Section Titles
Inspiration is a point of vital importance to Seventh-day
Adventists in this day when there seems to be a waning of certainty concerning
what have been understood to be God's revelations to man. Ellen White's
statements concerning the Bible and her work indicate that the concept of verbal
inspiration is without support in either the Bible writers' or her own word.
This position was also clearly set forth at the General Conference session of
1883:
We believe the light given by God to His servants is by the
enlightenment of the mind, thus imparting the thoughts, and not (except in
rare cases) the very words in which the ideas should be expressed.�Review
and Herald, Nov. 27, 1883.
In spite of this, there are some among Seventh-day Adventists
who still hold, perhaps subconsciously, the concept that the original autographs
of the Bible writers must have been �infallible� and �inerrant.�
On the other hand, there are some who take the position that
the Bible, not being verbally inspired, and evidently not
* This material was presented to
university and college Bible teachers at Berrien Springs, Michigan, in June,
1966.
[14]
being infallible in all its details, has only relative or partial
accuracy. The essential purpose of the Bible, they assert, is to make men �wise
unto salvation,� and this guarantees absolute reliability only thus far and no
further. Consequently, Bible statements in such realms as history, chronology,
geography, anthropology, geology, astronomy, botany, and so on, are beyond this
realm and are considered quite inconsequential. It is suggested by those who
hold such views that in these realms the Bible may disappoint or even mislead.
This viewpoint leaves the Scriptures serving as a dependable guide only in the
field of spiritual matters, and to go beyond this would be to impose tests on
inspiration stronger than are warranted by the claims of the prophets.
Obviously, not both can be right.
The position one takes on the inspiration of the Bible would
most likely be the position he would hold toward the inspiration of the E. G.
White writings. Indeed, we find that both views, in varying degrees, have been
held through the years, and are held today, in regard to the Spirit of Prophecy
writings.
When we approach the question of inspiration we step on holy
ground, and this behoves caution. We may well consider the words of Ellen White
commenting on a presentation made in the Review and Herald and at Battle
Creek College:
In the college the subject of inspiration has been taught,
and finite men have taken it upon themselves to say that some things in the
Scriptures were inspired and some were not. I was shown that the Lord did not
inspire the articles on inspiration published in the Review [January
15, 1884], neither did He approve their endorsement before our youth in the
college.
When men venture to criticize the Word of God, they venture
on sacred, holy ground, and had better fear and tremble and hide their wisdom
as foolishness. God sets no man to pronounce judgment on His Word, selecting
some things as inspired and discrediting others as uninspired. The testimonies
have been treated in the
[15]
same way; but God is not in this.�Letter 22, 1889
(quoted in Selected Messages, book 1, p. 23).
These words should not preclude thoughtful, reverent study to
understand how God communicates with man through His prophets, but they do alert
us to the caution with which we should approach this topic. We believe that
there is greater safety in arriving at conclusions based on facts than in
depending on an approach largely theoretical and perhaps idealistic.
Adventists Uniquely Fortunate
Seventh-day Adventists are uniquely fortunate in approaching
the question of the inspiration of the prophets. We are not left to find our
way, drawing all our conclusions from writings of two thousand years and more
ago that have come down to us through varied transcriptions and translations.
With us it is an almost contemporary matter, for we have had a prophet in our
midst. It is generally granted by the careful student of her works that the
experience of Ellen White was not different from that of the prophets of old,
and that the Spirit of God in His prophetic mission did not function differently
in the experience of Ellen White from the way He functioned in the experience
of the Bible prophets.
What is more, rather than having in our possession only
relatively few chapters or a handful of letters, as is the case with the extant
records of the Bible prophets, we have the full range of Ellen White writings
penned through a period of seventy years, embodying her published books, her
4,600 periodical articles, her manuscripts, letters, diaries, and so on. We have
also the testimony of her contemporaries, presenting the eyewitness accounts of
those who lived and worked closely with her and were well able to judge her
work. Both she and they discussed many points touching on
[16]
the manner in which the light was imparted to her, and how she in
turn conveyed the messages to those for whom they were intended�in other words,
the operation of inspiration. Further, she wrote in the English language, so we
are not confronted with problems of translation and only rarely with those of
transcription.
Consequently, if we may accept Ellen White as an honest
witness, then her observations concerning her work, her statements on
inspiration, and her declaration as to the work of the prophets of old are
particularly significant to us. These cumulative contemporary records, providing
a report of the work of the prophet in action, can well form a basis for
arriving at an accurate understanding of inspiration.
An examination of these practical records indicates to the
careful observer that neither the first nor the second proposition concerning
inspiration set forth at the outset is correct. The truth, it would seem, lies
somewhere between the two. It is my purpose to set forth appropriate exhibits,
primarily from the writings and experience of Ellen White, and to draw
conclusions therefrom that may be of service in reaching a factual conclusion.
In so doing I shall traverse a good deal of familiar ground. This seems
essential, for it is advantageous to have the facts well supported.
First of all, we should note that the Lord in His work of
imparting light to the prophets does not follow any precise procedure. �God, who
at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the
prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son� (Heb. 1:1, 2). No
one rule can be established or one uniform pattern delineated that will govern
all the procedures in this matter of God's giving His messages to man.
Second, the prophet is a normal human being with all the
[17]
faculties possessed by an individual. The circumstances of his
childhood days may have been different from those of another, and his
educational background and occupational aptitude may vary, but he sees, hears,
smells, meditates, reads, eats, sleeps, worships, speaks, travels, and so on, in
the same manner as we all do. At the time of his call to the prophetic office he
may be well informed in many lines of knowledge common to all men or he may not
have been so well informed. All through his life subsequent to his call to the
prophetic office, he may continue to gain information in matters common to all
in the same manner in which we all obtain such information. Being called to the
prophetic office does not blot from his mind information gained in past
experiences, nor does it block his mental faculties from continuing to obtain
information as he did before his call to the prophetic office.
Being called in a unique manner to the service of the Lord as
a prophet, he is, through visions, given special information imparted to him by
God. This may be in the fields of theology and religious experience, with man's
relation to God and the plan of salvation in its fullness made clear. It may be
in the field of history, recounting the special guidance of God for His people
or for individuals, or warning of the perils incident to Satan's determination
to destroy the work of God or the hope of souls. It may be in the field of
physiology, nutrition, or hygiene. It may be in the realm of eschatology. It may
be in the field of education or church administration. It may be in the opening
up of hidden sins. The fields in which information may be imparted are without
limit, for the work is in God's hands. This experience is uniquely that of the
prophet. Although the Spirit of God may speak to the heart of each consecrated
person, not all are or can be prophets. God alone selects the prophet. �Holy men
of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost� (2
[18]
Peter 1:21). The prophet does not choose his work, and he has no
control in the matter of the visions either as to timing or content.
The visions may have been given during the day accompanied by
physical phenomenon or in the night season in a prophetic dream. The prophet did
not write while in vision. He may have spoken a few words, indicating to any
observers the nature of the revelation being received. While not in vision the
prophet imparted to others what was intended for them, either orally, in
interviews, or in writing.
Some of the information thus divinely received he may not
have been at liberty to impart to others at once. Perhaps it had to be held
until certain developments had taken place; or perhaps the light was given to
fully orient the prophet, but he was not at liberty to disclose all that was
revealed to him. Note this concerning Paul:
The great apostle had many visions. The Lord showed him
many things that it is not lawful for a man to utter. Why could he not tell
the believers what he had seen? Because they would have made a misapplication
of the great truths presented. They would not have been able to comprehend
these truths. And yet all that was shown to Paul moulded the messages that God
gave him to bear to the churches.�Letter 161, 1903.
On several occasions Ellen White stated that she was not at
liberty to speak of what had been revealed to her until a certain time or until
and unless there were certain developments. The vision might have been given
just at the time certain information was needed, or the prophet may have been
given many visions opening up to him what would take place, so that when the
events occurred he would understand them and be prepared to deal with the
situation. Note again a reference to the experience of the apostle Paul:
[19]
The Lord had shown him the difficulties and dangers which
would arise in the churches, that when they should develop he might know just
how to treat them.�Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 65.
The report of a church member led to the writing of
instruction to the church at Corinth.
Now observe a paralleling E. G. White experience. She was in
Australia, and certain matters were brought before her in a council meeting. Of
them she wrote:
As my brethren read the selections from letters, I knew
what to say to them; for this matter has been presented to me again and
again�. I have not felt at liberty to write out the matter until now�. The
light that the Lord has given me at different times � �Southern Work,
p. 72 (1966 printing).
The many different ways in which the light was imparted to
the prophet is a study having a bearing on this presentation, but is too
extended for this book, except for one later allusion. See Messenger to the
Remnant, pages 9-11, for illustrations.
A summary of this chapter reveals that light came to Ellen
White�
1. In visions in which she was seemingly present and
participating in the events she was viewing.
2. In broad panoramic views such as when the events of
history past and future passed before her.
3. Viewing events with the angel standing by her side
explaining the significance of the scenes.
4. As seemingly she visited institutions, meetings in
session, and families in their homes, hearing all that was said and seeing all
that was done.
5. As she was shown institutional buildings which had not yet
been erected and then was given instruction covering
[20]
the work to be done in these institutions.
6. In symbolic representations, usually explained by the
angel.
7. In contrasting views in which two situations were opened
to her, neither of which had taken place, with an explanation of the results in
each case.
So much for the vision�the process, first, by which the
prophet received from God light through which his mind was enlightened.
The second process was the bearing of testimony of what had
been revealed in vision. Having been received, the message must be imparted by
the prophet in the best way and with the most accurate language at the prophet's
command in an attempt to create in the mind of the recipient the thought, the
idea, the picture contained in the message.
The prophet at one time might use certain words and at
another time employ other words in conveying the same message. He might have at
ready command words that would convey the message satisfactorily, or he might
find it necessary to study diligently to find words adequate to convey the
message correctly and impressively. While writing The Desire of Ages,
Mrs. White declared: �I tremble for fear lest I shall belittle the great plan of
salvation by cheap words.��Letter 40, 1892 (quoted in Messenger to the
Remnant, p. 59). The transmission of the message might suffer some
impairment because of the inadequacy of the prophet. Note this comment by Ellen White:
The Bible � was written by human hands; and in the varied
style of its different books it presents the characteristics of the several
writers. The truths revealed are all �given by inspiration of God�
(2 Tim. 3: 16); yet they are expressed in the words of men. The
Infinite One by His Holy Spirit has shed light into the minds and hearts of
His servants. He has given dreams and visions, symbols and figures; and those
to whom the truth was thus revealed have themselves embodied the thought in
human language�.
[21]
Written in different ages, by men who differed widely in
rank and occupation, and in mental and spiritual endowments, the books of the
Bible present a wide contrast in style, as well as a diversity in the nature
of the subjects unfolded. Different forms of expression are employed by
different writers; often the same truth is more strikingly presented by one
than by another�.
As presented through different individuals, the truth is
brought out in its varied aspects. One writer is more strongly impressed
with one phase of the subject; he grasps those points that harmonize with
his experience or with his power of perception and appreciation; another
seizes upon a different phase; and each, under the guidance of the Holy
Spirit, presents what is most forcibly impressed upon his own mind�a
different aspect of the truth in each, but a perfect harmony through all. And
the truths thus revealed unite to form a perfect whole, adapted to meet the
wants of men in all the circumstances and experiences of life.�The Great
Controversy, pp. v, vi.
Attention should be given to the expression �Each, under
the guidance of the Holy Spirit, presents what is most forcibly impressed
upon his own mind.� Although the prophet must draw upon his facilities of
expression in presenting his message, the work of the Holy Spirit must not be
overlooked. This is a vital point. Ellen White put it this way:
Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in
writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in
describing what I have seen are my own, unless they be those spoken to me by
an angel, which I always enclose in marks of quotation.�Review and Herald,
Oct. 8, 1867 (quoted in Selected Messages, book 1, p. 37).
In 1860, in answering certain questions, she also touched on
this point:
Sometimes the things which I have seen are hid from me
after I come out of vision, and I cannot call them to mind until I am brought
before a company where that vision applies, then the things which I have seen
come to my mind with force. I am just as dependent upon the Spirit of the
Lord in relating or writing a vision, as in having the
[22]
vision. It is impossible for me to call up things which
have been shown me unless the Lord brings them before me at the time that He
is pleased to have me relate or write them.�Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2,
pp. 292, 293 (quoted in Selected Messages, book 1, pp. 36, 37).
The thought is again emphasized:
Through the inspiration of His Spirit the Lord gave
His apostles truth, to be expressed according to the development of their
minds by the Holy Spirit. But the mind is not cramped, as if forced into a
certain mould.�Letter 53, 1900 (quoted in Selected Messages,
book 1, p. 22).
The prophet, then, received his message through the visions
while totally under the influence of the Spirit of God. He bore his testimony
under the influence of the Spirit of God, but not to the point of mechanical
control, or in a forced mould. Rather, he communicated the message in the best
manner consistent with his background and facility of expression. On certain
rare occasions the very words to be used were called to his mind by the Spirit
of God. Note this from Ellen White. In a letter of admonition, after dealing
with certain situations, she stated:
I am trying to catch the very words and expressions that
were made in reference to this matter, and as my pen hesitates a moment, the
appropriate words come to my mind.�Letter 123, 1904.
Another statement reads:
While I am writing out important matter, He [the Holy
Spirit] is beside me helping me � and when I am puzzled for a fit word with
which to express my thoughts, He brings it clearly and distinctly to my mind.�Letter
127, 1902.
Ellen White declares of the Bible:
The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative,
infallible revelation of His will�. �Every scripture inspired of God is
[23]
also profitable for teaching, for reproof� ��The Great
Controversy, p. vii.
She does not state that the wording of the Scriptures is
infallible. But the Scriptures provide an infallible revelation. The revelation
of God's will is authoritative and infallible, but the language used in
imparting it to mankind is not infallible.
Declares Ellen White: �God and heaven alone are infallible.��Selected
Messages, book 1, p. 37. And again in speaking of her work she says: �In
regard to infallibility, I never claimed it; God alone is infallible.��Ibid.
She further illuminates this point, saying:
The Lord speaks to human beings in imperfect speech, in
order that the degenerate senses, the dull, earthly perception, of earthly
beings may comprehend His words. Thus is shown God's condescension. He
meets fallen human beings where they are. The Bible, perfect as it is in
its simplicity, does not answer to the great ideas of God; for infinite
ideas cannot be perfectly embodied in finite vehicles of thought. Instead
of the expressions of the Bible being exaggerated, as many people suppose, the
strong expressions break down before the magnificence of the thought,
though the penman selected the most expressive language through which to
convey the truths of higher education.�Ibid., p. 22.
The fields of presentation of the inspired writers are broad
and diverse. As already observed, the prophet is in possession of many lines of
common knowledge, and his mind has been illuminated by the revelations received
from God. To a large degree he carries the responsibility, under the impress of
the Spirit of God, for the choice of the time and place and content of
presentation. He exercises great care that his message shall not be influenced
in its basic concepts by his own opinions or the thinking of his contemporaries,
yet in its presentation he may use some items of information
[24]
that are matters of common knowledge, such as the distance
between places, the location of a given happening, or the time of a commonly
known event.
It is at this point that an understanding of the manner in
which information often was given to the prophet is vital. We pause to review.
The description of the vision of Moses just before his death is very
illuminating:
And now a panoramic view of the Land of Promise was
presented to him. Every part of the country was spread out before him, not
faint and uncertain in the dim distance, but standing out clear, distinct, and
beautiful to his delighted vision. In this scene it was presented, not as it
then appeared, but as it would become, with God's blessing upon it, in the
possession of Israel. He seemed to be looking upon a second Eden. There were
mountains clothed with cedars of Lebanon, hills grey with olives and fragrant
with the odour of the vine, wide green plains bright with flowers and rich in
fruitfulness, here the palm trees of the tropics, there waving fields of wheat
and barley, sunny valleys musical with the ripple of brooks and the song of
birds, goodly cities and fair gardens, lakes rich in �the abundance of the
seas,� grazing flocks upon the hillsides, and even amid the rocks the wild
bee's hoarded treasures�.
Moses saw the chosen people established in Canaan, each of
the tribes in its own possession. He had a view of their history after the
settlement of the Promised Land; the long, sad story of their apostasy and its
punishment was spread out before him. He saw them, because of their sins,
dispersed among the heathen, the glory departed from Israel, her beautiful
city in ruins, and her people captives in strange lands. He saw them restored
to the land of their fathers, and at last brought under the dominion of Rome.
He was permitted to look down the stream of time and behold
the first advent of our Saviour. He saw Jesus as a babe in Bethlehem. He heard
the voices of the angelic host break forth in the glad song of praise to God
and peace on earth�. He beheld Christ's humble life in Nazareth, His ministry
of love and sympathy and healing, His rejection by a proud, unbelieving
nation. Amazed he listened to their boastful exaltation of the law of God,
while they despised and rejected Him by whom the law was given. He saw Jesus
upon Olivet as with weeping He bade farewell to the city of His love�.
[25]
He followed the Saviour to Gethsemane, and beheld the agony
in the garden, the betrayal, the mockery and scourging�the crucifixion�. He
heard Christ's agonizing cry, �My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?� He
saw Him lying in Joseph's new tomb. The darkness of hopeless despair seemed to
enshroud the world. But he looked again, and beheld Him coming forth a
conqueror, and ascending to heaven escorted by adoring angels and leading a
multitude of captives. He saw the shining gates open to receive Him, and the
host of heaven with songs of triumph welcoming their Commander. And it was
there revealed to him that he himself would be one who should attend the
Saviour, and open to Him the everlasting gates.�Patriarchs and Prophets,
pp. 472-476.
The dramatic picture continues, but we need go no further.
Enthralled, Moses watched the events take place, seeing, hearing, and
participating, and in receiving the message even the sense of smell came into
play. In this vivid manner the history of the future was opened up to the
prophet. It is very unlikely that dates were revealed to him. It is not likely
that all the cities he saw were named. Those were inconsequential details, not
of primary importance to the unfolding theme.
It was doubtless in just this manner that history past and
future was presented to Ellen White, history on which was woven the tapestry of
the great controversy theme. Thus she declares in her introduction to her book
The Great Controversy:
Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, the scenes of
the long-continued conflict between good and evil have been opened to the
writer of these pages. From time to time I have been permitted to behold the
working, in different ages, of the great controversy between Christ, the
Prince of life, the Author of our salvation, and Satan, the prince of evil,
the author of sin, the first transgressor of God's holy law.�Page x.
And again:
[26]
As the Spirit of God has opened to my mind the great truths
of His word, and the scenes of the past and the future, I have been bidden to
make known to others that which has thus been revealed�to trace the history of
the controversy in past ages, and especially so to present it as to shed a
light on the fast-approaching struggle of the future.�Ibid., p. xi.
But was she shown in each instance in minute detail all of
the names of the places and the dates of the events which she beheld? The
evidence is that she was not. She saw events occur. The significant events as a
part of the controversy story were the important part, the basic concept.
Minor details and incidental references not basic to the account were of much
less importance. Some of this information could be ascertained from the sacred
writings, some from common sources of knowledge, some from reliable historians.
Apparently God in His providence did not consider it essential to impart these
minutiae through vision. This leads us to the point of just how much we are
justified in demanding of divine revelation.
Henry Alford, the highly appreciated British theologian, in
his New Testament for English Readers in discussing �the inspiration of
the evangelists and other New Testament writers� under point 11 suggests that
the leading of the minds of the apostles by the Holy Spirit in their
reconstruction of the gospel story �admits of much variety in points of minor
consequence,�* and he points out:
* Note: This statement,
long known to the workers in Mrs. White's office at Elmshaven, was considered by
them and their successors as summing up the subject factually in full harmony
with what they had observed in their close association with Ellen White and
her writings. See Appendix B for Alford's full statement.
[27]
Two men may be equally led by the Holy Spirit to record the
events of our Lord's life for our edification, though one may believe and
record, that the visit to the Gadarenes took place before the calling of
Matthew, while the other places it after that event; though one in narrating
it speaks of two demoniacs,�the other, only of one.
In dealing with points of insignificance or minor consequence
Alford continues:
14. And not only of the arrangement of the Evangelic
history are these remarks to be understood. There are certain minor points of
accuracy or inaccuracy, of which human research suffices to inform men, and on
which, from want of that research, it is often the practice to speak vaguely
and inexactly. Such are sometimes the conventionally received distances from
place to place; such are the common accounts of phenomena in natural history,
etc. Now in matters of this kind, the Evangelists and Apostles were not
supernaturally informed, but left, in common with others, to the guidance of
their natural faculties.
In describing the walk to Emmaus, Luke informs us, as
presented in the K.J.V., that this town �was from Jerusalem about
threescore furlongs.� In Testimonies, volume 9, page 173, Ellen White
describes Loma Linda as �about four miles from Redlands.� We may properly
ask, Did the Holy Spirit impart this detailed information on �the conventionally
received distances� between the cities named, or did the prophetic writers draw
this incidental and unimportant but descriptive information from the common
source of knowledge available to anyone?
In discussing the number of rooms in Paradise Valley
Sanitarium and the fact that in a letter she had described the building as
having 40 rooms when in reality it had only 38, she stated:
The information given concerning the number of rooms in the
Paradise Valley Sanitarium was given, not as a revelation from the Lord, but
simply as a human opinion. There has never been revealed to me the exact
number of rooms in any of our sanitariums; and the
[28]
knowledge I have obtained of such things I have gained by
inquiring of those who were supposed to knew. In my words, when speaking upon
these common subjects, there is nothing to lead minds to believe that I
receive my knowledge in a vision from the Lord and am stating it as such�.
When the Holy Spirit reveals anything regarding the
institutions connected with the Lord's work, or concerning the work of God
upon human hearts and minds, as He has revealed these things through me in the
past, the message given is to be regarded as light given of God for those who
need it. But for one to mix the sacred with the common is a great mistake. In
a tendency to do this we may see the working of the enemy to destroy souls.�Selected
Messages, book 1, p. 38.
The point is so clear that further comment is uncalled for.
To return to the Alford statement on the inspiration of the
New Testament writers:
15. The same may be said of citations and dates from
history. In the last apology of Stephen, in which he spoke, being full of the
Holy Ghost, and with divine influence beaming from his countenance, we have at
least two demonstrable inaccuracies in points of minor detail. And the
occurrence of similar ones in the gospels would not in any way affect the
inspiration or the veracity of the Evangelists.
Stephen in his address in an incidental reference to the
people who went down into Egypt, puts the number at �threescore and fifteen
souls� (Acts 7: 14). The Genesis record in presenting the history, a basic
account in the historical setting, states, �All the souls of the house of Jacob,
which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten� (Gen. 46:27). This record makes
it clear that this number included �the sons of Joseph, which were born him in
Egypt.�
The Genesis record is the detailed historical account; the
reference in Stephen's defence is but an incidental reference. Would we require
that the Holy Spirit in this crisis presentation should supernaturally guide
Stephen's mind on an inconsequential
[29]
point of information that at least in its general features was a
matter of common knowledge to all Jews? Would we use Stephen's statement to
correct the basic historical record? In other words, would we make Stephen on
this incidental point an �authority on history�? If we do not choose to do so,
does this impair his reliability as an inspired witness?
Elder W. C. White, addressing the General Conference Autumn
Council on October 30, 1911, declared: �Mother has never claimed to be authority
on history.� Ellen White endorsed this statement. Her son was explaining the
1911 revision of The Great Controversy to the council in a statement
that, when transcribed, filled six full single-spaced pages.*
This sentence has become a classical exhibit in some
discussions and in certain statements touching on the inspiration of the E. G.
White writings. It is a factor that not infrequently leads some individuals to
take the position that little reliance can be placed on the historical areas of
the E. G. White writings. This is akin to Ellen White's statement, �I did not
claim to be a prophetess,� made in the Battle Creek Tabernacle on October 2,
1904 (see Selected Messages, book 1, pp. 31-35). These words, standing
alone, can be quite misleading. They have frequently been quoted out of context.
But taken in the setting of her life experience, her many allusions to her
prophetic work, and her own explanation, the matter becomes clear. Two
statements from Ellen White read:
During the discourse, I said that I did not claim to be a
prophetess.
* See Appendix C.
[30]
Some were surprised at this statement, and as much is being
said in regard to it, I will make an explanation. Others have called me a
prophetess, but I have never assumed that title. I have not felt that it was
my duty thus to designate myself. Those who boldly assume that they are
prophets in this our day are often a reproach to the cause of Christ.�Letter
55, 1905 (quoted in Selected Messages, book 1, p. 36).
My commission embraces the work of a prophet, but it does
not end there. It embraces much more than the minds of those who have been
sowing the seeds of unbelief can comprehend.�Letter 244, 1906 (quoted
in Selected Messages, book 1, p. 36).
Likewise, the E. G. White-approved statement by W. C. White,
�Mother has never claimed to be authority on history,� is rightly employed only
in the light of the full W. C. White declaration of 1911, other statements made
by him, and Ellen White's own statements.
The issues were: (1) Was it proper and right to revise The
Great Controversy, an inspired book, even though the work was done by Mrs.
White herself, or under her eye? (2) Did the E. G. White use of historical
quotations as a part of her record impart inspiration or a seal of inerrancy to
the statements quoted? (3) Inasmuch as The Great Controversy was an
inspired book, would not the minute detail of historical account embodied
therein settle in the minds of Seventh-day Adventists any differences that might
occur in the records of various historians? In other words, would not Mrs.
White's writing of history serve to correct history in all its minor details?
If we held to verbal inspiration, this should be so. The
point made by W. C. White in saying, �Mother has never claimed to be authority
on history,� was his attempt to prevent an unwarranted use of the E. G. White
writings as settling the minor points of difference between historians. With his
knowledge of the manner in which the light came to his mother, he felt that the
course followed by some was unjustified.
[31]
Perhaps an illustration will be in place.
Ellen White described her procedure in moving toward the
revision of The Great Controversy in a letter to the editor of the
Review and Herald on July 25, 1911:
When I learned that Great Controversy must be reset,
I determined that we would have everything closely examined, to see if the
truths it contained were stated in the very best manner, to convince those not
of our faith that the Lord had guided and sustained me in the writing of its
pages.
As a result of the thorough examination by our most
experienced workers, some changing in the wording has been proposed. These
changes I have carefully examined, and approved.�Letter 56, 1911. (See
Appendix C.)
One of the points called to Ellen White's attention in
response to her call for an examination of the book referred to in her letter
just quoted involved her account of St. Bartholomew's massacre. The Great
Controversy, 1888 edition, states on page 272:
The great bell of the palace, tolling at the dead of night,
was a signal for the slaughter.
She was now informed that historians differed on the point of
which bell actually gave the signal, (1) the bell of the palace, (2) the bell of
the Palace of Justice, or (3) the bell of the church of St. Germain. All three
were within a radius of approximately a city block. The plan was that the bell
of the palace would give the signal, and certain reliable historians state that
it did. Others differed. Here is some of the documentation taken from our files
having to do with the 1911 revision:
Criticism:
All the histories dealing with the French Revolution which
I have been able to consult, state that it was the original plan to toll the
bell of the palace as the signal, but owing to special circumstances,
[32]
the signal was given by the ringing of the bell of the church
of St. Germain.
Wylie's Account:
It was now eleven o'clock of Saturday night, and the
massacre was to begin at daybreak�. The signal for the massacre was to be the
tolling of the great bell of the Palace of Justice�. The Queen-mother
feeling the suspense unbearable, or else afraid, as Maimbourg suggests, that
Charles, �greatly disturbed by the idea of the horrible butchery, would revoke
the order he had given for it,� anticipated the signal by sending one at two
o'clock of the morning to ring the bell of St. Germain l'Auxerois, which was
nearer than that of the Palace of Justice.
Scarcely had its first peal startled the silence of the
night when a pistol-shot was heard. The king started to his feet, and
summoning an attendant he bade him go and stop the massacre. It was too late;
the bloody work had begun. The great bell of the Palace had now begun to toll;
another moment and every steeple in Paris was sending forth its peal; a
hundred tocsins sounded at once.�History of Protestantism, vol. 2, p.
600.
�Eyewitness Account: As soon as they had caused
the bell of the palace clock to ring, on every side arose the cry, �To
arms! and the people ran,� etc.��Account of the Massacre by �the statesman and
fair-minded historian, De Thou (1553-1617), who as a young man witnessed the
Massacre of St. Bartholomew.��Quoted in J. H. Robinson's Readings of
European History, chap. 28, sec. 6 (No. 286), pp. 180-182.
�New International Encyclopedia: From the tower
of the royal palace the signal was given for a carnival of blood.��Art.
�Bartholomew.�
Ellen White in vision saw and heard what took place. She
heard the tolling of a bell, giving the signal, and she saw what followed. Did
the angel give her minute information as to which bell tolled? Would not this
point be what Henry Alford describes as �certain minor points of accuracy or
inaccuracy, of which human research suffices to inform men�? She accepted the
record of a reliable historian who indicated that it was the palace bell. When
she learned that was uncertain, she reworded the statement to read:
[33]
�A bell, tolling at the dead of night, was a signal for the
slaughter.��The Great Controversy, 1911 ed., p. 272.
The point being of no real significance, she removed from
The Great Controversy the temptation that might come to some to employ the
book to settle this disputed but inconsequential point.
And note the paragraph bearing the W. C. White statement:
Mother has never claimed to be authority on history. The
things which she has written out, are descriptions of flash-light pictures and
other representations given her regarding the actions of men, and the
influence of these actions upon the work of God for the salvation of men, with
views of past, present, and future history in its relation to this work. In
connection with the writing out of these views, she has made use of good and
clear historical statements to help make plain to the reader the things which
she is endeavouring to present. When I was a mere boy, I heard her read
D'Aubign�'s History of the Reformation to my father. She read to him a
large part, if not the whole, of the five volumes. She has read other
histories of the Reformation. This has helped her to locate and describe many
of the events and the movements presented to her in vision. This is somewhat
similar to the way in which the study of the Bible helps her to locate and
describe the many figurative representations given to her regarding the
development of the great controversy in our day between truth and error.�W. C.
White in The Great Controversy, 1911 Edition (p. 4). (See Appendix C.)
Pursuing this matter a little further, and enlarging it to
include chronology, we turn to a rather enlightening W. C. White statement
written a few months later:
Regarding Mother's writings and their use as authority on
points of history and chronology, Mother has never wished our brethren to
treat them as authority regarding details of history or historical dates. The
great truths revealed to Mother regarding the controversy between good and
evil, light and darkness, have been given to her in various ways, but chiefly
as flashlight views of great events in the lives of individuals and in the
experiences of churches, of bands of reformers, and of nations. What has thus
been revealed to her she
[34]
has written out first briefly in the Early Writings,
then more fully as in Spiritual Gifts and in Spirit of Prophecy,
and finally in the Great Controversy series.
When writing out the experiences of reformers in the time
of the Reformation and in the great Advent Movement of 1844, Mother often gave
at first a partial description of some scene presented to her. Later on she
would write it out more fully, and again still more fully. I have known her to
write upon one subject four or five times, and then mourn because she could
not command language to describe the matter more perfectly.
When writing out the chapters for Great Controversy,
she sometimes gave a partial description of an important historical event, and
when her copyist who was preparing the manuscripts for the printer, made
inquiry regarding time and place, Mother would say that those things are
recorded by conscientious historians. Let the dates used by those historians
be inserted. At other times in writing out what had been presented to her,
Mother found such perfect descriptions of events and presentations of facts
and of doctrines written out in our denominational books, that she copied the
words of these authorities.
When Controversy was written, Mother never thought
that the readers would take it as authority on historical dates or use it to
settle controversy regarding details of history, and she does not now feel
that it should be used in that way. Mother regards with great respect the work
of those faithful historians who devoted years of time to the study of God's
great plan as presented in the prophecy, and the outworking of that plan as
recorded in history.�W. C. White Letter to W. W. Eastman, Nov. 4, 1912.
Just how far, then, can we depend on Mrs. White? Where do we
set the bounds? There were other points in The Great Controversy in the
historical account, which even when challenged Ellen White, because of the
visions, refused to surrender. Note the W. C. White statement in the same
document and on the same page as the much-used �Mother has never claimed to be
authority on history�:
[35]
On pages 50, 563-564, 580, 581, and in a few other places
where there were statements regarding the papacy which are strongly disputed
by Roman Catholics, and which are difficult to prove from accessible
histories, the wording in the new edition has been so changed that the
statement falls easily within the range of evidence that is readily
obtainable.
Regarding these and similar passages, which might stir up
bitter and unprofitable controversies, Mother has often said: �What I have
written regarding the arrogance and the assumptions of the papacy, is true.
Much historical evidence regarding these matters has been designedly
destroyed; nevertheless, that the book may be of the greatest benefit to
Catholics and others, and that needless controversies may be avoided, it is
better to have all statements regarding the assumptions of the pope and the
claims of the papacy stated so moderately as to be easily and clearly proved
from accepted histories that are within the reach of our ministers and
students.�
Here in a historical area was a basic concept brought
to Ellen White by vision. Any modification in the account was made by Ellen
White for reasons quite different from inconsequential details concerning
which she made no claim for �authority.�
The Ellen White declaration that historical evidence has
been destroyed is well sustained by the purging of libraries and the combing of
second-hand bookstores. Andrews University holds some of the rarest of volumes,
dating back to the beginnings of printing and having to do with the persecutions
by the Catholic Church. They are in our possession today only because the
director of a large public library in Minnesota placed these priceless works
from its rare book room in the hands of Elder Christian Edwardson, with the
suggestion that he check them out and not bring them back, for, said the
director, �I have orders to get rid of them.� The author personally saw these
books in the Edwardson study as he related how he came into possession of them.
They are now in the university's Heritage Room.
The reader will find further discussion of The Great
Controversy in Chapter 4, �Ellen White as a Historian.�
[36]
E. G. White Appraisal of History Presented by the Prophetic
Writers
A few quotations suffice to remind us of Mrs. White's
evaluation of history as presented by the Bible prophets:
The Bible is a history that tells us of the creation of the
world, and opens to us past centuries. Without it we should have been left to
conjecture and fable in regard to the occurrences of the remote past.�Counsels
to Parents and Teachers, p. 421.
The Bible is the most instructive and comprehensive history
that has ever been given to the world. Its sacred pages contain the only
authentic account of the creation. Here we behold the power that �stretched
forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth.� Here we have a
truthful history of the human race, one that is unmarred by human prejudice or
human pride.�Fundamentals of Christian Education, pp. 84, 85.
The divine mind and hand have preserved through the ages
the record of creation in its purity. It is the word of God alone that gives
to us an authentic account of the creation of our world.�Counsels to
Parents and Teachers, p. 13.
We are dependent on the Bible for a knowledge of the early
history of our world, of the creation of man, and of his fall. Remove the word
of God, and what can we expect than to be left to fables and conjectures, and
to that enfeebling of the intellect which is the sure result of entertaining
error. We need the authentic history of the origin of the earth, of the fall
of the covering cherub, and of the introduction of sin into our world. Without
the Bible, we should be bewildered by false theories. The mind would be
subjected to the tyranny of superstition and falsehood. But having in our
possession an authentic history of the beginning of our world, we need not
hamper ourselves with human conjectures and unreliable theories.�Medical
Ministry, p. 89.
Ellen White saw the Bible as an inspired reliable history.
Concerning its first records she states:
The preparation of the written word began in the time of
Moses�. This work continued � from Moses, the historian of creation
[37]
and the law, to John, the recorder of the most sublime truths
of the gospel.�The Great Controversy, p. v.
Concerning the history of the life of our Lord as recorded by
the apostles, she declared:
The Holy Spirit enabled the disciples to exalt the Lord
alone, and guided the pens of the sacred historians.�Gospel Workers, p.
286.
Of the record of the lives and work of the apostles, she
refers to it as �history, written under the direction of the Holy Spirit�
(The Acts of the Apostles, p. 593).
Granted there are some chronological problems. The verbal
inspiration concept on the basis of such problems would force us to abandon
confidence in the authenticity of the Bible history. With a factual
understanding of how the Lord imparted light to the prophets, do we need to
permit such problems to discount the value of the record? Is the validity of the
historical account bound up entirely with the chronology? Is there not some
danger of our attaching too much weight to these problems?
On this point W. C. White, who for years worked closely with
Ellen White, observed in his November, 1912, letter to W. W. Eastman, a leader
in Seventh-day Adventist publishing work:
It seems to me there is a danger of placing altogether too
much stress upon chronology. If it had been essential to the salvation of man
that he should have a clear and harmonious understanding of the chronology of
the world, the Lord would not have permitted the disagreements and
discrepancies which we find in the writings of the Bible historians, and it
seems to me that in these last days there ought not to be so much controversy
regarding dates.
Considerable chronology appears in the Ellen White
writings. It is worthy of examination. In the Index to the
[38]
Writings of Ellen White, under �Chronology and Time
Relationships,� eight pages (543-551) are devoted to an enumeration of such
references in the current Ellen White books. It will be observed that there
are items of direct and precise treatment and there are a few references to
incidental statements often couched in very general terms, as �a thousand
years,� �fifteen hundred years,� and so forth.
Ellen White kept before the church and the world the fact
that �since the book of nature and the book of revelation bear the impress of
the same master mind, they cannot but speak in harmony.��Education, p.
128. Her concepts of the reliability of the Word of God in the field of science
are revealed in such statements as:
There should be a settled faith in the divinity of God's
holy word. The Bible is not to be tested by men's ideas of science, but
science is to be brought to the test of this unerring standard. When the Bible
makes statements of facts in nature, science may be compared with the written
word, and a correct understanding of both will always prove them to be in
harmony. One does not contradict the other. All truth, whether in nature or
revelation, agrees.�The Signs of the Times, March 13, 1884.
See Chapter 2 for more similar statements.
Many points in the field of science were revealed to Ellen
White. Those of particular interest at the moment are largely in the area of
physiology and nutrition. Just now, at a time of intensive research, her
declarations of 70, 80, and even 100 years ago and more are being verified with
such precision that little room is left for question or doubt.
Because Ellen White in her writings presents some points of
historical interest found elsewhere only in tradition, or in
[39]
dealing with the subjects of health and education her counsels
parallel views set forth by some of her predecessors or contemporaries, it has
been assumed by some that tradition or the writings of her contemporaries
constituted the source of her information. This is a subtle pitfall and not in
harmony with the facts. Jude, a New Testament writer, informs us of views given
to Enoch. There is no mention of them in the Old Testament. Because there is
reference to this fact in certain writings of questionable source does not mean
that Jude was dependent upon this source for his information.
Neither Ellen White nor well-informed Adventists have taken
the position that on many points stressed in the E. G. White writings she was
the first to speak or write. If a historical event is correctly reported in
tradition and if Ellen White viewed this history in vision, her account would be
bound to harmonize with such points in tradition. The apostle John being placed
in a caldron of boiling oil is an illustration. If careful men in their research
discover the laws of nature manifest in physiology and nutrition, what was shown
by God to Ellen White in this field would be bound to harmonize, because God is
the author of those laws. It is neither correct nor in harmony with the facts
to assume that similarity of views indicates that Ellen White gained her
information from men, instead of from God.
An early statement on this point is worthy of note. J. H.
Waggoner, a prominent minister in our ranks, wrote as we were opening our first
medical institution:
We do not profess to be pioneers in the general principles
of health reform. The facts on which this movement is based have been
elaborated, in a great measure, by reformers, physicians, and writers on
physiology and hygiene, and so may be found scattered through the land. But we
do claim that by the method of God's choice it has been more clearly and
powerfully unfolded, and is thereby producing an effect which we could not
have looked for from any other means.�Review and Herald, Aug. 7, 1866.
[40]
The same might be said in the field of education and perhaps
other areas. But Ellen White disclaims the writings of others as the source of
her information:
As I introduced the subject of health to friends � and
spoke against drugs and flesh meats, and in favour of water, pure air, and a
proper diet, the reply was often made, �You speak very nearly the opinions
taught in the Laws of Life and other publications, by Doctors Trall,
Jackson, and others. Have you read that paper and those works?� My reply was
that I had not, neither should I read them 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.�Ibid., Oct. 8, 1867.
Her earliest writing in the field of health filled the first
half of a 64-page pamphlet entitled �An Appeal to Mothers� dealing with
masturbation. Her statement was followed by material on the same subject from
men in the medical field. The publishers in introducing the material from the
scientific world inserted this illuminating note:
We have thought proper to add to the foregoing the
following Testimonies from men of high standing and authority in the medical
world, corroborative of the views presented in the preceding pages. And in
justice to the Writer of those pages, we would say that she had read nothing
from the authors here quoted, and had read no other works on this subject,
previous to putting into our hands what she has written. She is not,
therefore, a copyist, although she has stated important truths to which men
who are entitled to our highest confidence, have borne testimony. Trustees.
There is ample evidence that she carefully avoided presenting
her own personal views and that she was not influenced by her contemporaries or
that her writings but reflected the concepts of the times. (See Chapter 3,
�Integrity of the E. G. White Writings.�)
[41]
Recalled by the Aid of the Spirit
Obviously the prophet could not accurately remember all that
had been revealed in vision. An outstanding case in point is the vision given to
the 17-year-old Ellen Harmon in the late summer of 1845. At family worship a
vision was given to her in which a card was held up before her on which were
written �in letters of gold� the chapter and verse of 50 texts of Scripture.
(See Early Writings, pages 22-31.) After the vision she took the large
family Bible and turned to all the texts that she had seen on the card. She
jotted them down also as the Spirit recalled them to her mind, for they are
listed in Early Writings and elsewhere. What normal individual, let alone
a frail teen-age girl with three years of schooling, could unaided recall 50
texts seen in a list on a card? A few years later she wrote:
After I come out of vision I do not at once remember all
that I have seen, and the matter is not so clear before me until I write, then
the scene rises before me as was presented in vision, and I can write with
freedom. I am just as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in relating or
writing a vision, as in having the vision. It is impossible for me to call up
things which have been shown me unless the Lord brings them before me at the
time that he is pleased to have me relate or write them.�Spiritual Gifts,
vol. 2, p. 292.
In dealing with the apostles, Henry Alford names as one of
the gifts bestowed upon them the ability of �recalling by the Holy Spirit of
those things which the Lord had said to them� (op. cit., par. 8). And he
hastens to point out that �this was his own formal promise, recorded in John
14:26.� The Gospels were written at a point many years after the events took
place. The sayings and acts of the Lord are recorded. Even though they were
eyewitnesses, without the Holy Spirit's recalling these facts to the mind the
Gospel writers would have been involved in hopeless garbling.
Of their experience Ellen White wrote:
[42]
When the apostles of Christ were to bear His gospel to the
world and to record it for all future ages, they were especially endowed with
the enlightenment of the Spirit.�The Great Controversy, p. ix.
Three of the Gospel writers were disciples continuously with
Jesus. The fourth, Luke, was not so favoured. He asserts that he diligently
traced down from the first the account of all things. In other words, as Alford
puts it, he was �a faithful and honest compiler� (op. cit., par. 12). But
this work he must have done under the leading of the Holy Spirit. The same must
be said of Matthew as he presents the story of the birth of our Lord.
In The Desire of Ages Ellen White writing of
Nicodemus' night visit with Jesus informs us that �Nicodemus related to John the
story of that interview, and by his pen it was recorded for the instruction of
millions� (page 177). As John records the incident and conversation in his
Gospel some sixty years after the event, the Holy Spirit must have fulfilled His
mission in recalling the words of conversation to the apostle's mind.
The Holy Spirit frequently recalled to Ellen White's mind
what years earlier was revealed in vision, as when she visited publishing houses
in Switzerland and Norway in 1885 and recognized printing presses shown to her
ten years before and delivered appropriate messages of correction and reproof to
employees imparted to her a decade before the plants were established. The
experience was repeated in Australia six years later as she recalled instruction
given her for publishing-house employees sixteen years before.
Frequently people would come to Ellen White for counsel, and
she would respond immediately, presenting a message that both she and the person
who approached her would consider inspired. Any question on this point is easily
dissipated if the relationship to the testimony Ellen White
[43]
presented to the vision in which information was imparted to her
is clearly understood.
The testimony that Ellen White bore was related to the
visions in four different ways. First the testimony she bore might be (a) a
direct account of a single vision. For instance, she says, �August 24, 1850,
I saw,� and then she tells what she saw.
It might be (b) a composite account of many visions
given over a period of many years, as is true of the Conflict of the Ages
series. In her introduction to The Great Controversy she explains this:
Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, the scenes of
the long-continued conflict between good and evil have been opened to the
writer of these pages. From time to time I have been permitted to behold the
working, in different ages, of the great controversy between Christ, the
Prince of life, the Author of our salvation, and Satan, the prince of evil,
the author of sin.�Page x.
Mrs. White here informs us that from time to time she saw
parts of the history transpire and then she put it together as one great
composite account as we have it in the Conflict of the Ages series. This was
increasingly so as she amplified the account.
The third relationship would be (c) that Ellen White
is giving counsel based on one specific vision. Note: �In the night of
March 2, 1907, many things were revealed to me regarding the value of our
publications.��Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 65. Then she gives counsel, but
she doesn't tell just what she was shown. The counsel was based on that vision.
Or it might be (d) counsel based upon many visions.
She writes, �God has given me a testimony of reproof for parents who treat their
children as you do your little one.��Ellen White Letter 1, 1877.
[44]
The Lord is sparing of miracles. He did not give a vision for
each family, but she had been given a vision with light for parents who treated
their children a certain way. When she found other parents treating their
children the same way, what she had been shown regarding a similar case would
fit their experience, too. She had a message for them.
Here is another illustration:
This matter has been brought before my mind, in other
cases, where individuals have claimed to have messages for the Seventh-day
Adventist Church, of a similar character, and the word has been given me,
�Believe them not.��Selected Messages, book 2, pp. 63, 64.
As we understand these four ways in which the testimony that
Ellen White bore is related to the visions we can see how people could come and
talk with Sister White and she would give an answer to questions that was
accepted as a message from God. Her answer was based on the visions�perhaps one
given recently or on many given over a period of years. On the other hand, she
might be strangely silent, conversing pleasantly, but having nothing to say on
the point�no answer to the questions. She did not dare project herself, setting
forth her own ideas.
In the Ralph Mackin case of 1908 she listened patiently, made
discreet inquiries, but could give no positive word till God a few days after
the interview gave her specific light that his experience of speaking in tongues
was not inspired by Him.
The question is asked, How can we know which of Sister
White's writings are inspired and which are not inspired?
If Ellen White set forth her own ideas in her books,
presenting them as counsel to the church, we would be in a difficult place.
[45]
Would we not quite naturally take the position that what we
agreed with came from God, what cuts across our pathway was Sister White's idea,
the idea of those who influenced her in reaching that conclusion? We should be
honest with ourselves. If we were required to differentiate, would we not tend
to use that criterion? In doing so, we would bring the Spirit of Prophecy down
below the level of our intelligence.
But you may ask, �Did not Ellen White think her own thoughts,
make free to express her own thoughts? Didn't she write about ordinary
subjects?� Of course she could and did. If you were in her home you would visit
with her and talk about the weather. She read the headlines of the paper and
knew what was going on in the world, and you would talk about world events. You
would visit about the advancement of the cause of God. You would talk of people
you knew and a lot of such things. There would be no special significance in
what was said. Then you might say, �Sister White, in Chicago in my work there is
a certain problem,� and she might launch into a line of counsel for you. Both
she and you would know that this counsel was based not on her ideas but upon
light God had given her in vision.
She wrote letters to old friends such as Elder and Mrs.
Haskell. She might say that the weather had been bad; it was raining and the
prune crop was spoiled. She might say, �Next Tuesday I'm going to go down to
Mountain View and then on down to Los Angeles. My granddaughter, Grace, the
other day fell out of the wagon and broke her arm,� and so forth. Neither Sister
White nor Brother Haskell would place any particular significance in those
words. But she might go on and say, �Brother Haskell, in your work in Chicago,�
so and so, and so and so, as she did in just such a letter. Both she and he
would understand that this part of the message was based on the light that God
had given her.
[46]
Ellen White drew the line between the sacred and the common.
That is where we draw the line today.
In her preface to Spiritual Gifts, volume 2, a
biographical work entitled �My Christian Experience, Views and Labours,� Ellen
White states:
In preparing the following pages, I have laboured under
great disadvantages, as I have had to depend in many instances, on memory,
having kept no journal till within a few years. In several instances I have
sent the manuscripts to friends who were present when the circumstances
related occurred, for their examination before they were put in print. I have
taken great care, and have spent much time, in endeavouring to state the
simple facts as correctly as possible.
I have, however, been much assisted in arriving at dates by
the many letters which I wrote.�Page iii.
The appendix appearing in the first 400 copies carried this
statement:
A special request is made that if any find incorrect
statements in this book they will immediately inform me. The edition will be
completed about the first of October; therefore send before that time.
These statements at times have been drawn upon as an
indication of the pains taken by Ellen White in preparing her writings, and
incidentally revealing the sources of her information. Such information is used
rightfully only as explaining the preparation of biographical material.
To apply it to her work in general is unwarranted and misleading.
We have but to turn to the preceding volume, Spiritual
Gifts, volume 1, which appeared within six months of the great controversy
vision of March 14, 1858. It embodies the expressions, �I saw,� �I was shown,�
and so forth, more than once for each page of the book. Or we may turn to the
third volume of the series, published in 1864, and read in the preface:
[47]
Since the great facts of faith, connected with the history
of holy men of old, have been opened to me in vision �
In the biographical account she does not say, �I was shown
that at the age of nine years an accident happened to me which was to affect my
whole life.� This information she got from her mother and from her memory.
But in Spiritual Gifts, volume 3, subtitled
Important Facts of Faith in Connection With the History of Holy Men of Old
she states, �I was then carried back to creation, and was shown ��
In none of the score or more books issued during her life did
she include words of the character that appeared in the Preface of her biography
of 1860, for the writing was in a different field.
A factual approach, then, to the question of inspiration
helps us to see that the prophet could think ordinary thoughts and could
converse on ordinary topics. He refrained from confusing the sacred with the
common. He was careful not to set forth in his teachings his own opinions or
conclusions, nor were his messages moulded by the current philosophies or
concepts, even though the messages may be couched in the phraseology of the
times and deal with local conditions or situations. It was his task to correctly
present the message God entrusted to him.
At times this was in marked contrast to current concepts. In
presenting truths as revealed he was aided by the Spirit of God. In his
presentation there was the basic concept, at times embellished by points drawn
from his mind enriched and moulded by the visions, and when dealing with certain
subjects, with some details drawn from sources of common knowledge�places,
distances, dates, and so forth. The prophet's inspired message could embody an
inaccuracy in a minor detail not consequential to the basic concept or on
a minor point in the field of common knowledge, the �accuracy or inaccuracy, of
which human research suffices to inform
[48]
men.� This does not in any measure diminish the weight or the
authority of the statement as a whole.
Inspiration acts not on the man's words or his expressions
but on the man himself, who, under the influence of the Holy Ghost, is imbued
with thoughts. But the words receive the impress of the individual mind. The
divine mind is diffused. The divine mind and will is combined with the human
mind and will; thus the utterances of the man are the word of God.�Selected
Messages, book 1, p. 21.
TOC