add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
| advertise add site services publishers database health videos
| | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Ellen Lange - Ellen Lange Skin Care Products and Ellen Lange Medispas ellenlange.com | Naperville White Crowns, Aurora White Crowns, Romeoville White Crowns,... paulcaputodds.com |
This article is about the nature of Ellen White's inspiration. For her biography and heritage, see Ellen G. White. Seventh-day Adventists believe church co-founder Ellen G. White was inspired by God as a prophet, today understood as a manifestation of the New Testament "gift of prophecy", as described in the official 28 fundamental beliefs of the church.[1] Her inspiration (compare: Biblical inspiration) is considered "authoritative" yet not infallible (compare: Biblical infallibility) by church scholars today. Her works are officially considered to hold a secondary role to the Bible, but in practice there is wide variation among Adventists as to exactly how much authority should be attributed to her writings. With instruction she claimed was received in visions, White made administrative decisions, gave personal messages of encouragement or rebuke to church members, and played a major role in doctrinal development. The debate concerning the validity of her prophetic gift has been heated, both from within and outside the Adventist church. This debate reached a climax in the 1970s and 80s, and since then the church's position has modified somewhat to place greater emphasis on her humanity and fallibility.[2] Non-Adventists typically believe she was not a prophet, although a few are open to the possibility. Walter Martin saw her as a genuine Christian although not a prophet. Stronger critics refer to her as a "false prophet". Specific criticisms include her literary borrowing from other writers, some of her doctrinal positions taken, and her alleged prominence in the church. Typical mainstream Adventist scholars today believe[citation needed]:
There has always been significant variation in the Adventist church regarding White's inspiration. Today both critics and mainstream Adventists believe that segments of the church exist which overuse her writings.[3] A small minority of the church believes she was infallible. Many "Conservative" Adventists tend to place greater emphasis on her writings and less emphasis on her humanity and fallibility than other Adventists. Liberal or "progressive Adventists" tend to view her writings as primarily devotional and pastoral in nature, rather than doctrinal. An estimated 81% of Adventists believe "The writings of Ellen White are an authority for the Adventist Church today", according to a 2002 worldwide survey of local church leaders. An estimated 50% believe reinterpretation is needed for today.[4] According to the same survey, an estimated 41% "Read the writings of Ellen G. White at least monthly".[5] According to the "Valuegenesis" studies, the percentage of self-identified Adventists studying in Adventist schools who read White's writings at least once a week was 13% in 1990 and 6% in 2000.[6][7] According to evangelical author Kenneth Samples, "No Christian leader or theologian has exerted as great an influence on a particular denomination as Ellen White has on Adventism."[8] A 2004 survey of American Protestant pastors by The Barna Group showed those under 40 "championed" Ellen White as an author who had influenced them.[9] [edit] BackgroundDebate has always been heated, both from within and from without the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Particularly since the 1970s, there has been much study on Ellen White's inspiration. Two of the most significant critical books in recent times are Prophetess of Health by Ronald Numbers, first published in 1976, and The White Lie by Walter T. Rea in 1982. The former argues that the source of White's health writings was not inspiration from God but from contemporary health authorities. Rea's book demonstrates literary parallels between White's writings and other earlier authors, what critics term "plagiarism" but what some Adventists term "borrowing" or something similar. In response, the church commissioned a study known as the "Life of Christ Research Project", which investigated parallels between White's book Desire of Ages which covers Christ's life, and contemporary sources. The result of the study was that 31% of the book shows literary dependence (although quotations are rarely verbatim). One of the most significant recent defenses is Messenger of the Lord (1998). Other significant works are Inspiration (1991), Prophets are Human (2004) and a series by George Knight including Meeting Ellen White (1996) and Reading Ellen White (1997). See below for more historical details. Douglass was specially commissioned by the White Estate to write his book. Inspiration also deals with the inspiration of the Bible writers, and not just Ellen White. Supportive books written before The White Lie in 1982 quote unrealistically low figures for the amount of borrowing, as the church was only just becoming more open about the amount of her borrowing. Perhaps this is why the White Estate says of F. D. Nichol's classic 1951 work Ellen G. White and Her Critics,
Mrs. White’s present, acknowledged status within the Adventist Church is complex. While her devotional works continue to sell, its conservative and progressive (liberal) theologians continue to disagree about her role in the 21st century Seventh-day Adventist Church. The progressive (liberal) position generally is that the writings of Mrs. White contain little or no authority for the interpretation or clarification of Biblical doctrine and prophetic eschatology. Rather, they maintain, her books, pamphlets and anthologies may be of use exclusively for devotion and moral exhortation. The conservative position is generally supportive of using Ellen White as a significant authority on doctrinal matters, while giving the Bible precedence in all matters. [edit] TerminologyEllen White never claimed the title of "prophet" or "prophetess" because of the stigma attached to the term in her day, which is still apparent today. Rather, Adventists think of her inspiration as a manifestation of the spiritual gift of prophecy described in the New Testament. In particular, the fundamental belief describing Ellen White is titled, "The Gift of Prophecy".[11] White recounts one situation where she said before a large congregation that she "did not claim to be a prophetess."[12] (emphasis in original) This statement generated much discussion and has been misunderstood since, to which she replied,
However she did not object to others calling her a prophet. Instead, she preferred the term "messenger" because her task involved many lines of work.[12][13][14] This is also the term used in Fundamental Belief #18. A proposed church style guide recommends avoiding the phrase "inspired pen" to refer to Ellen White, when engaging with Postmodern people.[15] [edit] Spirit of ProphecyThe term "spirit of prophecy" has sometimes been used by Adventists to refer to Ellen White, her ministry, and her writings. (Adventists also accept it refers to the Holy Spirit). An article by the White Estate gives the two definitions of (a) the Holy Spirit, or (b) the essence or heart of prophecy.[16] The term appears just once in scripture, in Revelation 19:10, "...for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." However Gerhard Pfandl argues it was well known to the readers of John's day, via Aramaic translations of the Old Testament ("targums"). He defines, "For the early Christians the “spirit of prophecy” was a reference to the Holy Spirit, who imparts the prophetic gift to God’s messengers." Comparing Revelation 19:10 and 22:8,9, the parallel passages compare "your brethren who have the testimony of Jesus" with "your brethren the prophets".[17] Ellen White's enlargement of Spiritual Gifts was titled Spirit of Prophecy (four volumes), which in turn became the Conflict of the Ages series (five volumes) (see also: The Great Controversy). However the title was chosen by the editors, not by White herself.[18] The official statement "A Statement of Confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy" applies the term to White. Also the segment of Adventist World which reprints an Ellen White article is titled "Spirit of Prophecy". Some such as Richard Lewis have criticized use of the term, who while book editor at Pacific Press eliminated the term from manuscripts when applied to Ellen White or her writings.[18] See also "The Spirit of Prophecy" (DjVu) by James White[19] and "Spirit of Prophecy" in the Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia. [edit] Views of her inspirationMost Seventh-day Adventists believe White was inspired by God, while most non-Adventists believe that she was not. Most denominationally-employed Adventist scholars today agree that
However Adventists differ significantly on precisely how culturally conditioned she was, how authoritative her writings are, how fallible she was, how much she borrowed from other authors or was dependent on their views, and so on. Most Adventists generally accept a view of inspiration termed: "thought inspiration" that is supported by two quotes from Ellen White's books. : "Those who believe that the Bible and the writings of Ellen White are divinely inspired by God impressing thoughts on the prophets’ minds who would then convey the message in the best language and thought frames at their disposal" (Douglass). However, there are many quotes from her showing that she believed the Bible was dictated. Biblical inspiration Neither the supportive nor the critical views concerning White's inspiration are monolithic, but both views are themselves highly nuanced and vary significantly in the details. The debate is related to the broader debate concerning Biblical inspiration, which is a hotly debated topic with views including infallibility, inerrancy and other, more liberal views. Supportive views:
Critical views:
Many of the major critics are themselves former Adventists. [edit] Official beliefsOne of the 28 fundamental beliefs of the church is
Fundamental number one, "Holy Scriptures", states
See also the General Conference Session statements "Resolution on the Spirit of Prophecy,"[22] and "A Statement of Confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy."[23] The former says,
[edit] Infallibility, inerrancy and verbal inspiration or dictationInfallibility of White and stronger views are not taught by mainstream Adventist scholars today.[25] Some of White's contemporaries believed that she was not only inerrant, but held to the even stronger view(s) of verbal inspiration or verbal dictation. White rejected these claims of all her writings being given by verbal dictation. Dr. D. Paulson wrote,
A. T. Jones and S. N. Haskell caused problems for the church by teaching verbal inspiration and inerrancy.[28] Haskell wrote, "one expression" in an Ellen White testimony was still likely to be worth more "than all the histories you could stack between here [North America] and Calcutta".[29] Jones later rejected her writings[citation needed]. W. W. Prescott once held a verbal inspiration view, but before 1919 he adopted a moderate position.[30] Bradford argues that those with an unrealistically high view of Ellen White are most prone to rejecting her writings, such as J. H. Kellogg, A. T. Jones and others.[31] Willie White[32] and others have argued similarly. Walter Martin wrote in 1965, "The Adventist denomination readily admits that not everything Mrs. White said or wrote was either inspired or infallible, although some individual Adventists still cling to that idea."[33] Also "no informed Adventist holds [to her infallibility]".[34] According to evangelical Kenneth Samples,
[edit] Mainstream
"The Inspiration and Authority of the Ellen G. White Writings"[35] document was issued by the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, "A statement of present understanding" document has had worldwide review and input, and subsequent use and respect, although not an official, approved statement. It contains 10 affirmations and 10 denials. It concludes that a proper understanding will avoid the two extremes of regarding her "writings as functioning on a canonical level identical with Scripture, or… considering them as ordinary Christian literature."[35] A core value of the Adventist Theological Society, the more conservative of the two Adventist theological societies, is:
The Adventist Society for Religious Studies has no belief statement nor membership restrictions based on doctrine. Conservative group Adventists Affirm upholds "the Spirit of Prophecy writings as inspired counsel and illumination on the Bible".[37] The church and Ellen White herself have always taught that the Bible is the ultimate authority, not her writings. This is the stated official position of the church. However there have been tendencies amongst some throughout the history of the church to give more prominence to White's writings than the Bible.[38] The church pioneers including Ellen White herself believed that acceptance of her prophetic ministry should not be used as a test of church fellowship. See the class outline by Jerry Moon.[39] Clifford Goldstein, who has been described as a "church apologist":[40] "I can accept that Ellen White, even as a prophet, was fallible, both in her life and writings. Her prophetic ministry, in my thinking, is not diminished if she made mistakes, grew in her understanding of doctrine and theology, changed her mind on doctrinal and theological issues, even, at one point, had an erroneous view of the Sabbath or of the law in Galatians, or didn't fully understand some of her own visions. I can accept that her humanity intruded upon her work and ministry (tell me that Moses', John the Baptist's, or Peter's didn't intrude upon theirs). Inspiration doesn't automatically include inerrancy."[41] Yet he limits her fallibility, believing that she could not be wrong on a topic such as the investigative judgment on which she wrote extensively.[42] He reached this position
Graeme Bradford states that he struggled for 20 years over questions and doubts until satisfied he had the answers, and the publication of his book. Alden Thompson also states that it has been a difficult journey for him to adjust his notion of Ellen White's prophetic gift, especially since her writings were so formative in his early spiritual journey. Many other Adventists claim that White's writings played an important role in their spiritual journey. Willie White and A. G. Daniells supported a more moderate view of Ellen White's writings as "thought inspiration". Authors such as Arthur Patrick, Alden Thompson, Graeme Bradford and many others have a more progressive or liberal view. [edit] Progressive (Liberal) or "devotional" viewProgressive Adventists argue for a reduced dependence on White's writings, and emphasize her human fallibility. Yet they typically appreciate and respect her Christian ministry. Ron Corson defines progressive Adventists as believing, amongst other things, in "A less rigid understanding of the role of Ellen G. White, ranging from acknowledging that she was not always correct in her teaching and understanding to denying her status as Prophet."[44] Many hold a "devotional" view of her writings, in which her authority is understand as primarily devotional in nature, and not theological. This view was promoted by Desmond Ford, who views White as "pastoral" and not "canonical".[45] Joseph J. Battistone saw White's writings as mostly homiletical, not exegetical.[46] A similar perspective can also be traced earlier, for instance at the 1919 Bible Conference. There, H. C. Lacey stated,
A. G. Daniells agreed, "Yes, I think so."[47] Others have taken a stance in opposition to this perspective, such as the (unofficial) Adventist Theological Society. Many advocating a more progressive view of White believe that the official church is still overly protective of her writings and prophetic gift. [edit] Cautiously open, to moderately criticalThe validity of White's prophetic ministry is typically denied by those outside the Adventist church (see below section).[48] However a few have made neutral or even positive positive comments. Evangelical Walter Martin of the countercult Christian Research Institute stated,
He believed she "was a highly impressionable woman, strongly influenced by her associates. That she sincerely believed the Lord spoke to her, none can fairly question, but the evidence set forth in this book gives good reason, we believe, to doubt the inspiration of her counsels..."[50] He also sees her as "a woman of great moral fortitude and indomitable conviction."[51] In contrast, he did not believe her alleged-prophet contemporaries Joseph Smith, Jr. (founder of Mormonism), Mary Baker Eddy (Christian Science), and Charles Taze Russell (Jehovah's Witnesses/Bible Student movement) were genuine Christian believers.[52] Kenneth Samples, a successor of Martin in his interaction with Adventism, wrote "while I do not accept Mrs. White’s claim to have the spirit of prophecy, I do believe she, at minimum, had some good biblical and theological instincts."[53] Others view her in a more negative light, as unchristian and deceptive. Charismatic Baptist theologian Clark Pinnock reviews Alden Thompson's description of how God can still speak through the Bible despite its human limitations: "As an Adventist, Thompson is able to appeal to Ellen White effectively on this point. I almost envy him the prophet because it is harder for me to appeal to any contemporary figure to secure the point..."[54] In reviewing Richard Rice's Reign of God he writes,
American radio broadcaster Paul Harvey quoted Ellen White in his broadcasts. Though not an Adventist, he was friends with Adventist evangelist George Vandeman, and attended an Adventist church for two decades.[56] [edit] Critical viewsAccording to one author, most criticisms of White come from former Adventists, many of whom were church pastors.[57] The most prominent early critic of the Adventist church and Ellen White was D. M. Canright, an early leader who had left the movement. Most subsequent criticism of the church has been based on his work.[58] Other significant early critics included Snook and Brinkerhoff (see below). From the beginning, William Miller, the founder of the Millerites from whom the Seventh-day Adventists emerged, did not accept White's prophetic gift. Some of her family members also rejected it.[citation needed] There were a number of prominent evangelical critics of Seventh-day Adventism generally in the mid-20th century. The categorisation of Adventists as a sect or authentic Christians was hotly debated by some at the time (see: Questions on Doctrine). Anthony Hoekema claimed "the teachings and visions of Ellen G. White" are for Adventists "the court of final appeal."[59] (Walter Martin wrote, "On the basis that Hoekema would call the Adventists a cult the same charge could be leveled against all devoted Calvinists who consider the Institutes and Calvin's Commentaries every bit as much illumination and guide lines in the study of the Scriptures as the Adventists do where Mrs. White's writings are concerned.")[60] Martin was more positive (see above). The 1970s and 1980s saw intense debates amongst scholars concerning her inspiration. Ronald Numbers book Prophetess of Health avoided invoking the supernatural to explain White's ideas. Former pastor Walter Rea, wrote the somewhat bitter The White Lie (see additional information in the article on Rea). Today, former Adventist Dale Ratzlaff has been described as the "fountain head" of all critics.[61] He believes, "One cannot understand the Bible correctly when continuing to read the writings of Ellen White."[62] He become the editor for the leading critical website, "The Ellen White Research Project", in December 2006. It was founded in 1996 by former Adventist Dirk Anderson.[63] Some Adventists are themselves critical. An estimated 19% of Adventists do not believe "The writings of Ellen White are an authority for the Adventist Church today", according to a 2002 worldwide survey of church pastors and lay leaders.[4] Adventist author Clifford Goldstein wrote, "Almost from the start [of his joining the church], I had to deal with SDAs who were attacking one way or another the ministry of EGW."[64] There have been claims of some church leaders also rejecting her inspiration.[65] Certain Adventist physicians have debated whether White's visions were caused by epilepsy or related ailments. Delbert Hodder suggested White's visions were "consistent with what is now known as partial-complex or psychomotor seizures."[66] Molleurus Couperus suggested they were due to temporal lobe epilepsy.[67] Donald Peterson responded to these accusations in the book Visions or Seizures,[68] and R. W. Olson in an article.[69] [edit] White's own viewsSome of White's statements on how inspiration or revelation from God works are found in the introduction to The Great Controversy and pages 15 to 23 of Selected Messages volume 1. (ref - "The Lesser and the Greater Lights", see below). These have been compiled by the White Estate into a document "Ellen G. White's Understanding of How God Speaks", along with one of her letters. See also also chapters from Selected Messages vol 1.[70] She described revelation as "thought inspiration", in the above references which is distinct from stronger concepts of inspiration, yet in other cases she suggested a stronger form. She wrote at least twice that the Bible was "dictated" by the Holy Spirit. "When writing these precious books, if I hesitated, the very word I wanted to express the idea was given me."[71] [edit] Thought or Dictated inspiration?
But she wrote many times about "the inspired words", and even wrote two strong passages supporting the belief that the Bible is dictated.
[edit] Rejected infallibility(Reference - Ashworth, below) "The Sacred and the Common" in Chapter 2 - Ellen G. White and Her Writings [edit] "Lesser light"Ellen White clearly and repeatedly stated that the Bible is the ultimate authority, and not her writings. She used a number of metaphors to illustrate that her writings were inferior to the Bible. The most well known is that her writings were a "lesser light" pointing to the "greater light" of the Bible:
Warren Ashworth stated,
Yet God also did use her to correct doctrine.[77] Ellen White's writings are not placed on a par with the Bible, as quoted above. However, others point out her "confirming" role for theology.
She also exhorted followers not to disregard the testimonies.[78] She also claimed that at times when she couldn't think of the right word to write, God would give her the exact word.[citation needed] She stated, "In regard to infallibility, I never claimed it; God alone is infallible."[79] She often made statements pointing readers to the Bible.[80] [edit] Degrees of inspiration?Debate concerning whether to divide between the inspired and uninspired. Adventists tend to follow White, who taught that there do not exist different degrees of inspiration among the prophets of God. In 1884 General Conference president George I. Butler published a series of 10 articles in the Review and Herald.[81] Five years later, White claimed she had received a vision showing that the articles were in error.[82] See Ellen White, Selected Messages, book 1, p23. Most Adventist literature including the White Estate, the 10 affirmations and denials document, Fred Veltman, etc. appear to dislike the idea of dividing between so-called inspired and uninspired portions because it could lead to the dismissal of portions at whim, especially if they are challenging to an individual's life. Douglass quotes prominent early leaders who ended up losing all belief in White after dividing her writings in this manner.[citation needed] Yet at least two Adventist authors have also discerned at different six different types of inspiration.[83] Protestant theologian Wayne Grudem has argued for a distinction between Old Testament prophets and New Testament prophets.[84] This has influenced some within the progressive/liberal camp (such as Desmond Ford) to see Ellen White as a "New Testament prophet", with lesser authority than a prophet as described in the Old Testament (as someone speaking God's words), and more subject to the spiritual discernment of others. [edit] Scope of authorityThe important book 1957 Questions on Doctrine claimed of White's writings: "we do not think of them as of universal application, as is the Bible, but particularly for the Seventh-day Adventist Church."[85] [edit] Change over timeToday, Adventist scholars tend to accept that Ellen White grew in her doctrinal understanding over time. The 1888 Bible Conference was a great insight for many in the church, when the centrality of Jesus and righteousness by faith became clearer. See Alden Thompson's book Escape from the flames: how Ellen White grew from fear to joy - and helped me do it too,[86] and his "From Sinai to Golgotha" series, which was first published in the Adventist Review.[87] Adventists generally believe a shift took place in her writings after the 1888 Minneapolis General Conference. Her major books about Christ were produced after this event, including Steps to Christ (1892), Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing (1896), The Desire of Ages (1898), Christ's Object Lessons (1900), as well as the early chapters of The Ministry of Healing (1905). Her conception of God changed over time, from stern to loving. Her understanding of the Great Controversy theme also shows shifts.[88] [edit] Sources of her writings White and her contemporaries listed a number of sources of her writings, the most prominent being the inspiration of God:
See also George E. Rice, Luke, a Plagiarist?, 1983. She claimed early on to receive wisdom from God that would enable her to select "gems of truth" from amongst the "rubbish of error".[91] Adventist authors have pointed out that many of the criticisms leveled at Ellen White's writings actually apply to the biblical authors as well. In particular, some believe that not all biblical content was derived from visions, although most Adventists still believe it is "inspired":
See above. Critics who hold to a strong form of inspiration such as inerrancy have accused Adventists of diminishing the inspiration of scripture in order to uphold Ellen White. In 1981 the church hired Vincent L. Ramik, a Roman Catholic lawyer specializing in copyright law, to investigate the charge of plagiarism. He concluded strongly in The Ramik Report that Ellen White was not a plagiarist:
(See Adventist Review, Sept. 17, 1981[92]) Later editions of The Great Controversy had citations inserted. In the past, Adventists spoke of her literary quality as an evidence of inspiration. [edit] AssistantsEllen White made use of editors or literary assistants to help with her work.[93] Marian Davis (1847–1904) was apparently White's foremost assistant, who made it her lifelong passion to hone the text of White's writings.[94] Frances E. "Fannie" Bolton (1859–1926) made some sensitive claims.[95] Her son Willie White wrote about the literary assistants in 1900: "...But none of Mother's workers are authorized to add to the manuscripts by introducing thoughts of their own. They are instructed that it is the words and thoughts that Mother has written, or spoken, that are to be used."[96] [edit] Plagiarism debateDuring the 1970s several scholars, including Adventist pastor Walter T. Rea, were researching White's dependence on other authors, such as Alfred Edersheim. The church commissioned Raymond Cottrell and Specht to study the literary dependence of Desire of Ages--they suggest a dependency of less than 2.6%. Later, Fred Veltman was commissioned to examine the book Desire of Ages in a scientific manner. His study, the Life of Christ Research Project, was completed in 1988 and concluded that, of the 15 random chapters sampled, approximately 31% of sentences in the book showed a literary dependency of at least one word. Others such as Rea suggest that as much as 90% could exhibit parallels. However, this claim has never been verified or proven. See here[97] for examples. Some scholars have argued that many of the parallels consist of a single shared word only. Only a small number are large, verbatim quotations. Denis Fortin and Jerry Moon argue that parallels such as White's view on inspiration published in Special Messages vol. 1, 21 which parallels Calvin E. Stowe, Origins and History of the Books of the Bible (1867), 19-20 displays a different theological thought. Hence, they argue, words found in common do reflect original thoughts by White. [edit] Miracles and tests of her inspirationSupportive arguments which are used include claims of miraculous physical signs which were present, the accuracy of her health message, predictions, character of her life, and so on.[98] George I. Butler stated that when going into visions, "...there is no appearance of swooning or faintness", yet "...Often she loses her strength temporarily and reclines or sits; but at other time she stands up."[99] A. G. Daniells did not think that miraculous signs were the best kind of evidence to produce,[100] but rather the fruit of her ministry.[101] The White Estate wrote, "Such experiences should not be considered proof of divine inspiration, as prophets must meet the tests set forth in the Scriptures; but this experience, as well as other remarkable physical phenomena, were seen as evidence by many early Adventists that Ellen Harmon's visions were of supernatural origin."[102] White made no claims to work miracles. Dudley Canright criticized her.[103] One claim was to White's prayers enacting healing.[104] She mentioned the phrase, 'the truth as it is in Jesus' hundreds of times. Adventists generally place less emphasis on these records today as evidence or proof. The primary test that Bradford suggests in Prophets are Human is whether or not her writings point the reader to Jesus. See also "Visions", p1380-1382 [first edition] of the Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia [edit] History of views concerning her inspirationThere has been much debate regarding the nature of her inspiration, both within and without the Adventist church. There have been many particularly significant developments since the 1970s when the discussion was particularly fierce. Throughout the history of the debate both more progressive/liberal and more conservative factions are clearly identifiable. Most recently, "the information age has thoroughly democratized the discipline of Ellen White Studies."[105] There exist a plethora of influential websites arguing both points of view. View of inspiration of Scripture have tended to be linked to the view of inspiration of Ellen White[106] [edit] White's lifetime Even during Ellen White's lifetime Adventists had different views regarding the nature of her prophetic ministry. She corrected both people who downplayed her writings, and those who elevated them too highly. She rebuked both those who downplayed or rejected her writings, such as A. T. Jones and also those who elevated her writings too high, such as Dr. D. Paulson (see above) During her life she constantly fought for her followers to focus on Scripture, and not to use her writings as the arbiter of truth. Her first vision was in December 1844. She also experienced powerful dreams, including two earlier in 1842.[107][108] One of the biggest opponents to White during her lifetime was the "Marion Party" in the 1860s, led by B. F. Snook and W. H. Brinkerhoff, which split from the church in 1866. In the same year, they published the first book critical of White's prophetic ministry – The Visions of E. G. White, Not of God.[109] (Together with others, they constituted the forerunners of the Church of God (Seventh Day)). Uriah Smith replied with The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White: A Manifestation of Spiritual Gifts According to the Scriptures (1868), "thus beginning the vast repertoire of apologetic literature defending the ministry of Ellen White", according to one historian.[110] Later in 1889 Dudley Canright, after his break with the church two years earlier, published Seventh-day Adventism Renounced.[111] It was the biggest attack on Ellen White's credibility in the nineteenth century, bringing together the accusations of previous critics.[112] In 1919 he published the critical work Life of Mrs. E.G. White, Seventh-day Adventist prophet: her false claims refuted.[113] He is the best known and most influential early critic, and his work has been the basis for much subsequent criticism.[114] One response was by William H. Branson.[115] A. T. Jones and S. N. Haskell taught verbal inspiration and inerrancy for not only the Bible but White's writings as well (see above). Opposing this view were Willie White and A. G. Daniells, who supported several statements from Ellen White advocating a more moderate view of thought inspiration. [edit] Other claims of prophecyMain article: Prophecy in the Seventh-day Adventist Church Two Millerites claimed to have had visions prior to Ellen White – William Ellis Foy (1818–1893), and Hazen Foss (1818?–1893), Ellen White's brother-in-law. Adventists believe the prophetic gift offered to these two men was instead passed on to White.[116] The 1888 Minneapolis General Conference provided "impetus" to those radically seeking God's presence. For example, W. W. Prescott sought miraculous spiritual gifts and supported Anna Rice Phillips, a claimed new prophetess.[117] Soon after White's death in 1915, Margaret Rowen claimed to receive visions, and formed the short-lived Reformed Seventh-day Adventist Church.[118] Many others such as Victor Houteff (founder of the Shepherd's Rod offshoot) and Jeanine Sautron also claimed the prophetic gift.[119] [edit] Struggle between fundamentalism and modernismFor much of the 20th century, the Adventist church had an unrealistically high expectation of Ellen White's writings, according to contemporary mainstream scholarship. Adventist views about Scripture and Ellen White were influenced by the wider debate within Protestantism regarding revelation and inspiration. A debate had been brewing between liberalism and fundamentalism, which reached a peak in the 1920s with the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy. This controversy saw a polarization between the two extremes, which saw Adventism lose its more moderate position. Impacted by the prevailing views of inspiration in the wider climate, the Adventist church took a fundamentalist stance towards Scripture and Ellen White. It continued to grapple with the struggle between fundamentalism and modernism from White's death in 1915 until about 1970.[120] While many scholars in the church have adopted a "thought inspiration" view of the Bible, and reject inerrancy, a poll taken in 2001 shows that 64% of the Seventh-day Adventist membership still believes that the Bible is totally accurate in all that it teaches.[121] In 1926 the General Conference even published a college textbook which argued for so-called verbal inspiration, while rejecting verbal dictation and Ellen White's several statements of thought inspiration.[122] Daniells, Prescott and Willie White were sidelined. The loss of the moderate position has caused problems for the church which continue to the present day.[42] Prescott expressed some serious concerns in a letter to Willie in 1915. H. M. S. Richards saw her as fallible, and when accusations such as plagiarism arose decades later, he reported that he was not disturbed because he had heard them all before at the 1919 Conference.[123] The 1919 Bible Conference[124] was a significant theological milestone in Adventist history, but the significance of the discussions about Ellen White were not recognized until the rediscovery of the conference transcripts in 1973. The discussion occurred within the context of issues related to prophetic interpretation, and how to relate to change after her death. The conference served to polarize Adventist theology into "liberal" and "conservative" camps which continue to impact the church today.[125] Today's views were evident at the 1919 Conference and remain today.[126] Progressive H. Camden Lacey stated the Bible "is verbally inspired, and the Testimonies are not, and do not claim to be, but the Bible does.[127] Other books published during this period include The Abiding Gift of Prophecy (version in DjVu) by A. G. Daniells (1936) and Believe His Prophets by Denton E. Rebok (1956), which are both fully available online from the White Estate. In 1951 Francis D. Nichol published the classic apologetic work Ellen G. White and Her Critics (DjVu version).[128] According to the White Estate, this book
Walter Martin claims that Nichol argues masterfully, but in defending her so strongly, weakens his case.[citation needed] In 1955 Thomas Jemison published A Prophet Among You,[129] which became a standard college textbook for decades. [edit] New information[edit] Source criticismThe years 1970-1982 brought challenging information and heated discussion. The drama Red Books describes it as "The Crash". While the Adventist church today still strongly upholds White's prophetic gift and personal spirituality, its views are more moderate and more emphasis is often placed on her human, fallible side. However this debate was primarily amongst scholars. In 1970, Adventist English professor William Peterson wrote an article in the recently started journal Spectrum critiquing one chapter of White's account of the French Revolution in The Great Controversy. He argued her use of sources betrayed bias and inaccuracy.[130][131] The article acted as a catalyst for the study of Ellen White's use of other writings ("source criticism")[132] and has been called "the first instance of a modern critical study on the prophet's writings."[133] Ronald Graybill responded that White did not draw on those sources directly, but received her information via fellow Adventist Uriah Smith who had compiled the information.[134] Jonathan Butler claims "this exposed White to be an even worse historian than Peterson had exposed", but this "fact[...] was lost on Graybill's audience; it was more important that he had undercut Peterson's research."[135] (White's use of other writers has been termed "borrowing" by supporters, or "plagiarism" by critics.) Arthur Patrick has written,
F. D. Nichol's classic defense has since been found to be wanting in some respects.[137] Alden Thompson has rated this as one of the most influential Spectrum articles. In 1973, Arthur L. White published The Ellen G. White Writings. [edit] Prophetess of HealthIn 1976, then-Adventist Ronald Numbers published Prophetess of Health, which focuses on the contemporary human sources for White's health messages rather than from visions from God.[138] There were many reviews.[139] Numbers claimed the book "seeks neither to defend nor to damn but simply to understand." He claimed to seek objectivity: "Thus I have refrained from using divine inspiration as an historical explanation."[140] As the author writes, it is not "a full-fledged biography", but is most concerned with "her health-related activities".[141] An updated edition was published in 1992, and a third in 2008.[142] Numbers was ultimately removed from church employment, which Jonathan Butler described in the painful account "The Historian as Heretic".[143] [edit] OtherIn 1979, the minutes from two days of the 1919 Bible Conference were published by the journal Spectrum,[144] and are now available from an official church website.[145] The complete minutes had been rediscovered in 1974. This information has since played a large part in the church's understanding. The key issue during those two days of the conference was the nature of the inspiration of Ellen White. In 1980, the White Estate and the Biblical Research Institute decided to begin a study of White's inspiration and other topics. This was described by then General Conference President Neal C. Wilson in two articles in the Adventist Review.[146] A scholarly committee met at the Glendale Adventist Hospital in January 28 and 29 to discuss Rea's studies into White's use of sources. The committee members and its conclusions are reported in a letter by Rea. Wilson reported,
The controversial dismissal of Desmond Ford from ministry and teaching position following his reinterpretation of the investigative judgment, peaked with the meeting in August 1980. This event was influential in the perception of White's inspiration. Ford still accepts her gift of prophecy as legitimate. In 1981 Robert W. Olson published a booklet "101 Questions on the Sanctuary and on Ellen White"[148] and "The 'Shut Door' Documents"[149] in 1982. In 1982, the first International Prophetic Guidance Workshop was held. Also in 1982, Adventist Walter Rea published the critical book The White Lie,[150] which documents literary parallels with other authors of her times, following several years of discussion with church leaders and scholars. He claimed to be tired of waiting for his views to be heard. The book elicited several responses.[151] Rea's employment by the church was terminated. There has been diversity within the church since 1982. In 1982, Walter T. Rea and Desmond Ford were guests on the evangelical John Ankerberg Show, for 3 programs. In 1985, William G. Johnsson (then editor of the Adventist Review) appeared on 5 programs of the Show to debate with evangelical Walter Martin regarding Ellen White and other issues.[152][153] In 1988 Adventist Fred Veltman completed his study, the True Life of Christ Research Project,[154] which investigated literary parallels between White's Desire of Ages (about the life of Christ) and contemporary literature.[155] He had been commissioned by the church in 1982 to conduct this study, prompted by the challenges of Rea and others. Of the 15 random chapters sampled, it was found that approximately 31% of sentences in the book showed a literary dependency of at least one word.[156] One statement by Veltman:
Dr. Roger W. Coon,[158] David J. Conklin,[159] Dr. Denis Fortin,[160][161] among others, undertook the refutation of the accusations of plagiarism. [edit] 1990sBy the 1990s, there was increasing consensus and some of the turmoil settled. The church has become increasingly aware of the reality of the literary parallels. Of the currently known parallels, the next most dependent book is The Great Controversy with 20% dependency on sources. It is also the most historical of the set in the Conflict of the Ages series. In 1991, Alden Thompson published Inspiration: Hard Questions, Honest Answers.[162] It was published by the church press Review and Herald. Evangelical scholar Clark Pinnock described it as "absorbing to read, even for a Baptist".[54] In 1992 a group of authors from the Adventist Theological Society published a conservative response, Issues in Revelation and Inspiration.[163] See also the article by Alberto Timm.[164] Conservative scholar Samuel Koranteng-Pipim and Historic Adventists Colin and Russell Standish also produced self-published works around this time. The competing publications illustrate the internal debate within the church. From 1996 to 1999 Adventist historian George Knight published a series of books on Ellen White - Meeting Ellen White: A fresh look at her life, writings and major themes (1996),[165] Reading Ellen White: How to understand and apply her writings (1997),[166] Ellen White's World: A fascinating look at the times in which she lived (1998),[167] and Walking With Ellen White: Her everyday life as a wife, mother, and friend (1999).[168] These popular books are both informative and readable. Several media productions have made an impact since the late 90s. In 1998 a critical video Seventh-day Adventism: The Spirit Behind the Church[152][169] was released by Jeremiah Films. The video is critical of both Ellen White and the Seventh-day Adventist Church and features several former Adventist pastors. It elicited Adventist responses.[170] In 2005 a supportive video documentary Keepers of the Flame hosted by Dr. Allen Lindsay includes a discussion of Ellen White.[171] Videos from the 2005 Ellen White Summit held at Gladstone Park Conference Center, which featured numerous experts, are available online. In 2006 another supportive video, Prophetic Inspiration[172] was produced by scholars from Avondale College. In 1998 Herbert Douglass published Messenger of the Lord, after being commissioned by the Ellen G. White Estate to write the book. It is used as a textbook at some Adventist places of higher learning. See Alden Thompson's review,[173] and a discussion with Douglass.[174] Also in 1998, Juan Carlos Viera published The Voice of the Spirit. Critical works include Ellen G. White: The Myth and the Truth by Asmund Kaspersen (1999) and Beware This Cult! An insider exposes Seventh-day Adventism and their false Prophet, Ellen G. White by Gregory G. P. Hunt (chapters relating to Ellen White available online). A summit was held on these issues in 2004.[175] In February 2004, a series of Australasian Record articles appeared featuring Arthur Patrick and Bruce Manners.[176] In 2005, Alden Thompson published Escape From the Flames,[177] which also incorporates a personal account of the author's journey. Graeme Bradford has published three books on Ellen White starting with Prophets are Human in 2004.[178] In the first he argues for a more realistic view of Ellen White as a godly woman and someone with the genuine prophetic gift, yet having human imperfections nonetheless.[179] People are Human was the second title. The third in the series, More Than a Prophet (2006) has been somewhat more controversial,[180] and is freely available online. Since 2005, "Ellen White and Current Issues Symposium"s have been held.[181] In 2007, the play Red Books was produced, featuring a dialogue on views of White's inspiration drawn from interviews of over 200 individuals. Adventist World has planned a two-year series, "Discovering the Spirit of Prophecy", with a feature article every second month, which started July 2008.[182] The first quarter 2009 Adult Bible Study Guide covers the gift of prophecy, particularly as it relates to Ellen White. See also the likely related book The Gift of Prophecy by Gerhard Pfandl (Pacific Press). See also for instance the Spectrum commentary on the lesson.[183] The forthcoming Encyclopedia of Ellen G. White is edited by Jerry Moon and Denis Fortin of Andrews University, and will contain contributions by dozens of scholars. A scholarly work about Ellen White is in production, as of October 2009, and is expected to be published by Oxford University Press. Some lecturers observe a different attitude to White amongst students – they are often open to her, and are more comfortable with her imperfections.[184] [edit] ParallelsSome reviewers have drawn parallels between White and other prophetic claimants. Phyllis Watson has claimed a literary dependency between White and Joseph Smith, Jr. (the founder of Mormonism and the leading visionary of his era); although she is not a professional historian. The Ellen White Estate and other scholars Ronald Numbers, Ron Graybill, Mario De Pillis, and Fred Veltman believe it is unlikely White plagiarized Smith. Mormon scholar Richard Bushman believes they merely share a "common milieu" – a similar "visionary culture" background. They heard similar preachers and were immersed in the King James Version of the Bible. No Smith books were known to have been in White's library, and he was viewed very unfavorably by early Adventists. Jim Walters concludes,
Hugh Dunton has compared and contrasted her with Muhammad, the founding prophet of Islam, concluding: "Just as Mohammed did, Ellen White called a community into existence to lead a complete way of life."[187] [edit] See also
[edit] References
[edit] Further reading
[edit] External linksSupportive:
Critical:
Other:
|
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |
