misunderstood" the vision. However, this does not solve the problem, in fact, it only adds to the confusion, because a new error is being launched to kill the old. Nowhere does the Bible say that the "door" to the "first apartment" was shut in 1844, and that Jesus went into "the Most Holy" at that time. This is a misinterpretation of Revelation 3 and 11:19. This view is not in harmony with Paul in the Book of Hebrews.

Ellen White's visions about the "Shut Door" was a blunder that did not come from heaven, but from more or less fanatical millerittes. This blunder from the part of Ellen White caused sensible, thinking persons to ask questions about her visions. But when such questions were being raised, she always denied having read any material she obviously must have read or have known something about. Another example of this, are the "health reform visions" from 1863. More on this later.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:08 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



5 -Pantheism and the "Alpha of Apostacy"

Dr. John Harvey Kellogg (1852-1943) was one of the most brilliant men in the Seventh-Day Adventist denomination by the turn of the century. As manager of the Battle Creek Sanitarium in Michigan, USA, he became world-renowned as physician, surgeon and health-reformer. He was the inventor of corn-flakes and similar cereals, as well as protose and other meat-substitutes. In addition he was a prolific writer, who published more than fifty books.

Within the history of Seventh-Day Adventism Dr. Kellogg also became known for certain things of a less flattering nature. According to Ellen G. White and other SDA-leaders, he was reckoned as the leader behind the so-called "alpha of apostacy" around the turn of the century, and was being accused of disseminating "pantehistic teachings" by means of his book The Living Temple(1902) - a book that deals with hygienic principles, physiology and simple home remedies. It was claimed that pantheistic philosophy was intervowen through the entire book, which today is very hard to obtain. Ellen White wrote a series of letters and testimonies, sounding strong warnings against the book and Dr. Kellogg's "panteheistic philosophy". She wrote,

"The sentiments in Living Temple regarding the personality of God have been received even by men who have had a long experience in the truth. . . .That those whom we thought sound in the faith should have failed to discern the specious, deadly influence of this science of evil, should alarm us as nothing else has alarmed us. . . . Those doctrines, followed to their logical conclusion, sweep away the whole Christian economy. . . . They make of no effect the truth of heavenly origin, and rob the people of God of their past experiences, giving them instead a false science." (Special Testimonies, Series B No. 7, p. 37.)

"In the book Living Temple there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given. . . .Living Temple contains the alpha of these theories. I knew that the omega would follow in a little while; and I trembled for our people." (Special Testimonies, No. 2, pp. 50,53.)

Those who are interested, may read this account in Selected Messages, Vol. 1, pp. 193-200. This is Ellen White's and the Adventist version of the "pantheistic issue".

Dr. Kellogg was also being accused of scheming to take over a number of Adventist health institutions. The following quote reflects how the Adventist denomination views the matter,

"Shortly after the turn of the century Dr. Kellogg came into conflict with the leaders of the General Conference over his attempt to get the control of all SDA medical institutions with which he had been associated. He finally did succeed in getting control of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, the Battle Creek Food Company, and the health institution in Mexico. He also began teaching strange doctrines. His book The Living Temple was permeated with the principles of pantheism. Everything was done to help him see his error. Ellen G. White worked with him personally and sent him many messages, but in vain. In 1907 he lost his membership in the church. Only a few intimate friends followed him." (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 10, art. Kellogg, John Harvey, p. 723. Emphasis supplied.)

So far the Adventist version of "the alpha of apostacy" and Dr. Kellogg's wishes to control and dictate. Strange enough, we are never allowed to hear his version of the issue, and his defense against the accusations aimed at him. May we propose that the reason for this, is that the General Conference did not have clean hands in this matter - that there was something they would try to hide for the lay people because Ellen White was involved, and her integrity would be jeopardized if the whole truth of the matter became generally known?

We are now going to compare the official SDA-version of the "pantehistic crisis" with Dr. Kellogg's own account on what really happened behind the scenes at that time - especially the issues which had to do with his book The Living Temple.

Another viewpoint

It is well known that a matter has two sides, like a coin. In a Constitutional state the accused will have equal right to give his explanation to his defense in a court of law, not just the accuser. It is unheard of to pass sentence or to convict the accused without ever giving him a chance to explain - even if the evidences against him are overwhelming. But when it comes to the Adventist denomination and Dr. John H. Kellogg, official sentence has been passed on him, and people have been told for a hundred years now, a one-sided version without ever giving the accused a chance to defend himself. Such however is common practice in closed, authoritarian cults.

What is now going to be told, is a piece of Adventist history unknown for most SDA's: Dr. Kellogg's own explanation of the "pantheistic crisis" - and a little bit more. This will at least balance the one-sided picture we have been brainwashed with the last hundred years. My personal opinion is that we owe Dr. Kellogg the justice of letting him explain his case. From time to time, the SDA-denomination publishes one-sided books and articles on "the alpha of apostacy". With Ellen White as chief accuser, propped up by "visions" and "dreams", the sentence is being passed on the man without ever giving him a chance to explain.

The plain truth is that Ellen White tried to dominate Dr. Kellogg the same way she tried to dominate others. But Dr. Kellogg was too strong for her, therefore she eagerly took this opportunity to condemn him, and she took heaven as witness to this dirty plot against the doctor.

We are now going to see how Dr. Kellogg interpreted the "attempts" being made from Ellen White and the General Conference to "help him see his self-deception".

On October 7, 1907, two men from the General Conference, G.W. Amadon (A) and A.C. Bourdeau ( came on a visit to Dr. Kellogg's home in Battle Creek, Michigan. The purpose of the visit was to interview the doctor before he was expelled from the SDA-church. This interview was being stenographed verbatim by J.T. Case and R.V. Ashley. Obviously, Dr. Kellogg wanted to have this interview in written form, with duly confirmation, because he knew well how shrewd the brethren could be. This stenographed interview was later (Dec. 30, 1907 and Dec. 7, 1954) duly documented as genuine by the Notary Public in Calhoun, Michigan. The entire interview was rediscovered in 1986. It throws light to a dark side of Adventist history. We will make a number of relevant quotes from this 108-page manuscript, letting Dr. Kellogg explain his views on "the alpha of apostacy", "grasping for power" and "the helpful hand of the General Conference". Lack of space does not permit to quote the entire manuscript. Selected quotes will suffice, enough to form a picture of how Dr. Kellogg (K) himself perceived the "crisis".

The church leaders never went to Dr. Kellogg


"Everything was done to help him see his error", the official version claims. Dr. Kellogg, what do you have to say to this?

"K: I might say that this is the first official visit I have ever had from anybody connected with the Battle Creek church. This is the first time that the church officers have ever called upon me with reference to my standing in the church. . . .

"I have long invited them to come and have a talk with me, but they have never come. . . . In the first place, at Berrien Springs, Bro. Daniells, Prescott, and others who were in a hostile attitude towards me received a letter from Sister White in which they were instructed to come to me, and to W.K. Kellogg, and to make no conditions. They never came. I waited on the ground for several days until I was compelled to go home to perform surgical operations, and I waited until the very last minute and the very last train and then hired a conveyance to hurry me to the depot, to give them every opportunity. They never came. They made no overtures of any sort whatever. I then thought that possibly in the light of what Sister White had written, it was my duty to go to them, and felt that possibly I ought to have done so before leaving the ground. So I went to the telephone and spent about two hours at the telephone in telephoning to the brethren - to Brother Butler, to Sister Druillard, and to others there - begging that they would come down here and let us sit down and talk our differences over. And I sent them the message that if they would come, I believed we could settle all our difficulties in half an hour, that we were ready to make every concession that could possibly be made. And they declined to come. They had different appointments. One had an appointment here, another there. Prof. Prescott, however, dropped off on his way through going east and came up with Elder Evans and sat down and had a little talk with me. And in talking matters over he made several statements which I felt were not true, which I knew were untrue, which I proved right on the spot were untrue; and I told him how I looked at it, and I felt that they not only untrue but that he was consciously telling what was not true, for it was so preposterous, so absurd, that it could not be true. . . .

"K: I mean to say he knew he was not telling the truth. And when I put it straight to him, he was completely dumfounded. He could not say a word. He could not raise a question. And I am willing to tell you what that was because that concerns the very thing that I am charged with doing - when the Living Temple was published in the first place. . . .

The Living Temple

"B: I read every word of that Living Temple and some parts of it several times over.

"K: Well, it has been read quite a little, I expect. Some parts of it particularly. Now, in preparing that Living Temple I did it in harmony with a plan prepared by Prof. Prescott and myself, in harmony with Sister White - to prepare an educational campaign for Seventh-day Adventists on questions of health. . . . This book was to be the textbook of the campaign, so I did my best to write that book as I thought in harmony with the teaching that Prof. Prescott was giving here at the Sanitarium and in the Review. . . .

"The views I put into the book I gave right at the conference, and they were published in the Bulletin; and I preached around at camp meetings, and there had never been any dissent on the part of the leading brethren from anything I had taught. I had presented my views on the Living Temple at a meeting at the Sanitarium chapel. . . . I presented my views with reference to the healing of the sick, and I presented the very views that I presented in Living Temple. Afterwards Sister White read the report of what I said there, and she said, 'That is right.'. . .

"The view I gave there was that whenever a man was sick and gets well, it is God that heals him; there is no power to heal but divine power; and the healing of the sick is always divine healing; that God may work quickly or he may work slowly; that healing power is creative power; and nothing less than creative power can heal the sick man. . . . But I might state further that Prof. Prescott was one of the committee who was to look over the book, and he went over it and gave me his written report on it. I had his criticism; and in this written criticism of the book, he did not condemn any of the things which he has since condemned. . . .

"K: It was six and a half pages of typewritten manuscript, and not a word said about anything in it for which the book is now denounced - nothing of that kind at all. I have that criticism on file, you know. Then, after I came home from Europe, I found I was under condemnation; and I was condemned at that time because I did not endorse the financial policy of the General Conference. . . .

"When I found the book was condemned as soon as the book was printed, or rather as soon as it was set up ready to print, I held it in plates for a year nearly, waiting to see what would come out of all this discussion. And when the book was finally condemned by Prescott and others openly, I sent a copy of it as soon as it was printed (before I put it into general wide circulation) I sent a copy to Sister White - two copies, one to Sarah and one to Sister White. I sent them both to Sarah to give one to Sister White. . . .

"I waited then for Sister White to have a chance to finish reading the book and to see what her criticism would be. So I held the book in and did not set it in circulation until fall. And at that time, along in October some months after I sent her the book, I sent out copies to the presidents of Union Conferences and asked them to look the book over and see what they thought of it, and if they wanted to use it to help us in paying the Sanitarium, paying off our debts, and helping along other Sanitarium enterprises. And I had back several very favorable letters. . . .

"I never received one line from Sister White condemning the book or giving me any hint against it - never received one line from her hinting to me that I was teaching wrong doctrines, although I had been teaching those doctrines for fifteen years or more, never received a line from her that those doctrines were wrong in any particular. They had been published in the Bulletin repeatedly, and published in at least one 'Week of Prayer Reading,' and I never received a hint that any of them were wrong; and I never did until that article appeared in the Review, although I sent the book to her for her own special opinion, and waited six months before putting it into general circulation. Still I never got any private reproof from her about it, or any letter at all. And about the first thing that appeared was this article in the Review.

"Now I saw that article a day or two before it was printed in the Review. It was not sent to me, but I happened to be in Washington, and some of the brethren there had a copy of it, and let me read it; otherwise I should not have seen it at all before it was printed in the Review. But she did not intend to have it printed in the Review. I know that. It was done by a trick. I am personally knowing to all the facts about it. She never sent it for publication in the Review: she only sent it for the private information of those brethren. And it would not have been printed in the Review if it had not been for a trick on the part of Prof. Prescott. They telegraphed to Sister White that there was a great crisis, and it must be published. They sent her a telegram, and she consented to it on that.

"Now there was no great crisis at all. It was an absolute falsehood. This paper was read before the Council in Washington. I arose before that Council and the whole Conference, and with tears running down my face I said, "I receive what has been said about this thing as from the Lord, and I will withdraw the book from circulation at once." The fact that I did not understand it all - I could not understand it all - but I said, "I see it is evident that the Lord does not want the book circulated; and I shall telegraph immediately to have the book withdrawn from circulation, packed up in boxes, and stopped." I did that thing at once. I telegraphed for the books to be boxed up and put in the basement of the college, and there they are now. There they are now. But that is a very different story from what is being circulated about the thing. I am telling you these facts because I want you to know them.

"Now I went to Prof. Prescott after this public meeting down there, and I said to him, 'Prof. Prescott, what is the trouble? What is the difficulty?' I had a private talk with him. I said, 'I have written that book, as I supposed, in harmony with what you and I believe, and what was generally believed, and just what I have been teaching for many many years. And if I have made any mistakes in expression, I am willing to withdraw them.' I might say that at the council held here the fall before, I asked the chairman to appoint a committee and let the committee revise this book and whatever they found in it that is wrong, we would take it out. I said, 'Anything that is not in harmony with the Bible and with the teaching of the denomination, I will take out of the book if you will point it out to me.' Now that is on record. You can find it there. I offered to do it at the very beginning, before the book was printed and after it was printed, and I sent it to Mrs. White for her consideration, but did not get a word of fault found with it.

"After it was printed and condemned, I said, 'Very well, I will withdraw it from circulation and pack it up.' . . . I could not help but feel that your attitude toward the book was a part of a campaign to bring me into subjection, to hinder me in my work at the Sanitarium; I could not help but feel that way. . . .

"Then I said, 'Prof. Prescott, you take this book of mine and revise it. Go through it from one end to the other, and you make a cross on the margin and underscore anything you think is wrong in this book, and I will take it out.' . . .

"Prof. Prescott said, 'I do not want to be a censor.' 'Well,' I said, 'I request you to do it. And you do not need to make any argument about it, but simply check on the margin of the book everything that is wrongly stated, and I will simply take it out.' And he said, 'I will do it'. . . .

"I went up to see Elder Haskell, and he agreed to do the same thing. Now Prof. Magan remained behind in Washington, and he afterwards told me, 'Prof. Prescott won't do that. He is not going to revise that book and send it to you.' I said, 'He said he would.' 'Well, but,' he said, 'he won't; because I heard he told Elder Daniells he was going to do it, and I heard Elder Daniells say at once, 'You ought not to do that'. . . .

"I waited until Sunday and it did not come; and Monday came a postal card saying, 'I did not get it finished, and was not able to get it off.' And the next day I got a letter saying that he was not going to do it at all. He advised that the book should not be printed. The next thing I noticed was an article in the Review (by EGW). . . .

"After a few days I got a letter from Haskell saying he would send a few suggestions. I guess he sent a few suggestions. Then I wrote to Will, told Will White the story, and I said, 'I propose to take out of the book certain pages which contain the matter which has been objected to, and to change the name of it to The Miracle of Life. And now I want to know what your mother thinks about that.' And I wrote her a letter and told her that I accepted what she had written with reference to the book as a message from the Lord, and had stopped the sale of the book.

"Will wrote me back that what I suggested to him seemed to him to be all right, and he said, 'I will speak to Mother about it, and if you do not hear anything to the contrary, go ahead.' I never heard a word to the contrary, so I went ahead. In fact, I felt so sure that if I took out everything that was complained of that they would find no fault with it that I sent out a little circular. I had ordered the circular sent out before, and had got the report from it. . . .

"Now with reference to Prof. Prescott, the situation was this: that it got out and got around that Prof. Prescott was going to revise the book just as he said he would, and Elder Daniells came in and talked to him and told him he must not do it. So he was in a tight fix - so he had to say something. Because that made it appear as though this difficulty which they had themselves created for the purpose of bringing us into subjection to them - that difficulty was going to be healed up, and they would not have it healed up for anything. The last thing in the world they wanted to have done was to have the thing healed up because they wanted to keep this thing going until the Sanitarium was crushed, so that they might bring the medical work into subjection to them. That is what their whole campaign was planned for. Elder Daniells told Prof. Sutherland after the first council meeting we had here, 'We made a mistake in attacking the theology of the book' . . .

"I am not a pantheist, and I don't believe in pantheism. Now, you heard what I said at Berrien Springs. I got up and made a public statement that if there was anything in what I had written on this question, that I would retract it and denounce it as being untrue. . . . I am not a pantheist, and you know it. If I were a pantheist, I would be out worshipping the morning sun. . . .

"If I have made an error in any expressions in this book, the Living Temple, I am very ready to correct it. I have been ready to correct it all the time. I only ask to have it pointed out for me. But when somebody says, 'You say so and so' and I tell them to find it, they can't find it so I can't take it out - I can only take out things that are pointed out to me. I wanted the General Conference folks and the State Conference presidents to come here to take up this whole thing here at Battle Creek, to go into the whole thing and settle it. And if you will have such a council here we will abide by the decision of that council, but we ought to have a square looking into the whole business. These brethren say there have been crooked things here. Let them come and show them up. . . .

"A: What Sister White sent here one time - I wanted you to see and read it yourself before it was read in the Tabernacle. I thought certainly that must melt down everything. Sister White said there on the occasion of that meeting that it seemed as though there would be a rending asunder of soul and spirit, and she said the Lord Jesus Christ came down himself and would have taken you right by the hand, and your brother Will, and would have lifted you right out into the light and liberty, but it wasn't done. Now your statement throws --

"K: I will go further and tell you something more. I am telling you the truth before the Lord. There were a lot of brethren there that knew it all. I am aware of what you say - that the two stories are not parallel. I cannot account for that. Only that there were some things the Lord did not let Sister White know about. I will tell you something more I don't believe she knows anything about at all. The last morning I was there, after I had been there several days, I sat in the house the next door to the house where W.C. White was staying. And I saw him out on the back porch or sitting on a log somewhere with his head in his hands. And I said, 'Will looks as though he is feeling pretty bad.' And he had some reason to, because, you see, when Prof. Prescott preached a sermon on Friday night against me and against the Living Temple, in which he did not read a line out of Living Temple, but he read out of Spiritualist books, heathen books, and pantheistic books, and theosophical books - read all those things, horrible things, making those people believe that he was reading out of my book all the time. It was the most horrible thing; I could not stand it, and I came pretty nearly shouting out at the time.

"Somebody asked him what book he was reading from, and he would not tell them. Then he went on and told this awful tale, these awful heathen doctrines, and said, "This is the doctrine that is being taught among us by this book that has been circulated." But in College View he stated before a public audience that we had circulated 50,000 copies of that book; and it was a falsehood. And he knew it was a falsehood when he told it - of theLiving Temple.

"Elder Evans came to my house when he got back and said, 'Prof.Prescott, W.C. White and Elder Daniells have bound themselves together in a conspiracy to ruin you and I have letters which I think will prove it'. . . .

"He (W.C. White) is a schemer, and he wanted that attack to be made on me; and the brethren on the ground knew that, Sutherland and others, and they had seen that letter that Sister White had given to W.C. White - had got a copy of it from Maggie and others. And now Sister White had told Prof. Prescott not to give that address and not to say a word against me; but instead of that, Will White kept that in his pocket, and Prof. Prescott came out that night with a most diabolical tirade against me, charging me with all sorts of diabolical things, reading from other books and then saying, 'That is the doctrine Dr. Kellogg is teaching.' Now, then, Prof. Prescott has gotten into a very humiliating position. Elder Jones sat there taking notes of the things which he charged me with. He put them down one after another, and the next Sunday morning Elder Jones stood up at six o'clock in the morning in the same room and he read out of the Review from Prof. Prescott's own pen every one of those things he had charged me with andnot one of which could he produce from the Living Temple. Now that is the situation he was in. He 'took to the woods.' A number of people here in town know that to be the truth of it. Elder Jones started at six o'clock in the morning, and that meeting did not close until one o'clock. They stayed away from breakfast. And when Elder Jones got through reading from the Review the things that Prof. Prescott had written, and it was found that he himself had done the things he had charged me with, and that I had not done these things - when he proved them all upon Prof. Prescott, Will White sat with his head getting lower and lower and lower. Elder Daniells said, 'Well, I am dumbfounded. I don't know what to say.'

"Now in that same meeting I got up and said to them there that I did not intend to write in Living Temple anything that was not in harmony with what Sister White had written and with what the Review was publishing and what was accepted by the denomination. I said, 'Now, I am ready to repudiate this moment, and I do retract, anything that is not in harmony with what Sister White herself has written in a recent article in the Review. That is what I believe. If there is anything in my book that is not in harmony with that, I retract it and denounce it.' How could they ask anything more of me? Sister White had instructed those people to come to me and offer me the right hand of fellowship, and they did not. I stayed there until the last day I could stay. I had to hurry home to do operations. That morning I saw W.C. White there. I knew Will was doing those tricky things. . . .

"This man Evans came into this room voluntarily and told me that Daniells and Prescott and White had organized a conspiracy and combined together to ruin me and would do it if they could. And he said, 'I believe I have letters to prove it'. . . .

"I have got a document, a report of that meeting, that shows how testimonies are manufactured. It shows the whole thing right in operation, a testimony being made. And it has got Sister White's name signed to it when the thing was manufactured on the spot, and it has got the internal evidence in it. Sister White suppressed the thing, and you know it. . . .

"That is the time they started their campaign against me, for I was there along with Ed but didn't know it until afterwards. Daniells sat there, and there are reports of things, statements made to Sister White just as false as sin, Brother Amadon. And she came out and took a position, told these men what to do. When they came up here and denounced the book Living Temple, it was only so that they might get rid of making up the $200,000. Sister White told them not to when they told her the tales they told her, and they wanted to know how in the world they could get out of it. And the only way in the world was to denounce the book, and afterwards Daniells told Sutherland they made a mistake denouncing the theology of the book. . . .

"I want to tell you that when Mrs. White wrote in her article that that book Living Templetaught free love doctrines, she wrote something that was libelous and is not true. There are no such doctrines in Living Temple. You have read the book through. Did you find any such there?

"B: I didn't think I did at the time.

"K: You cannot find it. It is not there. I do not believe in free love doctrines, and I never have been standing on that side of the fence. I am trying to stand up for straightforwardness and purity, and I try to do my part in holding up correct standards in the world. These people have come out to try to smut us in every way they can.

"B: That is one of the points I wanted to speak to you about sometime - that is, what is contained in that book.

"K: I will tell you about that. It will take but just a minute to say all I have to say about it, and that is this thing. I believe in the omnipresence of God. How God is omnipresent, I don't know. Do you believe in the omnipresence of God?

"B: I do - omnipresence, omnipotence, and omniscience

"A: Present as a Holy Spirit.

"K: That is all I believe.

"B: I believe we are in the likeness of God with regard to intellect as well as to body. But at the same time that the knowledge that He has is unlimited, but with us it is limited. And power He has is unlimited, but with us it is limited.

"K: Certainly, certainly. Now I hear the brethren say when they are in a meeting, 'I feel that the Lord is here.' I go into the laboratory, look into a microscope, see cells under my eyes, see cells working there, and I say 'God is here working.' I cannot see how God's Spirit is separate from His presence. Now you see I don't mean the Lord Himself is here; I mean His Spirit is here. It is all right as far as I am concerned. All I wanted to explain in Living Temple was that this work that is going on in the man here is not going on by itself like a clock wound up, but it is the power of God and the Spirit of God that is carrying it on. Now, I thought I had cut out entirely the theological side of questions of the trinity and all that sort of things. I didn't mean to put it in at all, and I took pains to state in the preface that I did not. I never dreamed of such a thing as any theological question being brought into it. I only wanted to show that the heart does not beat of its own motion but that it is the power of God that keeps it going. Now, Sister White wrote an article and said, 'It is wrong to say that God Himself is in the tree.' Now, I didn't intend to say that. I didn't intend to say that - that God Himself, the Almighty, separate and distinct from His power, from His Spirit as a separate entity - that He was in the tree. I didn't mean to say that. I meant simply that the Spirit, the power, the intelligence of the Almighty, is being manifested in all these living things that are going on about us.

"A: Yes, in all vegetable life, in all animal life.

"B: In everything.

"K: Certainly. I never dreamed of such an interpretation being put upon it as they have. When I found such an interpretation was being put on it, I said, "I will change it, do anything to correct that." And you know, they would not let me change it.

"'And if you will show me,' I said to Prof. Prescott, 'if you will show me how to correct this I will fix it right away.' But they would not let me do it. If they did the game was up right away, you see. The whole game was up - this campaign that was going on. If they will show me how to fix that book so it can't possibly convey any such erroneous impression as they say they got from it - just show me how to fix it up - and I will be tickled to death to do it. I didn't want to be teaching anything that would lead anybody astray. So there it is; the books are there in the basement.

"I have asked the General Conference to fix it; I have asked Haskell to fix it; I have asked Prescott to do it, told them to cross out everything they thought conveyed a wrong idea according to their notions, and I would take it out. Prof. Prescott said it was so interwoven all through from cover to cover that it could not be extracted. That was so preposterous. I knew it was not the truth, and I knew he did not think it was the truth, because the greater part of the book is about what to eat, what to drink, about what to wear and how to exercise, and a whole lot of other things where this question could not possibly come in at all. . . . I shall just simply accept the thing when it comes along.

"But I am not going to withdraw from the church or make any request to be put out, because that will put me in an attitude in which I do not wish to stand. I stand for the truth, and I have not changed, and I do not want anyone to have any excuse for saying I have. I want the people who keep on telling the lies to be responsible for the lies. (1907 Interview. Emphasis supplied.)

Scheming and lies

So far Dr. John Harvey Kellogg's own account on "the pantheistic crisis" - "the alpha of apostacy", according to Ellen White. This is his own version of the issue. We have learned what was his own views on "pantheism", and that there may have been some misunderstandings - and that Dr. Kellogg in so case wanted to correct them. But strong leaders in the General Conference did not want that to happen, because the issue was part of their scheming to oust the doctor. They inflated the whole matter to incredible proportions, and Ellen White was misinformed and manipulated by her own son Willie and other strong leaders. To support their scheming, she received "visions". "The alpha of apostacy" was, in brief, a schemed deception from beginning to end - there was no "apostacy" or "crisis" at all.

As we have seen previosly, Ellen White did send out testimonies where she claimed that Dr. Kellogg had "rejected" the testimonies at that time. This claim does not correspond with his own explanation.

The entire interview tells a story about how strong leaders in the General Conference disseminated the most vicious lies about Dr. Kellogg; that his sanitarium in reality was a covert whore-house; that the doctor procured whores from the West-Indies and disguised them as nurses, and that he himself was a womanizer. We learned how Ellen White was manipulated and disinformed, and how she sent out "testimonies from God", which later on showed up to be based on misinformation. We have learned how strong leaders in the General Conference accused Dr. Kellogg of swindle, wanting to get the power - while in reality the leaders themselves were guilty of what they accused him for.

During the whole interview, Dr. Kellogg talks respectfully about Ellen White; his attitude stands in strong contrast to the meanness, scheming and lies he experienced from some leading brethren. But Ellen White was guilty herself, with her false visions. She claimed revelations from heaven to participate in a scheme to break the will of an apparently innocent man.

There exist a number of letters and manuscripts from A.T. Jones from that time, which confirm the scheming of the General Conference against Dr. Kellogg.

If we are to form a relatively complete picture of "the pantheistic crisis", it is important that both parts involved are given equal opportunity to explain. The accused: Dr. Kellogg, and the accuser: Ellen White and the Adventist denomination. We are familiar with Ellen White's and the denomination's version - which we can find in numerous books. For obvious reasons, the accused's own version has been hidden. Very few know of it. Dr. Kellogg has been sentenced "in absentia". The sentence was passed on basis of a one-sided account of the case, and without damning evidence.

Dr. Kellogg was subjected to scheming and persecution (and he was not the only one. A.T. Jones did also experience some nasty things from Ellen White and the SDA-denomination), and we owe him a just hearing. The question of Dr. Kellogg being a pantheist or not, we will leave to God. Only He knows the heart.

On November 10, 1907, Dr. John Harvey Kellogg was expelled from the SDA-church at Battle Creek, without the biblical rule being followed. Dr. Kellogg did not got the opportunity (as far as I know), to stand before the congregation to defend his case. Were the leading brethren afraid of what he would have to say?

Merritt G. Kellogg

In 1908 Dr. John H. Kellogg's older brother (or half-brother), Merritt G. Kellogg, wrote a 33-page handwritten manuscript, where he gives an account of how he conceived the issue. Here follows an excerpt from his manuscript.

"As I understand the matter, there are many things which have brought about the persecution which has been waged against Dr. J.H. Kellogg and which has finally culminated in his expulsion from the Battle Creek church. Some of these things were remote and were only incidental. Others were more immediate, of these I will mention three which stand out more glaringly than the others.

"1st, Dr. Kellogg is a man of whom W.C. White has stood in fear for many years. He has told me on several occasions that he was afraid of him, afraid of his influence, afraid of his power as an organizer. He said to me more than once, 'I am afraid to meet Dr. Kellogg, he has such a way of stating things that I cannot answer him.' Just before the General Conference which was held in Oakland in 1903 I asked W.C. White who he thought would be elected President? He replied, 'We have been planning to elect Elder A.G. Daniells, and I expect we will be able to elect him if your brother does not oppose us. I am afraid, however, that he will come to this Conference with sufficient influence to prevent it. I am in hopes, however, that we may be able to elect Elder Daniells.' This shows how greatly he feared Dr. Kellogg. So much for this cause.

"2nd, Dr. Kellogg had been left alone in his struggle to re-build the Sanitarium. An attempt had been made to ruin his credit, and Dr. K. had decided to give his book, Living Temple, to the Sanitarium, they to publish it and use the profits as a building fund. A large edition was to be printed and sold by subscription.

"As soon as this fact became known a move was made by those who were working against Dr. Kellogg to stop the sale of the book by pronouncing it heretical. The true reason for wishing the sale stopped was because its sale would absorb many of the Canvassers who were engaged in selling Sister White's books, and other of the S.D.A. denominational books; therefore, to stop the sale of Living Temple, the charge was made that it taught pantheism. This charge was made by some of the General Conference officers in the face of the fact that the theology taught in Living Temple is in perfect harmony with the theology taught by Sister White and the leading ministers of the denomination and the editors of the denominational papers.

"In 1904, when the book Living Temple was being so severely criticised I called on Sister White and had a talk with her on the subject. She told me that the book taught pantheism. I told her that I had read it carefully several times and that I had been unable to find in it any different theology than that which I found in several of her books. I then asked her if she had even read the book. 'No,' said she, 'I have never read it, Willie has called my attention to a few paragraphs, but I have never closely examined it. It was not necessary for me to do so. I have been shown twice in the night season that which makes me say it must not be sold. In one of these night visions a dignified person, the one who is usually present when I am in vision[this was 'the young man' referred to previously in this manuscript, AK], stood before me with a copy of Living Temple in his hand. Holding it up before me he said, 'This book must not be sold.' A short time before, or after, this I had been reading an account of a Steamer which in crossing the Atlantic, had encountered a large iceberg and had found it very difficult to avoid colliding with it'. . . .

"'Now I want to tell you again that your brother John is not truthful. He has lied to me. When I wrote to him that he must not sell Living Temple he promised me faithfully that he would not, but he has broken his word for he kept right on selling the book and has sold many thousand copies since he promised not to sell any more. It is impossible for your brother to speak the truth, speaking untruths has been his failing all his life. Your brother John has become exalted like Nebuchadnezzar and like him he must be humbled, and I expect that like Nebuchadnezzar he will go insane.' [He never did. He lived as a healthy man till he died at age 93, AK].

"The third and chief thing which, in my opinion, contributed most to the persecution of Dr. J. H. Kellogg and his final expulsion from the Church, was the fact that Mrs. White had sent him, as a testimony from God, a charge that was not true, in any particular, a charge that was based on a dream which came to her as a result of reading the newspaper article concerning his work in Chicago and as a result of having seen in some of our denominational papers, a cut of the rented building in which the work in Chicago was conducted.

"Having made a mistake which she could not satisfactorily explain or correct she and others then made the mistake of trying to humble the Doctor and bring him to terms by seeking to destroy his influence, by proclaiming him a pantheist, a hypocrite, and a dangerous person. Not satisfied with this they sought to cripple the Sanitarium in its work by an endeavor to prevent it from getting nurses to care for the patients, by circulating all manner of vilifying stories about the Doctor and his helpers. They also sought to cripple the Medical Missionary College by preventing students from entering it as far as possible. This work of trying to cripple the Sanitarium and the Medical College was hatched up by some of the officers of the General Conference. It was agreed by them that the safest, the quickest, and probably the only way in which Dr. Kellogg could be crushed and humbled would be by cutting off his supply of students, helpers and nurses. After agreeing upon their plan, and after agreeing that the only way in which it could be accomplished was by showing that he was a pantheist, and a general all round bad man, they wrote the matter out, sent it to Sister White, got her to endorse the plan, and to write some articles for publication in the Review & Herald.

"These statements I had from Bro. Osborne, who told me that he was present at the meeting where the matter was considered by officers of the General Conference Committee. He also told me that he was the secretary of that Committee. I have just learned that Bro. Osborne died about ten days ago.

"To sum up, I am shut up to the conclusion that the persecution and expulsion of Dr. J.H. Kellogg was due primarily to a blunder of Mrs. White in sending a short testimony of reproof to him, charging him with having done things which he had not done and, secondarily, to a fear that the Doctor would use this false vision against her to the hurting of her influence in the denomination, and against her claim of being the mouth piece of God to this people.

"And thirdly, to a fear that if he was not humbled, crushed, or driven out of the Church, as was Nebuchadnezzar from among men, he would by his great organizing ability finally turn the canvassers from the sale of Sister White's books to the sale of his own, and thus abridge her income from the royalty on her books, which I am told W.C. White's son-in-law reported here in Healdsburg as being five thousand dollars a year.

"There are several reasons why I am fully satisfied that Mrs. White has sent out many false testimonies, believing at the time that she was speaking truth. I am personally knowing to two such testimonies in which a person was sharply reproved for doing certain things, when to my certain knowledge the person reproved had not only not done, but had actually done the very opposite. (Merritt G. Kellogg, A Statement, 1907. Emphasis supplied.)

The schemers at the General Conference conspired against Dr. J.H. Kellogg by concocting lies. Then the schemers went to Ellen White and got "the Spirit of Prophecy" joined to their scheming. Then Ellen White receives a "vision" - in precise time for the occasion. She uses strong words when she says, "It is impossible for your brother to speak the truth, speaking untruths has been his failing all his life". This statement by her is not to be taken seriously, of course. There are strong evidences that Ellen White quite often was far more reckless with truth than Dr. Kellogg.

In harmony with Ellen White's writings

William H. Grotheer has this to say about the book The Living Temple,

"Few today really know what the book is all about, for few have ever seen a copy. I recall, after learning about the existence of the book, of obtaining a copy on loan from a history professor at Andrews University. To my surprise, the major portion of the 568 page book, involved physiology, anatomy and principles of health and hygiene. The first fifty pages contained philisophical concepts which were subject to 'question' and even in these it was difficult to discern 'the deadly heresies'. When I returned the book to Dr. Vande Vere, I commented on this point, and he remarked that unless one knew what Ellen White had written about the book, a casual reader would not see the error charged to it.

"At the time of publication in 1903, those who favored a wide circulation for the book, declared, 'it contains the very sentiments that Sister White has been teaching.' (ibid, p. 52) in fact Kellogg himself maintained that the views expressed in his book were in harmony with Ellen White's chapter, 'God in Nature' found in Education. (John Harvey Kellogg, M.D., p. 185) On this point, I have personally, on several occasions, conducted an experiment with different audiences in discussing this issue. I compiled a series of quotations from Education and Living Temple, and asked those listening, as I read, to indicate from which book they were taken. At no time did anyone actually identify the quotations correctly." (Watchman, What of the Night, 12-94, p. 5-6. Emphasis supplied.)

Ellen White admitted that the "questionable passages" in Dr. Kelloggs book The Living Templewere almost in full harmony with her own writings (Special Testimonies, Series B, no. 2, p. 53). In order to explain away this, she claimed that they (the objectionable passages) were "the more dangerous". In doing so, she in fact condemned her own writings. When people are not able to discern between her statements in the book Education (plagiarized to some extent from John Harris) and those in The Living Temple, we have full right to brand her book Education as "dangerous" as The Living Temple itself! Ellen White did not quite manage to solve this dilemma, therefore the stronger became her condemnations of Dr. Kellogg's book, which she did not even read!

Ellen White stated that the book The Living Temple contained "the alpha of deadly heresies." We have learned on what foundation her accusations of heresy against Dr. Kellogg was based upon. At that time there were quite a few books on pantheism, spiritism and paganism in circulation. Why then ear-mark Dr. Kellogg's book the way it was done? We have seen the answer? Ellen White's "visions" on the "pantheistic crisis" and The Living Temple were false visions which were convenient for strong leaders who wished to break down Dr. Kellogg. The entire affair was a dark spot (among others) on Ellen White's reputation as a "Messenger of the Lord".

Fire

In February, 1902, the Sanitarium at Battle Creek burned down, and in December the same year, the publishing house and printing press, also at Battle Creek, burned down to ground. Some indicated that these fires were deliberately started from powers who wanted to break down Dr. Kellogg. In 1903 Ellen White wrote a testimony, where she stated that these fires were "judgments from God". The printing press had been keeping the plates to the book Living Temple.

But in 1906 the denomination's publishing house and printing press at Oakland, California - Pacific Press - burned down, and this time Ellen White herself suffered a substantial loss. She had paid several thousand dollars to New York artists for illustrations to be used in her books, and all the illustrations went up in smoke. After this Ellen White did not have much to say about certain fires being "judgments from God".


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:12 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



6 -The Ballenger case

Within the Seventh-Day Adventist church, "heretics" have arised from time to time, who, after a thorough Bible study, have concluded that certain fundamental elements in the teachings of the church were having problems with the Word of God.

Albion F. Ballenger, Dudley M. Canright, Ellet J. Waggoner, Louis R. Conradi, William W. Fletcher, R.A. Greive, Desmond Ford - just to mention some of the most prominent "heretics". Maybe it will come as a surprise to some that E.J. Waggoner from the 1888-General Conference belongs to this category, but if we are to judge from his "last confession" from 1916, we can safely put him there. Waggoner had become - at least privately - a "heretic" in the 1890's. Or perhaps he, with so many others, had discovered something in the Bible that was not in harmony with the official teachings of the establishment? Wasn't that the reason why "heretics" were burned at the stake during the Middle ages?

In this article, we are going to take a closer look at one of these frowned-upon adventists, and we are going to listen to his own defense against the accusations that was aimed at him during his own lifetime and after his death. A(lbion F(ox) Ballenger (1861-1921) received quite a few beats and strokes from the pen of Ellen White and from the SDA leadership. For that reason, it will be of some benefit to listen to his own words, and some of his teachings that provoked such wrath. After his death he got a name as a first rank heretic in the eyes of adventists, an error-promoter who "rejected the sanctuary doctrine". That's at least what we have learned from Ellen White and the official SDA-literature. But how many have read his book "Cast Out for the Cross of Christ" from 1909, and thus got a chance to listen to his own defense?

The ninth commandment in the Law of God says, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." I'm afraid that many today are guilty of transgressing the ninth commandment when they tell how an "apostate heretic" Ballenger really was. From where did they get that idea? They learned it from others - that is, Ellen White and official SDA-literature that are white-washing themselves. Can you imagine a lawsuit where the case proceeds without ever giving the accused a chance to explain? Lawsuits like that take place only where "truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter." (Is. 59:14.) Dr. John Harvey Kellogg was another "adventist-heretic" who suffered the same fate.

It seems that some people delight in mentioning Ballenger's name in certain contexts, without having the slightest idea about which arguments he built his case on. Maybe he was more right in some of his main arguments than we used to believe.

What did Albion F. Ballenger teach, and how did he prove his arguments? Looking from a traditional adventist point of view, he certainly questioned some important elements in the sanctuary teachings, as presented by the SDA-church, but how did his calling of evidence harmonize with the Bible? That's the big question.

Let's take a look at a letter A.F. Ballenger wrote to Ellen White - a letter she never replied to. In this letter he analyzes among other things, the expression "the veil", as used in the Bible,

"Dear Sr. White: For some time I have been constrained to write to you regarding my convictions on the sanctuary. Many of my friends have urged me to do this, while others have thought it useless inasmuch as, in their opinion, the letter would never reach you.

"Nevertheless I have decided to write, and state my difficulty frankly. My first difficulty is with the interpretation which you give to the following scripture found in Heb. 6:19,20, 'Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil, whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus made an high priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.'

"I cannot help believing that this term 'within the veil' refers to the holy of holies of the heavenly sanctuary and the scriptures which convinced me, are given below.

"On one side I have placed the interpretation given this scripture by the Word of God and on the other side the interpretation which you have given it. You will note that you merely assert that this term applies to the first department of the heavenly sanctuary, but you do not refer to any scripture which uses the term and applies it to the first apartment. What I am pleading for in this letter, is, that if there be a 'thus saith the Lord' to support your statement, that, out of compassion for my soul you furnish it.

'Within the veil'As the Bible Interprets it.

"'And thou shalt hang up the veil under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within the veil the ark of the testimony: and the veil shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy.' Ex. 26:23. "And the Lord said unto Moses, Speak unto Aaron thy brother that he come not at all times into the holy place within the veil before the mercy seat, which is upon the ark that he die not: for I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy seat." Lev. 16:2.

"'And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the Lord, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil." Lev. 16:12. "And he shall kill the goat of the sin offering that is for the people, and bring his blood within the veil, and do with his blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat.' Lev. 16:15.

"'Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest's office for everything of the altar, and within the veil.'Num. 18.

'Within the veil'As you interpret it

"'The ministration of the priest throughout the year in the first apartment of the sanctuary, 'within the veil' which formed the door and separated the holy place from the outer court, represents the work of ministration upon which Christ entered at His ascension. It was the work of the priest in the daily ministration to present before God the blood of the sin offering, also the incense which ascended with the prayers of Israel. So did Christ plead his blood before the Father in behalf of sinners and present before him also, with the fragrance of his own righteousness, the prayers of penitent believers. Such was the work of ministration in the first apartment of the sanctuary in Heaven. "Thither the faith of Christ's disciples followed him as he ascended from their sight. Here (in the first apartment) their hopes centered, 'which hope we have,' said Paul, 'as an anchor of the soul both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever.'' G.C. pp. 420,421.

"Sr. White, you refer the terms "within the veil" to the first apartment, while the Lord applies the terms "without the veil" and "before the veil" to the first apartment, as appears from the following scriptures.

"'And thou shalt set the table (of shew bread) without the veil.' Ex. 26:35.

"'And thou shalt command the children of Israel that they bring thee pure olive oil beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn always in the tabernacle of the congregation, without the veil, which is before the testimony.' Ex. 27:20,21.

"'And he put the table in the tent of the congregation, upon the side of the tabernacle northwardwithout the veil.' Ex. 40:22.

"'And he put the golden altar in the tent of the congregation before the veil.' Ex. 40:26.

"'And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation: and the priest shall dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the Lord, before the veil of the Sanctuary.' Lev. 4:5,6.

"'And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock's blood to the tabernacle of the congregation, and the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the Lord, even before the veil.' Lev. 4:17.

"'And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Command the children of Israel that they bring thee pure olive oil beaten for light, to cause the lamps to burn continually without the veil of the testimony, in the tabernacle of the congregation.' Lev. 24:1-3.

"Five times the Lord uses the term 'within the veil' and in every case it is applied to the second apartment of the sanctuary, and not to the first. Seven times the Lord uses the terms 'without the veil,' and 'before the veil,' and in every instance he applies it to the first apartment or tabernacle of the congregation, and never to the court outside of the door of the tabernacle. But if 'within the veil' applies to the first apartment as you teach in your interpretation of Heb. 6:19,20, then the term 'without the veil' must apply to the space in the court outside the tabernacle door. Every one of these seven scriptures which plainly state that "without the veil" and "before the veil" is in the first apartment, is a divine witness to the truth that "within the veil" in Heb. 6:19,20, must apply to the second apartment.

"There are therefore twelve witnesses, a twelve-fold 'thus saith the Lord' testifying that the term 'within the veil' refers to the holy of holies, and not to the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary as you assert. At my secret trial four years ago, three leading brethren were chosen to answer me. (It is interesting to note in passing that two out of the three were then and are still under your condemnation inasmuch as they both teach that the 'daily' of Dan. 8:13 refers to the heavenly service instead of paganism as taught by you in Early Writings.) In private conversation with me one took the position that 'within the veil' meant within the sanctuary, but did not refer to either apartment. Another asserted at the trial that the term applied to the first apartment as you have interpreted it. The third, compelled by the witnesses quoted above admitted in his answer that the term 'within the veil' does apply to the holy of holies, but that it is spoken prophetically, and although the scripture says Christ is entered 'within the veil' we are to understand it to mean that he will enter in 1844. This babel of voices did not help me to see my error, if error it be.

"Before publishing my MS, I sent it to several ministers holding official positions, whose loyalty to the denomination is unquestioned, and asked them out of love for the truth and my soul, to show me from the Scriptures, where I was in error. I promised that should they do this I would never publish the MS. Not one of these brethren attempted to show me my error from the Word.

"One wrote thus: Candor compels me to say that I can find no fault with it from a Bible standpoint. The argument seems to be unassailable.

"Another said: I have always felt that it was safer to take the interpretation placed upon the Scriptures by the Spirit of Prophecy as manifested through Sister E.G. White rather than to rely upon my own judgment or interpretation.

"This last quotation expresses the attitude of all those who have admitted that my position seemed to be supported by the Scriptures, but hesitated to accept it.

"Honestly, Sister White, I am afraid to act upon this suggestion; because it will place the thousands upon thousands of pages of your writings in books and periodicals between the child of God and God's Book. If this position be true, no noble Berean dare believe any truth, however clearly it may seem to be taught in the Scriptures, until he first consults your writings to see whether it harmonizes with your interpretation. This is the principle always advocated by the Roman church and voiced in the following quotation:

"'Like two sacred rivers flowing from Paradise, the Bible and divine Tradition contain the Word of God. Though these two divine streams are in themselves, on account of their divine origin, of equal sacredness, and are both full of revealed truths, still of the two, tradition is to us more clear and safe.' Catholic Belief, p. 54.

"It was against this putting of an infallible interpreter between the man and his Bible that the Reformation waged its uncompromising war.

"The Romanists robbed the individual of his Bible, denouncing the right of 'private interpretation'; while the Reformation handed the Bible back to the individual while denouncing the papal dogma that demands an infallible interpreter between the child of God and his Bible.

"The brethren urge me to accept your interpretation of the Scriptures as clearer and safer than what they call my interpretation. But I have not interpreted this Scripture, I have allowed the Lord to do this and have accepted his interpretation. Let me illustrate:

"The first mention of the Sabbath in the New Testament is found in Matt. 12:1. It does not there tell us which day is the Sabbath, assuming that the reader knows which day is referred to, or if not, he will be able to learn from the Old Testament, which day it is. When one turns to Ex. 20:8-12 and reads, 'The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord,' is not that God's interpretation? Has any one the right to reply, 'That is your interpretation.' Surely not.

"In like manner, the first and only instance where the term, 'within the veil,' is used in the New Testament, is found in Heb. 6:19. It is taken for granted that the reader will know to which apartment the Holy Spirit refers; but if not, the searcher can learn from the Old Testament which place is meant. Now, when I turn to the Old Testament and find that in every instance this term is applied to the holy of holies, can it honestly be charged that this is my interpretation? I have not interpreted it, but have given that honor to the Holy Oracles themselves. And now Sister White, what can I do? If I accept the testimony of the Scriptures, if I follow my conscientious convictions, I find myself under your condemnation; and you call me a wolf in sheep's clothing, and warn my brethren and the members of my family against me. But when I turn in my sorrow to the Word of the Lord, that Word reads the same, and I fear to reject God's interpretation and accept yours. Oh that I might accept both. But if I must accept but one, hadn't I better accept the Lord's? If I reject his word and accept yours, can you save me in the judgment? When side by side we stand before the great white throne; if the Master should ask me why I taught that 'within the veil' was in the first apartment of the sanctuary, what shall I answer? Shall I say, 'Because Sister White, who claimed to be commissioned to interpret the Scriptures for me, told me that this was the true interpretation, and that if I did not accept it and teach it I would rest under your condemnation?" (A.F. Ballenger, Cast Out for the Cross of Christ (1909). Emphasis supplied.)

So far Ballenger's letter to Ellen White. There are several things to take note of in this letter. What the matter really concerns, is the SDA-teaching that Jesus went into the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary at his ascension, in order to begin there an 1800 year ministry "according to the type". To support this view, SDA's quote Hebrews 6:19-20, and interpret the verses to the effect that the phrase "within the veil" means the veil before the first apartment - that Jesus went in "within" that first veil and into the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary at his ascension in 31 A.D.

But as we have noted from Ballenger's letter, the phrase "within the veil" in the Old Testament means only, without exception, the second veil which separated the Holy from the Most holy. The phrase was never being used when talking about the first veil. The two phrases, "before the veil" and "without the veil" was being used without exception in connection with the ministry in the first apartment. "Within the veil" did always point to the second veilwhich separated the two apartments.

When we analyze the phrase "within the veil" in Heb. 6:19-20, it shouldn't be that hard to understand which "apartment" Jesus went into at his ascension. But adventists need to manipulate the verse to find "support" for their sanctuary teaching. Some say that the verse (Heb. 6:19-20) is "prophetic", and "pointed forwards to 1844". Others say that Jesus of course went into the Most Holy at his ascension, but went back into the first apartment to begin an 1800-year ministry there. Such are unjustifiable manipulations with an otherwise plain text of scripture.

The Great Controversy

In his letter, Ballenger quotes from pp. 420-21 of the book "The Great Controversy" by Ellen G. White. In the two short paragraphs quoted, we find three gross errors.

1. Ellen White claims that "within the veil" means the first apartment in the heavenly sanctuary. As we have seen, this is not correct.

2. Ellen White claims that the priest during his daily ministry went to the altar of incense in the first apartment with the blood of the sinner. Neither this is correct. The blood from the common sinner was always poured out at the foot of the altar of burnt offering in the court. This is a plain fact everyone should find out by investigating his Bible for himself.

3. The verse in Heb. 6:20 is cut off with a period - perhaps to "support" the adventist interpretation of Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. The book "The Great Controversy" quotes, ". . .which entereth into that within the veil; Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever." (p. 421.) But the Bible says, ". . .which entereth into that within the veil; Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for everafter the order of Melchisedec." "The Great Controversy" puts a period after the words ". . .for ever," and omitted the words ". . .after the order of Melchisedec." Maybe this was being done because the last words in the sentence did not fit so well into the sanctuary teaching of the SDA church. However, Paul makes it completely clear that Jesus was not made a priest after the order of Aaron, but after the order of Melchisedec, and that the priesthood was changed (Heb. 7:11.) In the book "The Great Controversy" you will also find other manipulations of Scripture.

The first veil

In his book "Cast Out for the Cross of Christ", Ballenger emphazises that in the Old Testament, the entrance to the Tabernacle, into the first apartment, never is called a "veil", not to say "the veil". It is called "an hanging for the door of the tent" (Exodus 26:31-36), "the hanging for the door at the entering in of the tabernacle" (Ex. 35:15), "the hanging for the court gate" (Ex. 39:38,40), "the hanging of the door to the tabernacle" (Ex. 40:3.5.21.22.26.2 etc. It is nevercalled "veil", in contrast with the separation between the Holy and the Most Holy, which alwaysis called "veil". This phrase, "veil", which is being used 25 times in the OT, always means the veil which separates the two apartments. This is a plain "thus saith The Lord!" Why is that so hard to accept?

Septuagint

Some say that in the greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint, LXX), the entrance to the tabernacle sometimes is called "veil". To this, Ballenger comments,

"An effort has been made to weaken the force of this rigid distinction which the Hebrew Scriptures make between the two curtains, by referring to the Septuagint, which as all my brethren know, is a translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew into the Greek. It is claimed that in the Septuagint the first curtain is sometimes called a veil. This is true. And that the first curtain was a veil, both as to construction and use has never been denied. But I have contended that God had so clearly distinguished between the two curtains that when he uses the term 'within the veil' in the book of Hebrews, the reader is compelled to apply it to the holy of holies in the heavenly sanctuary. Never in the Septuagint is the first curtain called a veil except in the directions for the making and moving of the tabernacle and then only when the connection plainly shows to which curtain it is applied. To illustrate: In Ex 28:16 we have 'the veil of the gate of the court' and in Ex. 37:5 we have 'the veil of the door of the tabernacle.' Whenever the term veil appears in the Septuagint without qualification it refers to the veil separating the holy from the most holy. Never in the Septuagint is the first curtain called a veil in the book of Leviticus, which contains the law governing the sacrificial system. Never in the Septuagint is the term 'within the veil' applied to any other than the holy of holies. Lev. 16:3,12,15. Never in the Septuagint are the terms 'before the veil' and 'without the veil' applied to any other than the first apartment. Lev. 24:3." (Cast Out for the Cross of Christ.)

The veil in the New Testament

The book of Hebrews makes it plain that Jesus entered "within the veil", eg. The Most Holy at his ascension, and sat down at His Father's right hand. Adventists cannot accept this plain teaching because it doesn't square with their sanctuary teaching. In his book, Ballenger examines more closely the phrase "within the veil" in the New Testament.

"Passing from the Old Testament into the New, we find the Holy Spirit, still referring to the curtain between the holy and the most holy as 'the veil.' The Greek word translated 'veil' iskatapetasma, and it appears six times in the New Testament. The first reference is in Matt. 27:50-52, 'And Jesus when he had cried with a loud voice, yielded up the Ghost; and behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; and the graves were opened, and many bodies of the saints which slept arose.'

"The next instance of the use of the term 'veil' in the New Testament, as applied to the sanctuary, appears in Mark 15:37,38. 'And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the Ghost: And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.'

"The third instance occurs in Luke 23:44,45, 'And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour. And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.'

"The reader will notice that the Holy Spirit in all these three instances calls the veil between the holy and the most holy places 'the veil of the temple'. . . .

"There are but three more instances where this Greek word appears in the New Testament, and all of these three instances are to be found in the book of Hebrews. And can we suppose for a moment that the Holy Spirit in the hook of Hebrews would contradict the whole testimony of the Old Testament Scriptures, and its own previous testimony in the New, with this overwhelming evidence, both from the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament, that the term 'veil' when used without qualification applies invariably to the curtain between the holy and the most holy, and the term 'within the veil' applies just as invariably to the most holy place, let us now read again the Scripture in Heb. 6:19: 'Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil, whither our forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an High Priest forever after the order of Melchisedec.'

"I appeal again to the reader: How can I, in the face the testimony of Scripture, teach that this term refers to the first apartment? The next reference is in Heb. 9:3,

"'And after the second veil, the tabernacle, which is called the holiest of all . . .' Here, as before stated, we have the Lord calling the second curtain the 'second veil,' and by implication calling the first curtain 'the first veil.'

"And now from our study of the Old and New Testaments, which one of these veils does the Lord refer to when He uses the term 'within the veil'? Unquestionably, the second. . . .

An Appeal to the Reader

"And now I appeal to the reader: When the Holy Spirit in Heb. 6:19 tells us that Christ, our forerunner, has entered 'within the veil,' which department am I to understand is referred to by this term? Let me again call attention to the fact that the term 'within the veil' is used in Heb. 6:19 without qualification, it being taken for granted that the reader is familiar with the term, and will know without explanation to which apartment it refers. Never for a moment would the student of the Hebrew Scriptures think of applying that term to the first apartment. When we go to the Old Testament to see which apartment is referred to by the expression 'within the veil,' we find the term applied invariably to the holy of holies. How dare I, then, in the face of this overwhelming testimony of Scripture, apply the term 'within the veil,' to the first apartment, a place to which the Spirit of God never applied it?

"If I should teach that 'within the veil' applies to the first apartment, the Word of God would condemn me. When I teach that it refers to the second apartment my church condemns me. May the Lord have mercy upon me and sustain me in the trial!" (Cast Out for the Cross of Christ. Emphasis supplied.)

The Throne of God

Seventh-Day Adventists are teaching that the Throne of God was located in the first apartment in the heavenly sanctuary for 1800+ years - from the ascension of Jesus in 31 A.D, to 1844 A.D. This view creates quite a few problems. In his book, Ballenger comments upon this,

Where is the throne room?

"The next all important question is, Which apartment of the heavenly sanctuary contains the throne of God? which apartment is the 'throne room' of Jehovah? In the Mosaic sanctuary, the pattern of the true tabernacle, God's dwelling place in heaven, the throne of God abode in the second apartment. 'Let them make me a tabernacle that I may dwell among them.' Ex. 25:8. 'And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark, and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony which I shall give thee. And there will I meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testament, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.' Ex. 25:21,23. . . .

"Those who are well informed regarding the teachings of the Seventh-Day Advent denomination will be prepared to admit that when Christ ascended, he sat down on the throne with his Father in the heavenly sanctuary; but some of these will maintain that the throne of God was moved from the holy of holies to the first apartment at that time, and there remained until 1844. However, there are a goodly number, even of ministers, who have expressed surprise when it was stated that this was the denomination's position.

"One minister who has preached the message for many years, writes as follows concerning this point:

"'I am sure there cannot be found a single line in any book, pamphlet or periodical, written by our people, that ever intimates that the throne of God ever abode in the holy place or first apartment; and I have never heard it mentioned either in public or private. . . .It is the most unscriptural position that could be taken and involves more unreasonable and absurd positions than the Sunday keeper offers for keeping Sunday. Why was one part of the sanctuary called 'the most holy place'? Was it not because that part contained the throne of God which was between the cherubim over the mercy seat under which was the constitution of the universe? Now, if the throne made that place most holy, then if it be moved into the first apartment, would it not make that apartment the most holy place?'

"For the benefit of those who desire, like the brother referred to above, a definite statement from the denomination in proof that it teaches that the throne of God was in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary at the ascension of Christ, the following is submitted:

"'When Christ commenced his ministry above, on the throne of his Father, that throne was in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary.' Looking Unto Jesus (Uriah Smith), page 134

"'Thus the scene opens with the commencement of Christ's ministry, and at that time the throne of God was in the first apartment of the sanctuary, where the antitype of the golden candlestick was seen.' (Ibid.)

"This teaching that God's throne was in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, raises some very serious questions.

The Ark and the Throne

"If the throne of God was moved into the first apartment at the ascension of Christ, did that include the ark? . .

"If this teaching of the denomination be true and the mercy seat of Exodus is a type of the throne of grace of Heb 4:16 then it must follow that if the throne of God was located in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary from the ascension of Christ to 1844; then the real ark was in the first apartment during all that time. But this does violence to the type which put the ark in the second apartment with a veil between it and the rest of the furniture of the sanctuary.

"It also does violence to the type by putting all the furniture of the heavenly sanctuary in one apartment and leaving the holy of holies empty and abandoned for eighteen centuries.

Separating the Throne from the Ark

"Some have seen the dilemma into which this teaching leads, and have tried to escape the difficulty by separating the throne of God from the ark of God, and placing the throne of God in the first apartment in the heavenly sanctuary, and leaving the ark of God in the holy of holies as represented in the type. While this relieves the situation in the one direction, it greatly complicates it in another.

"If God moved his throne from the holy of holies at the ascension of Christ, did he leave the mercy seat or throne of grace behind him in the holy of holies? And did he then minister the gospel for eighteen centuries from another seat than the mercy seat, from another throne than the throne of grace? . . .

"If the throne was moved into the first apartment and not the ark containing the law, was the gospel ministered for eighteen centuries divorced from the law? . . .

"Does the reader not see that this doctrine which moves the throne from the holy of holies into the first apartment, divorces God and his Son from the mercy seat and the law, and changes the center of God's government and gospel from the mercy-covered law in the holy of holies to the first apartment which according to the type never contained either law or mercy seat; and that for a period of eighteen hundred years? . . .

"During the last four years I have laid this difficulty before the leading men of the denomination and no one has ventured an explanation. No one has dared to say that when the throne was moved out into the first apartment the ark and law went with it; and on the other hand no one has dared to affirm that the law and mercy seat were deserted - left behind in the holy of holies, while the gospel was ministered for eighteen hundred years from a seat which was not the mercy seat and from a throne divorced from the divine law by a separating veil." (Cast Out for the Cross of Christ.)

The idea that both the Father and the Son were in the the first apartment from 31 AD to 1844 AD, comes from a vision Ellen White had in 1845,

"In February, 1845, I had a vision of events commencing with the Midnight Cry. I saw a throne and on it sat the Father and the Son. . . . And I saw the Father rise from the throne, and in a flaming Chariot go into the Holy of Holies, within the veil, and did sit. There I saw thrones that I had never seen before. Then Jesus rose up from the throne. . . .And I saw a cloudy chariot, with wheels like flaming fire, and Angels were all around it as it came where Jesus was. He stepped into the chariot and was borne to the Holiest where the Father sat." (From the Broadside, To the Little Remnant Scattered Abroad. Emphasis supplied.)

This vision has been put into the book Early Writings (pp. 54-5), but somewhat amputated. The sentence "There I saw thrones that I had never seen before," has been removed. Please note that Ellen White says that The Father rose from the throne and was carried into The Most Holy. It then becomes obvious that the throne they sat upon in the first instance, was located in the "first apartment." This whole scene, as related in the vision, takes place in the 1844-frame, and is an unbiblical teaching.

If the adventist teaching of the sanctuary has a strong biblical foundation, as they assert, then why has this teaching not created anything but problems through the years for people who have a mind of their own? We are to note that none of the leading brethren, none of the ministers who were confronted with the problems, were able to give a satisfactory answer with a "Thus saith the Lord!" Why?

Other problems

In 1905 A.F. Ballenger submitted a list containing nine propositions to the leaders of the General Conference. I want to mention three of these points.

"5. The shadow placed the death of the Lord's goat, whose blood met the penalty of the law in type, on the great day of atonement. The denominational view places the death of Christ, whose blood meets the penalty of the law, more than eighteen hundred years before the great day of atonement is supposed to begin.

"6. The shadow represents the high priest going from his ministry in the court where he obtained the blood, directly into the holy of holies on the day of atonement. (He did not stop in that first apartment; he obtained his blood, and then carried it straight through into the holy of holies.) The denominational view teaches that Christ went from His ministry in the first apartment, and not from the court, into the holy of holies, in 1844."

"8. The shadow sends the high priest directly through the first apartment into the holy of holies as soon as he has in his hands the blood of the Lord's goat, or the blood which pays the penalty of sin ... The denominational view stops our great High Priest in the first apartment when He has in his hands His own blood which pays the penalty of sin."

According to the type, the High Priest, on the Day of Atonement, obtained the blood from the Lord's goat and went immediately into the Most Holy with the atoning blood. He did not stop to perform some duty or ministry with this blood in the first apartment, but stopped just a moment to pick up a censer with burning incense, which he waved as he went "within the veil". The Seventh-Day Adventists teach however, that Jesus - after having obtained the atoning blood on Golgatha's cross, stopped up for 1800+ years in the first apartment, where he performed some kind of ministry with the atoning blood. This view does not harmonize with either Scripture or the type. In addition, Jesus was made an High Priest forever "after the order of Melchisedec" (Heb. 6:20), while the ministry performed by earthly priests in the earthly Tabernacle, was a ministry after the order of Aaron. Paul makes it clear that this Aaronic ministry was abolished. The second veil in the earthly tabernacle (Herod's temple) was rent from top to bottom when Jesus died to show that the earthly ministry - the Aaronic/Levitic priesthood - was fulfilled. When he died on the Cross, Jesus cried out, "It is finished!" No, no, the adventists assure us. It was not finished at all. "By His death He began that work which after His resurrection He ascended to complete in heaven." (The Great Controversy (1911), p. 489.) The Adventists have used needle and thread, mending the rent veil. After that, they moved the entire Aaronic/Levitic priesthood up to heaven itself, where they let Jesus perform his ministry with the atoning blood for 1800+ years in the first apartment. And this in spite of the Bible's plain teaching that Jesus is not a priest after the order of Aaron, but after the order of Melchisedec. (Heb. 6:20; 7:11-15.), and in spite of the Bible's plain teaching that Jesus went into the Most Holy at his ascension.

Ellen White's response to Ballenger's letter

Previous in this article, we have been reading portions of the corteous and pleading letter A.F. Ballenger wrote to Ellen White, with sound biblical arguments no one were able to refute. Neither is it easy to refute the other arguments he presents - at least not from a biblical standpoint.

Ellen White did not reply to Ballenger's letter. In stead she wrote some testimonies and letters, in which she depicted the man as if he stood in league with the devil himself,

"There is not truth in the explanations of Scripture that Elder Ballenger and those associated with him are presenting." (A.L. White, The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, p. 409. Emphasis supplied.)

A plain "Thus saith the Lord!" was obviously not enough to Ellen White!

"I declare in the name of the Lord that the most dangerous heresies are seeking to find entrance among us as a people, and Elder Ballenger is making spoil of his own soul." (Ibid. Emphasis supplied.)

It is a very serious matter to call plain, biblical truth - a "Thus saith the Lord!" for "dangerous heresies", and condemn a man to perdition because he presented sound. biblical doctrine!

"I testify in the name of the Lord that Elder Ballenger is led by satanic agencies and spiritualistic, invisible leaders. Those who have the guidance of the Holy Spirit will turn away from these seducing spirits." (Manuscript 59, 1905. Manuscript Release #760, p. 4. Emphasis supplied.)

Folks, this is a very serious matter. Even the leading brethren at the General Conference could not refute Ballenger's sound, biblical arguments, and had to admit that they were unassailable from a biblical standpoint.

In this article the reader now have had the opportunity to look at the arguments for himself. It is crystal-clear that "vithin the veil" in the Bible unvariably points to the Most Holy, the second apartment. The Bible teaches that this was the place where Jesus went at his ascension. But as a consequence of that plain, biblical teaching, the foundation of the sanctuary doctrine, as teached by the Seventh-Day Adventist church, crumbles and fall. No wonder that the reaction from Ellen White was strong! She says that such a view is inspired from spiritism an satanic agencies! However, we are being forced to ask the question, Which spirit does Ellen White manifest through her statements about Ballenger? Certainly not the Spirit of God. Our loving, compassionate heavenly Father does not manifest such an attitude against honest, truth-seeking souls. But far more serious is the fact that she takes God Himself as a witness to this blatant transgression of the ninth commandment. This is to swear falsely in the name of the Lord! A very serious matter indeed! Sad to say, she had done this repeatedly every time she sent out false testimonies, false visions and false revelations in the name of the Lord: "It was shown me," "My accompanying angel said," etc. But now the matter is far more serious. Ellen White is calling a biblical truth for dangerous heresy - she makes truth to lie - and testify this in God's name! In addition she lies about Ballenger. She would have nothing more to do with him, and there is no record of Ellen White ever apologizing for her offense.

Further, she says that the sanctuary doctrine was formed by men who were under the influence of the Spirit of God, but we have seen that they made gross errors in their interpretations, and came up with things that were not in harmony with the Word of God.

It is important to note that Ellen White never came up with a single biblical argument to support her tirades, just a series of condemnations, supported by "visions". Such attitude is unforgiveable from a person who received a pleading like this,

"What I am pleading for in this letter, is, that if there be a 'thus saith the Lord' to support your statement, that, out of compassion for my soul you furnish it." (Cast Out for the Cross of Christ.)

The Scriptures and a 'thus saith the Lord' never came, just condemnations and warnings which she testified to in God's name! According to Ellen White, the man was in league with the devil himself. He would be lost. The prophetess, who admonished other people to sit down with "led astray"-brethren with Bible in hand and show them from Scripture their "errors", did not practice this admonition herself. In Ballenger's case even the leading brethren were not able to refute his arguments with Bible in hand. Obviously, neither Ellen White was able to do this. She did not produce one single verse from Scripture to refute his arguments. To the contrary she hints indirectly that we are to trust her "visions" rather than the Word of God. In cases like this, it was convenient to produce a strong "testimony" - a "thus saith the Lord" to stop what she perceived as a threat against the established teachings of the church - teachings that obviously had problems - and statements that could create some doubts about her credibility

No wonder that A.T. Jones wrote in 1905 that, after his opinion, there were no religious denominations that in their spirit resembled the Papacy more than the SDA church! (Some History, Experience and Facts, p. 24.) This is something to ponder.

In 1984, pastor Henry F. Brown, who had been a minister in the SDA church for sixty years, told that they learned that A.F. Ballenger's daughter still lived in California. At that time she was a lady in her eighties. Pastor Brown paid her a visit,

"In later years, being down in Riverside, California we learned that his daughter was still alive, a lady in her 80's. We went to visit her, a very pleasant lady, and she told us how, when they dropped him from the work, there wasn't a cent of remuneration, just left to themselves and how they wept and wondered how they would get along. He was a godly Christian until his death." (Elder H.F. Brown's Personal Testimony, Dec. 5, 1984.)

"There was no attempt of our leaders to bring one back. For instance; Elder Ballenger, with the tenderest of emotions, begged Sr. White, wrote her a letter, "Point out my difficulty. Show me where I am wrong. Help me. You once considered me a faithful brother and now you won't talk to me." She utterly ignored his plea and refused to have anything to do with him." (Ibid. Emphasis added.)

Again we are obliged to ask, What kind of spirit does Ellen White in this case manifest against a pleading brother? Certainly not the Spirit of Christ. A.F. Ballenger had committed the "grave sin" as noble Berean to ask some testing questions about the writings of Ellen G. White. She could not bear this - it would undermine her reputation as "God's prophet", and her credibility. She could never bear this. Consequently, if noble Bereans pointed out errors in her writings, they would be labeled by the prophetess as Satan's faithful instruments, led by spirits from the abyss. This is an inevitable conclusion after having investigated the available documentation about the Ballenger case. Other persons in similar situations have been experiencing the same sort of things.

The Seventh-Day Adventist church expects that what the "noble Berean" may discover in the Word of God, harmonizes with "the official teachings of the SDA church" and "Sister White". The Word of God is to be interpreted through "Sister White" - as some of the leading brethren told Ballenger. Consequently, there is no place for noble Bereans in the SDA-denomination. However, the noble Berean does not want to be an echo of others, a parrot on its perch. God has given him an independent judgement-ablity and a brain to think with, and he wants his people to make use of the abilities he has given them. But where the spirit of Papacy reigns, the noble Berean is considered a thorn in the eye, an extraneous element that has to be removed at any cost. And removed they were - with the help of Ellen White and her "testimonies". She would even resort to lies when her own credibility as "God's prophet" was at stake.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:13 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



7 -A letter from A.T. Jones

In the month of April, 1906, Ellen G. White sent out a testimony in which she mentions several persons by name. These were well-known men within the Adventist denomination, who had asked pertinent questions about her inspiration. In this testimony, which she claimed was based on a vision, she asks these men to write down their perplexities, and she would do her best to answer them.

Several of the brethren who were mentioned by name did as she asked them to do, but they never received the courtesy of a reply. One of the men who responded to the call, was A.T. Jones. Here follows portions of the letter he wrote to Ellen G. White, dated April 26, 1909. He never got a reply to this letter, for obvious reasons - what could she say? Once more, her false visions had put herself into an embarassing position.

"Dear Sister White: In April 1906 you sent out a communication dated March 30th, 1906 in which are the following words:

"'Recently in the visions of the night I stood in a large company of people. There were present Dr. Kellogg, Elders Jones, Tenny and Taylor, Dr. Paulson, Elder Sadler, Judge Arthur and many of their associates. I was directed by the Lord to request them and any others who have perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and to make plain that which seems to be intricate. Let those who are troubled now place upon paper a statement of the difficulties that perplex their minds, and let us see if we cannot throw some light upon the matter that will relieve their perplexities. . . .I am now charged to request those who are in difficulty in regard to Sister White's work to let their questions appear now, before the great day of judgment comes. . . .'

"And first of all it is proper for me to state why I have not written before:

"1. I never received from you, nor in any way by your instructions, any copy of that communication.

"2. It was a long time before I obtained a copy. And only then did I get a copy from a brother who had never received any copy from you, although he was named in it; and he had obtained his copy from yet another brother to whom you had sent a copy though he was not mentioned in it.

"3. Before I obtained a copy of it, the word came to me that you had called on certain ones, and me amongst them to write out what difficulties might be perplexing their minds concerning your writings, in order that you might explain, etc., and thus it was only that special point that came to my attention. But upon that consideration I would not write, and never would have written: and this is for the reason that such a proposition in itself surrenders at once the whole ground of the claim in behalf of your writings as the word of God, or as given by inspiration of God. For if the writings were really the word of God

a. They need no explanation.b. If the writings to be explained were not the word of God, then I would not want any explanation of them; for I would not care any more for them than for any other writings that were not the word of God.

"Further I knew that the things that could be written, you simply could not explain; and that any explanation would be worse than no explanation. And the event has fully justified this view. For when in honest response to your call, Brother Sadler and Brother Paulson wrote to you in all sincerity their difficulties, in a communication dated June 3rd, 1906, you wrote the following words:

"'Sabbath night, a week ago, after I had been prayer- fully studying over those things, I had a vision, in which I was speaking before a large company, where many questions were asked concerning my work and writings. I was directed by a messenger from heaven not to take the burden of picking up and answering all the sayings and doubts that are being put into many minds.'

"When Brother Sadler had his letter to you all written and ready to send, he read it to me before he sent it. And then I said to him, 'My Brother, you will never get an answer to that. Any answer would be worse than no answer.' And just so it turned out. To this day Brother Sadler has received no answer to his letter: though in acknowledging the receipt of his letter you promised that you would answer. This promise you made in a letter dated June 14, 1906, in the following words: 'As soon as I can I will clear up, if possible, the misunderstanding regarding the work God has given me to do.'

"To Brother Paulson's letter you did make somewhat of an attempt at an answer on just one point, and this most largely by quoting from Great Controversy, and from the printedTestimonies, matter with which he was already familiar.

"That as relates to Sadler and Paulson: but it is even worse as relates to Dr. Stewart: To Dr. Stewart there was sent a copy of your communication calling for a writing out of doubts, objections, etc., though he was not named in the communication. In response to that call Dr. Stewart wrote a letter to you presenting just what you called for. This letter he sent to you alone, in the confidence of a personal letter. At the same time he sent a letter to W.C. White, your son, in which he asked that an answer should be made to his letter, and that this answer might be received by him within thirty days.

"The next thing that Dr. Stewart heard from his letter, it was in the hands of Elder A.G. Daniells in Takoma Park, Washington, who was then making public use of it to the effect that "Here is a manuscript of seventy-eight pages of objections to the testimonies," etc.; with no intimation that you had written or sent to the author of the manuscript and others a communication calling upon them to do just what he had done; but conveying the impression that the whole thing of the manuscript was, on the part of the author, only a willful and voluntary attack upon the Testimonies. And that is the only kind of an answer to his letter that Dr. Stewart has ever seen or heard of. Neither from you nor from W.C. White has he ever received a word in answer to his letter.

"Now Sister White, you wrote in the name of God, and appealed to men's Christian integrity, and in the presence of the judgment, that they should state to you their perplexities: 'Let it all be written out.' And you put God under pledge for answer - 'The Lord will help me to answer these objections.' That communication was sent personally to Dr. Stewart. He accepted the communication as honestly intended, and wrote accordingly: then, in the presence of all that, can you think, or can you expect any Christian man to think, that the Judgment of God will justify or vindicate as fair, true, and Christian, the course that was pursued with Dr. Stewart's letter?

"Now in the presence of the Judgment, it is only fair that I should believe and recognize the probabilities are that you never saw Dr. Stewart's letter, and never even had a chance to see it, for your sake it is only fair to suppose that the probabilities are altogether that W.C. White received the letter and read it, and then without ever giving you a chance to see it, posted it off to Elder Daniells at Washington. . . .

"And will the Judgment vindicate as fair, true and Christian, the public use of Dr. Stewart's letter to you, with the impression that it was a willful attack upon you and your writings, while concealing the fact made perfectly plain in Dr. Stewart's letter itself, that it was only and altogether in response to the call that you had made in the name of the Lord, which call itself was copied in the very letter of Dr. Stewart's that was being used? And then the public use of his letter has so advertised it that there was such a call for it that another man published it, then again Dr. Stewart was charged with attacking the Testimonies and warring on you. Will the Judgment of God vindicate as the righteousness of God such dealings as that? Can anybody who knows God or has any respect for Him, believe of Him that He would sanction any such procedure as all this? . . .

"Now please let me say a word on God's behalf: In your communication of March 30th, 1906, calling upon certain men by name to place upon paper the statement of the difficulties that perplexed their minds, you wrote the following words:

"'In the visions of the night. . . .I was directed by the Lord to request them and any others who have perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the Testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and to make plain that which seems intricate. . . .Let it all be written out.'

"After having received in answer to that call what some brethren had honestly written, you wrote under date of June 3rd, 1906 the following words: 'I had a vision in which I was speaking before a large company, where many questions were asked concerning my work and writings. I was directed by a messenger from heaven not to take the burden of picking up and answering all the sayings and doubts that are being put into many minds.'

"Both of these communications profess to be as from God. As representing God, therefore, they present the impossible situation as to God, in truth, that God asked certain men by name that they put in writing a statement of all their difficulties, etc., with the promise of an answer, and then, after He got the statement, refused to answer.

"I repeat, therefore, that as to God in truth, and to any mind that has ever received the revelation of God, that presents an impossible situation. For no person that knows God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent, can ever believe it possible of God that He would call men personally by name to Him, only that they should receive a slap in the face, or to be condemned.

"Didn't the Lord know what responses could be made to that call? Didn't He know what response might be made? Yea, didn't He know what responses would be made? Accordingly didn't He know before these statements were written, that there was to be no answer? And He knowing all that, then can anybody except sensible Christian men ever to believe of God that He would deliberately resort to an unworthy trick of mere child's play with sober, well-meaning, manly men, believers, in His own Son?

"Let us set these two statements of yours side by side: 'Recently in the visions of the night I stood in a large company of people . . . .I was directed by the Lord to request them and any others who have perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the Testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and to make plain that which seems intricate. Let it all be written outand submitted to those who desire to remove the Perplexities.'

"'I had a vision in which I was speaking before a large company where many questions were asked concerning my works and writings. I was directed by a messenger from heaven not to take the burden of picking up and answering all the sayings and doubts that are being put into many minds.'

"Sister White, can you or anybody else believe any person who knows God or has respect for him to accept both these statements as coming from God? Can you or anybody else expect that Christian men will believe of God that He will act like that, or that He will treat men in any such way as that?

"Can you or anybody else expect that Christian men will accept any view of inspiration that involves the holy, just and good God in any such a slim and unworthy trick as that? Are we to believe of God that he is such an underling and so irresponsible of Himself, that He can be pledged to a thing that utterly fails? That He can be pledged and unpledged? That when under pledge He can be whiffled about, as the workings out of this case show, so that His pledge shall be worse than nothing? And all this in order to be 'loyal to the Testimonies?'

"Why, Sister White, to believe that and such as that, of God, the God of the Bible, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, would be nothing short of the utmost limit of irreverence.

"Again: In those letters you were asked these questions:

1. 'Do you approve of sending personal testimonies which the Lord has given to men, broadcast to other people?'

2. 'Is it not a Bible rule that when we have any criticism of a brother, it shall be presented to him personally, then afterwards to two or three, and then if he rejects it, to the church?'

"These are vital questions.

"It is the truth that copies of the Testimonies to individuals are sent to the officials of the denomination, at the same time, or even before, they are sent to the individuals to whom they pertain.

"It is the truth that Testimonies to individuals are sent to others than the ones most concerned, and are made public use of, and are even used in print and published everywhere, without their ever having been received, or seen or heard of, by the individual or the ones named in the Testimonies.

"When Brother Tenney was cast out of the church, there was read and used against him, as a basis and authority for casting him out, passages from a Testimony that he never saw and that he never knew anything about until it was used against him in that meeting.

"In the controversy over the Battle Creek Sanitarium, Testimonies that the Sanitarium Board never saw or heard of, have not only been published and used against them; but have been printed and spread broadcast, before the Sanitarium people ever knew that there were such communications in existence.

"Also myself: I have received letters from different parts of the country stating that in the camp meetings Testimonies concerning me have been read, or quoted from, or referred to; but Testimonies that I had never seen.

"That is exactly the case of your communication of February 4, 1907, to Bro. Russell Hart in which I an twice mentioned by name, saying that I would "work in every way possible to get possession" of the Tabernacle. That was used by men (not by Brother Hart) as a 'Testimony' to denounce and decry me, and yet I never saw it, nor knew of any of its contents till February 20, 1909 - more than two years after it was written. . . .

"In the Bible the Lord has directed that when a brother trespasses or is overtaken in a fault he is to be gained and restored: not condemned and denounced. . . .

"This is the word of the Lord directing us how we are to do towards the one that is overtaken in a fault, or who has trespassed. But in the use of your Testimonies this order has been reversed and even disregarded altogether. A man's fault is published to the world in print, or told to everybody but himself. And he is condemned and denounced, without the thing having been told him at all, much less told to him in Christian kindness a second or a third time. . . .

"September 7, 1907, this communication was copied with the usual filing marks "Sept. 7, 1907-8... H. 38 '07." It is only fair to suppose that at least seven of these indicated "-8-" copies were sent to as many different persons and places, and that they have been diligently used to publish and emphasize what is said in the communication concerning me. Yet I never saw it till February 20, 1909; more than two years after it was written. I saw it then only because a brother told me that Brother Hart had a copy, and that others had a copy and were using it. Then when I met Brother Hart I said to him that I had heard that he had a copy of a Testimony in which I was personally mentioned; but that I had never seen it nor known that it was in existenceand that I thought it only fair that I should have a chance to see it. He thought so too and let me take it. The passages that mention me are the following:

"I must act in accordance with the light that the Lord has given me, and I say to you that Brother A.T. Jones and Dr. Kellogg will make every effort possible to get possession of the Tabernacle, in order that they may present their doctrines. We must not allow that house to be used for the promulgation of error. The Tabernacle was built by the Seventh-day Adventist people. It is their property and their loyal representatives should control it. On this question I will stand firm, and if, you and others will take a decided stand with us, you will be doing that which God requires of you at this time.

"We must make sure the control of the Tabernacle; for powerful Testimonies are to be borne in it in favor of the truth. This is the word of the Lord to you and others. Elder A.T. Jones will work in every way possible to get possession of this house, and if he can do so, he will present in it theories that should never be heard. I know whereof I speak in this matter, and if you had believed the warnings that have been given, you would have moved understandingly.

"Now in all kindness, with no feeling of resentment whatever, but with perfect good humor I say to you, Sister White, and to everybody; and I say it solemnly before God to be met in the judgment as the truth that those statements concerning me are not true. They were not true when they were written, they have never been true at any moment since they were written, and they will never come true in any sense whatever. I not only never did "all" that I possibly could, to get possession of the Tabernacle, I never thought on it, nor thought of it. This I know in the same way that I know that I am alive, or that I am here this moment writing this to you. . . .

"And all this time of a year and a half or more after it was copied while the communication was being used far and wide to warn the people of my great wickedness, apostasy, and antagonism, there was I going quietly along totally ignorant of any such thing being in existence, and at the same time as innocent of what it charged as was any child in the world.

"Yet in that communication you say: 'I know whereof I speak.' In respectful reply, and in all kindness, I say: Sister White, you did not know whereof you spoke; for there is not a vestige of truth in it; and neither you nor anybody else can know what is not so. And while I cannot absolutely know of another, as I know of myself, yet I do firmly believe that what is said of Dr. Kellogg is just as completely untrue, as I know to be untrue what is said of me.

"Further there stand the words: 'In accordance with the light the Lord has given me... I say to you that Elder A.T. Jones and Dr. Kellogg will make every effort possible to get possession of the Tabernacle.'

"There stand the words: 'This is the word of the Lord to you and to others. Elder A.T. Jones will work in every possible way to get possession of this house.' Sister White, the simple truth is that that is not light at all for it is not true at all. And the Lord never gave it to you, for the Lord does not give nor tell what is not true. This is not "the word of the Lord" at all; for it never was true: and I know that the Lord never says what is not true. Besides, if that were truly from the Lord, it would have been given to me first of all, instead of to everybody but me, and never at all to me. Do you suppose that I am going to believe that the Lord disregards His own word and takes a course directly contrary to that laid down for us to take that we may 'follow in His steps?' That is impossible.

"The Lord knows perfectly well that I never made any effort at all; that I never worked in any way at all; and that I never thought at all to get possession of the Tabernacle. And the Lord knows perfectly well that I and Dr. Kellogg never acted together, nor spoke together, nor thought together, to any such purpose as getting possession of the Tabernacle. . . .

"Also Sister White, you may remember that this is not the first tine that I have been placed by you under the necessity of telling you that what you had said was not at all true. The other time was in July 1903 in your home at "Elmshaven" when you had called me at the Sanitarium to come down to your house. You began very positively to talk to me. When I had listened with some surprise for a considerable length of time you may remember that I halted you and, looking straight into your eyes, said: 'Sister White, there is not a particle of truth in what you are saying.' Upon this you instantly dropped that strain and turned the conversation to another subject. . . .

"At Berrien Springs, Michigan, in the time of the Lake Union Conference in 1904, speaking of the book Living Temple, you said publicly to the congregation in the assembly hall:

"'I never read the book; but Willie sat down by my side and read to me some of the most objectionable passages. And I said to him; 'Willie, that is just what was back there in New England,' etc., etc.

"Now, Sister White, I said then, and I say now, and I shall say forever, that I have not a particle of confidence in Willie's inspiration to select and read to you 'the most objectionable passages' of that book, or any other writing, as a basis for your denouncing the book or writing a Testimony on the subject. I know that John Huss and Jerome were burned at the stake, and Wickliffe and Luther were pursued and persecuted to their graves, solely upon "some of the most objectionable passages" of their writings selected and read by opposing and prejudiced people.

"I know that Willie presented to me some of these 'most objectionable passages' of his selection. And I know that the objectionable meaning which he put into the passages to make them 'objectionable passages' was directly contrary to the meaning that stands in plain passages in the plain printed words. . . .

"In 1902 there had been printed a leaflet sermon of mine on 'The Revelation of God.' I had been informed that in his addresses in these Union Conferences, Brother Prescott had taken a single sentence from this sermon of mine and had read that single sentence in with passages from books that he said were 'Pantheistic' (and books not one of which I ever saw) in such a way as to make it appear that I was teaching "Pantheism" equally with those others." (Letter from A.T. Jones to EGW, April 26, 1909. Emphasis supplied.)

So far his letter to Ellen G. White. There are several things we are to note in this letter.

1. Some of the brethren are asking pertinent questions about Ellen G. White's testimonies. This comes to her knowledge.

2. In a "vision" several persons were mentioned by name, and asked to write down their perplexities. God would then help to clear them up.

3. Faithful to this testimony, some of the brethren mentioned by name wrote their perplexities to Ellen White, but then she suddenly gets a new "vision" in which God informs her not to spend time on this matter. They would not get any help from him.

4. None of the brethren who wrote to Ellen White got a reply from her. Dr. David Paulson was the only one who got a partial "answer", mostly by quotes from her writings.

5. The private letter Dr. Stewart wrote to Ellen White came instead in the hands of A.G. Daniells, the president of the General Conference. Daniells published Dr. Stewart's private letter to create the impression that it was an attack on Ellen White and her writings.

6. Occasionally, testimonies from Ellen White were being sent - not to the person in question, but to others, who got them printed and published. The person whom the testimony was written to, learned of this after considerable time had passed.

7. On several occasions Ellen White accused A.T. Jones for having done certain things he most definitely was not guilty of, and she took heaven as witness to her accusations. This is bearing false witness.

There is no doubt that the two contradicting "visions" A.T. Jones is referring to, were false. Our Heavenly Father does not operate this way. In this case Ellen White presents God as a capricious God who changes his mind from day to day. First of all, God gives a promise, and when the brethren in question are faithful to the call, God suddenly withdraws his promise. These "visions" were definitely not from the God of heaven, regardless of what Ellen White may claim. A.T. Jones however tells, that this was not the first time he caught her in telling lies.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:14 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



8 -Contradictions

It is a matter of fact that several statements by Ellen G. White are self-contradictory. We are going to take a look at some of these statements.

Deity did/did not sink

"The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that 'God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.'" (EGW in SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1129. Emphasis supplied.)

"The man Jesus Christ was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are one. The Diety did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (Manuscript 140, 1903. Emphasis supplied)

God loves/does not love dishonest children

"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong." (An Appeal to the Youth, pp. 42,62. Letter to W.C. White. Willie was six years old at this time. Emphasis supplied)

"Do not teach your children that God does not love them when they do wrong; teach them that he loves them so that it grieves his tender Spirit to see them in transgression." (Signs of the Times, Feb. 15, 1892. Emphasis supplied.)

The plan of salvation was laid before/after the fall of man

"Sorrow filled heaven as it was realized that man was lost and that the world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and that there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I then saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, 'He is in close converse with His Father.' The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came from the Father we could see His person. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with a loveliness which words cannot describe. He then made known to the angelic choir that a way of escape had been made for lost man; that He had been pleading with His Father, and had obtained permission to give His own life as a ransom for the race, to bear their sins, and take the sentence of death upon Himself, thus opening a way whereby they might, through the merits of His blood, find pardon for past transgressions, and by obedience be brought back to the garden from which they were driven." (Early Writings, p. 126. Emphasis supplied.)

According to the above statement, the plan of salvation was laid after the fall of man.

"Before the foundations of the world were laid, Christ, the Only Begotten of God, pledged Himself to become the Redeemer of the human race, should Adam sin." (Selected Messages, vol 1. p. 226. Emphasis supplied.)

According to this statement, the plan of salvation was laid before before the creation of this world.

"While Moses was shut in the mount with God, the plan of salvation, dating from the fall of Adam, was revealed to him in a most forcible manner." (Ibid, pp. 231-232. Emphasis supplied.)

According to this statement, the plan of redemption was laid after the fall of man.

"The words, "Mine hour is not yet come," point to the fact that every act of Christ's life on earth was in fulfillment of the plan that had existed from the days of eternity." (Desire of Ages, p. 147. Emphasis supplied.)

According to this statement, the plan of redemption was laid from the days of eternity. All these statements are confusing, to say the least.

Proper position during prayer

"I have received letters questioning me in regard to the proper attitude to be taken by a person offering prayer to the Sovereign of the universe. Where have our brethren obtained the idea that they should stand upon their feet when praying to God? One who has been educated for about five years in Battle Creek was asked to lead in prayer before Sister White should speak to the people. But as I beheld him standing upright upon his feet while his lips were about to open in prayer to God, my soul was stirred within me to give him an open rebuke. Calling him by name, I said, "Get down upon your knees." This is the proper position always." (Selected Messages, vol 2, p. 311. Emphasis supplied.)

"I have been present repeatedly at camp meetings and general conference sessions in whichSister White herself has offered prayer with the congregation standing, and she herself standing." (D. E. Robinson letter, March 4, 1934.) At this time, Dores E. Robinson belonged to the staff in the White Estate.

The Testimonies

"And when obliged to declare the messages, I would often soften them down, and make them appear as favorable for the individual as I could. . . .It was hard to relate the plain, cutting testimonies given me of God." (Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 73. Emphasis supplied.)

"I take back nothing. I soften nothing to suit their ideas or to excuse their defects of character." (Testimonies, vol 5, p. 19. Emphasis supplied.)

Phrenology

Phrenology was a "science", developed by the Austrian physician Franz Joseph Gall (1758-1828.) It claimed that the human brain was organized into the same number of "organs" as there were propensities, emotions and abilities - which all were different from each other. According to Gall, this would be reflected in the shape of the cranium (head), and this in turn would give an impression of the relative development of the "organs" of the brain. The phrenologist would then be able to appraise the person's abilities, propensities etc., by touching and feeling the head and its "bumps" and "dumps".

This pseudo-science was very popular in the United States in the middle of the past century. One person who wrote about phrenology, but in a negative sense, was Ellen G. White,

"I have been shown that we must be guarded on every side and perseveringly resist theinsinuations and devices of Satan. . . .The sciences of phrenology, psychology, and mesmerism are the channel through which he comes more directly to this generation and works with that power which is to characterize his efforts near the close of probation. . . .Satan has come unperceived through these sciences and has poisoned the minds of thousands and led them to infidelity. . . .He works cures, and is worshiped by deceived mortals as a benefactor of our race.Phrenology and mesmerism are very much exalted. They are good in their place, but they are seized upon by Satan as his most powerful agents to deceive and destroy souls. . . .The world which is supposed to be benefited so much by phrenology and animal magnetism, never was so corrupt. Satan uses these very things to destroy virtue and lay the foundation of spiritualism. . . .Thousands, I was shown, have been spoiled through the philosophy of phrenology and animal magnetism, and have been driven into infidelity. If the mind commences to run in this channel, it is almost sure to lose its balance and be controlled by a demon." (Testimonies, vol. 1, pp. 290,296-297 (1862). Emphasis supplied.) This was written in 1862.

The same admonishment was repeated two years later (Spiritual Gifts, vol 4, p. 80-87 (1864).)

This same year (1864) Ellen White warned against venturing on forbidden ground, in particular the children,

"As Satan sees that he is losing control over the minds of your children, he will strongly tempt them, and seek to bind them to continue to practice this bewitching vice. But with a firm purpose they must resist Satan's temptations to indulge the animal passions, because it is sin against God.They should not venture on forbidden ground, where Satan can claim control over them." (Appeal to Mothers, p. 22. Emphasis supplied.)

According to Ellen G. White's warnings from 1862, phrenology was one of Satan's most effective methods to destroy souls.

However, this did not hinder Ellen White in taking her two sons to be examined by a phrenologist in 1864 - just two years after her strong statements on phrenology, and the same year she wrote that children should not venture on forbidden ground. In other words, she herself had been venturing on forbidden ground with her two children, thus violating her own counsel. She herself had placed her children under "the science of Satan" - "the channel through which he comes more directly to this generation", the method which "lay the foundation of spiritualism." Here is the story:

In the autumn of 1864, James and Ellen White spent three weeks at Dr. James Caleb Jackson's institute "Our Home". After a few days their two sons Edson and Willie also arrived at the place. At that time they were 15 and 10 years old.

"Fascinating to Ellen White was the 'science' of phrenology, which Dr. Jackson practiced at five dollars a reading. Soon after the arrival of Edson and Willie she took them to the doctor for evaluations of their 'constitutional organization, functional activity, temperament, predisposition to disease, natural aptitudes for business, fitness for corintibial and maternal conditions, etc., etc.' Writing to friends, she could scarcely conceal her elation with Jackson's flattering analysis: 'I think Dr. Jackson gave an accurate account of the disposition and organization of our children. He pronounced Willie's head to be one of the best that has ever come under his observation. He gave a good description of Edson's character and peculiarities. I think this examination will be worth everything to Edson.' Presumably she was not so pleased with the doctor's diagnosis of her condition as hysteria." (Ronald L. Numbers, Prophetess of Health, pp. 90-91. Emphasis supplied.)

"Her flirtation with phrenology seems to have begun during that first, critical visit to Dansville in1864 when she took her two sons to Dr. Jackson for head readings and physical examinations. Only two years earlier she had denounced phrenology, along with psychology and mesmerism, as a tool of Satan. Although 'good in their place,' these sciences became in Satan's hands 'his most powerful agents to deceive and destroy souls.' In the years following her contacts with Dansville, however, phrenological allusions began appearing frequently in her writings. During her husband's extended illness, for instance, she complained that his 'large and active' bumps of 'cautiousness, conscientiousness, and benevolence,' all assets in time of health, were in sickness 'painfully excitable, and a hindrance to his recovery.' And in an 1869 testimony regarding a brother's inordinate love of money, she attributed his problem to satanic excitation of 'his organ of acquisitiveness.' (Ibid, pp. 148-149. Emphasis supplied.)

Had she forgotten all "I was shown" warnings from 1862?

When Dr. Ronald Numbers asked the White Estate for copies of letters to be used as documentation for his book Prophetess of Health, there were two letters Arthur White would not release. One of these letters dated from 1873, and described a vacation trip in the Rocky Mountains, where Ellen White and her family dined on deer-broth and wild ducks. In the other letter, Ellen White wrote about a phrenological examinations of her two sons, Edson and William. These letters (an perhaps scores of others), were somewhat embarassing for the madonna-image the Adventist denomination had been erecting through the years. The truth that the prophetess quite often went against her own counsels, visions and testimonies were to be kept secret from the SDA people.

Influenced by others

It has been claimed that Ellen White by no means was influenced by other persons. The truth is however, that she quite often was influenced by others to get convenient "visions" they needed to collect money, to start certain projects or to blackmail certain unwanted persons. A striking example of this kind of influence is the Kellogg-case and "pantheism". We have covered this case in a previous chapter. Ellen White allowed herself from time to time to be governed by other strong leaders - in particular her youngest son William Clarence, "Willie".

Ellen's husband James complained from time to time that his wife was being influenced by strong leaders, as the following letters tell,

"Elder Butler and Haskell have had an influence over her that I hope to see broken. It has nearly ruined her." (Letter, James White to D.M. Canright, May 24, 1881.)

"Brother Canright, you are right in doing all you can to help me and others. I see my errors more and more, and shall do all I can to help matters and things. The pressure has been terribly hard upon my poor wife. She has been impressed very much by Elders Butler and Haskell." (Letter, James White to D.M. Canright, July 13, 1881.) At that time, George Ide Butler was the president of the General Conference.

Testimonies on demand

In the booklet "The Claims of Mrs. Ellen G. White", published by the Norwich SDA-church, Conn. in 1890, it says that when Testimony No. 11 was to be published, and Ellen White was working on No. 12, she received a letter from the publishing house, informing her that the publishing of No. 11 would be postponed till she could make a testimony to "influence" the brethren - a testimony which could be inserted in No. 11. The leaders at Battle Creek were in need of money, and the brethren were somewhat sluggish to donate. She complied with their wishes, and the necessary "testimony" came. A "testimony" from "the Spirit of Prophecy" had been ordered in advance to "influence" the brethren to give money!

Ellen White's testimony and article in the Review during "the panteheistic crisis" is another example of questionable testimonies made up to suit the needs of crooked brethren - and there are other examples. Ellen White was indeed being influenced to quite an extent by strong brethren to write testimonies when there was a need, sometimes to "influence" brethren to support various projects with money; other times to condemn this or that.Of course she denied this when she learned of such charges.

In 1867 plans were laid to erect a sanitarium at Battle Creek, "The Health Reform Institute". J.N. Loughborough and other pioneers commenced this planning while James White was absent due to illness. But they needed money, so they went to Ellen White and ordered a "testimony" to "influence" the brethren to donate money to the project. The "testimony" was delivered in due time with several "I saw",

"Here, I was shown, was a worthy enterprise for God's people to engage in." (Testimonies, vol 1, p. 492. Emphasis supplied.)

The money came, and the first floor was on place when James White returned. He became exasperated because he hadn't been consulted, and he saw to that everything was teared down and rebuilt after his own plans - with a financial loss of some 11,000 dollars.

Then a problem arose. Ellen White had received a "testimony" in the first place, with a number of "I saw", and what happened next, put her in an embarassing position. James demanded a new "testimony" to be sent out, in which she claimed that the first testimony was somewhat "wrong", and that the next "testimony", which was written according to the demand of James, was right.

"All along Mrs. White was influenced in this way by her sons and by leading men in the denomination to write testimonies to individuals and churches. Both she and they tried to conceal the fact that her testimonies originated in this way. In later years, some, like Elder A.G. Daniells, president of their General Conference since 1901, when desiring a testimony from her against some one, would write to her son, W.C. White, and he would read their communications to his mother. Then, when asked if they had written to Mrs. White about the individuals concerned, they would deny it, which was technically true, but false altogether in fact and effect, for they had written to her through her son. To such unworthy subterfuges both she and they resorted to shield her in her work and defend her testimonies." (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. Ellen G. White.

Who told her?

Several of Ellen White's testimonies were being written to individuals - often far away - in which she "discovers" and reproves their "sins and "mistakes". "Well", we may think, "how could Ellen White know of these things she had been writing about if God had not shown them to her?" Says Ellen White,

"God has been pleased to open to me the secrets of the inner life and the hidden sins of His people. The unpleasant duty has been laid upon me to reprove wrongs and to reveal hidden sins." (Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 314. Emphasis supplied.)

How could she know of the sins of others if God had not revealed them to her? Possibly the adventist pioneer H.E. Carver has something to say to that effect. He was associated with James and Ellen White in the 1860's and in his testimony he describes no less than four distinct cases where Ellen White wrote testimonies to individuals, based on information both he and others had provided her.

"At this point Eld. Cornell appeared amongst us, and attempted to settle the agitation produced by Bro. Everett's efforts against the visions. In prosecuting the case against Bro. E., Eld. Cornell manifested a most unkind, hasty, and unchristian spirit, which was a source of grief to the entire church, and which I took upon myself to communicate to Mrs. White. After having received this information from me, she published in the next 'Testimony' that she had been shown that Eld. Cornell had acted hastily in Bro. Everett's case." (H.E. Carver, Mrs. E.G. White's Claims to Divine Inspiration Examined. Emphasis supplied.)

"Such was my state of mind at the time of the organization of the church at Pilot Grove, Iowa, at which I was present and desired to become a member. But as I could not express a full belief in the inspiration of the visions of Mrs. White, it was thought best that I should not become a member at that time. . . .

"Deeply interested in the prosperity of the cause I had espoused, I communicated all the facts in the case to Eld. White and wife, and expected from them instructions or advice as to my case; but nothing was received until the next vision was published, wherein she says she saw that a wrong use was being made of her visions in Iowa. Here, then, were two instances in which she claimed to see in vision things that I had communicated to her myself." (Ibid., Emphasis supplied.)

"During a visit to our church, Eld. White and wife spent a portion of their time in the family of a brother with whom I was intimately connected, and there witnessed some of his peculiarities of demeanor, and which she afterwards wrote to him as having seen them in vision, but which in fact were apparent to any one who happened to spend a few hours in the household, and of which we" were all aware from our own observation." (Ibid., Emphasis supplied.)

"The fourth and last case concerning individuals which has come under my personal observation or knowledge, and which involves the inspiration of a vision, is that of two members of the Pilot Grove church, the nature of which it is not necessary to mention. This case produced a great commotion and trial in the church, which was not quieted until a vision was received from Mrs. White, in which she saw that the brother involved in the case, and who had been dismissed from the church, should resume his place in it. This brother, in kindly attempting afterwards to win me back to my allegiance to Eld. and Mrs. White, referred to his own case as a remarkable and indisputable evidence of the divine inspiration of the visions; for, said he, "she saw my case in vision." I told him I thought Mrs. White knew of the case before she had the vision. This he denied. I then told him that the other party implicated with him had positively asserted in the presence of my family that Mrs. White did know all about it, for the entire case had been written out and sent to her." (Ibid., Emphasis supplied.)

Ellen White got information from others. That should be perfectly clear. On the basis of this information, she wrote personal "testimonies" in which she claimed to have seen his/her case in a "vision." Most problably these were not the only cases when Ellen White was being informed in advance about individuals. Such information served as basis for reproving "I saw"-testimonies. What she saw, however, was not what God had shown her in "visions", but rather what other people had informed her.

Of course, Ellen White denied this,

"In some cases it has been represented that in giving a testimony for churches or individuals I have been influenced to write as I did by letters received from members of the church. There have been those who claimed that testimonies purporting to be given by the Spirit of God were merely the expression of my own judgment, based upon information gathered from human sources. This statement is utterly false." (Testimonies, vol 5, p. 683. Emphasis supplied.)

The following quote is a bit stronger,

"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. . . .For the future, I shall not belittle the testimonies that God has given me, to make explanations to try to satisfy such narrow minds, but shall treat all such questions as an insult to the Spirit of God." (Testimonies, vol. 3, pp. 314-315. Emphasis supplied.)

These are very strong words. According to Ellen White, those who ask, "Who told you these things," insult the Spirit of God!

There are numerous examples which show clearly that someone had been informing Ellen White certain details about individuals and other things - the Kellogg-case, the Salamanca vision, personal testimonies and letters, etc. There were testimonies which were spurious, which had been based on information given to her by others, and not by heavenly revelations. There were numerous people who had been receiving "heavenly" testimonies from Ellen White, reproving them for things they most definitely were not guilty of. In such cases it is quite naturally that the reproved individual asks some pertinent questions about a "heavenly testimony"of that sort - a blatant lie - but in doing this, they insulted the Spirit of God, according to Ellen White. This statement by the adventist prophetess is very precarious, to say the least. Her habit of resorting to lies to save herself out of the embarassing situations such false testimonies had caused, is also very questionable. It is a matter of fact that she was very sensitive when her own reputation as God's true prophet was at stake. In such situations the end justified the means in order to silence individuals, who by their own unpleasant experience with the adventist prophetess were obliged to ask certain testing questions about her "visions and heavenly call".

We have already mentioned that she had been sending Dr. John Harvey Kellogg a false, reproving testimony regarding some buildings in Chicago, buildings which did not exist. This was pure and simple a false vision, based on a sensational newspaper report.

In a long letter to Ellen White, A.T. Jones says that she did often send out testimonies containing false accusations. These false testimonies were often published prior to the individuals in question having received them - and sometimes they never received them at all. The case was unknown to them until they saw their names and the false accusations publicly on print.

There were some grave cases that should have been revealed to Ellen White if she indeed received revelations from heaven, but which were unknown to her until the case became generally known. And then she wrote testimonies with some "explanation" why God did not reveal the case to her. The Nathan Fuller case was a typical example,

"Look at another case - that of Elder Nathan Fuller. Elder Fuller was a man of commanding appearance, large abilities, and was highly esteemed by the Advent people. There was a large church at Niles Hills, Pa. He lived near there, and for years had the oversight of this church. About 1869 or 1870 Elder White and his wife visited this church and stayed at the home of Mr. Fuller. Elder White publicly praised Fuller as a godly man of much ability. Only a few days later, by the confession of a conscience-stricken sister in that church, it came out that for years Fuller had been practicing adultery with five or six of the women in the church. All of them confessed, and Fuller had to own it himself. The community came near mobbing him. The whole denomination felt the shock and shame of it. But it hit Mrs. White the worst of all. She had been right there for days in Fuller's home, in meetings with him, had met all these women, yet knew nothing of all this rottenness. A little later I went there and held meetings for two weeks, met all these people, and learned the whole shameful story. This case exposed the falsity of Mrs. White's claim that God revealed to her the 'hidden sins' of his people. What could she say? As usual, after it was all common knowledge, she had a testimony telling all about it. it is printed in 'Testimonies for the Church,' Vol. II., pp. 449-454. She says: 'The case of N. Fuller has caused me much grief and anguish of spirit.' Yes, well it might, as it so forcibly exposed her own failure. To excuse herself, she says: 'I believe that God designed that this case of hypocrisy and villainy should be brought to light in the manner it has been.'" (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White.)

In Canright's book, Uriah Smith mentions several examples of a similar nature. A leading preacher had seduced a number of women in several churches, and Ellen White had attended meetings where this particular preacher was present. In spite of that, she knew nothing about the case until it had been generally known (no one had told her!)

Another leading minister had commited adultery for a longer period of time. Neither in this case Ellen White knew about it until the case had been generally known. And then she wrote a testimony, The Sin of Licentiousness.

Pastor E.P. Daniels once received a sharp testimony from Ellen White. Unfortunately it showed up that she had reproved the wrong man! She had been informed beforehand about the case, but the individual who informed her had mixed up the names. This blunder from the informant caused the wrong man to be reproved, in spite of the "testimony" being "inspired from a heavenly angel". During her ministry, Ellen White's ears were always open to pick up reports about others - reports which could serve as basis for reproving "testimonies", but from time to time things went wrong. E.P. Daniels was shaken by the episode, and nearly left the ministry.

Some years before Ellen White's death, immorality was running rampant at one of the publishing houses to the degree that it began to come into disrepute. After the cases were discovered, some twenty persons were dismissed for adultery, among them several faithful church-goers and tithe-payers. Ellen White didn't know about all this.

Apparently she was quite helpless when no one told her, orally or by letter, about the sins of others. In spite of this, Ellen White denied this to protect her own image in the SDA-church as "God's true Prophet".


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:15 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



9 -Health Reform

In spite of what most Seventh-Day Adventists believe, Ellen White has been given unmerited honor for being a pioneer in the area of health reform.

"Ellen G. White's keen 'foreknowledge' of now-accepted scientific information has provided a strong reason why large numbers of people have developed an enthusiastic faith and confidence in her messages." (Ellen G. White Estate, Medical Science and the Spirit of Prophecy, p. 3. Review and Herald Publishing Assn. 1971. Emphasis added.)

This is a grossly exaggerated statement. We have previously been looking at "her" statements on the evils of masturbation, wigs, the lungs in the throat, narrow waists and other strange things. For obvious reasons, these oddities have not been accepted by today's medical science.

And for still more obvious reasons, Ellen White's statements where she supports these odd superstitions from an bygone era, are being bypassed in silence. They are to be found in her writings no longer in general circulation. But nevertheless, they are "the Spirit of Prophecy".

Of course there are many good and true counsels in her writings on health-related subjects - "now-accepted scientific information", but from where did she get her information? Research done by Dr. Ronald Numbers show that she almost completely got her information from well known health advocates in the early 1800's. This is very well documented in Dr. Numbers' bookProphetess of Health. Most of Ellen White's information on health matters has been borrowed from people like James Caleb Jackson, Russell T. Trall, Larkin B. Coles and Sylvester Graham - she often quoted verbatim from their works. What is more significant, is the fact that she also quoted their errors, which of course were common superstitions at that time. However, these men were right in a number of things which Ellen White "borrowed", and which today has been substantiated by modern science.

The problems arose when she got "visions" on health reform, in which nothing was new under the sun. Other people had written on this before her. These health reformers from the 1800's are almost completely forgotten today, while Ellen White, who had borrowed their material, and by "visions" made them a "thus saith the Lord", got all the credit. This because she had a strong and growing organization behind her which could promote her writings.

When James and Ellen White travelled around in the 1860's, promoting health reform, quite a few people noted the similarities between their teachings and those of Dr. James Caleb Jackson, of Dansville, N.Y. He also had a sanitarium there. In fact, Ellen White's visions on health reform were so strikingly similar to the health principles advocated by Dr. Jackson, that Ellen White was obliged to give an "explanation,. "Question,- Did you receive your vision on health reform before you visited Dr. Jackson's health resort in Dansville, N.Y., or before you had read any books on the subject?

'- I did not visit Dansville till August, 1864, fourteen months after I had the view. I did not read any works upon health until I had written Spiritual Gifts, Vols. iii and iv, Appeal to Mothers, and had sketched out most of my six articles in the six numbers of 'How to Live.'

'I did not know that such a paper existed as the Laws of Life, published at Dansville, N.Y. I had not heard of the several works upon health, written by Dr. J. C. Jackson, and other publications at Dansville, at the time I had the view named above. I did not know that such works existed until September, 1863, when in Boston, Mass., my husband saw them advertised in a periodical called the Voice of the Prophets, published by Eld. J.V. Himes. My husband ordered the works from Dansville and received them at Topsham Maine. His business gave him no time to peruse them, and as I determined not to read them until I had written out my views, and books remained in their wrappers.

'As I introduced the subject of health to friends where I labored in Michigan, New England, and in the State of New York, and spoke against 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 Drs. Trall, Jackson, and others. Have you read that paper and those works?

'My reply was that I had not, neither should I read them till I had fully written out my views, lest it should be said that I had received my light upon the subject of health from physicians, and not from the Lord.

'And after I had written my six articles for How to Live, I then searched the various works on hygiene and was surprised to find them so nearly in harmony with what the Lord had revealed to me. And to show this harmony, and to set before my brethren and sisters the subject as brought out by able writers, I determined to publish How to Live, in which I largely extracted from the works referred to." (Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, October 8, 1867. Emphasis supplied.)

In this explanation, we are to take note of a few things.

James and Ellen White visited Dr. Jackson's sanitarium in August 1864. Fourteen months earlier, Ellen White received her so-called "Otsego vision" on health reform (June 6, 1863). This vision lasted 45 minutes. In her explanation, she says that she did not know of any writings by Dr. Jackson until September 1863, one or two months after the vision. But in his book The Early Years, Arthur White reveals that James and Ellen in fact did know of Dr. Jackson's writings in February 1863, four months BEFORE the vision. James and Ellen's two boys had become ill by diphteria in the beginning of February 1863,

"And then it happened! In the first week of February two of James and Ellen White's three boys complained of severe sore throats and high fever, and they could hardly utter a word - undeniable, frightening symptoms. They had diphtheria. Fortunately - in the providence of God, no doubt - there had come into their hands, probably through an 'exchange' of papers at the Review office, either the Yates County Chronicle, of Penn Yan, New York, or some journal quoting from it, an extended article entitled 'Diphtheria, Its Causes, Treatment and Cure.' It was written by Dr. James C. Jackson, of Dansville, New York. How eagerly James and Ellen White read it." (A.L. White, Ellen G. White, Vol. 2, The Progressive Years, p. 13. Emphasis supplied.)

It becomes therefore obvious that Ellen White in fact was familiar with Dr. Jackson's writings at least four months before she received her "health reform vision" at Otsego.

Because Ellen White gave misleading information about this in her "explanation" in the Review, we are then forced to ask questions about other details in the explanation: Did she in fact unwrap and read Dr. Jackson's articles before she got her "vision?" A person caught in a lie, may be suspect of other lies.

In addition, James White wrote a series of health related articles in the Review six months before the Otsego-vision in June 1863. In his articles, James emphazised healthy living, and in a Review(February 10, 1863) he mentioned fresh air, clean water and light as "God's great remedies, which are preferable instead of physicians and their medicines." The following week, James put into the Review Dr. Jackson's article on diphteria and its cure.

Consequently, there's not a shadow of doubt that Ellen White both knew, and had been reading health related matter before her vision. Her statement that she did not knew any health related matter neither from Dr. Jackson or from others until spetember 1863, is simply not true.

Because the information given in her "visions" on health reform were strikingly similar to the teachings of Dr. Jackson and others, the suspicion is strengthened.

She says that she did not read other writings on hygiene until she had finished Spiritual Gifts, vols. 3-4, Appeal to Mothers and sketched the material for How to Live - information gathered almost totally from others. Appeal to Mothers was published in 1864. This book is so bizarre, that its contents certainly did not come from heavenly visions, but from other authors who were strongly colored from contemporary myths and superstitions on the subject of masturbation - in particular Sylvester Graham. These peculiarities did not originate with Ellen White, neither did she receive them from heavenly visions. From were did she get them, then? From other authors who believed these oddities. Ellen White just echoed the superstitions of others. This is the only reasonable conclusion. Ellen White must have read other health related material before she wroteAppeal to Mothers and the other works mentioned, which also contain strange things. The matter contained in Appeal to Mothers stands as a mighty witness against Ellen White's explanation in the Review. She did in fact read other writings on hygiene before her vision, and before she wrote the books she mentioned, and in these books she parrotted a motley-collection of truth and superstition. When it comes to Appeal to Mothers, mostly superstition. No wonder that this book went into a quiet death and a secluded grave. Why, one would ask, inasmuch it was based upon "heavenly visions"?

"Animal organs"

We have previously mentioned phrenology. This pseudo-science claimed that the brain was divided into as many "organs" as there were traits of character etc. The "Animal organs" were at the base of the brain, at the rear. These "organs" controlled the base or "Animal passions". Ellen White touched on this when she wrote a testimony to a money-greedy brother, telling him that the problem was caused by "satanic excitation of the organ of aquisitiveness" (letter to Br. and Str. Lockwood, Sept. 1864).

But Ellen White had other things to say about the "Animal organs".

"Fashion loads the heads of women with artificial braids and pads, which do not add to their beauty, but give an unnatural shape to the head. The hair is strained and forced into unnatural positions, and it is not possible for the heads of these fashionable ladies to be comfortable. The artificial hair and pads covering the base of the brain, heat and excite the spinal nerves centering in the brain. The head should ever be kept cool. The heat caused by these artificials induces the blood to the brain. The action of the blood upon the lower or Animal organs of the brain, causes unnatural activity, tends to recklessness in morals, and the mind and heart is in danger of being corrupted. As the Animal organs are excited and strengthened, the moral are enfeebled. The moral and intellectual powers of the mind become servants to the Animal." (EGW in The Health Reformer, October 1, 1871. Emphasis supplied.)

Now we have been learning something new: wigs and toupees (braids and pads) may cause recklessness in morals because the "Animal organs" are being excited.

"Habits which lower the standard of physical health, enfeeble the mental and moral strength. The indulgence of unnatural appetite and passions has a controlling influence upon the organs of the brain. The Animal organs are strengthened, while the moral are depressed." (Testimony for the Church, PH159, p. 67. Counsels on Health, p. 36. Emphasis supplied.)

Apart from the suspicion that the above quotations most probably are borrowed from other authors and published in The Health Reformer as "the Spirit of Prophecy" to give weight to their statements, they reflect the phrenological principles about "organs of the brain" and "Animal organs". Such kind of matter were mere reflections from the lack of knowledge about the brain, but still got their way into SDA-publications. Of course other people wrote on phrenological principles, but when such matter was borrowed and published under the name of Ellen G. White, it suddenly became "The Spirit of Prophecy".

Plagiarism

There is considerable evidence for Ellen White borrowing information from other health reformers and publishing this information as a "pipeline from heaven". Early books as Appeal to Mothers and How to Live, Articles in the Health Reformer etc. etc. testify to this. Her plagiarism of health related material is also evident. I will quote a few statements from Larkin B. Coles and compare them to statements allegedly from Ellen White.

"It is as truly a sin to violate the laws of our being as it is to break the ten commandments. To do either is to break God's laws." (EGW, Christian Temperance (1890), p. 53.)

"It is as truly a sin against Heaven, to violate a law of life, as to break one of the ten commandments" (Larkin B. Coles, Philosophy of Health (1853), p. 215).

"The sympathy which exists between the mind and the body is very great. When one is affected, the other responds." (EGW, Testimonies, vol 4, p. 60 (1876).)

"The sympathy existing between the mind and the body is so great, that when one is affected, both are affected" (Larkin B. Coles, Philosophy of Health (1853), p. 127).

". . .flesh meat is not necessary for health or strength. If used it is because a depraved appetite craves it. Its use excites the Animal propensities to increased activity and strengthens the Animal passions. When the Animal propensities are increased, the intellectual and moral powers are decreased. The use of the flesh of Animals tends to cause a grossness of body and benumbs the fine sensibilities of the mind." (EGW, Testimonies, vol 2, p. 63 (186.)

"Flesh eating is certainly not necessary to health or strength. . . .If it be used, it must be a matter of fancy. . . .It excites the Animal propensities to increased activity and ferocity. . . .When we increase the proportion of our Animal nature, we suppress the intellectual. . . .The use of flesh tends to create a grossness of body and spirit" (Larkin B. Coles: Philosophy of Health, (1853), p. 64-67)

It is evident for all to se that one is copied from the other. Ellen White published her testimoniesafter 1853, the year when Larkin B. Coles published his book, it is therefore easy to see who copied from whom. These comparisons can be continued ad infinitum.

Larkin B. Coles warned against the use of flesh meats many years prior to Ellen White's so called health reform vision in 1863, where she "saw" that the use of flesh meat was not the best. Ellen White's well known statement that transgression of the laws of health is synonymous with transgression of the Law of God, comes - as we have seen - from Larkin B. Coles. It stands there on print for all to see. Larkin B. Coles was a milleritte who died in 1856. He also advocated dress reform, and was against the use of drugs (medicines). He also launched the idea that there might be a connection between the use of tobacco and cancer. (The Beauties and Deformities of Tobacco-Using, p. 142. (1853).) Much of Ellen White's writings on health reform show great similarities with the writings of Larkin B. Coles, who wrote long before Ellen White. There should be no doubt about Ellen White's borrowing from Coles and presenting the matter as "heavenly visions."

In his book Lectures on the Science of Human Life (1849) the free-thinker Sylvester Graham (1794-1851) advocated most of the health principles Ellen White claimed to have seen in her vision from 1863. He warned about the use of eggs, milk, butter, tea, coffee, tobacco, rich pastries, medicines (drugs), white bread, pork, spices, tight lacing and all kinds of exciting food - exactly the same as Ellen White, but prior to her. Obviously, Ellen White was strongly influenced by Sylvester Graham. Dio Lewis was another well known health reformer from the 1850's. He advocated two meals a day - the same as EGW, but prior to her.

In the 1850's, health reform was very popular. Numerous health reformers travelled around, holding lectures on health reform. They advocated all the principles Ellen White later presented in her own writings. Her vision from 1863 represented nothing new under the sun. All this was well-known matter which had been preached and lectured in America at least ten years before her vision. On this background, it sounds strange that God would give her a "vision" on all these well-known things, and also that Ellen White claimed that she did not know about this before she got her "vision written down". Then she "discovered" to her "amazement" that others had advocated the same principles years before he! But Ellen White got all the merit for the pioneer work other people had been doing years before her.

It has been claimed that God had been showing Ellen White "advanced medical principles" years ahead of her time. As we have seen, these are exaggerated claims. These principles did not originate with her. What God really should have shown her in visions, was how to prevent by simple means some of the greatest causes of disease at that time.

1. In 1863 one of the greatest transmitters of disease was milk. Both tuberculosis and brucellosis could be transmitted by milk. In 1870 the method of pasteurizing was developed by heating the milk to a certain temperature. This was a simple procedure. Ellen White should have known this from her visions, but because pasteurizing was developed at a later time, she had no literature on the subject to copy from.

2. At that time people died by the thousands by typhus and cholera. The medical science did not know that this diseases could be prevented by boiling the drinking water. Ellen White should have been shown this in visions, but because medical science didn't know this simple fact in the 1860's, Ellen White had no one to copy from.

In 1844 Mrs. M.L. Shew published the third edition of her book with the lengthy title, "Water Cure for Ladies: A Popular Work on the Health, Diet and Regimen of Females and Children, and the Prevention and Cure of Diseases; With a Full Account of the Processes of Water Cure; Illustrated With Various Cases". The 1844-edition was in fact the third edition; the book must therefore have been published some time before 1844.

In this book a great number of the "new" health principles Ellen White "saw" in the "Otsego vision" of 1863, and which she got credit for, were outlined - health principles which were "far advanced for her time". Mrs. Shew (prior to 1844) and Mrs. White (after 1863) warned against the use of alcohol, drugs, salt, spices, tea, tobacco, opium. (Ellen White was warned in a "vision" against opium; Mrs. Shew warned against opium several years before, without help from any "vision".) She also warned against rich pastries, meat, cheese etc.)

Mrs. Shew (before 1844) and Mrs. White (after 1863) recommended water cures in the place of medicines, salt in small quantities only, daily bathing, excercise, fresh air, preparing pies and cakes with cream instead of butter and lard, cream and milk instead of meat, fruit and vegetables instead of meat, 5-6 hours between meals, bread from whole grain etc. etc.

Accordingly, there was nothing new under the sun in Ellen White's health reform vision from 1863. Others had been advocating the same principles long before Ellen White came into the arena. However, because of borrowing and plagiarism, and aggresive promoting, she got all the credit for health principles others had been pioneering long before her.

As we have seen, Ellen White's counsels on health are frequently mixed with bizarre superstitions she borrowed from others.

Ellen White went against her own counsels

In the 1850's both James and Ellen White made use of swine's flesh as food. Later they abandoned it.

"Dear Sister Curtis: - I felt sorry for you as I read your letter. I believe you to be in error. The Lord showed me two or three years since that the use of swine's flesh was no test. Dear sister, if it is your husband's wish to use swine's flesh you should be perfectly clear to use it." (EGW, letter to Str. Curtis, quoted in H.E. Carver, Mrs. E.G. White's Claims to Divine Inspiration Examined. Emphasis supplied.)

In 1858 Ellen White wrote a similar testimony,

"I saw that you had mistaken notions about afflicting your bodies, depriving yourselves ofnourishing food. Some have gone too far in the eating question. They have taken a rigid course, and lived so very plain that their health has suffered. I saw that God did not require any one to take a course of such rigid economy as to weaken or injure the temple of God. All this is outside of the word of God. If this is a duty of the church to abstain from swine's flesh God will discover it to more than two or three. A fanatical spirit is with you. You are deceived." Testimony No. 5. Emphasis supplied.)

This is the original testimony. The second edition has been put into Testimonies, vol. 1, pp. 206-7 - somewhat edited, with an "explanation" by James White. Here Ellen White says that swine's flesh is nourishing food, and that people who went against the use of it, were deceived and led by a fanatical spirit. (The testimony had to do with swine's flesh.)

Then we have the strange situation that God showed Ellen White in a vision that the use of swine's flesh was not a test, and that it was OK to eat it, in spite of what the Bible plainly says, that the swine is an unclean Animal.

". . .And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcase" (Deut. 14:.

This plain command, written several thousand years ago, was no unknown matter.

Later, Ellen White writes testimonies - allegedly based on visions - that swine's flesh was unclean food, and that God did not sanction its use. First, God shows Ellen White in a "vision" that the use of swine's flesh is OK. Later, God shows her that it is wrong to make use of it. Meantime, the Bible was clear on that point.

James White wrote in 1850,

"Some of our good brethren have added 'swine's flesh' to the catalogue of things forbidden by the Holy Ghost, and the apostles and elders assembled at Jerusalem. But we feel called upon to protest against such a course, as being contrary to the plain teaching of the holy scriptures. Shall we lay a greater 'burden' on the disciples than seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and the holy apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ? God forbid. Their decision, being right, settled the question with them, and was a cause of rejoicing among the churches, and it should forever settle the question with us." (The Present Truth Vol. 1., Nov., 1850. - No. 11., 'Swine's Flesh'. Emphasis supplied.)

James White wrote this in 1850. In 1858 both he and his wife wrote letters and testimonies echoing this article. James even claimed that to go against the use of swine's flesh, was contrary to Scripture.

On the back of this letter to Str. Curtis (quoted above), James White had jotted down,

"That you may know how we stand on this question, I would say that we have just put down a two hundred pound porker." (H.E. Carver, Mrs. E.G. White's Claims to Divine Inspiration Examined.)

Ann Lee (1736-84), who founded "the Shakers", received "visions" which she published as "Testimonies". She went strongly against the use of swine's flesh - and that several years before Ellen White came into the arena. All this was nothing new. At the very time James White "brought down a hundred pound porker", Ann Lee's testimony against the use of swine's flesh had been in existence for many years.

It then becomes clear that SDA's at that time did not dodge the use of fat porkers, and they had Ellen Whites "inspired testimonies" behind them to support this practice. But later she received equally "inspired testimonies", saying that God did not intend that people should eat swine's flesh, under any circumstances. (How to Live, chap. 1, p. 58 (1865).)

"You know that the use of swine's flesh is contrary to His express command, given not because He wished to especially show His authority, but because it would be injurious to those who should eat it." (Testimonies, vol. 2, p. 96 (186.)

Accordingly, Ellen White's statements where she "saw" that the use of swine's flesh was not wrong, comes into a strange light. Later editions of Ellen White's books have footnotes and appendices, trying to "explain" her many contradictory statements on health issues from that time. One common explanation is that Adventists got "progressive light" on health issues. But that doesn't explain away the fact that at the same time a substantial number of health reformers both wrote and lectured against the use of swine's flesh, and flesh meat in general, without pleading heavenly visions as basis for their teachings. Both Graham, Fowler, Wells, Jackson, Trall, Ann Lee and others warned against the use of swine's flesh, but God were obliged to give Seventh-Day Adventists "progressive light" and in addition contradict himself!

After her Otsego vision in 1863, Ellen White abandoned the use of flesh meat a few years. Later she took up her former practice and ate meat until 1894. This information will undoubtedly come as a shock to many, but is based on plain facts.

In a letter to E.S. Ballenger, (January 9, 1936), Dr. John H. Kellogg wrote,

"Mrs. White ate meat and plenty of it. The next day after she arrived in America on her return from Scandinavia. I took dinner with her at the house of a mutual friend near New Bedford, Massachusetts. A large baked fish occupied the center of the table. Mrs. White ate freely of itas did all the rest with the exception of the hostess and myself. From this circumstance I think Mrs. White began the use of meat during the several years she spent abroad, chiefly In Switzerland and Scandinavia. She visited the Sanitarium frequently during the years that intervened before she went to Australia. When there she always called for meat and usually fried chicken. Dr. H.F. Rand was then the cook at the Sanitarium and had became an ardent vegetarian and he on more than one occasion said to me, 'It goes very hard on me to have to prepare fried chicken for Mrs. White.' In those days we had a liberal table at the Sanitarium where we served meat to friends of patients who insisted on having it, although we did not prescribe it for patients.

'At the annual meetings of the General Conference, which were always held in Battle Creek, we used to give the Conference a banquet. Most of the members were members of the Sanitarium constituency. We thought we owed them that courtesy. At these banquets they expected us to serve meat.

'In those days practically all Seventh-Day Adventist ministers ate meat.

'They knew that Mrs. White ate it and with not more than two or three exceptions they all ate chicken or mutton stew that was usually served them.

'On the day of Elder White's funeral, his, brother, who attended the funeral, and his two sons, J.E. and W.C., took dinner at the Sanitarium. They ate the liberal table and both ate meat within an hour after their father was buried.

'After Mrs. White return from Scandinavia she visited many camp meetings at some of which I was present. She was then in the habit of eating meat and the fact must have been generally known. I heard J.E. on one occasion, standing in front of his mother's tent, call out to a meat-wagon that visited the grounds regularly and was just leaving, 'Say, hello there! Have you any fresh fish?' 'No' was his reply. 'Have you got any: fresh chicken?' Again the answer was 'No,' and J.E. bawled out in a very loud voice, 'Mother wants some chicken. You had better get some quick.'

'It was always lay suspicion that he was the one who was hankering for the chicken and that Mrs. White ate it also and that it was then her habit.

'I am surprised that Elder Starr should state that Mrs. White did not eat meat in Australia. He must have been acquainted with the fact that she ate it regularly. She was eating meat when she went there (1891) and continued to eat it for several years until she got rheumatism so bad she was not able to walk and had to be wheeled about and sat in a chair while she talked.

'After a while she gave up the use of meat and wrote me about it. She said that one of her addresses on Christian temperance was attended by a Catholic woman who was president of the W.C.T.U. and happened to be a vegetarian.

'After the lecture she called on Mrs. White and thanked her for the lecture and remarked, 'Of course you do not eat meat, Mrs. White.' Mrs. White replied she did sometimes, whereat the lady dropped upon her knees and with tears streaming down her face besought Mrs. White never again to allow a morsel of meat to pass her lips. Said Mrs. White in her letter to me, 'I thought it was about time me to begin my own teaching.' So who said, 'I have stopped the use of meat myself, but I still serve it to my workers. . . .

'When I visited the Grand Rapids camp grounds, one of the first camp meetings held, I found in the provision stand conspicuously displayed whole codfish, large slabs of halibut, smoked herring, dried beef and Bologna sausage. I found some of the same things at all the camp meetings I visited.

'After a few years I succeeded in getting these things cleared out. On one occasion in order to clean up the provision stand I paid what the whole stock of meat, strong cheese and some detestable bakery stuff cost, which was fifteen dollars, and ordered it thrown into the river. I was assured that this would be done, but learned afterwards that it was put away and after the camp meeting was Over was divided up among the preachers of the Conference. This was in Indiana. I received information concerning its disposal from Elder Covert who was President of the Conference." (Letter, J.H. Kellogg to E.S. Ballenger, Jan. 9, 1936. Emphasis supplied.)

In this letter, we are to note that Ellen White admitted as late as 1894 that she ate meat. According to the words of several witnesses, she had at that time been a meat-eater for several years. Further she admitted in 1894 that it was time to begin to follow her own counsel. Accordingly, she had not been doing this for a number of years. Do not forget that she received her so-called vision on health reform in 1863, 31 years before 1894.. In a manuscript, dated August 30, 1896, Ellen White herself admits this incident in Australia, in 1894.

It is strange that the Otsego vision in 1863 - which Ellen White claimed was from heaven - was not enough to convince her to keep to the health reform. A catholic lady was to intervene several years later, and she managed to accomplish what the "heavenly vision" did not.

In 1863, according to her own claims, God gives her a vision, in which both she and others were warned against meat-eating, that it caused leprosy, tuberculosis, cancer, benumbed the brain, shortened the life-span etc. Quite often Ellen White wrote testimonies, condemning others for eating meat, while she herself was a meat-eater.

"Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?" (Romans 2:21,22.)

"Thou therefore which teachest another not to eat flesh-meats, dost thou eat flesh-meat?"

According to Dr. Kellogg, she reverted back to meat-eating during her stay in Europe in the mid 1880's. However, from her own letters, it is quite obvious that she had been eating both meat and fish long before that. So what? She did not sin in doing this. Nowhere does the Bible call meat-eating a sin. That's not the point in question here. What we are discussing, is Ellen White pretending to be a health reformer, condemning other people for occasional digressions, all the time while she herself made quite a few "digressions" on a continual basis. This, of course, is hypocrisy.

In a letter, dated May 31, 1882, Ellen White wrote,

"Mary, if you can get me a good box of herrings, fresh ones, please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy cans, say, half a dozen cans, of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them." Letter 16, 1882", to her daughter-in-law, Mary Kelsey White.)

After the 1887 campmeeting in Springfield, Ill., Ellen White met Fannie Bolton and wanted to hire her as a literary assistant. Ellen White arranged to meet her in Chicago on the way back to California. From Chicago they were to travel together. Fannie Bolton tells the story,

"When Ellen left the campmeeting circuit to return to her home in California, she arranged for Fannie to meet her and her party at the Chicago depot so that they could travel together. Ellen was 'not with her party, so Elder Starr hunted around till he found her behind a screen in the restaurant very gratified in eating big white raw oysters with vinegar, pepper and salt,' Fannie wrote; and on the same trip Willie White brought into the car a 'thick piece of bloody beefsteak' for Sara McEnterfer, one of Ellen's valued employees, to cook on a small oilstove. These incidents were shocking to Fannie, who had 'lived up to the testimonies with all faithfulness discarding meat, butter, fish, fowl and the supper meal, believing that as the 'Testimonies' say, 'no meat-eater will be translated.'' (Letter, Fannie Bolton to Mrs. E.C. Slawson, Dec. 30, 1914; pp. 108-9. The Fannie Bolton Story: A Collection of Source Documents, Ellen G. White Estate, 1982.)

Dr. John Harvey Kellogg tells almost the same story,

"With reference to Fanny Bolton's story about Mrs. White eating oysters, Fanny told me that the first time she net Mrs. White was in Chicago in a restaurant. She had been informed that Mrs. White was eating her dinner at a certain restaurant and went there and found she was eating stewed oysters. Mrs. White I think was not so much to blame for eating meat oysters etc. as the people associated with her. They made her believe that she needed meat and ought to eat it." (Letter, J.H. Kellogg to E.S. Ballenger, Jan. 9, 1936. Emphasis supplied.)

According to Dr. Charles E. Stewart, Ellen White in fact ate oysters as late as 1890.

As I have mentioned on several occasions, Ellen White received her so-called health reform vision in 1863. The purpose of this vision was - according to EGW - to show the dangers of meat-eating,

"But since the Lord presented before me, in June, 1863, the subject of meat-eating in relation to health, I have left the use of meat. For a while it was rather difficult to bring my appetite to bread, for which, formerly, I have had but little relish. But by persevering, I have been able to do this. I have lived for nearly one year without meat." (Spiritual Gifts, vol 4a, p. 153. (1864). Emphasis supplied.)

Five years later Ellen White wrote,

"I have not taken one step back since the light from heaven upon this subject first shone upon my pathway. I broke away from everything at once, - from meat and butter, and from three meals. . . .I left off these things from principle. I took my stand on health reform from principle." (Testimonies, vol. 2, pp. 371-372 (1869). Emphasis supplied.)

The following year she wrote,

"Those who digress occasionally to gratify the taste in eating a fattened turkey or other flesh meats, pervert their appetites, and are not the ones to judge of the benefits of the system of health reform. They are controlled by taste, not by principle. . . .No butter or flesh meats of any kind come on my table." (Testimonies, vol. 2. p. 487 (1870). Emphasis supplied.)

This was written in 1870, just one year after she had written that she did not yield an inch from the principles of health reform.

When Dr. Ronald Numbers was struggling with the White Estate to get copies of letters and other material as documentation for his forthcoming book "Prophetess of Health" (1976), he finally got what he asked for, with the exception of two letters which Arthur White would not release - probably because they were damaging for the madonna-picture of Ellen G. White. One of these letters was dated 1873, just two years later than the above testimony from 1870. In this letter from 1873, Ellen White describes a vacation trip to the Rocky Mountains, where both she and her family ate deer-broth and wild ducks.

"A young man from Nova Scotia had come in from hunting. He had a quarter of deer. He had traveled 20 miles with this deer upon his back. ... He gave us a small piece of the meat, which we made into broth. Willie shot a duck which came in a time of need, for our supplies were rapidly diminishing" (Manuscript 11, 1873; Manuscript Release 14, p. 353. Emphasis supplied).)

". . . No butter or flesh meats of any kind come on my table," she had written two years before, reproving a brother for gratifying his appetite on a fat turkey. Those who did so, she informed, were not to talk aloud about the benefits of health reform - while she herself, from time to time, gratified her own appetite by eating meat. However none wrote more about the benefits of health reform than Ellen White at that time.

Long after the death of his mother, W.C. White told about picknic baskets laden with chicken, turkey and tinned tongue. (Ronald Numbers, Prophetess of Health, pp. 171-2.)

". . .No butter or flesh meats of any kind come on my table." (Testimonies, vol. 2. p. 487 (1870).

"You place upon your tables butter, eggs, and meat, and your children partake of them. They are fed with the very things that will excite their Animal passions, and then you come to meeting andask God to bless and save your children. How high do your prayers go?" (Testimonies, vol. 2, p. 362 (1870). Emphasis supplied.)

What kind of God does Ellen White present here? Are God's answers to prayers dependent on an egg or two, or a little butter on the breakfast table? According to this, one egg on the table, and your prayers go as high as the roof, but not further. Does this make any sense to you, dear reader?

But at the 1919 Bible Conference, A.G. Daniells, the President of the General Conference, commented,

"I have eaten pounds of butter at her table myself, and dozens of eggs. I could not explain that in her own family if I believe that she believed those were the Lord's own words to the world." (Statement by A.G. Daniells, Bible Conference of 1919.. Emphasis supplied.)

A.G. Daniells had been knowing Ellen White personally for 40+ years.

According to Ellen White's testimony, her own prayers during several years did not reach longer than the roof - she had been placing eggs, butter and meat on her table!

In 1888, at a time when Ellen White ate meat, she wrote,

"I do not preach one thing and practice another. I do not present to my hearers rules of life for them to follow while I make an exception in my own case...." (Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 302; Letter 12, 1888. Emphasis supplied.

But at this time Ellen White did teach one thing and practice quite another. This is well documented. She pretended before others that she was a strict health reformer, and she condemned in strong words others who took "side steps" - all while she herself took quite a few "side steps". If this is not religious hypocrisy, what is it then? The above statement is a plain lie which does not square up with documented facts!

In the years 1891-1900 she wrote,

"No man should be set apart as a teacher of the people while his own teaching or example contradicts the testimony God has given His servants to bear in regard to diet, for this will bring confusion. His disregard of health reform unfits him to stand as the Lord's messenger." (Testimonies, vol 6, p. 378. Emphasis supplied.)

In 1903, nine years after she finally abandoned meat-eating, she wrote,

"God gave the light on health reform, and those who rejected it, rejected God." (Special Testimonies, vol 6, p. 31. Emphasis supplied.)

She claimed that God gave light on health reform in 1863. According to herself, those who rejected the light, rejected God. Ellen White did not reject health reform per se, but for many years she did not practice it. She was a health reformer by principle, not by practice. According to her own words, she could not represent the truth to others, and was unfit to stand as God's messenger all these years - more than twenty years - all the while she calls herself "God's messenger".

At that time (1901) Arthur G. Daniells was elected President of the General Conference - an office he held to 1922. Daniells was a meat eater and neglecter of health reform, but in spite of this, Ellen White strongly supported Daniells when he was elected. How could she do that, when his "neglect of health reform" made him "unfit" to stand as the Lord's messenger? None should be elected to teach the people, she wrote, while they were neglecting health reform.

In 1909, Ellen White wrote,

"When the message of health reform first came to me (1863), I was weak and feeble, subject to frequent fainting spells. I was pleading with God for help, and He opened before me the great subject of health reform. . . .This light has been a great blessing to me. I took my stand as a health reformer, knowing that the Lord would strengthen me. I have better health today, notwithstanding my age, than I had in my younger days. . . .

'It is reported by some that I have not followed the principles of health reform as I have advocated them with my pen; but I can say that I have been a faithful health reformer. Those who have been members of my family know that this is true." (Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 158-159. Emphasis supplied.)

This light she may have been receiving by reading the numerous writings on health issues which circulated at that time - and she did exactly that.

But as we have seen, Ellen White admitted while in Australia, that she ate meat at that time, until 1894. Her big household, counting sixteen people, would most probably attest to that. Her own son Edson provided her with chicken; and while visiting the Battle Creek Sanitarium, she ordered fried chicken. She ate oysters and herring, butter and eggs. In other words, she was not a true health reformer from 1870 or prior to that, until 1894. In addition she was a hypocrite on this matter. She did not tell the whole truth in her statement from 1909.

Dress reform

Even the so-called dress reform, which the SDA's advocated in the 1800's, was not based on "visions" from God, in spite of Ellen White's claims to the contrary. Ann Lee, of the Shakers, introduced a special dress for her followers.

Shortly before the American Civil War in the years 1861-5, a few radical feminists in America advocated a so-called "reform-dress", consisting of a dress, halfways up to the knees, with loose-sitting pants underneath. Some adventist sisters claimed that such a reform dress was both healthy and sensible, but Ellen White condemned it and took heaven as witness to that, through a testimony,

"God would not have His people adopt the so-called reform dress. It is immodest apparel, wholly unfitted for the modest, humble followers of Christ. . . .Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights and the so-called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message." (Testimonies, vol 1, p.p. 421-422 (June 1863). Emphasis supplied.)

Here Ellen White claims in no uncertain words that God would not that his people should adopt this reform dress because it was "immodest".

Four years later (1867) Ellen White says in a new testimony, purportedly from heaven,

"Christians should not take pains to make themselves a gazing-stock by dressing differently from the world." (Ibid, p. 458. Emphasis supplied.)

She claims that his people should not adopt the American reform dress and dress differentely from the world.

One year later, in September 1864, James and Ellen White visited Dr. James C. Jackson's sanitarium at Dansville, N.Y. During their three weeks stay at this place, they both became fascinated by the health reform principles taught there. One of the physicians at Dr. Jackson's sanitarium, Miss Harriet N. Austin, wore a reform dress which, with small modifications, was similar to the reform dress Ellen White one year previously had claimed that God would not that his people should adopt. Ellen White began wearing Miss Austin's reform dress, and received "visions", testimonies and "revelations" where she claimed that God now wanted his people to adopt this dress,

"God would now have His people adopt the reform dress, not only to distinguish them from the world as His "peculiar people," but because a reform in dress is essential to physical and mental health." (Ibid, p. 525. Emphasis supplied.)

One of the reasons that God now wanted his people to adopt the reform dress - the same dress he previously had condemned - was to distinguish his people from the world and set them apart as his special people. But he had stated previously that his people should not make gazing-stocks of themselves, by dressing differently from the world! These are all absurdities and contradictions, which did not originate from an orderly God. God does not change his mind from day to day.

Ellen White provided paper-patterns which she advertised in the Review at one dollar each. She also brought these patterns with her wherever she travelled and sold them at the same price. She urged the sisters to buy them, and urged them not to make their own! This was some business going on!

D.M. Canright tells about his own wife, who wore this reform dress,

"I was married at Battle Creek in 1867, to a young sister of nineteen. It was at the height of this short-dress craze. Of course, as a minister's wife, she reluctantly put on the dress and wore it for eight years. So I know all about it. It was a shameful thing, and brought ridicule everywhere. On the street, people would stop and gaze at her and mock. I have seen troops of boys follow her, making fun, till she would step into a store to hide from them. We were both ashamed of it; but God's prophet said it was his will, and we must bear the cross! Here is the warning Mrs. White gave:

'I have done my duty; I have borne my testimony, and those who have heard me and read that which I have written, must bear the responsibility of receiving or rejecting the light given [Testimonies, Vol. 1, p. 523.]'." (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White, Chap. 19.)

"Christians should not take pains to make themselves a gazing-stock by dressing differently from the world." (Testimonies, vol 1, p. 458. Emphasis supplied.)

"God would now have His people adopt the reform dress, not only to distinguish them from the world as His "peculiar people. . ." (ibid, p. 525. Emphasis supplied).

Canright goes on,

"But at length she saw it was a mistake and a failure. So she went away to California and quietly laid it off herself, and never wore it afterward. Of course she was plied with requests for explanations; but she simply refused to give any. She said she had given the light. They could obey it or reject it. That was all! The fact was, she had been misled by Miss Austin, and dared not own it, for she had said it was light from heaven, and had made God responsible for it all." (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White, Chap. 19. Emphasis supplied.)

Ellen White says that she received the light, and they (SDA's) could receive it or reject it. Because Ellen White took off her reform dress and never wore it again, she rejected the light from heaven, according to her own words.

Such absurdities and contradictions are the result of claiming heavenly visions as basis for human inventions.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:18 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



10 -Plagiarism

In volume ten of the voluminous SDA Bible Commentary, there is a statement on how Ellen White's writings came into final shape,

"Carefully devised rules to safeguard the authenticity of the materials they handled, as well as a final careful reading by Mr. White, ensured a finished product that was truly the author's." (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 10: Encyclopedia, p. 1592. Emphasis supplied.)

According to what we know today, which is based on solid documentation, the above statement can be said to be quite inaccurate.

It is an undisputable fact that large parts of Ellen G. White's books contain "borrowed" material. In addition, her manuscripts and articles make use of such "borrowed" material. Quite often articles appeared in Signs of the Times, under the name of Ellen G. White - and therefore a "thus saith the Lord" - consisting of entire paragraphs taken verbatim from Wylie's History of the Reformation, and from other authors. The same applies to the Review and other magazines. All this is well-documented, and beyond doubt.

Ellen White's own statements on how her books came into shape, are thus to be weighed against documented facts.

"Sister White is not the originator of these books. They contain the instruction that during her life-work God has been giving her. They contain the precious, comforting light that God has graciously given his servant to be given to the world." (Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Jan. 20, 1903. Emphasis supplied.)

This is not quite true, at least not the way she depicts it. The cold, bare facts stand against her as witnesses. However, it can be said to be a true statement if we see it this way: Sister White is not the originator of these books because most of them consist of plagiarized material from other authors. But that was of course not what she intended to say in the above statement!

We are going to analyze some of her most well-known books, also less known writings, to determine to which extent Ellen and her literary assistants practised their literary stealing behind closed curtains.

The Great Controversy

The book The Great Controversy contains the entire Adventist system of faith, and is one of the most frequently quoted of Ellen White's books.

But few people who love to quote this book know how it came into shape. The Great Controversy went through three editions (1884, 1888 and 1911) - and every new edition contained still more pages and changes.

In his book The White Lie, Walter T. Rea gives us this information,

"One of the unwritten stories in Adventist history is the influence that James White had in forming the ideas and sentences that came out under Ellen's name and pen. Although not noted as a literary writer or as a theologian, James did produce four published books. Two of these wereLife Incidents in Connection with the Great Advent Movement, as Illustrated by the Three Angels of Revelation XIV, published in 1868, and in 1875 Sketches of the Christian Life and Public Labors of William Miller: Gathered from his Memoirs by the Late Sylvester Bliss, and from Other Sources. Both books were almost totally copied from others. The one on William Miller was taken from Sylvester Bliss (who in 1853 had written Memoirs of William Miller). The theology of Life Incidents was copied substantially from Uriah Smith and J. N. Andrews. Neither of these books was ever printed again under the name of James White as far as is known.

"But they were indeed reprinted under another name, that of Ellen G. White, his wife, a few years after his death in 1881-but under the title The Great Controversy (1884). And this production was sold to the believers and the world as the work of Ellen and the angels. Although it had been doctored and padded with other material in the usual manner, clearly it was material that had been published earlier under the name of James. What the people were not told was that the heart of this new revelation had been printed sixteen years before, and that the theme and thesis had been over literally and liberally into Ellen's new Great Controversy.

"One reason is now clear why much of the information in the 1884 edition of The Great Controversy could not have been included in the earlier works of Ellen on the same subject (Spiritual Gifts, published 1858¡64). James had not yet gotten around to copying it from J. N Andrews; so it was not available to Ellen at the time. The 1888 and 1911 editions of The Great Controversy went back to James White's compilation of doctrines and events and picked up even more of his findings and ideas. . . .

"So striking was the copying done under the name of Ellen - and so sensitive is the information that the heart of Adventist theology and eschatology came, not from the visions of or revelations to Ellen, but from the pen of James sixteen years before Ellen wrote them out - that time should be spent examining the evidence in Life Incidents.

"Here it should be recalled that the four small volumes of Ellen's Spiritual Gifts (1858¡64) were amplified to the four volumes of Ellen's The Spirit of Prophecy (1870¡84) and then expanded to Ellen's The Great Controversy (1888 ea.) of the five volume Conflict of the Ages Series. Inasmuch as the earlier eight volumes are now again available in facsimile editions, anyone can examine all the books and note the progressive copy work through the years. Meanwhile, during those same years, the legend grew and grew and was 'sold' and accepted that God had given Ellen exclusive and firsthand knowledge of his plans for the future events of the church and the world. Comparison shows that words, sentences, quotations, thoughts, ideas, structures, paragraphs, and even total pages were taken from James White's book to Ellen's book under a new title-with no blush of shame, no mention of her husband, no thanks to Uriah Smith and J.N. Andrews, for the hard work and theological insights of anyone. . . .

"Much of his material in Life Incidents was taken primarily from J. N. Andrews, whose book published in 1860, interestingly enough, was entitled The Three Messages of Revelation XIV, 6¡12, and particularly The Third Angel's Message and The Two-Horned Beast. James, unlike his wife Ellen, did not even bother to paraphrase-he just took the material from Andrews wholesale into his work.

"Examination reveals that the 1860 book of J. N. Andrews was an exact replay of his own 1851¡55 articles in the Review. Thus James and Ellen had available for their perusal and use after 1855 the content and form of Andrew's work for incorporation in their own work: Spiritual Gifts(1858¡64); Life Incidents (186; The Spirit of Prophecy (1870¡84); Sketches of. . . William Miller (1875); The Great Controversy (188." (Walter T. Rea, The White Lie, pp. 222-224. (1982.) Emphasis supplied. M & R Publications, Box 2056, Turlock, CA 95381.)

In the 1850's the First-Day Adventist H.L. Hastings published a book entitled "The Great Controversy Between God and Man, Its Origin, Progress and End". On March 14, 1858, Ellen White had her so-called Lovett's Grove vision about "The Great Controversy". Four days later James White wrote an enthusiastic review of Hastings' book The Great Controversy. This was just four days after the Lovett's Grove vision. It is quite obvious that James had been reading Hastings' book before he reviewed it. In other words, James and Ellen had this book in their home before she had her Lovett's Grove vision about "The Great Controversy". This gives us some thoughts. Six months later, Ellen published her own "The Great Controversy", (in Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1) purportedly based on her vision.

SDA historian Donald McAdams (Ellen G. White and the Protestant Historians, 1974) points out that Hastings' book "The Great Controversy" and Ellen White's book "The Great Controversy"are remarkably similar. Both books are about the same length, both have the same title, are on the same topic, have the same beginning and end, and interpret Bible the same way.

At this point it should be emphasized that the so-called pillars of Adventism are derived from other Adventist-pioneers, not Ellen White, who only accepted and adopted their interpretations of Scripture - errors and all - into her books, especially The Great Controversy. But first of all, much of the material found its way into James White's books. The Investigative Judgement comes from J.N. Andrews (possibly even the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith!), the sanctuary doctrine comes from Owen R.L. Crosier and Uriah Smith, The United States in Prophecy, the mark of the Beast/image to the Beast comes from Uriah Smith, the seventh-day Sabbath came from Joseph Bates (although there were other sabbath-keeping groups at that time). All this theology has been incorporated into the book The Great Controversy. But the plain fact is that Ellen White did not form the adventist theology - she adopted the various doctrines from other pioneers and claimed heavenly visions to give them the heavenly stamp of approval.

During an interview two men from the General Conference held with Dr. J.H. Kellogg in 1907, shortly before he was expelled from the SDA-church, Dr. Kellogg conveyed this information,

"When the Great Controversy came out and the chapters of the history of the Waldenses, my attention was called to it by somebody right away. I could not help but know about it because there was the little book, Wiley's [sic] History of the Waldenses right there on the Review and Herald book counter, and here was the Great Controversy coming out with extracts from it that were scarcely disguised, some of them. There was disguise because words were changed; it would not have been proper to use quotation marks because words were changed in the paragraph so they were not exact quotations but at the same time were borrowed." (J.H. Kellogg Interview, 1907. Emphasis added.)

Walter Rea continues,

"The whole interview shows that the good doctor was greatly disturbed over what he and others knew to be a deception practiced on the people by Ellen, her son Will and her editors. (Rea, p. 136.)

During the Bible Conference held by the GC in 1919, the following information was given,

"W. W. Prescott: If I should speak my mind frankly, I should say that I have felt for years that great mistakes were made in handling her writings for commercial purposes.C. M. Sorenson: By whom?W. W. Prescott: I do not want to charge anybody. But I do think great mistakes were made in that way. That is why I have made a distinction as I have. When I talked with W.C. White about it (and I do not know that he is an infallible authority), he told me frankly that when they got out "Great Controversy," if they did not find in her writings anything on certain chapters to make the historical connections, they took other books, like "Daniel and the Revelation," and used portions of them; and sometimes her secretaries, and sometimes she herself, would prepare a chapter that would fill the gap." (1919-Bible Conference. Emphasis supplied.)

Here Ellen's youngest son Willie admitted that "they", eg. his mother and her literary assistants, copied extraneous matter from other autors to "fill the gap", without even giving credit to the respective authors, and without references.
The chapters in The Great Controversy which came into fashion this way, were, among others,

"The chapter on William Miller ('An American Reformer') in The Great Controversy (and previously as chapter thirteen in The Spirit of Prophecy, volume four, was lifted, in many cases word-for-word, from a little book James had printed in 1875 as Sketches of the Christian Life and Public Labors of William Miller. (James had acknowledged, both on his title page and by quotation marks in the text, that he had used Sylvester Bliss's memoirs of William Miller (1853) and 'other sources.') Hence, Ellen's version was not 'selective'revelation.' It was not retail merchandise. It was wholesale stealing that went as fenced material incorporated in The Great Controversy."

"By this time Uriah Smith, having been joined to the group, got in on the fun. His material on the sanctuary (published first as Review articles between 1851 and 1855, and then in book form in 1877) provided material for chapter twenty-three, What Is the Sanctuary? in The Great Controversy. His word-by-word descriptions of the Old Testament texts and events were taken over - again not retail, but wholesale - into the picture of the struggle for victory on this earth as written by Ellen and her helpers. One of the other early discoverers and explorers was likewise drafted for the expedition - J.N. Andrews, also a knowledgeable writer. His writings - including the Prophecy of Daniel, the Four Kingdoms, the Sanctuary, and the Twenty-three Hundred Days, published from 1860 to 1863 - were put in the hold as cargo. People of the Adventist Church have been quoting for decades, as Ellen's infallible words, his material on the three angels' messages!" (Rea, pp. 136-137.

When the 1911-edition of Great Controversy was printed, the publishers claimed that "worn out plates" was the main reason for printing the new edition. But according to W.C. White, there may in addition have been another reason for doing so,

"In the body of the book, the most noticeable improvement is the introduction of historical references. In the old edition, over seven hundred biblical references were given, but in only a few instances were there any historical references to the authorities quoted or referred to. In the new edition the reader will find more than four hundred references to eighty-eight authors and authorities" (Selected Messages, Vol. 3, Appendix A, p. 434. Emphasis added).

Walter Rea continues,

"Adventist theologians who take the position that a great deal of stealing went on in the writing of the Canon might want to take note at this point. If one were to compare the four gospels withThe Great Controversy, this is how it would work out. Combining the 400 references from other authors and the 700 Bible texts, and using Willie White's figures, the four writers of the four gospels (copying to the extent that Ellen did) would have had to copy every single verse they wrote! What Don McAdams recorded on the tape of the Glendale Committee meeting about Ellen's Great Controversy is another way of saying the same thing. He said that if every paragraph in The Great Controversy were footnoted in accordance with accepted practice, giving credit where credit was due, almost every paragraph would be footnoted." (Rea, p. 139-140. Emphasis supplied.)

In the 1970's the SDA historian Donald McAdams wanted to do research on one single chapter inThe Great Controversy. In order to do that, he requested to borrow the original manuscripts from The White Estate. He struggled for four years with the prince of the vaults before his request was complied. At last he was granted permission to borrow the original manuscript to the chapter on John Huss - on certain terms: that he did not share the material with anybody, and did not publish his results and conclusions. This, in itself, is an indication that something was "rotten in Denmark." Why such secrecy about the writings of a "true prophet of God"? McAdams discovered to his amazement that in this chapter, consisting of 34 paragraphs, only four paragraphs were original from EGW, the rest was copied from Wylie's History of Protestantism. But when The Great Controversy was being published, those four paragraphs had been removed!

But there's more. The historical errors Wylie had been doing, also found their way into theGreat Controversy. This should be some thought food to them who claim that "God showed Ellen White what to copy and what to leave out"! She and her helpers also arranged the sequence of events and their meaning after Wylie.

Donald McAdams continues,

"Ellen White was not just borrowing paragraphs here and there that she ran across in her reading, but in fact following the historians page after page, leaving out much material, but using their sequence, some of their ideas, and often their words. In the examples I have examined I have found no historical fact in her text that is not in their text. The hand-written' manuscript on John Huss follows the historian so closely that it does not even seem to have gone through an intermediary stage, but rather from the historian's printed page to Mrs. White's manuscript, including historical errors and moral exhortations." (Donald McAdams, Shifting View of Inspiration. Spectrum, vol. 10, No. 4, March. 1980. Quoted in Rea, p. 164. Emphasis supplied.)

And former secretary of the White Estate, Robert Olson, admitted,

"In following Wylie, Mrs. White appears to have made several erroneous historical statements [about Huss in the Great Controversy] which are now deemed to be historically inaccurate. . . .

"I accept the fact that Mrs. White followed Wylie closely - very closely - from Great Controversy page 97 all the way to page 110. It is difficult for me to believe that the Lord gave Mrs. White a vision or a series of visions which, for fourteen pages, coincided in so many details with Wylie." (Robert Olson, Questions and Problems Pertaining to to Mrs. White's Writings on John Huss (1975). Quoted in Rea, p. 255. Emphasis supplied.)

Another matter is that the pictures in Wylie's work also had being copied straight into The Great Controversy. The artist's signature below to the left were removed by retouching, and in its place the Adventist Publishing house, Pacific Press, Oakland, Ca., appeared.

Adventist theologian Raymond F. Cottrell performed an investigation in 1977, where he compared material in The Great Controversy with the church historian Merle d'Aubigne. He discovered that Ellen and her assistants had been paraphrasing d'Aubigne closely. He discovered to his amazement that the material in fact was "borrowed" from a popularized version of d'Aubigne's work History of the Reformation, published for young readers by Charles Adams. In addition, Cottrell discovered that this material had been published in the first place - not in Great Controversy - but under Ellen White's name in Signs of the Times, October 11, 1883 ("Luther in Wartburg")! This should tell someone the extent of her plagiarism, published as a direct pipeline from Heaven!

But what about the rest of the chapters in the book, which have to do with final events, sunday-laws, the mark of the Beast etc.? Isn't that original with Ellen White? Did not God "show" her what to copy and what to leave out? Says Walter Rea,

"It might be useful, however, to note one of the Adventists dying hope. Adventists like to believe that the last chapters of The Great Controversy were structured in their theological favor, that little or no copying was done in the matter of eschatology. A comparison of some chapters in volume four of The Spirit of Prophecy (the forerunner of The Great Controversy) shows that this is only wishful thinking. The later chapters in the enlarged 1911 edition of Controversy show similar patterns.

"As painful as the realization is, the Ford controversy and the Ellen White-comparison-controversy have made The Great Controversy somewhat suspect. Further, another ongoing investigation of recent times shows large chunks of historical error. Even the circuit riders from the White Estate have conceded that the book can no longer be considered an accurate accounting of the events of nineteenth-century history but must be used evangelistically." (Walter Rea, The White Lie, p. 142. Emphasis supplied.)

Professor in English at Andrews University, William S. Peterson, researched the chapter on the French Revolution in Great Controversy, and discovered that her description of this event most probably did not originate from visions, but from bad historians which she made badly use of. A comparison of this chapter with the 1884-edition of Uriah Smith's book Daniel and the Revelation, shows that Ellen White did not quote historians as Scott, Thiers, Gleig or Alison direct from the original sources, but that she in fact drew these sources from Smith's book - which in turn had taken them from the above mentioned historians.

Ronald Graybill tells more on this,

"If one compares The Great Controversy, pages 269-270 and 273-276, with the 1873 edition ofThoughts on Daniel, pages 314-325, or the 1884 edition of Daniel and Revelation, pages 270-279 (either of which Ellen White could have used in her 1888 revision), one discovers that she used nothing from Scott, Gleig, Thiers, or Alison that Smith did not have. Every time Smith deleted material, she deleted the same material, although occasionally she deleted more. She even used the quotations in exactly the same order on pages 275 and 276. There can be no doubt that she drew the historical quotations from Smith, not from the original works." (Ronald Graybill, How Did Ellen White Choose and Use Historical Sources? The French Revolution Chapter of The Great Controversy. Spectrum, summer 1972. Emphasis supplied.)

SDA historian Donald McAdams says,

"What we find when when we examine the historical portions of the Great Controversy (those events from the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. through the French Revolution) is that entire chapters at a time are simply selective abridgments of protestant historians. . . . In the samples I have examined there is not one historical fact in her text that is not in their text." (Donald McAdams, Ellen G. White and the Protestant Historians. Unpublished Manuscript, p. 16-17.)

We are now being able to draw the following conclusions about the book The Great Controversyby "Ellen G. White",

1. The book contains the heart of the SDA faith system.2. Very little of the material in the book is original with Ellen White. Investigation has been showing that the book is made up by material from at least 88 different authors.3. The book was published in three editions: 1884, 1888, 1911. The 1884-edition (The Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 4), was simply doctored, new editions of James White's book Life Incidents andSketches of William Miller. James White in turn had been borrowing the material for his books from books by J.N. Andrews, Sylvester Bliss, and others.4. The 1888-edition was augmented with quite a number of pages, consisting of historical material, and from Uriah Smith - who in turn had been drawing from various sources. There were no references, and no credit had been given to the respective authors.5. Entire chapters in the book are from other authors.6. Historical errors these authors had been doing, were copied straight into The great Controversy. This should refute the claim some are making, that "God showed Ellen White what to copy, and what to leave out".7. The theology in the book, and accordingly the central doctrines of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, like the 2300 years, 1844, the sanctuary, the Investigative Judgment, USA in the prophecies, the mark of the Beast etc., had in fact been derived from adventist pioneers as J.N. Andrews, Uriah Smith, Owen R.L. Crosier etc.

These are cold, bare and undisputable, well documented facts, that places Ellen White's words on how The Great Controversy came into being in a suspect light,

"While writing the manuscript of The Great Controversy, I was often conscious of the presence of the angels of God. And many times the scenes about which I was writing were presented to me anew in visions of the night, so that they were fresh and vivid in my mind." (Letter 56, 1911; Colporteur Ministry, p. 128. Emphasis supplied.)

In fact, Ellen White had very little to do herself with this book, especially the 1911-edition, so maybe she refers to the previous edition of 1888 - a book which largely was put together by her helpers.

The facts are,

"The hand-written' manuscript on John Huss follows the historian so closely that it does not even seem to have gone through an intermediary stage, but rather from the historian's printed page to Mrs. White's manuscript, including historical errors and moral exhortations." (Donald McAdams, Shifting View of Inspiration. Spectrum, vol. 10, No. 4, March. 1980. Quoted in Rea, p. 164. Emphasis supplied.)

This was also the case with the rest of the book. The material was not presented to her by "heavenly visions", but was instead plagiarized from other authors without mentioning their names, and published under Ellen G. White's name as "revelations directly from heaven". Once more Ellen White does not tell the truth, but deceives her readers.

Some claim that because she strongly endorsed the 1911-edition, all should be well,

"A few days ago, I received a copy of the new edition of the book Great Controversy, recently printed at Mountain View, and also a similar copy printed at Washington. The book pleases me. I have spent many hours looking through its pages, and I see that the publishing houses have done good work" (Letter 56, 1911).

Of course she was pleased. She was just as pleased with the 1911-edition as she was pleased with the 1888-edition and the 1884-edition, as well as James' plagiarized books. The fact that she was pleased, does not change the matter. If a bank-robber in jail writes out an endorsement of his robbery, this does not change the matter. His written endorsement does not change the robbery into a charitable act.

Ellen White's endorsement of the 1911-edition does not automatically make the stolen goods a "thus saith the Lord." Here is, however, what the Lord says, "Thou shalt not steal." Regardless of her endorsement, to this day the book The Great Controversy is a big piece of stolen goods. The documentation for this is overwhelming, and should no longer be subject to any discussions. But unlike the bank-robber, Ellen White practiced her literary stealing in the name of God, and has thus been making God an accomplice in her transgression against His law. "Thou shalt not steal."

Desire of Ages

The Desire of Ages is another well known and dear book which goes under the name of Ellen G. White. This book came into being while Ellen White was in Australia, and was published in 1898. First of all, we are going to listen to what a former president of the General Conference had to say,

"In Australia I saw "The Desire of Ages" being made up, and I saw the rewriting of chapters", some of them written over and over and over again. I saw that, and when I talked with Sister Davis about it, I tell you I had to square up to this thing and begin to settle things about the spirit of prophecy. If these false positions had never been taken, the thing would be much plainer than it is today. What was charged as plagiarism would all have been simplified, and I believe men would have been saved to the cause if from the start we had understood this thing as it should have been. With those false views held, we face difficulties in straightening up. We will not meet those difficulties by resorting to a false claim." (The 1919 Bible Conference. Statement by A.G. Daniells. Emphasis supplied.)

Research has been showing that the great proportion of material in Desire of Ages was borrowed from other authors, such as William Hanna, Daniel March, John Harris, and Alfred Edersheim. This has been fully documented. In a letter to Leroy E. Froom, dated January 8, 1928, W.C. White says that Ellen, at the very time she was in the progress of "writing" Desire of Ages, was busy reading books by Hanna, Geikie, Fleetwood and Farrar. She had most certainly been reading books from other authors as well, because their material to a great extent appeared inDesire of Ages.

Further investigation reveals that Alfred Edersheim contributed freely from his book The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (1883). John Fleetwood contributed with material from his bookThe Life of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (1844), William Hanna from his book The Life of Christ (1863), and John Harris from his book The Great Teacher (1836). Other authors has been contributing with material to Desire of Ages as well.

Adventist theologian Walter Specht admitted, after having done some research, that Ellen White, in her books Desire of Ages and Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 2-3, had been making freely use of material by William Hanna. He discovered that this plagiarizing had started with the beginning and ended with the end. SDA historian Donald McAdams admitted that,

"Indeed, there are some closely paraphrased paragraphs and other paragraphs where, although Ellen White's words are different, it is clear she is following the ideas presented by Hanna." (Donald McAdams, Shifting View of Inspiration. Spectrum, vol. 10, No. 4, autumn 1971. Quoted in Rea, p. 91.)

In 1980, the SDA denomination asked Dr. Fred Veltman, who at that time was head of the departement of religion at Pacific Union College, to analyze the charges of plagiarism Walter T. Rea and others had been making against Ellen White. Dr. Veltman researched the matter for eight years, at an expence of some 500,000 dollars, and the results of his research was published inMinistry magazine (November 1990). The conclusions were amazing!

"It is of first importance to note that Ellen White herself, not her literary assistants, composed the basic content of the Desire of Ages text. In doing so she was the one who took literary expressions [copied] from the works of other authors without giving them credit as her sources[plagiarism]. Second, it should be recognized that Ellen White used the writings of othersconsciously and intentionally. ... Impicitly or explicitly, Ellen White and others speaking on her behalf did not admit to and even denied literary dependency [copying] on her part.

"I must admit at the start that in my judgment this is the most serious problem to be faced in connection with Ellen White's literary dependence [copying]. It strikes at the heart of her honesty, her integrity, and therefore her trustworthiness. The content of Ellen White's commentary on the life and ministry of Christ, The Desire of Ages, is for the most part derived [copied] rather than original. . . .

"In practical terms, this conclusion declares that one is not able to recognize in Ellen White's writings on the life of Christ any general category of content or catalog of ideas that is unique to her." (Fred Veltman, Ministry, Nov. 1990, pp. 11-12. Emphasis supplied.)

The conclusions are therefore plain as daylight regarding the book Desire of Ages,

1. The greater proportion of the book has been copied from books by Edersheim, Hanna, Fleetwood, Harris and March (and possibly others).2. A former president of the General Conference, A.G. Daniells, had to adjust his views on a whole lot of things when he saw how the book was being made.3. In Desire of Ages there is not a single thought or idea that is unique to Ellen White. This is of course understandably, since the material had been borrowed from other authors.4. Ellen White and her literary assistants denied their plagiarism.

All of this strikes - as Veltman said - at the integrity of Ellen White, and raises some serious questions about her credibility. It has been proved beyond all shadow of doubt that Ellen White and her helpers did plagiarize, and that to a great extent. This is an undisputable fact. Those who still deny this - and there are quite a few who do - simply have no idea of what they are talking about.

Pastor Henry F. Brown related an incident which happened many years ago, when he was in a second-hand book store together with Arthur S. Maxwell,

"Then, again, I was in a book store with Elder Maxwell, a very wonderful man and I greatly appreciated, he was considerably older than I and we were looking over some books in the second-hand book store. He pulled down from the shelf a book entitled, "Evening Scenes in The Bible." by Dr., I'll give the name later. (Daniel March He says), 'This book is a book from which Mrs. White has secured many of her most beautiful pages in some of her books.' I was amazed and stunned. I didn't dare buy that in front of him to let him know I was reading it, but later on I purchased it. Later on I found that Walter Rea had copied quite a number of quotations from that book." (H.F. Brown's Personal Testimony, Dec. 5, 1984. Emphasis added.))

In other words, well-informed adventists have been familiar with this fact for quite a time.

Prophets and Kings

Volume two in the Conflict series, Prophets and Kings, is no better off than Desire of Ages orGreat Controversy. Comparisons show that much of the material in the book has been borrowed from Edersheim's Bible History: Old Testament, Night Scenes in the Bible by Daniel March and other books.

What is worse, is the fact that Ellen White herself had very little to do with the preparation of this book, which was published in 1916, one year after Ellen's death. On December 27, 1907, Ellens secretary, Clarence C. Crisler, wrote a letter to William W. Prescott where he asked Prescott to "assist them" in the preparation of a book which had to do with ". . .the Old Testament periods not covered in any of the published writings of Str. White." The book in question was what eventually became Prophets and Kings.

In the year 1914, the year before Ellen's death, C.C. Crisler had a series of interviews with her. These interviews are giving us some insight on how the preparation of the book Prophets and Kings progressed - without much intervention from her part. In his manuscript Did the Prophet See Kings? Walter T. Rea tells,

"Crisler knew that Ellen was dying, that her book on this Old Testament period was not . done and that if it were ever to come out under her name it must be finished quickly. The interview shows clearly how it was being finished and shows also that merely having Ellen 'review' or 'supervise' the final draft was absolutely meaningless, but only a mechanical device to help sustain the white lie of Ellen's and thus God's involvement in the whole process. In the interview of several days he says:

"Wednesday eve., July 22, 1914. I related to EGW the main points of the Elisha article on "The Healing of the Waters," also the article on "Deliverance from Assyria;" and EGW expressed her pleasure in knowing that these chapters were nearing completion. She also expressed the hope that she might be strengthened to go over them the final time, so that the work could be bound off properly. But she added that we must help her in this work of binding off, and do our part faithfully, and that this would bring encouragement to all the other workers to do their part.

"Evening of July 27, 1914. Sister White inquired about the progress of the work, and I told her of the Old Testament Mss. again - how all was done now but nine chapters. I outlined at length the Isaiah prophecies we hoped to include in the Visions of Future Glory chapter, and of some of the matter we hoped to include in the chapter. She expressed pleasure in our being able to go to the Word for so much of the material for this chapter; . . . I outlined the plan for dealing with the Jeremiah and the Ezekiel portions, and mentioned in detail the call of Jeremiah, and also of Ezekiel; . . She expressed the hope that we would seize upon the most striking features.

"July 31. Told her of my O.T. History work, particularly the Josiah-Manasseh chapter, and ofhow we were arranging the scriptures and the materials." (Walter T. Rea, Did the Prophet See Kings?. Emphasis supplied.)

It therefore becomes crystal clear that Prophets and Kings was not written by Ellen White personally, but rather compiled from various sources by her many and industrious assistants.

A closer look at the book shows that a series of chapters (1-5, 9-11, 14, 17-18, 34, 39, 43, 47) has been compiled from material from Ellen White's previous books: Christ's Object Lessons, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4, Fundamentals on Education, Education, articles from the Review and Herald, Testimonies, vol. 3 and 5, Desire of Ages, Mount of Blessing, and Ministry of Healing. The last two chapters of Prophets and Kings were being compiled in their entirety from books asDesire of Ages and Great Controversy - which in turn had the great proportion of their material borrowed from other authors!This should tell us something!

Walter Rea goes on,

". . .and so on to the end of the book where the last two chapters were taken in their entirety fromDesire of Ages and Great Controversy. Along with character references from Night Scenes From the Bible by March, and some works of Harris which Prescott had used in his help of Desire of Ages in the first five chapters never written before, the over 2000 Bible texts helped to weave a tapestry of deception that was never discovered until this day when it can now be said thatProphets and Kings became the greatest compilation under the name of Ellen White that was ever published either during or after her death." (Rea, Ibid.)

An open question is how well Ellen's mental health was in 1914, when the above quoted interviews took place. According to D.M. Canright, she was somewhat dement at that time,

"We are informed by her near relatives that during these closing years of her life, when these important books were being prepared, she often did not know her nearest friends, nor even some of her attendants whom she saw almost daily. When she attempted to speak in her home church, she repeated herself over and over again, and had to be told when to stop. None of these weaknesses appear in the composition of her works prepared at that time, because, like most of her earlier work, they were prepared by others." (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White. Emphasis supplied.)

But adventists are not being informed about all this. The lustring picture are to be preserved at any cost.

Patriarchs and Prophets

The book Patriarchs and Prophets (1890, 1913) comprises the first volume in the Conflict series, and is heavy laden with plagiarized material.

In particular, material from Edersheim's Bible History: Old Testament, vol. 1-4, has been the cornerstone for Patriarchs and Prophets. In addition, material and thoughts from John Milton'sParadise Lost (1667) has found its way into Ellen White's book. It is very striking to glance at the chapter sequence in Edersheims work and Ellen's book. They are identical, and in the same order. This can hardly be called accidental.

The story in Patriarchs and Prophets about Satan's fall in heaven etc., shows striking similarities with John Miltons famous work from 1667, Paradise Lost. Ellen White received a copy of Milton's book from J.N. Andrews, who commented on that, but she tells that she "placed it on a high shelf". Maybe she had read Milton's book after all - before Andrews handed her a copy?

In Patriarchs and Prophets, we also find material by Daniel March, Frederick W. Farrar, F.W. Krummacher and others. In addition we find material from the Book of Jasher, a book mentioned in the Bible (Joshua 10:13; 1 Samuel 1:1, but not part of it. The Book of Jasher had been published in an English translation in New York, 1840. It has been claimed that there are 18 parallells to the Book of Jasher in Ellen White's writings.

Acts of the Apostles

The Acts of the Apostles (1911) comprises the last but one book (Vol. 4) of the Conflict Series. The story of how this book came into shape, makes up another dark chapter in the history of Seventh-Day Adventism.

In 1883 the Adventist denomination published a book entitled Sketches from the Life of Paul, by Ellen G. White. Problems arose almost from the start, when the striking similarities between Ellen's new book and the book The Life and Epistles of St. Paul by the British authors W.J. Conybeare and J.S. Howson (1852) were being discovered. In fact, the similarities were so striking that Conybeare and Howson threatened the Adventist denomination with lawsuit if the book was not withdrawn. After several denials, as usual, Sketches was eventually withdrawn.

But in the introduction to Sketches, it says,

"The writer of this book, having received special help from the Spirit of God, is able to throw light upon the teachings of Paul and their application to our own time, as no other authors are prepared to do. She has not suffered herself to be drawn aside to discuss theories, or to indulge in speculation. No extraneous matter is introduced. Consequently much that is contained in other books, which is interesting to the curious, and has a certain value, but which is after all little more than theory, finds no place in this work." (Life Sketches From the Life of Paul, introduction. Emphasis supplied.)

This was quite a statement, but far from any truth.

Of course one could argue that Ellen White did not write the introduction herself. This could be true. However, it has always been claimed that she had the final word in the publication of her writings, and that she always read carefully through the manuscript before it was sent to the publishing house for printing. On account of that, there is good reason to believe that either she endorsed the introduction to Sketches, or she did not. Because the book was published under her name, we will take for granted that she endorsed it.

It is an undisputable fact that great proportions of Sketches had been "borrowed" from Conybeare and Howson's work, and doctored the usual way by Ellen Whites "borrowing staff" before going to press. In spite of this, the introduction claims in plain words that no external material had been used!

"The truth is that Ellen had used the other author's material from beginning to end with little let-up. More recent comparisons indicate that paraphrasing of Conybeare and Howson's book is evident in structure, words, paragraphs, and even pages of material." (Walter Rea, The White Lie, p. 110.)

During the 1919 Bible Conference, Arthur G. Daniells commented on this,

"A. G. Daniells: Yes; and now take that "Life of Paul," - I suppose you all know about it and knew what claims were put up against her, charges made of plagiarism, even by the authors of the book, Conybeare and Howson, and were liable to make the denomination trouble because there was so much of their book put into "The Life of Paul" without any credit or quotation marks. Some people of strict logic might fly the track on that ground, but I am not built that way. I found it out, and I read it with Brother Palmer when he found it, and we got Conybeare and Howson, and we got Wylie's "History of the Reformation," and we read word for word, page after page, and no quotations, no credit, and really I did not know the difference until I began to compare them. I supposed it was Sister White's own work. The poor sister said, "Why, I didn't know about quotations and credits. My secretary should have looked after that, and the publishing house should have looked after it." (1919 Bible Conference, statement by A.G. Daniells.)

But obviously she did not learn from this incident. Both she and her assistants continued as if nothing had happened, in fact they borrowed more heavily than ever!

In the book Sketches From the Life of Paul, the Adventist denomination admits that,

"By the close of 1910 Mrs. White had given full consideration to all the problems connected with the reset edition of Great Controversy, That task having been completed, she found time to supervise the revision of Sketches from the Life of Paul, and add several chapters on the life work, and the writings of the apostles of the early Christian church. This matter was published in 1911, under the title, The Acts of the Apostles. [P. 434, Italics supplied]. There really wasn't much to oversee. In some cases the original material was rearranged, a few more authors were added, and some of the more obvious copying was toned down with more Bible texts." (Rea, ibid. p. 122. Emphasis supplied.)

Among the new authors who found their way into Acts of the Apostles, were, among others, Farrar, March and McDuff. Another author who Ellen White and her staff obviously held in high esteem, was John Harris. His book from 1836, The Great Teacher, became a source to numerous new material for The Acts of the Apostles.

Some EGW-apologists claim that Conybeare and Howson's book was not copyrighted, therefore all things were OK. But was it OK? Is it honest - copyright or not - to make use of other people's material the way Ellen White did, without even giving credit, and publishing it under the name of "the Spirit of Prophecy"? Of course not. This is dishonest practice, swindle, in the name of God!

The conclusion seems inevitable: The entire Conflict series by "Ellen G. White" consists of more or less plagiarized material from other authors.

Steps to Christ

Steps to Christ is a wonderful, spiritual book which has been a great blessing to a great number of people. We are not questioning the spiritual content of the book, rather the authorship. Because the book has been published under the name of Ellen G. White, we may think that she must be the inspired author, but according to what we know at this time about the Conflict series, and other books published under her name, there is good reason to put in a little question mark here. Is indeed Ellen White the real author of Steps to Christ?

The book was published initially in 1893, when Ellen White was in Australia. Strange enough, the first edition was not being published by the Adventist denomination, but by a secular publishing house, Rand McNally in New York.

The book was selling well, and the Adventist denomination, which had a keen sense of money-making, tried to take over the copyright, which it eventually managed to do. When the Adventist denomination published the book, it contained an entire new first chapter. No one knows who wrote this new chapter, certainly not Ellen White.

Who is the real author of Steps to Christ? Robert K. Sanders tells,

"I wrote a letter to the White Estate, January 8, 1997 to Mr. Tim Poirier Associate Director/Archivist asking: "Why did Fanny Bolton claim to have written, "Steps to Christ"? Would you send me a copy of a page from Steps to Christ hand written by Ellen G. White?"

"Mr. Poirier responded in a letter dated January 20, 1997, saying; "Fannie Bolton's claim re Steps to Christ: Fannie Bolton never made that claim, so far as I have ever seen. It was made by others after her death. Nor did Ellen White write the book by hand - so I cannot send you a handwritten page. It was compiled by her editorial assistants from her earlier writings. I've sent an example for your comparison, showing the source for the paragraphs on page 83. (Fannie first met Ellen White in 1887.)"

"Facts: Fannie went to work for Mrs. White in 1888. "Steps to Christ" was published in 1892.

"The comparison sent to me by Mr. Poirier is from Steps to Christ p. 83. "The humblest and poorest of the disciples of Jesus can be a blessing to others. They may not know they are doing any special good, but by their unconscious influence they may start waves of blessings that will widen and deepen, and the blessed results they may never know until the day of final reward." This is to be compared with, Testimonies Volume 3, p. 246 published in 1872. "The humblest and poorest of the disciples of Jesus can be a blessing to others. They may not realize they are doing any special good, but by their unconscious influence they may start waves of blessings that will widen and deepen, and the happy results of their words and consistent deportment they may never know until the day of final distribution of rewards."

"Because of the similarity of the wording of an earlier statement in 1872 found in "Testimonies"when compared to "Steps to Christ" 1892, Mr. Poirier would lead us to believe Fannie could not have written Steps to Christ.

Mr. Poirier, states, "Nor did Ellen White write the book by hand - so I cannot send you a handwritten page. It was compiled by her editorial assistants from her earlier writings."These editorial assistants would have to include Fannie Bolton. We also know Steps to Christwas not written by hand by Ellen G. White but by her editorial assistants.

"Fannie did claim to have written "Steps to Christ" to Edward S. Ballenger and witnessed by Charles D. Willis.

"'Riverside, California June 26, 1952To whom it may concern:This is to certify that I the undersigned, Edward S. Ballenger, was personally aquainted with Miss Fannie Bolton, a literary assistant of Mrs. E.G. White and to further certify that during the period 1895-97 I was told in person by Miss Bolton in Battle Creek that she had written the book Steps to Christ and that Mrs. White had taken the MSS and had published it under her own name. Signed, (Sign) Edward S. Ballenger, 4138 Mulberry St.Witness: (Sign) Charles D. Willis.

"Ellen G. White did not write this book admits the White Estate, and they also admit her assistants compiled it. Where did the material come from that the assistants used? The White Estate tells us it was from Ellen's earlier writings. Is this totally true?

"We now know that "Steps to Christ" was plagiarized from uninspired authors by Ellen's assistants? This was Fannie's habit in writing for Ellen.

"In Fannie's letter to Ballenger she says, "Mrs. White had take the MSS and had published them under her own name. See Fannies confessions: also Kellogg to Ballenger.

"From the evidence we have uncovered, it is easy to understand why Fannie claimed to have authored "Steps to Christ." (Robert K. Sanders, Truth or Fables. Who Wrote Steps to Christ? (http://bigchurch.com). Emphasis supplied.

Here we have once more the same procedure: Ellen White's literary assistants "borrowed" material from other authors, compiled it in a more or less doctored form into books and published them under the name of Ellen G. White as "The Spirit of Prophecy". We remember the incident in Australia, when Fannie Bolton revealed Ellen's working methods and complained about Ellen publishing Fannie's articles under her own (Ellen's) name. It is not hard to understand that she may easily have taken Fannie's manuscript and published it as her own. If Fannie Bolton is the author, there is of course strong reason to suspect that she may have compiled the book from other authors.

A comparison shows that the material in Steps to Christ has been taken from Night Scenes in the Bible by Daniel March (1868-70) and God's Will Known by Almon Underwood (1860). Some of the material had been published in Ellen White's earlier books, and it is an open question how much of this material is original with her.

Other books and articles

Ellen White's plagiarism started early in her career. In the very first publication by Seventh-Day Adventists, the pamphlet A Word to the Little Flock (1847), we discover such "borrowing". This time from the Apocrypha. Examples of this,

"We all entered the cloud together, and were seven days ascending to the sea of glass, whenJesus brought along the crowns and with his own right hand placed them on our heads." (A Word to the Little Flock, p. 15. Emphasis supplied.)

"I, Ezra, saw on Mount Zion a great multitude, which I could not number, and they all were praising the Lord with songs. In their midst was a young man of great stature, taller than any of the others, and on the head of each of them he placed a crown, but he was more exalted than they. And I was held spellbound. Then I asked an angel, 'Who are these, my lord?' He answered and said to me, 'These are they who have put off mortal clothing and have put on the immortal, and they have confessed the name of God; now they are being crowned, and receive palms.' Then I said to the angel, 'Who is that young man who places crowns on them and puts palms in their hands?' He answered and said to me, 'He is the Son of God, whom they confessed in the world'" (2. Esdra, 2:43-47).

"Mount Zion was just before us, and on the Mount sat a glorious temple, and about it were seven other mountains, on which grew roses and lilies,[2 Esdras, 2:19.] and I saw the little onesclimb, or if they chose, use their little wings and fly to the top of the mountains, and pluck the never fading flowers." (Ibid, p. 17. Emphasis supplied.)

"I will send you help, my servants Isaiah and Jeremiah. According to their counsel I have consecrated and prepared for you twelve trees loaded with various fruits, and the same number of springs flowing with milk and honey, and seven mighty mountains on which roses and lilies grow; by these I will fill your children with joy" (2. Esdra 2:18-19).

There was no secrecy about these similarities with the apocryphical 2. Esdra (4. Ezra). In the vision, as related in A Word to the Little Flock, James White did in fact refer to footnotes, which in turn refer to 2. Esdra. We also do find material from other chapters in 2. Esdra, with references, and from another apocryphical book, The Wisdom of Solomon - also with reference. When this vision later was published in Ellen's books Spiritual Gifts and Early Writings, the footnoting and references had been removed, but the material was still there - probably to create the impression that all this was derived from Ellen's "heavenly visions".

We are to note that chapter two in 2. Esdra, and chapters 1, 15 and 16, do not exist neither in the arabic, nor in the ethiopic original manuscripts of the book. Probably the chapters were inserted later by other authors. Even people who believe the Apocrypha to be half-canonical, or accept them fully, do not accept 2. Esdra. But it is quite obvious that Ellen White had been borrowing elements from this apocryphical book into her vision. It now remains to see how much she in fact borrowed from the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith, when such documentation eventually emerges.

In addition, there are unmistakable evidences of plagiarism in other of Ellen White's books, such as Education (1903), where we find material - without giving credit - from the book Our Father's House by Daniel March. Here is an example,

"The eagle of the Alps is sometimes beaten down by the tempest into the narrow defiles of the mountains." (March, p. 254.)

"The eagle of the Alps is sometimes beaten down by the tempest into the narrow defiles of the mountains." (Education, p. 118.)

In the book Education, we find evidences of plagiarism on almost every imaginable subject. Horace Mann is another author who also found his way into the book.

In addition, the books Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students (1913) has been compiled the usual way. According to D.M. Canright, Ellen White was somewhat dement at this time, and therefore unable to write books. But her assistants were in full work. Once more, John Harris' book from 1836, The Great Teacher, provided much material to Ellen's book.

The Testimonies for the Church are not exempted from plagiarism. In them we find considerable amounts of borrowed material, without references, to create the impression that this was material derived directly from "visions" and "revelations". Research has proven that a number of authors have found their way into the Testimonies, among them Larkin Coles, James White, Daniel March, John Harris, Eli Peck Miller, Henry Melvill, Hannah W. Smith and others. Here is one example,

"Christ sought for men wherever he could find them - in the public streets, in private houses, in the synagogues, by the seaside. He toiled all day preaching to the multitudes.( Testimonies, vol 3, p. 322 (1885).)

"He sought for men wherever he could find them - in the public street, in the private house, in the synagogue or by the seaside. He toiled all day in the work of healing and instruction." (Daniel March, Night Scenes in the Bible, p. 334. (1868-1870).)

Here is another,

"I testify to my brethren and sisters that the church of Christ, enfeebled and defective as it may be, is the only object on earth on which He bestows His supreme regard." (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 15.)

"But the church of Christ, enfeebled and defective as it may be, is the only object on earth on which he bestows His supreme regard." (John Harris, The Great Teacher (1842-edition), pp. 158-160.)

Please note that Ellen White inserted a few words at the beginning of the borrowed quotation to emphasize that these were "words from the Lord", "I testify to my brethren and sisters. . . ." We do not deny the truth of this statement. There is nothing wrong with John Harris' material. We do however question this kind of borrowing and doctoring to create the impression that the words came in a direct pipeline from heaven, "The Spirit of Prophecy". This is deception.

It would prove hard to find a single book by Ellen G. White, published before or after her death, which do not show some kind of plagiarism, without giving credit, in order to make people believe that the material was original with Ellen White - and therefore of "heavenly origin".

In the Signs of the Times and the Review and Herald, there are about 4,000 articles which were published under the name of Ellen G. White. These articles are laden with plagiarized material. Some times entire articles were copied from other authors and published under the name of Ellen White as a "thus saith the Lord".

In the article The First Prophecy (Review and Herald, July 18, 1882), by "Ellen G. White", there is a big amount of plagiarized material, mostly from Henry Melville's Sermons, Vol. 1 (1843). Even the title of the article has been taken straight from Melville. This article thus no longer is by Henry Melville, but has changed its status to "the Spirit of Prophecy", a "thus saith the Lord." This practice is more than questionable.

Articles published under Ellen White's name in Signs of the Times after the turn of the century were often copied in their entirety from other authors, mostly historians like Wylie and d'Aubigne.

There can be no doubt that Ellen White and her assistants were the most prolific, literary thiefs in history. The "5 million words, 4,000 articles, 70 books" etc. etc. which allegedly came from the "inspired pen" of Ellen White, as an constant flow of "visions and revelations" from heaven, is an adventist myth not based on plain facts.

In 1880 James White penned these words,

"In her published works there are many things set forth which cannot be found in other books, and yet they are so clear and beautiful that the unprejudiced mind grasps them at once as truth. ... If commentators and theological writers generally had seen these gems of thought which strike the mind so forcibly, and had they been brought out in print, all the ministers in the land could have read them. These men gather thoughts from books, and as Mrs. W. has written and spoken a hundred things, as truthful as they are beautiful and harmonious, which cannot befound in the writings of others, they are new to the most intelligent readers and hearers. And if they are not to be found in print, and are not brought out in sermons from the pulpit, where did Mrs. W. find them? From what source has she received the new and rich thoughts which are to be found in her writings and oral addresses? She could not have learned them from books, from the fact that they do not contain such thoughts. And, certainly, she did not learn them from those ministers who had not thought of them. The case is a clear one. It evidently requires a hundred times the credulity to believe that Mrs. W. has learned these things of others, and has palmed them off as visions from God, than it does to believe that the Spirit of God has revealed them to her." (James White in Life Sketches (1880-edition), pp. 328-329. Quoted in Rea, p. 171. Emphasis supplied.)

This sounds good, but is no more than a myth. James White knew better, therefore his words are the more deceptive. He himself had been writing four books which were copied almost in their entirety from others. He was Ellen's literary assistant during this period, until his death in 1881, and was instrumental in collecting material from other authors, which he published under his wife's name as "visions from God". In particular, this was the case with the four volumes ofSpiritual Gifts (1858-64), which were the forerunners of Spirit of Prophecy and Great Controversy. However, some of the health related "I saw" material in Spiritual Gifts vanished into silence, for obvious reasons.

Very often, Ellen White begins a sentence or paragraph with "I saw", "It was shown me", "My attending angel said", etc. This was calculated to give weight to the sentence. The words are thus no longer Ellen White's own, but have become a "thus saith the Lord". As we have seen, closer investigation shows that what she "saw", was not heavenly visions, but material from other authors. Far more serious is the fact that what she was "shown" by angels, and even "Jesu own words" to her during "visions", also was derived from other authors.

Well-informed people knew about her plagiarism, even during her own life-time. But all the extensive research being carried out in recent times, has brought to light the fact that most of her literary production has been borowed from other authors. Accordingly, James White's statement from 1880 will stand as one of many adventist myths.

During the General Conference session in 1909 - the last GC Ellen White ever attended, a certain pastor was asked to read before the congregation a collection of her unpublished testimonies. While he was reading, he discovered to his amazement that he in fact was reading from a letter he had mailed to Ellen White a number of years ago. She had extracted large portions of the letter, without mentioning the source, and created the impression that this was her own "testimony" (see D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White).

Miss Marian Davis became one of Ellen White's literary assistants, one of her "borrowing staff" who was busy preparing books for Ellen.

"Miss Marian Davis, the literary worker who had the most to do of any one in the preparation of Mrs. White's books, was one day heard moaning in her room. Going in, another worker inquired the cause of her trouble. Miss Davis replied: "I wish I could die! I wish I could die!" "Why, what is the matter?" asked the other. "Oh," Miss Davis said, "this terrible plagiarism!" It is said that before her death Miss Davis was greatly troubled over the connection she had had with Mrs. White's plagiarism, for she knew how extensively it had been carried on." (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White.)

There is much evidence to the claim that Ellen G. White was one of the most prolific, literary kleptomaniacs in history. However, she was very attentive that others gave her due credit if they would quote her in their own books. When Dr. David Paulson asked her for permission to make use of some of her material in his monthly magazine The Life Boat, W.C. White replied,

"Mother instructs me to say to you that you may be free to select from her writings short articles for The Life-boat. Or you may make extracts from these MSS. and from similar writings, in your articles, in each case giving the proper credit." (W.C. White, letter to Dr. David Paulson, Feb. 15, 1905. Emphasis supplied. Quoted in Canright's book The Life of Mrs. E.G. White.)

Is it e


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:22 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



11 -The Mormon connection

The Mormon prophet Joseph Smith experienced his first vision in 1820-23, some four years before Ellen White was born. Seven years later (1830) he published the first edition of the "Book of Mormon", and at the same time the Mormon Church was established. Fourteen years later the mormon prophet was shot and killed while in jail, and he ended his days as a "martyr". This was in August 1844, at a time when the Miller-movement spread like a wildfire, and two months before the "great disappointment".

In later years a growing number of researchers have noted the similarities between the early visions and experiences of Ellen G. White and the early visions and experiences of Joseph Smith. Even the online version of "Latter Day Saint News" featured a lenghty article, entitled"Similarities Between James and Ellen G. White's Suppressed 1880-Edition of 'Life Sketches' and 'Testimonies for the Church', with Joseph Smith's 'Pearl of Great Price' in 'The Book of Mormon,'" along with a picture of Ellen G. White.

The Seventh-Day Adventist Church is well aware that a bomb may detonate in the near future, and is making preparations by publishing books which they hope will soften the effects of the explosion. The Bible however says that all that have been hidden in darkness will be brought to light (1 Cor. 4:5), and this is happening these days. The amount of long hidden documentation on Ellen White and early adventism is increasing, and the Seventh-Day Adventist Church is unable to stem the tide other than denying and explaining away and blackmail people who are uncovering long hidden, embarassing documentation. When I say documentation, I do not mean the stereotyped, glossy pictures, but information which places both Ellen White and early adventism in a somewhat surprising new light.

At this time the documentation on Ellen White's extensive literary borrowing, or plagiarism, from other authors without giving due credit, is overwhelming. The same applies to her false visions and testimonies. Ellen White is in the progress of being disrobed as an untruthful person who did not dodge a lie in order to protect her own "integrity". Maybe she was honest in all this, but that does not make lies into truth. Much material from her pen, which adventists believe are "inspired" matter she received directly from heaven, show up to be borrowed, at times verbatim, from other authors, and published under the name of Ellen White as a "pipeline from heaven", a "thus saith the Lord". This is dishonesty.

Documentation has been uncovered, showing James and Ellen White participating in extreme, fanatical movements in the years following the "great disappointment", and other documentation shows that Ellen White did not follow her own "heaven-sent" counsels, at the same time condemning others for not heeding them.

At this time the connection between Ellen White's early visions and experiences and Joseph Smith's ditto has been placed under the spotlight. And what has been discovered, is alarming from an adventist point of view.

It has been claimed that the adventist teaching on "the Investigative judgment" in fact has been derived from Joseph Smith. The Mormon prophet also claimed that the tower of Babel was built before the Flood. Ellen White probably borrowed this information from Smith when she put it into Spiritual Gifts - which says that the tower of Babel was built before the Flood (Vol. 3, p. 301). This of course is not in harmony with Scripture.

In his book Ellen G. White & Inspiration, Maurice Barnett says, after having compared Ellen White's first vision with the visions of William Foy (where the similarities are striking),

"Similar likenesses can be made between Ellen White and Joseph Smith of Mormonism. She also borrowed from Mormon standard works. Joseph Smith was killed in the Summer of 1844, bringing him more national attention right at the height of Millerite expectations. One researcher points out that Ellen White especially liked the book of Alma in the Book of Mormon." (Maurice Barnett, Ellen White & Inspiration, p. 41. Emphasis supplied.)

Researchers in the Mormon Church are beginning to get their eyes opened for these things, and are making their own research. These scholars have access to the mormon genealogies, and will probably come up with some amazing documentation showing the connection between the early Mormon Church and the early Adventist Church. They will document that several well known early adventist pioneers had close relations with well known mormon leaders.

There are many things adventists do not know about early adventism and their prophetess - information which now begins to come out of the closet. Maybe what we have been learning so far is just the tip of the iceberg.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:23 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



12 -Adventist Myths

One of the ever popular adventist myths tells about Ellen White holding a heavy bible straight out from the body for about half an hour. The source for this story is the book "The Great Second Advent Movement" by John N. Loughborough.

"I will here state some facts respecting her third . . .as related to me by Mrs. White's father and mother, by her sister, Mrs. Sarah Belden, and others. In the room where the vision was given, there was lying on the bureau a very large family Bible . . .and weighs a little over eighteen pounds. While in vision, she arose, and took this heavy Bible on her left arm, the book lying open, and held it out at right angles with her body; and then for over half an hour, with her right hand, turned from place to place, and pointed to different texts of Scripture, which she repeated while her eyes were looking upward, and in an opposite direction from the book. . . in every instance she was repeating the scripture upon which her finger was resting." (J.N. Loughborough, The Great Second Advent Movement, pp. 236-7. Emphasis supplied.)

This feat should be enough to convince even the most hardened sceptic. Strange enough neither her close family nor other people who witnessed this "supernatural strength" became convinced that her visions were from God. This is somewhat strange, and gives some reason to believe that there was nothing supernatural about the incident.

One of the witnesses was Mrs. Lunt, who wrote,

"With my father's family, attended the meetings of Sister Harmon in Topsham, in 1845, and during these meetings she had a vision. It was the first time we ever saw her in vision. One of those old-fashioned Bibles [the Teale Family Bible, weighing eighteen pounds] was owned by Brother Curtiss. This big Bible was taken from the bureau by Sister Harmon while in vision, and texts of Scripture were pointed out by her as she turned from leaf to leaf, while her eyes were looking upward, and away from the book. The texts she repeated were either words of instruction, encouragement, or reproof. Another peculiarity of the manifestation at that time was the position of the book. It was held on her open hand at an angle of forty-five degrees, and no one else was able to hold any book at a similar angle without its slipping at once from the hands; but Sister Harmon held this Bible at that angle for several minutes, as firmly as though it was stuck to her hand, she passing meanwhile from one to another in the room." (Ibid., p. 238. Emphasis supplied.)

Another witness was Mrs. Truesdale, who related the incident more than 61 years later,

"Sister Harmon was in vision over two hours. . . .as she read to us passages. . . .such as. Heb.2:2,3; James 5,8; Heb. 10:35,39; 1 Peter 1,7; Luke 12:32-37 besides many others, holding the large family Bible so high that I was obliged to stand on a chair to read where she was pointing." (Ibid., pp. 238-9. Emphasis supplied.)

Mrs. Truesdale's memory must have been exceptional. It was quite a feat to remember all these scriptures being read to her when she was fifteen years old!

These testimonies are so divergent that it is difficult to rely on them. The heavy Bible incident occurred allegedly during the so-called Topsham-vision in 1845, and Loughborough quoted Mrs. Lunt and Mrs. Truesdale 45 years later. Loughborough says that Ellen held the heavy Biblestraight out from the body for more than thirty minutes, while Mrs. Lunt says that she held it at an angle of 45 degrees for "several minutes," and Mrs. Truesdale claims the incident lastedmore than two hours.

During the 1919 Bible Conference the President of the General Conference, A.G. Daniells, commented on this alleged incident,

"Now with reference to the evidences: I differ with some of the brethren who have put together proofs or evidences of the genuineness of this gift, in this respect, - I believe that the strongest proof is found in the fruits of this gift to the church, not in physical and outward demonstrations. For instance, I have heard some ministers preach, and have seen it in writing, that Sister White once carried a heavy Bible - I believe they said it weighed 40 pounds - on her out-stretched hand, and looking up toward the heavens quoted texts and turned the leaves over and pointed to the texts, with her eyes toward the heavens. I do not know whether that was ever done or not. I am not sure. I did not see it, and I do not know that I ever talked with anybody that did see it. But, brethren, I do not count that sort of thing as a very great proof. I do not think that is the best kind of evidence. If I were a stranger in an audience, and heard a preacher enlarging on that, I would have my doubts. That is, I would want to know if he saw it. He would have to say, No, he never did. Then I would ask, 'Did you ever see the man that did see it?' And he would have to answer, 'No, I never did.'

"Well, just how much of that is genuine, and how much has crawled into the story? - I do not know. But I do not think that is the kind of proof we want to use. It has been a long time since I have brought forward this sort of thing, - no breath in the body, and the eyes wide open." (1919 Bible Conference. Statement by A.G. Daniells. Emphasis supplied.)

A.G. Daniells had been personally aquainted with Ellen White for many years, and also knew J.N. Loughborough well. However, he did not put confidence in this story. In 1890 it was claimed that the heavy Bible weighed twenty pounds, and in 1919 it had increased to forty pounds!

Wallace D. Slattery related an incident during a visit to the White Estate,

"My aide in my last SDA teaching position in Pennsylvania was a great-granddaughter of Sister White. I discussed this supposed event with her, and she agreed that undoubtedly it never happened. She telephoned her mother, who worked at the White Estate in Washington, D.C., and asked her, 'Why do you still show that big Bible to people who come in, when you know that the event never took place?' Her mother answered, 'But you should see their faces when they see it!' (W.D. Slattery, Are Seventh-day Adventists False Prophets? A Former Insider Speaks Out, p. 5.)

Even the White Estate admits that the heavy Bible incident never happened, and that the evidences are dubious. It has become one of the many adventist myths which have slipped in. Through the years one single feather has become five hens.

It is quite possible that Ellen White on a particular occasion may have held a heavy Bible during a certain period. But as Daniells said, just how much of that is genuine, and how much has crawled into the story? A person may hold a heavy book a certain amount of time, but this does not make that person a prophet from God. It is not unknown that certain psychic ailments on occasions can give a person almost supernatural strength. It is possible that Ellen White's visions were triggered by a special type of epileptic seizures (see chapter 15). During such seizures patients may display unbelievable strength, and may perform feats of strength they normally would not dream of under normal conditions.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:27 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



13 -Ellen G. White and the Bible

In the plagiarized book Patriarchs and Prophets, "Ellen White" says on pp. 354-6,

"The most important part of the daily ministration was the service performed in behalf of individuals. The repentant sinner brought his offering to the door of the tabernacle, and, placing his hand upon the victim's head, confessed his sins, thus in figure transferring them from himself to the innocent sacrifice. By his own hand the animal was then slain, and the blood was carried by the priest into the holy place and sprinkled before the veil, behind which was the ark containing the law that the sinner had transgressed. By this ceremony the sin was, through the blood, transferred in figure to the sanctuary. . . .Such was the work that went on day by day throughout the year. . . . Such was the service performed 'unto the example and shadow of heavenly things.' Hebrews 8:5." (Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 354-356. Emphasis supplied.)

This statement does not square with the Bible. Nowhere does it say that the blood for the common Israelite was carried into the sanctuary. This is a fact everyone can check out for himself by some careful reading of the books of Leviticus and Numbers. The blood of sin-offering for the common Israelite was poured out at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering, and was not carried into the sanctuary. There were just two cases when the blood was carried into the sanctuary: when the anointed priest had sinned, or when the entire congregation had committed sin.

In order to save Ellen White and the Adventist teaching, it is commonly claimed that the priest should eat the flesh of the sin-offering, and thus carrying the blood into the sanctuary. There's a problem with this explanation. The Israelites, including the priest, were commanded not to eat flesh with blood in it. Whomsoever did that, were to be cut off from the congregation. The blood should be drained from the meat; then the meat should be washed out before eating it ("kosher meat"). The Jews continue this practice to this day.

It is strange that adventists, who claim to possess the "true sanctuary teaching" as one one of their cardinal doctrines, are publishing books which miss the mark on such important question in their sanctuary teaching. However, later editions of the book Patriarchs and Prophets, has an appendix where the fact is being pointed out (in small type!), eg. telling us that the book contains statements that are not in harmony with the Bible.

If the above statement is original with Ellen White, it is obvious that she had not understood the Old Testament sacrificial system well enough, then the statement of course is not inspired. It is more plausible that the statement had been borrowed from other authors who had not read their Bible carefully enough. If this is the case, the statement was copied straight into Patriarchs and Prophets with errors and all. People who claim that "God showed her what to copy and what to omit" - eg. filter away what was not correct, should think about this.. We are finding several such occurences in her writings, especially the book The Great Controversy, also in The Desire of Ages, as we have discussed in a previous chapter.

Here is another statement where Ellen White contradicts both herself and the Bible,

"He is today standing at the altar of incense, presenting before God the prayers of those who desire His help." (Desire of Ages, p. 568. Emphasis supplied.)

"This door was not opened until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the holy place of the sanctuary in 1844. Then Jesus rose up and shut the door of the holy place, and opened the door into the most holy, and passed within the second veil, where He now stands by the ark, and where the faith of Israel now reaches. I saw that Jesus had shut the door of the holy place, and no man can open it; and that He had opened the door into the most holy, and no man can shut it (Rev. 3,." (Early Writings, p. 42. Emphasis supplied.)

On pp. 55-6 in the same book, Ellen White says that it is Satan who at this time apparently stands in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary, to which the "useless" prayers go for them who did not follow Jesus into the Most Holy in 1844.

Here we have a contradiction. In 1898 she says that Jesus today stands before the altar of incence, ministering the prayers of the saints. All well-informed SDA's know pretty well that the altar of incence was located in the first apartment, before the veil which separated the two apartments in the earthly sanctuary. In 1882, based on earlier visions, Ellen White says that Jesustoday is standing before the ark, and has left the first apartment and "shut the door" to the first apartment - and none can open it. Any well-informed adventist know that the ark was located in the Most Holy, the second apartment, within the veil. Ellen White is saying that Jesus today is standing in both apartments, in spite of what she says in Early Writings, and in her early visions, that Jesus today has left the first apartment, where the altar of incence was located, and "shut the door" to this apartment.

Apart from the SDA teaching on 1844 etc., which is unbiblical, and the concept of two distinct apartements in heaven, which most probably is equally unbiblical, Ellen White contradicts herself in these two statements. The statement in Desire of Ages is most probably borrowed from another author, and this adds to the confusion - but she approved of the stolen literary goods.

Ellen White says that she went into the New Jerusalem temple,

"I saw an angel flying swiftly to me. He quickly carried me from the earth to the Holy City. In the city I saw a temple, which I entered. I passed through a door before I came to the first veil." (Early Writings, p. 32. Emphasis supplied.)

But the Bible says,

"And I saw no temple therein [the City of God]: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it" (Rev. 21:22.)

Ellen White saw (and entered) a temple in the New Jerusalem. John says that he did not see a temple in the New Jerusalem. Who was right?

There are many similar self-contradictions in her writings, including statements which do not square with the Bible. This is not that strange, when we consider the fact that her writings are put together from Ellen White's own material, mixed up with external material from scores of other authors.

Ellen White says that she saw in a vision that both the Father and the Son were sitting on a throne in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary. According to the adventist teaching, Jesus had performed a ministry in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary for 1800 years, from 31. A.D to 1844 A.D. But Ellen White also teaches that not only the Son, but also the Father was sitting on a throne in the first apartment all these years.

"In February, 1845, I had a vision of events commencing with the Midnight Cry. I saw a throne and on it sat the Father and the Son. . . . And I saw the Father rise from the throne, and in a flaming Chariot go into the Holy of Holies, within the veil, and did sit. There I saw thrones that I had never seen before. Then Jesus rose up from the throne. . . . And I saw a cloudy chariot, with wheels like flaming fire, and Angels were all around it as it came where Jesus was. He stepped into the chariot and was borne to the Holiest where the Father sat." (From the Broadside, To the Little Remnant Scattered Abroad. Emphasis supplied.)

This view can not by any means be harmonized with Scripture. For proofs, see the chapter on A.F. Ballenger.

God does not love dishonest children

"The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love." (An Appeal to the Youth, p. 61. Emphasis supplied.)

"God loves honest-hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest." (Ibid, p. 42. Emphasis supplied.)

How come that God loves his enemies, which the Bible tells us, but not dishonest children?

The Bible alone

Ellen White says that God will have a people on earth who maintain the Bible and the Bible onlyas their sole basis for all doctrines (Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 4, p. 413). If we are to follow this admonition, which by the way is biblical, it becomes impossible to defend the above statements (and many others) by the Bible alone.

Then, from an adventist point of view, we have been entangled into the following situation,

1. If we are to believe Ellen White's contradictory visions, we are in conflict with Bible, but not with "the Spirit of Prophecy", which adventists believe is Ellen G. White and her writings.

2. If we are not to believe Ellen White's contradictory visions, we are in conflict with "the Spirit of Prophecy", but not with the Bible.

Now the admonition from volume four of the Spirit of Prophechy is clearly in harmony with the Bible, but if we are to follow the admonition, we find ourselves in conflict with "the Spirit of Prophecy!". What it boils down to, is this: Ellen White's statement in 4SP 413 is in harmony with the Bible, but definitely not in harmony with Ellen White's visions. Then we have a plain contradiction in her book!

One has to choose between Ellen White's visions or the Bible. A compromise is impossible. Which are we to choose?

We will stick to the Bible, God's Holy Word, the infallible rule through the ages.

The Altar of incence

Regarding Ellen White's statement in Desire of Ages, where it says that Jesus today stands at the altar of incence and presents our prayers, in contradiction to the view presented in Early Writings, somebody would probably point to Paul's words in Heb. 9:3,4,

"And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant."

Here Paul says that the altar of incence in the earthly tabernacle was located in the Most Holy. All avid Bible readers are well aware that the only piece of furniture in the Most Holy, was the Ark of the Covenant with the Mercy Seat. The altar of incence was located in the first apartment,before the veil which separated the two apartments. See Exodus 40:26. All knowledgeable SDA's should probably know this. In addition to the plain teachings of the Bible, numerous sketches and drawings of the tabernacle testify to this. Of course Paul knew this fact. He was a man of learning who would not miss the mark when it came to such an important detail. What he really means by his statement, is rather unclear. Not even the voluminous SDA Bible Commentary has any reasonable explanation other than perhaps Paul placed the altar of incence in the Most Holy in a "symbolic way" inasmuch as this altar was closely connected to the Ark.

If we for the sake of argument are saying that the altar of incence was located in the Most Holy in the heavenly sanctuary, and that Ellen White therefore is correct in her statement, the whole SDA sanctuary teaching will fall like a house of cards. It is claimed that the earthly, Mosaic tabernacle was an exact replica of the heavenly sanctuary. The mosaic tabernacle was divided into two distinct apartments, separated by a veil, and the altar of incense was located before that veil, but in the first apartment. If the altar of incense in the heavenly sanctuary is located in the Most Holy, the concept of two distinct apartments in this sanctuary vanishes as dew before the sun, and give nourishment to the idea that there really are not two such apartments in the heavenly sanctuary. But then the SDA idea that Jesus performed a ministry for 1800 years in "the first apartment" and went into "the second apartment" in 1844, tumbles down - and then we have the domino-effect. No two distinct apartments in the heavenly sanctuary like the mosaic tabernacle, no SDA sanctuary teaching. It's as simple as that. Ellen White's statement in Desire of Ages stands in contradiction with statements in her early visions and in the book Early Writings.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:31 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



15 -Head injury

When Ellen Gould Harmon (later to become Mrs. White) was nine years old, she suffered an accident which left its marks upon her for the rest of her life. The consequences of this accident may be a reasonable explanation for her visions. Quoted below in its entirety is an article by Dr. Delbert H. Hodder, "Visions or Partial-complex Seizures". This article was featured inEvangelica, November 1981.

"The Seventh-day Adventist church was born in the period of time that immediately followed the 'Great disappointment' of 1844. From all religious denominations sincere people left their churches to join the 'Millerite Movement', a movement that, with evangelistic fervor not since seen, was predicting the end of the world and the coming of Jesus Christ on October 22, 1844. In preparation for this event, earthly possessions were dispensed with, and conflicting family and social ties were severed as they waited for Christ to return. Christ did not return as expected on October 22, 1844, and the magnitude of the 'Great Disappointment' can be only partially imagined today. It was from the group of people that suffered and survived this disappointment that the Seventh-day Adventist church was conceived and grew to be a major Protestant denomination containing more than 2,000 000 members and medical and educational institutions that circle the globe.

"There is no one individual entirely responsible for the development of the Seventh-day Adventist church, but there is no question that Ellen G. White was the one most influential person during the time of its formation. Were it not for Mrs. White one wonders if there would be a Seventh-Day Adventist church today. Her 100,000 pages of writing continue to be an authority for the Adventist church second only to the Bible. Seeing the Bible through the writings of Mrs. White has resulted in some of the unique doctrines held by the Adventist church. Mrs. White claimed to be a 'messenger of God' and the church accepted her as a 'prophet of God' and continues to believe that God gave her specific instructions and guidance through her visions. It was the supernatural nature of these "visions" that was one of the most significant early evidences that she was being used by God as a prophet, and it is these same events that continue to be evidence of her inspiration to most Adventists.

"When Ellen received her first 'vision' she was distraught and uncertain as to what to do with the information presented.(1) In an age when there were many psychics 'prophesying', in an age when the group with which she identified had fallen into disrepute following the 'Great disappointment', in this age, she recognized the risk of speaking the "truth" she felt was revealed to her. Based on her convictions that God was leading, she took the necessary risk and made her 'visions' public, for she and the early Adventist church were intent on finding 'the truth.'

"It was several months ago that I casually read Rene Noorbergen's book, Ellen G. White, Prophet of Destiny.(2) My reading was prompted by my general interest in Mrs. White and by my need for general information as an elder and sabbath school superintendent in mv church. As a pediatrician with special interest in pediatric neurology, I was astonished to discover the similarity between Mrs. White's 'visions' and a type of seizure called 'psychomotor' or 'partial-complex' seizure. I soon discovered the similarities between Mrs. White's personality and the recently described personality of those with this form of seizure disorder. Although educated from first grade through medical school at Seventh-day Adventist schools, I had never before critically looked at Mrs. White's 'visions', but always had accepted them on faith. With my subspecialty interest in pediatric neurology, the description of these 'visions' had significance that might not be found by someone without a background in medicine and neurology. As with Mrs. White, I feel a sense of responsibility to share this information.

"When F.D. Nichol discussed epilepsy in his book, Ellen G. White and Her Critics,(3) he unfortunately omitted the one type of seizure with which her spells were consistent. There is no question that her 'visions' are inconsistent with grand mal and petite mal seizures, but as the following discussion will show, her spells were consistent with partial-complex seizures in that they contained all the unique elements of this form of epilepsy. Since this form of epilepsy is always acquired and not inherited, we must first look at Ellen before her 'visions' were present.

"Ellen was in good health until age nine when she received a significant head injury. I quote from Rene Noorbergen and his book, Ellen G. White, Prophet of Destiny, a description of this event and its immediate consequences:

'Ellen's life took a drastic turn when, on the way home from school one afternoon in Portland, Maine, alarmed by the angry shouts of a classmate, she reeled around. For a moment she stood there, transfixed, while the girl raised her hand and viciously hurled a stone at her head. The impact was so great that Ellen was thrown to the ground. Upon returning to consciousness, she found herself in a merchant's store where she had been carried by worried bystanders. Refusing to be driven home, she pulled herself up and clung to the arm of her twin sister. Bleeding profusely from a head wound, she staggered home, supported by her sister and a schoolmate, once again falling unconscious before reaching her house.

'For a full three weeks, she wavered between life and death, and when she finally regained enough strength to get around, she was burdened with a disfigured face and the after-effects of a serious head injury.

'It influenced her health to such a large extent . . . that it forced her to forego further schooling. In fact, she never quite got beyond the third grade . . . Following her misfortune, she became an avid Bible student, fascinated by the religious revival taking place around her. Being intensely religious, she did not miss a chance to associate with others who shared her interest, inasmuch as her regular friends shunned her after the accident.'(4)

"Based on this description, it is clear that Ellen suffered a severe head injury, using the current medical definition of 'severe.' A severe head injury is associated with an immediate unconsciousness lasting an hour or more or in the sudden or progressive deterioration of the level of consciousness after an initial lucid period. Abnormal neurologic signs may develop and persist for hours or days or may be permanent. This type of head injury is usually associated with extensive cerebral edema (swelling), bruising and laceration of the brain, or an intra-cranial hemorrhage.(5) Approximately 10 percent of the people who suffer such a severe head injury develop a seizure disorder.(6) If a hemorrhage has occurred, this percentage is significantly higher. Mrs. White's immediate loss of consciousness followed by a lucid interval and a subsequent prolonged loss of consciousness is typical of the presence of a cerebral hemorrhage, specifically an epidural hematoma, but not diagnostic of such.

"At the age of 14, Ellen had her first 'dream' that seemed to have significant religious meaning for her.(7) At the age of 17, less than two months after the 'Great Disappointment,' she had her first "spell" that was interpreted by her as a 'vision.' Ellen is reported as having approximately 2,000 of these 'visions' during her life with those in the latter part of her life mainly occurring during sleep and thus being similar to those that occurred at the age of 14.

"From Rene Noorbergen's book once again, I found the following description of her spells.

'Suddenly her voice broke clear and musical, and we heard the ringing shout, 'Glory to God.' We all looked up and saw that she was in vision. Her hands were folded across her breast. Her eyes were directed intently upward, and her lips were closed. There was no breathing although the heart continued its action.

'As she looked intently upward, an expression of anxiety came into her face. She threw aside her blankets, and, stepping forward, walked back and forth in the room. Wringing her hands, she moaned, 'Dark! Dark! All dark! So dark!' Then after a few moments silence, she exclaimed with emphasis and a brightening of her countenance, 'A light! A little light! More light' Much light!'

'In vision her eyes were open. There was no breath . . . but there were graceful movements of the shoulders, arms, and hands, expressive of what she saw. It was impossible for anyone else to move her hands or arms. She often uttered words singly, and sometimes sentences which expressed to those about her the nature of the view she was having, either of heaven or of earth.

'Her first word in vision was 'Glory', sounding at first close by and then dying away in the distance, seemingly far away. This was sometimes repeated. . . .

'When the vision was ended . . . she would exclaim with a long drawn sigh, as she took her first natural breath, 'D-a-r-k.' She was then limp and strengthless.

'She drew her first breath deep, long, full, in a manner showing that her lungs had been entirely empty of air. After drawing the first breath, several minutes passed before she drew the second, which filled the lungs precisely as did the first; then a pause of two minutes, and a third inhalation, after which the breathing became natural.

'The time Mrs. White is in this condition has varied from fifteen minutes to one hundred and eighty. During this time the heart and pulse continue to beat, the eyes are always open, and seem to be gazing at some far distant object, and are never fixed on any person or thing in the room. They are always directed upward. They exhibit a pleasant expression . . . There is never the slightest wink or change of expression . . . It is sometimes hours and even days after she comes out of this condition before she recovers her natural sight. She says it seems to her that she comes back into a dark world, yet her eyesight is in no way injured by her visions.'(

"From these and other descriptions in Ellen G. White, Prophet of Destiny, the following summary of events during a 'vision' can be made. Mrs. White could occasionally sense she was about to have a 'vision'; they began abruptly; she was unaware of her surroundings while in 'vision'; and she was amnesic for events that took place in her environment. Her eyes were open and she stared upward without blinking. There was imperceptible breathing, but she did frequently repeat certain words or phrases while in a 'vision' and never became cyanotic (blue). Her heart beat was normal. During the 'visions' she sometimes appeared very anxious. She had various automatic like motor movements such as the wringing of her hands. The 'visions' terminated with deep sighs and the 'vision were followed by a prolonged phase where she was lethargic, frequently couldn't see or hear, and in general, had depressed mental status for a varying period of time.

"Subsequent to the invention of the electroencephalogram (EEG) in 1929, there has been a wealth of new information related to the understanding and treatment of 'epilepsy.' Prior to the last twenty years, in fact, epilepsy was frequently classified into only two categories, that being big seizures (grand mal) and little seizures (petit mal). Eighty percent of all seizures were previously classified as grand mal. Today, generalized grand mal seizures constitute only 20 percent of all seizures, whereas, a type of seizure called psychomotor seizure, renamed in 1970 as 'partial-complex seizure,'(9) now appears to be the single most prevalent form of epilepsy constituting 42 percent of all the focal seizures and 26 percent of all types of seizures.(10) The older term of 'psychomotor' was first used in 1902 as a label for seizures that combined psychic, and motor events.(11) The more recent nomenclature is based on the fact that the seizure involves a focal area of the brain rather than the whole brain and presents with complex symptomatology. The complexity of the seizure is based on the area of the brain involved - the temporal lobe and the underlying limbic system - the parts of the brain that are involved in high level cerebral activity.

"Partial-complex seizures occur only in a brain that has been injured and, thus, are not inherited or run in families as do other types of seizures.(12) In contrast to grand mal seizures, these seizures may occur quite frequently in an individual, are generally not associated with progressive neurologic dysfunction, and do not shorten one's expected life span. Although partial-complex seizures usually last only seconds to a few minutes, they very rarely may be prolonged at which time they are called 'complex partial status epilepticus.'(13)

"These seizures frequently begin in adolescence and continue throughout life. They generally occur spontaneously, but stresses may precipitate a seizure. Such stresses are psychological, hormonal changes, drowsiness, illness and sleep. Another factor that makes these seizures 'complex', the ability of some patients to not only sense an impending seizure, but at times to be able to abort or precipitate them. I had a patient whose spells consisted of altered, but not loss of, consciousness, and a generalized 'good' feeling that swept over his body. He frequently precipitated these spells by 'concentrating.' He nearly had a serious automobile accident secondary to a seizure that he had precipitated while driving. The near accident was enough impetus for this adolescent to stop precipitating these events, since his joy from driving exceeded his 'joy' from his seizures.

"Grand mal and partial-complex seizures are followed by period of neurologic dysfunction typically manifest by headache, lethargy, or sleep; this is called the 'post-ictal' period. The duration of this post-ictal phase usually varies directly with the duration of the seizure. This period essentially results from the exhaustion that has occurred in the parts of the brain that were involved in the seizure.

"Grand mal seizures are frequently associated with the absence of breathing, secondary to the respiratory center in the brain and the respiratory muscles being involved in the seizure. These patients generally become somewhat cyanotic. With partial-complex seizures, breathing generally continues but may be imperceptible. Observers of Mrs. White in 'vision' repeatedly emphasized that using the monitoring equipment available, a candle and a mirror, she was not breathing. Yet, she is described repeatedly as saying words or even sentences during her 'visions' which can only be attributed to air passing the vocal cords which suggests she had to be inspiring air in order to be able to expel enough air to speak. Her heart beat and pulse rate were also noted to be normal so the heart was continuing to pump blood through the lungs to the rest of the body as usual. Although it is possible that something 'supernatural' was happening in that oxygenation was taking place through channels outside the lungs, the normal oxygenation of her tissues, as is documented by her normal color, and the presence of a pulse, suggested that the lungs were the source of her oxygenization and that shallow, relativelv imperceptible breathing was taking place as would be typical in a partial-complex seizure.

"In common with all types of seizures is the alteration in the level of consciousness that occurs with partial-complex seizures. There are several unique characteristics of partial complex seizures that occur during the altered consciousness and these include: eyes being open, staring, and frequently turned up, automatisms, hallucinations, and various psychic phenomena. All of these unique characteristics were present in Mrs. White's 'visions.'

"In partial-complex seizures, the consciousness is always altered, but not always completely lost. It is clear by the previous descriptions of Mrs. White's 'visions' that she had lost consciousness during these spells. She was unresponsive to various forms of external stimuli and was amnesic for the events which occurred in her environment during the period of the 'visions.' It needs to be emphasized that the hallucinations that may be seen during a partial-complex seizure can be remembered after a seizure, and often can be described in vivid detail. The amnesia that is characteristic of seizures is for the events occurring outside of the seizure itself. As is also characteristic of partial-complex seizures, Mrs. White's eyes were open, staring, and described by some as rolled up.(14)

"One of the most interesting and constant features of partial-complex seizures is the presence of various automatic purposeful or nonpurposeful movements called automatisms. These automatisms frequently involve the alimentary tract and include chewing movements, lip smacking, tongue movements, or swallowing movements. The other characteristics of automatism involve the motor system and are called 'gestural automatisms.' The most typical of these are wringing of the hands, fumbling with a button or other object, closing the hands, scratching the head, rubbing the nose, or other purposeless and graceful movements.(15) Mrs. White is described as wringing her hands, having slow graceful movements of the shoulders, arms and hands, and walking back and forth.

"The automatisms with this form of epilepsy may be complex as well as simple, as described above. A host of complex acts have been described. A petroleum geologist could continue drawing at his drawing board or eating his meal, though more slowly, during his seizure. An organist, 'during Christmas services, switched from playing a hymn to jazz and went back to the hymn at the end of his seizure. A young woman always recited the 'Ave Maria' during her automatisms. A hospital janitor bobbed light bulbs in a bucket of water and, on another occasion, dumped mop water over the hands of surgeons scrubbing at a sterile sink.'(16)

"Another typical automatism involves speech and manifests itself as perseveration of speech - repeating the same words or phrases over and over again. Examples of such perseverations in my practice have included, 'Mommy, pick me up' and 'I want a cookie.' These two patients would start saying these phrases and continue saying them over and over again when their request had been granted. This abnormal speech was associated with other more typical seizure activity. The words Mrs. White characteristically repeated were 'Glory', 'Glory to God', 'light' and 'dark.'

"Hallucinations are another typical component of partial-complex seizures and may involve all the senses, but are typically either auditory or visual.

'An important point in the nature of this altered content of consciousness is that it constitutes an intrusion upon the patient's onflowing stream of awareness. No matter how vivid, complex or 'real' the ictal experience, the patient recognizes that it is an experience imposed upon him. His consciousness is 'split', and he can still remain the objective observer, the bystander witnessing these curious events.'(17)

"Illusions (distorted perceptions of ongoing stimuli) as we as hallucinations (sensory perceptions in the absence of stimulus) may be present.

'Seizures arising in the primary visual cortex produce crude sensations of light or darkness - for example, small circles or ellipses of white or colored light. In contrast, formed visual hallucinations may range from simple, static, monochromatic but recognizable objects, to intricate, multicolored progressing scenes. . . Occasionally a seizure may arise in primary visual cortex and subsequently spread into association cortex with a concomitant shift from unformed to formed hallucinations.'(1

"Since it is the patient's own brain that is 'shortcircuiting' and producing the illusion or hallucination, the content is frequently manifestations of previously stored information, or is given meaning based on the content of the patient's consciousness. Since the patients who have partial-complex seizures tend to be religious, the hallucinations frequently have a religious significance to them.

"A thirteen year old adolescent whom I follow for his partial-complex seizures recently glanced at a book his sister had brought home on Satanism and the occult. Shortly after looking at this book, the hallucination that occurred during his seizure consisted of seeing a ring of fire in vivid color with several human-like figures on the outside of the ring. The human-like figures were devoid of faces. These forms began walking through the ring of fire toward him with their arms gradually being raised as if they were to strike him and kill him when close to him. The patient stated that he could feel the heat from the fire and was described by the mother as screaming in terror with beads of sweat over his entire body as the seizure ended. When describing the hallucination to me in my office, he could vividly recall the entire episode and was himself convinced, that the phenomenon was real and that the devil was 'out to get him.' I had to read him descriptions of other people's hallucinations that occurred with seizures before I could convince him that his phenomenon had not been real but part of his seizure.

"The other unique characteristic of partial-complex seizures is the various psychic phenomena that can occur with the seizure. Essentially, all forms of bizarre behavior have at one time or another, been attributed to partial-complex seizures.

'Fear was the first ictal emotion recognized and appears to occur most frequently. In some instances, the fear is intense and patients use terms such as 'terror', 'panic', 'a feeling of impending disaster . . . a feeling that I'm going stark, raving mad'. . .Some patients express a fear of dying . . . Other patients experience less intense feelings, which may range from a sense of uneasiness or apprehension to anxiety.'(19)

"Pleasure, depression, eroticism, and anger are other psychic phenomena that may occur with the seizures.

'In certain instances, hallucinatory experiences acquire an affecive coloring. MacLean (1952) has described a man 'who senses in his stomach a feeling of fright that carries with it the conviction that someone is standing behind him. If he turns his head to see who it is, the feeling of fear becomes intensified.' Williams (1956) described an architect with an even more complex hallucinatory experience: He sees a man and two smaller figures on a frozen pond, around which he is skating. He experiences fear which concerns the,figures, and feels he is 'in the qrip of some power I cannot escape.' The figures are speaking quietly together about his fear, and he feels that he should get closer to solve the problem but cannot do so since he is skating in a circle, He then has a major convulsion.

'In other instances the ictal emotion may attach itself to an otherwise neutral sensory perception, giving the experience a totally different subjective quality. Two patients said that when their attacks began, any object at which they were looking, for example, a telephone or a chair, suddenly assumed a threatening or malevolent quality which each recognized as totaly inappropriate. If they shifted their gaze to any other object in the environment, it did not seem threatening and the sensation of fear would diminish. However, returning the gaze to the original object would result in an intensification of the fear which in each patient culminated in a loss of consciousness automatism.'(20)

"From the preceding discussion one cannot avoid coming to the conclusion that Mrs. White's 'visions' were at least consistent with what is now known as partial-complex or psychomotor seizures. I believe the quoted examples of the unique features of these seizures emphasize the complexity of the seizure manifestations and the confusion and concern that would result if the patient were unaware that these were seizures. What is of as much significance as the similarity between her 'visions' and seizures is the presence of Mrs. White's personality characteristics, typically seen in patients with this form of seizure disorder.

"Among neurologic diseases with confirmed anatomic localization, temporal lobe epilepsy has been most frequently associated with functional psychiatric disorders. Although psychiatric disorders are more frequently seen in these patients than in the normal population,(21) they are still relatively rarely present in these patients. What is of more interest has been the recent documentation of a specific profile of psychosocial aspects of behavior very frequently seen in these patients. In a recent study done at the Clinical Neurosciences Branch of the National Institutes of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke at the National Institute of Health,(22) forty-eight patients were studied and demonstrated that not only did patients with temporal lobe seizures have characteristic personality traits, but that it was possible to distinguish certain personality traits characteristic of right temporal lobe dysfunction from left temporal lobe dysfunction. Following is a list of all the traits frequently seen in patients with partial-complex seizures, but certainly not all the patients have all the characteristics:

1. Emotionality - deepening of all emotions, sustained intense affect2. Elation - euphoria, grandiosity, exhilarated mood3. Sadness - discouragement, tearfulness, self-depreciation4. Anger - increased temper, irritability5. Aggression - overt hostility, rage attacks, violent crimes6. Altered sexual interest - hyposexualism, loss of libido, etc.7. Guilt - tendency to self-scrutiny and self-recrimination8. Hypermoralism - attention to rules with inability to distinguish significant from minor infractions9. Obsessionalism - ritualism, orderliness, compulsive attention to detail10. Circumstantiality - loquacious, pedantic, overly detailed11. Viscosity - stickiness, tendency to repetition12. Sense of personal - events given highly charged, personalized significance, divine guidance ascribed to many features of patient's life13. Hypergraphic - keeping extensive diaries, detailed notes, writing autobiography or novel14. Religiosity - holding deep religious beliefs, often idiosyncratic15. Philosophical interest - nascent metaphysical or moral speculations, cosmological theories16. Dependence, passivity - cosmic helplessness, 'at hands of fate'; protestations of helplessness17. Humorlessness, sobriety - overgeneralized ponderous concern; humor lacking or idiosyncratic18. Paranoia - suspicious, overinterpretative of motives and events

"The above traits that most commonly discriminated the control group from the epileptic group were paranoia, anger, dependence, religiosity, sadness, philosophical interest and humorlessness. I emphasize once more that not all these tendencies were seen in all patients.

"What is of great interest in this research is the finding that patients with pathology in one temporal lobe differ in their personality traits from those with pathology in the opposite temporal lobe. Patients with pathology in the right temporal lobe were distinguished by items stressing externally demonstrated affects. 'This was manifest in unusual sexual attractions, remonstration of helplessness, periods of sadness, emotional arousability or moralistic fervor. Overconcern with details and orderliness also characterized the right temporal epileptic group more than the left.'(23)

'Left temporal patients were identified with a sense of personal destiny and concern for meaning and significance behind events. Related items emphasized powerful forces working with one's life (paranoia) and the need for sober intellectual and moral self-scrutiny (humorlessness, conscientiousness).'(24) Strikingly absent are many of the characteristics seen overall in patients with partial-complex seizures and, in particular, those seen in patients with right temporal lobe dysfunction. As equally striking, however, is the similarity between Mrs. White's personality and the description given to patients with left temporal lobe dysfunction.'(25)

"Adventists frequently point to the massive amount of writing Mrs. White did as evidence of divine guidance. She lacked the education that seemed necessary to author so many articles and books. As is pointed out in this recent research, even her extensive writing turns out to be a characteristic behavior of patients with partial-complex seizures.

"During the last ten years, the puzzle of Ellen White has slowly been pieced together. Ron Numbers discovered, in much the same fashion as I, that Mrs. White's health message appeared to be the health message of others of her day with whom she was probably familiar.(26) Jonathan Butler recently discovered that Mrs. White's ideas related to eschatology were heavily flavored by the contemporary emphasis of the Protestant church of her day.(27) With the information contained in this article, the puzzle takes on a more whole and complete appearance. It appears distinctly possible that the brain injury Ellen received as a child resulted in the development of seizure disorder and a personality type characterized by a deep interest in religion. It was less than two months after the 'Great Disappointment' that she had her first recorded daytime 'vision' and the lights she saw in her 'vision' took on significance because of her association with the small group that survived the 'Disappointment.' Not even the medical authorities of her day were aware of this type of seizure disorder, and knowing these 'spells' were inconsistent with self-hypnosis, mesmerism, hysteria, or cataplexy, they were interpreted as supernatural. Mrs. White seemed unaware that the contents of the visual hallucinations she thought were 'visions' were related to current events and opinions of her day. Unaware that her impulse to write was itself a manifestation her illness, she did what any honest God-fearing person would have to do in a similar situation - she shared that with others and it was these others who labeled her a 'prophet' and made her the center of the developing Seventh-day Adventist church.

The long-term significance and consequences of this formation will be determined, not by medical personell such as myself, but by the theologians in our church. These issues raise the distinct possibility that the Seventh-day Adventist church may now be facing another 'Great Disappointment.'"

(Dr Delbert Hodder, who graduated from Loma Linda Universitv Medical School in 1970, is a practicing pediatrician with subspecialist interest in neurology. He is Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Connecticut.)

1. Rene Noorbergen, Ellen G. White, Prophet of Destiny, (New Canaan, Conn.: Keats, 1972), p. 31.2. Ibid.3. F.D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics (Washington, D.C Review and Herald, 1951).4. Noorbergen, ibid., pp. 26-27.5. C.H. Kempe, H.K. Silver, O.D. O'Brien (eds), Current Pediatric Diagnosis and Treatment (Los Altos, Cal: Lange Medical, 1972), p. 50.6. Ibid., p. 504.7. Noorbergen, pp. 25-27 [Ellen G. White, Life Sketches, pp. 34-36.]8. Ibid., p. 41 [William C. White, Review and Herald, Feb. 10, also The Spirit of Prophecy Treasure Chest, p. 331, pp. 75-76 [Martha Amadon, "Mrs. E.G. White in Vision," Notebook Leaflets Misc. No. pp. 76-77 [M.G. Kellogg, M.D. in The Spirit of Prophecy Treasure Ch., p. 241, pp. 82-83 [George I. Butler, Review and Herald, June 9, 1874.]9. H. Gastaut, "Clinical and Electroencephalographical Classification, Epileptic Seizures", Epilepsia 11:102-103 (1970).10. W.A. Hauser and L.T. Kurland, "The Epidemiology of Epilepsy." Rochester, Minnesota", Epilepsia 16:1-66 (1975).11. Escueta et al, "Lapse of Consciousness and Automatisms in Temporary Lobe Epilepsy: A Videotape Analysis", Neurology 27:144 (1977).12. J.K. Penry and D.D. Daly (eds), Advances in Neurology, (New York: Raven Press, 1975), p. 163.13. Ibid. p. 77.14. Noorbergen, ibid, p. 89.15. Penry and Daly, Advances in Neurology, Vol. 11, pp. 71-7516. Ibid, p. 75.17. Ibid., p. 57.18. Ibid., pp. 59-60.19. Ibid., p. 65.20. Ibid., pp. 66, 69.21. V.R. Adebimpe, "Complex Partial Seizures Simulating Schizophrenia", Journal of the American Medical Association 237 1339-1340. (1977).22. D.M. Bear and P. Fedio, "Quantitative Analysis of Interictal Behavior in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy", Archives of Neurology 34: 454-465 (1977).23. Ibid., p. 459.24. Ibid25. D. Blumer, "Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and Its Psychiatric Significance" in D.F Benson and D. Blumer (eds), Psychiatric Aspects of Neurologic Disease (New York: Grune and Stratton, Inc. 1975), S.G. Waxman and N. Geschwind, "Hypergraphia in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy", Neurology 21:629-633 (1974), S.G. Waxman and N. Geschwind, "The Interictal Behavior Syndrome of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy", Archives of (wnc, Psychiatry 32:1580-1586 (1975).26. R. Numbers, Prophetess of Health: A Study of Ellen G. White. New York: Harper & Row, 1976).27. Jonathan Butler, unpublished manuscript.

This article concludes that the accident Ellen Harmon suffered when she was nine years old, resulted in a brain injury, which later perhaps was being manifested by a special kind of epileptic seizures - so called psycho-motoric seizures or partial-complex seizures. The article proposes that this may be a possible explanation for her later "visions". Ellens White's personality and behavior during her "visions" showed many traits characteristic for this type of epilepsy. Also the writing mania is characteristic for this disorder.

This information was not available at that time, consequently it was naturally to explain the seizures as "supernatural" or "visions" from God.

In light of the information now available, it is probable that Ellen Whites "visions" can be explained by psycho-motoric, epileptic seizures, or - as an alternative explanation - some sort of hysteria, which we also will take a look at. This latter explanation may be more reasonable. At least it explains the many false visions which often put Ellen White and others into embarassment, also the many self-contradictions - also based on "visions".

There is not a shadow of doubt that Ellen G. White suffered a serious accident at the age of nine. The stone that hit her in the nasal region struck her unconscious to the ground. According to Girgis, the temporary lobe is particularly vulnerable for damage because it is located at the base of the brain, between the eye cavities. This is where the cranium is thinnest, and where external damage may easiest penetrate the brain. This explains why epilepsy in the temporal lobe is quite common. (See M. Girgis, Neural Substrates of Limbic Epilepsy. Quoted in Couperus.)

Ellen White's prolonged unsconscious state (three weeks) may give us a clue to the extent of the damage. It is not common that pasients with damages like this are unconscious that long. A report for 105 children who suffered brain damages followed by unconsciousness, showed that only four of the patients were unconscious more than 24 hours (see M. Couperus, The Significance of Ellen White's Head Injury. Adventist Currents, June 1985.)

Patients who recover after serious head injuries, experience depressions, impaired concentration, headaches and dizzyness. In addition, patients suffering from epilepsy in the temporal lobe often experience fright, light and darkness. Ellen White had all these symptoms.

Fragrance of flowers

It is quite common that people, during Maria-apparitions and spiritistic seances, sense the fragrance of flowers, most often roses. We have touched on this earlier. But such sense-impressions also occur quite common during partial-complex seizures, eg. seizures in the temporal lobe, without having anything to do with seances and apparitions. During Maria-apparitions, persons in trance are insensible to external stimuli, the same applied to Ellen White.

"The seizure experience is usually initiated by a so-called symptom, or aura, that often involves some epigastric sensations or other automatic manifestations. There may be a sense of fear or the hallucination of smelling something, which Ellen White experienced a number of times as the smell of roses, or simply 'flowers.' She smelled the fragrance of violets, and at another time she was "gathering the flowers and enjoying their fragrance.' At another time 'she knelt by the bed, and before the first word of petition had been offered she felt that the room was filled with the fragrance of roses. Looking up to see whence the fragrance came she saw the room flooded with a soft, silvery light.'

"Arthur White, when describing a visionary experience of Ellen in 1901 in which there was 'a sweet fragrance, as of beautiful flowers,' added: 'She knew what it meant.' Apparently it was a frequent part of Ellen's visions to notice this fragrance. She also often saw a bright light at the beginning of her visions, a light that would flood the room, or would appear in various intensities, colors and shapes. The seeing of bright lights and various colors is very common in the partial complex seizures of epileptics. Ellen has stated:

'Well, while I was praying and sending up my petition, there was, as has been a hundred times or more, a soft light circling around in the room, and a fragrance like the fragrance of flowers, of a beautiful scent of flowers.' (Manuscript 43a, 1901.)

"If one takes seriously the statement 'a hundred times or more,' the circling light and the fragrance of flowers must have been present in nearly every vision. The hallucination of music (also associated with bright light) was present in Ellen's experiences (Testimonies, 9:66), as it is also found in the seizures of temporal lobe epilepsy." (Molleurus Couperus, The Significance of Ellen White's Head Injury. Adventist Currents, June 1985.)

Symptoms: Duration

Epileptic seizures from the temporal lobe commonly last from a few seconds to a few minutes. In some cases the seizures can last longer, from a few hours to a few days. Seizures of such prolonged duration are however rare. In his book Messenger to the Remnant, Arthur L. White elaborates on Ellens visions,

"While some of the visions were extended in their nature, at times lasting more than an hour, and on one occasion four hours, there were other times when the visions were very brief in duration - only a few minutes, or in some cases, seconds." (A.L. White, Ellen G. White, Messenger to the Remnant, p. 8. Emphasis supplied.)

It has been reported (Lennox) that seizures of this type which last several hours, occur one or two times a year (W.G. Lennox, Epilepsy and Related Disorders, 1:236.) Such seizures are called 'partial-complex status epilepticus'. They will often show up as a series of short seizures in rapid succession - so rapid that the seizures will be perceived as one single seizure.

Symptoms: Writing-mania (Hypergraphia)

It is quite common that pasients suffering from this particular type of epilepsy gradually develop changes in their personality and behavior pattern after the injury which caused the disease. Such was the case with Ellen White. Writing mania is a characteristic symptom for patients suffering from temporal lobe epilepsy. There's no doubt that Ellen White had this symptom. There are however, described several similar cases in medical literature. Waxman and Geschwind described a 24 year old woman who developed her first symptoms at the age of ten, and manifested aberrant behavior pattern at the age of fifteen. She became deeply religious, and experienced at least four conversions. She also had visual hallucinations of blue-green, blinking light. She spent several hours each day writing, in particular poems with moralistic or philosophical content. She copied several hundred times a song she had been learning, and she had an obsessional urge to write. Medical examinations showed that she had an injury in the right temporal lobe. (Waxman/Geschwind, Hypergraphia in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Neurology, 24 (1974). 929-363.)

Geschwind describes further,

"The degree of hypergraphia in many of these patients is striking. Thus patients may regularly write essays or sermons. One patient had trunks filled with his writings. A neurologist in New Zealand was presented by one of his patients with over twenty volumes of her selected handwritten works. I have recently seen a patient who developed temporal lobe epilepsy after partial resection of one temporal lobe during the removal of an aneurysm. He had never had intellectual interest but, following the appearance of temporal lobe epilepsy, became consumed with the thought that he had the mission to write something important." (N. Geschwind,Pathogenesis of Behavior Change in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, Vol. 61. Quoted in Couperus.)

Ellen White obviously manifested this writing-mania. Often she arose in the middle of the night in order to write "important testimonies" - which from time to time showed up to be false.

"The call to 'write, write, write' can easily change to 'borrow, borrow, borrow'. Under a strong religious compulsion, such a writer could well persuade herself that it was God who made her find the material she wanted to copy; and that she was simply obeying the divine obligation and prompting of the Spirit to copy the writings of others and put it out under her own name." (Couperus.)

Symptoms: Repetitions

A characteristic symptom during temporal lobe seizures are different kinds of automatisms - very often repetitions of words and sentences. This too was typical for Ellen White.

"Ellen had to write, and to produce the quantity she did she had no recourse but to copy from others; and this, with the help of her secretaries, she did well. . . .

"An easily observable trait in the temporal lobe epileptic is perseveration, stickiness, or viscosity - a form of automatism, which applies both to speech and writing, in which the individual repeats words, phrases, sentences, or, as Fenton expressed it, 'a tendency to adhere to each thought, feeling and action.' For example, many who saw Ellen White experience a vision report that she often exclaimed 'glory, glory, glory' at the onset of a vision. Daly describes a case reported by Penfield and Jasper of a boy who 'at the beginning of attacks heard a voice calling 'Sylvere, Sylvere, Sylvere' - the patient's first name.' A forty-five year old man was heard to say, 'Mother, Mother, Mother.' And an admitted agnostic repeatedly uttered 'God, God - oh, my God.' It would be easy for Ellen's subconscious mind to select the repetition 'glory, glory, glory' because the word glory was commonly used in the Methodist meetings she attended in her adolescence.

"Ellen gave evidence of this repetitiveness in her first publication when, as an eighteen-year old, she repeated the words 'I saw' sixteen times. In a second contribution to the same periodical three weeks later she used "I saw" thirteen times. Two months after this in an article in To The Little Remnant Scattered Abroad, she employed 'I saw' thirty-five times. The repetition of this phase becomes increasingly noticeable in Ellen's writings, until in some pages nearly every sentence begins with these words, as seen in an article by her in an 1849 Present Truth where, in thirteen sentences, she used 'I saw' or 'I was shown' eleven times. . . .

"Ellen had two visions on January 5, 1849, at Rocky Hill, Connecticut. . . .Jesus 'gazed in pity in the remnant,... raised His hands, and with a voice of deep pity cried, 'my blood, Father, my blood, my blood, my blood'... Then I saw an angel...crying with a loud voice, 'Hold! Hold! Hold! Hold!' In the same year she wrote also: 'I heard an angel say, 'Speed the swift messengers, speed the swift messengers'.' One year later she quoted an angel's question: 'Can such enter heaven?' Another angel answered, 'No, never, never, never. . . .

'If the sins do not go beforehand to judgment they will never go. Thy people, thy people, thy people, thy people not ready, not ready, not ready. . . .Get ready! Get ready! Get ready! almost finished' . . .

"In the Sutton vision of Ellen White in 1850, we have the following example:

'Then I saw we must drink deep, deep, from the water of the fountain. . . .Swim, swim, swim, plunge deep, deep, deep, in the ocean of God's love.'

"On January 3, 1875, in Battle Creek, Ellen had a vision reported by W.C. White that demonstrated some of the typical features of a temporal lobe seizure, including repetitiveness . . .

'Then mother undertook to pray, and in a horse, labored voice, she uttered two or three sentences of petition. Suddenly her voice broke clean and musical, and we heard the ringing shout, 'Glory to God!' We all looked up, and saw that she was in vision. Her hands were folded across her breast. her eyes were directed intently upward, and her lips were closed. There was no breathing, although the heart continued its action. As she looked intently upward, an expression of anxiety came into her face. She threw aside her blankets, and stepping forward, walked back and forth in the room. Wringing her hands, she moaned, 'Dark! Dark! All dark! So dark!' Then after a few moments silence, she exclaimed with emphasis, and a brightening of her countenance, 'A light! A little light! More light! Much light!' . . .Following her exclamatory remarks regarding the lights, she sat down in her chair.

"In 1868 she wrote: 'He will not accept half a sacrifice. All, all, all is God's.'

"In Early Writings (2nd ed., 1882) she wrote: 'Said the angel, 'Get ready, get ready, get ready, Ye will have to die a greater death to the world than ye have ever yet died!''

"She also repeated 'drudge, drudge, drudge, drudge' in a letter in 1892 from Australia." (Couperus. Emphasis supplied.)

There are numerous similar examples of repetitions in the writings of Ellen White. Here is one more,

"My vision comes up before me and the words of the angel even now seem to ring in my ears, 'Get ready, get ready, get ready. Time is almost finished, almost finished, almost finished. Cry, cry, for the arm of the Lord to be revealed, for the arm of the Lord to be revealed. Time is almost finished. What you do, ye must do quickly!'" (Letter 26, 1850, p. 2. - letter to Brother and Sister Loveland, November 1, 1850. Emphasis supplied.)

At one occasion, Ellen White became angry because Fannie Bolton discovered her "working methods", and Ellen got a "vision",

"Then there came the words rolling down over the clouds from the chariot from the lips of Jesus, 'Fannie Bolton is your adversary! Fanny Bolton is your adversary!' repeated three times." (EGW letter to Marian Davis, Oct. 29, 1895; Letter 102, 1895, p. 42.)

Symptoms: Hypermoralism

"Another trait in the writings of Ellen G. White is one that includes hypermoralism, sobriety, humorlessness, and multiple exhortations. This is particularly evident in writings which were intended for her fellow church members. A typical example of this is seen in a letter written to Dear Sister E. in 1873:

'I have been shown that you need a thorough conversion. You are not now on the right track to obtain that peace and happiness, which the true humble, cross-bearing believer is sure to receive. . . .You have a selfish disposition. . . .Your principal thoughts are for yourself, to pleaseyourself. . . .You neglect to cheerfully engage in the work which God has left you to do. Youoverlook the common, simple duties lying directly in your pathway. . . .You do not study to make others happy. . . .You indulge in a dreamy habit, which must be broken up. . . .You are not improving as fast as you might, and as you must. . . .You have been a cloud and a shadow in the family. . . .You have not had the grace of God in your heart. . . .You love to think and talk about young men. You interpret their civilities as a special regard for yourself. You flatter yourself. . . .A reformation must commence in your father's family. You bear the stamp of your father's character. You should endeavor to shun his errors and his extremes. . . .You do not love children. In fact you do not love anything which requires steady, earnest, persevering effort.'

"In this seven-page letter, 75 sentences begin with 'you', and an additional 115 times 'you' is used in the middle of sentences and is an example of the judgmentalness and hypermoralism seen in the temporal lobe epileptic, so often encountered in Ellen's writings." (Couperus. Emphasis supplied.)

Hysteria

In his book, Prophetess of Health, Ronald L. Numbers says,

"In her correspondence and autobiographical writings Ellen White reported a dazzling array of physical and psychological problems (see Appendix 1); yet despite even repeated expectations of imminent death, she lived to the ripe age of eighty-seven. A self-described 'great sufferer from disease' and 'lifelong invalid,' she from time to time complained of weakness and fainting, episodes of unconsciousness, breathing difficulties, 'heart disease,' pain in her lungs, 'pressure of blood on the brain,' intense headaches and 'inflammation on the brain,' dropsy, weak back, lameness, 'tenderness of the stomach,' nosebleeds, pleurisy, and rheumatism. On occasion she experienced dimmed eyesight, paralysis, lack of sensation, and muteness-to say nothing of repeated visions and hallucinations. She frequently suffered from depression and despondency."

"For understandable reasons, Ellen White attributed all of her visions and many of her ailments to supernatural causes." (Ronald L. Numbers, Prophetess of Health, p. 210. The University of Tennessee Press/Knoxville, 1992.)

Dr. Numbers does not really believe that partial-complex seizures may fully explain Ellen White's visions and behavior, even if she had many of the symptoms characteristic of that disease.

"To be sure, White in vision displayed many of these symptoms; however, her behavior also differed in significant ways from what might be expected of someone experiencing complex partial seizures. She apparently spoke clearly and lucidly during her visions, emerged from them with a clear mind, and did not suffer the amnesia, disorientation, or terror so often associated with complex partial seizures. . . .

"Complex partial seizures also shed little light on her manifold physical complaints, and they inadequately account for the degree to which her visions depended on the approval of others. But most telling of all, this diagnosis fails to recognize the large number of White's contemporaries who claimed to have had visionary episodes similar to hers-but reported no brain-damaging injuries. Thus we must look beyond complex partial seizures for an adequate explanation of her distinctive medical history.

"A more convincing diagnosis, which not only accounts for many of her physical and psychological symptoms but acknowledges the importance of social and cultural factors, is what mental-healtb experts today call somatization disorder with an accompanying histrionic personality style. These categories encompass the behaviors and symptoms formerly grouped together under the now-discarded label 'hysteria.' . . . .

"In other words, persons suffering from this disorder repeatedly complain of a wide range of physical problems and believe themselves to be sickly but are not physically ill. Symptoms, which range from gastrointestinal difficulties, chest pains, shortness of breath, palpitations, and dizziness to loss of voice, blurred or double vision, fainting, paralysis, difficulty walking, and amnesia, usually begin in the teens and occur most commonly in females. Although often described in a dramatic or exaggerated manner, the symptoms are neither intentional nor conscious; the typical sufferer has no sense of controlling thern and sincerely believes them to be of organic origin. . . .

"People with this disorder constantly seek or demand reassurance, approval, or praise from others and are uncomfortable in situations in which they are not the center of attention.'" (Ronald Numbers, Prophetess of Health, p. 212-13.)

This malady may explain the source of Ellen White's long list of more or less real ailments. In addition, her visions are to be judged in light of the time she was living in.

"In this diagnostic context, which, for our purposes, possesses greater heuristic than deterministic value, White's frequent dreams and visions shrink to mere epiphenomena. Histrionic persons today rarely report seeing visions, largely because such experiences have gone out of fashion. In the nineteenth century, however, trances and visions were the order of the day for a host of mesmerists, spiritualists, and religious enthusiasts. Self-proclaimed seers not only mod- eled themselves after the biblical writers, particularly Daniel and John the Revelator, but saw themselves as the fulfillment of the prophecy that 'in the last days . . . your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams' (Acts 2:17). In view of White's suggestibility and the atten- tion and reinforcement her dissociative experiences elicited from others, her claim to visions is hardly surprising. The exact mechanism that triggered these apparently self- hypnotic episodes is of less historical interest than the fact that phenomenologically her visions in no way differed from the trances of the run-of-the-mill mesmerist or spiritualist. The proof of this claim is White's own inability to distinguish empirically between her visions and those of her contem- poraries. She distanced herself from other trance mediums not on the basis of physical evidence, but spiritual content.

"From White's own testimony we are convinced that beginning in childhood she suffered from episodes of depression and anxiety that often left her debilitated and at times even crippled. . . . By her adult years she had developed a full-fledged somatization disorder and a histrionic personality style." (Numbers, Ibid., p. 214-15.)

Ronald Numbers elaborates further,

"In reading White's autobiographical accounts, one is immediately struck by the exaggerated, dramatic manner in which she portrays personal events. For example, she tells of how in 1858, following her vision of the 'Great Controversy' between Christ and Satan, she suffered from temporary paralysis and loss of speech, followed by several weeks of unsteadiness and impaired sensation. Her explanation:

'Satan designed to take my life to hinder the work I was about to write; but angels of God were sent to my rescue, to raise me above the effects of Satan's attack.'

"White hungered for the attention that attached to her role as a latter-day prophet. As early as 1845, public questioning of the divine nature of her visions so filled her with anguish her family thought she would die-at least that's what she reported. Later, in the mid-1850s, when her self-conscious husband refused to publish her testimonies and fellow believers neglected them, her visions dwindled and she sank into despair. . . .

"Ellen White often relied on her visions and ill health to control the distasteful behavior of family members and followers, at times even holding her own children responsible for her indispositions. Writing of her offspring in the mid-1850s, she said: 'I was keenly sensitive to faults in my children, and every wrong they committed brought on me such heartache as to affect my health.' Blaming her sons for her suffering may not have changed their behavior, but it undoubtedly induced considerable guilt. Even for relatively mundane matters she invoked the threat of becoming sick. When congregations failed to meet her demands for the ventilation of buildings, she on one occasion 'fell very sick with nervous prostration . . . suffering much with inflammation of head, stomach, and lungs,' and on another she refused to speak altogether out of fear that the poisonous air 'would cost me my life,' in effect saying, 'Open the windows, or I'll die.'"

"White's visions, like her ailments, served to keep family and followers in line. For how could they acknowledge her as God's inspired messenger and still dispute her messages, whether theological or personal'? Those audacious enough to challenge her authority found themselves the objects of divinely sent reprimands. When Fannie Bolton, one of White's literary assistants, raised embarrassing questions about her boss's writings, White beard a voice saying, 'Beware and not place your dependence upon Fannie to prepare articles or to make books. . . . She is your adversary. . . .She is not true to her duty, yet flatters herself she is doing a very important work.' Similar warnings discredited the claims of rival prophets, present and future. 'I have been shown,' said White, that there will be 'many who will claim to be especially taught of God, and will attempt to lead others, and they will undertake a work from mistaken ideas of duty that God has never laid upon them; and confusion will be the result.'" (Numbers, Ibid. pp. 218-21.)

Thus the door is effectively closed to any messenger other than Ellen White. And she testifies this in heaven's name.

In earlier years, Dr. Russell T. Trall predicted that her visions would decline after the menopause.

"The 1870s also marked the end of Ellen White's dramatic daytime visions, the last one coming about 1879 at age fifty-two. Years earlier Dr. Trall had privately predicted that the visions would end after menopause, and whatever the cause-they did. In the summer of 1869 Mrs. White wrote Edson that she was going through the change of life and fully expected to die, as her sister Sarah had done . . . .

"Somehow she survived the ordeal, which may have lasted until the mid-1870s; but thereafter her public visions apparently grew less and less frequent. For the remainder of her life she received her heavenly communications by means of dreams - 'visions of the night' - unaccompanied by any outward physical manifestations." (Numbers. Ibid. pp. 180-181. Emphasis supplied.)

By accident, this coincided with the death of her husband James, who died on August 6, 1881.

Dr. Merritt Gardner Kellogg (half-brother of John Harvey) wrote a letter to John,

"Now about my position as to the testimonies of Mrs. E.G. White. I think that in much of her writings we have clear evidence that the Spirit of God guided her thoughts as she wrote, but her inspiration came to her through the Holy Scriptures contained in the Bible. The Bible has been her constant study and has been the source of her inspiration.

"Her early vision was the result of an abnormal nervous condition and the subject of the visions were the result of her conceptions of things when in a normal condition. Her dreams may be accounted for in same manner. Of this I am full convinced." (Letter, M.G. Kellogg to J.H. Kellogg, Aug. 1, 1909. Emphasis supplied.)

Wrote Dr. W.J. Fairfield in 1887,

Battle Creek, Mich., Dec. 28, 1887."Dear Sir: You are undoubtedly right in ascribing Mrs. E.G. White's so-called visions to disease. It has been my opportunity to observe her case a good deal, covering quite a period of years, which, with a full knowledge of her history from the beginning, gave me no chance to doubt her ('divine') attacks to be simply hysterical trances. Age itself has almost cured her. W.J. Fairfield, M.D." (Dr. W.J. Fairfield, quoted in Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White. Emphasis supplied.)

Dr. William S. Sadler, a very intelligent man with great knowledge of human nature, was an aquaintance of Ellen White. He was one of the men who received a false testimony from her. In 1912, Dr. Sadler wrote the following observation,

"It is not uncommon for persons in a cataleptic trance to imagine themselves taking trips to other worlds. In fact, the wonderful accounts of their experiences, which they write out after these cataleptic attacks are over, are so unique and marvelous as to serve the basis for founding new sects, cults, and religions. . . . It is an interesting study in psychology to note that these trance mediums always see visions in harmony with their own theological beliefs. . . . Nearly all these victims of trances and nervous catalepsy, sooner or later come to believe themselves to be messengers of God and prophets of Heaven; and no doubt most of them are sincere in their belief. Not understanding the physiology and psychology of their afflictions, they sincerely come to look upon their peculiar mental experiences as something supernatural while their followers blindly believe anything they teach because of the supposed divine character of these so¡called revelations." (Dr. W.S. Sadler, The Physiology of Faith and Fear, pp. 461-62. Quoted in W. Rea, The White Lie, p. 211. Emphasis supplied.)

Ellen White came from Methodist background, in addition she was involved in the Miller-movement. Her visions were accordingly coloured by legalism and Millerism. An interesting question is, how would her visions turned out if she had come from Roman-catholic background or from Islam?

Isaac Wellcome, who was baptized by James White in 1844, was among the questioners of Ellen White's visions.

"Ellen G. Harmon. . . .was strangely exercised in body and mind. . .falling to the floor. . . .(we remember catching her twice to save her from falling upon the floor). . . .in meetings she would speak with great vehemence and rapidity until falling down, when, as she claimed, wonderful views of heaven and what was being transacted there were shown her. She claimed to have seen that Christ had left the office of mediation and assumed that of Judge, had closed the door of mercy, and was blotting out the names, from the book of life. . . .We saw her in Poland, Portland, Topsham, and Brunswick during the beginning of this career, and often heard her speak, and several times saw her fall, and heard her relate wonders which she said her heavenly Father permitted her to see. Her supernatural or abnormal views were not readily understood as visions, but as spiritual views of unseen things, which were quite common among the Methodists.... These visions were but the echoes of Elder [Joseph] Turner and others' preaching, and we regard them as the product of the overexcited imagination of her mind, and not as facts." (Isaac Wellcome, History of the Second Advent Message (Yarmouth, Maine: Advent Christian Publication Society, 1874).

Dudley M. Canright was of the same opinion,

"At the age of nine she received a terrible blow on the face, which broke her nose, and nearly killed her. She was unconscious for three weeks. (See her life in "Testimonies," Vol. I., pp. 9, 10.) This shock to her nervous system was doubtless the chief cause of all the visions she had afterwards." (D.M. Canright, The Life of Mrs. E.G. White.)

Canright continues,

"Now read the life of Mrs. White, and she tells it over and over, times without number, about fainting frequently, pain at the heart, and about being so sick that she expected to die.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:32 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



16 -Retouching

The White Estate, which stands as the zealous keeper of Ellen White's writings, manuscripts and letters, has from time to time faked photographs in order to preserve the myths about the adventist prophetess. As an example we will mention a photograph where Ellen White's granddaughter Ella Robinson is sitting besides her grandmother. On the photograph Ella Robinson wears a long necklace. This necklace was retouched away when Arthur White put the photograph into his book The Elmshaven Years, p. 243. The faking was probably done to create the impression that adventists at that time - and especially Ellen White's relatives - were faithful to the Testimonies, which condemn in no uncertain terms the use of jewelry. It was however obvious that SDA people in general, and her own relatives, did not take these statements on jewelry too serious, and it was evident that Ellen White did not have any objections to pose on a photograph together with her granddaughter wearing a long necklace. Otherwise, it was customary that artists at the Review and Herald routinely removed jewelry from people before photograps were published and printed. But now this practice has been abandoned, they say. There is a photograph of Ellen White from 1878, where she stands beside her twin sister Elizabeth. On this photo Ellen White wears a long gold chain and a brooch. This was fifteen years after she had condemned other people wearing similar jewelry.

The artists at the Review and Herald did also doctor Ellen White's nose. The stone which hit her in the nasal region when she was ten years old, damaged her face, giving her a "pug-nose". W.A. Colcord, who was secretary of the General Conference in the 1920's wrote a letter to Edward S. Ballenger,

"I am glad to see you getting after W.C. White. . . .No doubt he was the one who had his mother's picture doctored up to represent her having a beautiful, long, straight nose. . . . (it is) a misrepresentation which covers up the deformity caused by an all but fatal blow in childhood which later brought on her epilepsy and. . . fits mistaken for visions. . . . For many years he has figured in these misrepresentations and defenses of his mother." (Letter, W.A. Colcord to E.S. Ballenger, Feb. 29, 1928. Quoted in Sydney Cleveland's book, White-Washed.)

In other words: Not just the written words from Ellen White has been twisted and retouched by the myth-keepers. Also photographic material has been doctored to create wrong impressions about their revered prophetess among the common SDA people.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:33 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



17 -Undermining

On several occasions Ellen White states that in the future, persons would arise, making efforts to tear down the foundations of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, and who would try to create doubts regarding the Testimonies. Here comes a selection of the most well-known statements to that effect.

"Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid. . . .What influence is it that would lead men at this stage of our history to work in an underhand, powerful way to tear down the foundation of our faith - the foundation that was laid at the beginning of our work by prayerful study of the Word and by revelation?" (Selected Messages, vol. 1, pp. 206-207. Emphasis supplied.)

"Now at the present time God designs a new and fresh impetus shall be given to His work. Satan sees this, and he is determined it shall be hindered. He knows that if he can deceive the peoplewho claim to believe present truth, [and make them believe that] the work the Lord designs to do for His people is a removing of the old landmarks, something which they should, with most determined zeal, resist, then he exults over the deception he has led them to believe." (Counsels to Writers and Editors, p. 31. Emphasis supplied.)

"When the power of God testifies as to what is truth, that truth is to stand forever as the truth. No aftersuppositions, contrary to the light God has given are to be entertained. Men will arise with interpretations of Scripture which are to them truth, but which are not truth. The truth for this time, God has given us as a foundation for our faith. He Himself has taught us what is truth. One will arise, and still another, with new light which contradicts the light that God has given under the demonstration of His Holy Spirit." (Ibid, pp. 31-32. Emphasis supplied.)

"We are not to receive the words of those who come with a message that contradicts the special points of our faith. They gather together a mass of Scripture, and pile it as proof around their asserted theories. This has been done over and over again during the past fifty years. And while the Scriptures are God's word, and are to be respected, the application of them, if such application moves one pillar from the foundation that God has sustained these fifty years, is a great mistake." (Ibid, p. 32. Emphasis supplied.)

"No line of truth that has made the Seventh-day Adventist people what they are, is to be weakened. We have the old landmarks of truth, experience, and duty, and we are to stand firmly in defense of our principles, in full view of the world." (Ibid, pp. 52-53. Emphasis supplied.)

"In the future, deception of every kind is to arise, and we want solid ground for our feet. We want solid pillars for the building. Not one pin is to be removed from that which the Lord has established. The enemy will bring in false theories, such as the doctrine that there is no sanctuary. This is one of the points on which there will be a departing from the faith." (Ibid, p. 53. Emphasis supplied.)

"Satan is . . . constantly pressing in the spurious - to lead away from the truth. 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. 29:1. Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God's remnant people in the true testimony. . . . There will be a hatred kindled against the testimonies which is satanic. The workings of Satan will be to unsettle the faith of the churches in them, for this reason: Satan cannot have so clear a track to bring in his deceptions and bind up souls in his delusions if the warnings and reproofs and counsels of the Spirit of God are heeded." (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 48. Emphasis supplied.)

These were selected statements by Ellen White on the Adventist doctrines and the Testimonies. There are numerous other similar statements.

What are we to say about this? In one of the above statements Ellen White says it is wrong to use the Bible to test the pillars of adventism,

"We are not to receive the words of those who come with a message that contradicts the special points of our faith. They gather together a mass of Scripture, and pile it as proof around their asserted theories. This has been done over and over again during the past fifty years. And while the Scriptures are God's word, and are to be respected, the application of them, if such application moves one pillar from the foundation that God has sustained these fifty years, is a great mistake." (Quoted above. Emphasis supplied.)

In other words, it boils down to a confrontation between the Bible and Seventh-Day Adventism, and Seventh-Day Adventism and Ellen G. White are closely linked toghether. A confrontation between Ellen G. White and the Bible - that is the real matter. Which one are we to believe? What Ellen White in reality is saying in the above statement, is that we should stay by the Advent message if we, after a close investigation, discover that the Bible and the Advent Message does not square. She takes of course for granted that the Advent Message harmonizes with Scripture, but if they do not, the Advent message (and her writings) will have first priority above the Bible. That's what she in effect is saying. The A.F. Ballenger case proved this claim to be true. Even a "pile of Scriptures" against the Seventh-Day Adventist doctrines have no weight if they contradict these doctrines! We are to respect the Word of God, says Ellen White, "but if we make use of this Word to move a single block or pin in this message", it is "a big mistake" - even if the Word of God plainly contradicts the Advent message. The reader should review the chapter on A.F. Ballenger to see the truth of this statement.

This is pure cultism! It is a matter of fact that certain fundamental doctrines of the SDA Church does not harmonize with the Word of God. Every objective truth-seeker will soon discover this by personal study. The prejudiced adventist does not see it that way, of course. He has to "interpret" otherwise plain Scripture, twist them, read them out of context and perform other strange things to make them fit into a preconceived, doctrinal frame. This is not unique to SDA's, however. All cults have to do the same to fit the Bible into their particular theories.

For this reason there is no cause to worry about the above statements by Ellen White. If the pillars don't square with Scripture, let the "pillars" go! The Bible is the one and only rule of faith. The Advent message is to be judged by the Bible, not vice versa. According to Ellen White, God will have a people on earth who have the Bible only as their sole rule of faith and their sole basis for all doctrines. Not just some doctrines - all! In other words, There is no place for the writings of Ellen White here! It is not "the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy", which is a saying or stereotyped phrase among certain SDA's. It is the Bible alone!

"When you find men questioning the testimonies, finding fault with them, and seeking to draw away the people from their influence, be assured that God is not at work through them. It is another spirit." (Selected Messages, vol 1, p. 45. Emphasis supplied.)

When we are finding certain statements in the Testimonies - the "Spirit of Prophecy" - which do not harmonize with the Bible and plain facts, and there are a lot of such, then the Bible, and the Bible only shall be the standard - not the words of Ellen White. By the way,

"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God because many false prophets are gone out into the world." (1 John 4:1.)

The same test applies of course to Ellen White and her writings.

"It is Satan's plan to weaken the faith of God's people in the Testimonies. Satan knows how to make his attacks. He works upon minds to excite jealousy and dissatisfaction toward those at the head of the work. The gifts are next questioned; then, of course, they have but little weight, and instruction given through vision is disregarded. Next follows skepticism in regard to the vital points of our faith, the pillars of our position, then doubt as to the Holy Scriptures, and then the downward march to perdition. When the Testimonies, which were once believed, are doubted and given up, Satan knows the deceived ones will not stop at this; and he redoubles his efforts till he launches them into open rebellion, which becomes incurable and ends in destruction." (Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 672. Emphasis supplied.)

How would you harmonize this statement with the following quote from the same author,

"But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms." (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, p. 413. Emphasis supplied.)

This we believe fully, of course. But even if Ellen White points to the Bible as the only standard, and encourages personal Bible study, we can read between the lines in her many statements that the results of our personal Bible study must be brought into harmony with the "established faith" and the doctrines and interpretations supported by her writings - even if they cannot be supported by the Bible. From this standpoint a personal Bible study has little or no value because the results are determined in advance. They must be interpreted by Ellen White. "Study your Bible, but bring the conclusions into harmony with my writings".This is in effect what she is saying.

Ellen White claims (5T 672),

1. First of all you begin to cherish doubts about her writings.2. Then you begin to cherish doubts about the fundamental doctrines in "our faith". 3. Then you begin to cherish doubts about the Bible, and you have opened the way down to perdition.

Well - there you have it! This is in effect saying that the fundamental doctrines of "our faith" are based on her writings and not the Bible, and that her writings are elevated above God's Word. If you lose faith in her writings, you lose faith in SDAism. What then are SDAism based on, other than her writings?

My friend, this is not the Bible only. It is "the Spirit of Prophecy" and the Bible. The two above statements from 5T 672 and 4SP 413 are mutually exclusive and contradictory by nature, but 4SP 413 is absolutely true.

Ceertain adventists believe that by pointing your finger against Ellen White's writings, you are automatically accusing the Bible. This of course is the consequence of claiming that her writings are on the same level as the Bible, which Ellen White actually has done between the lines. Then the Bible and her writings stand and fall together. This extreme viewpoint has, thank God, no support in Scripture, but will drive adventists away from the Bible if they begin doubting her writings. They will then automatically doubt the Bible. From such a standpoint there is a kernel of truth in her statement, but it would be qualified by the person's standpoint, namely that the Bible and the Testimonies stand and fall together.

This is extreme, cultic fanaticism without support in the Word of God. Unfortunately, certain adventists in the ultra-zealous, ultra-conservative, fringe, the "Ellen White"-fringe practice this view.

Let's look at some facts,

It is crystal clear that Ellen White produced several false visions. It is also crystal clear that we encounter a number of absurdities and contradictions in her writings - things which cannot be sustantiated from the Bible. It is a matter of fact that she was sending out false testimonies from time to time, in which she accused named persons for having done things they definitely were not guilty of - and thereby placing these individuals in embarassing positions. By doing so, the false testimony or vision backfired on Ellen White herself, by placing her in embarassing positions she was having trouble getting out of. This is in open violation of the ninth commandment in the Law of God.

According to Ellen White, when a person begins to doubt her writings, the next step will be to doubt the fundamental doctrines of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. This of course is a logical conclusion of the above, because Ellen White's visions and writings very strongly support these teachings. However it is a undisputable fact that several of these teachings are not in harmony with Scripture, for example 1844 and the Investigative judgment. The adventist sanctuary teaching too will be surrounded by a big question mark when we read the Bible the plain way, without being led by preconceived interpretations. The sanctuary teaching is of course closely connected to the year 1844 and the Investigative judgment - or is it vice versa?

The next step will be to doubt the Bible, she says. This is a strong statement which undoubtedly applies to certain extremists as mentioned above, not normal, unbiased truth-seekers. A number of adventist pioneers, after having studied the Bible for themselves, asked pertinent questions about Ellen White's inspiration and certain adventist doctrines. They left adventism, but kept their faith in the Bible, which became dearer to them than ever. Ellen White's statement is to be taken with a big pinch of salt. Of course, a few may have taken extreme steps and ended out in the world as atheists, but we are not to generalize from such examples. They had built their house on sand, not Jesus and his Word. One will find examples like this in all christian surroundings - with or without Ellen White. If a person renounces the Bible as a result of questioning Ellen White's visions, this must of course be taken as a clear token that this person has not built his house on the right foundation, but on sand. Such course indicates that this individual has built his christian experience, his faith and ultimately his salvation on the visions and writings of Ellen G. White. This is 150% secterism and fanaticism, not Bible and a healthy relationship with the Saviour.

On what are we to build our faith? According to Ellen White (reading between the lines) her writings should be the norm, because these writings on account of her own words, stand as a shield against doubting the Bible. If you begin to doubt her writings, the next step will be to doubt the Bible. But does the credibility of God's Word depend on Ellen White? This unbiblical claim must be strongly rejected.

We believe fully that the Bible, and the Bible only, is the only unfallible standard for all doctrines and all reforms. By keeping to the Word of God only, we are building our house on a firm foundation which can stand against storm and torrents.

It is significant that Ellen White regards herself and her writings as "all or nothing",

"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." (Testimonies, vol 5, p. 671. Emphasis supplied.)

Regarding her Testimonies, she says,

"If the Testimonies speak not according to the word of God, reject them. Christ and Belial cannot be united." (Ibid, p. 691. Emphasis supplied.)

These are strong statements indeed. What are we then to say about the false visions, false dreams, false testimonies, contradictions etc. which carry the name of Ellen G. White on them? What about the extensive plagiarism? According to herself, she will not have a balanced view, but demands that we either accept her totally or reject her totally. She is either from God or the devil, she says.

As we have seen, great portions of her literary production from the earliest years of Adventism through her death in 1915, has been borrowed from other authors. Of course there is much good material here, and the authors of books like Night Scenes in the Bible, The Great Teacher etc., from whom Ellen White borrowed extensively, may have been inspired. But they got their inspiration from the Bible, illuminated by the Spirit of God.

In Ellen White's writings we do not find any soul-destroying teachings whih lead to perdition. It would then be more correct to say that Ellen White's writings neither were from God, in the sense of being based on "visions" and "revelations", nor from the devil. They were simply of human source, based on men's study of the Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit.. We do find many wrong conclusions and erroneous interpretations - errors - in her writings. These were all interpretations and conclusions she borrowed from other adventist pioneers, who also misinterpreted God's Word. This shows clearly that her writings were not based on "visions", as she claims. The false visions fall under the same category. This is at least my personal opinion. They were not visions, neither from God or the devil, but probably had their source in nervous diseases. The problem however, is that Ellen White constantly denied and explained away all the cases - based on "visions" - where she undoubtedly was wrong.

"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (1 Thess. 5:21.)

These are of course inspired words which also apply to the Writings of Ellen White. We are to keep what is in harmony with Scripture, and reject all things which are not in harmony with the Bible, plain facts and general good sense. Ellen White has written edifying things, the same applies to other christian writers. But we are not to make exaggerated claims about her writings.

When we test her writings with the Bible, and discover that certain things do not harmonize with Bible, certain people become frightened by Ellen White's warnings, quoted earlier in this article. But we are not to be frightened by this. The Bible says,

"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." (Deut. 18:22.)

This applies to non-conditional prophecies, and not prophecies connected to certain conditions on repentance etc., like Jonah's prophecy about Ninive. Jonah's prophecy did not meet its fulfillment in forty days as he proclaimed, but he certainly was a true prophet of God. If the Ninivites had not repented, the prophecy would have been fulfilled in forty days.

Several of Ellen White's non-conditional prophecies did not fulfill, and there were many false visions, false testimonies and false messages. Certain of her statements are not in harmony with the Bible. Consequently, according to the Bible, we are not to be afraid of her. She has not passed the biblical test of a true prophet.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/3/2008 7:35 pm

by Å. Kaspersen



18 -Afterword

According to prominent SDA-leaders, Seventh-Day Adventism stands and falls with Ellen White,

"The influence of the spirit of prophecy is woven into the warp and woof of Adventist faith, life, and organization. . . . What we are as a church is a reflection of our faith in the divine authority evident in the writings of Ellen G. White." (John Robertson, The White Truth, p. 61. Emphasis supplied. Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1981.)

"Our position on the Testimonies is like the keystone to the arch. Take that out, and there is no logical stopping place till all the special truths of the message are gone.... Nothing is surer than this, that this message and the visions belong together and stand or fall together." (Review and Herald Supplement, Aug. 14, 1883. Emphasis supplied.)

Please note that the above statement is taken from the Review and Herald, which is the official organ of the Seventh-Day Adventist church, and that the word our is being used. Consequently this is an official statement from the Seventh-Day Adventist church. It cannot be stated more plainly that some peculiar doctrines of this church are not based on Scripture, but on Ellen White's "visions" and writings. In other words, no Ellen White, no Adventist doctrines. We are not touching on SDA doctrines which are based on the Word of God, but on some peculiar doctrines which has been forming SDAism - the Investigative Judgment, the adventist sanctuary teaching and 1844. These are the foundations of Adventism

We read in the above statement that the Advent message and Ellen White stands and falls together. That is, if Ellen White's visions fall, the advent message falls; if the advent message falls, Ellen White's visions fall. For years we have been teached that the "special truths" in "our message" was based on Bible. Now we know better, according to the official SDA organ. If we remove the testimonies, "all the special truths in the message" will vanish. Maybe this is the cause for the serious problems we are having when we try to defend our "special truths" - the Investigative Judgment, the sanctuary teaching and 1844 - from the Bible only, without resorting to Ellen White's visions.

This radical standpoint, as quoted above, has been watered down considerably through the years, but because the pillars of adventism are unprovable from Scripture alone, contrary to what most SDA's believe, the statement from 1883 is certainly more in harmony with facts than later statements.

This is the case with every cult: No Joseph Smith and his writings, no Mormons; no Mary Baker Eddy and her writings, no Christian Science; no Mohammed and the Koran, no Islam.

In his book "The Mark of the Beast", a former president of the General Conference, G.A. Irwin, states,

"It is from the standpoint of light that has come through the Spirit of Prophecy that the question will be considered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy is the only infallible interpreter of Bible principles." (G.A. Irwin, The Mark of the Beast, p. 1. Emphasis supplied.)

This statement by a former president of the General Conference reflects the same principles found in the Roman Catholic Church. Irwin claims indirectly that "we" have an infallible authority an par with the Roman Pontiff, eg. to be the only infallible interpreter of Scripture.

This extreme standpoint from a former GC-president has been toned down considerably since his time, but in practice a number of ultra-conservative adventists view Ellen G. White through Irwin's glasses. If she has something to say about biblical topics, the final word has been said. No more discussion, or you are being labeled a "disbeliever in Ellen White", and frowned upon.

It is an undisputable fact that the scribes within the Seventh-Day Adventist church fail to produce conclusive Scriptural evidence when it comes to the central pillars of SDAism - 1844, the sanctuary teaching and the Investigative judgment. The latter depends of course on 1844 and the sanctuary teaching. The same can be said of the other doctrines - they are all interconnected and depending on each other. Learned SDA theologians know that they are in serious trouble trying to defend these doctrines from Bible alone. A special committee, nominated by the General Conference in the 1960's, came together for five years studying these things, without reaching agreement. Finally, they had to confess that these doctrines were not on a solid, biblical ground. Other Bible students reached the same conclusions, among them Ballenger at the turn of the century, W.W. Fletcher, L.R. Conradi, D. Ford and others. Regarding Ballenger, even the learned preachers confessed that his conclusions were standing on a solid, biblical platform. But as one of them stated, "I have always been of the opinion that the Bible should be interpreted by the writings of Ellen White." Ellen White condemned Ballenger as a "satanic agent" and threw him out as unclean without a cent to support his family. Louis R. Conradi and William W. Fletcher were among other SDA Bible students who came to these obvious conclusions when they in their Bible studies dodged Ellen White's writings.

That Seventh-Day Adventism in its present form stands and falls with its prophetess, is a true statement. Her writings are being used as "proofs" for the central doctrines, all while the lay people in the church are being brainwashed to believe that these doctrines are in full harmony with the Bible. But how many have followed the example of the noble Bereans? Some did, and the prophetess labeled them as "agents of Satan".

For this reason the lay people are brainwashed to believe that they under no circumstances are to turn the spotlight on their prophetess and her writings. She is "sacrosanct". If you do that, you are venturing on forbidden ground. Maybe the reason for this is fear - fear that someone should begin to make personal investigation and discover that the map does not correspond with the terrain.

If Ellen White falls, Adventism falls, at least in its present form. This will not happen, because history and experience shows that sectarians are true to their guru until death. Several suicide cults can attest to that.

Ellen G. White have had an enormous influence within Adventism for 150 years, and for those adventists who are true to their prophet, undisputable evidences that she was not what she pretended to be, are not evidences at all. Paradoxically, to those adventists heaps of evidences against Ellen White will only serve as oil on fire and confirm them still more in their belief in Ellen White. Literature such as this article are for them a fulfillment of her predictions. They are slaves under the yoke of "ellenocraty".

The person Ellen G. White

In "Bibelstudier" (the norwegian Sabbath School quarterly), February 20, 1999, we found this statement by EGW,

"In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision - the precious rays of light shining from the throne." (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 27. Emphasis supplied.)

Dear reader, do you still believe this after reading the documentation in this article?

"In her writings there is to be found no teachings which are not in harmony with Scripture" (Bibelstudier, p. 64).

After reading this article, you may evaluate if this is a true statement.

"Many of her aquaintances could attest to her noble character" (ibid., p. 64).

I have no right to judge any person, but I will at least mention that she on occasions lied to others, lied about her visions, lied about her plagiarizing, and lied about herself. She seldom apologized for all her blunders by sending out false testimonies which hurt and damaged other persons. In this article, we have documented several examples of this.

During many years she pretended to be a rigid health reformer while she was not. She spiced up her testimonies with sharp reproofs and the wrath of God over people who digressed from health reform while she herself was guilty of doing the very same things - and maybe even to a greater extent than the accused!

She was of course nice and sociable towards persons who supported her and did not gainsay her - those who parrotted her, but she was often merciless against persons who did not support her or who pointed their finger at something she had been writing, or something in her personal life which did not correspond with her profession. She labeled them as satanic agencies and would have nothing more to do with them. She became angry at those who gainsayed her in her many blunders.

It is of course human to err and make blunders, but Ellen White claimed heavenly visions and instructions to what finally turned out to be blunders which put both herself and other persons in embarassing positions.

In other words, Ellen White was a human being with many defects of character, like all of us. She was definitely not the madonna-figure on her pidestal certain fanatical adventists make her to be. She was in the same position all of us are. However it is a grave thing to take God as witness for unjust treatment of other persons, or to lie - swear falsely - in the name of God, which she certainly did at occasions - probably in an effort to maintain her own status as true end time prophet in the SDA church.

"Seventh-Day Adventists believe they can decide the genuineness of a prophet by seing him or her in light of the criteria found in the Bible. When we test Ellen White according to these criteria, we find that she is a modern, inspired prophet" (Bibelstudier, p. 65).

The documentation in the present article should convince open-minded persons that the above statement is not quite true. How many adventists have given their prophet a thorough biblical test? When we are saying that she passes all biblical tests, and that all her writings are in harmony with Scripture, we are reading Bible through Ellen White and interpreting Scripture according to preconceived ideas. The same applies to other cults. They read verses of Scripture which are interpreted in advance, consequently everything they come out with is "in harmony with Scripture". This is not to test a prophet with Scripture; it is to test Scripture with the prophet. This is exactly the way Seventh-Day Adventists are using Ellen White. It is possible to use Scripture to "prove" almost everything. It depends on which glasses you are putting on when you read the Bible.

"It is regrettable that someone would spend their time undermining her work and deny her inspiration. To be armored against such attacks, we are to know what the Bible says about the marks of a true prophet" (ibid., p. 63).

The present article will of course be regarded as a grandiose attempt to "undermine her work" and "deny her inspiration". There is no reason to pay much attention to such statements. It is the Bible and undisputable, documented facts that will settle the matter. We have documented the circumstances about her visions, and we have documented how large parts of her writings came into shape. Many a myth has been consigned to the grave.

But some will say; "the documentation in this article is rather dubious. It most certainly derives from persons who had a grudge against her".

Such arguments are based on the following logic,

1. Ellen White always told the truth.2. Adventist pioneers always told the truth about her when they were supportive of her.3. Adventist pioneers never told the truth about her when they were not supportive of her, or remained neutral.4. Adventist pioneers who always told the truth about her when they were supportive of her,always became untruthful about her when they changed their mind after having discovered a number of things.

Strange logic indeed.

Curiously enough, adventists who follow this kind of logic when it comes to Ellen White, do not follow the same logic when it comes to "outcasts" from other cults, such as mormonism and Jehovas Witnesses. When people from these cults get their eyes opened and leave - and eventually write books, uncovering their former church, such persons will of course be branded by their former church as liars with dubious documentation. "He is not to be trusted. He is an outcast. He does not tell the truth. He is trying to defame us".

But in such cases, many SDA's will say, "See? What did we say about them? This person knows pretty well what he is talking about. After all he had been connected with them for several years. We recommend this book to all Seventh-Day Adventists". No SDA will question their documentation.

But when a SDA get his eyes opened, and eventually leave - and writes books uncovering his former church, the SDA's will rant, "His documentation is not sound. He is not to be trusted. He is an outcast. He does not tell the truth. He is trying to defame us, and he gives a completely distorted picture of what we are standing for".

When a Mormon or a Jehovas Witness read his book, they say, "See? What did we say about them? This person knows pretty well what he is talking about. After all he had been connected with them for several years. We recommend this book to all Jehovas Witnesses". No JW will question their documentation.

It's a strange world we are living in, and people sometimes manifest odd behaviour. But all will of course try to defend their own.

Some will say, "the author of this article defends Ballenger, Kellogg and Canright, and we know these persons were under Ellen White's condemnation".

Yes. There is much evidence to their having been unjustly condemned by the adventist prophet. How many have investigated their case from their own testimonials? The opportunity has been given in this article. I am a defender of truth and justice. However, for the guardians of myths the end justifies the means, and the means have at times been merciless in its character. Even today there are SDA ministers standing on the pulpit condemning the above mentioned persons. One should be extremely careful to travel around condemning persons without knowing their case. Most adventists know these men from Ellen White's writings and what the denomination has to say about them. Is this how it works in a court of law? I am sorry to say that some have made a life-style out of acting as an accuser of the brethren. But God's law plainly says, "Thou shalt not lie".

The authors of the above quoted Bible lessons and other official SDA-literature are supported by a strong denomination, and they are intent on preserving the myth by presenting the fictive Ellen White, not the real one. This of course has to do with authority and money. Ellen White is a convenient tool to maintain authority over church members, quoting selected "Spirit of Prophecy" statements when there is a need - either to collect money or to bring people into line. "Ellen White says" - and church members who are brainwashed to accept their prophet as God's infallible mouthpiece are brought into submission. This is the case with every authoritative cult which claims extra-biblical writings as their authority. The Adventist denomination is no exception. Such propaganda is common among cults which try to maintain the image of their guru in order to keep church members into submission.

In their General Conference sessions the Adventist church has voted that Ellen G. White is an inspired prophet. The same applies to the Mormons/Joseph Smith and Christian Science/Mary Baker Eddy. But a vote with two thirds majority does not make Joseph Smith and Mary Baker Eddy true prophets, nor Ellen White. This is not the criterion. A majority vote does not make these writings into harmony with God's Word. I do not say that everything in their writings are unbiblical. It is more correct to say that not all are in harmony with the Bible. Such is also the case with the writings, visions and revelations of Ellen White. It is an undisputable fact that not everything are in harmony with God's Word. I think we have produced sufficient documentation to that effect.

Votes and decisions in human councils do not make darkness to ligh nor error to truth or vice versa. Light and darkness, truth and error are quite able to stand on their own feet and maintain their status regardless of human votes by raising of hands. It is the Bible and the Bible onlywhich settles the matter and discriminates between light and darkness, sweet and bitter, and truth and error.

In fact, Ellen White gives this good counsel, which is in perfect harmony with Bible,

"Suppose a brother held a view that differed from yours, and he should come to you, proposing that you sit down with him and make an investigation of that point in the Scriptures; should you rise up , filled with prejudice, and condemn his ideas, while refusing to give him a candid hearing? The only right way would be to sit down as Christians and investigate the position presented, in the light of God's word, which will reveal truth and unmask error. To ridicule his ideas would not weaken his position in the least if it were false, or strengthen your position if it were true. If the pillars of our faith will not stand the test of investigation, it is time that we knew it. There must be no spirit of pharisaism cherished among us." (Counsels to Writers and Editors, p. 44.)

This was a good admonition, which sadly enough Ellen White did not follow herself. The Ballenger case should prove this. What did Ellen White do with the kind, pleading letter he wrote to her, asking for help? He just found out that central points in the SDA sanctuary teaching were not in harmony with Scripture. When he pointed out this fact to her, what did she do? Did she sit down with him in a christian spirit, trying to figure out the problems from the Bible?

No. After having received his letter, she condemned the man, in the name of heaven, as an agent of the devil, being led by spiritistic powers. She was not willing to follow her own counsel and yield to the Word of God. It was obvious that her own honor and her own writings took priority before the Bible and truth and justice. All this she did in the name of heaven, testifying this in the Lord's name.

This is one of the things about Ellen White that have made the author of this article particularly hesitant.

This article is not intended as a personal, malicious attack on Ellen White as a human being. God shall judge her, not we. But we must admit that much is required from those who claim advanced light and constant communion with heaven, God and angels.

It is a fact that there exists two versions of the human being Ellen G. White. One is the fictiveEllen White, the other is the real Ellen White. We are asking for the real Ellen G. White to stand up. The fictive Ellen White has never existed. She is an imaginary product created by myths and superstitions. She then became the imaginary Ellen White, the adventist madonna entrusted with heavenly authority. The purpose of this article is to kill the fictive Ellen White and let the real Ellen White stand up. It will then be manifest that she was not a madonna, but a human being like ourselves, full of errors and shortcomings. This, however does not excuse her numerous, and grave offences against people who were innocent in what they had been accused of. Neither does it excuse her rather easy-going relation with truth.

To many adventists, Ellen White stands as an effective block to further Bible study. Because her writings are being considered the final word, the Ellen White reader does not progress further in his/her Bible understanding than Ellen White's own understanding. And her understanding was faulty in many areas, because she depended on the interpretations arrived to by the pioneers.

Some ultra-conservative adventists deny vehemently that Ellen White did plagiarize from other authors. They claim that everything in her writings are original, derived directly from heaven. Some of these people even publish magazines, in which every EGW-quote bear a stamp with the text: "Inspired". They claim that the allegations of plagiarism are from the devil, and undisputable evidences to the contrary, even direct comparisons, glance off as water on the goose. For such people fact are not facts, and evidences are not evidences. Sadly to say, they are completely brainwashed by "ellenism". They must defend her at any cost, and to them the end justifies the means. Some are even extreme to the degree that they label all who come up with information which they perceive as "attacks on Ellen White", as Jesuits and catholic infiltrators.

Robert J. Ringer gave this pertinent admonition on how to deal with such people,

"You have no obligation to deal with irrational people. . . . Talking, arguing and/or begging don't work with irrational people. Attempting to persuade them through logical argument will only wear you out. Dealing with an irrational person is a can't-win situation. . . . Always go out of your way to avoid can't-win situations. When someone surrounds you on all sides with irrational points, don't stand for it. Exit through the top, if necessary, but get out. When every side you turn to leads to trouble, you're in a can't-win situation." (Robert J. Ringer, Looking Out for #1, p. 111-12. Quoted in Walter Rea, The White Lie, p. 220.)

It will be profitable to us to know the truth about Ellen White's writings. In that way we do not make exaggerated claims about them, but place them where they belong, and handle them accordingly. There are many good, spiritual things in her writings, but they are not "the Spirit of Prophecy". Much of the good, spiritual content she had been borrowing from other authors, and we are to view her writings in that light. Certainly many of the authors she borrowed from, were inspired by the Holy Spirit when they wrote their books. A notable example is "Night Scenes in the Bible" by Daniel March, which is a wonderful book.

In addition, Ellen White's visions, dreams and revelations should be tested by the Bible. This we have done. Did she pass the test? You be the judge.

"But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him" (Deut. 18:20-22).

"Son of man, prophesy against the prophets of Israel that prophesy, and say thou unto them that prophesy out of their own hearts, Hear ye the word of the LORD;

Thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe unto the foolish prophets, that follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing!

O Israel, thy prophets are like the foxes in the deserts.

Ye have not gone up into the gaps, neither made up the hedge for the house of Israel to stand in the battle in the day of the LORD.

They have seen vanity and lying divination, saying, The LORD saith: and the LORD hath not sent them: and they have made others to hope that they would confirm the word.

Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination, whereas ye say, The LORD saith it; albeit I have not spoken?

Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have spoken vanity, and seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord GOD.

And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know that I am the Lord GOD.

Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter:

Say unto them which daub it with untempered morter, that it shall fall: there shall be an overflowing shower; and ye, O great hailstones, shall fall; and a stormy wind shall rend it.

Lo, when the wall is fallen, shall it not be said unto you, Where is the daubing wherewith ye have daubed it?

Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even rend it with a stormy wind in my fury; and there shall be an overflowing shower in mine anger, and great hailstones in my fury to consume it.

So will I break down the wall that ye have daubed with untempered morter, and bring it down to the ground, so that the foundation thereof shall be discovered, and it shall fall, and ye shall be consumed in the midst thereof: and ye shall know that I am the LORD.

Thus will I accomplish my wrath upon the wall, and upon them that have daubed it with untempered morter, and will say unto you, The wall is no more, neither they that daubed it;

To wit, the prophets of Israel which prophesy concerning Jerusalem, and which see visions of peace for her, and there is no peace, saith the Lord GOD.

Likewise, thou son of man, set thy face against the daughters of thy people, which prophesy out of their own heart; and prophesy thou against them,

And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe to the women that sew pillows to all armholes, and make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature to hunt souls! Will ye hunt the souls of my people, and will ye save the souls alive that come unto you?

And will ye pollute me among my people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, to slay the souls that should not die, and to save the souls alive that should not live, by your lying to my people that hear your lies?

Wherefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against your pillows, wherewith ye there hunt the souls to make them fly, and I will tear them from your arms, and will let the souls go, even the souls that ye hunt to make them fly.

Your kerchiefs also will I tear, and deliver my people out of your hand, and they shall be no more in your hand to be hunted; and ye shall know that I am the LORD.

Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life:

Therefore ye shall see no more vanity, nor divine divinations: for I will deliver my people out of your hand: and ye shall know that I am the LORD.Ezek.13:2-23

"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21).


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/4/2008 5:28 am

Yes Claudia, the world is wrong and Ellen White is right. Can you say brainwashing?


NJBeliever 48M

10/4/2008 5:58 am

Thanks for posting. I am still reading.


Tropical_Man 67M
6389 posts
10/4/2008 10:30 am

Hey NJ, yah this is a good book available free online. It clearly shows all the moronic and delusional things brought about.


Sweethoney2007 64F
6565 posts
10/4/2008 11:07 am

Good info Dennis.

Isaiah 42:8 " I am the Lord; that is my name! And My glory I will not give to another, nor My praise to graven images."